New Padah's Roth


Recommended Posts

And, 2):

I think others made similar points concerning "due care". Mine (concerning contact with the Roth Family) back on page 4 was:

"If one has doubt about Jesse's listing, the time to involve the Roth family might have been better before 3 full pages of comment and any accusations of foul-play... and arguably might have best been done before the listing (I don't know how in depth Jesse's contact with the family has been)."

Hey Jeffrey, maybe I'm being obtuse regarding this part of your response. Are we in violent agreement regarding this point (due diligence prior to listing), or was there something else that you'd like me to address, such as "best effort?"

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 256
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

jefferey, are you saying pahdah was wrong to label his juzek mint, or that i have a right to call the hopf mint but not the 1907 american, until i get some kind of consensus as to what mint is and is not from people that are not lonstanding lyndon haters, im not sure i want to change the listing.....

I'm not telling you what to do, Lyndon.

I'm saying I personally would not use the term if the item had been circulated/used. If an item was in immaculate condition and without repair, but had been circulated (used), I would choose to state the shows little signs of use, and is in very fine condition. To me, this makes more sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i talked to my expert friend about the listing, he recommended changing the title to nearly mint instead of mint, which i have done, i also edited the description to say the violin is in mint condition except for the wing crack, i hope that makes everyone happy, but im sure it doesnt

i havent changed the other C F Hopf violin listed as mint, because i still feel that is mint, at least by some definitions of mint

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Jeffrey, maybe I'm being obtuse regarding this part of your response. Are we in violent agreement regarding this point (due diligence prior to listing), or was there something else that you'd like me to address, such as "best effort?"

I don't think we are in disagreement. At the point I wrote this, I was not aware of how much data Jesse had concerning this particular instrument, instruments like it, or the extent of his contact with the Roth family. In other words, assumptions seem to have been made on both sides of the issue at that point in the discussion, the realities of which were hazy (at least to me).

When I write an opinion, I have data to support such an opinion (in the form of documentation & photographs of similar instruments, etc) which, if my opinion were questioned, I could produce to support it.

Even this due care isn't foolproof... There have been times in which an instrument can be supported (by the appraiser and others) to be "by" a maker, but historical research later nulls this possibility (Lorenzo Guadagnini is a good example of this). The previous opinion of an instrument like this might very well have followed the rules of "due care" and still be "wrong" in the end.

Interesting note: The IRS has, and can, throw out a charitable gift donation appraisal if the appraiser has not previously appraised similar items BY the maker, or author, or artist. Makes a bit of sense, no?

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who care:

From the Ebay Guide for sellers: "SUMMARY: "Mint" means perfect, if the item's not literally in perfect shape, it's not mint."

From Dictionary.com: "Definition: in new or like-new condition Example: In stamps, mint condition means unused."

"mint" (adj.) from Merriam-Webster: "unmarred as if fresh from a mint"

Link to post
Share on other sites

People, you've got to let this shit go!

At least 3 threads focused on an ebay seller with reasonable violins.

Are they EXACTLY what the seller claims to be?

Who cares?!

Caveat Emptor anyone?

The making and buying and selling of violin family instruments is a blood sport. If you wade in half-cocked, you will probably get f***ed.

Live and learn. Are you guys going to police ALL THE VIOLINS ON EBAY? I hope not.

Let Jeffery eat his dinner, don't buy the violins you don't like, buy the ones you do, but please put your big boy pants on and stop pissing and moaning about every mediocre (no offense) violin that rears it's ugly head online.

Or don't. I'm just saying, it makes one tired, and there are better ways...............blah...blah...blah...zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Link to post
Share on other sites

People, you've got to let this shit go!

At least 3 threads focused on an ebay seller with reasonable violins.

Are they EXACTLY what the seller claims to be?

Who cares?!

Caveat Emptor anyone?

The making and buying and selling of violin family instruments is a blood sport. If you wade in half-cocked, you will probably get f***ed.

