# Music by Genre > Orchestral, Classical, Italian, Medieval, Renaissance >  a classical Embergher reproduction

## labraid

Hi all,
I`ve been doing a bit of research and now we`ve come to this:



...the form, in solid mahogany with maple neck and mahogany endblock, ready for ribs.

When things come along, I`ll have quite a few questions no doubt, for all of you in the know. I`m hoping this project can develop into a collaboration between all of you, the players, and myself. As such, I`m open to all of your thoughts, and hoping to receive as many comments, solicited or otherwise, and critiques as she moves along. I`m doing my best to follow the set of four plans/posters (I forget the name of the provider, but many thanks to him for a great job.), however, they were taken from a single instrument, and what I hope to do is build something that will take the best of the Embergher`s evolution, and build it for you here.
That`s the idea anyway. 
In the end, I`d like to pass her around to all interested in playing her, but that remains to be seen, if there is any interest in this.
I hope you all enjoy the pictures as they come...

----------


## labraid

a few more views.

----------


## markmdavis

Wow - the form looks quite beautiful! Keep us posted as this project progresses.
MMD

----------


## Jim Garber

Yes, Brian, an exciting proposition. I am sure that others with more expertise will chime in here.

Jim

----------


## vkioulaphides

Beautiful, Brian. I am puzzled, though... what do you mean by "form"? I must be missing something... Is that the mold? Admittedly, I'm only familiar with the usual, "Neapolitan", face-down molds, on which the staves, already curved at the heating iron, are laid _doga madre_ in the center, then working your way outwards. But at that stage, the neck is obviously NOT connected to the bowl. All the bowl has, in its neonatal stage, is the neck-block (into which the neck is set LATER) and the butt, with the internal support for the eventual string-holders, etc. Hence my confusion... 

Care to shed some light on your _modus operandi?_ Your work does look very beautiful, and very promising.

Cheers,

Victor

----------


## brunello97

Brian, this is more exciting than the upcoming Fall Classic (significantly more.) 

Victor, here is an image I believe I got from the MC somewhere, showing the the forms/molds, with what I understand are necks-to-be already in place (temporarily fit to the bowl form) awaiting further finishing once the staves/doge are in place. Is this a correct interpretation? Or does the assembled bowl get re-fit to a finished neck?




Thanks, Victor, for the doga madre reference.


Brian can obviously clear up some of this. On a Puglisi I disassembled the neck block and neck were of one piece, the doge attached directly, as opposed to what I've found on Washburn or other US made mandolins with a separate dove-tailed joint between neck and block. 

I am sure there are other methods of construction-neck/body joints of which I am totally ignorant and would love to find out more about.

Go, Brian, go.

Mick

----------


## Graham McDonald

Victor,

From what I can dertermin from the various photographs that I have seen of Italian mandolin building establishments, the neck is almost always #attached to the form/mould and the ribs glued directly to the neck extension. It would seem that it was only the Amercian bowl back builders from the 1890s or so on that used a separate neck often using a horizontal dovetail. This technique I suspect was taken from guitar building ideas. I can't find a pic I thought I had of a Italisn shop. I am going to build a bowlback myself in the next year, so I am interested to see how Brian approaches the process. There is little information out there that I have found.

cheers

graham

----------


## vkioulaphides

Part of what confuses me is the sheer _beauty_ of the form that Brian speaks of; it seems as if it somehow wants to become _part of the finished instrument_ which, of course, no mold ever is.

I have been to several bowl-shops and have seen semi-finished bowls both with and without necks (or "proto-necks") attached to them. But, again, many luthiers use a "dummy neck" as a stencil of sorts, just for the alignment of the staves. This dummy, along with the mold, is obviously NOT meant to remain a part of the finished instrument.

I certainly don't mean to _criticize_ Brian, but only inquire for my own knowledge. I trust that my comments come across as inquisitive, not negative.

Best of luck and success, Brian.

----------


## labraid

Oh, not at all, this is the kind of discussion I was hoping for!
The bowl was finished, in my reasoning, so that if ever any glue were to seep through the spruce shavings (backer), it would not stick permanently to the bowl. Plus, I like the look, as you say, it calls to be worked on.
The one piece neck idea just seems ideal. Not only have I read that most Italian builders do it this way, I agree with what was probably their reasoning: A neck joint is a point of weakness, and it serves only if you are planning to take things apart one day. Ideally, one does not need to replace a neck during the life of an instrument, and you do all you can so that will be the case. 
What causes a neck to be replaced?
-A break near the nut caused by shock under full string tension. Add front and back veneers to the peghead and you diminish the chances of this immensely (not to mention an internal stiffener to be mentioned below).
-Warping. But we use dehumidifiers these days in our shops, the wood is equilibrated throughout the building process, wood movement is therefore diminished (note I did not say eliminated). String tension in a classical is low, and the neck is thick, especially this Embergher neck which I`d say has fairly normal cross sectional area, but which is tall--it acts better as a beam than a flatter, wider, shallower neck. What`s more, I`d like to add a stiffener. A slice of ebony, not too thick but rather tall, will not add greatly to the mass, and will create a plywood effect reducing the tendency for neck movement.
The neck is not actually attached to the bowl in any way, but rather both are secured to a workboard (plank). Once the staves are on and set, the bowl and neck will be detached from the workboard and the bowl/form should slip out pretty easily with maybe less than a tap of a hammer around the rim. The endblock "de-"wedges.
Does that clear things up somewhat?

----------


## brunello97

Nice description, Brian. Thanks. A few more questions if you don't mind:

Is the 'workboard' what we see clamped to your worktable? 

How do you secure the form and neck to it? 

Does any type of joint hold the neck to the form so that it can also 'release' when the ribs are in place? Or is the neck simply aligned and then held to the workboard/plank?

Does the final shaping of the neck occur after the ribs are glued up?

Will you veneer the neck? (That is something that truly amazes me.)

Is the end block (tail-block?) also temporarily set into a pocket or something in the formwork so that it releases along with the ribs?

Thanks again for opening this discussion. Bowlback construction has long seemed so mysterious to me. (It still is.) But you are slowly opening the sesame.

Mick

----------


## vkioulaphides

Yes, Brian, your excellent explanation sheds all the light I needed. Thank you.

Indeed, it is certainly a desideratum that the neck be as firmly attached to the bowl; even those luthiers who work with separate/separable pieces adhere to the "as-if-one-piece" ideal. You are, of course, using one piece for real, no "as if". Bravo!

To explain my perspective: I know for a fact that both in Greece (whence my eyewitness experience) and in Italy (where I have friends and colleagues) there are craftsmen and sometimes entire SHOPS! that build, (read: mass-produce) bowls ONLY. I once committed a (hopefully mild) offense on the English language by coining the original term "bowlwright" (as in "boatwright", "wheelwright", etc.) These folks build bowls by the hundreds, using the customary rosewood and maple, but also European walnut, chestnut, and even "exotic" woods (by European standards) such as mahogany, Madagascar or Indian rosewood (not _really_ rosewoods, I am told) and bubinga#charmingly called "carnation-tree" in Greece, because of the pinkish/rosy, poppy-seed laden color/texture. These bowlwrights then simply sell their wares to "luthiers proper", who do the rest. 

I stand witness to hundreds upon hundreds of neckless bowls. While upscale boutiques and solo luthiers (such as you, Brian) take the high road, what I described is, well, Main Street. One must also step back in history and remember how come the mandolin became Everyman's Instrument: some stages of its production lend themselves for MASS-production. I am also told that even venerable lutheries in Italy do not frown upon the practice of "outsourcing" their bowl-building to the busy bowlwrights of Catania and Sicily in general. No names mentioned...

Also, the molds I am familiar with are not solid like the ones posted above, but instead resemble a rib-cage of sorts: the "spine" is where the _doga madre_ or "mother-staff" is laid, clamped on both ends. But the rest of the mold is like, well... a mammal's rib-cage, with several ribs intersecting the spine at several, respective "vertebrae". I trust you visualize what I am describing. On either end of this mold, several small clamps, to hold each new staff in place. In most I have seen, the clamps are moveable, so that you don't need dozens of them. Larger, lateral clamps are also part of the "scaffolding", to hold the eventual _collanza_, the clasp or harness.

A "stiffener" is very common in Greece, especially in long-necked instruments, such as bouzoukis the obvious reason, Warp-o-Phobia. The "main body" of the neck has a groove carved in it, into which an ebony rod is inlaid, as a "immovable truss-rod". I am not qualified, of course, to say how much such a thing is needed on a mandolin. You surely would know better than I. Still, I can readily attest that several of my Greek mandolins have one, and that none has ever had a warped neck.

I should really shut up and sit down, though.  Since you are going down Embergher Road, I know precious little about _those_ instruments. I wish you the very, very, VERY best in your noble endeavor, and sign off with the faint hope if any that some day I will be able to *afford* one of those instruments that come out of your skillful hands. *sigh*

Cheers,

Victor

----------


## brunello97

Victor,

The formwork (framework?) you describe sounds amazing. I imagine something like that could potentially be made adjustable to work for different sizes, profiles, etc. The architect in me is most fascinated by this stuff. (Remember it was Brunelleschi's machines and Michelangelo's scaffolding that allowed them to do the work for which they might be most famous.) Would you have any photos to share of this?

Brian: How do you plan on holding the staves in place while you are laying them up?

This has been a very nice Sunday morning conversation!

Mick

----------


## vkioulaphides

Oh, Mick... I do have such images in _books_ yes, I am hopelessly, incurably old-fashioned. # Quite "asleep at the wheel" for a few decades-or-so, and scanner-less. Let me see what I can do, if I can find someone WITH a scanner, and try to be more helpful than just blabber on.

To my knowledge, such scaffolding is fixed and _defines_ the form of the product, i.e. the bowl that will emerge from it. In other words, the luthiers I am speaking of have a "mandolin-mold", a "pre-WWII bouzouki-mold", a "post-WWII bouzouki-mold", a "Cretan-laouto-mold", etc. So, while the mechanism of all is the same, I know of none that are adjustable. Now, if you mean *"scaleable"*, well... of course! Any mold can be built to (almost) any scale, yielding its own "progeny" of like-shaped, like-sized bowls. In my feeble knowledge of the mandolin's history, THIS is the very, ah... Brunelleschian force that put a mandolin into just about everyone's hands in its heyday. Think Model T... #

----------


## labraid

> Is the 'workboard' what we see clamped to your worktable? #


Yes, a hard maple 50mmx50mm workboard.




> How do you secure the form and neck to it?


Very long screws for the bowl, very short ones for the neck. Note, the ebony stiffener is not yet in there, and the screwholes, being right on center, will be excavated to make way for the stiffener.




> Does any type of joint hold the neck to the form so that it can also 'release' when the ribs are in place? Or is the neck simply aligned and then held to the workboard/plank?


No connection between neck and bowl, they are just very close. I've already noticed, however, when carving the neck to match the shape of the bowl, that there is some movement, and I think for the next mandolin I will fashion a slip joint connection that will just come undone when the bowl needs to be removed later on--thus the two will be held horizontally in unison, but will release vertically.




> Does the final shaping of the neck occur after the ribs are glued up?


