![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
No, anything I said or posted had nothing to do with that link or study other than mentioning it was 136 pages long. That much I noticed. I have a few basses in restoration right now that will need wood added back into the top to fix the Butchery that went on in it past from other luthiers. I say this now.. It it sounds good, leave it alone unless you know fairly sure that it still has a ways to go and also do so without weakening the plates. With basses being so different from one another in every which way, unless you are using some controlled materials, that study does very little to contribute to the improvement of the making or repairing of a double bass. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
This has turned into a pretty good thread! I just wanted to clarify...if anybody is still following from the original post, that the bass in question is just a shop bass with interesting wood and a comfortable size/shape for me to play. I would certainly never re-graduate a real makers bass. When I bought the bass, it had had a bunch of work done to it, including the re-graduation of the back (with back on), and re-graduation of top, graduated around the bass bar, and not all the way through to the edges. The current work being done is to graduate the whole top and fit a new bass bar. I've decided to leave the back alone, partially based on some of your responses, mostly based on the suggestion of the luthier doing the work...just wanted to say thanks for opinions/info, also I did read some of the 136 page paper, I'm into it, thanks for posting the link.
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Like I mentioned, I have had basses go both ways in restoration, wood in and wood out. So far, every bass was improved. On your bass that was worked around the bassbar, let me give you some information that might help. 30 or so years ago I heard about a full sized Maggini in a big shop for restoration. Along the entire bassbar area the top was built up under the bar. The Luthier thought that this famous maker was wrong and he was more knowledgeable. He removed the excess wood under the bar and 'sprung in' a new bar and closed up the bass when all the work was done. Guess what? The Top collapsed!.. This Luthier thought he knew more than Maggini.. Go figure.. When my Gilkes (Jilkes) was opened up for restoration and a new bassbar, I felt along the Bar area inside the Top and guess what? A similar platform as was described to me that was in the Maggini. That Bar platform-Top relationship was left intact and the Bar place in the Bass without any spring at all. This Bass dated 1814 on the Label has never cracked and has never sounded better in the 5 years I've had it. Maybe in your Bass, leave a platform built up under the Bar like Maggini and Gilkes did. I would try that if it were my bass if possible just to see what it does. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
I read some of the dissertation Ken M linked. What I found most interesting was the response of players to the round vs. flat back comparison. Comments were all over the place and contradictory. The author pointed out how subjective the whole subject is. I personally think there is something to having a "spring" of brace wood under the soundpost, regardless of whether the bass has a round or flat back. I have had the opportunity to add a back brace to a round backed bass on several occasions, and felt the bass responded quicker afterward. Ken S. has some experience with this as well. Your comments, Maestro?
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
My Candi went in for some repairs and a new Neck Graft. Due to an old repaired crack in the Back running up from the bottom to the soundpost area I suggested we put a center brace in the roundback Candi for two reasons. One, this would keep direct pressure off of the Crack from the soundpost for ever! and Two, the Candi made from soft Italian maple aka Oppio would benefit as well from this structurally and hopefully tonally. My Martini has a 3-pc back of this same Oppio but seems to have been graduated much thicker by the maker back in 1918/19 when it was made. The soundpost had over the years pushed on the back joint that is only a few inches from the post but outside towards the C-bout, not a center joint as it is 3 pieces as I mentioned. This center brace was more of an alongated back patch but a brace no doubt joining the center and outer pieces of the back therefore once again taking the direct pressure off of that joint nearest the Post area. The Candi brace was mostly all across but did not reach all the way t the Ribs or linings. Thus a center brace/patch in one. Results?. Both basses are louder, more focused sounding and healthier as well. I was very pleased with the outcome as I know both of these basses from before the repair. At the ISB this summer with all of the great old and expensive basses there the Candi had quite the audience. Italian Luthier Sergio Scaramelli came by several times during the week looking it over and playing it with passion I might add. A true compliment to the bass. Sregio mentioned he owned a Candi Cello that in other words, needed his big brother back home if you get my meaning. At this same time, world renown Italian bassist/soloist Stefano Sciascia played the bass and I must tell you, this guy can make a grown man cry. He was there to play in one of the venues in which the Karr/Koussevitzky bass had been prepared for him to do so. He told me if not for the Karr bass (the one they 'used' to call an Amati) he would have chosen the Candi to play. I played the Karr bass and I must say, Sergio would have sounded much better with the Candi. It has more power and more color to the sound. If just doesn't have the Karr mojo in it. Maybe I can call Gary and have him play a few minuted on the bass and see what mojo might rub off.. You think? ![]() There is something to be said for adding this center Brace in many cases. My Gilkes however is made from such dense wood that it was not even considered. The Gilkes is a bass made from the finest woods one could ever wish for, made by a maker with magic in his fingers and posses more power than any 3/4 bass I have ever seen matching and surpassing most 7/8ths and 4/4 basses I have seen in projection as well. This Bass needs only to be played as it was made as perfect as a Strad Cello and needs no modifications. Modifications are good to do if it helps the bass. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well, since the meastro spoke, I might take a turn.
Regarding the players responses to the listening test being contradictory and variable. Browns summary on the subject:
Martin Schleske a modern violinmaker who is alive today makes "tonal copies" of some of the finest stradivari and del Gesu violins. He charges a small percentage of what it would cost for an original. As a physicist and violinmaker he has developed some techniques to test and replicate violins. Schleske was quoted by Brown in the dissertation on page 47 to say:
And here is also where the graduated plate, thick in the center and thin at the recurve, works to a similar advantage. Or a sprung X brace. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
While on the subject of bass back bracing, some colleagues of mine suggested installing what amounts to a single angled long brace, which I have used with excellent results. It's up to our esteemed host whether he wants to post the pics. (Nick Lloyd used this same system in his 2009 Silver Medal ISB bass.) It provides the requisite support for the soundpost, but avoids the cross-grain attachment which makes traditionally-braced flat-backs so trouble-prone. Last edited by Arnold Schnitzer; 09-12-2009 at 02:16 PM. |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
![]() |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
This was some minor inspiration for some that I have been trying...and just good work to look at. http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showpo...4&postcount=39 I will say I did try one thing Hans did, but with bad results (I had to replace a customers back ). He said he did spots of glue every inch or so to allow for wood movement. I did this...and the wood moved...causing a bulge in between two of the glue spots. I won't try that again. |
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|