Sign in to follow this  
Michael_Molnar

Stradivari Mould/Violin Identification

Recommended Posts

... the studying the photos of the moulds, I realized that all my moulds were slightly distorted which naturally occurs due to instances of camera angles - parallax exct..

This is why there is nothing better than life size scans like those done by the "Museo Stradivariano"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is why there is nothing better than life size scans like those done by the "Museo Stradivariano"

please Tom,

I didn't know that Stradivari museum had life size scan available, do you have more details about that?

FD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a grey book that was tattered and pretty worn that I got the first set from. Black and white photos of the moulds. After looking at them I could see the parallax pretty obvious by the blocks where you could see the angles down in the mould.

The new moulds look much better though. Even correcting for slight wear around the edges.

I think I noticed it much more the last time a golden period strad came in that was pg mould.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
please Tom,

I didn't know that Stradivari museum had life size scan available, do you have more details about that?

FD

They r available within the BROOKS/DEGROTTE book "Stradivari, the violin & the golden number".

Mosconi made them at the request of Eric BROOKS. (circa 1994/95)

I don't think the Museum sells them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They r available within the BROOKS/DEGROTTE book "Stradivari, the violin & the golden number".

Mosconi made them at the request of Eric BROOKS. (circa 1994/95)

I don't think the Museum sells them.

dear Tom,

When I went to the Stradivari museum in 2005 Mr Mosconi had only full size black and white photos of the forms and the scans of this photos (which are in the BROOK/DEGROTTE book) can not be compare to the real scans of the forms. Anybody can appreciate the difference seeing them.

FD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dear Tom,

When I went to the Stradivari museum in 2005 Mr Mosconi had only full size black and white photos of the forms and the scans of this photos (which are in the BROOK/DEGROTTE book) can not be compare to the real scans of the forms. Anybody can appreciate the difference seeing them.

FD

I did some proof reading of their book and I was with them in Cremona at the Museum when Mosconi gave them the scans (I wrote scans and not photos !!!) I know the difference of what is a scan (made with a scanner :) so u do have NO parallax errors or edge distortions and so on ...) and what is a picture (taken with a camera (whatever the quality u can have ! with all the problematics stuffs cited above). And this is NOT scans of photos like u hastily seems to imply without proof. Anybody can appreciate too ...

This is why they used the material done under the supervision of the museum (like I wrote it in my previous post) so there is no "blahblah" about it.

There is the Museum copyright on each scans. Maybe u didn't had "access" to it.

It's no big deal with all of this, "whatever u can say, u will always find someone to say the opposite", that's what they always told me :)

"votre méthode est bonne ... comme est la leur !"

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Francois,

Thank you for posting the pictures of the tracing tool you use. I could not tell what was actually making the mark, was it a piece of pencil lead? How was it attached?

I also enjoy your book and and am using a PG mold that I made with your method.

I looked briefly to see if you had made any attributions for molds and instruments but did not see any in the book.

Thanks for adding your thoughts and also for the respectful way in which you make your comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike,

Francois' images are from scans, front and back and he describes in detail the process and margins of error. The book comes with ( 10?) full size laminated copies of the 4/4 violin molds with the corner and end blocks in position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

forgot to add that they spent hours at the Museum to check the accuracy of the scans on all their respective molds.

One mold was not present in the series. (A viola one) They tried to scan it with their own A3 size scanner they brought but it didn't work. Probably because of the nature of the wood use. so they took a pencil outline of it.

Mosconi had suspicions about its authenticity so Brooks/Degrotte decided to put it aside and not to publish it.

They were fortunate to capture the acoustic signature of the Cremonese violin which is another story :)

Good day all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I did some proof reading of their book and I was with them in Cremona at the Museum when Mosconi gave them the scans (I wrote scans and not photos !!!) I know the difference of what is a scan (made with a scanner :) so u do have NO parallax errors or edge distortions and so on ...) and what is a picture (taken with a camera (whatever the quality u can have ! with all the problematics stuffs cited above). And this is NOT scans of photos like u hastily seems to imply without proof. Anybody can appreciate too ...