I haven't yet figured this one out as a definite, but I think I will indeed go ahead and shape the neck, and have it complete, so that once the ribs are on and the form released, only the top attachment will remain. Does it really matter a whole lot? no, it is just easier to manipulate a neck than a whole, near-complete mandolin.




> Will you veneer the neck? (That is something that truly amazes me.)


Veneering. Correct me if this isn't the veneer you're talking about, but there will be a 1mm "veneer" on the front of the peghead, and one on the back. It is structural as well as visual. The back one especially, where the wood is under tension, the veneer, being straight-grained, reinforces the peghead rear which is almost always slant-grained and vulnerable.




> Is the end block (tail-block?) also temporarily set into a pocket or something in the formwork so that it releases along with the ribs?


Yes, it is wedged from the bottom side (2 degree degrade on each side), so it will unwedge when the time comes to lift out. This was my own idea, I am not exactly sure how it was done otherwise, but am sure it will work as well as any other method could.




> How do you plan on holding the staves in place while you are laying them up?


The first stave will go on and be held tight with a wide rubber band down it's length, head to toe. And maybe some pushpins when needed on the blocks.
For the ones that follow, my favorite idea yet involves small wood blocks with cutoff nails protruding just enough to grab the stave on one side, while the other side will receive the same large rubber bands. Doing two staves at a time, one on either side, they will pull toward one another, clamping to the ever-growing mid-section, and to the form itself. This was my method before, and it has worked well, even without the help of a form underneath to support it. Is it the best method? There might be better ones, but I haven't looked at how other's do it (Yet!)

You have a lot of experience with the Greek bouzouki, Victor? My grandfather was a Jacovides, from Cyprus. He left me all of his records from the old days, grew up loving that Greek bouzouki sound... Would love to make one! (a question of time perhaps)

----------


## Jim Garber

> Originally Posted by  
> 
> Will you veneer the neck? (That is something that truly amazes me.)
> 
> 
> Veneering. Correct me if this isn't the veneer you're talking about, but there will be a 1mm "veneer" on the front of the peghead, and one on the back. It is structural as well as visual. The back one especially, where the wood is under tension, the veneer, being straight-grained, reinforces the peghead rear which is almost always slant-grained and vulnerable.


Lot's of questions, Brian, eh? Are you sorry that you invited us into your workshop?

To clarify Mick's question: it is not the headstock that he is referring to but the technique that many neapolitan makers used of sheathing the neck in a veneer. Both Vinaccia and Calace used that but you are building a Roman mandolin and with the exception of the very ornate models which had tortoise shell veneers over the neck, most of the Embergers did not.

Here, for illustration are the neck details of more pedestrian Calace and Emberghers. The Calace has a rosewood veneer on the neck. the Embergher has none, just the bare neck.

Jim

----------


## Jim Garber

Even this very ornate model 7 has a plain neck. 

Jim

----------


## brunello97

Brian, Thanks so much for your careful blow by blow answers. I think I am starting to visualize your process. Clearly you have thought this through carefully. I suppose you have built bowlbacks before?

If I haven't exhausted you, I do have a couple more questions......

What is the wide 'skirt" piece that wraps around the end of the bowl called? Typically this covers the tail-ends of the staves. 

It is easy to see from your photo how the staves will fit into the notch on the neck providing a flush transition. I can't quite tell from the photo how that will work on the tail block so as to allow the "skirt" to overlay flush-ly. Does this question make sense?

I don't think I quite understand your nail /block/rubber band clamping system, but if we could convince you to post some assembly photos it would probably clear all that up.

As to the neck-veneer...I have a Stridente mandolin, and also a Lanfranco on which the neck itself was covered with a thin veneer. It strikes me as very odd and difficult. You can detect a little air pocket or two revealing its existance. Otherwise, quite clean work. I don't know if the Embergher model you are working from has this feature.

Well that is probably enough peppering of questions for one day. Good thing I didn't run into you at a party or I'd be backing you into a corner and really asking a lot of questions.

I look forward to hearing more about your ongoing work. Best of luck with the project.

thanks,

Mick

----------


## vkioulaphides

> "You have a lot of experience with the Greek bouzouki, Victor? My grandfather was a Jacovides, from Cyprus... Would love to make one!"


Well, I have _some_ experience with the bouzouki. As one of our most august Café contributors once wrote (quite correctly), the Greek bouzouki is a "mandolinized saz": a long-necked lute, probably of Persian descent, originally with a one-piece, CARVED bowl, "married" to the mandolin tradition that existed in Greece (as imported from nearby Italy) since the latter part of the 18th century. Hence the unique, local hubrid. 

As regards the bowl specifically, it is interesting to note that *pre*-war bouzoukis had an almond-shaped, mandolin/mandola-like bowl; it was only in the *post*-war evolution of the instrument now with *8* strings, not the traditional 6 that the larger, wider bowls became common.

For obvious reasons, preventing warping of the neck is THE concern on the #bouzouki-builder's mind. Nothing more pathetic than the poorly built, banana-shaped bouzouki, merely a few years old... # Hence all the stiffeners, ebony rods, etc. Many bouzouki-builders use truss-rods by now, of course. Also, almost all higher-end instruments have MULTIPLE veneers on the neck, for added resistance. Again, however, I doubt the value of taking such heavy-handed measures on the dainty, little mandolin. 

So, ehm... _rubber bands_, eh? No clamps? Sounds intriguing... Again, you are not bound by the exigencies of those old shops, and you are your own man, your own luthier. To give you an idea of mass-production: I once owned a lovely Giovanni de Meglio of 1897, model 1A; during Giovanni's tenure at the shop, the company put out over *10,000* pieces of this model! Naturally, much of the routine cutting, bending, clamping, polishing, etc. was done by countless apprentices, performing only the basic task(s) in which they were skilled. Let it also not be concluded that mass-production led to poor product; said instrument and ALL such I have seen, heard, or played were truly excellent mandolins, well crafted and fine sounding instruments.

Still, there is great excitement in figuring things out as you go. Best of luck!

----------


## vkioulaphides

[QUOTE]"What is the wide 'skirt" piece that wraps around the end of the bowl called? Typically this covers the tail-ends of the staves."

"Clasp", or "harness". This is the colloquial _collanza_ I mentioned earlier, as it "collates" the staves.

----------


## Jim Garber

A little more about the veneer question. I believe that one purpose of that technique was to cover the dovetail joint for the headstock to the neck. I believe that the Emberghers' necks were one piece hence no need to cover up that part. 

The Calaces and Vinaccia I have also have a triangular piece of pearl or ebony covering that joint.

Jim

----------


## otterly2k

Victor... it seems to me that rubber bands, if used as clamps, ARE clamps. As are clothes pins, binder clips, surgical tubing, string, straps, or anything else...whatever it takes to hold something together,right??   :Cool:

----------


## Jim Garber

Hopefully one of our Embergher experts will chime in soon as to the construction aspects of this master. Hint, hint...

Jim

----------


## Graham McDonald

The idea I have been working on for holding the neck in alignment on the workboard was a strip of 1/4 x 1/2" timber attached to the workboard which would mate with a slot in the neck. This would be replaced by a carbon fiber bar once the neck/body assembly was removed from the workboard. I am not really convinced that there is any need to re-enforce a classical mandolin neck at all. I don't think I have ever seen a neck actually warped, even the lightes of the veneered Italian ones. The problem is almost always with the whole neck rotating a little. Perhaps the slight concavity as the ribs come to the neckblock in the Embergher design adds some mechanical strength to this area, but I'm not enough of an engineer to have any more than a slight gut feeling on that.

I do like the slightly tapered end block idea. My thoughts there had been to very lightly glue that block to the mould with animal glue and pop it off with a knife once the ribs were glued, in the same way violin makers glue the blocks to an inside mould when making the rib assembly of a fiddle. I would be inclined to also glue the extension of the neck to the mould as well. Both being endgrain joints, it should be a simple joint to pop open (there's optimism for you!)

That photo of the workshop with the moulds uses circular springs as clamps to hold the ribs in place (I think)which is also an interesting idea.

cheers

graham

----------


## labraid

Great idea about the truss slot. Dual purpose, I like. Just can`t hit too hard with a mallet, unless it were metal, and not wood, protruding from the workboard.
Ah, veneered neck, now I see. Ok, no, not on an Embergher. Thanks for clearing that up Jim.
The rubber bands I use, they are about 1/4" wide, and doubled over twenty times, I wouldn't be surprised if it exceeded the pressure exerted by a metal clamp, though it is a blanket pressure, and not focused, which is really their greatest utility.

----------


## vkioulaphides

Good morning, all.

A few words, by way of clarification, and sharing of experience:




> "...rubber bands, if used as clamps, ARE clamps."


Ehm... well, yes, of course. I was, however, contrasting rubber bands to the usual clamps made of metal and wood, exerting pressure by a screw-like mechanism. But, again, I never meant to imply that Brian is doing anything "wrong", just "unfamiliar to me".




> "I don't think I have ever seen a neck actually warped, even the lightes of the veneered Italian ones."


Oh, Graham, I must have seen HUNDREDS of warped mandolin necks, ESPECIALLY on vintage bowlbacks caused, most usually, by the excessive tension put on these poor, delicate creatures by BG strings. Still, I do agree with your comment that




> "I am not really convinced that there is any need to re-enforce a classical mandolin neck at all."


Indeed. Especially an Embergher-esque V-neck, if well crafted, should be able to offer adequately stiff resistance to any appropriate strings. To my understanding, this is one of the reasons why Mr. E.'s instruments have held up so very well in time.




> "That photo of the workshop with the moulds uses circular springs as clamps to hold the ribs in place."


With all due respect and apologies, that picture weirds me out.  It looks like one of those KGB-doctored images of some dissident, depicted as sunbathing in Cuba, AFTER having been assassinated in Siberia. To explain:

In my (hopelessly narrow-minded) view, a luthier's shop has a floor of raw cement, strewn with wood-shavings; au contraire, this image has a... *carpet* (?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?) A shop has shelves, tools, bottles of varnish; this has a... *television* (?!?!?!?!?!?) It makes no sense at all... this is more like someone's living room, not a lutherie at all. Where IS this place? 

More saliently: the metal contraptions appear (to me, at least) to be compass-like instruments of _measurement_, NOT clamp-like instruments of _pressure_. I may very well be wrong but, to be truthful as to the extent of my limited experience, I have never seen such a thing as those rings. Hmm...

----------


## Bob A

With regard to warping of necks, Embergher fretboards are several times thicker than Neapolitan instruments; they also are asymmetrical in cross-section, that is, they are thicker on the bass side. This should go a long way toward providing stability.

The mold depicted above does not seem to have the compound recurve that is evident on the model 7 pictured. The bowls I'm familiar with have that pinched-looking recurve as the bowl slopes into the neck joint. I don't know whether it's my faulty interpretation of the photos, or if the drawings that provided the basis for the construction were of a simpler bowl design. (Did the lower-end Emberghers have a more neary Neapolitan bowl?).

----------


## vkioulaphides

A digression, but (I hope) a forgivable one, as it IS relevant: belatedly, I just looked at the stunningly beautiful instruments that Brian has been building. How exciting, that a luthier of such talent would be devoting time and effort on our beloved bowlback, especially harking back to the venerable Luigi Embergher. I can only wish Brian the very best of luck, and wait with bated breath for the final product. 

