Mike's Oud Forums

Unique Oud Bowl - 21 different Woods

JT83 - 1-15-2014 at 03:55 PM

Hi Guys,

I was talking with Luthier Veysel Sarikus earlier last year when we were planning my new JT 7 signature model oud, wondering what woods we'd use etc.
I asked him, what he thought would happen if he put 1 strip of each wood he had in his workshop to make one bowl. After discussion with his Father Master Luthier Cengiz Sarikus, they decided to undertake this experiment...below was the result. We were uncertain about how it would sound and how all the different woods would react together but I am amazed by the results. The oud has a great old Arabic tone for a new instrument and it is an absolute gem. Definitely the best Arabic sounding oud in my opinion. String length is 61.5 for those playing at home :)
Photos to follow

Best!

JT








[file]30053[/file]

[file]30057[/file] [file]30055[/file] [file]30059[/file]

JT83 - 1-16-2014 at 04:06 AM

Photos above :bounce:

Microber - 1-16-2014 at 04:53 AM

I like it. It's original but very nice.
Robert

SamirCanada - 1-16-2014 at 06:03 AM

It's the leftover special ;)

Honestly it sounds and looks great

Marcus - 1-16-2014 at 06:10 AM

Hi Samir,

where from do you know how it sounds?

spyblaster - 1-16-2014 at 06:56 AM

I really dislike the idea of mixing woods for the bowl. also those polygonal shapes on the top... :(

Lysander - 1-16-2014 at 07:03 AM

Unconventional, I like it. You don't get much that's unconventional in the oud world.

Greg - 1-16-2014 at 02:41 PM

I heard the oud unamplified backstage last Saturday and the sound surprised me. It has a rich bottom end very similar to the old Farouk Shehata ouds (Farouk was Maurice's father).
Particularly on the second and third courses, it has that elusive 'rubbery' sound that I associate with good Syrian ouds.

Regards,

Greg

SamirCanada - 1-16-2014 at 05:14 PM

I heard it on JT's youtube or facebook. Somewhere.

to be honest both his ouds by Veysel sound amazing.

Dr. Oud - 1-16-2014 at 05:24 PM

There goes the theory "----wood for the bowel is best sounding". I'm just saying, and have been for years. It's just a chamber, make it out of anything, the soundboard produces ALL the sound, the bowel only reflects the low frequencies. It's physics 101. BTW, I made a rainbow backed oud in 1976, in San Francisco. Not souch an original idea after all.

Oud Freak - 1-17-2014 at 12:23 AM

Quote: Originally posted by Dr. Oud  
There goes the theory "----wood for the bowel is best sounding". I'm just saying, and have been for years. It's just a chamber, make it out of anything, the soundboard produces ALL the sound, the bowel only reflects the low frequencies. It's physics 101. BTW, I made a rainbow backed oud in 1976, in San Francisco. Not souch an original idea after all.


The sound of a "bowel" is interesting as long as it remains just a sound... :))

JT83 - 1-17-2014 at 03:58 AM

Hi Richard,
But the woods of the bowl would affect tone quality, no?
Also, would love to see the bowl of the rainbow bowl oud you made, do you have pics? how many woods were used?

Best,

JT

Dr. Oud - 1-17-2014 at 11:51 AM

The wood of the bowel does not affect the sound. The size of the bowel does. It is only a reflecting chamber and it doesn't matter what the material is. Wood, fiberglass, paper mache, carbon fiber, whatever. All the sound is produced by the soundboard, the bowel only reflects the low frequencies. This has been demonstrated many times, but you know, you can take a monkey to college, it doesn't mean he will accept education.

I built the rainbow oud back in the 1980's and don't have a picture of it, sorry. Every rib was a different wood, so 13 different woods were used.

jdowning - 1-17-2014 at 01:12 PM

I would tend to agree with Richard on this point - although I don't suppose that anyone has done any 'in depth' comparative acoustic testing (even if that might be possible) to prove it one way or another. The great 19th Spanish guitar maker Antonio de Torres is said to have made a guitar with papier mache body to 'prove' that the wood is not an important factor and I have made lutes with fibreglass bowls that seem to work OK - but hardly rigorous scientific proof!

