M Alpert

I'm still wondering why you and @mendel say it's MK. Doesn't seem clear to me- maybe MK dressed up to look French, as you say, but I've seen plenty of cheap Mirecourt babies with this look ... JTL Medio Fino and the like. Of course this is all just from pictures- what don't I see here that nails it as MK?

Also- hang out here and read! Toughen your skin. And do, do, DO! As Michael Darnton says, get rid of the preciousness of it, you have to do it to learn. Just remember to respect history, but go your own path!

A 3 month trade school for 15k$??? Wtf... Don't go there. UNH has online classes, they're affordable, although online you can still learn. Davide Sora posts the best videos on making (sorry to the rest of y'all!) Is Learning Trade Secrets still doing master classes? I went to Red Wing, Minnesota, 25 years ago, but it cost about 5k$ per year. Sounds like the guy is abusing you, a bit, but not abnormal. Overhead and taxes, everything costs, and margins aren't great, unless you're swindling. I couldn't make it working for others in this business, but there's loads of repair work, for an entrepreneur. Depending on the competition in your area, of course. My advice - try a week or two week course, practice on your own, do what you can to learn, but don't let anyone take advantage of you! Know your worth! Good luck.

Indeed, we can only assume there has been some flattening. In any case the long arches in Don's post are extremely illuminating. However, personally I think you @Riccardo964 would be better off looking at the arches for the Willemotte from Strad3D, and making your own templates, perhaps slightly adjusting for what we might assume to have been "settling" in the top (and back). I would not use those Herdim templates, nor especially compare them to Strobel. I don't think either of them are particularly good references, compared to CT pics of real Strads. Many use a top arch height of 16mm and back 15mm, that is a good reference. Combined with a long arch from Strad and a simple radial cross arch, as per Davide Sora's arching guide, and you can't go too far wrong.

Thank you for the thorough explanations, and the valuable advice (don't worry)!! It's very interesting. Presumably all this would imply that a different shaped arch (ie: higher, or fuller, or more pinched) would also influence these tap tones, and these node lines... As has been shown, and you have explained, a higher arch would tend to make a stiffer resonant plate, with presumably high tap tones? Does your experiments with this stuff extend to experiments on the full (closed) violin? With my colleague we have been doing some making in which we shape the plates and finish the insides, leaving the plates intentionally slightly thick. Then with the violin strung up in the white, we are thinning the plates front the outside while playing in between, to see in practice how removing wood from different areas seems to affect the sound. To be honest, while it is a fascinating process, it feels a bit like walking in the woods with my eyes closed, so I am searching for any clues which might help us "map" the process. If that is even possible! I think many people would like that- to know how to "tune" an instrument... How is it done that some people have measured the nodal lines of different frequencies and resonances, from the outside of the closed corpus? Sorry, now I'm having a deja vu that I have asked this question before as well, but clearly have not understood the answer, nor did I manage to find it now. Probably it will anyway be beyond my personal technical capabilities, but an explanation would be greatly appreciated, if one has the time and knowledge to share. Ever so grateful!

On the subject of linseed oil on wood, I have used, and heard from many makers who have used, a bit of quality linseed oil mixed to a paste with pumice powder, let sit for a few days, then rub in all over the instrument. It hardly penetrates, smooths nicely and gives good optical properties. Of course there are also only about a million other decent options. But I think if you don't want to try them all this works reasonably well as a "first step". However your coloring options are limited afterward, and if you color first, you may risk rubbing it unevenly with this. Which is why I don't use it anymore, because I now want a lot of color in the top surface, before it is sealed.

Marty, I find this very interesting. I would like to know which steps did what (besides the bass bars, which are rather obvious). Can you share some of your observations, thinning which areas raises M5? And is it indicative of anything relevant in the final instrument (in your estimation)?

I agree, except for the bit about no benefits for coloring the bridge. Looking old and nicely colored is always a benefit!! To many, it even helps the sound... This reminded me that I also have used propolis in alcohol the same way as shellac. It gives a very nice color. I can't prove it but I think there is a chance a slight impregnation with a resin might stiffen the bridge a bit, and it might also help it resist the effects of moisture, a bit. But even tiny changes make a difference in a bridge. Prove I'm wrong!! In a similar vein, some like a high-ratio resin varnish as a ground on an instrument, claiming it gives a stiffening sort of "exoskeleton" to the plates. Prove they're wrong!!

This might be a good candidate for an "optical filler". I use super glue for this on bows, with accelerator between layers. It works very well, but I have only ever used it to fill the edges of instruments. Some use epoxy, on other things than violins. Deft, and thickened sandarac in alcohol are used by some, but I think they would take forever to fill this. I have heard of various art restorers' materials, but can't recall the names. Doesn't seem worth a time-consuming "surgery" like a through patch. Maybe just varnish it dark (as it was before)?

Don, that's a beautiful gold. By far the best results I have had making intense transparent color were with "Flavetta's method", discussed in this thread (among other topics): I have understood that it is a zinc alizarin rosinate made during the cook... Beautiful color which lasted many days in our UV box without fading, a year later still as intense.

Oh yes, now I remember, I used to brush on a thin cut of orange or ruby shellac on a finished bridge, starting with the faces, finishing with the edges. Gives a nice aged look and a bit of shine, especially to a lighter wood. I mostly do bow work now, so didn't think of that at first. But I like the shellac better than other finishes, if you want to put something on a bridge. My colleague rubs a finished bridge on his nose and forehead

Except for the usual reason - dollar signs... There's a ridiculously big retail difference in "value" between an obscure, idiosyncratic, autodidact Italian of any period, and "just an old fiddle with a repair label". Not that I agree, just sayin'. In any case, I quite like the scroll, and what's left of the body too. Though the corpus seems clearly refinished, would be nicer less painted glossy. Polish it out at least!!

Erm. Not sure this is the answer you want, but I'm pretty sure all this has been discussed in depth in various threads on this forum... I suggest reading up first, before asking, no offense intended. In general, I think consensus is against "drowning" anything in linseed oil.

Hi! Maybe I'm not exactly answering you, but - I think the pin holes are significantly easier, that's probably why they are more common? Otherwise, I have used brass, aluminum, maple and plastic. Despite it being not very romantic, I find plastic the easiest and quickest. But I am more interested in looking at the result, than the template, so less concerned anymore if the template is "perfect"... By the way, an outside template of the scroll can be very handy, for comparing profiles with other scrolls!

Seems to be quite a lot of medullary rays in the soundpost area, suggesting radial cut. I imagine it may be pretty thin, if the whole thing weighs 370!