Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Wood Density May Explain Stradivarius Secret

Posted by CmdrTaco on Thu Jul 03, 2008 09:37 AM
from the don't-sit-on-it dept.
Whorhay writes "A Dutch doctor and a violin maker from Arkansas have compared five classical and eight modern violins in a computed tomography (CT) scanner. Apparently the 300-year-old violins are made of wood with a more consistent density than the modern violins. They aren't saying for sure that this is what gives the Stradivarius violins their unique sound, but it's the first scientific explanation I've heard for it that seems to have merit." Unfortunately science has yet to explain how how all three chords I know ROCK on my SG.
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Harmonics (Score:5, Funny)

    by Bandman (86149) on Thursday July 03 2008, @09:41AM (#24043913) Homepage

    It might go a log way to preventing them from producing undesirable harmonics.

    Anyone know of any studies which looked at the waveforms to find unique qualities?

    • Re:Harmonics (Score:5, Informative)

      by bigtomrodney (993427) * on Thursday July 03 2008, @09:45AM (#24044019)
      I wouldn't be all that surprised. Wood quality has always been a key factor in instruments. Even with electric guitars weight and density are considered a good thing. You'll find people complaining how heavy their Les Paul Custom is yet still play it for the sustain the extra weight provides. And Swamp Ash is a preferred material for Stratocasters and Telecasters because it is very hard while not being as heavy. High density again would provide for more fidelity in sound transfer.But hey, don't expect the science to devalue the old instruments. A '59 'Burst can still cost you $250,000.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Not being a guitar player, I have to ask...

        Is it the density, mass, or maybe the structure?

        Would a quartz guitar play amazingly?

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          Not likely. Jackson made and aluminum guitar, and I thought that it soundedking of harsh. My mahogany guitar sounds different than my ash guitar and my mystery wood guitar, they all have maple necks and the same model picukps. Mahogany is warm, ash is a little bright, etc.

          I also think a crystal guitar would buckle the first time you put the strings on. they run at 16+ pounds of tension per string.

          • Re:Harmonics (Score:4, Informative)

            by m50d (797211) on Thursday July 03 2008, @11:01AM (#24045517) Homepage Journal
            Crystal, particularly Quartz, wouldn't buckle; it's far too brittle for that. It'd either stay solid or shatter, and given the strength of the stuff, I'd imagine the former. It might actually be worth making, though how the hell GP is proposing to get a quartz crystal large enough to carve a guitar out of I don't know (and if the top isn't carved from a single contignous piece of the original material, it's practically guaranteed to sound awful).
      • Re:Harmonics (Score:4, Insightful)

        by ari_j (90255) on Thursday July 03 2008, @10:16AM (#24044563)
        Wood - all aspects, from density to shape - plays a huge role in guitar tone. I've always found this to be rather astonishing since the sound of an electric guitar comes from a vibrating piece of wire interacting with a small magnet. How is it that the thing holding the string above the magnet can play such a big part in what the magnetic field is doing? But it does, and that's pretty cool to me.
        • I am not a guitar player. I might try my hand at making one, though.

          I can imagine that the wood affects the rigidity with which the bridge and (for guitars, the fret on) the neck hold the string, and hold the pick up under the string. Some frequency components of the vibration of the string get damped because the body and the neck absorb them.

          And, of course, the weight and shape and finish of the instrument change how it affects the musician. Do not underestimate this impact.

      • Re:Harmonics (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Doctor Faustus (127273) <Slashdot.WilliamCleveland@Org> on Thursday July 03 2008, @10:22AM (#24044701) Homepage

        Even with electric guitars weight and density are considered a good thing. You'll find people complaining how heavy their Les Paul Custom is yet still play it for the sustain the extra weight provides.
        That sustain comes at the expense of having a very simple clean tone. They're great for distortion, though.

        And Swamp Ash is a preferred material for Stratocasters and Telecasters because it is very hard while not being as heavy.
        A swamp ash Stratocaster is my ideal guitar for playing clean, since it brings out the fundamental note and higher harmonics without so much midrange -- that's great for getting an ominous sound when you want it. I suspect it's the hardness that lets the higher frequencies reverberate so well.

