martin swan

Members
  • Content Count

    10170
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Everything posted by martin swan

  1. Everything about a Bultitude is "just so" - he was an incredibly precise worker and he didn't make that mortise. Bow makers use templates and always use the same tools for the same jobs, and the mortises always look the same. Where I am at with this bow is ... 1. I don't believe the button is Bultitude, since the first ring of the button is always short, generally the second cut of the collar is very pronounced, and the buttons tend to be marginally fuller than the sticks. 2. The brand is curiously wonky for Bultitude, who was pretty obsessive about such things .... 3. The
  2. I agree that this isn't very important. I think it would be more helpful to discuss the entire bow rather than just one small area, otherwise we are in danger of discussing how many angels there are on the head of a pin.
  3. You can get it for £5 less on his website : https://www.ksblutherie.com/instruments
  4. Let's see the rest of the bow ...
  5. The principal point about the mortise on Philip's bow is that it's too short. If someone had whittled out the end with a gouge or a knife it would be longer than normal, not shorter.
  6. I don't quite think the bow is authentic - there were other details that were off, the adjuster, the size and orientation of the "tudor rose" - but I'm really not sure and I would recommend you post the other photos here. It wouldn't have a Hill marking on the faceplate since Bultitude only used the rose frog decoration after he left Hills. I can't see how the skanky routered mortise can be the result of a repair unless there is new wood between the serial number and the "England" stamp, and I don't see any. Besides, if someone was clever enough to insert new wood almost invisibly, w
  7. On Philip's bow the A of ENGLAND takes up more room. However, I don't think this is terribly important as these stamps are quite varied, The important thing is the size and shape of the mortise and the way it's made. The only way Philip's bow could be genuine is if there's a piece in the bottom facet with a new mortise ...
  8. That Vuillaume presented copies of fine Cremonese violins at the Paris exhibition of 1827 is well-known, but what does it have to do with your violin?
  9. Yours has a rather short mortise that seems to have been formed with a router, and the "serial number" should indicate the year of manufacture. I would want to see the rest of the bow before thinking that it might be a Bultitude ...
  10. I'm also not understanding what you're asking. If you look carefully at the label in your violin and the label no. 3 from your original post you will see that they are not the same. Your label is an apocryphal label, a loose copy of the Vuillaume label but with different typesetting and punctuation. I don't see how a discussion of genuine Vuillaume labels and genuine Vuillaume violins/fiddles is in any way relevant.
  11. Agree - bears no relation to ay kind of Vuillaume. Labels are really the last thing to look at in any violin.
  12. I think you should also bear in mind that over 99% of the violins with Vuillaume labels aren't "copies" of Vuillaumes, but simply violins with a spurious Vuillaume label. There are some Laberte instruments that could be conceived as being made in the style/manner of Vuillaume, but these are few and far between, and they aren't really copies either - more they incorporate a certain approach to varnish/antique-ing.
  13. If you've gone to all that effort of tooling a brand or two and formatting a fake label, might as well make good use of it ...
  14. I would send it back and report the seller to Ebay for fraud - it was described as Italian, no two ways about it ...
  15. Yes, one of several IDs - a serial re-labeller and brander. Or more likely a safe outlet for someone else's dirty work, since that's how the French underground trade tends to operate. The original violin looks like it could be something from the Apparut workshop/stable but it's been truly buggered about. Nothing to do with Corsini or any Italian maker. Sadly this violin would be worth more without all the stupid add-ons.
  16. It's a lot easier to set a neck accurately if the fingerboard is in place.
  17. OK - this label was used by a number of Mirecourt factories/dealerships, but the date on the label doesn't relate to the date of manufacture. Normally there's a brand on the button - can't see it here but maybe it's worn.
  18. Do you have a physical address for the owner? I would try snailmail if you haven't already ...
  19. I can't speak for JTL specifically but in Mirecourt violins it's uncommon, though it does imply a lower grade of instrument and suggests the date more likely to be post WW1
  20. Looks like a decent Mirecourt/JTL violin from the early 1900s, and in good condition apart from some dunts to the varnish. What does the label actually say?
  21. I don't recommend you wander into any bow restorer's workshop!
  22. No downsides in my view as long as the hook doesn't have any sharp edges ...
  23. The first thing to say is that the violin has nothing to do with Gand & Bernardel, or with any member of the Gand family. I went through the same thought process as Jacob - the back length and the very distinctive sharp edge cry out early 19th C Mirecourt, yet the scroll isn't right and usually these Nicolas/Duchene type violins have a plainer varnish and quite distinctive upright f-holes with a spot of fluting. However, it's not difficult to modify a scroll, flatten out the eyes and add a bit of blacking. Given that someone has bothered to get inside this violin and add a Gand &
  24. It looks a lot better than most ...