... or is that spelled "baited"?  

../...

Back to our regular programming.

----------


## Jim Garber

I don't know if this helps, Bob. Here is a photo that Martin so expertly took of the neck joint of my Type A, currently under the care of Dr. Springall.

Jim

----------


## Neil Gladd

Brian, I hadn't looked at your website until Victor mentioned it, but I see that you are a fellow Virginia Tech graduate! I may have to order a mandolin with a turkey inlay...

----------


## Bob A

Still hard to tell, from the photos. The Model 7 looks more deeply indented as the bowl sides shift from convex to concave before joining the neck block.

Bated (abated) is the usage I'd go for, whilst trembling on the edge of my seat.

----------


## Graham McDonald

'morning,

Like Victor, I have seen lots of old bowlbacks with unplayable actions, but the neck between the nut and the body join at the 10th fret is almost always straight, even on cheap instruments with a veneer over a very light timber (poplar?) neck. A combination of neck block rotation and some sinking of the soundboard around the soundhole is the usual cause, not a warping of the six inches or so of actual neck.

That photo of a mandolin moulds is from a museum somewhere in the northern part of Italy if memory serves, rather than an actual workshop, but I am intrigued by theose circular spring clamps, if that is what they are.

Brian, A lightly animal glued block shouldn't need a mallet to separate. A sharp butter knife will pop it off. Violin makers often glue the fingerboard on for neck shaping with a sheet of newspaper between the fingerboard and neck which makes it even easier to remove.

The Calace catlogue is downloadable as a pdf, and has several useful photos (rather low-rez) of their building process. As an extra bit of, possibly, useless information, a lot of the Neapolitan builders spliced the headstock on using a triangular splice/tenon in the same way as classical guitar necks were made. This was often covered by the veneering which was often done over the whole neck and head. A rather tricky job I have always thought! The solid maple necks of the Embergher seem a better way to do it, though it does require more accuracy in getting the ends of the ribs to meet the neck.

cheers

----------


## brunello97

Graham, I am glad you are now involved with this great conversation. I am learning an amazing amount, as is often the case at the Cafe.

The assymetrical fretboards that BobA speaks of is interesting. Would any of the Embergherians have a view of that to share? 

Is the V-shaped neck section of the Roman style mandolin a structural design decision, an aid to playability or both?

(I have what Jim has titled a 'boatback' mandolin of early 20th C. US manufacturer. It features a V section neck with guitar-style turned down neck block at the body. Quite nice craft on it and not much chance of it coming out of alignment. Did the V section neck get appropriated by any other US makers?)

If I recall correctly where I DLed the shop photo posted, it was from a 'museum' somewhere near Napoli, I believe.

Any concensus on the bowl to neck recurve-evident in Jim's picture. Is this an essential feature of the Embergher models?

This is getting good now.

Mick

----------


## labraid

There will be a definite rib recurve near the neck. Jim's photo above shows a faint one, not like the model I am working off of which is very evident (and graceful I might add).
Thanks, Graham. I admit, a small dab of glue would hold the block well for the pre-rib steps, but really, it engages quite well without glue, and stays in place without trouble.
Neil, some of my best memories in Blacksburg. Built my first instruments there, walked the Appalachian Trail weekends, and thanks to US law, learned to brew better beer than one can buy, at 18. hehe.

Tomorrow morning the first ribs are going on. Pictures to follow.

----------


## Jim Garber

> Any concensus on the bowl to neck recurve-evident in Jim's picture. Is this an essential feature of the Embergher models?


I took a good flip thru Ralf Leenen and Barry Pratt's excellent Embergher book and it does seem that the higher end mandolins have the recurved whereas the student model (like my lowly tipo A) are rather straight.

BTW check out this earlier thread where many of us discussed similar topics.

Jim

----------


## Graham McDonald

Thanks Jim for reminding us of that previous thread and Ralf's link to the museum site. The google translation is delightful, and I think we should all stop calling them strings and only refer to 'harmonic ropes'

----------


## Bob A

The fretboard on my Pecoraro model 5 is about 5mm thick on the bass side at 12th fret; it tapers to about 3.5mm on the treble side. The board is radiused. My understanding is this offset is meant to reduce strain on the fretting hand. 

While the Vee neck seems to me to offer considerable resistance to warping from string tension, I believe that was not the primary reason for the design. (My belief is based on faith rather than fact, alas. And the fact that the neck is considerably narrower than the Neapolitan design may well give the lie to my faith.)

The overall elegance of Embergher's instruments, especially the higher-end consert mandolins, and their graceful archings, and the lines of the neck, all seem to flow from a concept of grace of form. While the Neapolitans have their own charm, nothing says elegance in engineering so well as one of these Roman instruments. Even to lining the bowl with shaved pine instead of paper, every detail of construction seems to have been scrutinised with an eye towards maximising performance. 

Even though most of my playing is on the tubby, chubby Neapolitans, just picking up the Pecoraro is rather thrilling. One tends to want to fondle it; the hands seem to explore the surfaces for the mere pleasure of understanding the shapes of the surface. 

Ahem. 

Well, some violins have the same effect on me, and I can't even play them. I think sometimes there's a transfer of information between luthier and player on a tactile level that goes to the heart of the art, so to speak.

----------


## Martin Jonas

I agree with Bob that there is an ineffable elegance to the curves of the Embergher bowl and neck, and the graceful transition from one to the other at the neck joint, that makes the Neapolitan shapes look ever so lightly clumsy by comparison, graceful though they are in their own right. Looking at my own Tipo A and comparing it to the higher-end models I've seen in person and in photos (I've seen and played Alison Stephens' 5bis and her Pecoraro mandola, and have seen Frances Taylor's 5bis close up), there is indeed less of a recurve in the Tipo A, but it still shares the elongated shape of the bowl. It's just that there is a bit more of an angle at the neck joint instead of the staves asymptotically approaching the line of the neck.

I should also say that in some ways I prefer the student model over the 5bis: the concert model is much heavier and needs to be played with rather a lot of deliberation to coax the tone out of it. Of course it then amply rewards the effort put in to play it. The student model is lighter and more responsive, a more informal and less intimidating instrument for playing at home for fun.

Martin

----------


## Alex Timmerman

Hello Brian and all others here,

There are of course differences within all the Embergher types and models. And when examined closely even differences in design within every type and model through the years in which the Embergher mandolins were made. 

The best thing here is first to know which model you are making. 
Brian, did you buy the drawing that has been (and still is) for sale at e-Bay´s from my good friend ´Alipio´ (Lorenzo Lippi)? If so (and I think you mentioned something like that you work from drawings in an earlier post), then the measurements you made your mould of are for an Embergher Orchestra model No.3.

This model (the highest ´plain´ Orchestra model) is certainly different from the lower types and models ànd the higher soloist Embergher mandolins. 

Therefore, if you can inform us about which work drawings you use, we can all here have a better insight in what model you are copying. 
Perhaps and if you like, I can place some photos/close ups of the original Embergher mandolin for a better understanding here. 

By the way, do you know the sound of a No. 3 Embergher mandolin? If not I will see what I can do for you with regard to some pieces on a CD-R. It is always good to hear the right sound in your head while working towards a mandolin of the same kind. # 


Best and success!

Alex

----------


## labraid

Alex, a very generous offer, I'd love to have some clips of model specific playing. And yes, this is being taken from the Lippi drawings. More soon.

----------


## labraid

A frustrating day yesterday, with as much wondering as working. Did Embergher place his shavings after making the bowl, was it a two piece form perhaps, how the heck did he get a good, even clamping pressure on the first few staves (they buckle if you clamp too much, don't contact evenly if you don't).
I have some things to mull over the next few days before going for a second round. The photo above is my second attempt at lining the bowl. The first was a disaster, rubber bands whipping around loose shavings, tearing them, and then finding out my mathematics were wrong as regards the various circumferences of the bowl, and the first few began already to curve off of true. Errors corrected, now to see if this way of applying the staves over shavings works. If not, my plan is to build the form gluing only lateral joints, and applying the shavings, wet, in the end (it works beautifully this way with cloth/paper, but my thoughts were that the original makers used these shavings with a dual purpose in mind: one, to reinforce the bowl, but two, to give a medium that separates easily once the bowl is constructed/glued over it. I'm less sure about that second one now...)
Well, other work calls. I'll pick up on this in a week or so.

----------


## vkioulaphides

> "Did Embergher place his shavings after making the bowl?"


To be clear about your question, Brian: do you mean the _lining_ of the bowl? If so, yes, to my knowledge of _general_ practice, not specifically Embergher's the lining is done well after the bowl is otherwise completed.

But I may be totally off the mark...

----------


## dave17120

Hi there, have just found this thread. As a lowly Irish trad junkie, I don't often visit the elevated heights of the classical forum, except to have a look at the 'bowls of note' now and again. Jim, how come you didn't tell me this thread was here??? Why not the builders and restorers?? Anyway......

 # Brian, I too have the Lippi drawings, and have got as far as trying to work up a detailed plan, in order to try and solve some of the logistical problems of bowl building. I am on my second version of a mold to build the bowl on, so I'm a little behind you, but via the planning have been wrestling with the same problems.... particularly the exact shape for the ribs, how to plain the edges at a slight angle for a good fit, and how to press down AND together at the same time whilst gluing?!?

 # With regard to 'lining the bowl' I'm not quite sure what you are doing with the shavings, and why??? (I know I'm thick, but....) Having repaired over 50 Italian bowls to date, most have the ribs, then a layer of newsprint, then the lining paper. I always imagined that the coloured lining paper went in after the bowl was made, and the newspaper was what enabled the builders to get the thing off the mold. You know, grease the mold, apply newspaper with paper glue, then build the bowl on that! The grease allows you to get the bowl off and leaves the paper stuck inside the bowl. A bit like papier mache I guess.
Feasible or not???

 # I'll try and sort some pictures out of what I have been doing now I have found this thread.
 # All the best, looking forward to the next posting.... Dave

----------


## labraid

Hi Dave,
Well, that explains things pretty well. The shavings are what Embergher used, what I've been trying to figure out is at what point were they applied, and how. I am the sort who likes to try things wrong at least once, so I can say I tried it another way (which, in all hopes, is occasionally better). I like the newspaper idea, but the grease has me wondering. Wouldn't it get in the way of gluing the second layer?

----------


## Jim Garber

My Pandini is lined with shavings. Perhaps, if you speak Italian, you can email him.

Jim

----------


## dave17120

Hi Brian, I think you are right about the grease..... guess you can't take analogies too far. 
(Co-incidentally I do know a Spanish chap who makes wooden statues for those religious parades, and because they are carried, they have to be light. He achieves this by hollowing them out once built, which he is able to do, as someone said earlier, by gluing a sheet of newspaper through the centre enabling him to split it later for hollowing. Perhaps the newspaper alone would facilitate removal from the mold???!!! Hmmm)

I see now about the shavings..... but were they to assist in removal from the mold... or to strengthen the interior of the bowl?? I see your dilemma. If the former, they need to go on the mold, if the latter, they could go in after.... perhaps.
I think I'm sticking with newsprint.

