Victor Roman

Maybe. Maybe not. One surprize we had once early recordings kept being discovered was how let's say, superficial, the score was treated. Often the musician just played the notes as written and did little to nothing else. Similar to reading a good book or listenting to a radio play, the public made up some form of personal impression.

It is not true. I never cared much for "bell" trills as what I could do was acceptable - neither Oistrakh nor Szeryng have ( or use... ) fast trills and their artistic output is perfectly fine. However, I had collegues at the Conservatory whom , starting slower than myself , developed bell - like ringing trill after a lengthy period of dedicated and systematic practice.

You surely meant beginners, not "advanced". I like it and it should be well suitable for a pupil with six months of violin learning under his belt. Of course, not expected to be played quite a prima vista. If you are a teacher and will keep producing those I humbly suggest that for this particular level you stick to G Major or A minor should need be. BTW, "advanced" used to mean Tchaikovsky and "intermediate" , Mendelsohn..............

Many years ago I tried out a violin made from very old wood. The top plate was supposed to be 600 years old and the back plate around 150-200. To my ear ( the 2nd violin of my quartet agreed ) there was nothing special about the tone - it sounded like a fairly good new violin one can go through the Conservatory with. It had one clear quality : it felt flexible when played. I had opportunity to play a number of violins made from 2-3 years old wood and they were fine. Bit stiff and a bit false but nothing to write a letter of complaint about. Usable. There was an idea circulating at the time ( '68 ? ) that if the wood is "new" the violin becomes noisy as it ages.

One can actually tell quite a bit from that if one listens carefully. It doesn't sound like a violin, it sounds like.... ???

Maybe less so for recitals and chamber.

Are you implying that such celebrities would use their "aura" to push Paul Kaul's wares ???? Because if you do, you are right. The three had some sort of stake in the business. In the case of the Ro maker that was a definite charity exercise - the maker was afaik a poverty stricken alcoholic. However, it might be of interest to mention that he was commissioned a violin by Erika Morini, considered the best woman violin player of the time ( 30s ). In a thank you letter to the maker Morini states that she is very happy with the violin which ( in her opinion ) is better than her Strad. Whatever that means...

I can not say for the case of the violin being "cheap" but quite a few famous players did announce on the concert/recital posters that they are playing on a modern / contemporary violin. Often this was for violins made by Paul Kaul - very popular before WW2, it seems. I also remember a sort of mini-campaign probably, advertising a Romanian maker - Stirbulescou, now practically unknown. Kreisler, Enesco and Jacques Thibaut mentioned they will be using a violin by this maker in the recital. One of my colleagues in the Romanian Radio Orch played a Stirbulescou violin. It had an indifferent tone, usable nonetheless, though nothing special. What was special and impressed everybody was how easier it was to play, how responsive it was. I have never seen anything even close to that.

You will be doing me a great favor if you could explain how did you come up to this conclusion.

My many decades of professional playing in orchestras and as a very busy chamber musician clearly, unambigously, proved that is NOT the case. I have no idea how or why this "idea" seems to have so deeply penetrated amateur forums all over the internet. By the way, JH could not play ( to good standard ) Paganini pieces on a "crappy" violin. And he wasn't actually that interested in Paganini either.... JH is not Kogan. And yes, I have witnessed a number of occasions when a player had to use a different violin for the 2nd night / morning recital, probably more than twenty. Did they manage ? Yes. To "90% of his standard" - NO.

I see... Not in my experience - I think we are quite a compliant bunch.

Am sorry but I do not understand.

Thank you, Mr.Noon. The reason I asked is because I found little convergence when it comes to the opinions of players in respect of a particular violin - basically, all over the place. In the end one is interested in what works well for him/her.

Within this context what is a "good player" ? Have you ever found a satisfactory one ?

Quite right.