this was kind of interesting, but possibly misguided. I think their goal is to somewhat increase response and projection while keeping the tonal character of the instruments. Otherwise, they could just put higher bridges and replace the Pirazzis and Jargars (strings) with, say, higher gauge steelcore Preludes, the idea being to increase string tension and breakover angle at the bridge to increase downward force at the bridge. Likewise, heavier bow, more hairs, and make sure the shoulder rest is not damping the back plate at all. But except for the last, these will markedly change the attack and tone, or the heavier bow will throw off the players' technique. Also i think the Russian right hand technique lends itself to more volume but more laborious bow recoveries. I'll have to look at Galamian's book about that [2]

If anybody's interested, you can try to understand Strobel's userful measurements [1]. for my student violin and viola I more or less gave up, and just defer to my luthier's bridge and soundpost intuition.

_____________

finally, there's the ergonomic viola with substantially larger top and back plates, for greater projection[3]. i don't think i've ever seen one played. String players are a conservative lot.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Useful-Measurements-Violin-Makers-Refe...

[2] http://www.sharmusic.com/Sheet-Music/Violin/Etudes-47-Studie...

[3] http://www.rivinus-instruments.com/Pellegrina.htm