Has anyone here ever experimented with cutting a soundhole in either a skin or synthetic head, a la the Van Eps Recording banjos?
The players in this 1910s photo seem to have found some benefit doing this. No doubt the reason was to increase sound projection.
Edited by - vintagetenor on 12/05/2024 11:08:06
Sorry, I posted this, because the picture wasn't showing at first , but now it is in your post. I cannot delete it for some reason…
Edited by - Emiel on 12/05/2024 11:12:59
Fad. It does nothing for the banjo. Van Eps stopped using it.
Sound is produced by the head surface. It doesn't squirt out the soundhole.
Thanks for your help, Emiel.
It took me a couple of attempts to get the photo to show.
Thanks, Marc. I suppose that if there were some kind of backing as with the Van Eps "dish", there might be some projection but probably not of all of the sound that a standard resonator projects.
"Has anyone here ever experimented with cutting a soundhole"
Here on the Hangout, unlikely but Don Reno did for a while - didn't catch on though.
quote:
Originally posted by trapdoor2Fad. It does nothing for the banjo. Van Eps stopped using it.
Sound is produced by the head surface. It doesn't squirt out the soundhole.
Didn't Van Eps ditch it after the advent of electric recording? As far as I'm aware, he only used the hole-in-the-head for cutting acoustic recordings. He used a regular head while performing.
quote:
Originally posted by csacwpquote:
Originally posted by trapdoor2Fad. It does nothing for the banjo. Van Eps stopped using it.
Sound is produced by the head surface. It doesn't squirt out the soundhole.Didn't Van Eps ditch it after the advent of electric recording? As far as I'm aware, he only used the hole-in-the-head for cutting acoustic recordings. He used a regular head while performing.
I seem to recall reading that.
The hole should actually reduce sound production but the reality is that our perception is based on all our engaged senses. If it looks really cool, we may perceive an unheard benefit. If our brain likes it for any reason, we may perceive an unheard benefit. This is one of the fundamental concepts of marketing. You can sell ice cubes to Inuits. 
In the 80s there was a Cox head with a hole in it.Don Reno was using them so I took a series 1 Fiberskyn head and cut a 2" hole in it.
I didn't like the Fiberskyn as bought,but after cutting the hole I performed on stage with it for around 6 months.
I found it to mic very well at the hole.
quote:
Originally posted by trapdoor2quote:
Originally posted by csacwpquote:
Originally posted by trapdoor2Fad. It does nothing for the banjo. Van Eps stopped using it.
Sound is produced by the head surface. It doesn't squirt out the soundhole.Didn't Van Eps ditch it after the advent of electric recording? As far as I'm aware, he only used the hole-in-the-head for cutting acoustic recordings. He used a regular head while performing.
I seem to recall reading that.
The hole should actually reduce sound production but the reality is that our perception is based on all our engaged senses. If it looks really cool, we may perceive an unheard benefit. If our brain likes it for any reason, we may perceive an unheard benefit. This is one of the fundamental concepts of marketing. You can sell ice cubes to Inuits.
The Recording Banjos I've played that have the hole and the dish reflector had a brighter, more present sound better suited for cutting cylinders and 78s. I wouldn't write these features off as a gimmick. That said, the "in the room" sound they produced was unpleasant compared to that of Van Eps banjos with regular heads and Farmer tone rings (no dish).
Every once in a while someone tries putting holes in banjo heads again. The fact that it has never caught on says something to me.
Musical instruments have been made for thousands of years, and many have had the same relative form for at least hundreds of years even though "innovations" come and go.
The things that work stay around and the things that don't work fall by the wayside, generally to be forgotten and tried again. Anything we can think of has probably been tried before, and we usually don't know about it.
quote:
Originally posted by csacwpquote:
Originally posted by trapdoor2quote:
Originally posted by csacwpquote:
Originally posted by trapdoor2Fad. It does nothing for the banjo. Van Eps stopped using it.
Sound is produced by the head surface. It doesn't squirt out the soundhole.Didn't Van Eps ditch it after the advent of electric recording? As far as I'm aware, he only used the hole-in-the-head for cutting acoustic recordings. He used a regular head while performing.
I seem to recall reading that.
The hole should actually reduce sound production but the reality is that our perception is based on all our engaged senses. If it looks really cool, we may perceive an unheard benefit. If our brain likes it for any reason, we may perceive an unheard benefit. This is one of the fundamental concepts of marketing. You can sell ice cubes to Inuits.
The Recording Banjos I've played that have the hole and the dish reflector had a brighter, more present sound better suited for cutting cylinders and 78s. I wouldn't write these features off as a gimmick. That said, the "in the room" sound they produced was unpleasant compared to that of Van Eps banjos with regular heads and Farmer tone rings (no dish).
I'll stick with "gimmick". I've played them (even back when I could hear), didn't note any difference. I've seen them on bluegrass banjos and clawhammer banjos as well. Meh. I do think the hole might indeed mic differently (esp. with a resonator/reflector)...but even moving the mic around to different spots on the head makes a marked difference.
You are far more sensitive to these things than I am...but I cannot believe that 'brighter, more present' was even perceptible in an acoustic cylinder recording. There are just too many variables to assign anything like that to a specific cause. Van Eps heard something, of course (and you do too) but in the end, it isn't worth the trouble.
Yes, I modified an early Iida banjo into a full double resonator banjo a few years ago. I couldn't justify the cost of a Rickard so I conjured up my own version and incorporated a fair sizable hole in the original plastic head. I reinforced the head by using a 'grill' that I had left over from a cigar box project that I did for my Grandson. The results were affordably 'resophonic ish'. It was an interesting winter project and satisfied my curiosity. I get it out from time to time to amuse my Grandson.
A sound hole in any instrument does two things, 1) project the sound toward a specific direction, 2) creates a Helmholtz resonator effect (in simple terms, similar effect as blowing across the top of a beer bottle - it creates a deeper resonant tone). Neither of these would work if there was no back on the instrument (ie. Would not work on an openback banjo).
I used my "holey head" on my StewMac "Vintage" kit when I first built it in '86.
I hoped that with the crossed fibers construction of the Fiberskyn head it wouldn't need reinforcement under tension.
It went as tight as I wanted to take it and it opened up the sound of that extra heavy head.
Steve Cox of Hiwassee VA patented a banjo head with a sound hole. You may be able to Google it. It was named a Cox Head. I used to have a picture of Don Reno playing a banjo with one on it. It just didn't catch on at the time.
