Page: 1 2
I just tonight noticed that my two fiddles have different grades of Aubert bridges. The better sounding, to my ear, is an Aubert Deluxe and the lesser sounding is an Aubert. Quality of the two fiddles is similar and both makers, American, have won top level awards at the VMAAI contest with their instruments. Can the quality level between these two bridges have a significant impact on the each instruments voice????
I would value opinions.
Well, in my limited experience a better bridge will ring a clearer tone when dropped on a hard bench from a few inches. How much this is worth, I am fairly sure, is related to how well or poorly the bridge is carved to fit. So .... everything makes some difference in a fiddles tone. How much or how little is grist for opinions and the expression thereof. R/
There is a difference in the wood of a #7 vs. a Luxe or De Luxe. The higher the grade of bridge, the more the wood has been naturally aged and the more carefully selected the grain.
At least in the old days, the higher grade bridges were treated with rabbit urine (according to Roger Hargrave) to give the wood a richer color. I’m not sure what they’re treated with now.
Some luthiers do a drop test on a hard surface to listen to the ring of the bridges in search of a higher pitch. I’ve tried it before, but in the end have felt that the grain is more important and the drop test makes no noticeable difference in results.
The grade of the bridge makes a difference in the outcome, but only if the bridge is cut well. A poorly cut De Luxe will not be better than a well-cut #7.
I recently had my bridge changed and asked my luthier to put the best bridge he had on my violin. The better bridge was about double the cost. $130 compared to $60. He talked me out of spending the most because he "kindly" said my violin was not good enough to show a difference in the more expensive bridge. that's something to consider.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeff YI recently had my bridge changed and asked my luthier to put the best bridge he had on my violin. The better bridge was about double the cost. $130 compared to $60. He talked me out of spending the most because he "kindly" said my violin was not good enough to show a difference in the more expensive bridge. that's something to consider.
It's true that violins have limitations and at some point there can be diminishing returns. When I'm asked about cutting a new bridge or when I'm recommending it to a customer, I always offer the three levels of bridges that I cut but give a suggestion for one or two of them based on my own estimation of the instrument's value. That way I can tell the customer which option is the most practical while also respecting their right to choose.
It is easy to expect that a violin bridge that costs more will make a difference on your fiddle. Truth, in my opinion, is that any decent quality bridge well fitted will be about as good as any other. Violins each have their own character which, when trying to improve them, can be affected only somewhat by various set-up details. If you feel that a more expensive bridge might help your violin's tone cost might not be so much a factor, less than a set of strings. Your luthier should charge the same to fit a good bridge as a crappy one.
Thanks all for the input. I truth I am less worried about "the most expensive bridge" then in getting a bit cleaner voice. It is warmer than I would like and warmer than my other fiddle. When I got the fiddle I took off the synthetic strings. I then played it for 6 months with Prims but the tone was harsher than I wanted. I shifted to Helicores for the past year and they were better. The look of the wood grain between the standard and the deluxe seemed to be a difference in more grain and color. My sense is a harder wood would, after being well fitted by a talented professional luthier, provide a bit mire clarity or ring.
I am not looking for, nor do I expect a sea change in the tone with the better bridge. And I take the point that there is only so much you can hope for out or some instruments. This particular fiddle is one made by Frank Daniels of Meridian, ID and his instruments tend to be favored by Bluegrass players and Weiser level contest players. So, I am willing to make the investment in a harder new bridge, on the chance it might help a bit.
Again, Thanks for all for the opinions.
quote:
Originally posted by ApltrezThanks all for the input. I truth I am less worried about "the most expensive bridge" then in getting a bit cleaner voice. It is warmer than I would like and warmer than my other fiddle. When I got the fiddle I took off the synthetic strings. I then played it for 6 months with Prims but the tone was harsher than I wanted. I shifted to Helicores for the past year and they were better. The look of the wood grain between the standard and the deluxe seemed to be a difference in more grain and color. My sense is a harder wood would, after being well fitted by a talented professional luthier, provide a bit mire clarity or ring.