:)

Hi Tom

I'm not saying that you took photos in Cremona but I believe that you did a scans of pictures of the forms given to you by Mr Mosconi. I saw myself these pictures, they look like full size negatives of the forms (black and white on transparent plastic). I have to say that it has been long way to get the permition to scan the forms (more than two years). I need some hight references to convice Mr Mosconi to open the showcases (among many thank again to Mr Charles Beares and Etienne Vatelot who wrote personnal letters to Mr Mosconi emphazing the interesst of my work). Once in Cremona I did the job with Me Patrick Robin and Eric Blot and dispite my recommendations Mr Mosconi tried to avoid the opening of the showcases and he offered me to scan the full size negatives. He explained me that this work (the full size photos) had been done with a specialy big camera and expensive camera. But I insisted a lot and finaly he opened the windows. I remember to have been very surprised to see how much some of these forms were worn and twisted. After a while Mr Mosconi were getting nervous and impatient, he worried about the light of the scans and Mr Blot provide the perfect answer saying "don't worried maestro this light it's cold light..."

I attache two samples (a particular of the G form withe the 300 dpi printers standard)

One come from the Brook's book and the other is the one I made.

Obviously anybody can appreciate that something is different.

FD

post-29143-1257449604_thumb.jpg

post-29143-1257449656_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francois,

Thank you for posting the pictures of the tracing tool you use. I could not tell what was actually making the mark, was it a piece of pencil lead? How was it attached?

It's an thin iron pin (drill into the wood) . There is a carbon paper under the white paper so when the iron pin goes along the ribs, the carbon paper marks the trace on the other side of the white paper. Like that you don't need to sharp the pencil and the line is very accurate

good try

PS: don't sharp to much the iron pin, you will cut the paper...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francois,

Thank you for posting the pictures of the tracing tool you use. I could not tell what was actually making the mark, was it a piece of pencil lead? How was it attached?

It's an thin iron pin (drill into the wood) . There is a carbon paper under the white paper so when the iron pin goes along the ribs, the carbon paper marks the trace on the other side of the white paper. Like that you don't need to sharp the pencil and the line is very accurate

good try

PS: don't sharp to much the iron pin, you will cut the paper...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Tom

I attache two samples (a particular of the G form withe the 300 dpi printers standard)

One come from the Brook's book and the other is the one I made.

Obviously anybody can appreciate that something is different.

FD

I apologize but it seems that only one picture is there

new try

post-29143-1257452822_thumb.jpgpost-29143-1257453544_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"La plupart des hommes ne réfléchissent pas sur ce qui se présente à eux et, même une fois instruits, ils ne comprennent pas: ils vivent dans l'apparence." Platon

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They were fortunate to capture the acoustic signature of the Cremonese violin which is another story :)

Good day all

tomroth,

Could you elaborate on this remark please.

Thank you,

Craig T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Always keep in mind that it is not known if all of Stradivari's molds survived and most likely some did not.

According to correspondence between concerned parties (during the transition of ownership) 410 wooden moulds were counted amongst the artifacts in Stradivari's shop. How many of these were classifed as violin moulds is not known.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last post November 2009.

Where you in a time out for that long? :)

Wow! I'd better behave myself or I could be seeing triple digits before I am allowed back again! :)

410 wooden 'patterns' maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is a nice article by John Dilworth in The Strad, April 2005 p. 56 on Making a Mould in the Trade Secrets.

I lost the link to it.

Mike

It was in the 'old' downloads section, at TheStrad.com, but didn't get transferred to the new web-site when they changed over.

That was the very first of many great Trade Secrets articles!

The PDF file was titled Stradposter and it was 207 Kb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, the letter stated 410 wooden moulds.

My point being that the word moulds here might be referring to 'patterns' made out of wood as well, unless Stradivari was a pack-rat and had a shop the size of Lake Michigan, I don't see 410 full sized moulds, some cellos, hanging around the shop. But hey that could be just me, as I may not have the imagination you do! :) Just razzin' you! :)

It's good to have you back! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently laid out a PG mould à la Denis. When I compared it to the Messiah I found the the lower bout of the Messiah is larger than my PG - more like the G mould. The upper and middle bouts match, but not the lower bout. To be blunt the Messiah has a big ass in my brazen opinion.

For those who don't know the facts that this could be an issue, there is a PG inscribed in the pegbox of the Messiah.

Did anyone else do a comparison? Data and Measurements needed, not opinions.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.