• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Double Bass soundpost

  • Thread starter Thread starter D.W.
  • Start date Start date
#22
arnoldschnitzer said:
I've seen many soundposts installed in the method he describes, with a huge bevel. None of them fit well. Nearly all of the bass' tops had developed dents. All of the basses were improved tonally (according to their owners) by the installation of a properly fit soundpost without the huge bevel. I think installing a post with a huge bevel loads too much pressure on too small a spot and can contribute to a crack in the top there. Do you see violinmakers or cellomakers doing this? No. Other bass luthiers (than Traeger or Merchant)? No. I'm certain Mr. Traeger could fit a post properly if he wanted to. Where's the science and research behind this "twisting" business, and why have 500 years of stringed instrument evolution never before gone down that road?

BTW, great to read your words again, Bob. It's been dull without you.
Click to expand...
While I do not endorse nor condemn Mr. Treager's method, I do need to point out that he says nothing about a "huge bevel". In fact, he says in the book that he does the rounding of the outer edges After properly fitting the entire surface of the soundpost in the traditional way. The only way you could exert enough pressure to dent or crack the top would be if the post were too long and of course that is not proper fitting regardless of whether or not the outer edge were rounded or not.

While on the subject of a proper fitting soundpost, I recall a discussion a few years ago where you stated that a soundpost can only be properly (i.e. exact fit) in one spot in the instrument. Once you move it (adjustment!), it is no long an exact fit. Rounding the edges of the ends is nothing new. Contrary to you, I know lots of violin and cello makers who routinely slightly round over the end edges to prevent a sharp edge of a soundpost from digging into the top while making adjustments (under tension). With some high archings, it is almost a neccessity.

As for the science and research of "twisting", I should point out that Chuck Traeger was a founder and remains a member of the Catgut Acoustical Society (now a part of the Violin Society of America). CAS members have been doing just this sort of acoustic science research for the past 60 years or so. I'm sure that if you were to call Chuck (the number is in his book), he would be more than happy to point you to the exact reference you are talking about. Sorry my friend, but many folks have been going down that road over the past half century. Perhaps you didn't mean it to be, but it sure looked like a cheap shot at a guy who isn't here to defend himself to me.
 
#23
Yes, I also slightly chamfer the soundpost's edges to prevent splitting of the post and tearing of the top wood. We're talking barely perceptible here. And I did say a soundpost will often need to be refit when adjusting it, because it only fits precisely where it was originally set. A slight chamfer is way different than a huge bevel leaving only 1/2 to 2/3 the original diameter intact. And this is what I have seen, several times. And when you try to adjust a post fitted in this way you can't see what you're doing (because of the bevel), so it's next to impossible to assure a good fit.

Yes, my comment may have been a bit extreme. I get excited when I see people doing questionable things to fine instruments. But as far as Mr. Traeger defending himself; this is an open forum--who's stopping him?
 
#25
I have never noticed Chuck Traeger on these forums!

Traeger writes 4 full pages on how to fit a soundpost and I can't honestly see any significant difference in what he describes to what you or Eric might do. Exact fit, correct placement, alignment of the grain, correct width, correct length.

Of four pages, he spends about one short paragraph on the "rounding" of a soundpost in certain cases, and his words include "lightest possible chamfer" ... "the edges of the end that are rounded, not the entire surface domed over" ... "work slowly and test as you go" ... "proper manipulation of the post by ... gently drawing the top end against the top will avid scraping wood from the spruce top plate" etc

But he does share his own observations, a few personal experiences, theories, and a few things that have worked for him.

And he doesn't mention "a huge bevel leaving only 1/2 to 2/3 the original diameter intact", or signing his soundposts ...

So, er, like, um, yeah. Possible.

