Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
We have covered strings and wood used for the frame and Wil’s remarks are all helpful. But how about the soundboard? We often say that strings are the heart of the harp and the board is it’s soul.
A harp get’s part of it’s distinctive sound from the board. Dustys are known for a bright crisp sound in the treble to lower mid – part of that is because they use mahogany in the upper 3 1/2 octaves and Sitka spruce for the lower octaves.
Rees harps are known for a smooth transition and mellow tone: they use a species of poplar.
Boulding’s harps (Magical Strings) have a big bold sound but are somewhat lacking in subtle overtones; the SB is high density birch laminate. The R harps do also and some people feel that they lack “color”.
Smaller harps – 3 1/2 octaves or fewer – may benefit over time from from a solid wood board, but many makers think it is not enough to justify the greater expense over high density laminate.
All interesting things to consider and nice to listen to sound samples too. But remember as well, how the harp sounds in a professional’s hands may not be what it sounds like in yours.
Try first, then buy!
Biagio
Returning to this thread….you might wish to take a look at the new Serrana 34 that Dusty Strings recently introduced:
https://manufacturing.dustystrings.com/harps/browse-models/serrana-34
I don’t know what they mean exactly by “closer string spacing” but imagine it is perhaps half way between typical lever harp spacing and classical wire harp spacing: respectively about 13mm and 10mm. The tension however looks as though it will be very easy on your hands.
Some advantages over the Rees Grand Harpsicle: the Serrana is a floor sized harp and you would not be paying for an electro-acoustic, has a big voice without the electronics, and you would not have a 4 week wait while being assembled (probably). On the other hand, it costs more.
Best wishes,
BiagioDear Patricia,
It does my heart well that you are an enthusiast of the Joy. Arsalaan named it for Jocylan “Joy” Chang, my first and dearly loved teacher and indeed it is a wonderful instrument.
Off topic, I suppose. Yet it warms me that harp makers continue to experiment and player to try other things.Biagio
Not sure exactly what you are after Maya, but some of Harper Tasche’s scores might be helpful:
Ray Pool also does a lot of interesting things with his lever playing.
Biagio
Well said, Gretchen! To quote a well known harpist, “Play the harp in front of you.” Getting back to Robin’s original question:
It might be a good idea to start off with a Sharpsicle, or the Grand Harpsicle, which is light in tension, inexpensive, and easily resold, or kept as a travel instrument later. I’m not a big fan of Harpsicles in general, but they ARE a good low cost instrument.
Best of fortune to you Robin!
Biagio
Evolene, I mean that on the Rees and Dusty, both hands will be eqidistant from the string row at every point vertically,as they would be on a single. Further, you cannot play PDLT when the strings angle in to the same point. Although you can achieve the same effect by playing up near the neck, of course.
Which ever design one chooses, and I think from a player’s perspective it is entirely a personal decision, it will take a while to get accustomed to two rows. I’m not saying that one is intrinsically better, just what I prefer as a player, and believe makes more sense to me as a designer.
I’m not sure what is being meant here by “ring”. Is that the actual tone, or the sustain? Whatever, it is unclear to me that “healthy technique” is limited to only one string material.
As with gut, there is no such thing as light, medium, and strong tension for Savarez Alliance. If you want lighter tension for a particular frequency, use a smaller diameter. Unfortunately for pedalists who just go with the Egan naming convention, whatever Savarez has decided upon for that “3rd octave C” or whatever, that is what they get. Folkies have more reason to know and understand the diameters on offer.
Same as with gut. Take a look, for example, at the gut string option that Dusty offers.
BiagioOk…first, some history: Gary Stone has been around for a long time, since the seventies, and has pretty much stayed with his design approach of that time. “Budget harp” I think is a relative term, meaning to me “less expensive than more elegant appearance”.
An ongoing argument among makers is whether a classic solid wood board sounds better than the modern high strength laminates – aka, Finnish Birch ply. I think most makers if they are honest would agree that in a full sized harp the solid wood board is preferable over time, but in smaller harps – not so much. So for purposes of this discussion we’ll use 3mm thick 5 ply laminate.
Leaving that “elegance” debate aside, when Laurie and Liz Cifani approached their harp makers to design a double, Ms. Cifani’s designer was Gary and that’s the design he came up with. Laurie’s at the time was Steve Triplett, who decided on the two-rib wider course approach.
