Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

New quiz


Omobono
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 and 3 seem to have very similar ffs;

2 and 3 have very similar outlines;

all three seem to have been varnished in a way that does not enhance the spruce grain (though also 3 has some splotchiness)

I don't recognize 1, but with that edgework, 2 and 3 can only be one thing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate not having the cat out of the bag yet, as I want to learn some of this. I didn't follow the last one too well, but here is what I see on these.

Long corners and abrupt arching on #1. Squarer shoulders. Also, the upper R bout looks unnaturally flat towards the corner. The f's on 2 are more upright (are those Stainer-ish?).

I agree with Mauricio about the similar outlines of 2 and 3, but are the C's longer on #3?

Regarding the edges, was the reference to the pronounced edging, i.e., the edges stand out? I am only aware of one reference whenever edging is mentioned. So, Mauricio, were you implying that you know the country? Or more?

I think I remember that folks look at outline first...HOW?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something like that, Maurizio, but not the same city necessarily.

My source and authority for the answer is here on Maestronet files.

Personally I think fiddle #1 in set 1 is gorgeous.

But there again, "de gustibus non disbutantur" - 'there's no accounting for taste'!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:


Originally posted by:
falstaff

The first two look like they were made yesterday.


They are pretty fresh, aren't they... The second one of the first set almost looks new.

To me the features, especially the patina, doesn't have a "classic" look like a 18th century Cremonese fiddle... Shall we say they're probably 150 years old or less?

Omobono, hope you don't mind... That's my one hint. I'll be quiet now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is my take on the age/wear. On set 2 all seem to have bow wear on treble C edge, esp. #2, which also has rounded treble corners. #3 upper treble corner is also rounded. Set 1 violins have less apparent wear. So, with Jeffrey's hint, maybe in the 1880-1920 range?

Although I won't know any of the makers by their characteristics...for those of us learning, do you have any hints to share on country or region? What to look at?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even talking of 150 years - the work still looks fresh.

How about this edge work and f-hole carving?

Some have said, it represents the transition or bridge

from the last links with the classic tradition

to the beginning of the modern revival, if there is such a thing(?)

All three belonged to "familes" if you will of violinmakers.

I seem to recall Michael Darton has a particular admiration

for the craftsmanship of the last of the three.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mauricio,

I didn't see any preaching in your posts. I just wanted to bring out more of your knowledge on the edging and what you inferred from that. I have a limited knowledge on violin characteristics and know even less about particular schools, families, and makers. I enjoy the beauty of violins and maybe it wouldn't be such a bad thing to understand what I am looking at. On this trio I am trying to connect WHAT I see with the little I know. I hope not to mislead others, but...

Re: edging, I have been told that French edges are more rounded, and therefore more pronounced.

The edge closeups show #3 has the tightest edges, #2 may have the most pronounced.

THe closeups also reveal to my eyes a significant difference in varnishes, #3 being much warmer and #1 having the least depth.

Re: age, #1 looks the most recent with #3 being oldest.

The back images seem to amplify the differences in the C bouts of #2 and 3 (#1's C's being completely different) and the squareness of #1's shoulders.

When looking at outlines and ffs,is it common practice, in general, to try to see influences of Strad, Guarneri, Amati, and Stainer and just learn which schools and families emphasized characteristics of these makers? If so, #3's Cs look Guarneri-inspired to me. Also, the ffs and scooping of #1 in set 1 look like those on Le Messie in CJ book but either #1's waist is more pinched or corners are longer, increasing the concavity of the Cs.

Intriguing that #1 and #3 seem so different and yet are somehow connected.

Not that it would help me identify them, but are we going to see the scrolls?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still not sure about #1, so it will be based on deduction. It reminds me a little of Sgarabottos that are not fake antiqued, but I don't think that's what it is.

#2 has to be a Riccardo Antoniazzi, among others because of the yellow varnish and the very pronounced edgework (Brad, I guess you're seeing the right things).

#3 at first I thought was also an Antoniazzi, but seeing the back made me think it's a Leandro Bisiach, either no pin or hidden pin, bigger button, crazily precise workmanship, etc.

So, by deduction, I'm going to call it a Leandro Bisach connection, for having first studied with one of them (Romeo? I can't remember...) and later employed one or both of them, assuming then that #1 is a piece by Romeo.

The other option would be to call it an Antoniazzi connection, in case #1 is indeed one, and in case there's also Romeo's hand in #3 (top?)

There, that was a stab alright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...