Incidentally, in one bowl I disassembled.... you know, just to see what was going on under the end clasp..... I found small holes in the ends of the staves/ribs, which suggests to me, that at least some makers tacked that end to the tail piece during gluing. Naturally no tacks remained.... just the hole. I wonder how they got away with that without splitting the very narrow ends of the ribs.

Can't wait for the photos of your system for clamping up the ribs... I use elastic bands a lot, but have been unable to figure a system to get sideways pressure as well.

Keep up the good work, Dave

----------


## dave17120

Oh yes, I meant to ask.... how did you decide on the exact shapes for your ribs/staves. Not easy to draw accurate plans from the photos. Perhaps you are shaping each to fit individually as you go along???  ....another problem I have been wrestling with!! Dave

----------


## labraid

dang, can't sleep this morning, can`t seem to escape this work even in my dreams!
Well, contemplating the newspaper method, I came across the same problem--how do you remove the bowl. And the answer is now simple, in my head anyways. The first layer can have no glue--this will be wetted shavings which will, by grace of the water, stick to the form _as if_ glued. This, just long enough to begin applying a second layer of either shavings or newspaper soaked in wetted glue. Then to remove excess moisture and let dry completely. At this point, I'd think one would need a set of new markings on the bowl, a map of where to begin applying ribs, some sort of paper templates which will let us mark the appropriate lines. 
After that point, I have several ideas about how to attach ribs, one involving flexible spring rod, but that will have to wait for the moment...

----------


## vkioulaphides

On the subject of the mysterious to me "wood shavings": are we talking about some sort of small, wooden _cleats_, running along the interior joints between staves? That would be in line with common practice on bowed string instruments. 

Jim, do you have an image of the interior of your Pandini (or your Embergher) that shows exactly what we are talking about? That would certainly help me visualize the actual thing we are discussing.

If so, due consideration must go into perpetuating this practice (or not). I can tell you that, if ANYthing buzzes and rattles inside a bowed string instrument, it is invariably such a cleat, come loose. In fact, to speak of personal experience, I have switched to _canvas_ strips as interior supports on the various seams of my bass. Canvas will obviously NEVER rattle and, even if loose, it can easily be peeled off and replaced. Ah, the wonders of surgery...  

Granted, of course, that any such procedure on the _mandolin_ is truly MICROsurgery but, before attaching anything to the interior of the instrument, please consider the question of how it would be _removed_ and _replaced_ in the course of routine maintenance.

----------


## Graham McDonald

Brian,

My ideas about making a mandolin bowl are very much informed by the approach of lute/oud makers. As far as I can tell, these are almost always made by gluing ribs to the neck and tailblocks and then re-enforcing the joins by paper, linen, shavings or whatever once the bowl is removed from the mould. Robert Lundberg's series of articles for American Lutherie which the #GAL have republished in a book, has lots of info on this method of construction, and the oud building book written by 'Dr Oud' who is from Vancouver has a similar approach. There is also a website by a student of Dr Oud (whose name escapes me at the moment) that documents his oud building project. Worth checking out via a google (though doubtless someone will supply a URL) if you didn't know about them. 

My impression from pulling apart a few bowlbacks is that there was a fair amount of 'fudge factor' (is that an Australian term?) in the way they go together and that the linings, usually paper, can hide a multitude of sins. I suspect the Emberghers are a level or two above the average bowlback! I once had a 5 bis in my workshop many yaesr ago for some minor repair, without any idea of what it was, but it struck me then as the most gorgeous bowlback mando I had ever seen. I presume it is still somewhere in Sydney, hopefully being played.

Good luck with the next stage

cheers

----------


## Martin Jonas

Victor: in Roman mandolins, the entire inner lining of the bowls is made up of wide strips of wood shavings. This replaces the paper lining used in Neapolitan mandolins. On my Embergher, each strip is about 3cm wide and they run transversely across the bowl, at right angles to the staves. The orientation of the strips shown in Brian's photo above looks about right to me, although I can't say if they would have been applied to the mould or to the inside of the bowl after assembly. I'm however pretty sure that there is only one layer of shavings, so i don't think Brian's theory is correct, at least as far as it concerns Embergher's method. A two-layer method may of course work for him.

Martin

----------


## Jim Garber

Here is as good as I can get inside my Pandini. These look to be about .5 inch (1.27cm) in width. You can see the ribs thru them in this photo.

Jim

----------


## vkioulaphides

Thank you, Jim. NOW I know what you all meant, all along. On some Greek instruments I have seen, the material seems to be some sort of hard, felt-like textile often in some beautiful, deep wine-red hue, or blue, or green, etc. (Sort of like the material you find on pool tables, whatever THAT is...) The argument I have heard from luthiers is that, once it is just about soaked in glue (on only one side, of course), it expands; once placed on the interior of the bowl, and as it dries up naturally, it contracts, thereby pulling the staves together. This, to my knowledge, is the force that was alluded to earlier, i.e. the force that pulls the staves together; the force that holds them DOWN onto the mold is exerted by the (whatever) clamp mechanism of the luthier's choice.




> "As far as I can tell, these [i.e. lutes] are almost always made by gluing ribs to the neck and tailblocks and then re-enforcing the joins by paper, linen, shavings or whatever once the bowl is removed from the mould."


Yes, that is the order of events, as I am familiar with it. 

Now... how cohesive can wood-shavings be? They may, of course, have the advantage of *reflecting* vibrations best of all other, alternative materials. I would suspect, that is, that anything soft would *absorb* same, thereby muting, deadening the sound of the instrument. Hmm...

----------


## brunello97

Victor,

Your description of the wood-shaving-shrinkage = interior-stave-binding is interesting and has the intuitive type of sense I admire in traditional craftwork.

In a previous incarnation I was fascinated with trying to build the hour-glass shaped drums played in traditional Afro-Cuban religious rhythms. I visited a old-time cooper's shop thinking I could learn something about stave (rib) tapering and forming. The man was eye-balling the shaping of the staves, not so slowly adjusting each piece with spoke-shave type tools. Very quickly and obviously accurately because the barrels were watertight. A hot iron hoop (on the outside) was fit around the circumference, which after cooling, contracted to pull the staves together. Kind of the inverse of what you describe but similar concept with different materials. 

Jim, thanks for the great picture. I never was quite sure what anyone meant by 'shavings', thinking it was more a matt of smaller bits, kind of like oriented-strand-board. Your picture and Victor's description and Brian's experiments really cleared this all up well.

Victor, does your description imply the strips of shaving would go in after the bowl is made?

Mick

----------


## vkioulaphides

> "Victor, does your description #imply the strips of shaving would go in after the bowl is made?"


Yes. Italian old-timers or is it old-t*y*mers? ''  used the jargon non-word _cordellare_, meaning (in equivalent non-English) "ribboning". You get the idea: "ribbons" of whatever material, would be glued to the interior of the bowl, AFTER it would come off the mold. Speaking of material, porous, parchment paper, or anything with an adequate swell/shrink effect would do the job.

One must not confuse this layer that will REMAIN as part of the instrument with whatever other material one lays down between the mold and the nascent bowl, so that glue does not seep through and make a mess; the latter will obviously NOT be part of the finished instrument.

You know... nothing like experience. Most present-day luthiers I know personally have plans, blueprints, stencils, what have you. They all, however, swear to it that their forebears/mentors under whom they apprenticed had the very same equipment, yet _never consulted it_. # In other words, the legend is that the old-old-old-timers had built so many hundreds (if not THOUSANDS) of bowls that they did it all "by eye". Amazing, no?

But at this point in the mandolin's development, it is important, indeed crucial to salvage and incorporate whatever information we have gleaned from the past. And, perhaps, some day the _apprentices_ of Brian, Graham, Mick, and their peers will speak in nearly mystical devotion of your skills and talents. # 

Best of luck to all of you, brave friends!

----------


## vkioulaphides

As "a picture is worth a thousand words", let me take you, visually at least, into two Greek lutheries: Dino Bersis was in Astoria, New York, and has recently moved to the Midwest; I spent some time at his shop, when it was a subway-ride away from my home. 

By way of disclaimer: I am not _advertising_ any of the luthiers I am about to reference, but only do so for you to navigate their sites, if you wish, and get a visual idea of the process(es) involved. You will surely see, for example, finished, neck-less bowls hanging from Dino's wall.

----------


## vkioulaphides

Greece's only true *mass*-producer, the company of Dionysios Mátsikas. Go under "Our Shops", then click the legend under the glamorously resort-like # factory in Messolonghi incidentally, the historic lagoon town, where Lord Byron died (of typhoid fever, I think), sacrificing fame and fortune for somebody ELSE's country, while the city was besieged by the Ottomans.

OK, OK... back to the _real_ topic: a true manufacturer, Mátsikas & Co. You may see the bending irons, and other tools of the trade. Here goes:

Mátsikas & Co.

----------


## labraid

From the photo it is a certainty now, shavings at the end. Thanks, Jim.
Guess I could flour the form........ 
This all opens up the world of tacking the staves in place to dry as well, interesting...

----------


## Jim Garber

> Guess I could flour the form........


I believe that old Luigi developed an early form of a substance he called _il teflono_  

Jim

----------


## Alex Timmerman

Hello all,

For those who haven't got the work posters Brian is working from, they are on line again and <a href="http://cgi.ebay.de/Drawing-Plan-Poster-of-a-Embergher-Mandolin_W0QQitemZ230031301126QQihZ013QQcategoryZ1  0179Q
QssPageNameZWD2VQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem" target="_blank">here is a link to the Ebay page where they are for sale. They are much bigger in real (and for those who havent seen them before) they give an idea what we are talking about here.</a>

The photo of the No.3 Embergher Mandolin beneath is an image of the very same instrument. 


Best, Alex

----------


## vkioulaphides

How absolutely GORGEOUS! Thank you, Alex. Soooooo... haven't you convinced Hendrik to build something like this yet?  I am not suggesting that such an instrument would be _easy_ to build but... wouldn't it at least be _possible_?

----------


## Jim Garber

My feeling is that something that looked like this in terms of workmanship is very possible. Duplicating the Embergher magic in terms of tone, playability, etc is prob considerably more difficult. I would think a luthier would have to be very familiar with the instruments in order to come close to the old ones -- very similar to the American luthiers who are attempting to copy the Loars.

Jim

----------


## labraid

So when you coming up to Montreal with your prizes, Jim?  :Wink:  You might need some of that il teflono to get through a border crossing with so many sharp axes.

The new staves are ready to bend. Pictures tomorrow! (Hopefully not disastrous)

----------


## Jim Garber

I would love to come to visit. Maybe I could convince a few others of my eastern seaboard cohorts with armloads of choice Italian mandolins. Ah... a dream...

Jim

----------


## vkioulaphides

Ah, I remember traveling with my bass and this, mind you, well before the current Age of Absurdity and being asked at a checkpoint "and what do you have INSIDE that instrument, sir?"  Yes, break out the teflon!

But, back to instruments: we need, at some point, to reach a level of _production_. No, I don't mean necessarily of MASS-production, but at least past the stage of prototypes only. I see that as feasible, if also difficult to arrive at. But hope springs eternal...

