This one's a bit different

[jackc]

Anybody care to express an opinion on the origin and age of this violin? I have an idea what it is, but wondered what others might think. Photos are not so good, sorry.

Thanks. Jack

Front

Back

F-hole

Scroll front

Scroll

[Guy_Gallo]

My (wild) guess would be Hungarian, early 20thC, maybe a little earlier.

[apartmentluthier]

It's in your french folder . . could it be french?

[T_Rocca]

I will say Hungarian or Czech early 20th century

[Guy_Gallo]

French was my first impression based on the corners, but the f-holes and tiny nicks remind me of some Hungarian fiddles I've seen (in books).

[T_Rocca]

The color and wood selection made me think it might be a Czech or Hungarian violin. I think the arch, outline and color is too exotic to be a French..

[T_Rocca]

however the chin rest is very Eastern Europe.. I had one of those before

but my guess is the violin might not be very old.

[troutabout]

Interior wood is too white to be much past early 20th. Scroll looks too massive for French / Italian. Ripples on back look like rushed Czek manufacture like one of mine.

[Michael Darnton]

Because of the very circular outline and strange color, I'd say "amateur". Once it becomes that, all bets as to country are off, but since it looks less than 100 or so years old, being amateur most likely points to the US or the UK.

[fingerbord]

This one looks a great deal like the the trade name work Richard Breuer Markneukirchen, 1930s

[Regis]

Just when I 'thought' I was beginning to be able to identify "better" scrolls, I miss-judged this one. What do you see in the scroll? Is it the poor angle of the pegs (especially "A")? Or, did I just miss totally (scroll that is). Or did you use the "overall" to reach your conclusion?

I'm a long way from corpus identifacation.

[Michael Darnton]

I'm just going by the body outline. To round out an outline that much isn't a professional thing. There have been just a couple of professional makers who've done it, but not for a few hundred years. It could still be someone quirky from some school or another, but it doesn't follow any of the normal standards of professional violin making, that's all. If someone's going to come up with all the known makers who made violins for a living doing that, the list is going to be *extrememly* short.

Additionally, the strange arching and f-hole placement push the idea that the maker was someone who was trying out all of his extreme ideas for pushing the violin forward 400 years all at once on his one and only violin--it's the type of stuff that people who don't know what they're doing do.

Following fingerbord's lead, I looked through my book of modern Germans, and I do see a lot of excessively smoothed outlines, but not the extremes in arching, paint job, and f-hole placement. It's an idea, though.

[fiddlecollector]

I`d describe this as circular also!

http://www.tarisio.com/auction/auction_l...p;c_filter_on=1

[Michael Darnton]

Yes. That's why I said "just a couple of professional makers who've done it, but not for a few hundred years". There are a couple of old makers who did it. A few of your ancestors did it, too. Though this is the inside, I think you can see it in this probably-a-Daniel-Parker (I shot the photo because of the dazzling array of unnecessary studs):

[jackc]

Well, the upper bout on the Tarisio example is very similarly rounded to the violin in question, but the lower bout on the Tarisio one is much "droopier". That is, wider and it looks shorter, though it isn't I know. It's just the visual.

I was guessing that this was a good French factory violin from between 1900-1930. The workmanship is very good, if the model isn't. The corners and edgework look more sophisticated and are executed better than any amatuer work I've seen.

As Michael says, the "paint job" is pretty severe. I like the color of the varnish but the antiquing is just too much. It's been played a lot, as there is serious thinning of the board and neck between the scroll and the body. There's a lot of wear behind the scroll, which I think is false, but the thinning of the neck is subtle but pronounced and looks like honest wear. On the other hand, it's in great shape if it's 80 years old. I like the scroll, and it does not look factory. The scroll graft is very well executed, and all the efforts at antiqueing make me think it came from a factory workshop.

If it's by an amatuer, it's by a very talented amatuer, at least in terms of wood work. But I agree totally with Michael that the model is weird. The transverse arching is almost like a Stainer, but the long arch looks OK. Length is 356 mm, short for a Frenchie.

Thanks for the discussion. I still don't know what it is, and maybe there's no way to know. I'll just go play it.

[jackc]

Yikes! What's the point of all those cleats? Not crack repair?

[Michael Darnton]

Someone thought they were fixing cracks, and I guess they were, but I think 1/3 the studs would have done the job just fine.

[AMORI]

What is a 1/3 stud please?

[Michael Darnton]

33% of the number that are there now.

[fiddlecollector]

The upper bout is very circular almost a perfect circle.

[Skreechee]

Excuse my ignorance on form but why are some old Italian violins plump and rounded? Like smaller C bouts and big archings?

[Michael Darnton]

You think of a shape, and someone, in some country, has made a violin that way at some point in time.

[Richf]

I had the pleasure of seeing a genuine Ferdinandus Gagliano a couple weeks ago. I'm not going to say this looks like a Gagliano (it doesn't), but the "antiqued" finish on the back of this one was very reminiscent of the 250 years of real wear on the FG. Also, the wear marks on this one don't seem at all similar to the many contemporary antiquing efforts one sees so often. Am I alone in thinking Jack's fiddle might have some really age? (Maybe Jack will put up a photo of the back of the scroll, which I have seen. The wear there also reminded very much of that FG and some other truly old instruments I've seen. It's that flat spot I guess they get from lying in wooden cases, which never seems to show up on antiqued models.)

Michael, could you describe what you thought was extreme about the f hole placement? Thanks. (As you know, my eyes aren't so good).

[Michael Darnton]

Very wide, especially at the top.

[Richf]

By "wide," you mean the flaring? I'm looking at the Vieuxtemps photo on Tarisio, and I don't see a big difference (a difference, yes, but not an extreme difference). However, now that my eyes are focusing, I can see the differences in arching.