Live and learn. Are you guys going to police ALL THE VIOLINS ON EBAY? I hope not.

Let Jeffery eat his dinner, don't buy the violins you don't like, buy the ones you do, but please put your big boy pants on and stop pissing and moaning about every mediocre (no offense) violin that rears it's ugly head online.

Or don't. I'm just saying, it makes one tired, and there are better ways...............blah...blah...blah...zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

The law says it's Caveat Venditor is the point. Don't be making claims you can't afford to cash.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Flyboy, I like Jesse's ebay listings as everyone knows he "sometimes" embellishes a little, is quite a character and I believe him to be very honest. Now that I have read all of your posts, I am extremely impressed with your knowledge and presentation on this board and can see that you are certainly a top notch attorney. I am not only an "oldtimer" but also a "lightweight" on this board and this topic with nothing of real importance to say. But I really enjoy reading all the different opinions as there are many very smart and intelligent professionals here and I have learned a lot. It will be interesting to see if there is ever a conclusive ending to this particular famous Roth (the Hound). OT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Martin, would like to complement you on your serious replys and comments on this Roth. Also, your attitude in your replys should be an example to all who comment on this board, as I feel you are a sterling example of how to conduct a civil discussion,as you are certainly one of the very best! OT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Martin, would like to complement you on your serious replys and comments on this Roth. Also, your attitude in your replys should be an example to all who comment on this board, as I feel you are a sterling example of how to conduct a civil discussion,as you are certainly one of the very best! OT

Hello OT, I agree with this 100%. I must say though, I enjoyed all the fuss with Jesse's listing. I think that poor old Roth violin got the worst of it though. Good luck with this listing Jesse:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

its hard to imagine some people actually read the 19 page discussion on the "1929" Roth, and still dont find anything wrong with pahdahs original listing, even martins theory is in direct contradiction to what pahdah said in the ad

my apologies on the mint business, i was under the it seems mistaken impression that mint just means exceptionally good condition FOR ITS AGE. it seems others see mint as an almost unreachable ideal for antiques, even though i see online almost 300 year old stradivaris refered to as mint(the lady blunt) or near mint. Anyway it seems i was mistaken, and have edited the listing

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, lyndon myself I think that's nonsense. I think your listings are fine, and all my life an antique car etc that was advertised as mint was just that. It's how one would process our own thoughts on that particular item, violins included. Some may think differently but who's to say what is right and what is wrong. It's an expression of something, and I'm sure when it comes to an old violin, 99% of us would see mint as in perfect or close to it for an old antique. Ahhhhh!,,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, lyndon myself I think that's nonsense. I think your listings are fine, and all my life an antique car etc that was advertised as mint was just that. It's how one would process our own thoughts on that particular item, violins included. Some may think differently but who's to say what is right and what is wrong. It's an expression of something, and I'm sure when it comes to an old violin, 99% of us would see mint as in perfect or close to it for an old antique. Ahhhhh!,,

I'd have more faith in your judgement about language if you could use it properly yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well a talk with another expert friend and a thorough search of "mint antique" on google has convinced me that my more liberal idea of what mint means is not supported in the industry, my mistake, but an honest mistake, i had no intention to deceive anyone, the pictures and descriptions speak clearly for the instruments,so i have edited all the "mint" out of my listings and used the words "top condition" instead. now the wolves can tear me apart for using top

Link to post
Share on other sites

again rudall misquotes me, i clearly state that the ONLY structural issue on the whole violin is a 1/2" wing crack, you cant just string together parts of sentences, skip important info in the same sentence and call it a quote, rather its called a misquote, very unprofessional

I didn't misquote you at all. That was a direct excerpt from your listing. Nothing was strung together or skipped.

I am not a violin professional and have no pretensions in that quarter at all. I don't know what profession you were referring to when you called me 'unprofessional'. Another loosely used word.

