Official Luthiers Forum!

....get a load of this:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 081611.htm


Q: Did you hear the joke about the fungus?

A: I could tell it to you, but it might need time to grow on you.

Now the spalted wood guys will be joining in...

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince

Well, here I am, a spalted guy.
I'm an electric builder, but the fungi article sounds like croc to me.
I put a spalted maple top on a walnut guitar. Looks cool, but that maple was deader than a chunk of oak firewood. - I wont be doing that again!
DZ

_________________
wah
Wah-wah-wah-wah
Wah

Does it have to be any particular kind of fungus?

Oh please!
This however is a great quote from the article, " indistinguishably similar "

_________________
Jim Watts
http://jameswattsguitars.com

Thanks Charlie you made my day with this one.

I doubt the "fungized" wood is remotely similar to spalted maple...which can range from pretty hard to spongy and useless.

I scanned the article hoping to find a practical test of the theory and was content to see there were blind comparisons made to the Stradivarius. They didn't say who their 'expert' listeners were so it's likely more subjective than they will admit. But any reference to a comparative test was more than Somogyi offered in his article on Moonwood.

_________________
I read Emerson on the can. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds...true...but a consistent reading of Emerson has its uses nevertheless.

StuMusic

Well, I'd rather play an average fiddle rather than a stinky one.

_________________
wah
Wah-wah-wah-wah
Wah

this seems to have potentially more merit than the moonwood thing, just because they seem to have a reasonable explanation for how the wood has been physically changed by it's interaction with the fungus, while the moonwood didn't seem to have any kind of evidence as far as the wood actually being different but instead seemed to rely on people's belief.

This reminds me of alchemy. Assume someone could actually produce a modern instrument with the exact same tonal qualities of a Stradivarious. What would that do to the value of real Strads? Nothing. Just like Cubic Zirchonium has no impact on diamonds (other than create mild confusion). The intrinsic value is in the time that has transpired in the process. We value that more than anything because OUR time is limited. People will try forever to find shortcuts to everything from riches to beautiful sound. It is a pursuit wrapped in folly. Like Zig says, there is no shortcut to the top.

Mike

I'm not saying that technology is not important or even revered. Some of this stuff moves us forward in real and meaningful ways. It's always been that way. But real advancement in an art (or science) involves people doing things others deem crazy or too hard. And the proceed anyways. To ignore that process and devote oneself to creating what was done by great creators of the past is like a pursuit of a "get rich quick scheme". I don't doubt it's possible, and it will no doubt creat modern wealth. But there is something cheap about it. Like reverse engineering. We still can't make concrete like the Romans did.

Mike

Read this. (ca. 250 pages)

I swear I remember seeing a report on TV about this back in the 1980's. Anyone else remember that?
That must be some really slow growing fungus to take 25yrs to grow.

Honestly...every few years someone claims to have the formula to make a new Stradivarius. Just wait a year or so and the magic varnish people will have a big story out there.

Last time it was a guy using wood that had been submerged in seawater for years now it's fungus but everyone seems to forget that in blind listening studies a strad usually winds up ranked toward the bottom as one of the worse sounding violins. Yamahas usually rank pretty high if i remember correctly.

Now a beard.....that's something that'll grow on ya.

_________________
Brian

You never know what you are capable of until you actually try.

https://www.howardguitarsdelaware.com/

Here's a link to just such a blind study, conducted early this year.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/deceptivecadence/2012/01/02/144482863/double-blind-violin-test-can-you-pick-the-strad

Or you could just buy one.

http://www.vat19.com/dvds/beardo-original-beard-hat.cfm

_________________
Mike Lindstrom

You know why Strads are so valuable? They are over 300 years old, still playable, and all are accounted for. Probably does not matter that blind tests prove new technology produces better sound. It's history! That piece of crap Willie Nelson plays is invaluable. However, if I had done that to a Martin guitar, nobody would give two turds about it.

Did you know that theres quite a few mysteries surrounding fungus? For instance.....
Cheers
Charliewood

We really need a "like" button here!

_________________
Bryan Bear PMoMC

Take care of your feet, and your feet will take care of you.

"In 2009 the violins were played in a blind, behind-the-curtain test versus a genuine Stradivarius from 1711. All the violins were played by the British violinist Matthew Trusler. The result was surprising for all participants: Both the jury of experts and the majority of the audience thought that the mycowood violin that Schwarze had treated with fungi for nine months was the actual Strad. "Of course, such a test is always subjective," Professor Schwarze said. "There is no clear-cut, scientific method for measuring tonal quality.""

So what did they think of the actual Strad? It would appear that their blind test was conclusive. The instruments did not sound alike!

_________________
Michael Lloyd

“I was born to ignorance, yes, and lesser poverties ...
I was born to privilege that I did not see ... I didn’t know it, but my way was paved” – John Gorka

BINGO.

In additition to them not being confused for one another, one could infer that the judges thought the fungus violin sounded "better." Of course with a sample size this ridiculously small, it is silly to assume that these fungi deserve any credit. After all that one violin could have been such a nice sounding instrument because it was purfled during a full moon.

_________________
Bryan Bear PMoMC

Take care of your feet, and your feet will take care of you.

I imagine the most critical and accurate comparison would come from the player rather than an audience. I don't know if a player has much freedom to add personal nuances in an orchestral setting,
but I think a player would notice subtle differences that an audience would not. Let's let the players comment.

_________________
wah
Wah-wah-wah-wah
Wah

this is the crux of the matter. Well said!
Another equally important point is that what is good for one type of instrument is not necessarily good for another. Tonewood should not be cross referenced from the violin world to the guitar world or even from different types of guitars.

_________________
Ken