If one wants eye dazzling effects, papier mache might be the way to go - the design and artistic variations would be infinite and more or less dramatic depending upon the choice of paper - gift wrapping, newsprint, wallpaper etc. - or whatever colourful material one might also want to incorporate into the mix - gemstones, gold leaf, and so on.

rojaros - 1-18-2014 at 04:59 AM

Quote: Originally posted by Dr. Oud  
The wood of the bowel does not affect the sound. The size of the bowel does. It is only a reflecting chamber and it doesn't matter what the material is. Wood, fiberglass, paper mache, carbon fiber, whatever. All the sound is produced by the soundboard, the bowel only reflects the low frequencies. This has been demonstrated many times, but you know, you can take a monkey to college, it doesn't mean he will accept education.

....

Sorry Dr. Oud, with all due respect I dare to contradict a bit.
What you are referring to is maybe college physics, but it IMHO not entirely true. It would only be true if the bowl was totally stiff. meaning, acoustically dead (like made from thick concrete or porcelain.

Concluding from my long discussions with Sebastian Stenzel, a world renown guitar maker, who has built an oud for me, and from my own experience as player I would claim to know that the above statement isn't entirely true, although it was stated again and again also as being true for guitars.

Stenzel builds highest standard classical guitars and the quality of his guitars is extremely consistent. I would say he plays in the league of the top ten or 15 guitar making luthiers of the world. He basically builds only one model varying only the woods used. I had the chance to play many of his guitars, guitars made from the same materials as well as such with same top and different sides and backs. Those with same materials were closer to each others (of course not identical, though), but with same top and different backs and sides they seem to acquire some different character. This was especially true and evident for comparing maple back and sides against rosewood back and sides, but also with east Indian against south American rosewood.

In our many discussions he repeteadly pointed out that, although the sides and the back do not contribute much to the sound radiation (as they are not totally stiff, there still is a small contribution), they nevertheless act as a sort of acoustical filters, absorbing some frequencies stronger than others. For me (myself being a physicist) that sounds very plausible (of course to confirm it scientifically one would have to do some experiments).

That's how the wood of the back and side comes into the sonic characteristic of a guitar. Maybe this is more strongly perceived by the player or people who sit close; but according to Sebastian Stenzel it also influences partly the projection of the guitar.

Now, I'm writing all this, because it evidently applies well to the oud, as the oud bowl is even less stiff (it doesn't have beams and it has only the one edge with the top.

The quality of his instruments speaks for himself, and the oud he has built proves that he has a sound understanding of how an oud works.

Also there is a very simple experiment to prove that bowl vibration do change the sound: just dampen the back of the bowl with a lot of stuff (wool, felt, whatever) so that it's vibrational contribution is strongly diminished, and then decide for yourself. You could also do a recording and compare.

For me it's quite evident, although the effect is of course much, much smaller than all the decisions made with respect to top construction (wood, beams, thicknesses, you name it).

I'm sure this discussion will go on for ever as it does within the classical guitar community. Not worth of becoming a Big-endian/Little-endian war of Liliput.

Meanwhile everybody should play the instrument built according to his belief system and be happy and healthy ...

best

Robert

Alfaraby - 1-18-2014 at 03:19 PM

Quote: Originally posted by Dr. Oud  
The wood of the bowel does not affect the sound ... and it doesn't matter what the material is, wood, fiberglass, paper mache, carbon fiber, whatever.


Well doc., if this's true why not a plastic bowl. It's lighter, cheaper, elastic, accessible and affordable worldwide. In a couple of minutes you glue the pre-cut ribs in any color you'd choose, and here you go: a wonderful bowl is born, ready for use. Or why not build the mold you like and just cast the plastic bowl you want :(

I'm serious asking you & Mr. Downing: why not plastic ?