Let’s talk about structure first. When you double the load on a beam (in this case the SB) it’s thickness should increase by about 40% to sustain the load at the same resistance to rupture. In this case, a 40% increase of a 3mm board, or 1.2mm. Not a whole heck of a lot. With the angled in approach that “added thickness” is compensated for in a fairly wide internal string rib and a reinforcing outer rib. By comparison, with the wider spacing approach you have two thinner ribs, no external rib, and that acoustic dead space between. But is it really “dead”?
One of the double’s charms is that you get a lot of resonance from adjacent strings. So yeah, there’s not a lot of SB vibration going on between the rows but there is more sympathetic string vibration than with the “one wide rib angled in” approach. Like so much in harp design it is a trade-off and I prefer the latter.
It would be even better if they also made the SB wider than a single, but they don’t for manufacturing convenience – it is easier to use the same jigs and fixtures constructed for a single and sacrifice a little volume.
In point of fact, though, Dusty I know reduces the string tension a little in the lower mid anyway. I have not measured Rees but I’d bet they do too. Another trade-off: slightly lower volume without building an entirely new harp.
Ergonomically, I would prefer to keep everything aligned on the same plane for my eyes and hands. I suppose one can get used to anything, but the less relearning my hands have to do the happier I am:-)
Biagio
Wil answered the V question wrt the Stoney End. I personally do not like that approach either structurally or ergonomically and neither does Laurie.
One harper that we both know has a Stoney End Lorraine which she has happily played for years. Recently she bought a Rees. When I saw her last summer she said she liked the Rees much better, both for the separate rows and for the tone.
Biagio
Indeed, Wil, and not only the material naming but the string position. Even harp makers debate the latter: should we use the convention first used by Egan and now standard for all pedal harps? Or should we use scientific notation which is not harp specific? Or any of a variety of other?
No wonder players can get confused! It would be a really good idea IMHO if teachers would add a little about these sorts of things to their lessons. Then we might at least avoid hearing things like “Gut is higher tension than nylon”. It ain’t. Heavier, yes, stiffer, yes, but not intrinsically higher tension. That depends on vibrating length, frequency, and diameter.
Biagio
Just as a followup note: there is no such thing as a “carbon fiber” harp string. People who use that term are speaking about what is essentially a carbonized synthetic related to nylon.
Carbon fiber, per se, is composed of micron-thin strands of pure carbon, woven into a fabric. It’s great for auto body repairs, space crafts, even some harp bodies. But you would not want to use it as a harp string, believe me.
Biagio
Wil seemingly read my post although I don’t see it anywhere. Whatever…here’s the deal on tension: the type of strings does not matter in and of itself. Holding all else the same:
Shorter strings = lower tension for any given note (frequency). Larger diameter = higher tension. Heavier string material = higher tension.
You could take a “high” tension harp and lower tension by a) dropping the range a step or two b) using material with lower weight (substitute nylon for gut or fluorocarbon, e.g.) c) use a small diameter or d) any combination of the above.
Fluorocarbon does weigh most of the three but it is also the most flexible which may be kindest to your hands. So following this logic you might want FC strings with fairly short lengths for the give frequencies in an ideal world. It’s more likely that you will find a small low tension instrument strung with nylon (and it will cost you less).
I don’t know the Camac, but Harpsicles in general are lower tension than many others. As Wil mentioned, the best way to determine if a harp will suit you is to try it out.
You might also take a look at Laurie Riley’s discussions on ergonomics – see “The Harper’s Manual” and “Harping with a Handicap”:
All Books, DVDs and CDs by Laurie Riley
Best wishes,
BiagioOn basic harp technique and exercises:
Books:
Grossi – “Metoda per Arpa (only available in Italian)
Kondonassis – “On Playing the Harp”
Friou – Exercises for Speed and agility
Pool – “1-2-3 Play” and “3’s a Chord”DVDs:
Bruner “Play the Harp BeautifullY vols.-3
Riley – “Secret of the Celtic Style”
Ortiz – “Special Effects”Nice to have:
From The Great Courses – “How Music and Mathematics Relate”Enjoy!
BiagioThose are the ones and I ordered the DVD directly from Dr. Ortiz; I only bought the second volume (Special Effects), as I already had several others on basic methods; but since you are just beginning it would a good idea to order both. The Special Effects specifically covers techniques used on South American harps which are also applicable to lever or pedal.
Be sure to get the DVD format that is used in your country.
Best wishes,
Biagio
