Jeff White Posted August 12, 2014 Report Share Posted August 12, 2014 Ok, so many of you might remember this violin as I used it to post my first post here on MN back in 2011. I have recently decided to do (and redo) previous work on this to get it up to speed. I have has this mostly kicking around my shop (instead of in the showroom) because: #1 is really wasn't finished (peg bushings etc), and #2, I can't quite get a hold on what it is. This is the link to the original thread....if anyone cares: http://www.maestronet.com/forum/index.php?/topic/325080-old-saxony-violin-help-wid/ I now have it open, so I can see that it looks to be BOB construction. Not sure if those sweeping end/neck blocks are original. I think the corner blocks might be original. The rib extensions (depth) you see from the outside are put on top of the linings, ribs and blocks. I originally thought the the linings where replaced because from the inside I couldn't see the extensions, but not open its obvious. Corners looked to have been clamped together in the typical BOB construction and later fitted with full corner block inserts. What bugs me about saying this is Saxony??? 1. Neck block, attachment area 2. That scroll just doesn't seem to match. So tiny too. I know some others (Martin) on the old thread felt it to be original, but I'm struggling with that. It is an AMAZING sounding violin, almost a little scary. 352mm back. 30mm ribs (with the extension). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin swan Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 Jeff, why don't you get a dendro? I think the violin is easily old enough that it would be very revealing ... in fact Peter may already have done one What's the black of the purfling material? Is it ebony, stained wood or "something else"? Looks from the photos like stained wood - is that right? I don't suppose the ribs are let into the back? Does the scroll bear any relation to this one? I couldn't tell without seeing them side by side and the same size .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richf Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 Jeff, I see that you haven't yet summoned the courage to act on Jacob Saunders' suggestion and remove the Grancino label. There might be something under there that would clear things up. Richard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff White Posted August 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 Jeff, I see that you haven't yet summoned the courage to act on Jacob Saunders' suggestion and remove the Grancino label. There might be something under there that would clear things up. Richard Aahh. Jacob's theory of a pot of gold under that there Italian label? Jeff, why don't you get a dendro? I think the violin is easily old enough that it would be very revealing ... in fact Peter may already have done one What's the black of the purfling material? Is it ebony, stained wood or "something else"? Looks from the photos like stained wood - is that right? I don't suppose the ribs are let into the back? Does the scroll bear any relation to this one? I couldn't tell without seeing them side by side and the same size .... scroll.jpg Dendro, Ummmm, hadn't really considered it. Purfling, not sure, what do you think? Really black, through and through in most places. Not really any bleeding into the center strip, except for the "fill" in some areas. Not good on purfling, I haven't gotten that far in Jacob's ID book yet. Addie's on that lesson I think. Ribs let in: No, don't think so. Scroll: In some ways yes, others no. Not sure what similarities are more important than other similarities. Fluting on your pic seems deeper on the turns(side view). Mine aren't really deep until the last turn, no forward facing finish....... Not good with my scroll nomenclature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratcliffiddles Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 No Martin, I haven't.. i'd need far sharper and larger images to attempt it. I think the fiddle looks more late 18th century French every time I see it. I can't really place it anywhere else stylistically. Jeff can you post a picture of the hand varnish wear on the upper right rib? What do you mean "Dendro, Ummmm, hadn't really considered it."!! It's the first thing anybody should consider on this type of fiddle. There are plenty of rings there, so dendro might give added info. Contact me if you want to pursue that.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin swan Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 Absolutely the first thing I would do with this would be to get a dendro. No-one would pretend that dendro will solve all identification conundrums, but in this case I think it would at least tell you who to ask next. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blank face Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 Did anybody notice, that the corner blocks are covering more from the middle bouts than from the outer? In the "old french construction" thread this was named as the typical french manner of the bob method. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff White Posted August 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 No Martin, I haven't.. i'd need far sharper and larger images to attempt it. I think the fiddle looks more late 18th century French every time I see it. I can't really place it anywhere else stylistically. Jeff can you post a picture of the hand varnish wear on the upper right rib? What do you mean "Dendro, Ummmm, hadn't really considered it."