Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Giovanni Valentini

Members
  • Posts

    49
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

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

Giovanni Valentini's Achievements

Junior Member

Junior Member (2/5)

  1. Evidently. That's what I fear, too! Of course not necessarily, but it may explain why people are weary certificates by BF (and others, for that matter).
  2. Sure, but they did, and therefore, in this case, I would tend to believe a dendro-induced 'Tbay proforma' more than BF certificate. Sorry, I thought that was obvious: Because BF are neither omniscient nor infallible, and their certificates can be annihilated by as little as an uncomfortable dendro result (q.e.d). As this is clearly the case with the 'Maggini', why could it not be with the Landolphi?
  3. Perhaps because of the ca. 1700 'Maggini' with BF certificate and buy-back guarantee in the same sale?
  4. Another one: https://tarisio.com/auctions/auction/lot/?csid=2199617536&cpid=3687645184&filter_key=#cond You might muse at the price guarantee (and the word 'anytime') in the accompanying letter from Bein & Fushi!
  5. Thanks for that. And sorry - I forgot to paste in the link !
  6. Hello all! Would anyone be so kind and have a look at this Georg I Klotz at Vichy Encheres for me? It obviously had woodworm issues, but I am finding it hard to judge the extent of it from the photos. E.g. are the marks in the bridge area from woodworm or some other damage? Many thanks in advance!
  7. I always thought there ought to be more in continenetal Europe (Tarisio caught on to that!). Anyone fancies a venture (-> PM)?
  8. I am not sure what the Tecchler went for, but I also think ca 70k. The Ferdinando is now in the aftersale, but the vendor does not seem budge on price. Did you look at lot 59 at Brompton's (good and interesting) by any chance? I thought it was lovely, but it did not sell. It is now on for 5k - quite tempting. It has an enormously high arching, but the good kind I wonder whether its might be Florentine or Roman?
  9. And if the owner of the unsold Ferdinando Gagliano is out there: Do get in touch and save us all some commission!
  10. Many thanks for the information! Depending on how bad the woodworm will turn out to be, I think that was an attractive price for the Nicola Gagliano (65k I think).
  11. Yes, some one took took a good bite out of it. I have often wondered why woodworm affects the price so heavily. Does it have such a profound effect on the Instrument? Curious that thx did Not bother getting up-to-date certs for those three violins, or is a dendro just as good now (it certainly is a lot cheaper!)?
  12. Thanks! The condition of both Gaglianos is - according to Photos and diagrammes- not brilliant, but still good / fixable. Are the low estimstes, esp. for the Nicolo, due to the small size?
  13. Has anyone tried the two Gaglianos and the Tecchler at Amati?
  14. No, I did not try them. But I should probably add that lot 82 was surprisingly pleasing. It is a simple Mittenwald trade instrument, but displays some skill (e.g. the scroll) and uses decent material. It is in a very good condition. Normally, I don't even bother trying those, but for some reason I did in this case and found that it has a good strong sound, plays easily in all registers and was generally a lot more pleasing than many of the more expensive lots - perhaps partly because it had decent strings on. What more can you ask for for 2-4k?
  15. Yes, I tried some of the violins. A slight problem was that many of the instruments were presented with a poor setup - anything from no strings, via soundpost down to 20 years old Dominants not tightened up for a decade because the pegs won't move. That's why there were a lot of instruments that I cannot comment on or only with a lot of phantasy. That said, the high-end instruments were lovely: a good late Vuillaume (259) and a G. Gagliano (257) were probably my favourites. The Amati Bros (96) is a beautiful and sophisticated instrument, but I slightly wondered whether it would have the desired power and projection - hard to tell in the room, of course. The Maggini (92) plays very well - if one is looking for that unique sound. In the mid-range, I really liked the Bagatella (226 - not the ascr. Bagatella 245!). At the lower end there were a few promising candidates: The Desideri (51) is not much to look at, but punches above its price range in terms of sound - presumably the very flat table and long f's give it that pleasing, dark, viola-like tone that reminded me of the Maggini, but I would not promise that it has much carrying power. The 'good and interesting violin' (59) is aptly called so - very clear and powerful sound, but with an extremely high arching, which means that it is not the easiest instrument to play (I once had a early Carcassi Bros which felt and sounded very similar). The R. Bergonzi (70) was good, once I approached it with a more 'robust' playing style. The violin after Testore (actually nicer looking than many Testores I have seen!) is good and solid. The attr. P. Landolfi gave me the impression that there may be a good instrument in there somewhere if one would spend a couple of hours on a better setup - again, no promises! Unfortunately the circle of Rombouts (52) was withdrawn, which was beautiful to look at and a joy to play. It may come back one day. I hope this helps!
×
×
  • Create New...