Cremonese "secret"?

[Alan_Coggins]

I am always bemused by these discussions - I am never sure what exactly it is that people are aiming for. Do we want to make a violin as it would have come fresh from the Cremonese makers in 1720, or are we aiming for a Cremonese violin as we see it (and hear it) before us today. The former is an impossible aim - we have no idea what these instruments sounded like when they were new. We don't know, for example, whether a "new" Strad is any better or worse than a "new" Darnton, and Michael will be long gone before we get any hint of an idea. And if we are aiming to make a violin to today's standard, based on 300 year old techniques, then we will need to somehow factor in 300 years of wear, repair and, more importantly, 300 years of playing by good players - in some cases, continual playing by the world's best players.

To me, there doesn't seem much point in worrying too much about what the Cremonese makers MIGHT HAVE DONE when what we are really trying to recreate is what their instruments HAVE BECOME.

[Michael Darnton]

What I'm trying to do is make a better violin than anyone else is, and given that all the guys in the past who said they were making violins as good as the Cremonese, and everyone would know that in 100 years. . . were wrong. . . I'll settle for beating my competition today, assuming that all I need to do is get an edge. Which I think I can do by coming as close to what the Cremonese did, which still is better than the guys 150 years ago were doing. So just being a good modern maker using the "modern tradition" isn't good enough for me. If you follow my line of reasoning.... which is clear in my mind, but not here in type, I don't think...

[jmasters]

Be careful, he might find a vague sense that you are trying to make a pass at him.

[jmasters]

The third from last paragraph is the one that interests Nagyvary, I think. The borax would be intended to cross-link hemicellulose molecules. Hemicellulose adds mass but is not very strong in itself. Cross-binding would tend to make it into a stronger material, in his view.

[jmasters]

But what edge is there to get? I will admit that your sculpture is very nice. Vuillaume and many others had good eyes for geometric copies. And they experimented a lot. They also were motivated by fame and fortune. And Vuillaume got both. But you said the other day that Vuillaume did not succeed in duplicating the Cremonese ideal. So where do you seek your edge ? Not a secret is it?

[Michael Darnton]

Well, first, Vuillaume suffered seriously from temporal displacement. That is, he lived firmly in his place and time, and put a decidedly French 1850 twist on what he did, as nice as it was, making his violins less effective than they might have been had they been simply more accurate. That's something I'm constantly trying to avoid. In fact I feel that this is where many makers miss the boat. It's inevitable that we would approach things with the eyes of someone of this time--doing otherwise requires a lot of information and concentration. In fact, I'm giving a presentation at the Guild of American Luthiers convention this summer about violin design, and that's going to be the centerpiece of my presentation.

Beyond that--secrets? Yes. :-) But we'll have to wait 150 years before we see if I'm right. :-)

[jeff1]

True we don't know what the great masters violins sounded like when they where new! We can only compare our instruments today with the construction of the old masters and how they built their instruments. But learning more about your trade is not a comparsion, it's trying to achieve a higher level. As I stated before there are maker's building instruments close to the tonal quality as the Stradivarus. So I guess yes that is the brass ring for some people. I do feel that it can be achivied, and to scoff at people because they believe in something, just shows how little you know. To me this isn't a money game, I build instruments because I love doing it!! And if thinking that there is a special secret makes me stupid, then for now I'm stupid, but who knows I might just get the last laugh!!!!:-)

[Alan_Coggins]

Sorry Jeff - I didn't mean to suggest that anyone is misguided or stupid for raising these questions. I just happen to think that if you are looking for something, it helps to try and define exactly what it is you are looking for, and also how you will know when you find it :-)

By the way - it IS all about money for me. At the moment I have a wife and two small children to support and if I don't sell instruments they don't eat!

[jeff1]

Thanks, I guess I'm lucky, I own a cattle ranch. My cows let me know if my violins sound good, if they moo, it's good, if they stampede, then I'd better try something else!! See I got the last laugh!!:-)

[Alan_Coggins]

Hey - I need some of your cows!! If I don't make a sale I could always eat the cows!

[Violinnut]

Michael , I do believe you are right about Vuillaume. Could I venture and say that Vuillaume was an innovator and also a very proud man. He belonged to the French school ,more later.

He did not try to make Strad copies per say, but look alike copes. Meaning violins that looked exactly like Strads, but I think he tried to 'improve on it' imho.

I might be wrong , but in judging from his saying and what I could get of his personnality I dont think that would be to far off.

What was that controversy with the Messiah by the way?

[jmasters]

This begs the question. How did the Cremonese makers home in on the ideals so quickly whereas Vuillaume was blind to what they saw........ This is just an interesting question.

