Jump to content
Maestronet Forums


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Ratcliffiddles

  • Birthday 04/22/1961

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    UK Brighton

Recent Profile Visitors

15950 profile views

Ratcliffiddles's Achievements


Enthusiast (5/5)

  1. I think they may have mentioned the earliest ring on the one piece front, which is impressive at 1297, but actually useless when it comes to the important information which is the latest ring.
  2. That one was very actually close , with a latest ring date of 1567, and had a small wing, suggesting that the wood wasn't quite wide enough, and also suggesting that this date was very close to the felling date.
  3. BF, what you say above, in my experience, is not the norm but the exceptions. Most ( maybe over 80%) Mittenwald 18th century have fairly fresh, or very fresh wood.
  4. Just to correct, wood used in the Low Countries, between about 1650 and 1720 is generally super specific, and for that period, dendro cross-matching can be extremely useful, as many Dutch have been re-labelled, and sold as Italians. After 1720, the wood looses all specificity as far as I can gather, so if it is is mid-18th century Dutch, dendro may found a date for the wood and possible wood provenance, but not much else. To be honest, the wood choice on that front doesn't look great, so I am unsure a test would even give a date.
  5. Well, you didn't look very hard, as there clearly is a label. What does it say?
  6. It has a certain English early 19th century look about it. It's not the one that was attributed to George Panormo, age 6?
  7. I meant the model, common French wide, often long, and as BlankFace mentioned, it was used by various workshops. Very often with one-piece backs, also often with excellent one-piece front of Swiss provenance, I can't quite tell on this one, but it looks like it could be one-piece. I don't suppose the stamp in this case is of any relevance.
  8. It looks like one of those Mirecourt "Didier Nicolas" model thing after someone has had a go at the inner curve of the ff-holes ( not successfully, and also thinned the neck. Is it long ( 361mm+?)
  9. I would personally worry about the orientation of the pores in the final part of the stick, which looks like they are at 45 degrees to the stick. But then, it's still in one piece!...
  10. Don't think so. Unstamped almost certainly because of run-out. Almost surprised it's still in one piece!
  11. No doubts it's a "Trouser-leg" Hill bow. "Walked out" of workshop before stamping or they felt it wasn't quite up to standard
  12. I see doubling, but don't think the top half is replaced. Same on the front, but no evidence, as far as I can see, that the model has been tampered with/ cut down. There are normally clues, which I cannot see here.
  13. Ratcliffiddles


    Sharper profile of the head without angles, and with part of the stick would help, but from what I see, I would be optimistic, and the brand from under the lapping looks ok to me. Does it have a frog and screw?
  • Create New...