Does the Virzi Really Rob Volume?

[banjo1]

I have heard that the virzi tone producer steal volume from mandolins and that is why many have been removed.

Is this a myth.

How many builders offer this as an option today?

[SternART]

The only current builders I can think of are Rigel & Dudenbostel......others?

[jjboone101]

Jamie Wiens is starting to produce them and offer as an option on his custom F5's.

[glauber]

It adds mass to the top, so yes, should take away some volume. The idea is that it helps create a more complex sound. I'm not sure i believe it makes much of a difference, but there are better people than me who say it does.

[banjo1]

I know that this depends on the piece of wood, can a top of a mandolin be carved in such a way that a Virzi will not dampen the sound.

Since each piece of wood is very different, could you look for a piece of top wood that is stiff? enough that you can carve it thinner(lighter) to accomidate for the weight of the Virzi?

[evanreilly]

Doug Woodley was offering them as an option.
I also believe Randy Wood offers them as an option as well.

[grandmainger]

The summary of a discussion by many expert builders on Commando (http://mandozine.com/resources/virzi.php) is available on MandoZine.
Germain

[glauber]

I know that this depends on the piece of wood, can a top of a mandolin be carved in such a way that a Virzi will not dampen the sound.

Since each piece of wood is very different, could you look for a piece of top wood that is stiff? enough that you can carve it thinner(lighter) to accomidate for the weight of the Virzi?
Sure, then you add the Virzi and it becomes a little heavier, right? http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

To put it in a different way, imagine that you have built a mandolin as you describe: the top is specially light, so wven with the Virzi in, it's as light as a normal top. Then when you're done, you can remove the Virzi and it will be even lighter.

[glauber]

Here's (http://mandozine.com/resources/virzi.php) perhaps the best information i've read on this.

(Ooops; i didn't notice Germain had already posted this link. I would delete this message, but it's already been quoted from, later on.)

[danb]

If you know studio terminology, from my perspective it sounds like a non-virzi mandolin that has had a limiter filter pass on it!

What a limiter does is take a waveform and limits the amplitude, meaning the tone doesn't have large "Spikes" in it where a certain frequency is much louder than another. Doing an A/B on a virzi & non-virzi Loar is more or less my experiment, but obviously flawed.. not the same mandolin, or done on any kind of scope.. but still, it's pretty much how it was experienced by me.

In a Jam, that spiky sound "Cuts" better. IN the studio, or at home in a quiet setting, the virzi sounds better to my ears.

[Dave Cohen]

In March/April, 2005, I did the experiment in which I compared, among other things, the same mandolin with Virzi and without Virzi. I built a mandolin with a solid laminated lining (i.e., not kerfed) at the back, and attached the back plate to the solid lining with #2x3/8" wood screws. The mandolin started out with conventional "tone bars" bracing. I did holographic interferometry, sound spectra (averaged "playing" spectra), and spectra from body taps ("bonks"). Then the back was removed, a Virzi was installed, the back was put back on, and the experimental regimen was repeated. After that, I went on to remove the tone bars and the Virzi and install other bracing patterns. The experimental regimen was repeated after each variation of the internal structure of the mandolin.

I'm still sorting out the data, and preparing a manuscript for publication, so I can't say too much about the results. But in a nutshell, the differences were far from profound. A Virzi made from the GAL specifications and drawings weighs about 15 grams, which is about the same mass as a typical Gibson-type adjustable ebony bridge. The Virzi shifted a few of the plate mode frequencies around a bit, and that was about it. To my ears, all of the structural iterations sounded fine. They were played at least a day apart, so the comparisons should be taken VERY lightly. But the mandolin was not noticeably quieter with the Virzi than with any of the other variations, nor did it sound profoundly more "mellow" or "sweet" to my ears. Disclaimer: No attempt was made to quantitatively compare loudnesses using physical measurements. To summarize, the differences between Virzi, no Virzi, and different bracing patterns are subtle at most.

