Andres Sender

Although she has borrowed a Strad once or twice (was it for some of the Mozart recordings?), her instrument has been the Pesarini since the Bach recordings. Before that she used an instrument by a modern maker whose name escapes me. There was a recording long ago. It did not flatter the arrangement.

This is perhaps another option. It's been mentioned here before, price seems in the ballpark, and you may find reviews of it here. https://www.dictum.com/en/bending-irons-jbp/bending-iron-with-digital-temperature-control-violin-703921

Self-selected for doubt. Therefore not even remotely representative.

This thread confuses multiple issues into a big mishmash. I suggest Rue narrow the specifics. Are we talking about all instances of labels that do not reflect the maker of an instrument? If not, which subset are we talking about? If any of the latter, recognize that labeling is a completely separate issue from seller representations as to who made an instrument. Which issue do you want to discuss? If you want to talk about seller dishonesty, be sure to notice that similar misrepresentations occur in any field in which it is possible. Then we can get down to addressing this widespread fact of life. We will have to discuss laws, law enforcement, law enforcement budgets, lawsuits (yes you got there quickly, well done) and the accessibility of expertise.

I doubt there are any. You can figure out a fair amount from the portfolio on the birdseye 1740 (?) violin which I think used to be for sale at Cremonabooks (?) (There's a 3/4 view of the top.) I used to be fascinated by this maker a million years ago. You would not go far wrong basing your arching off the 1666 (?) Nicolo Amati drawing from The Strad.

It can be "none is" but "none are" is equally correct.

None are as dangerous as a mind that has not learned how to think.

The article is not an outlier. It reflects an influential broader cultural movement which is growing quickly. It can't be dismissed with simple appeals to common sense--because it is an evolution from ideas about morality and knowledge that have been woven into our culture for a long time. If 'the underdog' is your standard of value in ethics; or you believe that objectivity is a false idol, then you are part of the historical current of which this article is just one symptom. To that extent you won't be able to fight the underlying movement because your arguments will be self-contradictory. Such arguments are easy for a cultural movement to topple on its path to change. They are just part of the process, they are cobblestones rather than barricades. If you want to oppose this movement, then you'll want to educate yourself about its foundations, and carefully consider the various arguments and fundamental ideas of the public intellectuals who are attempting to challenge it.

I expect it has it, but since it's not specified it probably reflects "recommended drinking temperature" which some sources have at 130-160 Fahrenheit, and my guess would be this thing hovers widely at the low end of the scale.

Pegs are flipped too.

Thanks for the correction. Blues instruction is also found in a lot of books. Improvisation is not a dirty word here. Hmm, something else must be going on.

Gently, without pain or tension, without forcing, as slowly at first as necessary, perform movements with your fingers (on a table, perhaps) that are as close as you can get to the way you would like them to behave on the violin. Just focus on what your fingers can do, how much independence they actually have, and what you can do in a very relaxed way. This is about learning fine motor control of your fingers, and getting used to the feeling of relaxation. Then transfer this feeling to the violin. You won't be able to be that relaxed all the time on the violin, but try to find ways to stay in orbit around that feeling, and return to it when possible. Watch out for instances in which you are introducing tension unnecessarily on the violin, i.e. when it is not buying you anything. Tension is like an important nutrient that is also a poison in large doses. Use it to make musical things happen, but don't waste it on things that don't matter. Sympathetic movement of the fingers is indeed normal and fine, but your description is a little vague and sounds a bit like you might have a lot of tension going on. Strength is great too, as it increases the range of what you can do in a relaxed way.

Funny how someone with an axe to grind just happens not to think of the fact that jazz and second language education are both overflowing with textbooks and reference books.

Current divisions in music teaching strike many people as artificial. I think there's something in that, but it is also true that cultural traditional arts and skills tend to develop specialized knowledge relevant to their value set which does not exist in other traditions. While it would be fantastic to approach teaching music in such a fundamental and general way that one had a compatible and flexible base point from which to fully comprehend any musical tradition, that sort of phenomenon (a Grand Unified Theory of music?) isn't going to spring into existence by order. It may come into being through the efforts of one or more great minds. In the meantime, different musical traditions currently can't contend fully with each other. In other words, you need really good jazz training to be in a position to do jazz at a high level. You need really good classical training to be in a position to do classical music at a high level. I would hate to see the fine points of great music get lost in the rush to 'egalitarianize' music. In the short run, musical training can become stagnant (one of many possible effects) due to forces which distort the market for education. In the long run, musical training will come to reflect the culture it is happening in, for better and for worse.