I am not looking for, nor do I expect a sea change in the tone with the better bridge. And I take the point that there is only so much you can hope for out or some instruments. This particular fiddle is one made by Frank Daniels of Meridian, ID and his instruments tend to be favored by Bluegrass players and Weiser level contest players. So, I am willing to make the investment in a harder new bridge, on the chance it might help a bit.
Again, Thanks for all for the opinions.
You are correct that a harder bridge will give you a brighter sound. I just did the same but in the opposite direction. I wanted a more mellow sound and went with a softer bridge. Ask Ken at international violin. (I don't think there is a difference in price.)
The cheaper bridge blanks are considerably softer. This is why I won’t cut anything below the #7 grade. My reputation as a luthier is determined by the quality of my work, and I don’t believe in taking any shortcuts by putting out work with mediocre materials.
It would be silly to charge the same amount for any level of bridge when the cost of the blank is considerably different, and even though I cut all my bridges with care, I have to take into consideration the way in which the instrument will be used and the characteristics of the wood, and there is simply a higher expectation of refinement with an intermediate or professional bridge than with a student or rental level bridge. Just about every competent shop has different levels of bridges available. I know of one extremely well-respected shop that has a set price, but that’s because they will not cut anything but a De Luxe for any violin. For a lot of luthiers the difference between a student bridge and a professional one can involve hours of time and careful consideration of the particular instrument. Amateur workmen tend not to understand how much goes into cutting a good bridge—it’s not just a throwaway item, and the difference in sound can be dramatic.
When I first started transitioning from serving violinists to serving fiddlers, I did quite a bit of research on the basic sound that fiddlers preferred. One thing I found was that fiddlers in general, and especially Old-time fiddlers detested "brilliance", that crystalline aspect of violin sound that helps the sound carry out over an orchestra. In my surveys , I got uniform, vehement rejection of that aspect of violin sound, and developed a basic setup that gives a dark low end, a fairly sweet, clear high end, but not much sound above 4000 hz. To that end, I deliberately choose a somewhat softer bridge, and cut it in ways that minimize the "violinistic" aspects of the sound. A lot of fiddlers also seem to prefer a somewhat "covered" sound, and I set up for that, too.
I spent the day yesterday with a pro from Branson who likes all the opposite characteristics. He likes a more "violinistic" sound, without the brilliance. He had brought up a fiddle that had been overthinned, and was a real cannon, but was tubby and wolfy sounding, and took a pretty radical sound post setup to make it smoother and more balanced. So, as a luthier, you have to listen to your customers and try to provide them what they want.
Edited by - KCFiddles on 04/17/2023 06:42:57
quote:
Originally posted by The Violin BeautifulThe cheaper bridge blanks are considerably softer. This is why I won’t cut anything below the #7 grade. My reputation as a luthier is determined by the quality of my work, and I don’t believe in taking any shortcuts by putting out work with mediocre materials.
It would be silly to charge the same amount for any level of bridge when the cost of the blank is considerably different, and even though I cut all my bridges with care, I have to take into consideration the way in which the instrument will be used and the characteristics of the wood, and there is simply a higher expectation of refinement with an intermediate or professional bridge than with a student or rental level bridge. Just about every competent shop has different levels of bridges available. I know of one extremely well-respected shop that has a set price, but that’s because they will not cut anything but a De Luxe for any violin. For a lot of luthiers the difference between a student bridge and a professional one can involve hours of time and careful consideration of the particular instrument. Amateur workmen tend not to understand how much goes into cutting a good bridge—it’s not just a throwaway item, and the difference in sound can be dramatic.
