Schilder von Ernst und Max Kreul

Model design

Everyone is naturally in search of the one ideal instrument to match his or her special musical personality, whether in terms of tone, playability, response, form or varnish finish.

Thanks to our broad diversity of models and tone characteristics, you have every chance of finding the instrument you are looking for - and if not, we would be pleased to design it specifically for you.

Playability, response and tone differ from one model to another and permit the cellist to find the perfect instrument to match his or her playing style.

Different contour and arching templates of 4/4 cello models

The templates emphasise the significant form and volume properties of the different cellos. These differences are naturally factors which influence the tone and playing characteristics of the instruments.


A test series with eight cellos yielded a wealth of important findings.

The cello models were chosen to cover the greatest possible diversity with regard to contour and the form and height of arching (e.g. a small own design and a large Montagnana model). All eight cells were made from wood from the same spruce trunk for the tops and the same maple trunk for the backs, ribs and necks. Care was taken to ensure that the cellos were as identical as possible in terms of thickness graduation, varnishing, strings and bridge height.

In cooperation with the Institute of Musical Instrument Making (IfM) in Zwota and a group of experienced musicians, the tone characteristics and playability of the two new designs and six reproductions of historical cello models were analysed. The test series showed that it is by all means possible to match an instrument to the tone and playability wishes of the individual musician through an appropriate choice of construction.

Comparative measurements on cellos of different constructions

The task was to perform an acoustic analysis of cellos of different constructions, including a comparative discussion of results obtained within the sample alongside data from the IfM database. The measurements involved plotting of the frequency curve in an anechoic chamber. When interpreting the curves, it must be taken into account that the values are presented in logarithmic form. A linear presentation would be unnecessarily confusing, and the typical structure of human acoustic perception is in any case essentially logarithmic. From mere appraisal of the curves, only very distinctive differences can be identified. The characteristics of the instruments are only revealed through calculation and evaluation of the individual properties. The outcome of the measurements was a set of three frequency curves. As a first step, the three curves are averaged on the basis of their frequency data points. The following properties can then be derived from the resultant average frequency curve: LS(40..200) Measure for bass transfer; higher values are better LS(100..400) Measure for sound volume; higher values are better LS(800..1200) Measure for clarity; higher values are better LS(2..4k) Measure for brightness; higher values are better |Lm(0.04..0.6k) – Lm(2..4k)| = ΔLbal. Measure for balance; lower values are better Lm(2..4k) – Lm(>4k) = ΔLS Measure for low tone sharpness; higher values are better Lm(0.04..0.6;2..4k) – Lm(1,2..2k) = ΔLn Measure for suppression of the upper nasal formants; higher values are better LS(0.04..5k) Measure for loudness; higher values are better. LS(f1..f2) – total level in frequency range f1 .. f2 Lm(f1..f2) – average level in frequency range f1 .. f2

News als RSS empfangen: RSS-Symbol