        You have to remember, though, that Fender sells many times more Stratocasters made of Alder than made of ash. Not everyone wants that sound.

      • Re:Harmonics (Score:5, Informative)

        by Anonymous Psychopath (18031) on Thursday July 03 2008, @10:29AM (#24044843) Homepage

        I saw a special, on History Channel I think, where they thought that the trees that Stradivarius used to make his violins had unusual density qualities caused by the mini ice age.

          • Re:Harmonics (Score:4, Informative)

            by budgenator (254554) on Thursday July 03 2008, @05:31PM (#24051933) Journal

            There is quite a demand for old growth dunderheads ,logs to heavy to float all the way to the sawmill from the logging days. One of these logs pulled out of the mud in a river or lake bottom after a hundred years can fetch thousands or or tens of thousands of dollars at auction depending on condition and species.

      • You'll find people complaining how heavy their Les Paul Custom is yet still play it for the sustain the extra weight provides.

        Nigel: The sustain...listen to it...

        Marty: I'm not hearing anything.

        Nigel: You would, though, if it were playing.

    • by An ominous Cow art (320322) on Thursday July 03 2008, @09:47AM (#24044043) Journal

      It might go a log way

      Nicely played. :-)

    • Re:Harmonics (Score:5, Informative)

      by tompaulco (629533) on Thursday July 03 2008, @10:05AM (#24044361) Homepage Journal
      Acoustically, a consistent density would tend toward one resonance frequency (and it's harmonics), whereas an inconsistent density could have many resonance frequencies and their harmonics, which would probably be less pleasing to the air. I know it wouldn't work well for a violin, but when designing subwoofer boxes, it is recommended to use particle board for reasons of both structural rigidity and almost complete lack of resonance frequency.
  • by CXI (46706) on Thursday July 03 2008, @09:43AM (#24043957) Homepage
    Here's an article from 2004 about the fact that the Little Ice Age [wikipedia.org] was most likely responsible for slowing tree growth and creating perfect wood for violins: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/01/0107_040107_violin.html [nationalgeographic.com]
    • by zippthorne (748122) on Thursday July 03 2008, @09:44AM (#24043987) Journal

      So.. you blame Global Warming?

    • by crow (16139) on Thursday July 03 2008, @09:45AM (#24044017) Homepage Journal

      So I suppose someone could carefully manage a tree farm to produce some new perfect instruments.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        It would have to be an indoor tree farm, as things like cool temperatures, sunlight, humidity would all have to be carefully controlled. If a little ice age can slow the growth of the trees down you would have to duplicate that, over a period of 30-50 years to grow the slow growth trees large enough for timber.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          It would have to be an indoor tree farm, as things like cool temperatures, sunlight, humidity would all have to be carefully controlled. If a little ice age can slow the growth of the trees down you would have to duplicate that, over a period of 30-50 years to grow the slow growth trees large enough for timber.

          Wouldn't it be possible to find a natural climate that caused slower tree growth. I live in Colorado, and trees tend to grow slowly here, probably due to the dryness and possibly altitude. Would an ash or maple from Colorado produce a superior instrument?

    • by b4upoo (166390) on Thursday July 03 2008, @09:47AM (#24044061)

      There is much confusion among musicians as to what causes tone qualities in various instruments. Violins may well be locked to resonance
      more than other instruments. But for brass and woodwinds the hardness of the material is overwhelming as an influence. What is not clear in any instrument is to what degree the hardness of the surface coatings are vital as opposed to the hardness of the material underneath the coatings. Dr. Adolf Sax from whom the saxophone gets its name was the genius who discovered the importance of surface coatings.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        I also think there is some other reason why Stradivari violins are so good. It's called bias. Yes, they are fine instruments, no doubt, about the best there is, no doubt. But can you detect a Stradivarius without knowing it is one? And telling it apart from a Guarnerius or Amati? Or even a good quality modern instrument?

        There is a good bit of knowing it is an expensive instrument in hearing a big difference. The player plays a much bigger role. A good player on a good day with a cheap violin can sound be
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          It's called bias. Yes, they are fine instruments, no doubt, about the best there is, no doubt. But can you detect a Stradivarius without knowing it is one? And telling it apart from a Guarnerius or Amati? Or even a good quality modern instrument?

