mmmm

Forgive me for resurrecting this old thread, but I bought one of those inexpensive 'snake' endoscope cameras on eBay to try and take photos inside my violin without taking the top off...and I'm here to report, not surprisingly, that those things don't work too well. Impossible to position and/or get a long view so that things could be seen in context. I managed to cull together a few close up photos, but not sure if it'll reveal anything conclusory to the experts...

Yes you're right, Televet, my post was ill conceived (and/or stupid). I guess I was responding to a first time poster and should have written (if anything) make sure you try before you buy! But of course, the scroll is here for opinions both during and after auctions. My bad!

I suspect I'm not alone in feeling uneasy about extensive reviews of items at auction before the sale...I don't think it's against the rules of this forum, but there is the potential for all kinds of misdirection, well intended or not...imho.

I wonder who is suing the garage, the owners directly - or the owner's insurance company, assuming the violin was insured?

Well I promise to post some pictures of the insides as soon as I have someone take the top off...or if I can borrow a sneaky camera with a light ;). Till then, here's another lame attempt with my iPhone to try and get some better pictures of the ribs going into the back, etc...

I believe the neck is grafted...

That is hilarious...(re: the Hills). I really should have someone at least fix up those cracks, and if I ever have the top taken off I will photograph the cr*p out of it. Until then, is there a particular shadowy bit that I can try and capture? I was hoping and thinking it was a Thier violin of some sort. I sure wish you had a shop here in NYC Jacob ;).

The Hills serial number on the fingerboard identifies it as "French Mirecourt 1780" which surprises me, as I didn't think it was French. Anyway, I'm just curious as to what it might actually be...

Yes it was

Dear experts (and others ;), I recently acquired this violin which is truly excellent sounding...and I'm wondering if any of you had some thoughts on origin or even maker. It has a label inside which I assume is bogus: "Mathias Thier, fecit, Viennae Anno 17..." It also has a W.E.Hill and Sons stamp on the fingerboard G738 (which I guess may, or may not, refer to the violin). I've seen what the Hills wrote about it, but thought I'd get some opinions before revealing that. Thanks in advance! And apologies for my louy pictures...

Ha, I think a Nemessanyi certificate would complicate the Del Gesu fantasy. This could have been intentionally withheld by the seller, so it's possible Tarisio never saw it. In anycase, would be interested to hear opinions on how it sounds, if anyone plays it. All in all, it's safe to say this violin has disappointed it's owners in one way or another ;).

Check the condition report...

I agree completely...I've looked at bows on auction sites that seemed amazing, then tried them. Invariably, one ends up either falling in love with something else or nothing at all. If you're a player, a picture just isn't enough!

If you tried a hundred bows, and none of them matched what you are looking for - it's hard to believe a stab in the dark could hit the bullseye. Try a hundred more, you'll get there!

I think when they say circa 1942 and the label says 1942 they are all but saying they think it's legit...but, just a strong inference.