Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Georges Chanot


GoldenPlate

Recommended Posts

I have found a pattern among fraudulent sellers on ebay (e.g., violiniada, eboy.inc, stradivari1719, etc.), and it often involves one or more of the following:

1. Private listing (this helps hide shill bidding)

2. No returns accepted

3. Low number (below 50 feedbacks) or bad quality (below 99%) feedback score

4. The appearance of unusually intense early competition between 2 or 3 bidders (shills)

5. The CYA words "lab." or "labeled" in the description, which means "hey it's labeled X but it's not necessarily by X"

6. Absurdly high asking prices for items with buy it now and "best offer" (fishing for offers)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its not chinese people i hate, its the violins,chinese violins i hate so much (a quote from my mini novela the violin war with china, 2nd link below....) are you sure thats not 100 yr old german, peter, they made a lot of chanot, but this label looks pretty new

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if a new member went to all the trouble to join maestronet and then out of all the wonderful offerings on ebay he picks this ugly duckling to ask his first question??? it doesnt make a lot of sense, i mean if you are going to bid on a violin on ebay, you wouldnt want to draw attention to it and push the price up by listing a link on maestronet, readers beware......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This should help clear the air.

Jmann; I'm confused. Clear the air about what? Except the general model, all I see are two unrelated violins... and that is even detectible in spite of the terrible resolution of the first photo of the sets.

A public note to you: I appreciate your acknowledgement about my attempts at fairness on the"other" thread, but I've only let two of your last 4 posts through. You know why, I'm sure. Please refrain from being combative. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jmann; I'm confused. Clear the air about what? Except the general model, all I see are two unrelated violins... and that is even detectible in spite of the terrible resolution of the first photo of the sets.

A public note to you: I appreciate your acknowledgement about my attempts at fairness on the"other" thread, but I've only let two of your last 4 posts through. You know why, I'm sure. Please refrain from being combative. Thank you.

Jeffrey,

I don't see anything confusing. The fiddles are related according to what I know. Can't help old pictures being grainy when cropped and resized. The backs are quite similar, but the one in the listing is cropped off at the lower end, so I left that out.

Enough detail is present because I can see it well enough to say so.

Re my posts you didn't allow: I wasn't being combative at all, just speaking my mind.

Everyone else does. Why can't I do the same? Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeffrey,

I don't see anything confusing. The fiddles are related according to what I know. Can't help old pictures being grainy when cropped and resized. The backs are quite similar, but the one in the listing is cropped off at the lower end, so I left that out.

Enough detail is present because I can see it well enough to say so.

I can see the fuzzy image well enough to note that the outline differs (especially as it enters the corners and in the C bouts), the treatment of the corners do not relate, the arching does not relate (visible even viewed in 2 dimensions ) the ffs do not relate (eyes, wings or geometry), the placement of the ffs do not relate, the fluting of the lower wings do not relate, what I can see of the edge-work does not relate... In other words the subjects of the images are different enough that these things can be seen even in a grainy photo. Imagine what could be noted if the images were clear and of higher resolution!

I'm pointing this out so that other participants can look for what I'm seeing. If you really want believe they are related, I'm sure I'd be wasting my time trying to convince you otherwise.

Re my posts you didn't allow: I wasn't being combative at all, just speaking my mind.

Everyone else does. Why can't I do the same? Thank you.

Your deleted posts were aimed at specific posters, contained combative language, and qualified as "flames"... they were made of the same stuff as those that resulted in my move to preview your posts before approving them... but you knew that already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

curious that lalofrank2011 is a member of MN with 2 posts related to ebay listings and lalofrank2011 is also the seller of this VSO. the item is located in ca[space]lifornia. private listing/bidders hidden. early intense shill bidding. both non-native english speakers in the ebay listings and the mn posts. the OP’s first Maestronet post is related to an auction, ostensibly seeking an opinion but apparently more of an ‘advertisement’?; because said auction started roughly at the time of said post, their first MN post, their first violin auction. curious. gee whiz, it's amateur hour! kinda fun though.