I disagree. Good work is good work, and fitting a bridge is just that. A blank comes already cut. Refining the dimensions and fitting the feet to the top should be done with care no matter what the bridge cost or how soft or dense it is. I'm sure you "cut" all your bridges with care. You should! We can disagree, but your tendency to talk down to "amateur workmen" is unnecessary and self-serving.
For those interested in seeing what actually goes into cutting a good bridge, here is an excellent article that explains the process. Not everyone does isn’t exactly this way, but the basics are consistent among people who do good setup work.
trianglestrings.com/carving-a-...n-bridge/
As you can see, it’s not just a matter of fitting the feet and making a few small adjustments.
quote:
Originally posted by The Violin BeautifulThe cheaper bridge blanks are considerably softer. This is why I won’t cut anything below the #7 grade. My reputation as a luthier is determined by the quality of my work, and I don’t believe in taking any shortcuts by putting out work with mediocre materials.
It would be silly to charge the same amount for any level of bridge when the cost of the blank is considerably different, and even though I cut all my bridges with care, I have to take into consideration the way in which the instrument will be used and the characteristics of the wood, and there is simply a higher expectation of refinement with an intermediate or professional bridge than with a student or rental level bridge. Just about every competent shop has different levels of bridges available. I know of one extremely well-respected shop that has a set price, but that’s because they will not cut anything but a De Luxe for any violin. For a lot of luthiers the difference between a student bridge and a professional one can involve hours of time and careful consideration of the particular instrument. Amateur workmen tend not to understand how much goes into cutting a good bridge—it’s not just a throwaway item, and the difference in sound can be dramatic.
".......the difference in sound can be dramatic."
Is this because you spend more time fitting the feet on an expensive bridge blank?
I understand that the hardness, or density, of the bridge would matter, with all else being equal. The vibrations of the strings travels through a harder bridge bridge faster (and less impeded).
Similarly, vibrations would be less impeded traveling through a bridge with less mass. So, removing unnecessary mass from the bridge would make a difference.
But, aside from fitting the feet to the soundboard, considering two equal blanks- what possible difference could it make whether you carefully or sloppily carve one bridge vs the other?
quote:
Originally posted by fiddler135quote:
Originally posted by The Violin BeautifulThe cheaper bridge blanks are considerably softer. This is why I won’t cut anything below the #7 grade. My reputation as a luthier is determined by the quality of my work, and I don’t believe in taking any shortcuts by putting out work with mediocre materials.
It would be silly to charge the same amount for any level of bridge when the cost of the blank is considerably different, and even though I cut all my bridges with care, I have to take into consideration the way in which the instrument will be used and the characteristics of the wood, and there is simply a higher expectation of refinement with an intermediate or professional bridge than with a student or rental level bridge. Just about every competent shop has different levels of bridges available. I know of one extremely well-respected shop that has a set price, but that’s because they will not cut anything but a De Luxe for any violin. For a lot of luthiers the difference between a student bridge and a professional one can involve hours of time and careful consideration of the particular instrument. Amateur workmen tend not to understand how much goes into cutting a good bridge—it’s not just a throwaway item, and the difference in sound can be dramatic.".......the difference in sound can be dramatic."
Is this because you spend more time fitting the feet on an expensive bridge blank?I understand that the hardness, or density, of the bridge would matter, with all else being equal. The vibrations of the strings travels through a harder bridge bridge faster (and less impeded).
Similarly, vibrations would be less impeded traveling through a bridge with less mass. So, removing unnecessary mass from the bridge would make a difference.But, aside from fitting the feet to the soundboard, considering two equal blanks- what possible difference could it make whether you carefully or sloppily carve one bridge vs the other?
I fit the feet the same way for any bridge. A perfect fit to the top is an essential part of the process of cutting the bridge, and sloppy work is never acceptable.
