THE COMPLEXTY OF SOUNDTo speak about sound is somewhat like discussing colours. When we show someone a red object, it is clear that the other person will see the same thing as us, whereas perception of tonality and shade will differ from one person to another. That is because every brain does its own interpolation; it would be difficult if not impossible to make an interpretation of what exactly one sees and hears. Another matter is when we have the same perception, but we give it different names.
Violoncello Bow by D.T. Navea Vera – 2013 Last week I demonstrated the beautiful violoncello bow made by my colleague, shown in the photo above. Almost immediately the client was enthusiastic about the bow. He tried our bow, then he tried his own bow and so on several times. Right from the beginning, the superiority of my colleagues work was audible. I was at the house of the musician, and therefore in a relatively small environment. When we had finished the session, he asked for the possibility to try the bow at the theatre, to confirm the sensation he just had. I agreed to meet the following day. I was sure that further evidence would convince him, but I was wrong. Motivation: “the bow is much more precise than mine, but produces less harmonics”. I do agree with this statement, as long as you interpret the words correctly. Let's begin with the first part of the statement. In the small environment our bow proved to be “more precise” in definition and articulation. This is because of the superior material chosen; the tension of the fibres in the wood allows these results. The observation is therefore correct. The second part: “produces less harmonics”, is correct as well, as long as you know exactly what's behind the affirmation. The two bows were made with different mechanic concepts; the bow of our client is made with a modern mechanism, that would be after 1855, whereas our bow is made with an antique mechanism. Not only does the two bows function very differently one from the other, they also have a different return of sound. The motivation to why we have chosen the antique mechanism to our bows is precise and very easy to understand. Thanks to the antique structure, which is more soft and has the curve distributed evenly throughout the length of the stick, you obtain a broad sound which is more easy to control dynamically. Choosing the antique structure, you can use a more nervous wood which then gives definition and penetration without renouncing on the sound. The curve in a modern structure is more rigid and as you know it wasn't developed with the purpose to improve the mechanism but to speed up production. The modern curves are pushed towards the tip and this leaves an enormously unbalanced bow, and not only in mechanical terms. Three-quarters of the stick with this kind of structure remains straight and a bow with less curve will be more rigid. The effect on the sound reflects the structure. The sound will become hard and filthy, and that would be the harmonics I am referring to. The same thing has happened with these two bows. The sound of our bow is acuto and defined whereas the sound of the other bow has more harmonics. Some not needed; that is if you are not looking for a sound like Hendrix. Knowing “the sound” is quite difficult. Not only does it have a multitude of variables all to be analysed, but more importantly, it acts according to the environment and the way in that we relate to it. I know very few musicians that have, as well as technical skills on developing bows, the possibility to obtain experiences like the ones my work offers me. If this client had tryed our bow within an orchestra, he would have realized that the sound of our bow would have continued in an unchanged way, whereas his own bow has a confused sound because it produces multiple harmonics. Craftsmen and instrumentalists deal with similar things observed from different angles – we should enter into dialogue even if it isn't simple. To read more about this topic: So long, Paolo
|
   |