          Thee and me, probably not.

          According to this [sonoma.edu]:

          A common question: In a blind test, could a nonmusician or "uneducated" listener tell the difference between a Stradivarius and some other violin? The answer is that it depends. If the other violin, whether old or modern,

          • by Slashidiot (1179447) on Thursday July 03 2008, @11:59AM (#24046637) Journal
            Actually, one of my uncles (the rich one) is a violin collector. He has several antique violines, most of them italian. He actually owns a Guarneri, which are regarded as the best violins, second only to the Stradivarius. It is a wonderful instrument, but the difference with other much less appreciated violins is quite small. It does have a "wider" sound, but you can only tell if you listen carefully, and repeatedly, comparing with another violin. I can hardly tell apart a 10.000$ violin from a 1.000.000$ violin.

            When you get to a certain quality, you start getting diminishing returns, and there is really no difference from a certain point on.

            It's like encoding music. You can easily tell a 32kbps file from a 128kbps file, but it's harder to tell a 160kbps from a 256kbps. And anything over that is just a waste of bits. A Stradivarius might sound as good as an uncompressed WAV file, but there are many violins that sound as good as a 320kbps mp3. (What a great analogy, better than cars).
        • Magic........ (Score:4, Interesting)

          by tinkerghost (944862) on Thursday July 03 2008, @12:29PM (#24047191) Homepage
          I admit I took violin & cello for 3 years - it was that or sing & nobody should be subjected to that.

          But can you detect a Stradivarius without knowing it is one?

          Yes, a trained professional can pick a Strad' out of a crowd of violins just by the tonal qualities. The resonances & harmonics have a distinctive gestalt.

          And telling it apart from a Guarnerius or Amati?Or even a good quality modern instrument?

          Dito.

          There is a good bit of knowing it is an expensive instrument in hearing a big difference.

          No, there is a difference that you can clearly see in the waveforms between a good instrument and a great instrument.

          A good player on a good day with a cheap violin can sound better than that same player on a bad day with a Stradivarius.

          God no. Ignoring the sense of pacing, emotion, and the hundreds of details a violinist can put into a piece, a cheap violin sounds just that - cheap. Even on a bad day, a mastercrafted violin has a sense of warmth & a clarity of tone that a cheap instrument can't match. It's like saying a trashcan lid is just as good as a Zildian cymbal.
          That being said, there is a diminishing return & once you get into those instruments that are made by the masters of their craft, then the differences become minute. The difference between an instrument hand crafted by a master of the art & any mass produced ones will be detectable.

  • by blahbooboo (839709) on Thursday July 03 2008, @09:45AM (#24044003)

    Well, perhaps this is the final verdict? However, in the past the claim was the wood was from logs that were at the bottom of a swamp or something. Also, it was thought to be the chemical treatment. I suspect this is just the latest theory.

    http://news.softpedia.com/news/Stradivarius-Violins-Mystery-Solved-41462.shtml [softpedia.com]

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      I heard something similar from a violin maker in Indiana. He said the wood was treated by submerging it in the acidic bogs around Cremona. Supposedly this efficiently removed the pectin [wikipedia.org] leaving only the cellulose.
  • New news? (Score:5, Informative)

    by demonbug (309515) on Thursday July 03 2008, @09:45AM (#24044015) Journal

    They aren't saying for sure that this is what gives the Stradivarius's their unique sound but it's the first scientific explanation I've heard for it that seems to have merit.

    This idea (and papers supporting it) have been around for years... a quick Google Scholar [google.com] search turns up papers going back to at least 2003. The only new part was the use of CT imagery, as far as I can tell.

  • by Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) on Thursday July 03 2008, @09:51AM (#24044115) Homepage Journal

    The varnish on a Stradivarius [sciencenews.org] is what biochemist Joseph Nagyvary thinks is relevant. Cheaper varnishes may be too rubbery and as a result damp high frequencies. He's built some violins based on his ideas, though apparently a good musician can still tell the difference between one of his and a Stradivarius.