For the sake of future discussion, please assume that this is not about violins at all. It is about the evolution of technology, what the aims of technology are, whether a seeker succeeds in meeting a need (through a technical process) of his market.

No two makers will agree on particulars in all degrees. If that were the case, it seems as though the violin could never have evolved in the first place. (It is like the proponent who insists on Divine Intent for the origin of our species. The result is too glorious and special to be an accident.) I consider such people to be idiots. Perhaps this is unjust. Their views come from a naive orientation and innocence of philosophy that may be no fault of their own. (please read that again: I am speaking of those who wish to comment on the origin of humans.)

Well, I do not have such a romantic view of the violin. I will just say that I like wood-working, developing of my varnish methods, and playing the instruments. I do not need to be the best, but I ask the aspirants to superiority to describe their goals and justify them. I don't know how Vuillaume's intentions and aspirations compare with yours. Certainly he became rich and famous. And he did not pussy-foot around ethics to do so either.

I don't see that Vuillaume suffered from anything. He got rich and famous, as I just mentioned. If that was his goal, I believe that he succeeded. I would expect a French workman to evolve his work into a French mentality. Painters certainly did the same thing. If you believe that the tonal superiority of the Cremonese is superior to the French, then how do you explain it? I still do not think it is geometry. That is unlikely given the endless copies coming after the rather rapid evolution of the Cremonese school (at its height).

You say that Vuillaume's violins were inaccurate and you are trying to avoid this. The first part of the statement is undemonstrated and the second part is just plain puffery.

You do not know why Vuilluame's instruments did not last... apparently they had great promise when new. Why did they go down hill? (if they did) How can you say that many makers missed the boat without including yourself? We will need to wait 150 years to see if you missed it? And I doubt you have a leg up on 200-400 makers.

As to secrets, I don't very many. As to the physics and mechanics, one can ignore these and simply cut off pathways to insights. I don't plan to discuss the issue of the Nigo effect any more on the forum unless there is some respect shown for the problem as proposed. It is all consistent and falls into place. One would need some background to understand this.

[jmasters]

Vuillaume wanted to get "successful" by hook or by crook. And he did just that.

Ther word "successful" means "rich and famous" with no implications about ethics or honesty.

[jmasters]

By the way, I do not dismiss your statements about avoiding the copyiests of the past, including great names such as Vuillaume. Sometime in the future I would like to hear your views on these people and their efforts.

[Michael Darnton]

I think you misinterpret my take on Vuillaume and his violins. I don't maintain his violins lost something--they never had it to the extent that he claimed, except in his mind and his self-promotion. The history of modern violin making is stuffed full of people who over-promote themselves. One day in casually browsing the web I found three people whom I'd never heard of who claim to the possibly the world's finest violin maker! If I looked harder, I'm sure I'd find even more of them.

Have I said I'm doing better? I don't think so--I said I'm trying to be aware of the problems to a greater extent and trying to avoid them. I certainly didn't claim to be succeeding. Violin history is littered with people who did that, but I have not been one of them: here, I'm just trying to explain what basis I work from, since it's a discussion about how things happen.

This isn't an issue of the evolution of technology at all--it's the issue of loss of technology. I think their (the Cremonese) results were the natural result of their process, which was highly integrated in all respects with a little luck thrown in, unlike our secondary source efforts. A copy that's not fully informed can only be inferior.

" I don't plan to discuss the issue of the Nigo effect any more on the forum unless there is some respect shown for the problem as proposed. "

I agree--I think it's best not to continue to discuss Nigo's effect until you begin to express some respect for viewpoints other than your own. Otherwise, it can't be a discussion, can it?

[Steve R.]

I play violin, don't make them, and I have been following (or at least trying to) this string, the one regarding new violins sounding better with age and a string in the fingerboard section also discussing new violins.

A comment, in the fingerboard string, jumped out at me as maybe being relavant over here:

Lastchair said:

Quote:

---

Walter Kolneder, who wrote "The Amadeus Book of the Violin: Construction, History and Music", offers some fascinating timelines for when a new violin will sound marvelous. Unfortunately, it is in the 40-60 year range. It is hard for people to have an objective rating system, since the people who heard the violin 40-60 years ago are now dead. And I'll be gone in 40-60 years.

---

Maybe part of the "Secret" is that Stradivari and Guarnari were trying to make their "new" violins sound like "old" Amatis?

Feel free to shout me down...

[Michael Darnton]

A well-known Chicago maker, Franz Kinberg, maintained that Stradivari antiqued his violins. I think he's the only one to believe that. . . . unless you do. :-)

[Steve R.]

Michael, I'll let ya know after I get the chance to play a Strad.

Steve