i heard about this process,
i think its made of something like
50% BS
25% Hot Air
25% Vinegar
paddy
| Official Luthiers Forum! http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| The Josepi Process http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=5865 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | Iplaytheoldies [ Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
A local luthier in my area has been using a process called the Josepi process in which some type of chemicals are applied on the inside of the instrument without adding significant mass that supposedly cause more vibrations and enhance the sound of the instrument. He specializes in orchestral stringed instruments but the science should work on all acoustic instruments as well. I have E-mailed him today for more info on this process and will post it when I receive it. Here is a linkHokanson Violins |
|
| Author: | peterm [ Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Very interesting! I wonder what he uses? |
|
| Author: | PaddyD [ Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
i heard about this process, i think its made of something like 50% BS 25% Hot Air 25% Vinegar
paddy |
|
| Author: | Don Williams [ Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
You forgot the snake oil.... Seriously, I've heard of this before, and supposedly it does have some impact on the sound. I think it may be the equivalent of CA-ing the whole thing to make it all crispier or something, but it does do something. Just not sure what. Perhaps Al Carruth can talk about it... |
|
| Author: | Phil Marino [ Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Don Williams] You forgot the snake oil.... Seriously, I've heard of this before, and supposedly it does have some impact on the sound. I think it may be the equivalent of CA-ing the whole thing to make it all crispier or something, but it does do something. Just not sure what. [/QUOTE] If it really is just applying CA to the insides, it could have some effect. If that's what they do, I hope they use good ventilation when they do it. But, to me (an amateur skeptic) the web site smells badly of snake oil. He used vague buzz-wordy phrases like : "mechano-chemical methodology" and "stiffness to mass modulus". And, he claims that no mass is added, so painting with CA is out. Maybe he just irradiates it... Also, the quotes add no support at all to his claims. One is by the inventor, and the other does not specifically address this process, but just talks about innovation in general. This reminds me of all the pseudo-science in the field of high-end audio equipment. This type of stuff can succeed because the sound of an instrument (like the sound of audio equipment) is so subjective, and, the placebo effect can be a big factor. If someone paid real money to have this done to his or her guitar, it would be easier to believe - playing it weeks later - that it improved the sound than to believe it was a waste of money. Phil |
|
| Author: | Bill Greene [ Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Oddly, this very topic came up this past weekend with a builder who epoxies (slightly) the entire inside of the guitar (not top). Claims this makes the guitar project much better, and adds a punch. Now I had never heard of the Josepi Process until this thread...but coating the inside of the guitar with "something" apparently isn't a new idea. |
|
| Author: | Iplaytheoldies [ Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Here is a link to another article.Salt lake tribune article |
|
| Author: | Dave Rector [ Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Something like that could work I guess, I'm certainly no expert. It does seem to me that it would make future repairs close to impossible though. |
|
| Author: | Bobc [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Don Williams] You forgot the snake oil.... Seriously, I've heard of this before, and supposedly it does have some impact on the sound. I think it may be the equivalent of CA-ing the whole thing to make it all crispier or something, but it does do something. Just not sure what. Perhaps Al Carruth can talk about it...[/QUOTE] Actually I think he uses wine!!!
|
|
| Author: | Michael Dale Payne [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Bobc] [QUOTE=Don Williams] You forgot the snake oil.... Seriously, I've heard of this before, and supposedly it does have some impact on the sound. I think it may be the equivalent of CA-ing the whole thing to make it all crispier or something, but it does do something. Just not sure what. Perhaps Al Carruth can talk about it...[/QUOTE] Actually I think he uses wine!!! [/QUOTE]
And too much of it 
|
|
| Author: | yukonarizona [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
We're mostly guitar people here I guess, and the process in question is applied to bowed instruments thus far. I feel like it's 'apples and oranges' for us - interesting for the fiddle makers though. A spray that makes an average fiddle really great? Sounds groovy to me. |
|
| Author: | Don Williams [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 4:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=yukonarizona] A spray that makes an average fiddle really great? Sounds groovy to me. [/QUOTE] I agree. Now if we could come up with a product that would make an average fiddler play great, then you've really got something. There's already plenty of substances that a listener can take to make the average musician sound great. Same stuff that makes an ugly person look great too...  |
|
| Author: | burbank [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 4:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Seems like every few years somebody comes up with claims filled with mumbo-jumbo that they have dramatically enhanced the sound of violins. This has been going on since, well, the days of Stradivari. He or Guarneri are invariably mentioned. This has BOTH! Don's got it! Kool-Aid! 
