![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Here is a pic of the Scalloped outer Block bass we call 'Scallopini'! ![]() Now, an important thing Arnold mentioned was marketability. For an Italian Bass over 200 years old made as it was made and with the reputation of sound being well known and rememberd by all that have heard it in the last 40 years we can accept this particular Bass for what ever venue the player brings it to. For selling it, it is a known classic Italian Bass with a sound to die for. In making a brand new Bass today and keeping the re-sale thought in mind, putting corners on the 'modified' copy along with several other changes to the original Bass to meet todays needs in both playability and marketability. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Good for you Ken, that will turn out nice I think.
Last edited by Ken McKay; 02-03-2010 at 08:16 PM. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
I have used the original in Symphony concerts so I know very well what I would like if I owned a twin with the desired modifications. This is it, the twin, modified! You would need wood from the same boards as this to make it exact but even then, it wont be. Only the exact is the exact. I know David's copy BUT, to my eye it is more of an inspired copy than a copy copy. It was made with Walnut, different Scroll, different FFs and, he didn't have the original apart in his hands at his disposal to copy from. Arnold has heard the Wiebe copy and it doesn't sound like the original. Perhaps nothing will. The original has been re-graduated within the last 100 years or so and we have to 'guesstimate' what the original thicknesses were. Actually, the bass is currently 'reverse-graduated' The bass is thinner now in the middle and thicker (original) around the outer edges as the center was cut up quite a bit. We will use something more traditional and maybe tap tone the Top along the way making it to the actual wood chosen. We will have to ask Arnold when all is done how he arrived at the final thicknesses. I say we but 'I' am not the maker here. Arnold Schnitzer is. The 'we' is us, maker and player/designer but without 'me' commissioning this, it would never happen. On the Ribs, they will be solid, not laminated. We can see now how cross grain Spruce against Maple reacts after 200+ years. Not something I want to see in my lifetime. I will however have the Rib depth and top to bottom tapers copied. This will not be a very deep bass at all. It tapers 7 3/4" to 5 3/4" Block to Block. I asked Arnold to copy as close as possible and make the same Purfling as well. I also want that Scroll/Pegbox copied. It might get slightly extended in length if it helps fitting the C-Extension as this was a 3-string. How would this maker have made the Pegbox if it was to be a 4-string originally? This is in thought for now. We can use the Original to measure from and decide from there. Maybe we need to have a mini-convention of all the recent Cornerless Bass copies and inspired models which this one actually is. I am not all that concerned how much the corners will affect the sound. The inside lines of the Bass will flow in the manner of mainly a Guitar form. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() I am sure it will be fantastic.
I forgot about that string length. You can't really leave it that long, can you? Last edited by Ken McKay; 02-03-2010 at 08:18 PM. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
As far as measuring, I don't know what is involved there. Maybe you can ask him. I am confident with whatever he does concerning the copy-making process. By the way, this bass is #24 for Arnold. Nice even number, 2 dozen! ![]() I am sure some of the sound comes from how the Ribs are made and how free they are as well as how free they are not! My Martini (here I go again.. ![]() I don't think anything can ever be copied 100% when it comes to an instrument but all things considered, this Bass will be like "what if the original was made like this?" kinda thing. So an inspired copy with a 'wish list' of modifications. Arnold will try staining the figure like this one was done to bring out the flames. I remember a few years back playing a bass he had just made while my Martini was there in the shop and comparing them. I was quite impressed how well his brand new bass held its own beside my nearlky 90 year old (at the time) Martini as far as tone and power. I think that bass of his after 90 years will at least as good if not better than the Martini, maybe sooner and maybe not! You never know but it's worth a chance to try. All basses were once new! |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Ok, I opened it in Windows Media but there was no sound. What do you suggest?
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Ken,
As you have the "real thing" open for restoration, I would trace the outlines of the plates on the same sheet of paper. Then I would draw a centre line, and the perpendicular lines at the upper and lower width, at the C width, at the stop, at the eyes of the F holes,etc. I would also trace the given back braces. Then I would play a bit with numbers, looking for proportions among the given measurements. I don't pretend that this is a way to know the original maker ideas about the design, but it may be helpful to get one's own insight of a given object, and sometimes it's funny (sometimes it's frustrating too). The danger is to cut the foot to fit the shoe... Anyway, if something is to modify, I would do it thinking of the founded proportions (if any!) |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|