| Author |
Comment |
Bobbie
Registered User
Posts: 595
(8/19/01 11:41:33 am)
Reply
|
Things that
affect sound and response
Vague, I know. But I have a few questions maybe someone can help me
with. I'm trying out a new cello (new to me, actually about 8 years
old) and I'm very happy with the response. I can bow cleanly and
easily on all four strings, anywhere. But I'm not happy with the
sound on the A and D as it seems somewhat muffled and the A seems to
lack some harmonic richness.
In addition, this cello has a
more normal bridge height than my old one does (the old one is quite
low so the strings are closer to the fingerboard. This one is right
at about 5 mm for the A and 7.5 for the C. Right now that feels
uncomfortable to me but I'm assuming it contributes to the sound and
that I'll get used to it.
So: what factors affect string
response? What factors affect the tone? Am I going to lose the quick
string response if I find a cello that has a richer upper register
or make changes to this one? What can I do to my old cello to
improve string response and open the sound up more?
|
TerryM
Registered
User
Posts: 512
(8/19/01 1:24:13
pm)
Reply
|
Re: Things that
affect sound and response
Some of the first things that come to mind are the type of strings,
the position of the soundpost, the type of tailpiece and the actual
fit of the bridge. If the tailpiece is too heavy this can have a
muting effect on the sound, especially in the upper registers. I am
sure you have followed all the Harmonie, etc. tailpiece posts that
were on this board. One additional factor with respect to tailpieces
that I have found is that the tailpiece can be too light and you
tend to lose a bit of bottom end sound. The overall thickness and
carving of the bridge can affect the areas you are concerned with as
well.
I recently worked on a friends cello that had a similar
problem with muted upper strings. I took a bit of wood off the
bridge right at the "waist" on the treble side of the bridge. I have
found that the thickness of this part of the bridge can greatly
affect the openness of the instrument. The net effect is to make the
hole at the waist slightly more oval than round. Keep in mind
however, that it is a one-way modification because once you have
removed wood you can't put it back on. If you go too far then you
have to fit a new bridge. I use a small sharp carving knife to take
off very little wood and test it as I go. The same process can work
on the bass side as well, but I caution again that it is a one-way
modification. My friend was very pleased with response on his cello
after the modification.
As far as the bridge height goes you
will, as you say, get used to that. Make sure that the height is not
too high at the nut end as well. This can greatly affect the ease of
playing as well.
I am presently experimenting with strings on
trial from Ellen at Cellos2Go and what I am finding out is very
interesting. I am working between two D strings that have different
playing character. One is a Pirastro Permanent and the other is a
Jargar. What surprised me most is that the two strings affect the
response of the A string quite significantly. I can tell that the
two strings give different force on the bridge, when up to pitch, by
the way the other strings go out of tune when I change between
strings. This means that I have to string the A string especially at
a higher or lower tension to compensate for this. I am speculating
that this "loading" on the bridge must affect the overall vibration
of the cello top as well, thus giving rise to a varied response to
the other strings. Thus it might seem optimal to try different
string that have different sound and projection to increase the
openness of the cello. However, this, in turn, could affect the
overall evenness of sound from string to string and the ease of
playing the cello as well.
I continue to be amazed at what a
bundle of interrelated and active parts go into making a stringed
instrument sound the way it does.
Terry
|
Bobbie
Registered User
Posts: 596
(8/19/01 2:15:43 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Things that
affect sound and response
If I put a new bridge on my old cello, raising the height of the
strings a little closer to normal, what will that do to the sound?
How are "strong" vs. "medium" strings? I've thought of replacing the
tailpiece and I can see how that would help the sound, but how can I
make the cello easier to play, i.e, more responsive?
On the
new cello I have limited options. I'm going to try varying the
strings. The tailpiece seems light enough and not so light the bass
is lacking. I am afraid that the climate change is affecting the
sound but the best I can do for that is wait for awhile and then get
the cello adjusted again. What I think is going to happen is that I
won't be able to get the sound I want and will have to keep on
shopping, and in the mean time I may want to do what I can to
improve the old cello.
|
TerryM
Registered
User
Posts: 513
(8/19/01 3:03:01
pm)
Reply
|
Re: Things that
affect sound and response
A new and slightly higher bridge will most probably increase the
projection of the instrument as a higher bridge adds further tension
to the strings. One thing to check is the angle of the neck. I had
an interesting and somewhat costly experience with my main cello
that I have had for over twenty years. I was in a luthier's shop
trying out bows and the owner of the shop, who is a cellist as well,
tried my cello and said, "nice sound but the neck is low and the
projection of the cello could be improved by re-setting the neck." I
continued to try out bows, thinking, "this guy wants me to spend
some money here for sure." A bit later another man was wandering
around the shop and he commented on the sound of my cello. I asked
him if he was a cellist and he said yes. I asked him if he would
like to try the cello and he did. He immediately launched into the
Dvorak concerto in the upper registers. He then said, "Nice cello,
but the neck is low and you could have the projection improved by
having the neck re-set." I thought, "right...this guy is in cahoots
with the owner." The cellist left the shop and I asked one of the
clerks in the store who he was and he gave me his name and he is a
professional cellist, and in fact I own several of his CDs. To make
a long winded story short, I had the neck reset and it really
improved both the projection, response and overall evenness in
playability of my cello.