How much difference does doing a competent job of cutting a bridge make over doing it poorly? The answer is pretty simple: it makes all the difference. Anyone who makes an argument that it's just a matter of getting a couple "dimensions" correct has not grasped the significance of cutting a good bridge. Luthiers make reputations for themselves by the skill of their bridge cutting. Good tonal results aren't just an accident or something that arise out of the ether--good work leads to good results, and fluency in tool skills and understanding of the mechanics of violin sound often go hand in hand.
Some years ago the Violin Society of America spent a week in the Oberlin summer workshop with many of the best makers and setup people cutting, adjusting, and comparing bridges to see how their methods and results differed and what aspects of the process make the biggest difference. Adjusting certain areas of the bridge will drastically change the sound. In my own experience, it's made the difference between customers hating and loving their instruments.
Edited by - The Violin Beautiful on 04/23/2023 09:24:01
quote:
Originally posted by The Violin Beautifulquote:
Originally posted by fiddler135quote:
Originally posted by The Violin BeautifulThe cheaper bridge blanks are considerably softer. This is why I won’t cut anything below the #7 grade. My reputation as a luthier is determined by the quality of my work, and I don’t believe in taking any shortcuts by putting out work with mediocre materials.
It would be silly to charge the same amount for any level of bridge when the cost of the blank is considerably different, and even though I cut all my bridges with care, I have to take into consideration the way in which the instrument will be used and the characteristics of the wood, and there is simply a higher expectation of refinement with an intermediate or professional bridge than with a student or rental level bridge. Just about every competent shop has different levels of bridges available. I know of one extremely well-respected shop that has a set price, but that’s because they will not cut anything but a De Luxe for any violin. For a lot of luthiers the difference between a student bridge and a professional one can involve hours of time and careful consideration of the particular instrument. Amateur workmen tend not to understand how much goes into cutting a good bridge—it’s not just a throwaway item, and the difference in sound can be dramatic.".......the difference in sound can be dramatic."
Is this because you spend more time fitting the feet on an expensive bridge blank?I understand that the hardness, or density, of the bridge would matter, with all else being equal. The vibrations of the strings travels through a harder bridge bridge faster (and less impeded).
Similarly, vibrations would be less impeded traveling through a bridge with less mass. So, removing unnecessary mass from the bridge would make a difference.But, aside from fitting the feet to the soundboard, considering two equal blanks- what possible difference could it make whether you carefully or sloppily carve one bridge vs the other?
I fit the feet the same way for any bridge. A perfect fit to the top is an essential part of the process of cutting the bridge, and sloppy work is never acceptable.
How much difference does doing a competent job of cutting a bridge make over doing it poorly? The answer is pretty simple: it makes all the difference. Anyone who makes an argument that it's just a matter of getting a couple "dimensions" correct has not grasped the significance of cutting a good bridge. Luthiers make reputations for themselves by the skill of their bridge cutting. Good tonal results aren't just an accident or something that arise out of the ether--good work leads to good results, and fluency in tool skills and understanding of the mechanics of violin sound often go hand in hand.
Some years ago the Violin Society of America spent a week in the Oberlin summer workshop with many of the best makers and setup people cutting, adjusting, and comparing bridges to see how their methods and results differed and what aspects of the process make the biggest difference. Adjusting certain areas of the bridge will drastically change the sound. In my own experience, it's made the difference between customers hating and loving their instruments.
I'm not sure I asked my question clearly. Let me try again.
Take two bridges: bridge #1 and bridge #2. Both are the same quality of wood blank, and the feet are fitted equally well to the top of the same violin. They are of the same mass, having the same amount of wood removed, from the same places. The only difference is that with bridge one the wood was removed hurriedly from its front and back face, and inside the curves. It does not look as professional as bridge #2.
Would there be a difference in the sound when using bridge #1 on this violin vs bridge #2, and could you guarantee that the carefully carved more professionally looking bridge would be better?
quote:
Originally posted by The Violin Beautifulquote:
Originally posted by fiddler135quote:
Originally posted by The Violin BeautifulThe cheaper bridge blanks are considerably softer. This is why I won’t cut anything below the #7 grade. My reputation as a luthier is determined by the quality of my work, and I don’t believe in taking any shortcuts by putting out work with mediocre materials.
