Interesting finding. In which way was the new bass bar different? Harder wood? Dimensionally different? Both? My initial thoughts would have been to match the higher scratching pitch of the table by scraping the sides at the upper end of the bass bar. Which would result in a slightly narrower bass bar top. Similarly, making the bass bar top flatter would lower the pitch. It doesn’t require much scraping to raise or lower the pitch following that method. There must be a reason you preferred to change the bass bar. Not questioning, just trying to understand and learn. Thanks for sharing.
The answer is that the new one was slightly dimensionally bigger. I try to match the pitch of tapping from the outside across the bass bar position, and on the top on the side of it, but here I missed. I guess it was at the final fine-shaping of the first bar. I agree that the pitch goes up when you cut the sides, but I wanted more resistance, so I went for a new bar. The first one was tapered as well.
My immediate thought was, what happened on the original one, seemed like the tone/pitch was quite different.....are you surprised you missed it? How do you think it happened?
@@westerlundsviolinverkstada9892 Yes, of course, I understand that, was just wondering if maybe some other process changed the bass bar relationship to the top.....sounds like it was a simple mistake, understood, thanks.
Why don’t you plane down say 2/3 of the bar and then glue a piece on top which you can “carve” to give you the extra strength you need ? This will save you fitting a new bar which takes a long time. After all the glue joint is no different to the centre joint of the top and bottom plates.
@@westerlundsviolinverkstada9892 I’ve just fitted a base bar to an old trade ? fiddle I bought 50 years ago. I used a magnetic tool to measure the top plate thickness. It was thin in a few areas but generally very thick along the centre joint. I took the top off and the bar was 9mm thick and really short and crudely shaped. After fitting a new bar , I shaped it following Johnson & Courtnal and then found the plate resonated at 400 Hz. I trimmed it a little and it increased which I wasn’t expecting. I wanted 375 Hz or F#. The bottom plate was thick too, so I put it back together and today I set it up. I was disappointed when I played it, but it’s still settling down. I need to do more reading and thinking to try and understand things.
@@westerlundsviolinverkstada9892 I’ve just fitted a base bar to an old trade ? fiddle I bought 50 years ago. I used a magnetic tool to measure the top plate thickness. It was thin in a few areas but generally very thick along the centre joint. I took the top off and the bar was 9mm thick and really short and crudely shaped. After fitting a new bar , I shaped it following Johnson & Courtnal and then found the plate resonated at 400 Hz. I trimmed it a little and it increased which I wasn’t expecting. I wanted 375 Hz or F#. The bottom plate was thick too, so I put it back together and today I set it up. I was disappointed when I played it, but it’s still settling down. I need to do more reading and thinking to try and understand things.
![เปิด อาณาจักร หมื่นล้าน "สาระตั้ม" l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3XE0nPF4YkQ/mqdefault.jpg)
So excited to see a new batch of videos from you! I'm still following along with your method with instrument #4
Interesting finding. In which way was the new bass bar different? Harder wood? Dimensionally different? Both? My initial thoughts would have been to match the higher scratching pitch of the table by scraping the sides at the upper end of the bass bar. Which would result in a slightly narrower bass bar top. Similarly, making the bass bar top flatter would lower the pitch. It doesn’t require much scraping to raise or lower the pitch following that method. There must be a reason you preferred to change the bass bar. Not questioning, just trying to understand and learn. Thanks for sharing.
The answer is that the new one was slightly dimensionally bigger. I try to match the pitch of tapping from the outside across the bass bar position, and on the top on the side of it, but here I missed. I guess it was at the final fine-shaping of the first bar. I agree that the pitch goes up when you cut the sides, but I wanted more resistance, so I went for a new bar. The first one was tapered as well.
Does this method work when the box is closed as well or only on a free top?
Yes. As I see it, the method is a way to form an arching. Then it doesn´t take into account if the plate is glued or not.
My immediate thought was, what happened on the original one, seemed like the tone/pitch was quite different.....are you surprised you missed it? How do you think it happened?
The answer is of course that I missed that when I made the violin at the start.
Anyone can make a misstake. The important thing is what you do then.
@@westerlundsviolinverkstada9892 Yes, of course, I understand that, was just wondering if maybe some other process changed the bass bar relationship to the top.....sounds like it was a simple mistake, understood, thanks.
Why don’t you plane down say 2/3 of the bar and then glue a piece on top which you can “carve” to give you the extra strength you need ? This will save you fitting a new bar which takes a long time. After all the glue joint is no different to the centre joint of the top and bottom plates.
Ok, that is one idea. I have no arguments against it, but I am a traditionalist in some ways.
@@westerlundsviolinverkstada9892 I’ve just fitted a base bar to an old trade ? fiddle I bought 50 years ago. I used a magnetic tool to measure the top plate thickness. It was thin in a few areas but generally very thick along the centre joint. I took the top off and the bar was 9mm thick and really short and crudely shaped. After fitting a new bar , I shaped it following Johnson & Courtnal and then found the plate resonated at 400 Hz. I trimmed it a little and it increased which I wasn’t expecting. I wanted 375 Hz or F#. The bottom plate was thick too, so I put it back together and today I set it up. I was disappointed when I played it, but it’s still settling down. I need to do more reading and thinking to try and understand things.
@@westerlundsviolinverkstada9892 I’ve just fitted a base bar to an old trade ? fiddle I bought 50 years ago. I used a magnetic tool to measure the top plate thickness. It was thin in a few areas but generally very thick along the centre joint. I took the top off and the bar was 9mm thick and really short and crudely shaped. After fitting a new bar , I shaped it following Johnson & Courtnal and then found the plate resonated at 400 Hz. I trimmed it a little and it increased which I wasn’t expecting. I wanted 375 Hz or F#. The bottom plate was thick too, so I put it back together and today I set it up. I was disappointed when I played it, but it’s still settling down. I need to do more reading and thinking to try and understand things.