You can check the neck projection by
putting a stiff ruler on the fingerboard at the middle or highest
point and then extend it to the bridge. Now measure up from the
bridge to the lower edge of the ruler and it should be very close to
81mm or about 3.2 inches. My cello was about a 10 mm too low. My
cello was made in 1871 and may have been originally built that way,
but it may also have been the result of a careless repair. Most
pre-1800 cellos have all had the necks reset to a higher angle to
improve (or should I say change) the projection of the instrument.
Moving the soundpost can also affect the response of the
treble strings and the overall evenness of playing. If you are
trying out this new cello you might take it to a shop and have a
luthier adjust the instrument and have you play it. You will soon
see, after a few adjustments, if any appreciable change in sound
and/or response is possible. Generally, moving the soundpost toward
the bridge foot will increase the volume of the cello, especially
the A and D strings. Moving it away from the bridge foot will have
the opposite effect. Moving it slightly sideways will change the
relative response of the bass and treble strings. Moving it closer
to the bass strings will give a slightly better bass response at the
expense of the treble strings. Moving the soundpost sideways can
only be done on a very limited basis as the curvature of the back
and belly change and the soundpost will be either too tight or too
loose depending on where it is placed. It is also important that the
soundpost not get turned as it should be a very close fit to back
and belly as well.
I am not so sure on strong vs medium
strings. I think that, when up to pitch, they give different loading
on the bridge and that it changes the upper harmonics to some
extent. I would think that strong or forte strings would tend to
have better projection. Others here will be sure to have some
comments in this direction.
So many variables, so little
time.........
Terry
|
Bobbie
Registered User
Posts: 597
(8/19/01 3:28:00 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Things that
affect sound and response
Thanks, Terry. If I'm measuring correctly it is about 80mm. It may
be slightly to low but that probably isn't worth trying to fix. But
fitting a new bridge and a new tailpiece just might be worth the
expense if I don't find a new cello soon.
It IS probably
worth having the luthier try adjusting the newer cello, especially
after it has acclimatized. I hope it won't unacclimatize in just a
few hours, if I do decide to do that. It depends on my string
experiments, as right now I don't think the sound of the A matches
the rest of the cello, and strings ought to affect that more than
soundpost or bridge adjustment. It does amaze me how the A is
changed by a change in the lower strings. Just changing the A rarely
has anywhere near the effect of changing the lower strings.
|
CelloBass
Registered User
Posts: 58
(8/19/01 3:34:20 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Things that
affect sound and response
Bobbie,
you were right when you mentioned the string choice
as an important factor.
On one of my cellos I had the same
problem - lacking brilliance and harmonics on both A- and D-string.
The instrument sounded loud, but somehow tense. Both were Larsen
soloist, and I thought that this would already be the most brilliant
string combination. Then I replaced the D by a soft (gauge) Prim
string - and suddenly I had much more harmonics on the D. The sound
was softer, but more expressive, had more overtones and the response
was better. Really nice, almost like a gut string. And, I could
hardly believe it, suddenly the A-string (still Larsen soloist) had
more brilliance as well. The whole cello had turned to the bright
and brilliant side. Next step: I replaced the super-expensive
tungsten Spirocore G-string with a cheap medium Prim. Now I had nice
harmonics on the G-string as well, it sounded better, had more
character, and it was easier to bow, without loosing substance. And
the whole cello sounded more relaxed, not tense
anymore.
Actually the whole thing was not my idea. Some weeks
ago I had taken one of my cellos to my luthier and told him that he
should find out what strings work best on this cello. The cello came
back with a weird combination of soft and medium Prim strings -
except the A which was a Larsen soloist. My luthier is cellist, and
when he played my cello, I thought that I would listen to a new,
different cello, much better than my old one. I asked him why he had
put those cheap Prim strings on it. With a broad grin he told me:
"Stay away from those high-tech heavy-metal tungsten strings unless
you have a good old cello in the 50.000$ plus range. New cellos are
often overloaded by the intense harmonics produced by those modern
high-density-strings. The result is that the response gets worse and
finally they sound worse than the good old simple and cheap steel
string. The only exception is the A-string. On this string it is
worth investing more, even on new cellos. When trying strings, start
with steel core, rope or solid, steel-wound and don't think that
their price indicates their quality."