    One problem with the wood density idea is that not all Stradivarius violins have the sound for which they're famous.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Actually, I believe that your statement "... not all Stradivarius violins have the sound..." may support the wood hypothesis, not refute it.

      The ideal test (if possible) would be to obtain several Stradivarius violins, have them categorised by top-notch professionals as "have" or "not have" with regard to "the sound", and then compare them.

      A reasonable (though maybe not accurate) "assumption" would be that the varnish is identical on all of the sample violins. That way, the only variable to be examined would

  • by fermion (181285) on Thursday July 03 2008, @09:52AM (#24044125) Homepage Journal
    Every once in while I hear that someone has tried to restore an instrument such as this. In some cases, they try to sand down the instrument so it is perfectly flat, and destroy it. It seems that the violin makers tried to not only get very good wood with proper and uniform density, but also made a fairly good attempt to compensate for non uniform density by varying the thickness.

    This is a problem with woodwork. It is difficult to get dense wood. Only 20 years ago it was easy to get good dense wood that could be built and oiled so it would last a very long time. Now all I see is light junk wood.

  • by swm (171547) * <swmcd@world.std.com> on Thursday July 03 2008, @10:00AM (#24044255) Homepage

    There was a TV show some years back about a physicist who tried to figure out what makes violins sound good. He found a few interesting things.

    High-frequency response depends on the shape of the bridge. All those curly-cues cut into it control the transfer function from the strings to the body.

    Mid-range response depends on the shape of the f-holes in the body. In this range, the bridge is rigid. The strings push on the bridge, and the bridge rocks the portion of the top plate between the f-holes back and fourth so that it radiates sound.

    Bass goes from the strings, through the bridge, down through the sound post to the back panel, and is radiated by the back panel. Stradivarius shaped the back panel of his violins asymmetrically, so that the center of percussion was right where the sound post pushes on the back panel. IIRC, getting the center of percussion under the sound post was a distinguishing characteristic of Stradivarius violins.

  • by fm6 (162816) on Thursday July 03 2008, @10:09AM (#24044431) Homepage Journal

    So, there's some big mystery about Strads that makes them sound better than other violins? Or do people just think they sound better, because a single Strad goes for millions of dollars? Jon Rose adheres to the second theory:

    As any honest violin dealer will tell you (and there are a few) the sound of a violin can be priced in a range from $50 (bad, but playable), to $10,000 (good-sounding) to $20,000 (extremely good tone and projection) to $100,000 (simply over-priced). The rest is snotty-nosed hubris. As has been proven on a number of occasions, most notably by the BBC in 1975, a well-made, top modern violin can sound just as good if not better than the prized golden age models. In a recording studio, behind a screen, the violins of Isaac Stern, Pinchas Zukerman and Charles Beare were played back to them. The instruments were a Strad, a Guarneri del Gesu, a Vuillaume, and a Ronald Praill (a modern instrument less than a year old). None of the esteemed violin experts really had a clue which violin was which. Furthermore, two of them couldn't even tell which was their own instrument. They were left mumbling platitudes about the personal relationship between fiddle and player — bloody obvious if you spend most years of your life playing the violin.

    His full rant here [abc.net.au].

    • by jamrock (863246) on Thursday July 03 2008, @12:34PM (#24047311)
      It's all subjective, and opinions are colored by a variety of factors. Here's a great story from the science blog The Frontal Cortex:

      In 2001, Frederic Brochet, of the University of Bordeaux, conducted two separate and very mischievous experiments. In the first test, Brochet invited 57 wine experts and asked them to give their impressions of what looked like two glasses of red and white wine. The wines were actually the same white wine, one of which had been tinted red with food coloring. But that didn't stop the experts from describing the "red" wine in language typically used to describe red wines. One expert praised its "jamminess," while another enjoyed its "crushed red fruit." Not a single one noticed it was actually a white wine.

      The second test Brochet conducted was even more damning. He took a middling Bordeaux and served it in two different bottles. One bottle was a fancy grand-cru. The other bottle was an ordinary vin du table. Despite the fact that they were actually being served the exact same wine, the experts gave the differently labeled bottles nearly opposite ratings. The grand cru was "agreeable, woody, complex, balanced and rounded," while the vin du table was "weak, short, light, flat and faulty". Forty experts said the wine with the fancy label was worth drinking, while only 12 said the cheap wine was.

