In tune with the types

Luthiers often examine a musician’s way of playing before setting to work on their instrument. David Leonard Wiedmer explains why it can be helpful to categorise players into two different ‘types’

MAKING MATTERS

Points of interest to violin and bow makers

David Leonard Wiedmer (right) studies the technique of violinist Manuel Solans as a prelude to making his new violin

In my opinion, the true aim of any violin maker is to make the best instrument for a particular musician. This involves finding and evaluating the wood, the model and the set-up that would best suit that player – a complicated issue given that there is no definitively ‘correct’ solution, any more than there is one perfect ‘ultimate’ violin. For a critical approach to violin making we certainly need to create our own theories, but if we follow them too strictly they can end up hindering our endeavours. I personally think that there comes a time in every luthier’s experience when they need to rely on their intuition rather than put their faith in fundamental rules. In other words, it’s important for us to understand those rules well enough to be able not to follow them.

For me, whenever I make a violin or a new set-up, I start by defining the type of violin player sitting in front of me. This basically falls into two categories. First, there are the players who try to make the violin ‘breathe’ as much as possible, and who need an instrument that is free to react. These musicians tend to use more bow and have a supple wrist. Secondly, there are the musicians who need to push to find the sound. They tend to have a more compact technique along with strong shoulders. For this article I’ll call the two types the ‘breathing’ musician and the ‘strong’ musician. Both types can reach the highest level, but each requires a different kind of instrument and set-up. With this in mind, I’ll listen to each musician play, and then try to work out how closely they fit into one of these types.

For the breathing musicians my standard violin will have the following features: flat arching, a narrow distance between the f-hole eyes, low string angle, Kevlar tailgut and ‘high-vibrating’ strings. This leads me on to another of my theories. To my mind, there are two categories of strings: the ‘high-vibrating’ ones, which have wide amplitude and exert less inertial force on the bridge, and the ‘strong-vibrating’ strings, with less amplitude but more force on the bridge. This is not a matter of string tension, but about the way the strings behave. I won’t go into string brands here, but readers will probably have an idea about which brands suit each category.

For the strong musicians, I’ll opt for a high arching and good counter-curve before the fluting, with a wide distance between the f-hole eyes, higher string projection, a nylon tailgut and ‘strongvibrating’ strings. The player type also influences my decisions regarding the making of a new instrument. Regarding the thicknessing of the top plate, for the breathing musicians I would make it finer around the fluting area compared to the rest of the plate, whereas for the strong musicians I would make it thicker. The list could go on: density, wood structure, soundpost thickness, string length and so on, but this at least gives a basic insight into my approach. Of course, this segregation into two types of player is a generalisation, but from this starting point I can build a better idea of how to unify the musician in front of me with the wood I have and the bow they use.

Checking the soundpost position to find the correct tension for the top plate

ALL PHOTOS DAVID LEONARD WIEDMER

Finding the correct pressure on the violin by checking the string angle

I think every musician wants good projection and a noble sound, which consists of depth and timbre. Some players are always more focused on finding as much depth as possible, so the instrument needs to have more timbre built in from the outset. And some prefer to search for the timbre, so they need a violin with depth. It all depends on their natural way of playing.

As I see it, if the violin’s top plate vibrates well, the player will find a way to make that energy come about in any way they can, be it through the violin, the bow or the shoulder. They try to find the focus and power by making the entire violin breathe. If you have a good Peccatte and a Stradivari with low archings, you can make a miracle. But if the musician has an instrument with a rigid table, they will focus the energy of the vibrations into that, so as to not waste energy. In this scenario, the strong musician tends to contain the energy by using a stronger bow and placing the chinrest to the side, not over the bottomblock, so they can apply more pressure with their chin and add more dominance from the left hand. To make a miracle in this case, we are more likely to see a good Sartory paired with a ‘del Gesù’. This, of course, is another generalisation rather than a hard and fast rule. But if I follow my instincts I can hear the difference when I am in a concert hall. The fact is, in the Stradivari scenario I’d be able to hear the sound coming from every direction in the hall, while in the ‘del Gesù’ scenario, where the table is the main vibrating source, I can feel where the musician is standing on the stage, and even if the direction of the violin changes.

IT’S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE RULES WELL ENOUGH TO BE ABLE NOT TO FOLLOW THEM

The differences I mention here refer to professional players. If we also take ability into account, we can bring in another dimension. When I started making violins I used to adjust my instrument alone before showing it to the musician. This was a terrible mistake because I am a terrible violin player! Every time I was happy with the sound and the response, the professionals didn’t like it. When I was struggling, the musicians used to love it. In any case, musicians need to find the instrument that is best matched to their skill level. Blind tests for instruments are intrinsically flawed because there is no scientific answer to the human element. A violin could be incredibly impressive in the hands of a top player who is able to find the right impulse to make it vibrate perfectly. The same violin could sound absolutely awful if the musician could only make it bring out 25 per cent of its potential, because it’s not suited to their style of playing.

I am always surprised at how neglected this crucial topic has been. Matching the violin making process to the player type has helped me a lot, and has brought me much better results than simply making a violin and then waiting to meet a player whose playing style fits it. It has been a tough journey, but my new approach of matching player types to instruments is much more rewarding for me. I wish you luck with my contribution to the world of crazy violin making theories.