I am not even adamant about exact _replication_, as long as the new, based on the old (however loosely) is a good instrument. THAT is my bottom line, as it were.

----------


## labraid

Could you explain that thought in a bit more detail Victor?

----------


## vkioulaphides

Well, Brian...

I know that I may be clobbered to death (with Embergher mandolin-cases, no less ) for my views, but, hey... I am no "Neapolitan general" although, of course, I do like Neapolitan _mandolins_. 

So, then: I am a player, not a historian. It matters little to me, whether a new instrument is *100%* identical to an old one, for as glorious and august as the archtype may have been. Besides, I think that this pursuit of the Perfect Replica may/will lead talented luthiers like yourself, Brian, to 100% _madness_. I'd hate to see that happen...

So, Victor's Dream goes like this: you learn what there is to be learned from Embergher's heritage; you conduct your own experiments, to see what works best; and finally, FINALLY, you come to the *Brian Dean* Model 1A. I respect that wholeheartedly, and would gladly become customer #1, as soon as time and money permits. There will be others, too...

But the idea is NOT to lose sleep over becoming Embergher's reincarnation, but building _the best instrument YOU can_. THEN, you put that wisdom into some sort of a production-line. No, not HUNDREDS of instruments per year for which there is no adequate demand, anyhow. But, say, why not _several_ instruments per year? "Build it, and they will come", is the motto. I don't see, in other words, why mandolinists would not try their hand at a fine, modern bowlback built right here in North America, if it is available, reasonably-priced, and of good quality. Luthiers building OTHER instruments have done it; why not mandolin-builders? We NEED you, Brian!

All that requires getting past the stage of experimentation. I am patient, very patient... still, at some point, once you have the right-sized mold, the right clamps/gauges/calibers/etc.etc., you want to reach the point where you can turn out instruments, GOOD instruments, unburdened by the concern of whether "Embergher would have done exactly so". Such metaphysics gets in the way. Scrap it and get on with the present, say I.

Due apologies to all those I may surely have offended with my populist/democratic bias(es). One can be both idealistic AND pragmatic, both at the same time.

----------


## Jim Garber

To clarify what I said above:
I agree whole-heartedly with Victor. My feelings are that we can learn from the instruments of the past but that the outer trappings of these instruments merely hold the more elusive inner aspects of tone and playability that makes these vintage ones so desirable. The contemporary luthier can copy a photo of an instrument but it takes more to duplicate the tonal qualities that this instrument can produce. That is where the genius or the luthier resides.

Having said all that: I also find the aesthetic of the Emberghers quite appealing. 

I must also confess: that until I actually have mine in my hand -- hopefully in a few weeks -- I can't say that I even like these mandolins. I have never had the opportunity to actually play one, tho I have held one in terrible condition in my hands.

Jim

----------


## labraid

Thanks for the encouragement Victor. I feel more and more this mandolin plays some role in the future... I have every intention, however, to start from the work of a master, I've had quite a decent dose of experimentation in my short career and am ready to settle down a bit. Time will tell!

I am happy today, seems the secrets of this mandolin have been winning til now, but today it relented. So here's a photo. 

Now to look for some _brass_ pins ;)

----------


## Jim Garber

Nice (and large) colorful pushpins, Brian. I was curious how the ribs meet at the endblock, never having seen one in person and in disassembly.

Jim

----------


## otterly2k

> I've had quite a decent dose of experimentation in my short career and am ready to settle down a bit. Time will tell!


So you say, Brian.... but I'll believe it when I see it! I think you may have an experimental nature...

----------


## vkioulaphides

... and THIS is precisely what I meant earlier, about the ribcage-like molds: since they are not solid (as Brian's is), they allow the luthier to pass clamps _through_ them, thereby fastening the staves onto the outer arches that define the curvature of the bowl. 

I've simply *got* to get a scanner!  Nevertheless, I trust that the contraption I am describing is easy enough to visualize: think of the hull of a ship, still incomplete (i.e. without the outer planks), upside down, as it is normally seen in shipyards. 

No push-pins needed in that case, of course. But, hey... whatever works!

----------


## Jim Garber

This from an oud making site, but I think this is what Victor is talking about.


The site is here.

Jim

----------


## vkioulaphides

PRECISELY! Just think smaller, of course...  

Thanks, Jim.

----------


## labraid

...though I don't see any convenient place to clamp to in that hollow mould. Anyone else think he's probably using tape to clamp with?
I'd also like to say, that while his oud mould is perfectly round, the Embergher is not, and this complex form would likely complicate such a hollow venture (cough, cough). It's already complicating mine. ;)

The other non-pushpin method which I have great faith in, and which I will try next time, is a series of thin, strong ribbons strung under the ribs, which works as a clamp when doubled back, pulled toward the joint, pinned down somewhere convenient to hold. In fact, I might try this Monday as I don't really like the idea of putting any more holes in this mould.. Just need to thread it under the current ribs and go to town. Pictures to come.

----------


## labraid

Hey, what are those litte white things in the tailblock??  :Wink:

----------


## Mike Buesseler

I know this Dean character fairly well. Do not trust his sincere sounding modesty or his promise to "settle down." If he is setting out to build a near-replica of _any_ mandolin, I can almost assure you it will come, at least, very close to equaling the original. His second and any subsequent attempts will almost sure exceed that original in some way, and I feel quite certain that it will also incorporate some design features _none of us has seen--or thought of--before_ . 
"Settle down." Right.

----------


## labraid

...and strips of newsprint soaked in hot hide glue, left to dry, then perhaps heated in place with his iron and an instant bond forms?

as if to say to us, "and it only took me two hours, ha ha ha"  :Wink:

----------


## vkioulaphides

To offer some more of my worthless commentary, Brian # the ribcage-molds I have seen "in action", as it were, resembled more, ehm... _porcupines_, with countless clamps of different sizes sticking out from just about every direction.




> "though I don't see any convenient place to clamp to in that hollow mould."


Think "porcupine": clamps holding down the staves against the skeletal structure of the mold.




> "... heated in place with his iron and an instant bond forms?"


Maybe. I do know for a fact that Greek luthiers would apply the heating iron while the staves were in place, but I always thought that was to give the staves their final _bend_, not to melt the glue. I could, of course, be wrong (again # ) I just beg to differ with the interpretation of the picture: to wit, I think that the newsprint is there so that the heating-iron will not burn the surface of the wood, leaving ugly stains. Drycleaners do this all the time...

And, to apologize to any and all manufacturers of push-pins: I have nothing against them, really... # They just seem rather flimsy not to mention that, several mandolins later, your mold will look like it was visited by a colony of termites. But, if it works...




> "...as if to say to us, "and it only took me two hours, ha ha ha"


Well... the _bowl_ itself should not take an eternity and a day. It seems to me that the major part of the luthier's effort goes into the stuff that needs to be fine-tuned. The bowl is or rather _should_ be#not the greatest concern. It certainly isn't to the function of the instrument. A harsh truth, I know...

----------


## Neil Gladd

Brian, this won't help you in the least, but FYI, here is the way Seiffert put his bowls together: no form and clamped with masking tape. But then, he had fewer ribs, and they were symmetrical and identical. I took these when I stayed with him 20 years ago.

----------


## mandoisland

I just saw a link to an oud resource, there is another oud resource but only in German, with a very detailt documentation about building an oud. It has also a very good description on building the bowl.
Oud bauen als Hobby (DIY oud building)

Maybe this is helpful to someone here.

Neil Gladd - did Seiffert put the bowl together just by hand, without a mold? Your picture makes me think so.

Michael

----------


## Jim Garber

This oud building page has this form, reall bare bones but it looks like the angles buil int to the end block force the ribs to conform to the shape.



Jim

----------


## brunello97

Great site, Jim. I'm wondering after seeing Khalaf's jig whether the kind of skeleton form Victor speaks of (and 'oudmaker' uses) might not help eleviate some of the mid-rib deformations that plague Khalaf. They might perhaps provide some mid-rib alignment and attachment points.

Astonishingly clean and careful work, though, and the walnut is beautiful. Excellent photos. I'd love to see how it progresses.

A question for Brian: what are your thoughts on the 'skeleton' mo(u)ld relative to your experience with the solid one?

Mick

----------


## vkioulaphides

[QUOTE]"I'm wondering after seeing Khalaf's jig whether the kind of skeleton form Victor speaks of (and 'oudmaker' uses) might not help eleviate some of the mid-rib deformations that plague Khalaf. They might perhaps provide some mid-rib alignment and attachment points."

PRECISELY! Providing mid-rib alignment and attachment points IS the crucial benefit of the ribcage-mold.

The German oud-site is quite helpful. I would offer to translate for you, Brian, but there are others on board who are far better qualified, such as Michael or Martin (whose _native_ language is German, but his _everyday_ language English, as he lives in the U.K.) Not all oud-making techniques are relevant to the mandolin, of course, but still, a good many of them are.

I have said all I _could_ say done enough damage   so I will sign off and watch with great interest from the sidelines. After all, I am no luthier, have never built an instrument, and never will. I'm just someone who, due to family/cultural circumstances, has been around mandolins for a long time, has walked in and out of luthiers' shops, peeked around with keen interest but precious little knowledge. The more salient issues are for skilled craftsmen to discuss.

Best of luck, Brian!

----------


## Martin Jonas

The German oud-site is indeed quite helpful, and as it is insanely detailed there's an awful lot of text to translate. If Brian would find it useful, I would be very happy to translate, but it would take a little while.

They do address the question of solid moulds versus skeleton:




> Ich würde nicht empfehlen, eine geschlossene massive Form (in der Form eines halben Eies) zu bauen, wie sie viele eurpäischen Lautenmacher verwenden. Der Vorteil der Schiffsrumpfform ist, daß man die Leimnähte von innen kontrollieren und eventuell nachbessern kann. Sie ist auch viel leicher zu bauen. 
> 
> _I would not recommend to make a closed solid mould (in the shape of half an egg), as used by many European lute-makers. The advantage of the "boat skeleton mould" is that it makes it possible to check and, if necessary, rework the glue seams from the inside. The skeleton mould is also much easier to make._


Personally, I can see the advantages of a more open mould for mandolins and/or ouds in general, but I think the main reason why Brian opted (sensibly in my opinion) for the solid mould is that the Embergher shape is _not_ "half an egg", it's a much more complex curvature even on the student model. Much of the elegance comes from that curvature.

Martin

----------


## vkioulaphides

A brief trespassing on my word: apologies to Martin, as I did not intend to, ehm... _volunteer_ him as translator. Indeed, an awful lot of text there...

Yes, the site reminded me of a rather salient point, which I had failed to mention, i.e. that the skeletal mold allows the luthier to work on the bowl from the _inside_, too.

A "half-egg"-shaped mold will obviously yield, well... half-egg-shaped bowls. I would assume that a differently shaped, i.e. Embergher-esque skeleton will just as naturally yield the appropriately different bowls.

At the risk of being lynched by oud players, I must publicly admit that the oud's bowl is one of the most INelegant, IMHO. I invoke both the First and Fifth Amendments in my defense.  Having said that, the graceful shape of more complex arches and curvatures can be had by similar techniques.

