Martin McClean

Members
  • Content Count

    168
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Martin McClean

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

4982 profile views
  1. I used to write a few bits and pieces inside the top. I always finished by saying, "work carefully, I'm standing behind you".
  2. I don't see it to be honest. The varnish on yours looks different in terms of colour, texture and wear. The fs are radically different and there's not much similarity in terms of edgework or corners.
  3. I see some similarities in the scroll, though yours seems to have been subjected to some enthusiastic planing? However the varnish, fs and corners look to be from a completely different hand and school.
  4. The photo is a little deceptive here, there is virtually no varnish left- if anything the wood appears burnished.
  5. Good morning blank face. You have me opening my workshop on a Sunday morning- I suspect you're right about the label, and I apologise for my response. The label has been there since at least the 1970s, a little research reveals it to bear a resemblance one in the jalovec book- also dated 1803!
  6. It's a sad day when a mint condition (almost) perfect example of a historically significant violin doesn't raise an eyebrow. You can forget about seeing my Amati.
  7. Does this help? (Apologies for the photography)
  8. Thanks Martin. The scroll is definitely original to the instrument, that's not to say they weren't made in separate shops. The varnish is more chestnut /golden brown and not particularly chippy. My photography leaves a lot to be desired! I agree re the button and purfling. The interior is neat and tidy with carefully orientated grain in the block wood etc.
  9. Thanks gents. I thought it was distinctive and good enough to belong to a definite school or shop.
  10. Not the squared off corners though?