[Eugene]

This is interesting, Dave. Decades before Loar, there was also a late 19th-c. Neapolitan builder, Umberto Ceccherini, who used a "double top" that was functionally the same as a Virzi. I don't know anybody to have compared a single Ceccherini with a double top to itself wihtout, but the consensus is that Ceccherini mandolins were pretty loud and quite bright.

[Eugene]

PS: I like the Monteleone quote in Glauber's link:

I don't know what they were thinking. But I would have loved to have overheard the convincing salespitch that Mr. Virzi sold to Mr. Loar. Amazing!
...As though 1) the Virzi was an undeniably, quantifiably bad plan and 2) Mr. Loar was some kind of infallible, acoustic engineering genius. Sure, he did good work for Gibson. Not many people care to remember his half-baked notions and efforts at luthiery were wholly unpopular after he was unfettered from the Gibson Co. and are almost wholly forgotten nowadays.

[Ken Waltham]

I have both a Virzi and non Virzi Loar F5's. This particular Virzi F5 is one that in my estimation, doesn't suffer too much from a lack of volume. But, it is less of a "Bluegrass" type mandolin than the non virzi one.
My previous experience with Virzi Loars is that they are, in fact, somewhat muted. I believe the idea of "smoothing out" the sound is perhaps true. Tony Williamson had a very good article about them, where he states that F5's were meant to be played in the mandolin orchestra, so a loud, " hoss-type" mandolin was not the optimal one to have. That is what my non Virzi Loar is like, for sure. Robust, powerful, dominating sound. It's what we seem to crave,( the louder, robust tone) or at least did after Monroe.
Another thing worth stating is that Virzi mandolins almost always sound different to the listener out front than the player behind the mandolin.
The current Virzi Loar I own does please me more than any other Virzi Loar I have been exposed to. I know my friend Brian has one he's very pleased with, but I have not seen this one personally.
I guess, as a general rule for me... and I don't have any scientific data to back this up, I prefer non Virzi Loars to Virzi ones. I think that in SOME WAYS, the Virzi removes the very thing that many people like about Loars.
However, just to really muddy the water, and seem totally stupid in my comments, the Fern Loar Virzi F5 I own now satisfies me in every respect.
One thing to note, however, is that I no longer play in a bluegrass band, so I have not used this one in a band context.
I will state that I love Virzi's in oval hole Gibsons.
Ken

[Martin Jonas]

I don't know anybody to have compared a single Ceccherini with a double top to itself wihtout, but the consensus is that Ceccherini mandolins were pretty loud and quite bright.
Well, I probably come closest to that, as I have two Ceccherinis, one with the double top and one without (and mine is still the only single-top Ceccherini I've ever seen or heard about). Without doubt, the double-top is both substantially louder and substantially brighter and the single-top is quieter with a mellower/softer tone. This would go exactly opposite to the typical theories of the effect of a Virzi on tone. This is of course not quite the experiment Eugene was talking about, as the two instruments have additional differences other than the top, namely the single top is a lighter instrument with a smaller bowl.

Martin

[Glassweb]

OK, here's my 2 cents on this. I own 2 Loar F5's... a March 31st Flowerpot with a Virzi and a July 9th sidebound without a Virzi. These are two of the best F5's I've ever owned or played. They couldn't be more different. The Virzi model is louder than the non and has an epic, piano like sound. EVERY note sustains amazingly and frets perfectly. Unlike some other Virzi mandolins this one sounds as good from behind (player) as it does out in front (listener). It's chop is honkin' and enormous. The July 9th has an exquisite voice as well... not as loud but extremely focused and penetrating. The notes come out like crystal darts! Perhaps a more refined sound than the Virzi, but the Virzi might be more complex. Sure, it's all difficult to make sense of, but here's the bottom line - Virzi or no Virzi, tone is in the ears of the beholder and there are great Loars, really good ones, average ones and yes, I've played one TERRIBLE one. That one did, indeed, have a Virzi... but the Virzi wasn't the problem, believe me! It was just a dog... super heavy and completely dead. Why Loar signed that one 'll never know. A few of you out there have played this one and certainly know which one I'm referring to. Had an amazing blue/purple lined case though!

