Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Fotios

Members
  • Posts

    121
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
    Zlín

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Fotios's Achievements

Member

Member (3/5)

  1. I think you misread the first name - you are probably thinking of Georg Wörnle, who was spelled in Latin as Georgius on the labels. According to encyclopedias (e.g. Lütgendorff) he worked in Mittenwald around 1760 and is considered a good maker (see attached photo for Lütgendorff's entry). Other information on the history of violin making in Mittenwald can be found on the website of the Geigenbaumuseum Mittenwald: https://www.geigenbaumuseum-mittenwald.de. There you can also find contact details of experts who can tell you more.
  2. I'd like to meet someone like that.
  3. I was not so much referring to the nationality of the Schönbach inhabitants as to the style and origin of construction of Schönbach violins. After all, who can say for sure that this violin is from Schönbach and not from Klingenthal?
  4. Such a little ugly duckling. Something that is usually referred on this forum as "bohemian fiddle", although it is actually a German ... But there's no denying that it has its own "character".
  5. Certainly - violins could have been made before WWI and exported as late as the 1920s. I have no idea how quickly trade with the United States took off after the war.
  6. In September 1919, when the Treaty of Saint Germain was concluded, Czechoslovakia had already been in existence for almost a year - it came into being in October 1918. The Great Powers had already de facto recognised its creation in June-September 1918. The violin looks like a classic mass production from Schönbach (Luby) at the beginning of the 20th century. Of course, exports to the United States did not work during World War I, this violin must have been imported to the States after 1918. So the label therefore fully corresponds to the situation.
  7. The violin on Corilon.com is obviously an example of the "better" class of instruments I was talking about - see workmanship and material. That's not the case with your violin. As far as your violin is concerned, I don't see any serious problem other than the crack at the saddle, which should definitely be repaired or it will get bigger. Whether it makes sense to take it to a violin maker is for you to judge.
  8. The company František L. Duchoň - výroba hudebních nástrojů (production of musical instruments) in Náchod is mainly known for the production of harmonicas, but he also "produced" other instruments, including violins. He probably bought white violins from Schönbach, at least violin boxes, as other manufacturers and even some violin makers did at that time (for production of cheap instruments). Anyway, I have seen much nicer violins with his markings, for which I would expect a significant share of finishing work than the example of the violins published here. Your favourite Jalovec (Czech Violin Makers) states that a trained violin maker from Schönbach worked for him. Since this was the custom of similar manufacturers at the time (see Prokop and Lídl mentioned above), I have no reason to disbelieve him.
  9. František L. Duchoň was a manufacturer of musical instruments, not a violin maker. Although he often referred to himself on labels as a master violin maker. He opened his workshop in Náchod (East Bohemia) in 1913 and production continued there until about 1939. An unknown violin maker from Schönbach was engaged in the production of violins at Duchoň. This was a similar model to that used by other major Czech musical instrument manufacturers, such as Josef Lídl in Brno or Ladislav F. Prokop in Chrudim. They employed trained violin makers, mostly from Schönbach, for violin making. I have seen several different violins marked with the label František L. Duchoň, some of them very nice. Evidently, he produced violins of different quality classes - from cheap school instruments indistinguishable from the violins from Schönbach of that time, to almost masterful instruments. Your violin, however, is a common cheap instrument.
  10. Excuse me, but if you claim that the handwriting of the persons the conscripts refer to can be seen on the conscripts, and you fail to understand that these records were written by the hand of a police officer, then I have no further comment on the level of your archival erudition. These entries have nothing whatsoever to do with violin labels.
  11. http://digi.nacr.cz/prihlasky2/?action=link&ref=czarch:CZ-100000010:874&karton=193&folium=23 Are these "your notes"?
  12. It is a fact that Jalovec is now outdated literature. In addition, he is unreliable in his encyclopedias of foreign violin makers (Italian, German and Austrian). However, as far as Czech violin makers are concerned, it is an objective fact that more reference material has passed through his hands than anyone else on this forum. So, with your kind permission, I will keep my confidence in Jalovec regarding Czech instruments. As for "objective arguments" - the objective fact is that an argument is not a simple assertion by anyone without any supporting evidence or proof. The only thing that came close to an objective argument was Jacob's pointing out the fact that E. E. Homolka used printed labels. However, as Jalovec attests, he also used handwritten labels. The rest is just your belief, not objective fact. It is also an objective fact that prolonging this discussion is a sheer waste of time. For my part, I consider it closed.
  13. I did not claim that the label I mentioned is original, as I have only seen it in a photograph. I said that the label that is the subject of this thread is not necessarily a fake. I think that makes a bit of a difference. I'd be careful with categorical statements like "it's fake like a $3 bill" for which you've provided no objective argument. Did I say something else? I have no explanation for this. Probably Homolka occasionally used both orders of first names, as evidenced by another handwritten label published by K. Jalovec in his book Čeští houslaři. However, on the label that is the subject of this thread the order of the names is quite correct. I used the label which I advertised primarily to compare manuscripts. I dare say I have spent an order of magnitude more time in the Czech archives than you have. And that's probably why I'd be careful with categorical statements.
  14. I'd say the label doesn't necessarily have to be fake. The fact is that the word in question in the second line would be "Vineae" and refers to Homolka's residence in Královské Vinohrady (Kgl. Weinberge in German, i.e. Royal Vineyards), which is a city district (formerly a separate municipality) in Prague. The strange "thing" in front of this word is probably an abbreviation of "Regiis", i.e. Royal. E.E. Homolka probably did not create many instruments. I accidentally found one of his violins with a label on the internet - see photo. Whether it is genuine I cannot say, but the handwriting looks the same and very similar to the writings posted in the quoted thread.
×
×
  • Create New...