Why are modern string bows concave instead of convex?












21















Every bow that I have seen used to play an orchestral stringed instrument, regardless of the style of music being played, has the same concave design. By concave I mean that there is a slight curve of the wood towards the bow hair (which is pronounced by loosening the bow).



As best I can tell, bows of the 17th century were convex. Why are convex bows virtually never seen in use now?










share|improve this question


















  • 1





    Then there are some off-the-wall bows, such as a super-slack hair kind that allows genuine quadruple-stops! or worse, classicfm.com/discover-music/instruments/violin/features/…

    – Carl Witthoft
    Jan 28 at 14:17











  • @CarlWitthoft – That is truly cool: like a poor man's hurdy-gurdy!

    – feetwet
    Jan 28 at 15:57
















21















Every bow that I have seen used to play an orchestral stringed instrument, regardless of the style of music being played, has the same concave design. By concave I mean that there is a slight curve of the wood towards the bow hair (which is pronounced by loosening the bow).



As best I can tell, bows of the 17th century were convex. Why are convex bows virtually never seen in use now?










share|improve this question


















  • 1





    Then there are some off-the-wall bows, such as a super-slack hair kind that allows genuine quadruple-stops! or worse, classicfm.com/discover-music/instruments/violin/features/…

    – Carl Witthoft
    Jan 28 at 14:17











  • @CarlWitthoft – That is truly cool: like a poor man's hurdy-gurdy!

    – feetwet
    Jan 28 at 15:57














21












21








21








Every bow that I have seen used to play an orchestral stringed instrument, regardless of the style of music being played, has the same concave design. By concave I mean that there is a slight curve of the wood towards the bow hair (which is pronounced by loosening the bow).



As best I can tell, bows of the 17th century were convex. Why are convex bows virtually never seen in use now?










share|improve this question














Every bow that I have seen used to play an orchestral stringed instrument, regardless of the style of music being played, has the same concave design. By concave I mean that there is a slight curve of the wood towards the bow hair (which is pronounced by loosening the bow).



As best I can tell, bows of the 17th century were convex. Why are convex bows virtually never seen in use now?







bow orchestral-strings archeterie






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Jan 27 at 0:42









feetwetfeetwet

31213




31213








  • 1





    Then there are some off-the-wall bows, such as a super-slack hair kind that allows genuine quadruple-stops! or worse, classicfm.com/discover-music/instruments/violin/features/…

    – Carl Witthoft
    Jan 28 at 14:17











  • @CarlWitthoft – That is truly cool: like a poor man's hurdy-gurdy!

    – feetwet
    Jan 28 at 15:57














  • 1





    Then there are some off-the-wall bows, such as a super-slack hair kind that allows genuine quadruple-stops! or worse, classicfm.com/discover-music/instruments/violin/features/…

    – Carl Witthoft
    Jan 28 at 14:17











  • @CarlWitthoft – That is truly cool: like a poor man's hurdy-gurdy!

    – feetwet
    Jan 28 at 15:57








1




1





Then there are some off-the-wall bows, such as a super-slack hair kind that allows genuine quadruple-stops! or worse, classicfm.com/discover-music/instruments/violin/features/…

– Carl Witthoft
Jan 28 at 14:17





Then there are some off-the-wall bows, such as a super-slack hair kind that allows genuine quadruple-stops! or worse, classicfm.com/discover-music/instruments/violin/features/…

– Carl Witthoft
Jan 28 at 14:17













@CarlWitthoft – That is truly cool: like a poor man's hurdy-gurdy!

– feetwet
Jan 28 at 15:57





@CarlWitthoft – That is truly cool: like a poor man's hurdy-gurdy!

– feetwet
Jan 28 at 15:57










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















30














It's a fun experience to play with a convex Baroque bow, but if you've ever tried to use it for anything romantic or later, you'll quickly want to get back to the concave Tourte design that everybody has nowadays.



The thing with convex bows is that they bounce around like mad. This can work quite well for the elegant-rhythmic dance feel of Baroque and early Classical music. But it works completely against you if you need biting attack and/or dramatic long tenuto notes. With such a playing style, a baroque bow feels like immersing styrofoam in water: the string seems to outright repel the bow. Whereas a Tourte bow can pretty easily be forced to “sink into he string” for straight sustained notes.