      Read the complete article here [scienceblogs.com].

  • by wbtittle (456702) on Thursday July 03 2008, @10:11AM (#24044459) Homepage

    Who alternately and randomly played a strad and a fake strad for an audience and for experts. Turned out that the well made violin was dubbed a strad equally often as the strad even by experts.

    What really makes a strad sound good is the musician playing it.

    How many entry level violin players play a strad?

    There is no magic, there is just LOTS of practice.

  • by Monkey_Genius (669908) on Thursday July 03 2008, @10:11AM (#24044465)
    Why is it that people seem to seek the most complex answer for these type of things? It's the wood. It's the varnish. It's the 'Little Ice Age'. Why not Stradivarius was the best violin craftsmen? Ever. Like other artists before him, he had a unique understanding of how to make this particular instrument and polished his abilities to perfection, the results of which the musicians and listeners still enjoy hundreds of years later.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Why not Stradivarius was the best violin craftsmen? Ever.
      Because there were several other people living in the same town at the same time who made comparable violins.

  • Define the terms.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mtconnol (1170419) on Thursday July 03 2008, @10:54AM (#24045397)
    I agree with some previous posters that the question isn't "What made Stradivarius instruments so great" as much as "how are we defining 'great' in this context?"

    I have played fiddle for 10 years, mostly bluegrass and Irish music. I've also spent time in an orchestra as a clarinet player, as well as a smattering of other instruments. The world of bowed strings and the prices associated with Strad-grade instruments has always astonished me. I can't name another type of musical instrument people are willing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for, and I think there are a couple of factors behind it:

    1. Most classical violinists play in the company of others, i.e. in an orchestra, where 'one-upmanship' can play a big role. If your instrument isn't as expensive as your stand partner's, you might fear the perception that you value your craft less highly! In fact, I'm told some orchestras won't audition players unless their instrument cost a certain (quite high) dollar amount.

    2. I can say as a violin player that the instruments are basically impossible to perform systematic A/B tests with. For example, I can't A/B two different brands of string on my instrument, because changing the strings takes at least 5-10 minutes, by which point my short-term aural memory is already gone. Furthermore, it's next to impossible to change strings without shifting bridge and tailpiece position, both of which affect tone as well. Need some more nails in the coffin? Rosin buildup on the strings and string age also affect the tone _more_ than different brands of strings do. It's a different picture than, for example, factory built electric guitars, where you could set up two identically built solidbody guitars with your A and B stringsets, and (at least within a first order) you could claim equivalence between your two string-testing platforms.

    In the absence of the ability to perform systematic tests, it seems like string players go for a lot of "magic" - $90 sets of strings, rosin with gold flecks in it for "warmer, richer tone" - and a lot of other bullshit, including price-performance equivalence. Like Lotus owners, violinists are usually limited far more by their technique than their instrument (once you get into the 10-20K range), and yet there is still a push to buy the 100K instrument!

    As for the Strad instruments: scientific inquiry into things like wood density, varnish, etc, seems pretty disingenuous if no one can reliably detect the qualities the instruments are supposed to have. If, as the earlier posters mention, Strads can't be reliably detected in double-blind conditions, it seems obvious that any investigation into their unique properties would be chasing one's own tail. Even if there is an amazing, one of a kind Little Ice Age, shipwreck-sunk virgin blood Stradivarius, none of those attributes are relevant if they don't impact the sound. And if "what makes Strads so great" isn't about the sound, then WTF is the point of the investigation? Dense wood really isn't great for its own sake.

    Whew. rant over.

    Find a music teacher. http://www.learningmusician.com/ [learningmusician.com]

  • by infodude (48434) on Thursday July 03 2008, @11:00AM (#24045503) Journal

    That it was the volcanic dust they used to finish rubbing the wood before varnishing, which stayed in the wood to leave a very hard layer under the varnish - it floated my boat.