J-man, i like the pic comparison. I feel that I've seen this somewhere before, though. eBay, perhaps? just curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see the fuzzy image well enough to note that the outline differs (especially as it enters the corners and in the C bouts), the treatment of the corners do not relate, the arching does not relate (visible even viewed in 2 dimensions ) the ffs do not relate (eyes, wings or geometry), the placement of the ffs do not relate, the fluting of the lower wings do not relate... In other words the images are different enough that these things can be seen even in a grainy photo. Imagine what could be noted if the images were clear and of higher resolution!

I'm pointing this out so that other participants can look for what I'm seeing. If you really want believe they are related, I'm sure I'd be wasting my time trying to convince you otherwise.

Thanks, Jeffrey! Your narrative is quite good but it has nothing to do with the facts: "what I want to believe" is far different than "what I know". No two fiddles are exactly alike; even when made on the same pattern differences can easily be seen. So why then would using grainy old photographs be a problem in the identification process? say of a Strad or a del Gesu? (I get the distinct impression that you're deliberately trying to 'discredit' me and what I said, just because I speak my own mind and do NOT agree with the usual bent.)

Why? For what reason? Because you think you don't like me? Am I not chic enough to be in the Maestronet clique?

That another poster has spouted off about the label looking 'too new' and how so many great copyists have out copied George Chanot is pure bunk. There are only a couple 1849 George Chanot fiddles registered on cozio which doesn't mean much in real time, but it does mean that it is highly unlikely that a 'random fake' is going to show up anywhere. But, the armchair critics will surely try to have a field day trying to turn a molehill into the Matterhorn. The less they know the more they say.

The label in the fiddle in the eBay listing is authentic to a fare-thee-well, so that tells me that the poster/spouter doesn't have a clue and should not have said anything for or against the seller, or the violin. Who cares if the seller posted the link fishing for 'opinions'? Is anyone participating (in this thread) going to bid on the fiddle? I doubt it, but I'll guarantee you this: a 'dealer-incognito' will win the auction. I've seen it happen many times and the fiddles still sold for pennies on the dollar.

What benefit is there in 'discussing' something so inconsequential? - "the usual rubbish?" really? Compared to what? A Jackson-Guuldan? howz about Roth, Heberlien, JTL, John Juzek, Asa White, Gand - or one of the hideous Vuillaume (JB that is) 'exactments' of the Cannon? How about as compared to any fiddle maker's work who posts in the forum? Compared to what?

Allowing posters to (criminally) accuse (without proof) any trader in any online sales venue isn't good. Aren't such accusations called slander, character assassination, defamation of name? Some people very dear to me just went through 2 years of living hell over that kind of crap and the appellate courts finally overturned every false charge of which they were 'convicted in the local jurisdiction'. The tables are now turned and their accusers have scattered like a covey of quail. What goes around comes around.

(Jeff, I seriously doubt that you'll let this one pass, but at least I didn't "flame".) :)

But if you really believe in fairness and freedom of speech, you will let my post through.

Right? Good on you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Jeffrey! Your narrative is quite good but it has nothing to do with the facts: "what I want to believe" is far different than "what I know". No two fiddles are exactly alike; even when made on the same pattern differences can easily be seen. So why then would using grainy old photographs be a problem in the identification process? say of a Strad or a del Gesu? (I get the distinct impression that you're deliberately trying to 'discredit' me and what I said, just because I speak my own mind and do NOT agree with the usual bent.)

Why? For what reason? Because you think you don't like me? Am I not chic enough to be in the Maestronet clique?

That another poster has spouted off about the label looking 'too new' and how so many great copyists have out copied George Chanot is pure bunk. There are only a couple 1849 George Chanot fiddles registered on cozio which doesn't mean much in real time, but it does mean that it is highly unlikely that a 'random fake' is going to show up anywhere. But, the armchair critics will surely try to have a field day trying to turn a molehill into the Matterhorn. The less they know the more they say.

The label in the fiddle in the eBay listing is authentic to a fare-thee-well, so that tells me that the poster/spouter doesn't have a clue and should not have said anything for or against the seller, or the violin. Who cares if the seller posted the link fishing for 'opinions'? Is anyone participating (in this thread) going to bid on the fiddle? I doubt it, but I'll guarantee you this: a 'dealer-incognito' will win the auction. I've seen it happen many times and the fiddles still sold for pennies on the dollar.