It would be silly to charge the same amount for any level of bridge when the cost of the blank is considerably different, and even though I cut all my bridges with care, I have to take into consideration the way in which the instrument will be used and the characteristics of the wood, and there is simply a higher expectation of refinement with an intermediate or professional bridge than with a student or rental level bridge. Just about every competent shop has different levels of bridges available. I know of one extremely well-respected shop that has a set price, but that’s because they will not cut anything but a De Luxe for any violin. For a lot of luthiers the difference between a student bridge and a professional one can involve hours of time and careful consideration of the particular instrument. Amateur workmen tend not to understand how much goes into cutting a good bridge—it’s not just a throwaway item, and the difference in sound can be dramatic.".......the difference in sound can be dramatic."
Is this because you spend more time fitting the feet on an expensive bridge blank?I understand that the hardness, or density, of the bridge would matter, with all else being equal. The vibrations of the strings travels through a harder bridge bridge faster (and less impeded).
Similarly, vibrations would be less impeded traveling through a bridge with less mass. So, removing unnecessary mass from the bridge would make a difference.But, aside from fitting the feet to the soundboard, considering two equal blanks- what possible difference could it make whether you carefully or sloppily carve one bridge vs the other?
I fit the feet the same way for any bridge. A perfect fit to the top is an essential part of the process of cutting the bridge, and sloppy work is never acceptable.
How much difference does doing a competent job of cutting a bridge make over doing it poorly? The answer is pretty simple: it makes all the difference. Anyone who makes an argument that it's just a matter of getting a couple "dimensions" correct has not grasped the significance of cutting a good bridge. Luthiers make reputations for themselves by the skill of their bridge cutting. Good tonal results aren't just an accident or something that arise out of the ether--good work leads to good results, and fluency in tool skills and understanding of the mechanics of violin sound often go hand in hand.
Some years ago the Violin Society of America spent a week in the Oberlin summer workshop with many of the best makers and setup people cutting, adjusting, and comparing bridges to see how their methods and results differed and what aspects of the process make the biggest difference. Adjusting certain areas of the bridge will drastically change the sound. In my own experience, it's made the difference between customers hating and loving their instruments.
I tried to edit my last reply and couldn't, so I will have to do an addition. My addition question is this; are you saying that you can fine tune the sound quality of the violin through the carving of the bridge? For instance, bringing out more sound from one string vs another by how much wood you remove from different places on the bridge?
Going further, would you remove more wood underneath the D string to increase its volume, and similarly with other strings?
Or, do you carve the bridge to adjust the frequency range, not to just adjust which string is responding?
Edited by - fiddler135 on 04/23/2023 11:11:16
quote:
Originally posted by fiddler135Going further, would you remove more wood underneath the D string to increase its volume, and similarly with other strings?
Or, do you carve the bridge to adjust the frequency range, not to just adjust which string is responding?
I think tuning a bridge by varying the amount of wood underneath individual strings is not plausible. Even if it worked to some degree balancing the remaining strings would be an impossible puzzle. I might be wrong, and I'm interested in what violin beautiful says to your question. If such tuning were possible I'd think it would be more achievable on a harder bridge.
quote:
Originally posted by The Violin Beautifulquote:
Originally posted by fiddler135quote:
Originally posted by The Violin BeautifulThe cheaper bridge blanks are considerably softer. This is why I won’t cut anything below the #7 grade. My reputation as a luthier is determined by the quality of my work, and I don’t believe in taking any shortcuts by putting out work with mediocre materials.