I have learned a lot
from this experience: Replacing one string can change the whole
instrument. Prim strings are the most underestimated cello strings.
I play medium on G, soft on D and C, but this can vary from
instrument to instrument. At first the Prim-D has a slight metallic
edge, but it disappears after one or two weeks.
Horst
|
Bobbie
Registered User
Posts: 598
(8/19/01 3:55:11 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Things that
affect sound and response
Interesting. I used Prims on my old cello for awhile but Larsens
were definitely an improvement. I've always replaced them in pairs,
though, so never paired a Larsen A with anything else on my own
cello. I have an old Prim D around so maybe I'll give that a try.
|
Andrew
Victor
Registered
User
Posts: 381
(8/20/01 11:29:28
am)
Reply
|
Re: Things that
affect sound and response
What a great thread! So much useful advice.
I would only add
two things to be considered. The endpin can make as big a change in
the sound of an instrument as can the tailpiece - many of us have
found the New Harmony graphite-composite endpins to have a
"profound" effect.
The bow can also make an unbelievable
difference in the sound of a cello and its response - so try
different bows - and make sure the strings are clear of excess rosin
and that the bow hairs are tightened properly (not as easy to assure
as you might think).
Andy
|
Bobbie
Registered User
Posts: 601
(8/20/01 12:40:00 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Things that
affect sound and response
Right now I'm more interested in response. How can you improve on
that, other than with the right strings? Is it built into the cello?
What makes one cello better than another?
|
TerryM
Registered
User
Posts: 516
(8/20/01 6:24:50
pm)
Reply
|
Re: Things that
affect sound and response
If we had the answer to your last question we would be all playing
Strad-like instruments. :) Seriously, I think it is very difficult
to answer this question. There are so many different aspects to a
good sounding, good projecting cello. Some of it comes down to
subjectivity as well. What some like, others will not.
I am
presently working on a cello that I bought on eBay. This cello was a
mess when I got it. It had two serious cracks on the belly and
someone had attempted to patch them and hide the repair under some
ugly stain and varnish. The cello was poorly setup, with a bridge
that was too high, too thick and the feet did not fit the belly. The
fingerboard was improperly put on, the neck is set a bit low, the
nut was too high, the saddle too low. etc. I only paid a very small
sum for it and I was expecting most of these ills. The bow I got
with the cello has been valued at more than I paid for the cello,
bow and hard case. But even with all these faults the cello had a
good sound and projected well. The tone was complex and rich in
harmonics. My teacher played it and even thought it was difficult to
play the way it was set up, immediately offered me twice what I paid
for it. There was just something about the sound of it.
I
have since cleaned the stain off the belly and fixed the other
faults myself and re-carved and re-fit the bridge, although I have
not re-set the neck. The cello looks quite passable now. The tone
has only improved and is now much more responsive and even across
the registers. However, it is still the same basic quality of sound
as before - projecting and complex. The cello dates from about 1850
-1870, according to a shop that I had look at it when I first
received it. By the way, they told me it would not be worth it to
have them do the work. My point to all this is that the quality of
sound was there even before the cello was properly set-up.
I
think that lot of it must be in the quality of the wood and the
carving. A luthier friend of mine told me that when he first started
making cellos he carved them to specific dimensions in the front and
back plates. His cellos were quite variable in sound quality from
one to the next. He then began sizing the plates to the specific
density of the wood rather than a rote set of standard measurements
and this improved the quality of the sound and the responsiveness of
his instruments. The famous makers used tap tones to tell them when
the wood had been carved to the right thickness. I would assume that
most factory carved cellos made today are made to specific
dimensions rather than treating each piece of wood separately and
allowing for density variations. I think that quality and seasoning
of the wood are major factors as well. Try pricing the wood to build
a cello and you will see that aged, high quality wood and fittings
will cost several thousand dollars, before any labor is put into
making the instrument.
With my eBay cello new strings also
made a positive improvement and I think that picking strings that
make up for deficiencies in the sound or response of an instrument
is important and it is also important to find a set of strings (not
necessarily the same make of string) that complement each
other.
Sorry for the long winded response to your short, but
difficult question.
Terry
|
Bobbie
Registered User
Posts: 603
(8/20/01 9:30:26 pm)
Reply
|
Physics
??