[glauber]

This is interesting, Dave. Decades before Loar, there was also a late 19th-c. Neapolitan builder, Umberto Ceccherini, who used a "double top" that was functionally the same as a Virzi. I don't know anybody to have compared a single Ceccherini with a double top to itself wihtout, but the consensus is that Ceccherini mandolins were pretty loud and quite bright.
Hmm... with a double-top Neapolitan mandolin, doesn't the bridge drive the inner top?

[Martin Jonas]

Hmm... with a double-top Neapolitan mandolin, doesn't the bridge drive the inner top?
Not with a Ceccherini. The bridge sits outside, as on a normal bowlback, and the inner top is a thin spruce piece suspended underneath the outer top. Really very similar to a Virzi, except that there is only about 1 cm between the two tops.

I think what you may be thinking of is the Gelas double top system. They were not bowlbacks but flatbacks and the bridge sat on the inner top through a cut-out in the outer top. They also had a reverse break angle. Very strange instruments. Ceccherinis are much more normal and you have to look very closely to see the second top.

Martin

[glauber]

I think what you may be thinking of is the Gelas double top system. They were not bowlbacks but flatbacks and the bridge sat on the inner top through a cut-out in the outer top. They also had a reverse break angle.
Yes, that's exactly it, thanks!

[Frank Ford]

In the 1970s, I had occasion to be present at two "Virzi-ectomies." Both were removed from decidedly weaker Loar F-5s, and in both instances, the resulting instruments were decidely weaker Loar F-5s. The conclusion at the time was that removing the Virzi did not harm the instrument, but if doin so improved the sound, the removal didn't help enough to even justify the work of taking it out. . .

[markishandsome]

Not many people care to remember his half-baked notions and efforts at luthiery were wholly unpopular after he was unfettered from the Gibson Co. and are almost wholly forgotten nowadays.

Oh I don't know. Some of Lloyd's later experiments were interesting. I remember seeing some vivitones with set in backs so that the player's belly didn't interfere with the back plate. Seems better than a Tone Gard to me. His ideas may also not have caught on because he didn't have the Gibson production outlet and brand name to back him up. I think the lesson to learn is to keep experimenting, because you never know what half-baked ideas people will really like.

[jasona]

I remember seeing some vivitones with set in backs so that the player's belly didn't interfere with the back plate. Seems better than a Tone Gard to me.
I've seen a snakehead with the same thing-essentially a false back covering the "real" back of the instrument. The owner said he thought it was original. Certainly it looked as old asthe rest of the mando--but it had evidentially went through a fire.

[Eugene]

That's a pretty old technique, appearing on guitars dating to the early-mid 1800s. I've handled several by Scherzer's Vienna shop with this feature.

[siminoff]

The Virzi Tone Producers do make a major contribution to the instrument’s timbre. The thin plate, supported in its center, improves the amplitude of the overtone series (partials) and adds warmth and richness. But as many of you have pointed out, because they are an attachment to the soundboard, they do rob the instrument of some amplitude. So, there is a real trade-off here: amplitude at the expense of tone, or tone at the expense of amplitude. I sell many Virzi Tone Producers to folks building our kits and while I do hear back about good results in tone, I don’t have any data on what those instruments would have sounded like without a Tone Producer. However, I have been asked to remove Tone Producers from several original Gibson instruments and clearly the instruments appear “brighter.” Several years back I used a decibelometer to measure the difference before and after, and the measurable results were just under 2dB (where 3dB is twice the sound pressure). But since that test was conducted by hand rather than in a fixture that delivered consistent attack, I wouldn’t suggest the test to be conclusive. One important aspect is that the tuning (pitch) of the soundboard increases almost a half tone when the Tone Producer is removed and the increase in pitch does give the perception that the instrument is louder. (One reason various orchestras and organizations have desired to move concert pitch higher over the years – A440 being only a few decades old - is because of the perception of improved clarity and loudness as the pitch increases. I have some information on the history of concert pitch in a document entitled “What was Loar hearing?” – it’s a free download from my web site at www.siminoff.net).