|
|
| Author: | Mike Dotson [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 5:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think this amazing breakthrough will be second only to 'Sound is Round' and the 'secret Strad varnish' in the furtherence of scientific cockamaminess in the field of 'loot'hiery. All hail the 'unique mechano-chemical methodology'! :D PS. anyone else notice that some of the pictures of violins for sale on that page are the same picture? |
|
| Author: | CarltonM [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
What puzzles me the most is their caveat that your instrument has to be evaluated for the "right" kind of wood to receive their treatment. Has there been a sudden flooding of the market with violins made from something other than spruce and maple?
|
|
| Author: | Alan Carruth [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Mike Dotson wrote: "PS. anyone else notice that some of the pictures of violins for sale on that page are the same picture? " Well, they all look alike anyway.... Saconni used to use 'water glass' to do this, but on the outside. Didn't work out too well. There is no lack of other candidates, nor has there ever been. If what he's doing neither adds nor takes away wod or mass, but improves the stiffness, then it has to be some sort of chemical treatment that either replaces some component of the wood with something stronger, or does something like cross-linking the wod molecules that are there. It also has to be compatable with all sorts of glues and finishes. I'm not much of a chemist, but it sounds like a tall order to me. Time will tell. My gut feeling is that if it was all that good he would hardly need to talk it up: he'd be too busy trying to fill orders. It sounds like snake oil, smoke and mirrors, but there's a small (emphasise small) chance that he's on to something. If he is, it will take over the violin world in short order, and he will be wealthy beyond the dreams of avarice. If not it will be another in the long series of footnotes. I'm betting on the latter. |
|
| Author: | Brad Goodman [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
About 8 years ago a couple of guys(one was a "scientist") brought me 2 "identical" guitars(yamahas!~!!)and had me adjust hem so the action and set-up was as close as possible to each other. They then went on to tell me about some miracle "stuff" they were going to coat the innards of one of them with that would dramatically "improve" the tone. They did bring the guitars back and yes the "coated" one sounded different-I couldn't say better (wouldn't matter if I did). They were real serious about this being a big breakthrough and they were going to make a lot of money-I guess they didn't! |
|
| Author: | RussellR [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
We have the spray already Don, its called Mace
|
|
| Author: | sfbrown [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Cynic or not, I haven't heard anybody in this thread claim that the instrument will actually sound better. The idea that doing this to a violin to make it louder begs the question, "they aren't loud enough?" In the case of a guitar, is louder the only criteria? If someone offered up a potion to make the sound sweeter, mellower, more bell-like etc it may be interesting. In the case of a CA-like substance or even waterglass (silica based), all I can see (strictly from a lay luthier wannbe but lifetime science-wonk) is something to stiffen the wood and turning it (them) into a more plastic-like mass. If the tone thus produced is considered better by some, well, so be it. But it seems on the face of it to merely rob the wood of at least a portion of its tone producing properties. And in the words of the first person on the internet, the preceding is IMHO.
Regards, Steve |
|
| Author: | Iplaytheoldies [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I haven't this much fun reading through threads in a while. Great point on the wood types Carlton. Unfortunately I haven't heard back on the E-mails I sent as of now so there is no more info on exactly what he's doing with these instruments. On a different note, although I do not subscribe to this idea actually having promise, I think we should all keep an open mind to furthering the evolution of our craft. Taylor is thinning the outside perimeters of a soundboard to try to gain more reflex from tops. Cole clark uses CNC to route out backs for joining. Soundhole/size placement is continually being questioned. Alot of us seem to think that tradition is the only way, but If C.F. Martin stuck with tradition, then tradition today wouldn't be the same. The world used to be flat you know? Just something to think about. |
|
| Author: | CarltonM [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 3:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=sfbrown] The idea that doing this to a violin to make it louder begs the question, "they aren't loud enough?" [/QUOTE] Oh, man, I hope this guy doesn't decide to "improve" the banjo--GOOD GOLLY!!! |
|
| Author: | Rick Turner Gui [ Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I wonder if this might not be an ozone treatment. Some violin makers put their fiddles in the white into a chamber with ozone which quickly oxydizes the surface of the wood, giving it an antiqued look before varnishing. However, there has been some concern about wood degradation from this treatment. If one did it only to the inside of the fiddle, piping in ozone through one of the F holes, it would add no mass, yet might change the surface of the inside enough to make a change (for better or worse!) in the tone of the instrument. This is the smoke part of smoke and mirrors which are the main ingredients in violins, it would seem. |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|