Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Josep J. Ruiz

Members
  • Posts

    61
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

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

Josep J. Ruiz's Achievements

Member

Member (3/5)

  1. Don't worry. Let him rejoice in hin own ego.
  2. You have remembered the threat is about the identification of a violin and I'm free to post whatever I consider appropiate to illustrate whatever about my instrument. If you don't have something different or constructive to say me concerning this topic, better keep silence. Curiously, some of this many senior members are teaching us added some comment about your way of criticizing, also about your particular point of view concerning the 'bricks' and the sound. Seems you have not learned yet about them here. Be more humble and preach by example
  3. I only tried to explain honestly my opinion about the label (not about the violin) using my experience working in antique bookshops. Forgive me if I have disturbed you.
  4. In the purposed threat there are some XIX century facsimiles, for example the 'Josef Klotz, 1795', which is really from c. 1850-60 seeing the typography. During these century the facsimiles were very primitive and is easy to recognize the incongruences. If my one is a facsimile, should be a very modern one...or a fake label printed during the time were the maker lived IMO.
  5. Thanks for the response! Regarding the label and obviating the violin, I think it is not the same case as the fake labels from the threat you linked me. My Mittenwald violin from the other day has a clear fake label from 'late XVIII century' but really reproduced roughly during 1980's. The aspect of this Jacob Petz label (ink, typgraphy, paper...) correspond to the period indicated by the manuscript year. Of course it does not mean that both label and violin have the same origin but I'm prety sure the label is not a facsimile in this case. Concerning the violin I recognize my ignorance. I slighly know about roughly made XIX century Saxon violins but I tough in this case the rough fabrication was due the instrument is 'only a kids violin'.
  6. Hello and happy new year 2021! Before selling my little collection of old violins I decided to keep only the Mittenwald discussed days ago and this one (purchased cheap during 2008 for approxinately 80 euros). As you can see the instrument outline and f holes are made roughly but the back wood looks nice. The label indicates it is made by Jacob Petz in 1783. I don't know so much about this maker but the label seems from the period and not re-glued (apocryphal or not, I don't know). The long of the soundbox is 32.8 cm. The neck seems the original, also the fingerboard? What do you think? A rarity despite the rough aspect? Any similar kids violin in your minds? Many thanks in advance and best regards!
  7. Seeing some old interview to Milstein I'm prety sure he was not a guy who accepted suggestions about playing violin Thanks! I will do!
  8. Yep! When I was a child I wanted a lot to be a virtuoso violinist but later the life brought me to other things. Althougt that, I've never lost my passion on classical music. To me play the violin is still one of the most pleasant activities. I'm very happy to work to improve my violin playing even if I'm not a professional violinist.
  9. At first I did not dare to make a video by the same reasons than you but then I tried to hear myself and was very illustrative. If you play without teacher (as I do) a video is very helpful.
  10. I don't know exactly but I will check it. Also, my bow had only a half of the bristles when I make the video. Anyway seems clear that the guy which posted about metallic sound does not really want to be constructive, so I don't care about understanding his reasons.
  11. Totally right, and is very curious that you are precisely the one who mentioned this...because after various messages you haven't said anything at all about the identification of my violin If I paraphrase you, perhaps you would understand better what happened here: I suppose on MN you can find more appropiate place to post pedantic comments, I am sure there are people who will welcome that.
  12. Whatever is said should be said humbly. No necessary to be a violin expert to know that No worries. I understood perfectly your intention and the answer to your message. Of course I wil try to improve myself with my performings...and remember better every note You're welcome!
  13. Well, someone mentioned not exactly mistakes (in plural). Someone mentioned I played a single note which is not in the original score (I have to agree with that because is a fact). This person mentioned also the sound is very good, and every person that heard the violin, in video or personally. The problem with this violin is not the sound, which is deep and powerful, but the loss of value due the ''brick'' you mentioned and later belly. A pity in case I wanted to gain lots of money with it but not so much important concerning the sound in this case. There are much more rellevant imperfections which changes the sound of the instrument, for example a crack in the harmonic bar zone. The ''brick'' is ugly but I don't think that changes the sound enough to appreciate it in a simple video. In fact Jacob told previously about how ''easy'' is to restore the ''bricks'' and I perfectly know it don't worth in this case. See the previous comments.
  14. You're welcome. I'm not a graduate violinist but a classical music lover. Best regards. So I recommend you do it even if you mistake some note. Especially if you mistake some note. I'm sure you speak from experience and knowledge. Please, show us your own Bach performing made with your phone to know how is the acceptable way.
×
×
  • Create New...