Some “historically informed” performers do use convex bows for Baroque music, but it's not like a Tourte bow doesn't still have some bounce and can convey that gracious character, especially when held in “Baroque position” (i.e. closer to the center of gravity, rather than right at the frog).






share|improve this answer
























  • center of gravity = center of mass?

    – Kami Kaze
    Jan 28 at 10:49






  • 1





    @KamiKaze yes. Arguably, CM is the better term here, since inertial forces are more important than weight. That post was anyways not one of my most scientifically rigorous ones... I think I'd had a bit of alcohol when I wrote it. Does seem to be popular though...

    – leftaroundabout
    Jan 28 at 11:20











  • This was in no means a criticism on your answer, just a little suggestion for improvement.

    – Kami Kaze
    Jan 29 at 7:12



















6














If you trace the development of the orchestra, you'll see that there has been a shift toward larger groups in larger spaces between the baroque period and now. A natural consequence of this is that instruments had to adapt to project more sound to fill those spaces up. The modern bow is just one of those adaptations. The concave design can hold significantly more tension in the bow hair than a convex design. This allows for more pressure to be applied to the strings when playing which increases the volume of the sound. It's not the only adaptation to string instruments over that time either. The angle of the neck and fingerboard used to be much flatter than it is today and the bridge is higher. All of this allows more tension on the strings to make the instruments project more into larger performance spaces.






share|improve this answer


























  • Hi Christopher, welcome to Music: Practice & Theory! Feel free to contact the mods if you'd like to merge your different accounts.

    – Richard
    Jan 27 at 22:27











  • @Richard Aw, all that detective work I just did, and you beat me to it!

    – user45266
    Jan 28 at 1:59











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "240"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f79287%2fwhy-are-modern-string-bows-concave-instead-of-convex%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









30














It's a fun experience to play with a convex Baroque bow, but if you've ever tried to use it for anything romantic or later, you'll quickly want to get back to the concave Tourte design that everybody has nowadays.



The thing with convex bows is that they bounce around like mad. This can work quite well for the elegant-rhythmic dance feel of Baroque and early Classical music. But it works completely against you if you need biting attack and/or dramatic long tenuto notes. With such a playing style, a baroque bow feels like immersing styrofoam in water: the string seems to outright repel the bow. Whereas a Tourte bow can pretty easily be forced to “sink into he string” for straight sustained notes.



Some “historically informed” performers do use convex bows for Baroque music, but it's not like a Tourte bow doesn't still have some bounce and can convey that gracious character, especially when held in “Baroque position” (i.e. closer to the center of gravity, rather than right at the frog).






share|improve this answer
























  • center of gravity = center of mass?

    – Kami Kaze
    Jan 28 at 10:49






  • 1





    @KamiKaze yes. Arguably, CM is the better term here, since inertial forces are more important than weight. That post was anyways not one of my most scientifically rigorous ones... I think I'd had a bit of alcohol when I wrote it. Does seem to be popular though...

    – leftaroundabout
    Jan 28 at 11:20











  • This was in no means a criticism on your answer, just a little suggestion for improvement.

    – Kami Kaze
    Jan 29 at 7:12
















30














It's a fun experience to play with a convex Baroque bow, but if you've ever tried to use it for anything romantic or later, you'll quickly want to get back to the concave Tourte design that everybody has nowadays.



The thing with convex bows is that they bounce around like mad. This can work quite well for the elegant-rhythmic dance feel of Baroque and early Classical music. But it works completely against you if you need biting attack and/or dramatic long tenuto notes. With such a playing style, a baroque bow feels like immersing styrofoam in water: the string seems to outright repel the bow. Whereas a Tourte bow can pretty easily be forced to “sink into he string” for straight sustained notes.



Some “historically informed” performers do use convex bows for Baroque music, but it's not like a Tourte bow doesn't still have some bounce and can convey that gracious character, especially when held in “Baroque position” (i.e. closer to the center of gravity, rather than right at the frog).






share|improve this answer
























  • center of gravity = center of mass?

    – Kami Kaze
    Jan 28 at 10:49






  • 1





    @KamiKaze yes. Arguably, CM is the better term here, since inertial forces are more important than weight. That post was anyways not one of my most scientifically rigorous ones... I think I'd had a bit of alcohol when I wrote it. Does seem to be popular though...

