Advice please

[chas.thomason]

Thanks Emma. That Ravenna does look like a lovely harp. I’ll have a think about it and may talk to the person selling it. Thanks again to all for your help.

[chas.thomason]

This may seem a silly question to all you experienced harp-folks, but is the Ravenna really as good as the feedback seems to indicate?

[Biagio]

“is the Ravenna really as good as the feedback seems to indicate? ”

Put it this way: there are very few harps in that price category that are even worth considering. I can count them on one hand: the Rees Grand Harpsicle, Musicmakers Voyageur kit, the (no longer made) Caswell Sweetharp, the Magical Strings Concert Oladion, perhaps one or two others I do not remember at the moment.

It is worth while asking why that is. Dusty came up with a labor-saving way of making a good harp that might more often be designed and made by an amateur with more standard methods. Consider the costs before labor of a good 34: levers $500, strings $200+, sound board (aircraft laminate) $120, hardware $100 – we are up to almost half the retail price before the wood for the frame and body, not to mention miscelaneous materials, tools and time needed in designing it. The latter may take two weeks or more.

I rest my case haha.

Some professionals choose the Ravenna for casual gigs, many recommend it to students either as a first harp of their own or keep a few for rentals. If I were looking for a “first harp” that is probably the one I would choose.

Biagio

[balfour-knight]

Thanks for mentioning me, Emma! I hope you are doing well.

Biagio, I just saw your post come in as I was about to say very much the same things about the Ravenna!

Charles, I loved my Ravenna so much that the only reason I do not have her anymore is that I had to trade her in on my Cherie FH36S (for financial reasons–the FH36S in cherry, fully equipped, is a very expensive harp!). If you look on Dusty’s site at the “testamonials” you should find mine about the Ravenna, and then two or three more I wrote about my Cherie. I just cannot say enough good things about Dusty and their harps!

Well, I hope this helps. Good to see all the posts here, my friends, now for the Sleigh Ride thread!

Harp Hugs,
Balfour (and Carol Lynn)

[Tacye]

I find the financial view of harps is rather different in the UK than that Biagio presents. I don’t know of anyone importing most of the instruments mentioned and the Ravenna comes in at £2200 new – slightly more than the Camac Telenn and the same as for instance a Pilgrim Skylark or Silver Spear’s Camlad. Teifi’s Siff Saff is a bit less.

[wil-weten]

Frankly, I prefer all Camac lever harps I know above the Dusty Ravenna, though I like that harp too. As you live in the UK, which at the moment is still a part of the EU, the Camac harps are a lot cheaper than in the US (no importing costs and affordable transporting costs), and, as the Dusty’s come from the US, they are relatively pricier in Europe.

Charles, you may like to compare the harps next to each other and decide for yourself what you think of the kind of sound, the balance of sound and feel of the strings, the ease of lever flipping and your general impression if you look at the harps.
By the way, you may like to read this about the Camac soundboards: https://blog.camac-harps.com/en/uncategorized/td_d_slug_46/

[Biagio]

Needless to say there are costs associated with imported items, and labor and material costs may differ as well in different countries. Camacs are certainly excellent harps and they cost more in the US than they do in Europe for similar reasons.

I’d be more than happy with a Camac instead of a Dusty if I lived there. But I don’t so “Oh well” – the question was about the Ravenna, however. I do hope that does not sound snippy, it was not meant that way.

Biagio

[chas.thomason]

Hi again folks. I’m just about to take the plunge & buy a harp. Can you please explain what the difference in spacing & tension is between a ‘Celtic style’ lever harp (Camac Tellen) and a 38 string ‘pedal harp’ spacing & tension (Camac Korrigan). Which would be best for a basic level returner? N.B. I don’t have any intention of moving on to a big pedal harp. Thanks again.

[Biagio]

Charles, the short answer is that those designed for “Celtic style” usually have less string tension and closer spacing than “pedal ” but these descriptions are somewhat less than rigorous. Tension rises from treble to bass on any harp so the average does too as you add more strings.

Spacing may be a matter of one or two millimeters difference; one might average 30 lbs. per string, the other 40. Harp makers would call a 36 lb. average “medium tension” for a 5 octave lever harp and that is perhaps a good all around size for a beginner with no orchestral ambitions.

In the case of these two harp models the difference is mainly tension which determines the force which you use to produce a good clear tone. Something like he Korrigan requires greater force (and along the way more blisters and callouses).

