“SUBJECTIVE” METHODS OF ADJUSTMENT.
The soundpost and the effect of its position has fascinated violinists ever since the violin existed. The soundpost was in place before the bassbar which evolved from a thickening of the top to the separate entity we are now familiar with. A reference to the early interest in the soundpost appears in Sol Babitz [1] where he says that when the bridge was moved below the soundholes, the sound was worse if the soundpost was moved away from the centre of the violin to a new position below the bridge similar to that it would have had before the bridge was moved. The sound quality was only restored by moving the soundpost back to its original position.
Much has been written on the subjective reactions of players
…show more content…
Rubbio [6] says that a tight soundpost makes the sound “nazal and sharp”. Moving the soundpost back from the bridge makes the sound “gentle in the treble”; closer to the bridge “sharper and more authoritative”. Gerald Betteley [7] says “a harsh tone can be mellowed by fitting a softer soundpost and bridge, and a weak tone can be strengthened by fitting a bridge and soundpost of greater density”. He goes on “if the E string is brilliant but the G string lacks power, fit a new but fractionally longer soundpost, using the same wood density. To make the upper register less strident and improve the resonance of the G string, move the soundpost toward the G string (and vice …show more content…
[13] have described player reaction, in subjective terms, to alteration in the position of the soundpost across the violin and lengthwise behind the bridge foot. The low frequencies were suppressed by moving the soundpost toward the centre of the violin and the tone was “looser”; moved away from the centre the tone was “rumbling and harder”. The tone quality with the soundpost moved toward the centre line was similar to that with no soundpost. They also considered the effect of these moves which were “± a soundpost width” but the starting position was not indicated, on the shape of the response