| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
actonern
Super Member
Joined: 15 Aug 2007
Posts: 444
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 9:19 pm Post subject: sound post dimensions over the centuries |
 |
|
Are there any surviving examples of sound posts throughout the history of violin making?
Is the 1/4 inch post pretty much it from the get go?
Best regards,
E |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jacob
Junior Member
Joined: 13 Jan 2013
Posts: 20
Location: Cape Town
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:26 pm Post subject: Re: sound post dimensions over the centuries |
|
|
| actonern wrote: | Are there any surviving examples of sound posts throughout the history of violin making?
Is the 1/4 inch post pretty much it from the get go?
Best regards,
E |
Several years ago Dan Larson (Gamut Strings) posted some articles on the web about Baroque setup. About the sound post he states: "The sound post in early violins was smaller in diameter than the modern post. John Talbot, who documented the specifications of musical instruments in England about 1700, noted that the thickness of a violin sound post was about the diameter of a goose quill[1]. This would make the diameter about 3mm – 4mm. There is a sound post that was found accidentally glued into a violin in the Brussels museum that is thought to original. The diameter of this post is about 4.7mm which is slightly thicker than a goose quill. I have tried very thin sound posts of 4mm and I have had difficulty in regulating the tone of an instrument with such a thin post. Generally the thicker posts give greater control over the sound and I prefer a diameter of 5mm or so for the best control and tone. On the Cremonese paper pattern the diameter of the post is shown as being about 5.2mm, (Figure 4), which is larger than the goose quill sized post that Talbot knew. It is possible that the English preferred a slightly thinner post than the Italians." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
actonern
Super Member
Joined: 15 Aug 2007
Posts: 444
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks Jacob!
Do you have any sense of when thicker stops being better?
If 5.5 is good, why not 6.2mm? 7mm? 8mm?
It all makes me wonder if an "ideal" post would be fatter, were it not for the average constriction of the f hole widths?
Best regards,
E
Last edited by actonern on Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:52 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael Darnton
Moderator
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 1347
Location: Chicago
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
actonern
Super Member
Joined: 15 Aug 2007
Posts: 444
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
6.3 too fat? That's interesting to know... Do you have a one size fits all personal favorite diameter, or does it depend on the instrument?
E |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael Darnton
Moderator
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 1347
Location: Chicago
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lemuel
Site Admin
Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Posts: 515
Location: Mt. Elgin, Ontario
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 12:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
We've been using 6.0mm. However, one day I was using a caliper to measure the diameters of several 30cm
sticks, and the measurements varied between 5.9mm to 6.1mm. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
okawbow
Member
Joined: 31 Mar 2009
Posts: 63
Location: Southern Illinois
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I try to save the cut-offs on violins I make, and split out a sound post from the same material as the top. I have made most of them 6.0mm round. I've made a couple of them 5.5 x 6.5mm oval. I fitted the oval posts with the thicker part north and south. They seemed easier to set straight and with light pressure, and sounded as good or better than round. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael Darnton
Moderator
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 1347
Location: Chicago
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MANFIO
Super Member
Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 458
Location: Sao Paulo
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