Any well made harp should be fine for a basic level beginner, the issue to my mind is how much you wish to spend and whether you intend to go on to a pedal harp. Your technique would be essentially the same on either.

Biagio

• This reply was modified 6 years, 9 months ago by Biagio.

[wil-weten]

Hi Charles, the 34 Camac Telenn has lever gut tension and the same string spacing as the 38 Camac Korrigan with pedal gut tension.

If you’d like a smaller string spacing, you would need to have a look at the light strung harps of German harpbuilders. I don’t know anything about harpbuilders in the UK. Anyway, as you are searching for quality harps for a rather nice price, you’d probably end up buying a Camac (or L&H or Salvi).

By the way, the string spacing of the L&H’s are greater than that of the Camac, this is especially noticeable at the bass strings. It’s much easier for me to grasp a tenth at my Camac Excalibur than at my L&H Prelude. The string spacing at my old Salvi Heather is just about the same as that of my Camacs.

The best harp for a basic level returner is the harp you feel best about when you try harps out for yourself.

• This reply was modified 6 years, 9 months ago by wil-weten. Reason: I changed 'decime' into 'tenth' as 'decime' proved to be not the widespread term I expected it to be

[Biagio]

To clarify a little since these terms often cause confusion: for the same note (frequency) and vibrating length, a “lever gut” string will have smaller diameter and hence lower mass than one rated “pedal gut”. Increase mass => increase tension. If the harps are otherwise the same, the spacing will differ by the differences in diameter. That will be more noticeable as you progress from treble to bass.

Biagio

[balfour-knight]

Biagio, that is a very interesting point I had not thought of–the thicker the strings with the same spacing, the smaller the distance between strings!

I just measured the distance between the lowest C on my Dusty FH36S and the 10th above, E. It is 5 and 3/4 inches. I did the same (for the same notes) on my Camac Atlantide and the distance is 5 and 7/8 inches, one eighth of an inch greater. As for me, I do not notice such a small difference, and I go from one harp to the other with no problems. Wil-Weten, I assume you were talking about a 10th? I had never heard of a “decime.”

Charles, I agree that the best harp for you is the one you select for yourself when you are able to test-drive them at your leisure. Spend some time doing this and get someone to play them for you so you can just listen for the tone you like best. As you play them, see which is the most comfortable harp to hold and how hard the strings are to pluck. I personally do not prefer carbon-fiber strings–they are more rough and harder on my calouses than gut or nylon. For example, all the strings on my Dusty are nylon or nylon covered, very nice for the fingers and almost effortless to play for very long periods of time.

Best wishes everyone and Happy New Year (almost!)
Balfour

[Biagio]

Hi Balfour,

Yep, and I might note that the spacing between strings also increases from higher octaves to lower…not only due to the string diameters but for the very practical reason that longer strings, if not spaced wider apart, would potentially interfere with each other.

Greater length means greater flex for the same force of the pluck. For instance on my (just completed) 36 the width between the low C and D is 16mm inner edge to edge; two octaves higher it is 12mm.

People who really like to play in rapid Celtic sessions prefer narrower spacing, as it enables faster playing, especially ornaments. They seem to prefer nylon over gut too – I imagine that is because nylon lasts longer if using the nails, and has a brighter ring.

Whatever…gut seems to be preferred in Europe, nylon in the US. Perhaps someone knows why that is, I don’t. Other than guessing it may have something to do with tradition.

Happy Holidays All,
Biagio

[chas.thomason]

Thank you Biagio, Balfour-knight and wil-weten. This is an excellent place to have ‘harp conversations’. I’m learning a lot already…and I haven’t even got my harp yet!
I’ll let you know what I do buy and hope to have many more happy conversations in the coming months. Kind regards to you all.

[wil-weten]

Balfour, thanks for enlighening me.

‘Decime’ is the current Dutch word for a ‘tenth’ in music. I expected ‘decime’ to be used internationally, as it is derived from the Latin ‘decima’ which means ‘tenth’.

I just adapted my earlier post.

As to fluorocarbon strings, they come from several sources and look, feel and sound different, which has not only got to do with their diameters. I’ve got some of those strings of Kürschner and some of Savarez. All of them are thinner and feel more elastic than gut or nylon strings with the same tension. Frankly, I prefer them above nylon, as they souns warmisch clear and last an eternity without getting to sound dull. Still, I prefer (pedal) gut strings on my lever harps, because of their very rich sound.

[Author]

Posts