Roger Siminoff

[banjo1]

Hey thanks Roger.
I value your input, more than I can say here on the Cafe. I have used your research to vioce my 1972 D28 and it is a killer in tone and volume.
It is a trade off, amplitude or tone, is a thing to think about when building mandolins.I have yet to order my first F model kit from you but the time is coming.
Virzi or not is what I have to decide.
Thanks

[Dave Cohen]

Roger, I don't know where you got the notion that removing the Virzi increases the "pitch" of the soundboard. My data for the experiments described in my previous post simply do not show that in an assembled mandolin. The (0,0) or "trampoline" motions of top and back plates were for all practical purposes unaffected by the Virzi. Only the sideways rocking or (1,0) motion was affected significantly. The frequency of that motion was significantly lowered, but it has little or nothing to do with radiation of sound. I also acquired sound spectra. The spectra for tonebars without Virzi and for tone bars with Virzi were extremely similar up to the 3500-4700 Hz region, and in that region, the spectral amplitudes were actually [/I]less for the tone bars with Virzi than they were for the tone bars without Virzi. That would seem to contradict what you said about improving the amplitude of the overtone series. I hope that I have misinterpreted what you stated.

When you talk about the tuning of the soundboard increasing almost half a tone when the Virzi is removed, are you referring to a free plate? That is, a soundboard which is not[I] assembled into a mandolin? If so, that would account for the discrepancy, since free plate modes of motion bear very little resemblance to the modes of an assembled mandolin body.

Luthier Alan Carruth suggests a simple way to control the plucking force on a string. Instead of building an elaborate (and expensive) mechanical plucker, use very fine coil wire for pulling the string. The coil wire has a consistent breaking tension, so when one passes the wire behind a string and pulls on both ends of the wire, the wire will break and release the string into motion at a consistent amount of tension. With a suitable loudness meter, such as the affordable one from Radio Shack, one can then make more reliable loudness measurements for comparison.

[f5loar]

Lets not forget Loar wanted the Virzi in the mandolins.
He pushed it so hard that in '23 the Virzi was an option for $15 and by '24 it was standard in Master Models so he won the battle for a short while. It helped cost him his job too. Orders came in asking for the Virzi to be left out in '24. Some were sent back and removed by the factory while many were removed by their owners with work being done by violin repairmen.
As soon as Loar left so did the Virzi. So many Loars have had the Virzi removed that the Virzi Loar is pretty rare today.

[Darryl Wolfe]

F5LOAR, that is alot of conjecture delivered as fact. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[danb]

There are some post-Loar oval-holes with virzis..

[sunburst]

There are some pre-Loar oval-holes with virzis..

(retrofitted)

[f5loar]

Fact is stranger than truth! There was rippling waves about the Virzi at Gibson and Loar was at the center of it.

[danb]

Well he was one of many endorsers.. there is an interesting tidbit in a virzi promo leaflet/letter by LL (that Bruce Harvie uncovered) that includes an endorsement by Jascha Heifitz of the virzi.

I think what Darryl is saying though, is that we aren't really sure about all the consternation details there, that's one way it might have played out though!

[Darryl Wolfe]

My point: "he pushed it so hard" "cost him his job" "orders came in asking for the Virzi to be left out" "as soon as Loar left so did the Virzi". These are conjecture and circumstantial evidence with respect to everything. There is very little proof of the facts and or real documented evidence to "convict", much less to fully state as fact.

There is just as much circumstantial evidence to suggest the Loar left as a result of his experimentation into electrics.

Heck, maybe he had an affair with Guy Harts wife http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Tom C]

My friend met a Virzi recently through work. While he knew his family's contribution to mando, he did not play or know anything about mandos. I believe he said his family back then was known for furniture.