:eyebrow:
 
#26
My daughter made $80 last sunday standing with two clarinettists and the "band manager" outside the supermarket holding my bass ( shes a player too) and singing Kum Ba Yah and When the Saints.
$80!! And my band played for 3 hours in a busy market in town playing salsa and we walked away with $7.50 each ... Oh Lord, Kum Bah Yah ...
 
#27
Matthew Tucker said:
My daughter made $80 last sunday standing with two clarinettists and the "band manager" outside the supermarket holding my bass ( shes a player too) and singing Kum Ba Yah and When the Saints.
$80!! And my band played for 3 hours in a busy market in town playing salsa and we walked away with $7.50 each ... Oh Lord, Kum Bah Yah ...
Click to expand...
And I'll bet she's prettier than you, too.;)
 
#28
Matthew Tucker said:
...

Surely, slightly rounding the top of a soundpost only effectively decreases the contact surface while retaining the mass of the existing soundpost? ..
Click to expand...

Decreasing the contact area would also increase the pressure on the table, which would not be a good thing. I imagine there'd be a greatly increased liklihood of cracking at that point. Rounding the top of the post could easily reduce the contact area by 80%... meaning a 5x increase in force at the point of contact.
 
#29
mje said:
Decreasing the contact area would also increase the pressure on the table, which would not be a good thing. I imagine there'd be a greatly increased liklihood of cracking at that point. Rounding the top of the post could easily reduce the contact area by 80%... meaning a 5x increase in force at the point of contact.
Click to expand...

Correct. While I am no expert in the fitting of a soundpost and am unqualified to weigh in on the matter at hand, I will weigh in on a matter of physics. Bob's statement that, "The only way you could exert enough pressure to dent or crack the top would be if the post were too long and of course that is not proper fitting regardless of whether or not the outer edge were rounded or not." is not really correct. Imagine filing the sound post to a point and fitting it with the same overall tightness. It would poke right through the top! pressure = force/area.
 
#30
arnoldschnitzer said:
But as far as Mr. Traeger defending himself; this is an open forum--who's stopping him?
Click to expand...
This is exactly the kind of attitude that convinced me to leave this forum two years ago. The question raised concerned a topic that is written about in Mr. Traeger's book. It is more than apparent that you have not truly read his book. It took me several weeks to digest all that is in it and I'm sure I missed a few things along the way. It is not a perfect book, but until someone writes another one, it's the only book out there dedicated to doublebass repairing and setup.

I would have expected this attitude from some others here, but I'm disappointed to see it from you. I always consided you to be one of the good guys around here. If one of the good guys can not address what is in a book without attacking the author, then this is not a place where I wish to wish to be.
 
#32
Bob Branstetter said:
This is exactly the kind of attitude that convinced me to leave this forum two years ago. The question raised concerned a topic that is written about in Mr. Traeger's book. It is more than apparent that you have not truly read his book. It took me several weeks to digest all that is in it and I'm sure I missed a few things along the way. It is not a perfect book, but until someone writes another one, it's the only book out there dedicated to doublebass repairing and setup.



"Both Arnold and I have seen work from Mr. Traegar and his disciple and have not been impressed. [have you seen his work?] Just our opinion. Hearing someone say that rounding the edge ot the post will let the top vibrate freer sounds to me [and apparently Arnold]like caca. So Arnold made a snide comment, big freakin' deal! Did you reappear just to "quit" again? People talk about being "professional" and all. I got a big mouth and if you come to my shop I'll be wearing shorts a stained TB shirt and worn Birkenstocks. But yer bass'll get glued up right and I'll never make good money on you. Arnold may not live up to your standards of "professionalism" but I can tell you he does fine work! And it's the work that talks and everything else walks."

I would have expected this attitude from some others here, but I'm disappointed to see it from you. I always consided you to be one of the good guys around here. If one of the good guys can not address what is in a book without attacking the author, then this is not a place where I wish to wish to be.

"You are repeating yourself, Bob."
Click to expand...

11111111
 
#35
Peace%20In%20The%20Valley%20EP.jpg
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back