----------


## labraid

Right, Martin. Victor may be right that it's possible, but it would seem to complicate things. Plus, I like being able to stick in a pin _if I need to_--that is my joint insurance. Ideally one fits the ribs carefully enough to avoid that altogether. I'd imagine in speed production, the open moulds would be best to check one's work as one watches TV or listens to the game during 8 hours of repetition. 
So, here we are now.


Looking decent eh?



Ah, not so good here!
That's why I tore it off... 
Yep, I'm starting over. I found a local hobby supply with a sealing iron like in the oud photos above. I should not be spending over a week in the construction of a bowl, that I know now. And with the misalignment, I've only learned enough to do it that much better next time. 
In case you're wondering, the "misalignment" is what is causing the ribs in the second photo to "twist" up at left--they are not lying flat on the mould (neither are the ones right to center--I found out after taking it off--these four were attached simultaneously at the beginning, so the pins weren't holding the two at center flat to the mould--learning, one at a time!) because the centers are being pulled by both tips, and this means there is less of a glue joint contact surface, both on the edge and the inside. If I'm gonna do this right, and spend all the time, the bowl had better be perfect. 
Ahh, ok, a few days to get back to speed...........

----------


## Linda Binder

Perseverando!!! We're all rooting for you Brian. This is much better than "reality TV". 
You'll get this right and better.
--Linda
part of the world wide web mando cheering squad

----------


## labraid

Ah yes, perserverence! For the hope that on it someone will make as beautiful music as you have shown in your MySpace. Fantastic stuff Linda...

----------


## vkioulaphides

Ah, there is something profoundly spiritual in the luthier's art! 

On the inside of a harpsichord's lid (in Italy), I once read the inscription:

_Dum vixi tacui
Mortua dulce cano._

("While I lived, I was silent; now that I am dead, I sing sweetly.")

It is the voice of the *tree*, out of whose wood the musical instrument was built. A beautiful thought...

I am, of course, no luthier. Yet, as a composer, my standpoint is not entirely different: one *builds* an instrument, the other *writes* a piece of music, so that another one will actually *play* the piece ON the instrument, so that ultimately others will *hear* it and hopefully be _moved_ by it. 

In conclusion of one of his epistles, Seneca wrote in exhortation:

_Colamus humanitatem!_

("Let us cultivate humanity!")

I think THIS is what he had in mind.

Best of luck, Brian.

----------


## Linda Binder

Thank you Brian!!

----------


## berkeleymando

Brian this is absolutely intruiging. The piccolo is doing great, just so you know.

----------


## vkioulaphides

Sooooooooo, Brian...  ... how is your masterpiece coming along? I am not alone, I am sure, in my eagerness to read some progress report, if any.

----------


## labraid

Wow, has it been that long... Time seems to fly these days, and yet stand still.

Photo please.

a) fully glued and rough sanded. This is the ideal shape of the ribs (look closely at their tips). They lie flat on the form perfectly but visually aren't uniform.
b) glued but rough. This is the ideal, the way it should look. I worked the strips differently than the prior failed attempts (working a rectangle to shape rather than starting with a standard cutout allows you to shave off in the right areas and still come to the same overall conclusion). Why did I do this part differently than a? Hadn't quite thought of it yet. "Explain that a bit more..." Very hard to do without pictures, and I'd forgotten my camera the first few days. Sorry this time around...
c) this piece was tricky. It is glued in place but what a bear to match it to the piece above/next to it. If the line is not perfectly straight you must carefully fit this large rib to it with sandpaper, all the while holding it firm to the mould while checking, and, well, ok.
d) so I didn't glue this one, but left it to dry overnight, nailed into place to hug the form as best as possible. When dry and stiff, it will be that much easier to fit to the rib above/next to it which is never perfectly straight.
But hallelujahs anyway, this work took all of two days, and that my first one. 



The trick is really the hide glue and the iron. Thick glue for the ribs, when heated in place, works just like hot glue sticks, if the pieces fit well and tight without great force, it gels enough to hold things in place in about ten seconds. Very handy, no clamps except the occasional bit of paper to hold more stubborn joints.
Tomorrow I'll remove the form and get to work on the apron.

----------


## vkioulaphides

Very, VERY impressive, Brian.

Explain (again), please, how come the staves at "a" do not terminate into the clasp, but into each other, as it were. I doubt that this will have any _structural_ implications for the instrument but, still, it makes me curious.

Bravo!

----------


## vkioulaphides

> "The trick is really the hide glue and the iron. Thick glue for the ribs, when heated in place, works just like hot glue sticks, if the pieces fit well and tight without great force, it gels enough to hold things in place in about ten seconds."


YES! With the right thickness of glue plus, of course, heat the bowl should come together both quickly and VERY solidly! 

And, I neglected to add that you have indeed captured that quintessential, Embergher-esque elegance with your nascent bowl. Thumbs up!

----------


## labraid

Imagine the very center piece. There are 15 on each half for a total of 30. This Embergher contour at center is very flat, moving to very curved, to flat near the skirt once again. My first method, which failed, was to cut all staves to final shape on the bandsaw, then clean them up after the bend, and attach. This required a twist in the stave to get it to fit. Very bad, as we saw. The way it DOES work is to start each stave as a rectangle. The very first stave to go on--it will have it's center-most edge straight--no planing whatsoever except to give it a good glue surface. Great, now to it's other edge. It needs to fit a certain profile in order to make all the staves of alike appearance (side a did not have this like appearance because I had not thought of doing it this way yet--actually, I thought it would be impossible, but did not mind as the belt(?) will later cover much of this jointed area). I divided the bowl into 15 parts for the right side, and planed the secondary edge to follow these marks very closely. When pieces 1 through 5 go on, the beginning edge will always be flat as the first one was, and it is the secondary edge which is planed to a curve. Progressivley, to fit the complex curve, this goes the other way and by the fifteenth rib, I am only planing the first edge and the secondary edge is remaining flat--the edge that will meet the skirt. Perfect, yes, and it takes a lot of work.
By the way, the light is exagerrating the joint overlaps. These are almost 3mm thick, and only .5mm of any one rib can be found to protrude, so we have a minimum of about 2-2.5mm glue surface even in trouble spots--just fine. After final sanding inside and out, we should be left with 2.5mm thickness give or take. 
Ah yes, I forgot to mention. There are no decorative strips this trial. I buried my pride and acknowledged I have enough to learn without fidgeting into place 31 strips of flimsy veneer. They would hide the joinery very nicely though--most likely their prime purpose! Though I did see one or two models in the Embergher book with no strips. Er, hmm, yes, I'm copying "that" one!

----------


## Alex Timmerman

Hi Brian,

As promised here is a link to a video recording of Ruth Rouw, Pauline Ulderink and Tom Edskes. You can hear them play the Ionian Mandolinata as set by our own Victor Kioulaphides. Both mandolins are excellent examples of the Luigi Embergher´s Orchestra Model No. 3. And both are made in 1924. I hope the internet sound quality will at least give you some idea of how these instruments can sound.

Click here for opening the file (it takes a while to download...).



Best and enjoy,

Alex

----------


## dave17120

Superb Brian, I'm not entirely sure I have the process clear in my mind, but I'll work on it..... mean while, what sort of sized plane have you found most useful to plane the edges of what are really very narrow ribs?
By 'secondary edge', do you mean the edge that is away from that being glued?

'Bon chance pour le continuation', I shall be watching avidly.
Dave

----------


## vkioulaphides

Brian, your pride needs no burying.  There are PLENTY of finely wrought instruments without those spacers. Yes, I believe you are correct as to their actual purpose and, I suppose, once one has mastered the process of interjecting them and made it into a routine, they probably make the fit easier, not harder. But I certainly do not see your choice as any sort of "demerit". 

Alex as always#does me great honor by referencing the cheerful Ionian Mandolinata, which I only arranged and published, but (of course) did not compose originally. I'd have to be, oh, some *200* years old to have done THAT!  But, yes, the two mandolins played by Pauline and Ruth are absolutely _wonderful_ sounding instruments. 

I applaud, encourage, and congratulate ANYone who applies his skills and talents in lutherie to building such instruments, or such that emulate their luminous sonority and superb playability. Hopefully, looking forward to a day not TOO far into the future, modern Embergher-esque mandolins will be a reality, and beyond the prototype stage.

I must also congratulate Brian in _particular_, as he has chosen to work using an, ehm.. _democratic_ Embergher model as his own. What I mean by this is that, the precious few luthiers who DO build Embergher-esque instruments, strive to replicate the upper-series models only the economics are too obvious to mention. Yet, alas, the result is the OPPOSITE of what I would wish for: to wit, I dream of the day that, say, a few DOZEN "orchestra"-model mandolins will be around, available, and in use by day-to-day players, _not_ just one or two, super-ultra-maxi-deluxe models for no one but the very, very, VERY few. 

Citizenry on its feet at the forum, and public roar of approval for Brian.

Victor (incorrigible Athenian democrat)

----------


## Alex Timmerman

Hello Victor, Brian and all,


As for Luigi Embergher mandolins being copied I have some good news. 
Last weekend I visited the Mondomusica fair in Cremona, Italy, one of the largest musical instrument exhibitions, organized by and for luthiers, musicians, musical instrument dealers and other people with interest in this subject from all over the World. This year the guitar was chosen as the main focus of interest and a number of specialists in this field gave lectures on several related guitar topics (Stradivari guitars, Torres soundboard bracing etc. etc.). I was invited to speak about the development of the 6-string guitar from c. 1760 to c. 1865 and the influence the Italian luthiers have had on their collegues in the rest of Europe.

Among the thousands of new and old violins, violas, cellos and double basses on display many antique 18th and 19th Century guitars and mandolins of all types and models as well as important old 20th Century instruments of these instrument families were shown. For me of course a wonderful chance to find new old instruments, first editions of printed mandolin and guitar music and of course to find out if there were new developments with regard to the field of copying the best (old) mandolin examples. And there were indeed some exciting developments and new Italian mandolin(o)s to see. About these instruments (Stradivari, Vinaccia and Embergher copies) I hope to find some more time to write and to inform you later this weekend. 


Best regards, 

Alex


PS. 
 Click here to read more about the Cremona Mondomusica fair.

PS 2. Here a photo of an excellent (and almost finished) copy of the Luigi Embergher No. 3 Orchestra model by my friend Mr. Lorenzo Lippi. More about this instrument later...

----------


## vkioulaphides

Delightful-looking instrument, Alex! One bad thing, though... it has that _terrifying_ little piece of paper stuck between the strings... terrifying, because it looks like a *price*-tag. # I'm afraid to ask...

I would, however, LOVE to hear more about the instruments you saw (and perhaps heard) in Cremona. What a treat for us Café regulars, to be there vicariously, and share your experiences through your account! Whenever you get a chance, I am sure I am not alone in my eager expectation of fascinating news and information.

Cheers,

Victor

----------


## dave17120

Hi Brian, been wrestling with your explanation of how you assembled the ribs...... and I have bad news and good.