[sunburst]

Darryl, I've already quoted you as saying LLoyd had an affair with Mrs. Hart on 25 web sites!
Coming from Darryl Wolf, that must be the truth, right? http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

It's as easy as that to get false information into common knowledge. "I read it on the internet! Darrly said it!" We've all heard stuff like that...

[Darryl Wolfe]

Good point John. I am thinking that Siminoff does have some information that puts the Virzi thing into somewhat more than conjecture. Hopefully, Loarfest may bring some of the actual facts closer to the surface.

You may quote me. Lloyd did not have an affair with Guy Hart's wife.

Woops, how do I know for sure?

http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Darryl Wolfe]

Here is something that can be quoted as fact:

Catalog N has the first mention of Virzi's, and as an option
The F5 is pictured for the first time
Lloyd Loar is not mentioned, nor pictured anywhere in the Catalog, nor is the "Signature Label"
The Virzi has testimonials from numerous people.(not Loar)
It is touted and listed as being endorsed and used by a long list of Artists (not Loar)

Puts a different spin on things eh?

[Darryl Wolfe]

Woops, Loars name is listed obscurely well into a list of people who recommend it, but not in the testimonials #My bad. #But, his name shows up after Heifetz, Place and about 12 others in a little dinky list of Artisits.

[danb]

I wonder if they cracked open "the David" or Heifetz Guarneri to test a virzi?

Does that company (Virzi) still exist? Now there's an interesting place to look for records!

[Glassweb]

I have a question for all you Virzi scholars... is the placement of the tone bars really different for a Virzi F5 as opposed to a non-Virzi? I've heard a couple of different takes on this and would love to hear from a "doc" who has actually compared insides of the two. Also, any truth to the fact that the mandos were "tuned" with the Virzi installed and then how would we know for sure?

questions... questions...

[danb]

Glassweb: I believe the tone bars are set apart wider, but I'll leave it to a mando surgeon to explain.

Roger Siminoff has quite interesting points to make on tuning.. I've also heard some very interesting comments on that process from builder friends suggesting that the tuning process isn't as precise as all that when you really get down to it.

[sunburst]

...the tuning process isn't as precise as all that when you really get down to it.
That, in my experience, is an understatement.

While we're dealing in speculation and hearsay anyway, I've "heard" that the tonebars weren't really in standard positions in the Loars. Supposedly, the builders moved them side to side a little for a better fit against the top. In other words, if it fit better 1/4" this way or that way, that's where it went.

[f5loar]

As a Lawyer I would put on the stand Walter K. Bauer who said "I had to take mine to my violin guy to rip out that damned Virzi. Lloyd owned stock in that company and he was padding his pocket having Gibson putting them in there you know. They should have had me signing them Master Models. I was a better picker than Lloyd". And then I would put on the stand Herman VonBerniwitz who would said "The darn thing clooged up my H5 so I took it out piece by piece and now it's fine" And then Bobby Osborne would be next on the stand to say "I couldn't hear the mandolin with that darn Virzi in there so I took it out and then Sonny couldn't hear it so I put it back in" And then I would bring in the daddy of them all the Father Mr. Bill Monroe who would testify "No sir mine never had no such thing in there. I put in Uncle Pen's rattler to keep out them evil spirits in that there mandolin. It's never let me down all through the years here. I played it for 10 Presidents and they all liked it". And to finally convence the jury I would bring in expert George Gruhn who would say "There was a time when it was okay to remove the Virzi. I now believe it's best to leave them in there and if you don't like the sound simply get you another one that has no Virzi in it".

[Darryl Wolfe]

Tone bar placement. I don't think there was any difference Virzi/non-Virzi

[Fretbear]

I call to the stand to testify about Mr. Loar's infidelity: Ms. Fisher Schipp...
(we mando-nerds need to get a life...)

