Violone Grosso

[Calvin Marks]

Originally Posted by Pino Cazzaniga

102 was the maximum SL I was allowed to reach, as the musician plays with a finger per fret (with the finger on the fret, not in the space between).
That shape of the body has a short body stop, mm556,5 (21,88) measured from the upper edge of the top, while the body length is mm1071 (42,16).
So I could make a long Eb neck to place the seventh fret before the curve of the heel and reach the 102 SL, while the body size is not too small
The lower bouts are mm662 (26,06), the upper bouts are mm519 (20,43),the C bouts are mm346 (13,62).
I hope that this let the sound be warm enough even with short strings.
Also, with gut strings we can try different diameters and materials, like sheep gut.
To design a new modern instrument I think that more SL is better, maybe working on the upper part of the body to lenghten the stop.

Pino, nice instrument but Maggini never made a five string bass, and there's no record of that tuning anywhere. Add a sixth string and tune it to D and then you've got a D-violone. Maggini made several violones, most notably the "Dolmetch" instrument, but that was tuned in G and had a string length under 95cm. Also, why the Viennese style tailpiece? ...I thought this instrument had an Italian influence?

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Charles Stark

Pino, nice instrument but Maggini never made a five string bass, and there's no record of that tuning anywhere. Add a sixth string and tune it to D and then you've got a D-violone. Maggini made several violones, most notably the "Dolmetch" instrument, but that was tuned in G and had a string length under 95cm. Also, why the Viennese style tailpiece? ...I thought this instrument had an Italian influence?

Maggini made some of the later D'Salo instruments. One that is pictured in Elgar (D'Salo, attributed?) is a 5-string, page 71.

We do not know if any of the Amati's made basses and we know for sure that Strad did NOT. However, there are thousand's and thousand's of basses claiming to be copies of both.

At least we know that both Maggini and D'salo made Double Bass instruments.

We can only speculate from the few original Scrolls survived by these two pioneers what they might have made as far as the number of strings.

Maggini 'influenced' is just that. It can have 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7 strings if you like. All numbers of strings that were made by the early Italian bass instrument makers.

If one copies an English or Italian or even a Prescott Bass of which almost all were 3-strings originally, do you come and say Prescott didn't make a 4-string?

[Calvin Marks]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

Maggini made some of the later D'Salo instruments. One that is pictured in Elgar (D'Salo, attributed?) is a 5-string, page 71.

We do not know if any of the Amati's made basses and we know for sure that Strad did NOT. However, there are thousand's and thousand's of basses claiming to be copies of both.

At least we know that both Maggini and D'salo made Double Bass instruments.

We can only speculate from the few original Scrolls survived by these two pioneers what they might have made as far as the number of strings.

Maggini 'influenced' is just that. It can have 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7 strings if you like. All numbers of strings that were made by the early Italian bass instrument makers.

If one copies an English or Italian or even a Prescott Bass of which almost all were 3-strings originally, do you come and say Prescott didn't make a 4-string?

Firstly, what kind of instrument is this and what is it intended for? If it's a true period instrument then the tuning is not legitimate. You can turn it into a Viennese bass tuned FADF#A but the Italian design would look somewhat odd. Also, the neck angle is too steep for a period bass. The entire purpose of period instruments revolves around lower tension on the table. These basses were not intended on being canons (certainly not in Maggini's time!!). We over string them today and use tall bridges, but these instruments had an entirely different sound and function in the ensemble.

[Calvin Marks]

Basically, I'm just really confused at what this instrument is...

Once I see frets on an instrument the idea of it being a modern bass goes out the window.

So...It's a fretted bass with five strings. Viennese Violone? That could work except the body is Italian in design. Think Stadlemann, Thir, Posch...

There is no such tuning as what you describe above. Once again. There were instruments (Italian especially) during the early Baroque and Renaissance that had six strings tuned like you have it but it had a high D above the A. The bass is built along heavy lines and the neck is at a fairly steep angle for a true period instrument. To each their own but I just don't get it.

[Pino Cazzaniga]

Calvin,
We don't know how many strings Maggini put on his instruments.
It is also possible that he put the number of strings which his customer needed, like I did.
It's not a joke, they were developing a design for bass instruments, these days, and probably both makers and players were working on it.
These basses were hibrids, and you can see features on them from both the viol and the violin family.
Praetorius was a contemporary af Maggini, he knews that work, and in his drawings you can see a small bass with 6 strings and a larger one with 5 strings.
One may think that the smaller is a viol and the larger a double bass, but he named the player of the big one "violonistam" too.
You said that these instruments were not cannons, but Gasparo was shared to play a violone during the mass in the church of S.Maria Maggiore in Bergamo. In that church there is an organ since at least 1402.
The Gasparo bass I saw, the one in S. Marco, is very wide between the upper eyes of the f holes. Usually Magginis are smaller: maybe a string less? How useful is the first string of a 6 string DD violone? Wasn't it the first one to disappear when they made longer instruments, as it was prone to break?
About the string angle: The width of the body of the Maggini "Dragonetti at the C bouts is mm 352.
If you want a low bridge you can't put on it more than 3 strings, or you can't bow them, even with wide string spacing and a flat bridge.
About the tailpiece, ther is a similar model on Praetorius.
Another is in the Elgar book, on an instrument attributed to "Pietro Zenatto".
The Dolmetch is a GG violone, a different kind of instrument which plays 8', while my customer's demand was for a 16'.

That said, I admit that I didn't make a true philological copy: many things on this instrument are pretty modern.
Tuning gears, to avoid spending half the time tuning and half the time playing out of tune.
Mortised neck, which is better for future repairs, as I hope a long life for my instruments.
Decreasing rib depth from the bottom to the bend, for playability.
I cut longer C bouts, and rounded lower bouts.
I must admit that the longer C bouts were not needed: we saw that the bow works far enough from the upper corners.

This instrument was designed to play with gut strings, frets, a "baroque" bow and technique.
I think it is legitimate to play period music, at least like a musician who was born in this (well, the last) century, and lives and plays now.

Philology is a way to educate the taste, not a jail.
As a listener, of guts I like the "progressive" sound, warm at the bass and sharp and rich at the treble. I like too the start, growing and fading of each note. These are colors to enjoy, and what my customer asked for.

P.S.
The minimum thickness of the front is 4 (3,5 along the edges), the maximum is 8.
I don't think it's heavy...