Yours indeed
Alfaraby

jdowning - 1-18-2014 at 04:43 PM

The body of a classical guitar is not comparable with the bowl of an oud (or lute). The bowl of an oud - like an egg shell structurally - is very stiff whereas a guitar has a relatively flexible flat back that vibrates in conjunction with the sound board , creating a pumping effect on the air within the body (similar to a violin). The most significant feature of an oud bowl from an acoustical perspective is its geometry that dictates the volume of air within the bowl that in turn - dependent upon total sound hole area - affects the response of the instrument - particularly in the bass frequencies (both ouds and guitars being imperfect Helmholtz resonators). Also the profile of the bowl section - be it deeper or shallower than semicircular has an effect on sound `projection`. Late 16th C lutes had bowls of `shallow`section whereas lutes of the later were made - like the Nahat ouds of the late 19th C for example - with deep section bowls.

Jamil - I have witnessed some experimental fibreglass bodied lutes (during the 1970`s) that were not only less costly to make but performed quite well acoustically in my subjective judgement. I do not believe that these lutes are currently in production - lute players demanding lutes that more closely respect the historical materials,design and construction of surviving lutes.
So there is absolutely no reason why oud bowls should not be made of plastic and it is not a novel concept (in fact as I recall there is at least one oud maker currently producing carbon fibre reinforced plastic bowls). Plastic bowls may not, however, be lighter than those of all wood construction. Not my particular preference however.

For interest, there has been some earlier recent discussion in the forum on fibreglass bowl construction. These bowls are made by laying up layers of glass fibre cloth - saturated with resin - on a solid mould.





Dr. Oud - 1-18-2014 at 09:46 PM

"... I recall there is at least one oud maker currently producing carbon fibre reinforced plastic bowls"
Is this oud maker a Turkish composite engineer in Virginia? If so I may have a claim on his oud. I sent a cad file to him, he translated it and machined a mold to make carbon fiber bowel, neck and pegbox, then dropped out of contact.

JT83 - 1-19-2014 at 04:22 AM

I always thought that the wood on the back affected the tone, volume and reverberation of the sound. Although its not technically affecting the 'sound' as you guys claim, the above factors should affect how we perceive the sound after bouncing off the bowl.

Since all woods are quite different and will affect the sound in different ways, all I meant by my comment is that we were uncertain of what the output sound would be with 21 different types of wood together.

Whatever the case, it is a great instrument and I love it :) :applause:

jdowning - 1-19-2014 at 06:26 AM

Richard - the luthier I had in mind is Philip Shaheen of Upper Galilee who is producing carbon fibre reinforced plastic bowls - recently discussed here on the forum

http://www.mikeouds.com/messageboard/viewthread.php?tid=13583

I also did a report on my past experience with making fibreglass lute bowls here

http://www.mikeouds.com/messageboard/viewthread.php?tid=13288#pid90...

Glass reinforced fibre composite material is unpleasant to work with and is toxic when uncured - so my experiments with the stuff over 30 years ago were short lived. Give me wood and other traditional materials for luthier work any day!

Getting back on topic the mixture of woods for making bowls is of course nothing new - it has been going on since at least the 16th C in lute bowl construction - although this particular example takes matters to extreme. In the case of lutes the objective in mixing woods (or other materials such as ivory) appears to have been primarily decorative. In any case, the interior surface of an oud or lute bowl - the rib joints being reinforced with paper strips saturated with glue - is primarily hard glue. So any interior sound wave reflection (if that somehow does play a significant part in the instrument acoustics) is from a surface coating of hard brittle hide glue not the wood of the bowl itself.

rojaros - 1-19-2014 at 10:02 AM

Quote: Originally posted by jdowning  
The body of a classical guitar is not comparable with the bowl of an oud (or lute). The bowl of an oud - like an egg shell structurally - is very stiff whereas a guitar has a relatively flexible flat back that vibrates in conjunction with the sound board , creating a pumping effect on the air within the body (similar to a violin). The most significant feature of an oud bowl from an acoustical perspective is its geometry that dictates the volume of air within the bowl that in turn - dependent upon total sound hole area - affects the response of the instrument - particularly in the bass frequencies (both ouds and guitars being imperfect Helmholtz resonators). Also the profile of the bowl section - be it deeper or shallower than semicircular has an effect on sound `projection`. Late 16th C lutes had bowls of `shallow`section whereas lutes of the later were made - like the Nahat ouds of the late 19th C for example - with deep section bowls.