    – leftaroundabout
    Jan 28 at 11:20











  • This was in no means a criticism on your answer, just a little suggestion for improvement.

    – Kami Kaze
    Jan 29 at 7:12














30












30








30







It's a fun experience to play with a convex Baroque bow, but if you've ever tried to use it for anything romantic or later, you'll quickly want to get back to the concave Tourte design that everybody has nowadays.



The thing with convex bows is that they bounce around like mad. This can work quite well for the elegant-rhythmic dance feel of Baroque and early Classical music. But it works completely against you if you need biting attack and/or dramatic long tenuto notes. With such a playing style, a baroque bow feels like immersing styrofoam in water: the string seems to outright repel the bow. Whereas a Tourte bow can pretty easily be forced to “sink into he string” for straight sustained notes.



Some “historically informed” performers do use convex bows for Baroque music, but it's not like a Tourte bow doesn't still have some bounce and can convey that gracious character, especially when held in “Baroque position” (i.e. closer to the center of gravity, rather than right at the frog).






share|improve this answer













It's a fun experience to play with a convex Baroque bow, but if you've ever tried to use it for anything romantic or later, you'll quickly want to get back to the concave Tourte design that everybody has nowadays.



The thing with convex bows is that they bounce around like mad. This can work quite well for the elegant-rhythmic dance feel of Baroque and early Classical music. But it works completely against you if you need biting attack and/or dramatic long tenuto notes. With such a playing style, a baroque bow feels like immersing styrofoam in water: the string seems to outright repel the bow. Whereas a Tourte bow can pretty easily be forced to “sink into he string” for straight sustained notes.



Some “historically informed” performers do use convex bows for Baroque music, but it's not like a Tourte bow doesn't still have some bounce and can convey that gracious character, especially when held in “Baroque position” (i.e. closer to the center of gravity, rather than right at the frog).







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Jan 27 at 1:27









leftaroundaboutleftaroundabout

19.8k3586




19.8k3586













  • center of gravity = center of mass?

    – Kami Kaze
    Jan 28 at 10:49






  • 1





    @KamiKaze yes. Arguably, CM is the better term here, since inertial forces are more important than weight. That post was anyways not one of my most scientifically rigorous ones... I think I'd had a bit of alcohol when I wrote it. Does seem to be popular though...

    – leftaroundabout
    Jan 28 at 11:20











  • This was in no means a criticism on your answer, just a little suggestion for improvement.

    – Kami Kaze
    Jan 29 at 7:12



















  • center of gravity = center of mass?

    – Kami Kaze
    Jan 28 at 10:49






  • 1





    @KamiKaze yes. Arguably, CM is the better term here, since inertial forces are more important than weight. That post was anyways not one of my most scientifically rigorous ones... I think I'd had a bit of alcohol when I wrote it. Does seem to be popular though...

    – leftaroundabout
    Jan 28 at 11:20











  • This was in no means a criticism on your answer, just a little suggestion for improvement.

    – Kami Kaze
    Jan 29 at 7:12

















center of gravity = center of mass?

– Kami Kaze
Jan 28 at 10:49





center of gravity = center of mass?

– Kami Kaze
Jan 28 at 10:49




1




1





@KamiKaze yes. Arguably, CM is the better term here, since inertial forces are more important than weight. That post was anyways not one of my most scientifically rigorous ones... I think I'd had a bit of alcohol when I wrote it. Does seem to be popular though...

– leftaroundabout
Jan 28 at 11:20





@KamiKaze yes. Arguably, CM is the better term here, since inertial forces are more important than weight. That post was anyways not one of my most scientifically rigorous ones... I think I'd had a bit of alcohol when I wrote it. Does seem to be popular though...

– leftaroundabout
Jan 28 at 11:20













This was in no means a criticism on your answer, just a little suggestion for improvement.

– Kami Kaze
Jan 29 at 7:12





This was in no means a criticism on your answer, just a little suggestion for improvement.

