Delabo

Members
  • Content Count

    1173
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Delabo

  • Rank
    Enthusiast

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Looks like a bigger, wider violin, has been cut down, or maybe a viola was reduced.
  2. its amazing what a man with lump of wood and a penknife can whittle.
  3. The photos have quite good resolution, they allow blowing up the photo to reveal the beauty of the fake scroll graft. A high quality Stanley blade was used in the making of it..........
  4. What would the magnet be attracted to ?
  5. If you are taking the back off and replacing the top block you may as well do a button patch. Your top block can be spruce - willow - basswood etc. Probably best to just replace with the wood your old block was made of. Jacob did a great tutorial of a button patch repair on here some where a couple of years back but I can't find it.
  6. Doing a clavette instead of a button patch ? We know what your opinion is of that method. Or not matching the grain and making the insert visible instead of making it invisible ?
  7. The recommended way is to use maple for the whole wood insert but to not to totally match the grain. The reason to not match the grain is so another luthier on a later occasion can see the repair that has already been done and knows how to take the neck apart without causing damage. If the previous repair was invisible then it makes the process harder. Here is an in depth tutorial of a clavette repair. https://indd.adobe.com/view/b2d11313-d418-496b-8e01-c8a6b11e9a02
  8. I was just going to post that Jacob Saunders will recommend a sound-post patch, but he got here before me. It is the best way because its invisible if done right. Some luthiers would do a "clavette" because its quicker and cheaper. A sound post patch involves back removal, whereas a "clavette" only needs to take the neck out of the mortice and a neck reset.
  9. Its a nice violin. If "Germany" was stamped on it when it was made then it it must be the second half of the 19th century after Germany was established. But are there any circumstances, for instance, tax reasons - export - legal , that a violin might be stamped at a later date to its making ?
  10. So it seems that "chanterelle" in French has the basic meaning of "sing". So its the singing E string that carries the melody that Lupot thought was not as good on Del Gesu violins as a Stradivari E string.
  11. Does that not translate back to " petite chanteuse " ? Assuming the E string is a she.
  12. OK, thanks, I thought he was talking about the E, but what on earth has a mushroom "chanterelle got to do with an E string ? Maybe its the French love of food which pervades everything, and I suppose everyday things get compared to it. So I guess a "chanterelle" is - delicate - peppery - fruity to describe the loveliness of the Del Gesu E string. Or is there an easier explanation for "chanterelle" ? He talks about the plates being thick which I guess adds body to the G and darkens it.
  13. Lupot was definitely acquainted with at least one Del Gesu. Proof of that can be found in the French book "La chélonomie ou le parfait luthier" where he criticizes Del Gesus poor G string which is a surprise to me as I thought that they were supposed to be one of the strong points of Del Gesu violins. It may be that what he calls the fourth string we call the 1st, ie, he is talking about the E string being bad. He thinks the bridge needs sorting out to rectify it. The other three strings he thinks are good. Here is the google translated gist of it................................ "First he shrunk the model; which seems all the more strange as it fortified its thicknesses; he flattens the vaults, which at least was better reasoned after this additional force. Its proportions are exact; its perfectly fused vaults; the thicknesses of the two tables, perfectly equal in the centers to those of Stradivare, gradually increase to the ends. This combination, although regular, is not the happiest. Looks like he took on the task of to ensure bulky sounds, and that he is aware of their luster more than their plumpness. If that was his intention, he is sure that he did well; not that his violins are completely lacking in strength, but a prodigious brilliance is their main part: the chanterelle is sparkling, the second is at the same level for brilliance the third also bright has a certain roundness; but the fourth is dry like a stiff almond in its entire length, restive at every tone, mainly in natural if and ut. She is completely sacrificed to the other three. It is quite simple that this excess thickness in the two tables, especially when the models are shrunk, must greatly harm the reflections of the air, which, if it enters smoothly, trembles then too abruptly, and evaporates without producing its effect. We have always noticed that this luxury of thickness was the death of the fourth, as the opposite vice is one of its most formidable scourges. Despite its construction flaws, it has its supporters, even its enthusiastic fanatics. It’s a matter of taste. For some time now, his violins have been in favor. We see musicians raising them above even the Stradivare, so much the extraordinary brilliance of the first three strings imposes on their ears. It's a shame that this unhappy and too charitable fourth is exhausted for ungrateful people who absorb it. I only see one way to avenge; it would be to force them to restitution, to form from their superfluity the necessities of their prodigal benefactress, and, for to speak without a figure, to take on the top of his violins to rectify the bottom. Everything would consist, without altering the original to transpose the soul, and reason the bridge so as to obtain equality. These two means seem essential to me, if not as specific remedies, at least as more or less sufficient palliatives; and the luthiers will be forever forced to resort to it, unless, giving up the fourth, which is more important today than ever,"
  14. I have managed to read a bit of the French book and found that Lupot was definitely aware of Joseph Gouarnère and dictated the book to the author. I have cut and pasted some bits from the book and translated them with our dear friend google......................... ............................................................................................................................................ La Chélonomie was printed twice in 1806, in Paris; in 1823, in Brussels. page 3 (foreword) The principal, or, to put it better, the sole author of the work, is a distinguished luthier from Paris, Nicolas Lupot, who provided all the materials (notes, observations, documents, memoirs, etc.), and c ' is an ecclesiastic, Father Sibire, who classified them, connected them to each other and ... styled. Apollo (Lupot) dictated and ... Sibire wrote. page 23\24 For some time now, his violins have been in favor. We see musicians raising them above even the Stradivare, so much the extraordinary brilliance of the first three strings imposes on their ears. Trained at the Italian school, too proud to be self-employed as sub disciplina, Joseph Gouarnère, student of Antoine Stradivare, and Pierre Gouarnère, pupil of Jérôme Amatus, wanted in their turn to be original like their masters; but they did not realize that already the true principles were fixed, and that to try other roads to reach to their glory, it was condemning themselves in advance to stay on the way. So they are of a much lower class. In the absence of our homage, they will be happy to be satisfied with our praise. At most, that's what is theirs. By casting down our admiration with them, we will descend to esteem, and their rights will be paid. This Joseph Gouarnère, close to varnish and color, which he borrowed from Stradivare, was thus like him original, but he had neither the lightness of his hand nor the fruitfulness of his genius; making his way badly, he deviated from the goal, and did not reach it not the truth. Either self-love, or jealousy, or rather the ridiculous ambition of the best, as if the best, which is already the enemy of the good, did not become an absurdity, since perfection existed, he wanted to have principles, a method, sounds that were his own, and that none of his predecessors could claim; but opposed to them all over all points, he was nonetheless always similar to himself, and consequent in his processes. ............................................................................................................................................
  15. Maybe it would be better to say he was "influenced" by Del Gesu rather than made accurate bench copies. But I see that you were not convinced in a thread here last year. It is known that he had access to a Del Gesu because he is apparently quoted about them in a book , "La Chelonomie, ou le parfait luthier" by Abbé Sibire. I do not have the book, and I cannot read French, but it should be in their somewhere................. https://www.luthiers-mirecourt.com/sibire_la_chelonomie.htm Other than that Tariso said that Lupot made Del Gesu style violins - " and Nicolas Lupot, who definitively brought French lutherie out of the ‘vieux Paris’ style by producing high-quality Stradivari copies and, in the case of Lupot, some of ‘del Gesù’. https://tarisio.com/cozio-archive/cozio-carteggio/copying-the-best-of-cremona-a-brief-survey-part-2/