GOOD NEWS: I have been looking at my embarrassingly large selection of mandolins awaiting repair, with particular reference to the bowls. It seems obvious to me now.... (isn't hindsite a wonderful thing???) that the bowls were not built with the elaborate care I had assumed...... in fact a look at the following 2 photos suggests that they were built as you have done, 'by eye and hand' as they went along. On both of these instruments, (1. a Loveri and 2. a Stridente) the widths of corresponding ribs on either side varies by up to 3mm (a lot when some are only 5mm wide!) On the Stridente, the centre is not even central.

----------


## dave17120

and the Stridente....

----------


## dave17120

Now for the bad news..........
BAD NEWS: trying to understand your method, I made myself a couple of 'rectangles' in tracing paper (so I could see what was going on underneath...) and imagined I was trying to fit a rib somewhere on the Loveri side, having understood as I thought, that you were only planing one edge of the rectangle. Dismal failure I'm afraid. The strip wasn't very wide, but once off the top, I couldn't find a straight edge anywhere to match onto. 
I have obviously totally failed to grasp what you described (....a bear of little brain I'm afraid!)

----------


## dave17120

S next I thought, I'll whip a rib out of an old wreck, lay it flat, and see what shape it actually is.......... so, even though it was not too far from the top of the bowl, it hasn't got a straight edge anywhere!!

Perhaps the different, smoother curves of the Emburgher you are copying do line up straight when bent...... which leaves me back where I was before, wrestling with the problem of creating a 3D plan from a 2D photo. :Frown:  

Somewhat confused, Dave

----------


## Jim Garber

I think if I were attempting this, I would prob do a "dry" mockup with cardboard. I think I had seen one of the luete or oud sites do that.

This amazes me in the same way that some of the southwest potters are able to do an intricate design on a curved surface. I think at some point is depends on the artistic eye, for sure.

As to those Stridentes: bear in mind that they are lowend instruments made in a large shop or factory (I believe). Quality control was not profitable at that price point.

Jim

----------


## vkioulaphides

Beautiful, Alex! When you say "unvarnished", do you mean that the instrument is as of yet _unfinished_, or that the luthier intends to _leave_ it like this, as final product? In other words, I cannot tell from the picture whether the bowl is unSTAINED (i.e. without any coloring agent applied to the wood), but still clear-varnished, or TOTALLY unvarnished (i.e. with absolutely NO substance applied to the wood). Very interesting...

Also fascinating, of course, is the very name of the luthier. Imagine going through life (present-day) called Dante Aligheri, or Lucrezia Borgia...

----------


## vkioulaphides

Oops... Alex withdrew the picture and post I was replying to, presumably to modify it. Once he re-posts it, my own post above will (hopefully) make more sense.

----------


## Alex Timmerman

Hi all,

Since the making of the bowl and ribs is under discussion here I thought it would be nice to show the (unvarnished) backside of the Lorenzo Lippi Embergher mandolin (the front of this exact Embergher copy can be viewed at the previous page of this topic).


Best,

Alex

----------


## Alex Timmerman

Ha ha Victor,

Yes I took the post out again because I didn't like the little horizontal linecuts in the bowl. In my computer the photo is OK, but when placed here they simply appear.

If you copy your post, delete it from this topic and replace it, every thing will be in the right order and I can answer at the right place again # #  # .
If you don't, I will answer anyhow # # .


Cheers, Alex

----------


## etbarbaric

Thanks for the photos Alex.

I'm glad to see that Sr. Lippi has nicely duplicated the book-matched ribs of original roman instruments (Emberghers in particular). I think this feature is significant because it shows how the Romans were striving to raise the mandolin to the level of the violin, even in appearance. 

In this case, rather than cutting ribs consecutively from the edge of a block of wood (traditional lute-building technique), the ribs are cut from two book-matched panels, that are then aligned along the central seam. Each rib is then carefully lined up so that the flame pattern in the wood is continuous across the back. The result is somewhat like the book-matched backs of violin-family instruments, but with the multi-rib back and scalloping adding to the effect. There are many good photos of this on Alex' website (www.embergher.com).

Eric

----------


## Alex Timmerman

Hello Victor and others of course,

Mr. Lorenzo Lippi _( - indeed Victor, what a great name to have! Some years ago when we first encountered eachother, I asked him whether he was a descendant of this great Florentine painter and poet (1606-1664), but he admitted that this was not the case. For the fun of it I have attached a intriguing portret of the Maestro.)_ wanted to get the Embergher ready in time for Mondomusica fair in Cremona but unfortunately didn't succeed doing so. Fortunately he did bring the mandolin so I could see it. As you can see on the photos the instrument is quite 'white' in its appearence. This is because it hasn't been varnished yet (the complete instrument; soundboard front, sides and back of the head as well as the neck and bowl). Also missing are the flower shaped position dots on the fingerboard and the metal sleave guard (the sleave guard that you see on the mandolin now is one of the type used by another Roman mandolin maker named Giovanni De Santis). He attached that one and the strings to give the mandolin a presentable appearance. 
But all these things to finish Mr. Lippi hopes to do very soon, for we will meet again on November 4th in Arpino at the conference in honour of the 150 birthday of Luigi Embergher. Sebastiaan (de Grebber) will join me there so it will be possible to _hear_ the mandolin played in its full glory. 

It is all very exciting because, as you know, it was my great wish that the 'Roman' or 'Embergher' mandolin making tradition would be picked up again. I now have the feeling that, with regard to the excellent (wood) workmanship seen in this mandolin, that point is now reached again. 
Now we have to be patient for some weeks but be sure, we are eagerly awaiting the moment the mandolin is played and to hear how it sounds. Let's hope this most important aspect will also be of the quality we expect of a No.3 'Embergher' mandolin! Artistry is needed now! 

I will keep you updated on this! 


Best,

Alex
Photo: The artist *Lorenzo Lippi*  - #_painter and poet (b. & d. in Florence 1606-1664)_.

----------


## Alex Timmerman

Hello Eric,

Indeed, you described it very well and this mandolin has it all! I think once it is varnished the flame pattern of the back and neck will be very beautiful. #

And there is more; the Italian luthiers are really catching up again where it concernes the making of quality instruments of the mandolin family. Fine Neapolitan instruments can be had from a.o. Calace jr. and Pandini and nice Roman mandolins will soon become available from Cecconi and Lippi!

Extra of interest is the fact that Mr. Lorenzo Lippi teaches at the Luthier school in Milan, a school that brings together an international group of young people with one main goal in their minds: to learn the necessary skills of woodcraft and become professional luthiers! #


Best regards,

Alex

----------


## vkioulaphides

Yes, that is the same (self-portrait?) of Sr. Lippi *Sr.* that I was familiar with. Ah, a sharp eye this man had!  

Let us hope, then... Mr. Cecconi do I remember correctly is the one from the _Liuteria Romana_, or am I TOTALLY confused? (as usual  )

----------


## Alex Timmerman

Yes Victor, Mr. Cecconi is the one from Marco Onorati´s Nuovo Liuteria Romana. His replica shows that he is a little bit more free in his copying (a.o. the bindings around the table and soundhole, the rather large shape of the soundhole and its decorations, the bridge, no fingerboard position markers), but as for the body shape etc. the instrument is still close to the original 5bis Embergher Concert Model he copied (see the attached photo of his mandolin).


Greetings,

Alex

PS. Indeed, it´s a self-portrait by Maestro Lippi.

----------


## Jim Garber

> Mr. Cecconi is the one from Marco Onorati´s Nuovo Liuteria Romana.


I am confused on this account. From my correspondence with Marco, I was pretty certain that Sr. Cecconi was not the maker of these Emberghers but it was a consortium of luthiers. Others have said that Marco is the maker, but he is the one who emailed me about that fact and that he commissioned them from this group.

Here is a quote from an email from Marco in spring of 2005:


> In few days I will be able to upload photos of one of our Embergher 5 bis copia.
> However this mandolin are produced not by Sir. Carlo Cecconi but by a specialized team in Roman Mandolin called "Nuova Liuteria Romana".


Perhaps Alex, you can clear up my confusion? Have you been there and saw these being made by Sr. Cecconi who has some historic instruments pictured on Marco's site.

Jim

----------


## labraid

Hey, great discussion going on over here, I hadn't been on for a few days. 
The Lippi reproduction is just gorgeous... I have much to work up to!
Regarding the cut of the slats, I slab sawed my pieces thinking this was probably the traditional way, and getting the pieces to match up pretty good anyway, I'll have to try the method mentioned above--a flat sheet cut into strips. Probably even better match, it's true.
The photo of that rib, re: bent, not straight edge. I'd suspect the rib you have there is of some permanent deformation, but that it was not applied that way in the beginning--no flat plane could make that curve. Very interesting to see, though, of course!
Yes, when I said "secondary edge", the edge away from that particular joint being glued. I didn't get a chance to work on the skirt yet, another mandolin has been keeping my attention at the moment. Rent to pay, etc etc!  :Wink: 



Half of the interior strips applied...

----------


## labraid

I take that back... Once curved, a flat plane can and will take material away from that area. The question becomes, how did his shape get so out of whack that he needed to remove so much for a fit...

----------


## etbarbaric

Hi Brian,

You mandolin is looking wonderful! Congratulations.




> Regarding the cut of the slats, I slab sawed my pieces thinking this was probably the traditional way, and getting the pieces to match up pretty good anyway, I'll have to try the method mentioned above--a flat sheet cut into strips. Probably even better match, it's true.


The visual results are quite different. The method you used, which is indeed fairly typical for lute-type constrution, causes each rib to repeat the flaming or patterning. It doesn't matter much with a wood like rosewood since there isn't much patterning to be had. I've seen this used to very good effect on lute backs made of maple. The approach that Roman makers took (bookmatched slabs) results in the pattern running continuously across all of the ribs, and joining in the center. The effect is quite amazing when done properly. You probably knew this... but I thought I'd put it down again anyway.

Best of luck with the rest of the instrument.

Eric

----------


## dave17120

Hi Brian, I just took the rib above into the shop and cleaned up the back...... it difinitely shows the line of the grain, not so easy to see in the photo, and it was 'cut on a curve'. I'm beginning to wonder now more about the shape of the bowls.... I haven't got an Embergher to examine, but the general shape of the bowl is much more evenly rounded than most of the other Neapolitans. Perhaps this results in ribs that don't need to be initially curved. 
The rib in question, above, is from an old German instrument, but I'm afraid very typical.
The plot thickens, the implications of bowl shape on rib construction.... I think as Jim suggested, I'm going to go away and play with some cardboard.

Keep up the good work, however it is done, its looking good! Dave

----------


## dave17120

And here is that rib, curved, tail-end section, definitely showing straight grain and curved edge....

----------


## vkioulaphides

Very nice, Brian! Keep up the good work.

