Separated at Birth?

[MANFIO]

Roger Hargrave in the previouly mentioned article proves the similarity between the body of the bass soundhole of the KREILER DG and the Betts Stradivari.

[Guy_Gallo]

Quote:

---

I also don't see too many similarities between the two ffs, other than the overall shape.

---

Wow. I guess I need to get my eyes checked.

Or better understand the definition of "overall shape."

To me, all f-holes have the same "overall shape." But rarely are two so closely aligned as these two.

Again, I challenge others to come up with as close a match.

[Mauricio]

Being a writer, you have a much better command of words. By "overall shape" I meant to indicate some of the curves and the alignment, but again, that's all I see. To me, the eyes are not identical, and the wings are not either (one is fluted, and the other one looks lowered, as you'd see it if you were looking at the long arch)

[andrew weinstein]

I'd say that both ff's are similar in design, and both would appear to be inspired by Guadagnini. It's not enough to really go on, but I'd say the ff's on the left appear Milanese, and the ones on the right look like Turin. Did you say there was only 9 years difference, or was that another set of ff's? I would have said Pedrazzini and Pressenda, but that would be more than 9 years

[Guy_Gallo]

Andrew,

No, the nine year difference is between the two strad f-holes.

The one on the left is Turin 1810 -- and likely inspired by Guadagnini to some extent -- it was a maker named Alessandro d'Espine (or Despine). He had a very personal model. Was a bit of an amateur (according to Blot) whose real career was as dentist/surgeon to the local royalty.

As for fluting, the base lower wing looks pretty flat to me. If anything with a slight rise (rather than a flute) to the extreme tip.

Yes, the treble lower wing of the right example IS sunken (or appears sunken) because the upper wing (as happens over time) has risen.

[Jeffrey Holmes]

If that's the fiddle illustrated in Eric's book, I believe the wings are fluted, just not overly so. Also, 1810 seems a bit early for that instrument... and I think Eric mentions this in the caption, yes?

I always considered D'Espine as a maker influenced by the Pressenda camp... at least based on the instruments I've seen that I'm comfortable with.

[Guy_Gallo]

Well, Pressenda's first contact with violin making came in 1819 at the Lete-Pillement workshop. Not sure when his first independent violin was out and labelled. Perhaps 1821? 1822?

According to Cozio, d'Espine had a workshop of his own with finished and half-finished violins in 1816.

"His production, though never abundant, was fairly consistent and of such excellent quality that it possibly influenced Pressenda... By observing his few known instruments we came tot he conclustion that D'Espine was not influenced by any particular school or violinmaking circle. He crafted models that revealsed free choices, unfamiliar to any school.; nevertheless, they were reminiscent of a typically French 'apprenticeship.'"

[Jeffrey Holmes]

Hi Guy;

I know what Eric's book says... and I still have the same reaction when I see a D'Espine, of which there aren't all that many. I see similarities with other instruments from the Turin school, especially Pressenda... and I am certainly happy to admit that I see "departures" as well. That would be expected, I think... but I don't see unlogical departures.

It is certainly possible that D'Espine had an influence on Pressenda early on (I think Eric even mentions this) and the more prolific maker (Pressenda) had an influence on D'Espine's making later... (Eric kind of dismisses this, but I'm not sure I agree). We're not talking about too many years (what, if we take the 1816 date and go to 1821 after Lete's death... 5 maybe?) between the documented half-finished instruments on D'Espine's bench and Pressenda's rise. Same city, small industry. Bisiach and the Antoniazzi's had this kind of influence relationship (teacher/student; student/teacher)... Unfortunately, it's really all just an educated guess on my part without some sort of documentation (or other evidence) linking the makers.

[Guy_Gallo]

I take your point, Jeffrey.

Is that a d'Espine you posted or a Pressenda? The fact that I have to ask sort of makes your point, doesn't it... looks like Pressenda's varnish.

Seems to me part of the reason this is all a bit of a blur (sort of like Milan in the 18th Century) is that so many of these makers seem to have intermingled with the same sequence of immigrant French (master and apprentices) makers. So that it gets a little murky at the middle of the century.

Anyway, what do you make of the two set of f-holes? Some relation, no relation? I defer to your eye regarding the slight fluting on this example of d'Espine. Perhaps I saw flat 'cause I wanted it to be flat (there is no unbiased eye).

[Jeffrey Holmes]

It's a D'Espine (at least I hope it is! ) I sold several years ago.

Back to your two sets. I'd say the "idea" behind the ffs are similar. The execution is different to my eye.

