This is continued along over the top and down the back of the scroll to
the shell, which seems to be a little less elongated than the early
specimens. It may be more apparent than real in most instances in
consequence of the bolder edging. The hollowing of the "shell" is
seemingly less delicate, but this may be taken as a natural result of
the foregoing. Further on these details will come in again for review.
To continue our remarks on the question of "thicknesses and their
adjustment" with each other. This is a department of the luthier's art,
to which perhaps much more attention has been directed by theorisers
than by practical workers. The latter class have no doubt been
influenced by the former to a considerable extent, oftentimes having
their views expressly carried out under their personal supervision. By
musical amateurs it is found to be a good theme for conversation when
the excellencies of the works of various masters are dilated upon. That
the richness of quality in a "Joseph" is the result of his having left
"his wood" thick in certain parts and not so much in others, and that
this, combined with the flat modelling, was the secret, and that it was
written that some of the Josephs were too thick in the back, and
therefore the freedom of the vibration was checked and the tone to some
degree stifled and deficient in penetrative power.
Among my early musical acquaintances, I remember an amateur violinist
who would "wax eloquent" on the power of his Strad, asserting that it
was owing in a great measure to its having been "left thick by the
maker" all round near the border. This, no doubt, many other amateurs,
acquainted with what used to be in print on the subject, will recognise
as being in opposition to what had been accepted as being the rule
generally observed by Stradivari, that the arching in its thickness
gently decreased towards the border where it was about a third less than
at the centre. This gentle gradation was said to be the cause of the
beautiful "silky" and "sympathetic" quality so prominently
characteristic of his instruments. The explanation of "the thing in
action," as mechanicians would term it, was thus--the greatest thickness
being at the part all round by the feet of the bridge, was able to
sustain the vibration, or the successive shocks caused by the bow, which
were transmitted through the wood of the upper table and were gradually
lessened in intensity as the thickness decreased toward the border,
where they subsided, or were lost.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account