!! It's the first thing anybody should consider on this type of fiddle. There are plenty of rings there, so dendro might give added info. Contact me if you want to pursue that.. It's the first thing anybody should consider on this type of fiddle. Ooops, just PM'd you and I"ll get a pic out when I get to the shop this morning. jeff Guess I should study up on Dendrochronology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff White Posted August 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 Peter is trying a dendro on it. In the wake of the more 18thC french thoughts I separated this corner block area from the back to see if the ribs were in fact let into the back. Not. I also wanted to see evidence of a block inserted after the corners were made. Using Jacob S.'s observations (and mine too subsequently)that in order to make the fit look nice, they most ofter left a glue gap in the corner when the corner block was mounted onto the back and pushed in. Don't see one here. Here it's quite flush throughout. Upon magnification of the pic, I see a little bit of glue at the end of the point, but upon looking at in real life, it looks perfect. I'm not getting much work done this morning. jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin swan Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 If Peter can get a good reading, it should be possible to at least answer the question as to whether it's French or not! It would be fun (and instructive) if you were willing to share the dendro results. It's come to my attention recently that people buyers and sellers alike generally understand very little about dendro, and about what it can and can't do. Sometimes the results trump all other considerations (particular schools of making having unique sources of wood), and sometimes they don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff White Posted August 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 If Peter can get a good reading, it should be possible to at least answer the question as to whether it's French or not! It would be fun (and instructive) if you were willing to share the dendro results. It's come to my attention recently that people buyers and sellers alike generally understand very little about dendro, and about what it can and can't do. Sometimes the results trump all other considerations (particular schools of making having unique sources of wood), and sometimes they don't. I absolutely will share the results. Learning is top priority! I (and probably others)need a "dendro for dummies" thread. I've seen other threads on it that have raised more questions for me, than answers. jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blank face Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 IMG_0985.JPGPeter is trying a dendro on it. In the wake of the more 18thC french thoughts I separated this corner block area from the back to see if the ribs were in fact let into the back. Not. I also wanted to see evidence of a block inserted after the corners were made. Using Jacob S.'s observations (and mine too subsequently)that in order to make the fit look nice, they most ofter left a glue gap in the corner when the corner block was mounted onto the back and pushed in. Don't see one here. Here it's quite flush throughout. Upon magnification of the pic, I see a little bit of glue at the end of the point, but upon looking at in real life, it looks perfect. I'm not getting much work done this morning. jeff In contrast to other schools, the saxon or Füssen for instance, it was told in the thread I quoted above, that the "old french" glued the corner blocks on the back first and then built the rbs around them (while the others added the blocks after the ribs were finished). I.e., proper fitting joints between blocks and back are another evidence for a french origin IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin swan Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 If it is French (dendro will tell us for sure) it doesn't very "vieux Paris" - but maybe it's provincial, or a bit older than the stuff I'm familiar with. The varnish and even the wood seem inconsistent, and the scroll is rather off piste too. Didn't the Parisian scrolls all come from the same source, like a separate guild? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blank face Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 I'm a bit suspicious of the varnish, too. It looks old, but not so old as the rest, it could be a later revarnishing. If so, the scroll could be an addition, too (although it doesn't look saxon at all IMO). Reg vieux Paris, there are different styles, Salomon is different from Castagnieri school for example - where is Michael Appleman, in holidays? Edit: And thank you, Jeff, for taking all the efforts, opening the back to clear the blocks, etc., really interesting stuff! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blank face Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 The more I'm looking at the details of the varnish, the edges for instance, the more I'm thinking that it is revarnished. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff White Posted August 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 The more I'm looking at the details of the varnish, the edges for instance, the more I'm thinking that it is revarnished. I had always assumed that. Looks even more so in person. I'm quite sure it has been "over varnished" with some of the original seen in places. Peter sent me an email on the Dendro: Hi Jeff, Thanks for the pictures. I get strong date results giving a latest ring on the bass side of 1747 and on the treble side 1775. Firstly, the two sides are totally unrelated (different trees) with low correlation between each other. I have to say that it is not at all from the batch of wood used by the majority of Paris makers in the mid to late 18th century, so my suspicion that your violin was a French 18th century instrument is neither confirmed nor supported by my results (in other words, I was wrong...). If it is from there, then the wood is very atypical. (or in other words, it's probably not from there...) Interestingly (or not) the strongest correlations for treble side are with wood from a couple of Neapolitan instruments of the Gagliano school, and several others with Italian and Southern German instruments. with a few English. I get slightly different "signal" from the ring pattern of the two sides, and a strong hint that the wood may have originated in Switzerland, or on its Eastern/ south-eastern borders for the bass side in particular. Wood from there was definitely used in France, but not, in my experience before about 1820, and I really don't see that violin to be later than 1800, so I would tentatively rule out France or Paris 18th century. Also, I cannot see any relationships with wood from Saxon instruments in my results for either side, so would tend to rule out that location as well. In view of my results, it might be therefore useful to you to show the violin to somebody who knows about Italian instruments to rule out (or in) that possibility. Not much more I can say from my results... You are welcome to share the above on MN Best Peter Now I'm really lost.......................................................jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin swan Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 It would be very handy at this stage to know if the scroll belongs, and UV might reveal at least if it doesn't belong. Hard to know right now whether it should be part of the story or not .... if it was original, I think you could exclude Gagliano family. Perhaps Bruce Carlson could give you an opinion from the photos. With that dendro, bottom rib and stained purfling, I would be getting mildly optimistic. But I've been here a dozen times and more often than not been disappointed! BTW if the ribs have been heightened, is there any reason to think that any of the inner work is original, apart from the fact that the blocks fit well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Addie Posted August 13, 2014 Report Share Posted August 13, 2014 Wouldn’t we be looking for paper/beech/paper purfling on a Gagliano? I wouldn’t mind seeing a closeup of the label. It almost looks like there’s a ghost mark from a shorter, wider label? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff White Posted August 14, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 BTW if the ribs have been heightened, is there any reason to think that any of the inner work is original, apart from the fact that the blocks fit well? The heightening was added on top of everything, blocks, ribs. I originally thought the linings were not original because I saw the extended area on the ribs, but not inside, but once I opened it, I realized the it was just neatly added on top of everything. Now, that said, I think the linings aren't original because of differing color than the lower lining. Addie, I'll take a good pic tomorrow morning for you on that label. jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratcliffiddles Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 Wouldn’t we be looking for paper/beech/paper purfling on a Gagliano? I wouldn’t mind seeing a closeup of the label. It almost looks like there’s a ghost mark from a shorter, wider label? I never said it was Gagliano, or Neapolitan, or Italian, but suggested the Italian connection should be explored. I said that the best correlations were with a couple of Gagliano instruments. This means that the growing location of the tree (treble side of Jeff's violin) was somewhat more related with the trees from those two Neapolitan instruments than it was with wood from other instruments in my database. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Addie Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 I never said it was Gagliano... Nor did I. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratcliffiddles Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 Nor did I. I didn't say you did I just want to make sure people don't extrapolate and read only what they want to read. I have seen it happen on numerous occasions, which is why I write what I see in my results, and while trying to be informative, also remaining objective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff White Posted August 14, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 Bruce said he'd take a look next week when back to the shop, mentioned he had thought the f's looked possibly "opened out", might make for the wonkiness of them....partially. jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff White Posted August 14, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 I wouldn’t mind seeing a closeup of the label. It almost looks like there’s a ghost mark from a shorter, wider label? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blank face Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 Ratcliffiddles, on 14 Aug 2014 - 08:18 AM, said: I never said it was Gagliano... I didn't say you did I just want to make sure people don't extrapolate and read only what they want to read. I have seen it happen on numerous occasions, which is why I write what I see in my results, and while trying to be informative, also remaining objective. Nor did I. Nobody did,,,,it's always a bit inoportune to bring up the I..-word, isn't it? It's more on the safer side to assume french. Let's see, what Bruce will see and say about it, it's getting thrilling now. (But I'm still believing that the inside work looks french, I hope for Jeff that I'm wrong) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.