And still, just do the experiment I suggested, or, more comfortably, take a piezzo element and attach it to the bowl.

Then record the response of the rib to different notes you play. As stiff as it is, it is vibrating sympathetically with the strings. The stiffnes of the bowl is not the same in all directions. Anyway, they can absorb energy in a selective, frequency-dependent manner and function as a filter that way. I wasn't claming mor or less than that. The effect is most strong for the player, but ther certainly is an audible contribution to the overall sound.

Whether one considers this important or not is an entirely different matter. The top construction and the geometry of the bowl, es well as the selection of adequate strings certainly are the three most decisive factors for the sound of the oud.

NeighborOud - 1-21-2014 at 11:42 AM

If ouds were not made entirely of wood, we would not be able to call them "ouds" anymore :))

Oud Freak - 1-22-2014 at 01:53 AM

It is BOWL :rolleyes:
Thank God the Oud doesn't have a bowel :D

rojaros - 1-22-2014 at 01:28 PM

As to the issue whether the bowl (I like the idea ouds having bowels, though - it would make them living beings :)) contributes to the sound, today I did an experiment related with the one I suggested above.

I put my turkish oud in its hard fiber glass case, which is thin and stiff and slightly bigger than the oud, so that the bowl is touched only at few points. The lid doesn't go off to the side but downwards, so that I can play (a bit, halfways) with the oud in the open case. The top was mor or less flush with the rim of the case.

I was amazed how much the bowl was actively driving the wall of the case, whic acted as a kind of resonator, it was even more than I would expect.

The bowl is by no means just the passive border surface od a Helmholtz resonator as was suggested in the contribution of Dr. Oud! On the contrary, it proved that the bowel pumped quite a bit of energy out.

The bowl material matters. Its internal damping, its Young modulus and its frequency dependent absorbtion of frequency bands - It all matters to the sound, even when it is not the primary factor of the sound.

Best

Robert

Greg - 1-26-2014 at 11:24 PM

Prior to one of Joe's recent concerts in Brisbane, I went backstage to have a chat and videotaped a couple of short grabs. I used only the camera mic. and that is not terrific.

I sent the footage to Joe and he has now uploaded them to his Youtube channel.

http://youtu.be/sdbBN_m-RxE
and
http://youtu.be/OC_JayOAA0w

Enjoy!

Greg

rojaros - 1-27-2014 at 02:03 AM

Very nice indeed. If I saw it right, it's seven course oud. Do you know which strings JT uses?

best
Robert

Greg - 1-27-2014 at 04:55 AM

Quote: Originally posted by rojaros  
Very nice indeed. If I saw it right, it's seven course oud. Do you know which strings JT uses?

best
Robert


Yes, seven courses and he has always used Pyramid strings.
In the past, they were the standard oud set, but he is now using Pyramid lute strings.

Greg

rojaros - 1-27-2014 at 06:51 AM

Quote: Originally posted by Greg  
...he is now using Pyramid lute strings.

Greg


Many thanks. What would be the string tension he is aiming for in choosing the lute strings?

best
Robert

rojaros - 2-3-2014 at 02:08 PM

Bump...

JT83 - 2-12-2014 at 11:54 PM

Hi R,

Medium tension, comfortable yet enough to project well, especially in terms of dynamics.

Best!

rojaros - 2-13-2014 at 09:51 PM

Any numbers what medium tension would mean? Like 3kg per string or 2 kg per string?
thanks!