[T_Rocca]

Cant I see the scroll of that violin?

Thanks

[Guy_Gallo]

Which one? The right or the left?

By the way, to all that have been following this... I have aligned the overlays of the two sets of f-holes using the outermost nick. Given the slight differences in angle it might actually be a better match if i "skewed" the overlay to match the c-bouts and the upper eye. Might try that next.

[T_Rocca]

both of them if possible

[Guy_Gallo]

Here is the head of the fiddle on the left. The d'espine.

[MANFIO]

D'Espine was an amateur maker, he was the Dentist of the King Vittorio Emanuele I and of his family. Blot mentions that he exerted an influence in Pressenda. The instruments in Blot's book are very beautifull, and there is a very good biography in the book too.

[Guy_Gallo]

Yes, Manfio, that's where I found the photographs that seemed, to me at least, the closest match to the top of my own violin...

The reason I am not posting the head and back of the violin on the right is that this comparison is solely regarding the relation, if any, of the tops.

My violin has been pronounced a composite. And the 19thC Turin school was suggested as a place to look for a match to the belly. Of all the makers in Blot's book, this particular top resonated most sympathetically with my own. (Of course, it could be anyone -- and most likely is some unknown apprentice.)

Yes, there are signal differences as well. And I could never prove that D'Espine made a top for an existing back and scroll (unless he's signed the underside of the belly...) But it was fun to conjecture, and to see how others view the differences in the execution if these f-holes.

I suppose that raises another question the makers here might care to comment upon. If you are making a top to fit an existing back, how does that task differ, how might the resulting placement/edgework differ, from your normal belly?

[Mauricio]

I've always found D'Espine's shallowly fluted scrolls extremely attractive, like the one pictured here. Does that please anyone else? Or is this considered to be part of his amateur traits?

[Jacob]

Aren't shallowly-fluted scrolls a matter of style rather than competence?

[Oded Kishony]

Hello Guy,

Since I'm making a new top for an old cello at the moment.....how I make a new top depends on the existing instrument. The new top for this cello is needed because the arching of the old top collapsed several times and the cello is no longer stable enough to be playable. So copying the arching would not be a good idea. Since the arching will necessarily be different this will have an effect on the edgework as well. The thickness of the edge is different from the original which was too thin, but I am trying to keep it similar to the back edge thickness. I will try to match the purfling and varnish color and texture as well. To answer your question: for an anonymous early 19th C cello with poor arching I try to have the new top fit in the picture without copying the original. If it were a more important instrument with a history I would make a greater effort to remain loyal to the original. My main objective is to resurrect a beloved cello for a working professional cellist whose primary concern is the sound of the instrument.

He chose me to do this work because he likes the sound of my cellos and hopes that a new top made by me will produce that sound.

Oded Kishony

[MANFIO]

Hi falstaff! Another thing that seems to be a feature of D`Espine is that his soundboxes a bit on the long side, in Blot's book they range from 358 to 360.5.

He knew also Count Cozio di Salabue, an authority in the violin world.

Mauricio, I find his scrolls very classy.

Another amateur wich work I love is Chiocchi, he was a doctor, a violinist, a man of the theater and a violin maker.

[Guy_Gallo]

This image seemed to have gone missing in the thread. So I'm reposting for completion's sake.

[Michael_Molnar]

Fluting looks different.

[Guy_Gallo]

Good eye. There's a subtle fluting on the D'Espine. And none on the mystery fiddle.

[Jeffrey Holmes]

Good eye. There's a subtle fluting on the D'Espine. And none on the mystery fiddle.

Guy, how did you manage the image retrieval? Very impressive!

Thought you all would enjoy the back along with the front:

Funny enough, I saw a very fine D'Espine quite recently... believe me, based on all those I've seen, fluting on the ffs is very much part of his protocol.

Another feature of D'Espine is very tight clearance at the points of the wings (very evident in the f hole photo from Blot, maybe not so evident in the photo from my archives as the points are lost in shadow, but very present when the fiddle is in hand)... not present on the mystery fiddle.

As Andrew pointed out, while the general shape of the ffs on shown in the first portion of this thread may be similar, to my eye the approach (style, workmanship details, positioning on the top) are not.

[Guy_Gallo]

Thanks for jumping in, Jeffrey.

Yes, I noticed the difference in "clearance" between the two. And the lack of fluting in my fiddle is a problem.

But I have to say that the overall idea and shape of the fs in the D'Espine are the closest match (by far) that I have found in ten years of looking. The general shape and particularly the broadness of the wings.

I'd love to see another maker proposed with as close a match.