It would be silly to charge the same amount for any level of bridge when the cost of the blank is considerably different, and even though I cut all my bridges with care, I have to take into consideration the way in which the instrument will be used and the characteristics of the wood, and there is simply a higher expectation of refinement with an intermediate or professional bridge than with a student or rental level bridge. Just about every competent shop has different levels of bridges available. I know of one extremely well-respected shop that has a set price, but that’s because they will not cut anything but a De Luxe for any violin. For a lot of luthiers the difference between a student bridge and a professional one can involve hours of time and careful consideration of the particular instrument. Amateur workmen tend not to understand how much goes into cutting a good bridge—it’s not just a throwaway item, and the difference in sound can be dramatic.".......the difference in sound can be dramatic."
Is this because you spend more time fitting the feet on an expensive bridge blank?I understand that the hardness, or density, of the bridge would matter, with all else being equal. The vibrations of the strings travels through a harder bridge bridge faster (and less impeded).
Similarly, vibrations would be less impeded traveling through a bridge with less mass. So, removing unnecessary mass from the bridge would make a difference.But, aside from fitting the feet to the soundboard, considering two equal blanks- what possible difference could it make whether you carefully or sloppily carve one bridge vs the other?
I fit the feet the same way for any bridge. A perfect fit to the top is an essential part of the process of cutting the bridge, and sloppy work is never acceptable.
How much difference does doing a competent job of cutting a bridge make over doing it poorly? The answer is pretty simple: it makes all the difference. Anyone who makes an argument that it's just a matter of getting a couple "dimensions" correct has not grasped the significance of cutting a good bridge. Luthiers make reputations for themselves by the skill of their bridge cutting. Good tonal results aren't just an accident or something that arise out of the ether--good work leads to good results, and fluency in tool skills and understanding of the mechanics of violin sound often go hand in hand.
Some years ago the Violin Society of America spent a week in the Oberlin summer workshop with many of the best makers and setup people cutting, adjusting, and comparing bridges to see how their methods and results differed and what aspects of the process make the biggest difference. Adjusting certain areas of the bridge will drastically change the sound. In my own experience, it's made the difference between customers hating and loving their instruments.
My 3rd reply-I couldn't edit to add this before I got your reply, so I hope you read all 3 before you do;
Do you carve each bridge the same way, or is each one customized?
[very much like question 2 , just less specific.]
There’s a lot to address in the last few comments, so let me break it up into separate thoughts.
First, in the scenario where there are two bridges of the same model and with the feet fitted equally well, I think the conditions of the comparison are too hypothetical to begin with; anyone who takes the time to properly fit the feet isn’t going to just rush through the other aspects of cutting the bridge and leave everything looking crude and rough.
Cutting a bridge hurriedly and roughly means that it would be almost impossible that the measurements would end up the same between bridges. Someone who’s just doing all the thicknessing with a belt or disc sander and just making some crude cuts or quick passes with a coarse file isn’t going to be able to get the same degree of accuracy without it just being dumb luck.
As important as the measurements are, there are other factors. If the work is crude, the surfaces of the bridge are then not being finished well, and that is not unimportant. Sandpaper and sanding devices leave behind a different surface than a block plane or file and there are remnants of sawdust and the abrasive in the wood. A dull knife or chisel cuts the wood differently from a sharp one, and this can be observed both by the naked eye and under a microscope.
Crude work also includes not cutting the wood in a way that keeps the curves and lines in order. This might sound like a criticism of aesthetics, but it pertains to structure and sound, not mere appearance.
The speed of the work doesn’t really matter if the results are the same, but for the results to match, the skill in cutting the faster one must equal or exceed that used to cut the other.
quote:
Originally posted by The Violin BeautifulThere’s a lot to address in the last few comments, so let me break it up into separate thoughts.
First, in the scenario where there are two bridges of the same model and with the feet fitted equally well, I think the conditions of the comparison are too hypothetical to begin with; anyone who takes the time to properly fit the feet isn’t going to just rush through the other aspects of cutting the bridge and leave everything looking crude and rough.
