Hello, Anthony. Thanks you for your message. You are correct, in that the Pistoy cannot be made for a course smaller that the 5th, because of the triple strands. In terms of the vibrating string length, Leonard explained it better than I can. If the string is true and very flexible, the intonation is usually much more accurate than a stiffer gut string.
ed At 11:04 AM 8/19/2007 +0200, Anthony Hind wrote: >Hello Ed > You are no doubt right, as Venice are supposed to be double >direction twist (not triple); but in their "blurb" they claim they >are the most flexible string on the market, as they explain, here: > >"The Venice strings possess a remarkable degree of elasticity and >pliability, superior to any strings currently on the market. This >means a surprisingly ready attack and good richness in upper >overtones."http://www.aquilacorde.com/catalogo4.htm >However, I am not sure I understand the physics of what you tell >me, "stiffness makes the vibrating portion of the string in effect >shorter, therefore pitch problems can occur. This is why the Pistoy >works the best, due to its flexibility." and also "That is why they >intonate so well, because the vibrating aspect of the string is from >the nut to the bridge, not in effect a shorter distance." > >I thought all strings vibrate in a complex manner, from the nut to >the bridge, but also at multiples of this measure (half the string, >quarter of the string, etc). >Indeed, Aquila claim (see above) that Venice being very flexible >allow for rich high frequency harmonics to develop. " > >Thus, I imagined that the stiffer the string, the less these >harmonics are allowed to develop. >I understood that was the same logic as explained by Martin Shepherd >in relation to low tension strings (ie the lower the tension of a >given string, the greater its flexibility and the richer its >harmonics). I imagined that reaching a certain critical stiffness the >string would almost only vibrate along its full length, with all the >in between harmonics damped out, and only the full length vibrating. > >I am no specialist in physics, so I may well be using my imagination >too much. >Now, if a stiffer string is more likely to be untrue than a flexible >one, could that be due to the fact that the stiffness, and thickness >can never be homogenous, and so some parts of the string may more >freely be resonating, while at some other part of the string, the >harmonic is partly damped. >Thus we have the same string vibrating in different modes (as shown >in some old treatise on string choice), and as the pair might be >vibrating in quite a different pattern the buzz problem could occur. >This would be most problematic on the 4th, as these strings are >thicker and therefore closer than on the first or second. A flexible >string that has be twined from both ends might be less liable to show >this irregular harmonic pattern. > >However, the point I was making was not that the Venice was more >flexible than the Pistoy. I was trying to understand why the very >stiff paired Kurschners on my 4th course were causing a buzz (I >changed them three times) while the paired Venice on the same course >had no such problem. I was assuming that the Kurschner were slightly >untrue in relation to each other (for the reason stated above), I >have no way of seeing whether a Larson Pistoy would behave even >better than a Venice, as they can't be made down to the size for the >4th course. They are great however, as diapasons on my Sixth, and in >the Gimped version on my 7th. > >On the other hand, if the buzz were due to contact with the fret, >while this same explanation could hold, another plausible explanation >comes to mind. I suppose there is the possibility that when the >Venice come up to full tension (being more flexible or elastic) they >may, as a consequence, take on a slightly smaller diameter than the >Kurschner, when they reach the same tension. I suppose it could be >true that the stiffer the string, the less its diameter "shrinks" as >it reaches the desired pitch. If this is, at least plausible, then >perhaps this 'thinner' string's vibrations, are just missing the fret. > >I have no way of finding out which, if any, of these "explanations" >might be right. However, a very niggling problem was got rid of in >the change over to Venice, which are very well worth trying on the >4th course, in my opinion. >Best regards >Anthony > >Le 18 août 07 à 14:35, Edward Martin a écrit : > > > Hi, Anthopny. > > > > The Pistoy is the most flexible string available. They are made > > using 3 strands of wet gut, and they are each triple twisted. > > Then, they are twisted together in the opposite direction, making > > for a very loose, flexible string. That is why they intonate so > > well, because the vibrating aspect of the string is from the nut to > > the bridge, not in effect a shorter distance. > > > > ed > > > > > > > > > >> Venice are possibly even more flexible than Pistoys, and > >> definitely far less stiff than the Kurschners, which I find > >> particularly stiff even for a low twist string. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Edward Martin > > 2817 East 2nd Street > > Duluth, Minnesota 55812 > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > voice: (218) 728-1202 > > > > > > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > >-- >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG Free Edition. >Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.0/960 - Release Date: 8/18/2007 >3:48 PM Edward Martin 2817 East 2nd Street Duluth, Minnesota 55812 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice: (218) 728-1202
