Wilano Cortignini

I do that all the time . I am really not a fan of the varnish. It really reminds me of "the usual" violins... And the scroll too... Stylistically a typical "the usual" scroll, plus no bushing. Though it could be a later scroll, I don't see anything indicating it cannot be the original. Thus 19th century would be my best guess for now.

yea... We might have just found the very first evidence of time-travelling.

I suppose you mean John Baker. I'd say it's whether the product of an experienced dealer, trying to fool whoever was buying by giving such niche attribution, hoping that the buyer won't be able to find any information/anyone to counter it (such things were hard before the internet). Or else it may be done by dealers (i.e. lute, viol dealers) not mainly dealing with violin, who just happened to have the knowledge. This is not important after all . The violin itself, although I can't say anything for sure by just looking at these photos, may as well be an cheap old English violin (might also just be a uncommon case of "the usual"). 1701 is stretching it too far. I'd like to think at least as late as mid-late 19th century.

Now comparing the two I see no relevancy as well. It is quite uncommon to have a facsimile label of such a niche maker.

Have not dealt with this particular maker before, and can't say anything for sure just by looking at a blurry image of the table. Did manage to pull some images from the Cozio archive. Many things do look similar but many things do not.

Looks quite amateurish... with painted purfling and pinched rib joints. Though also no delta on the scroll and one piece lower rib. Can't say anything for sure but certainly quite beaten up. Even if the label were to be true, I don't think would worth anything significant in terms of commercial value. May be one of those violins you can tell a good story about.

Certainly the set up is key to the sound. But frankly speaking a decent setup costs money and time, and usually if you were to take these to luthiers asking for restoration, they will likely suggest/imply that it is not worth it, unless if there is certain sentimental value. Most of the time, people would just walk away, disappointed. If @Will A. is simply looking to sell this violin after the restoration and gain a profit, I'd say it may not worth the investment, as they usually don't go higher than a few hundred bucks (Tarisio has a similar example included in the T-2 auction right now, with a starting price of $275, and no bids yet), and the restoration/setup would likely cost $500+ (can't say for sure since I can't really determine the condition from these photos alone), depending on where you go to. You can probably get better profit simply listing this thing on eBay, raw, unrestored, since you mentioned you got it for cheap. Also, if you are simply looking for a good value violin, I'd also say check one out from a reliable source (reputable violin shops, not eBay!). If this violin holds sentimental value, which I don't think would be the case here for Will, it might be worth the effort to have it worked on by an expert and put up some decent setups. There is another option called a "decorative setup", in which we would simply find an old bridge, some old fittings and roughly fit them on for cheap, making the violin look like it has been completely restored, but in fact not. The later is usually a way cheaper option and was practiced by many. Above all, @MysticI am glad that yours sound good, and was able to get a quality hand working on it. And in fact these carved heads were way rarer, and no matter if it is by a famous maker, it still requires a great deal of work and skill.

Welcome! I agree with Rue, this would be one of the decorated trade violins mass-produced in Markneukichen/Schoenbach from the late 19th century. The Americans were really digging these decorated ones. Lyon Healy (Chicago based musical instrument company) had catalogues filled with these inlaid and painted violins. Though the commercial value may be limited, still a cool piece to look at. Yours also appears to be in fair condition. Violins similar to yours were discussed in a previous post, linked below: https://maestronet.com/forum/index.php?/topic/333373-help-identifying-old-violin-with-inlays/ https://www.fiddlehangout.com/archive/45802 Hope this helps, Wilano

Well I learned something new today . I mixed the Hill style with those mentioned. Some were even made in two separate pieces which I found quite unnecessary. Thanks for sharing!

Also just saw this. An excellent example as well.

For some reason I missed your reply from yesterday. I did not look hard enough, but here is a violin made by A.Stradivari's son, Omobono Stradivari, in c1727. See if you can spot the knot. I am sure if you invest more time into searching, you can find even bigger names with a knot on the top. Many of these smaller knots usually hide quite deep down, and stay invisible until you have planed/gauged/chiseled the wood down to the plane where it stays. Some maker just go for it, while many more painstaking makers would simply look for a replacement.

I actually would agree with you. Quite frankly, looking back to my paragraph, I did exaggerate the importance of mathematical models to state the practicality in design. However, I would not completely rule out careful planning and calculations done before or during the design process, and their importance in leading to design advancements. I recall seeing hand drafts of Stradivari and Vuillaume (though I can't recall whether it is the original or an exact copy, but for sure not a later re-master of their draft where people add in unoriginal measurements and such), and that simply impressed me so much. Consider all of the work was done around 200~300 before us, and was presumably some of the most advanced acoustic design / geometric pattern calculations ever being applied in instrument making at that time. Although I have to admit, comparing to some modern researchers / copyists 50-page research papers on violin modelling, those old hand drafts seem to have little significance. Once again. I 100% agree with the importance of "a good eye", but as Beard stated, "beyond and method of working one might choose, a good eye, talent, skill, and experience must be added for great results". Good eye is indeed the foundation of everything else to make a top of the top maker, and later skill and experience build on that. Take Stradivari once again as an example: though he made some of the most respected instruments, it still took him quite a while before figuring out the iconic P and G forms. He obviously started off decent enough with the "good eye", but after years of making and experimenting, perhaps even innovating little by little, he had come to the conclusion that bigger, flatter models such as P and G deliver more powerful sound, or some other advantages. That being said, the power "good eye ", as quoted from Burgess, "perhaps God-given", should never be underestimated. For that there is a reason we call that "Joey guy" from Cremona "Del Gesu"

Thanks for sharing! Though I have often wonder why cutting into the ribs. From my POV as a restorer, I'd try to keep everything less invasive as possible. Though I understand that provides extra support and glue area, but I don't see the Hill style saddle being the only and the best method of doing so. Just my humble opinion.

Ah, I must have misread. I was referring to the part extending into the lower ribs. I though it was the topic of discussion. I am indeed getting old Although these are really great pictures! Thanks for sharing.

Looks like a normal size to me. Maybe it has been refitted afterwards?