– Kami Kaze
Jan 29 at 7:12











6














If you trace the development of the orchestra, you'll see that there has been a shift toward larger groups in larger spaces between the baroque period and now. A natural consequence of this is that instruments had to adapt to project more sound to fill those spaces up. The modern bow is just one of those adaptations. The concave design can hold significantly more tension in the bow hair than a convex design. This allows for more pressure to be applied to the strings when playing which increases the volume of the sound. It's not the only adaptation to string instruments over that time either. The angle of the neck and fingerboard used to be much flatter than it is today and the bridge is higher. All of this allows more tension on the strings to make the instruments project more into larger performance spaces.






share|improve this answer


























  • Hi Christopher, welcome to Music: Practice & Theory! Feel free to contact the mods if you'd like to merge your different accounts.

    – Richard
    Jan 27 at 22:27











  • @Richard Aw, all that detective work I just did, and you beat me to it!

    – user45266
    Jan 28 at 1:59
















6














If you trace the development of the orchestra, you'll see that there has been a shift toward larger groups in larger spaces between the baroque period and now. A natural consequence of this is that instruments had to adapt to project more sound to fill those spaces up. The modern bow is just one of those adaptations. The concave design can hold significantly more tension in the bow hair than a convex design. This allows for more pressure to be applied to the strings when playing which increases the volume of the sound. It's not the only adaptation to string instruments over that time either. The angle of the neck and fingerboard used to be much flatter than it is today and the bridge is higher. All of this allows more tension on the strings to make the instruments project more into larger performance spaces.






share|improve this answer


























  • Hi Christopher, welcome to Music: Practice & Theory! Feel free to contact the mods if you'd like to merge your different accounts.

    – Richard
    Jan 27 at 22:27











  • @Richard Aw, all that detective work I just did, and you beat me to it!

    – user45266
    Jan 28 at 1:59














6












6








6







If you trace the development of the orchestra, you'll see that there has been a shift toward larger groups in larger spaces between the baroque period and now. A natural consequence of this is that instruments had to adapt to project more sound to fill those spaces up. The modern bow is just one of those adaptations. The concave design can hold significantly more tension in the bow hair than a convex design. This allows for more pressure to be applied to the strings when playing which increases the volume of the sound. It's not the only adaptation to string instruments over that time either. The angle of the neck and fingerboard used to be much flatter than it is today and the bridge is higher. All of this allows more tension on the strings to make the instruments project more into larger performance spaces.






share|improve this answer















If you trace the development of the orchestra, you'll see that there has been a shift toward larger groups in larger spaces between the baroque period and now. A natural consequence of this is that instruments had to adapt to project more sound to fill those spaces up. The modern bow is just one of those adaptations. The concave design can hold significantly more tension in the bow hair than a convex design. This allows for more pressure to be applied to the strings when playing which increases the volume of the sound. It's not the only adaptation to string instruments over that time either. The angle of the neck and fingerboard used to be much flatter than it is today and the bridge is higher. All of this allows more tension on the strings to make the instruments project more into larger performance spaces.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Jan 28 at 1:56









C. Wolfe

32




32










answered Jan 27 at 22:12









Christopher WolfeChristopher Wolfe

611




611













  • Hi Christopher, welcome to Music: Practice & Theory! Feel free to contact the mods if you'd like to merge your different accounts.

    – Richard
    Jan 27 at 22:27











  • @Richard Aw, all that detective work I just did, and you beat me to it!

    – user45266
    Jan 28 at 1:59



















  • Hi Christopher, welcome to Music: Practice & Theory! Feel free to contact the mods if you'd like to merge your different accounts.

    – Richard
    Jan 27 at 22:27











  • @Richard Aw, all that detective work I just did, and you beat me to it!

    – user45266
    Jan 28 at 1:59

















Hi Christopher, welcome to Music: Practice & Theory! Feel free to contact the mods if you'd like to merge your different accounts.

– Richard
Jan 27 at 22:27





Hi Christopher, welcome to Music: Practice & Theory! Feel free to contact the mods if you'd like to merge your different accounts.

– Richard
Jan 27 at 22:27













@Richard Aw, all that detective work I just did, and you beat me to it!

– user45266
Jan 28 at 1:59





@Richard Aw, all that detective work I just did, and you beat me to it!

– user45266
Jan 28 at 1:59


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Music: Practice & Theory Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f79287%2fwhy-are-modern-string-bows-concave-instead-of-convex%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Human spaceflight

Can not write log (Is /dev/pts mounted?) - openpty in Ubuntu-on-Windows?

張江高科駅