I am, however, a language professional, so when I say that your violin is not mint I do know what I'm talking about.

Challenge my use of English when you have learned to write a coherent sentence and show other readers the courtesy of attempting to type properly.

Congratulations on backing down and editing your listing.

Andrew

Link to post
Share on other sites

... all my life an antique car etc that was advertised as mint was just that.

Actually, that's precisely the problem. Different market segments have adopted the term, meaning slightly different things within that market. I'm afraid I disagree with you, however. Most antique cars are not "just that" if one chooses to use the dictionary to define the word.

Tell me about it! I'm directionally challenged and this thread is not helping. LOL

The calculator was an important piece of technology, but for me, GPS was the really critical invention!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, that's precisely the problem. Different market segments have adopted the term, meaning slightly different things within that market. I'm afraid I disagree with you, however. Most antique cars are not "just that" if one chooses to use the dictionary to define the word.

The calculator was an important piece of technology, but for me, GPS was the really critical invention!

Funny thing is that my gps got me lost.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Martin, re-read your own post:

- Shouldn't you perhaps apologize to Mike Danielson? He got it more right than you did.

- Notice anything ad hominem in your post?

Mike, I think you should read the original thread, as you seem to have picked up a lot of false information : http://www.maestrone...7-pahdahs-roth/.

It's not by any means strange for an instrument from 1929 or 1960 to be pristine. In this case the varnish treatment gives a good ballpark "latest date".

The Roth firm are responsible for the contradictions in this violin, but they are very unlikely to admit to this. A second EH Roth certificate would most likely back up the contents of the first one.

Flyboy gets very hot under the collar and likes to threaten people with legal trouble. If his interpretation of fair practice was observed, you would have to put half the violin dealers in the world in jail and half the violins in the world into landfill.

The main thing I've learnt from all of this is that maestronet has become deeply unpleasant.

Categorical statements and insults don't lead to the widening of our knowledge base!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, that's precisely the problem. Different market segments have adopted the term, meaning slightly different things within that market. I'm afraid I disagree with you, however. Most antique cars are not "just that" if one chooses to use the dictionary to define the word.

Thanks Jeffrey, I want to apologize because I went to be bed after posting that and you are correct. This part "Different market segments have adopted the term" says it all. I just couldn't pull myself out of bed but I did realize it and today I see your reply. A lot of people do use the word to draw in buyers. In all fairness I agree, most cases it is not correct especially with Violins\Fine Instruments. Selling cars and boats one may get away with it but it's still not right. The Violin market is a different market, a class of it's own. Thanks for correcting me... Lyndon did the right thing by changing his listings, sounds a lot more professional too!

Learning something new everyday:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Martin, re-read your own post:

- Shouldn't you perhaps apologize to Mike Danielson? He got it more right than you did.

- Notice anything ad hominem in your post?

It's a fair cop Flyboy - I did make an ad hominem remark about you. I would happily retract it but you've just re-posted it.

If Mike Danielson wishes me to apologize, I'm sure he's capable of letting me know in what way I might have have caused him offence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say that I find this thread on the whole to be quite disappointing.

I was just perusing some other threads on this forum and found that people were willing to give simple answers to questions, and back up their reasoning with certain facts. That doesn't seem to be happening here, and I don't know why. Only Martin seems to be willing to do so regarding the 1929 Roth, and it seems that he (like me) is stil trying to learn about the details of the Roth's history.

It seems to me that a question I asked earlier would end the debate regarding this particular violin. Specifically, was the "rich oil varnish" and the "genuine grafted scroll" an indicator of pre- versus post-WWII Roths, or was it merely an indicator of the IX-R model versus the XI-R model?

Surely there are people reading this forum that can answer these two simple questions definitively (Flyboy certainly presents himself as one). So would someone kindly provide an answer to these two points? It would seem that a knowledgeable answer to these questions would end all debate as to the question of whether this violin was pre- or post-WWII.

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.