----------


## Acquavella

Quote - "His replica shows that he is a little bit more free in his copying (a.o. the bindings around the table and soundhole, the rather large shape of the soundhole and its decorations, the bridge, no fingerboard position markers), but as for the body shape etc. the instrument is still close to the original 5bis Embergher Concert Model he copied (see the attached photo of his mandolin)." Alex

Hello everyone - 

I am afraid that I am mostly responsible for the above mentioned. There is no inlay on the fingerboard because I prefer to have a blank fingerboard like a violin. Marco did ask me before construction if I wanted the original Embergher inlay but I declined. I find inlays to be distracting. I admit that the bridge that came with the instrument was very odd and was replaced immediately. The sound hole is a little distorted in the pictures. When you put my mandolin next to Alison's Embergher there isn't a difference in size or look around the soundhole area. The main difference I notice is that the original Embergher was made with the highest quality of materials. My inlay around the sound hole is a similar pattern to Alison's but where mine looks cheap and faded; Alison's inlay still looks fresh, vibrant and new. Marco used ivory(or fake ivory) for my inlay where Luigi used some kind of silver material. Alex - I'm sure you know what material it is. One thing that I was disappointed about is the scratch plate. The original Emberghers had tortoise shell with silver flake for the scroll. My scratch plate is ebony with fake ivory for the scroll. Doesn't look as nice. 

The body and sound of my Embergher 5bis replica is very close to the originals. I am very happy with the sound and attack. I feel a little let down by the cheap hardware. I recently have had to replace the tuning machines with Schaller tuners which just cost me 168 pounds. The original tuners stopped working (siezed close to tension), which made the instrument unreliable. Also - Marco has had to make me a new tailpiece because the original is oxidized and now looks ugly. It also recently just broke but Marco reimbursed me for the repair. So it hasn't been all rainbows. 

That being said - I am still a happy customer and only perform on this instrument. Cheers

Chris.........

----------


## vkioulaphides

Very revealing... Thanks, Chris. Would you be kind enough to post, say, two images of your Embergher-esque beauty, one of the front, one of the back?

----------


## Jim Garber

I think that the photo that Alex posted is Chris' instrument. I believe that to date Marco's group has produced two instruments: Chris' and one for marco's wife Sonia. There may be more in the works, however.

Jim

----------


## vkioulaphides

Duh... somehow, I _knew_ that the very same instrument Chris was talking about MUST have been posted at some point of this thread. # The tuning machines look most respectable; too bad they deteriorated functionally. The tailpiece, however, ah... DOES look rather cheap, and only corroborates Chris' sad tale of corrosion and breakage. # Annoying, really, that at least _some_ parts of an otherwise fine instrument are sub-par. 

Also, Jim's account of the Liuteria Romana's output puts this out of my pipe dream of a "production line" for such instruments. Critical mass has not been reached yet... 

But this instrument does _sound_ good. Of course, "it's not the instrument, it's the *player*". Thumbs up and a round of applause for Chris.

----------


## Alex Timmerman

Hello all,

What a small World we live in! I already told you that at the Luigi Embergher conference on the 4th of November in Arpino, I will meet again with mr. Lorenzo Lippi and have the chance to hear his wonderful Luigi Embergher Model No. 3 copy played by Sebastiaan. 
It will all the more be an interesting meeting (see attached programme) and a special gathering of people since as it happens Marco Onorati will also be there and I #will of course ask him all about his group the 'Nuovo Liuteria Romana'. 
As for now I believe Mr. Ceccone was the one most involved building Chris' 5bis Roman mandolin. 

And interesting to read Jim, what you tell us about Sonia Maurer's Embergher's copy; there will be plenty of time to talk with *Sonia Maurer* (of whome you #can find more info by clicking here - you can select the English language) because together with Luca Mereu and Sebastiaan, we - for the special occasion of Luigi Embergher's 150-ties birthday - have founded a kind of _'Quartetto a plettro Itali - Olandese'_  . I'll ask Sonia if she brings her Roman mandolin copy with her.

More info about the composer and mandolinist *Luca Mereu* is found on the special composer´s page at The CONSORT website (click here). In the past Luca Mereu composed several very nice works for us.


In the meanwhile, perhaps Chris has more information about who the actual maker of his Embergher copy was? I take it that there must be a label inside the mandolin.


Best,

Alex.

----------


## vkioulaphides

How exciting!!! I will be with you on November 4 via... _telepathy_.  I am sorry I don't know these good folks (yet) personally, but I would LOVE to eventually get to know them. Yes, a small world indeed!

----------


## vkioulaphides

Also, I must add that Luca Mereu's _Greek Suite_, which I had the pleasure of hearing performed live by Het Consort in Holland last year, is an EXCELLENT piece for plucked orchestra. 

Hmm... I must now "retaliate" or is it "reITaliate"?   by writing an *Italian* Suite as an act of retribution.

----------


## Jim Garber

Rather than hijack Brian's thread, I posted some pics that Lorenzo Lippi sent me of his style 3 here.

Jim

----------


## vkioulaphides

Yes, Brother James the Just is right again. We may, perhaps, have a thread some day regarding Embergher-esque instruments _in general_ but, for the time being, this one belongs fairly and squarely to Brian's efforts.

----------


## Jim Garber

..and now, back to our program, which is already in progress...  

Jim

----------


## InspectorMorse

Hi, thanks for that..I`ve deleted my blunder...Ooops

----------


## Jim Garber

> As for now I believe Mr. Ceccone was the one most involved building Chris' 5bis Roman mandolin. 
> 
> And interesting to read Jim, what you tell us about Sonia Maurer's Embergher's copy; there will be plenty of time to talk with *Sonia Maurer* (of whome you can find more info by clicking here - you can select the English language) because together with Luca Mereu and Sebastiaan, we - for the special occasion of Luigi Embergher's 150-ties birthday - have founded a kind of _'Quartetto a plettro Itali - Olandese'_  . I'll ask Sonia if she brings her Roman mandolin copy with her.


I must have missed these comments by Alex a few days ago. Marco is Sonia's husband. I had another email conversation with Marco a year or so ago how Pandini's instrument were inferior to the ones that his consortium were making and that Sonia who is an excellent musician preferred her Roman copy to the Pandinis. In any case, it would be nice to clear some of this up. I was also under the impression that Sr. Ceccone was the maker but Marco says no.

Jim

----------


## vkioulaphides

> "I had another email conversation with Marco a year or so ago how Pandini's instrument were inferior to the ones that his consortium were making and that Sonia who is an excellent musician preferred her Roman copy to the Pandinis."


Sure. Nothing like an unbiased view...  

I might add, on this occasion, that the music I write is vastly superior to that of any other composer, and that some of the finer musicians I know agree with me in preferring my works over anyone else's.

Oh, by the way... my _mother_ thinks so, too.

----------


## labraid

The latest update, this is the third effort and I am terribly comfortable with it this time. Ouf, it might finally happen.



Yes only two ribs there now, but the method is what counts. It was the same method I used to do this one:



...and it worked like a charm.

More to come, of course.

----------


## Martin Jonas

Hmmm... I feel this picture is like one of those old Flemish masters where there is a deep symbolism to all the objects displayed in the background. So, the works consulted by Brian are by Ralf Leenen and by Arnold Schwarzenegger, the twin pinnacles of modern mandolin lore. Presumably, that's where the blow torch comes in...

Martin

----------


## brunello97

Martin, I think you are right. 

That's not really a glue pot but some type of anamorphic skull. You just have to look at your screen from the side a little bit......

Holbein has what appears to be a lute in his:

[IMG]http://img127.imagevenue.com/loc308....MG]

Mick

----------


## dave17120

Looks like Arnold's arrived in person?!?

----------


## labraid

ok, ok,.. moving along  :Wink: 



The first few times around I found it irresitible to remove the little "tape" bits, just to see what was underneath. Then, when I went to apply the interior strips, I found the shell very brittle. Which it is. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that while there are glue joints between the slats, that the paper thin shavings provide at least half of the strength of the assembly. Like a house without sheathing, just the sticks nailed together, the bowl without shavings would fall apart in a matter of minutes once strung.. because the first bowl resounded "crack!" every time I pressed just a bit while applying the shavings. 
Bon, good, so I leave the strips on and the structure is then a sandwich once the shavings are inside, and the outers can come off. 

I wanted to also say, this is production work. No matter how much of an artist you are -- sculpting a top can be art, shaving a neck can be art, bending sides can be an art -- putting the slats on the back is production, slave labor, uninteresting work. I understand now the television set in that previous photo. If I were to be building these, it would be an apprentice who'd be on it. In fact, I'm already out of patience today and have only done one quarter of a bowl! So, what I mean is, today I am like the young man who has just moved out of his parent's house and realized how nice and warm it was before at home. And to say, those little bowlbacks selling for pittens on eBay... I can respect now, no matter how funky, broken, or what have you, condition that mandolin is in, it was a lot of energy and thought that went into the construction of that back. Yes, I'm sure it will get easier with time and practice, but.. but.. I dunno, it's all I have to say right now!  :Wink:

----------


## Jim Garber

Now you see why CF Martin IV was quoted as saying that some of the upper end Martin mandolins, if they were to be made today would cost upwards of $25,000 to produce. 

Jim

----------


## RSW

As we say in french, "n'importe quoi!" . 


> Now you see why CF Martin IV was quoted as saying that some of the upper end Martin mandolins, if they were to be made today would cost upwards of $25,000 to produce.

----------


## labraid

n'importe quoi, well, maybe. $25,000 is high, but $5000 would not be. Will I get near that. I doubt it, only because of the market. Whic seriously dents my prospects here for continuing. There's a lot of good stuff already out there, maybe in need of repair only. In fact, I'd almost go so far as to say that wit the huge talent out there right now in F-models, octaves, etc, and with the population demographics as they are, we mayt enter soon into an era where very few new instruments are built at all, for this very reason. Repairmen will perhaps own the next 30 years, beginning soon. Lundberg mentions something along these lines in his Lute book. Most lutes were simply modified and repaired endlessly from the Renaisance through their entire functional lives of 200 years or so. So they couldn't often tell what the original configuration of these instruments actually were...

----------


## Bob A

I suspect that anyone who can build a functionally representative example of a high-end Embergher would be able to get 4-5K for such a thing, once the quality and playability was demonstrably established. Be aware that there are far fewer examnples available than are being sought. How long it would take to saturate that market is unknown to me, however. 

And string instrument players tend to be, uh, picky about their instruments. So it might require a substantial effort to prove the worth of the product, and get the word around.

----------


## labraid

the naked interior. next, the large sides will be bent, left to dry on the form, and applied freehand.

----------


## labraid

oh, and finally found a decent copy of Kevin Coates book on "geometry, proportion..." under $300! my own christmas present which will be waiting for me in Virginia for Christmas.  :Wink: )))))))

----------


## John Bertotti

Looks like you are well on the way now.

----------


## Bill Snyder

Brian,
Your photos are missing! 
Are you still building this instrument?

----------


## dave17120

"Are you still building this instrument?"

I was wondering that myself, but I feel there should be a certain level of privacy for those who may in fact be licking their wounds as it were.... quote..."I'm sure it will get easier with time and practice, but.. but.. I dunno, it's all I have to say right now!  :Wink: "

If commiseration is in order.........???
Dave

----------


## otterly2k

Brian's website still says he's working on that Embergher repro... but he's definitely cooking up a bunch of other things too... I know a couple of cafe'ers who have orders in with him now... maybe it's back-burnered??

----------


## Jim Garber

Perhaps he has to pay the rent with completing some orders? I think the Emb clone was his own baby and an exploration into hitherto unknown territory.

Jim

----------