Cutting a bridge hurriedly and roughly means that it would be almost impossible that the measurements would end up the same between bridges. Someone who’s just doing all the thicknessing with a belt or disc sander and just making some crude cuts or quick passes with a coarse file isn’t going to be able to get the same degree of accuracy without it just being dumb luck.
As important as the measurements are, there are other factors. If the work is crude, the surfaces of the bridge are then not being finished well, and that is not unimportant. Sandpaper and sanding devices leave behind a different surface than a block plane or file and there are remnants of sawdust and the abrasive in the wood. A dull knife or chisel cuts the wood differently from a sharp one, and this can be observed both by the naked eye and under a microscope.
Crude work also includes not cutting the wood in a way that keeps the curves and lines in order. This might sound like a criticism of aesthetics, but it pertains to structure and sound, not mere appearance.
The speed of the work doesn’t really matter if the results are the same, but for the results to match, the skill in cutting the faster one must equal or exceed that used to cut the other.
Do you "tune" the bridge specific to the violin? (Other than the feet and height) and does the "tuning" include more than just leaving the bridge thick to reduce volume and thinning it to increase volume?
Or, is each bridge cut the same way?
quote:
Originally posted by fiddler135My 3rd reply-I couldn't edit to add this before I got your reply, so I hope you read all 3 before you do;
Do you carve each bridge the same way, or is each one customized?
[very much like question 2 , just less specific.]
I'll take the liberty of answering that from a job I"m working on today. One of my regular customers came up last weekend to spend some time learning about setup. He brought a fiddle he had bought over 10 years ago from a well known Texas luthier, before he started working with me, but hadn't played since. It didn't sound bad, but he wanted to know whether I could make it sound more like this one, which was the second favorite among the 15 that were tried out on that video.
First thing I needed to do was to put in a post that fits perfectly, a few mm in from the edge of the bridge foot, and 3mm back, for starters. I'll adjust the response of the G by slowly moving it east and gradually shortening the post, until I have the G response I want, and adjust the openness and response of the E and A primarily by moving the post North and South. He wants a more violinistic sound, so I'll cut a harder bridge, thinner at the bottom, higher arch, skinnier legs, narrower waist and more open kidneys, to improve mid- and high -end response, and leave the bridge top narrower. That should give a more open sound and eliminate the slightly covered sound my clientele usually prefers.
Now, the same guy had just brought in another fiddle that was strong and loud, but tubby and hollow, so I took a different approach. Started with the longest , tightest post I could squeeze in, way farther west than normal, and very close to the bridge (North). That smoothed things out quite a bit, and gave a much more balanced sound. We'll see what other minor tweaks may be useful in the future. As I often say, if the post isn't right, not much else makes any difference. I'll leave the existing bridge on this one until we know what more we want to do with it. Maybe that will give an ide of what can be done with a fiddle in everyday situations. You can't make a steak out of a spoiled pickle, but you can sometimes make a pretty big difference!
Also, regarding quality of work, when you are fitting post and bridge, a miss by .001 is in effect the same as 6 inches; it's still a miss. No contact is no contact. That's why we use some method of positively determining that the post ends and bridge feet make full contact.
Edited by - KCFiddles on 04/25/2023 09:51:16
I think Michael has answered the second question pretty well. There is quite a lot of room to adjust a bridge (within certain parameters). That is why they are sold as blanks—the luthier needs enough wood to be able to make choices.
In answer to the question about removing wood under each string, it is a practice that some follow. The way to do it is to get the bridge otherwise cut and then play the instrument. One can then take the bridge off to make adjustments, cutting away material in specific spots under the strings and repeat the process until the intended sound is achieved. I’ve tried this before but it isn’t what I do. Luthiers who spend a lot of time tuning their bridges tend to do it in other ways.
When I’m cutting a bridge, I need to think about the intended use of the instrument and how careful the owner will be in caring for it. This informs my decisions about how to cut a particular bridge.