What benefit is there in 'discussing' something so inconsequential? - "the usual rubbish?" really? Compared to what? A Jackson-Guuldan? howz about Roth, Heberlien, JTL, John Juzek, Asa White, Gand - or one of the hideous Vuillaume (JB that is) 'exactments' of the Cannon? How about as compared to any fiddle maker's work who posts in the forum? Compared to what?

Allowing posters to (criminally) accuse (without proof) any trader in any online sales venue isn't good. Aren't such accusations called slander, character assassination, defamation of name? Some people very dear to me just went through 2 years of living hell over that kind of crap and the appellate courts finally overturned every false charge of which they were 'convicted in the local jurisdiction'. The tables are now turned and their accusers have scattered like a covey of quail. What goes around comes around.

(Jeff, I seriously doubt that you'll let this one pass, but at least I didn't "flame".) :)

But if you really believe in fairness and freedom of speech, you will let my post through.

Right? Good on you!

Sure... I'll let this one pass. Not for the benefit of "freedom of speech" though. This is a discussion board, paid for and run by a private company... not Hyde Park corner. Not for "fairness" either. I don't think huffing and puffing about "facts" (especially when they aren't facts) is all that fair to some of the other members of the board. I'll let your post through for amusement. Why? Don't know. Just feel like it.

For my part, I will suggest that you READ my posts instead of skimming. You have a habit of getting that portion of the facts wrong yourself. I didn't say anything about "exactly alike". I said "they don't relate". These two fiddles were not made on the same form, by the same maker, and I very much doubt during the same century. That said, I did mention that trying to convince you would be a waste of my time. I was right. According to the logic you've presented above, one could make a case for any violin being by pretty much any maker... and the opinion is defended by "I speak my own mind and do NOT agree with the usual bent."

As far as attempting to discredit you; No. I'm really not making an effort to do so. Why should I bother? Sometimes your opinions are so far out there that I can't help but point out the difficulties, however.

Original Label? I'm not even going to dignify the statement with a response. BTW: I really don't know who might have gone to the trouble of "copying" Chanot, but I've seen plenty of instruments that have had Chanot (or tons of other) labels inserted later on. Why? The instrument probably looked "something like one" and someone thought they might get away with it and make a few bucks in the process.

Had a nice Vuillaume Cannon copy in the shop today... If you think they are hideous, I'd suggest you've not seen a good one.

As far as others presenting information that you or another trader might disagree with, I have my limits, but also try to balance things... and tend to allow responses from the seller should they wish to clear the air... even when the seller in question thinks they are successfully hiding behind a screen name.

Bottom line; If you don't like the way the board is being moderated, you do not need to participate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Bottom line; If you don't like the way the board is being moderated, you do not need to participate."

Mr. Holmes,

Your time, experience, and trustworthy expertise is appreciated by many, including me.

Disagreement does not mean enmity.

Thanks for your service to Maestronet and violin lovers, from all walks of life.

Jmann

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not many people will say on here what they really think an ebay violin is before the end of an auction, if they think it is good. I know I won't, and don't see why I should. Ebay, supposedly is an auction site, and may the highest bid win.

The reason is simple, and I don't think there is anything unethical in the buying process.

Ones knowledge, accrued over many years, is very valuable, but also not infallible.

If nobody sees what I see, then I will get the item at a bargain price, and I have purchased several good items for a fraction of their true worth over the years. (not recently)

Equally I have made some mistakes, thankfully nothing really silly, mostly based on incorrect statements about condition.

If you see something good, why tell everybody? just go buy it, and then you can bask in the self congratulatory feeling that I get when something good appears out of the case.

I have to say, that I don't do ebay anymore, just can't be bothered to go through the new, and pretend old stuff, which I believe this one is.

If, on the other hand you feel you have a duty towards the seller, I really don't think you or anyone has. The seller, albeit sometimes in ignorance, chose to put the item at auction, and that's it as far as I am concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lalofrank2011 is the new i.d of "ihaformosa" whose bizarre and deluded use of eBay I recorded in :

previous post

Interestingly the last violin this freedom fighter sold repeatedly was a genuine but tatty Joseph Chanot which he bought at Bromptons.

I see lalofrank2011 has just "sold" a bow which he inherited from his mentor, the same bow as has been "sold" several times by ihaformosa! How long before he lists it again?

Martin Swan Violins

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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...