skiingfiddler

Back some time ago, a violinist gave a recital of the Bach Partita 2, all movements, including the Chaconne. The first 4 movements were a smarmy indulgence in "look at me," with lots of extraneous body movements, rubato. The player seemed to be displaying themself more than the music. Then the player got to the Chaconne and a transformation occurred. The extraneous body movements disappeared along with the rubato, and the player just stood there, playing what Bach wanted, nothing more. The player's Chaconne was mesmerizing and completely swept you away. The Chaconne made an honest musician out of that performer instead of the self-indulgent performer of the first 4 movements. The Chaconne is too hard and mentally demanding to play any other way.

Don Noon, A Del Gesu model doesn't have to be gnarly. A Del Gesu model can be as clean as any Strad model. Here's a Del Gesu from Jan Spidlen: http://spidlen.com/cz-en/galerie/jan/jbs12-op82.php?l=cz Granted, this seems to have a bit of shading, or maybe the varnish is so soft that it wares quickly. But it's not hard to imagine that fiddle with an absolutely straight varnish, in addition to that very clean outline and f-holes. My point is that a maker doesn't have to give up the idea of making a clean, precise, symmetrical instrument with a straight varnish in choosing to make Del Gesus.

The differences between straight line, caliper measurements and flexible tape measurements over the arching are surprisingly small, although, given the standardization of what the dimensions of a newly made violin should be, those differences can be important. A while back I did some measurements with both caliper and tape on the 4 or 5 instruments I have to see what the differences were. Off the top of my head the differences were (all measurements taken of backs still attached): Upper bout: with caliper, shorter by about 1mm, or less, than with tape. Middle bout: shorter by about 3 to 4 mm . Some people on Maetronet have reported differences of 5 mm. Lower bout: shorter by about 1 mm. Length: shorter by about 1 maybe 2 mm. This is measuring from the bass side of the neck button straight down to the edge at the bottom, the same distance from the center line as where one is measuring at the top. I should double check these numbers, but what I distinctly remember is that the middle bout gave you the biggest difference as an absolute number and, of course, as a percentage. The other differences were almost not worth worrying about unless you were going to worry about a 1 mm difference. In doing these measurements, you would want to calibrate your tape and caliper to each other. Maybe, say, the tape measures 1 mm shorter on a straight line than does the caliper. I did not notice any great difference between my tape and caliper on a straight line, but I wasn't extremely careful of checking that.

I can think of one very good reason not to oil gut or any other strings: The oil would get on the bow hair, and then you have to replace or clean the hair. That is my conjecture. I've never oiled the many gut core strings (metal wrapped gut) I used a lot decades ago, and that is the reason why.

Hope some questions from a non-maker about measuring arching heights are ok. What distances are used for arching height measurement? I assume that one point is the highest point in the plate arching. But what do you measure down to?: The surface that the plate would be sitting on if it were detached and lying on that surface? (In other words, is the thickness of the plate included in the arching height?) The outside surface of the plate at its lowest point? (You're not including plate thickness.) If you are not including the plate thickness in the arching height, where on the plate surface do you measure down to?: Where the plate is thickest, probably at the edges, or more inward, in the channel, where the plate would be thinner?

Stephen, Thanks for that tip, and thanks for your willingness to offer help throughout this thread. I will search for examples.

Jacob, Nobody's trying to convince you to become a consignment dealer. I would hope that you would allow others to do consignment selling if they wish.

I don't regard it as a favor. It's a business transaction in which I can get my property sold, and the dealer (the consignee) is compensated typically by 20% to 30% of the selling price. The dealer has no property at risk, while possibly earning a sizable sum. As others have mentioned, consignment selling is an acceptable business model, at least in the USA, offering advantages to both consigner and consignee. My questions about a consignment agreement is what it should look like so that this business transaction gets done to both the consigner's and consignee's satisfaction.