Really, every bridge has to be customized, whether it’s being done for acoustics or not. The feet have to fit the top, the heights need to be carefully set, the curve needs to be laid out properly, and the thicknesses have to be adjusted. These parts of the process are essential for it to just be functional, and, with every violin being a little different, this means there has to be custom work.
There are factories that pay workers to quickly cut bridges for their instruments, which are made using the same materials, templates, and working methods. Since these things are all the same, the factories try to save money by just having everyone copy a template bridge so they don’t have to have the instruments on their benches.
Instruments of the same model should have interchangeable bridges, right? Wrong. This is why the factory bridges almost never actually fit—the feet are sometimes close, but being close to fitting is still not fitting, and the string heights are all over the place. The best thing to do with those bridges is to throw them out and fit proper ones.
quote:
Originally posted by KCFiddlesWhen I first started transitioning from serving violinists to serving fiddlers, I did quite a bit of research on the basic sound that fiddlers preferred. One thing I found was that fiddlers in general, and especially Old-time fiddlers detested "brilliance", that crystalline aspect of violin sound that helps the sound carry out over an orchestra. In my surveys , I got uniform, vehement rejection of that aspect of violin sound, and developed a basic setup that gives a dark low end, a fairly sweet, clear high end, but not much sound above 4000 hz. To that end, I deliberately choose a somewhat softer bridge, and cut it in ways that minimize the "violinistic" aspects of the sound. A lot of fiddlers also seem to prefer a somewhat "covered" sound, and I set up for that, too.
I spent the day yesterday with a pro from Branson who likes all the opposite characteristics. He likes a more "violinistic" sound, without the brilliance. He had brought up a fiddle that had been overthinned, and was a real cannon, but was tubby and wolfy sounding, and took a pretty radical sound post setup to make it smoother and more balanced. So, as a luthier, you have to listen to your customers and try to provide them what they want.
Is this a move the post setup more south and west; which means make a new post; or just loosen up the post thats there.
quote:
Originally posted by dogmageekquote:
Originally posted by KCFiddlesWhen I first started transitioning from serving violinists to serving fiddlers, I did quite a bit of research on the basic sound that fiddlers preferred. One thing I found was that fiddlers in general, and especially Old-time fiddlers detested "brilliance", that crystalline aspect of violin sound that helps the sound carry out over an orchestra. In my surveys , I got uniform, vehement rejection of that aspect of violin sound, and developed a basic setup that gives a dark low end, a fairly sweet, clear high end, but not much sound above 4000 hz. To that end, I deliberately choose a somewhat softer bridge, and cut it in ways that minimize the "violinistic" aspects of the sound. A lot of fiddlers also seem to prefer a somewhat "covered" sound, and I set up for that, too.
I spent the day yesterday with a pro from Branson who likes all the opposite characteristics. He likes a more "violinistic" sound, without the brilliance. He had brought up a fiddle that had been overthinned, and was a real cannon, but was tubby and wolfy sounding, and took a pretty radical sound post setup to make it smoother and more balanced. So, as a luthier, you have to listen to your customers and try to provide them what they want.Is this a move the post setup more south and west; which means make a new post; or just loosen up the post thats there.
I was doing a new setup, so starting with a new post as far "west" as I thought likely, then moving east until things balance out, keeping optimum fit at each stage. Not as tedious as it sounds..
That sounds like the way to do it; start west then go in [east] shortening the post until you like it.
quote:
Originally posted by dogmageekThat sounds like the way to do it; start west then go in [east] shortening the post until you like it.
Works for me. Easier to take wood off than to add it back on, refining the fit and the tone together. On a good instrument, I'll do a basic setup, let it settle in for a few weeks of playing if I can, then do some final, very subtle tweaks that involve just a whisper's worth of wood, or a mm of movement. When the fit is good, the post almost automatically goes back exactly where it belongs.
Page: 1 2