  • by grizdog (1224414) on Thursday July 03 2008, @11:17AM (#24045799) Homepage
    Over the years, instrument makers have spent considerable time trying to "recreate" the wood that Stradivarius used, to the point of immersing the wood in water with the same mineral composition that the river water had that the logs travelled which probably made their way to Cremona back then. And of course finding wooden items from the same period, and cannibalizing them for their wood to try to make a violin. Obviously, nothing has worked.

    I'm a woodworker and some of my friends have tried to make violins. They all looked good and sounded terrible. It's definitely a tough business.

  • Obviously we aren't there yet, not even close; but in principle the future(possibly even a future some of us will live to see) will hold nanolevel assembly techniques that will allow us to construct objects out of pretty much any material or mixture of materials that plays well with existence. I find it extraordinarily unlikely that the best possible violin is made of some sort of naturally occurring wood, finished with simple hand tools and crude chemistry. How long, though, will we resist such a conclusion?

    The same could be asked of wine. In principle, a team of analytical chemists with the right equipment and no reverence for the past could characterize(and possibly, at some future time, economically duplicate) whatever vintage has the experts drooling this week.
  • by swschrad (312009) on Thursday July 03 2008, @11:32AM (#24046129) Homepage Journal

    for a long, long time now. every real violinmaker has a chunk of heavy old curly maple that was inherited from somewhere, in case they need it to repair a fine old instrument. they tap the wood to determine the density by the sound, like testing for the best watermelon in the bin.

    • by Daimanta (1140543) on Thursday July 03 2008, @09:51AM (#24044119) Journal

      Highly unlikely. Are old paitings worthless because we have high definition movies now? No, because they are considered works of art. This is the same for the Stradivarius.

      • by e4g4 (533831) on Thursday July 03 2008, @10:06AM (#24044371)
        Indeed - and like a great wine, a great violin improves with age. As closely as we might be able to mimic the construction of a Strad as it was 300 years ago, that 300 years is hard to fake.
        • how do you know that the 300 years have improved the sound? a new stradivarius might sound better.
          • by e4g4 (533831) on Thursday July 03 2008, @11:35AM (#24046213)
            It might - we'll have to wait until we can replicate a "new" Stradivarius and compare it to the old ones (of which there are still quite a few kicking around). However, as a string player I can tell you that generally, as an instrument ages (and if it is well taken care of), its sound improves. Seeing as every single (acoustic) violin out there is modeled after the Stradivarius - I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that the same would be true for the genuine article.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Not only a work of art, but a historical artifact, just like Civil War-era keyed bugles, serpents, sackbuts, etc.

    • Not necessarily.

      I know this is anecdotal, but I've a violin that's my grandmother's, which was her mother's (I think). It's very old, and German, and is a pleasure to play.

      I also have several new violins that have been modeled after the really good old ones (including one that's modeled after a Bolshoi instrument [wikipedia.org]). Now, the new ones sound fabulous, no doubt, but the old ones still have an ineffable quality to them that makes the music stand out.

      For the longest time I thought this was psychological, but I've played both kinds of violins to friends and family with no music knowledge, and almost always, people say that the older violin just sounds richer. Even more interesting is the fact that the strings (both violin and bowstrings) are all quite new, so it most certainly is the body.

      Secondly, it is also the collector's value - you have some excellent replicas of some of the world's most famous paintings, perhaps in better quality and in better resolution. However, that hardly diminishes the value of the original.

      Do I enjoy playing my new violins? Hell yeah. In fact, I've some with fixed microphones inside which makes it easier for me to make recordings and the like (this is a problem because appropriate placing of mics inside a violin is hard, without affecting the harmonics, and there are some violins that take this into consideration).

      And while some of my new violins can certainly take a beating, while I'm scared shitless of doing anything to my grandmother's violin. That does not mean that it diminishes the value of the old one - if anything, it makes it a delicate, valuable item.

    • Did anybody else hear the theme from Deliverance while reading that?

      Q: What's the difference between a violin and a fiddle?

      A: People actually like fiddle music!

      There was a world class concert violinist (don't remember his name, it has been several years ago) who said he tried to learn to play the fiddle. "Turkey in the Straw is Mozart played real fast with extra notes!" he siad.