Jacob, I assume your reference to a "draft contract" is to my outline in the initial post, and not specifically to Stephen Perry's old contract. Either way, it sounds like you, in no way, would do something that is pretty common here in USA, consignment selling. Is there any consignment selling in Austria at all by dealers who aren't auction houses? Any you know of in Europe? I assume the only response you could offer a violin owner who wants to sell an instrument is to buy the instrument outright from them. That's fair enough.

Stephen, I realize that "fair market value" is ambiguous. I assume that that could be resolved by having a line in the contract: "Fair market value is _________." Alternatively, one can use another term. If the proposed addition were to appear in your old contract, I assume that addition would make reference to "minimum sale price." The addition in your old contract would thus read: "Prior to the dealer ending ownership of their business or prior to the dealer beginning the process of declaring bankruptcy, the dealer agrees to return to the consigner the consigner's property or the minimum sale price established in item 2" The wording, I leave to lawyers, but the idea was to hopefully get the instrument back before a shop closes or goes bankrupt. In line with Jacob's thinking, I was afraid that there is no inoculation for the consigner against bankruptcy. There is no way to force a dealer to deal with return of instruments before closing its doors. Would the UCC-1 force a dealer to return instruments before filing for bankruptcy? Would there be any harm in having both the above proposed addition to a consignment agreement in the consignment contract and doing the UCC-1? Does that create any conflict? The proposed addition would at least remind the dealer what' the consigner expects of the dealer.

Philip, I found another address for Geigenbau Winterling in the town of Walsrode, south of Hamburg and east of Bremen. https://finde-offen.de/walsrode/geigenbau-winterling-gmbh-1921654 Apparently, they moved out of Hamburg into a town of 23,000. Can that be right?

Stephen, Does the part I quoted from your post indicate that you believe the following proposed addition to a consignment agreement would be acceptable and enforceable in a consignment agreement? (I took the proposal from my post on Manfio's thread.) Proposed addition to consignment agreement: "Prior to the dealer ending ownership of their business or prior to the dealer beginning the process of declaring bankruptcy, the dealer agrees to return to the consigner the consigner's property or its fair market value." i don't want to appear anonymously, here, while you are being quite open. I know nothing formally about law. Many thanks, Steven Csik

Stephen Perry, Many thanks for that form. That answers a lot of my questions. I'm surprised by item 7, risk of loss. That item makes the consigner responsible for any damages while the instrument is with the dealer. I would have thought that shop insurance, rather than owner's insurance, would cover that. That leads me to believe a consigner had better check with consigner's insurance to see if consigner's insurance would cover the instrument in the shop. That, or seek another consignee, who is willing to insure the instrument while in the shop. In a contract like the one, above, I wonder which insurance would cover the instrument while it's out on trial. I'm guessing it would not be the dealer's (consignee's) insurance, if the dealer doesn't want to insure the instrument while it's in the shop. The more I think about it, the less I like item 7. I wonder if it's typical. Anyway, thanks again. Would you be willing to elaborate on the changes you would like to make?

PhilipKT, Back in the late 1960s, one of prominent violin shops in Hamburg was the Winterling shop. That was 50 years ago, so I have no idea how the shop is doing today. But that might be a place to look in. The maker Georg Winterling passed away in the 1st half of the 20th century, but the shop, in the late 1960s, still carried his name. Here's the website, but it's all in German: https://www.geigenbau-winterling.de The current name is "Geigenbau Winterling." How do foreign buyers in Europe these days deal with the VAT (value added tax)? Are they exempt if they're just passing through?

deans, Thanks for the tips. I will definitely seek clarity on allowing or not allowing set up modifications. I hadn't thought about using auctions. I might consider using one dedicated to string instruments and related items only. That might be a good place to sell the books, too. That deserves further research. My concern about auctions with public viewings is the idea I have that there isn't any oversight about how potential customers are handling the instruments. Any stranger can walk in and handle an instrument. (At least that's been my experience with the auctions I've been to, but those weren't auctions associated with major auction houses.) At least with an instrument on consignment, possible buyers go through some kind of filtering process by having a dealer present the instrument to them.