Re: Moderation

[Dana S Emery <emery@onyx.si.edu>]

Bob Barclay>

>1. ...CIMCIM produced a survey...

I'd love to have an electronic copy made available either in postscript or
plain-text form.

>2. What are your thoughts on the making and use of [instrument] copies?

Speaking as an amateur performer I would prefer a good copy to the original.

I would be reluctant (as a player) to take responsibility for a "unique"
bit of history, and I would take comfort in knowing that some attempt had
been made to discover and preserve the originals "secrets".  All
instruments are at risk when in the hands of a performer, the art of the
music should be allowed to predominate, it should not be clouded by fear
for the instrument.  To require a performer to use an historical instrument
could well be a diservice to the performer and to the music produced.
Further, so many subtle things influence the sound of an instrument that it
is not guaranteed that anything is gained by using the reconstructed
remains of an original.

The original strings, bridge, bow, bow-hair, rosin are unlikely to be
available for a stringed instrument.  The windway, lip, and bore of a
recorder will be different from original.  A double reed will require new
reeds, often with no original available to be a prototype.  Modern shalm
replicas can vary in sound just by changing reeds; from the smooth sound of
a modern oboe to a (IMHO) more appropriate raucus sound.

I suspect that many concert artists would like an alternative to the cost,
maintenace, insurance and other paranoia that goes with a famous
instrument, IMHO, the concept of working with "copies" should not be
limited to the confines of a museum.  The sister of my roommate has yet to
pay off her $300k cello, she is fortunate to have indulgent and well-off
parents.  I suspect that a concerted effort by skilled luthiers using
modern analysis techniques could unlock the design and technological
secrets of the cremona schoool and other ancient masters, but I would only
like to see it undertaken if _full_ disclosure of all findings was both
required and _funded_.

Most surviving ren and earlier woodwinds are no longer shaped as they were
intended by their makers due to insect infestation, "ovaling" of the bore,
even re-boring by later hands.  Thus it is neecssary to "adjust" bore
measurements when making a "replica" intended for performance.

The question of pitch is raised when one considers performance, "A" has
varied over more than a semitone historically.  Strings are more easily
made tolerant of that degree of variation than woodwinds, so the copier of
a wind must first discover the pitch the instrument was designed for and
then scale its design to the pitch of the modern ensemble.  Mind you, that
scaling is not trivial, the area of the bore needs scaling, _not_ its
diameter.  Unfortunatly the restraints on finger-hole locations involve
non-acoustical constraints (human fingers have limits).  One of the major
arts of woodwind design lies in placeing and sizing the holes.  The modern
practice of keyworks was considered undesirable by our ancestors, without
it many things are difficult.

--
Dana S. Emery
Smithsonian Institution
Laboratory of Molecular Systematics
MRC-534, MSC A2000
Washington DC 20560

(301) 238-3444     (voice)
(301) 238-3059     (fax)
emery@onyx.si.edu  (internet)