A cello has a good sound when the vibration of the string is easily
carried through the bridge and body of the cello and the body is
built in such a way that the sound is amplified pleasantly. Right?
Thick wood, poor bridges, bad strings, all serve to damp out the
sound. Some of that is adjustable but the major factor, the cello,
is not, at least not by most of us.
If the cello is
responsive, it sounds quickly and easily when the bow is used. That
would suggest that the vibrations travel quickly. Why? Or maybe it
is just that the string starts vibrating with less effort? The cello
itself must vibrate with less effort, as well. I can see how the
construction of the bridge, the body, and the soundpost placement
would all affect that. Maybe we should have carbon fiber bridges.
|
CelloBass
Registered User
Posts: 62
(8/21/01 7:46:46 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Physics
??
Bobbie,
exactly, you are right. Two things are important.
The waves have to travel along the top quickly and at the same
speed. When the density of the top's wood is not even and the top is
carved in a factory, the waves travel faster through the denser
parts of the wood. Those differences in speed mean a loss of energy,
and a major part of the energy you put into the cello with your bow
is used up to bend the wood. To compensate that, a luthier carves
the denser parts of the wood thinner which slows down the waves.
When you knock at the top (not mounted, just the top) and the
carving has been done perfectly, you will hear a clear sound having
a well defined pitch. Almost like those wooden sticks of a
xylophone. If the carving is not OK, it will sound like knocking at
a door, just noise. The difficult part is to find out where you have
to carve the wood thinner and to keep the pitch at the specified
note. Top and back are carved until a specified pitch is reached.
The luthier can also decide whether he wants to build an instrument
that is easy to play now - or in 100 years. If you leave the top
thick, the instrument will sound weak and will be difficult to play
at first, but it will improve when time passes and when the wood
drys out and is cracked in. When you carve the top thin, the
response of the new instrument will be good, it will speak easily
and sound loud. But its tone will loose substance over time. This is
because the top has to have a certain mass to transmit the waves to
the air. And because the mass gets lower over time, it is not
possible to build an instrument that sounds and responds perfectly
forever. So you could say that if you play a good instrument that is
difficult to play now, you actually do this job so that anybody else
will have a good instrument in 50 or 100 years. Unfortunately he
will not pay you for that, but it might pay off when you sell the
instrument later. 
Horst
|
Patocellist
Registered User
Posts: 9
(8/22/01 9:22:36 pm)
Reply
 |
Carbon Fiber
Soundpost
I am currently trying a carbon fiber soundpost, searching to
improve the responsiveness of my cello. The instrument used to be
very easy to play, but some day in tour, on the road, some
not-so-responsable luthier change my soundpost, and it started my
torture. Since then, my cello sounds well and loud as always, but
incredible hard to play, in especial the lower strings. I must say
that the new soundpost marks a change, but not so dramatic at first.
It continues to improve, and each morning I notice that at orchestra
reharsal.
I recommend to everybody to try that kind of soundpost!
Edited by: Patocellist
at: 8/27/01 9:47:40 pm
|
Len
Thompson
Registered
User
Posts: 204
(8/30/01 7:33:22
pm)
Reply
|
Things that
effect your cello
Everybody seems to have a slightly (or grossly)different idea of
the correct improvment'(s) to make to get a better sound from their
cello. Obviously each cello is different, and the modifications will
most likely differ also. That said, my own cello (Doetsch) was quite
lacking and I had it in the shop today. Here are some of the things
we tried and the results found.
Adjusted sound post- No
noticable improvment
Carbon fiber end-pin- " "
Change bridge-
Deffinate improvment
Change C/G strings- Greatest
improvment
Plane f/b(less scoop)- Action improved
Reshape nut
- Action and sound improved
The strings were Helicore, and
are now Spirocore. They are infinately better, and along with the
bridge, account for the greatest improvments. The cello was rather
nasal, and lack-luster, but now is sounding quite nice.
In
fairness, the other items had some effect, but they were very
subtle. Also I tried a few new bows and have to say that for the
money the Glasser carbon fiber bows were great, for less than half
the cost of Coda bows.
Of course this is how my cello reacted,
but thought I would share, especially for other Doetsch owners!
Len
|
TerryM
Registered
User
Posts: 539
(8/30/01 9:29:24
pm)
Reply
|
To:
Patocellist
Interesting idea. Where did you get your carbon fiber soundpost?
Terry
|
Patocellist
Registered User
Posts: 11
(9/1/01 11:57:41 pm)
Reply
|
Re: To:
Patocellist
A luthier & cellist (female) did it. She got the fiber and made
it by herself.
It sound real good!
| |
Internet Cello Society
Forums
Email
This To a Friend
Topic Commands (Moderator only)