Mass Production

The birth of the first cellos were made almost 500 years ago in Italy by Andrea Amati. They were hand carved pieces of art, and all of the decisions were very deliberately made. The craftsman needed to know exactly which wood to use for each part of the cello, and how to fit it with strings and bridges that would resonate the most on that particular cello. Now in the 21st century, professionals strive to play on those old beautiful instruments especially by the widely popular Stradivarius and Guarneri, which have rich tones and can produce many different qualities of sound. However their prices can become rather high; from hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars. Is it worth spending all that money for a handcrafted, old instrument? Many of the strings and bridges string players use on their instruments cost a fortune on their own, cello string sets costing around $300 and lasting for only a few months. To get a full set of one of the most popular strings for cello, “Larsen”, it costs $227 on Amazon. To get your bow rehaired at Sullivan Violins in Rochester it costs $70, and to get a new bridge could be in the hundreds. Repairing your instrument will always be expensive, so why not buy a mass produced computer-perfected instrument?

Recently, the Chinese have started to sell instruments in the violin family that are under $5,000 (I’m playing on one right now). These instruments, although not as brilliant as a Strad, are not too shabby. They can have beautiful sounds, and can be fixed up with proper strings and a better bridge if needed. The reason these instruments are so cheap, is because they are partially (if not fully) factory made. Yes, instruments are becoming mass produced products, rather than finely crafted pieces of art. Some will be painted with spots trying to look old and used, to appeal to an audience or buyer that appreciates antique instruments (kind of the equivalent to pre-ripped jeans).

Although this baffles the mind of most classical string players, these cellos and violins are not the first factory made and mass produced instruments. Super-stores are selling guitars for very cheap. “Huge U.S. chain stores, such as Costco, Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club, are beginning to sell low-cost instruments, appealing to spontaneous buyers. Those stores have been partly behind a fivefold increase in the sales of electric and acoustic guitars in the U.S. market since 2000. ‘The average selling price (of a guitar) has gone down from $630 or $640 to somewhere in the $300s. That is almost a direct result of Chinese manufacturing,’ Lamond said”. These mass produced instruments are changing the way we think about music and craftsmanship. Is it important to always require authenticity and individuality as artists? Even for poor college students who just want to learn how to play guitar in an elective class during their first semester sophomore year?

This applies to all forms of art, not just music. Just the other day I was shopping in my favorite store, Target, and I saw many pieces of art for sale. It was very obvious that a computer had created it, my good friend Raina pointed out the straight lines on the canvas that suggested an automatic machine painting in a factory setting.

There were many upsetting aspects to this “wall art”, but there were also some nice things to consider. The price is always fairly cheap at Target, the symmetry can be very pleasing to the eye, and the colors in the painting are very real and don’t have anything to do with the artists themselves. If the buyer is not an art expert and wants something that will brighten up the room rather than something to really sit and think about, this should be perfect for them.

So is it really important that someone is handcrafting your instrument? Aren’t machines made to perfect what the human body cannot do on its own? For some it isn’t important, and that is okay. Not everyone needs to be an expert on what the latest painter likes, or all the latest fashion trends, or have the most beautiful sounding cello. Some buyers really want to experience something raw and human; to notice a connection between themselves and the artist. It is obviously not essential to use machines, as the best instruments we have are made by craftsmen in the 17th and 18th centuries who made glorious instruments all on their own.

But do these instruments really sound different? In a blind test where a violinist played the same piece on a Stradivarius and a modern instrument, the results were never actually what we would expect. Some of the time performers and listeners would like the Strad the least!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtlTJkbUqkA

Does this mean that mass produced instruments can sound the same as a Strad? Is there actually a difference in the instrument’s sound, or are we just pretentious? Maybe spending thousands or millions on a fancy instrument is just a waste of money, and buying mass produced instruments is the way to go.

Why F Holes?

One the most notable features of the modern bowed string instrument family is that of the so called “f holes” located centrally on either side of the instruments’ main bodies.  These in particular contrast with the single circular shaped sound hole located in the center of an acoustic guitar.  In the guitar’s case, the single circular hole has been a staple of the instrument’s design for centuries.  In the case of the violin and other bowed string instrument, the f hole is a product of years of development through trial and error.

Image source: http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1741&context=gradreports

The earliest bowed string instruments actually had the same circular hole design as the guitar.  This probably occurred as some of the first instruments to be played with bows were simply lutes, whose main performance technique remained plucking.  However, as bowing took off as a genuine technique in its own right, the makers of such stringed instruments found that the circular sound holes did not produce the desired results.  And so, they began experimenting with other designs.

In the 10th and 11th centuries, the single circular hole was replaced by two separate circular holes on opposite sides of the instrument’s body, much as the modern f holes are located today.  This double design produced a greater acoustic clarity for bowed instruments than the single holes did, but it was still far from perfect.  And so, the experimenting continued.

By the 12th and 13th centuries, the circular holes were replaced with half moon shaped holes, followed quickly by C shaped holes.  These, combined with improvements in the technology of the bow itself contributed to a new era in the evolution of the bowed string instruments.  These C holes were so successful, that while they went through many phases of stylization through the centuries to come, they remained a staple through the early baroque.  In fact, many baroque string instruments retain the C shaped sound holes.  However, by the high baroque, influential luthiers – most notably Nicolo Amati – began creating instruments whose sound holes were shaped like an f.  This new design caught on rapidly, and remains in use today, with slight variations between different makers.  Guarnieri, for example, favored a longer and narrower design, while Stradivarius’s design was wider and shorter.

Viola Da Gamba with C shaped sound hole

Image Source: http://www.orpheon.org/OldSite/Seiten/education/ShapeUpEnglish.htm

The reason for the adoption of the f shape is not entirely clear.  However, a separate blog I found poses an interesting theory: namely, that the holes are not intended to be f – shaped.  Rather, the shape is intended as a stylized s, which in turn stood for “sound” in various languages.  Whether this theory is accurate is up to debate, but in either case, the f hole (or s hole), is now an integral part of the design of any modern bowed string instrument.  (side note, the f hole is also shaped like the symbol for integral: )

Interestingly enough, an MIT study from 2015 (in sources) has discovered that the f-hole is actually the ideal shape for sound production.  The vibrations from the f-holes carry longer and louder than that of any other shape on the bowed string instruments, as it is most suited to the sonic vibrations and air flow that bowing the strings produces.

Image source: http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/471/2175/20140905#sec-4

It is a curious coincidence that this ideal shape was stumbled upon by what amounts to accident.  While I am certain that the early luthiers could empirically ascertain the superiority of the f-holes, they undoubtedly were unable to replicate the detailed acoustic physics calculations of the MIT researchers.

As a violinist, I am actually rather pleased with the concept of a chance occurrence driving the evolution of an important part of my instrument.  After all, so much of what goes into a good performance is created by chance – the atmosphere of the hall, the artist’s current mood, avoiding an unfortunate mistake – that having the creation of your instrument be coincidental is rather comforting.

 

 

Sources:

http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1741&context=gradreports

https://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/music/publications/mclennan/fholes.pdf

http://blog.feinviolins.com/2013/04/why-f-holes.html

https://www.thestrad.com/new-research-into-the-development-of-violin-f-holes-is-simplistic-at-best/4073.article

http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/471/2175/20140905#sec-4

http://www.orpheon.org/OldSite/Seiten/education/ShapeUpEnglish.htm