[Darryl Wolfe]

Ok, agree Ms Schipp was his interest, but I do not think he was married then

[PaulD]

What I don't understand is what effect Ms. Schipp had on the tone of a Virzi F-5. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Paul Doubek

[f5loar]

The question should be did Lloyd's Loar have a Virzi in it?
Darryl?

[danb]

Yes, it does..

[sunburst]

How 'bout the saw?

[danb]

Virzis in the viola, 10-string mando-viola, and his F5..

[Darryl Wolfe]

I didn't start all this Schipp http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[evanreilly]

I have to post this pic every so often!!
Just look at them there Virzii tonsil producers.

[Jim Hilburn]

I have to admit that the handsaw in the cabinet behind him is not in my shops toolbox.

[PaulD]

How about the backsaw below it? I have to admit that although I have several sharp crosscut and rip saws in my tool cabinet, I tend to go to the miter saw, table saw, band saw, or a backsaw for 98% of my sawing.

pd

[sunburst]

Well, my shop is, in fact, equiped with a hand saw. It's probably about the age of that one behind ol' LLoyd there, and I do use it from time to time. I don't play music on it, and mine doesn't have a Virzi either.

[danb]

appears he's checking the tuning of one in the white against the mando-v in that shot..

[glauber]

I have to admit that the handsaw in the cabinet behind him is not in my shops toolbox.
That's actually a musical instrument. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Jim Hilburn]

I believe it's tuned to C.
It's a C-saw.

[Ken Waltham]

I personally don't think there is any difference in the tone bar placement, or the graduation of a Virzi to non Virzi F5.
Tone and richness do increase, and amplitude does suffer, just as Roger said, in my experience. As I stated, to me, it may remove some of the very characteristics that people like about Loars.

One thing I've never heard of, is a post Loar oval hole mandolin with Virzi... Dan, do you have a link or photos? I have had a couple of teens F4's with retrofitted Virzi's, and pre '24 F5's with retrofitted Virzi's, but never heard of ( but one F5, a ####### Loar) a post Loar with Virzi.

[danb]

Well there are a couple with serial numbers just after the last signed Loar..

These 32 instruments (http://www.mandolinarchive.com/perl/list_mandolins.pl?virzi_noloar) are virzi with no Loar signature.. including
6 that appear after 80416 (last known signed Loar). The serials are close enough to not really support the virzi-post-loar point though..

[Ken Waltham]

Right.

[f5loar]

I would imagine the box of Virzi's left over after Loar left went into the trash along with that big box of unsigned Loar labels. Those you speak were in there when Loar was still around. Darryl, didn't the infidelity problem occur at the Gibson Office party on Dec. 22?
Has anyone comfired for sure the proposed Dec. 31 signed L5?

[danb]

Which serial are you referring to?

[Darryl Wolfe]

He is referring to L5 80262 December 31, 1924. #It was published in a Gruhn article as the last signed Loar instrument (at that time). #It has been argued to be actually December 1, 1924. #However, now that two Loar intruments have cropped up bearing December 21, 1924, it is somewhat irrelevant as the last signed instrument (recorded) is now verified as a Fern Loar mandolin, 80416, signed 12/22/24. The original premise was that Loar signed nothing after December 1, 1924, because he left dyas later

[sunburst]

...unsigned Loar labels.
Whoah!
Gotta add that to the list!

Indoor yard sale
Unsigned Loar
Unsigned Loar label
http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Darryl Wolfe]

Here's one I got on my trip to Kalamazoo in the early 70's. They didn't throw them all away

[Darryl Wolfe]

Getting back on track

[Darryl Wolfe]

and the "culprit"

[Darryl Wolfe]

I removed these from a February 18, 1924 Loar. #Sound is subjective, but the mandolin sounded incredibly better to me. I thought it was a "dud" before the 'Virzectomy

[banjo1]

great pics Darrly
The unsigned label is a great piece of mandolin history.
Keep the stuff comming.

[Darryl Wolfe]

Let'sot start any more myths. That's a repro label

[banjo1]

Thanks Darryl.
That will keep thing straight.