Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Expertise and all that......


Dr Watson
 Share

Recommended Posts

Dear Mr, Stross,

 

Your snide supposition was off-putting and hardly worthy of a reply. Just let me say that the number of fine instruments I own or have owned in the past would most likely be greater than the total you have had in your hands during your lifetime. 

 

Well certified and fairly priced violins in the higher price ranges typically posses greater tonal complexity and quality. In lower price ranges the bias toward instruments of a particular origin exists. This may at times impede proper consideration of instruments of other origins. 

 

My comment regarding provenance/certification does bring us back to the origin of this thread as well as the now locked "Rumor has it..."  thread.  Expertise is the foundation of the stringed instrument business. The experts that have withstood the test of time are few in number. Their firms continued to carry on after their departure at least until the public began to realize that that the expert was an individual, not something inherent in the company brand.  

 

This is at the heart of the two recent threads. Questions remain surrounding the posts by RH, misleading statements still found on the Beare website relating to the role Charles Beare continues to play in the company, the identity of the current signatory on the Beares certificates, and the rufusal of Mr. Morris to address any of these concerns. The failure on the part of the current Beare regime to clarify the situation is what is "dangerous for the business" as it shakes the very foundation on which the continued health of the violin trade stands. 

I do not completely agree that there is a definitive correlation between tone and price but I do agree that there is a correlation between what a violin is worth and the certification it bears. As has been stated before and confirming what stradbergonzi implies, an early Hill , a Rembert Wurlitzer, a Charles Beare paper are still the gold standard for expertise and there are other younger experts today who are also making their name. They are not valuablet because the certificate has an intrinsic worth but simply because all other violin experts i.e. their peer group, recognize these experts knew what they were talking about. Many other certificates are useless, misleading, even deceitful.

The question is whether a Beare paper signed by another person whether from 1940 or 2014 is worth as much as one signed by Charles Beare, especially if one is not told who signed it, or who is doing the expertise (assuming it is 'out of house' as some people seemingly in the know have asserted) is surely a reasonable topic for debate?

Incidentally a check at Companies House will confirm that the present company trading under the name J&A Beare is 16 years old. Started on 02/01/1998. This company is not over 120 years old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Dear Mr, Stross,

 

Your snide supposition was off-putting and hardly worthy of a reply. Just let me say that the number of fine instruments I own or have owned in the past would most likely be greater than the total you have had in your hands during your lifetime

 

 

I have no reason to doubt you and now I understand more or less what is it you are doing here - you must own or owned a COLOSSAL number of instruments given that through my hands passed for some 4 months, the ENTIRE production of a violin factory. ( I was the QC for the German buyer ).

Around 3000. 

 

In one single day I looked at ( and tried around 1/3)  for a fairly reputable violin player who wanted to make a bulk purchase and donate, the entire "collection" of a violin maker / dealer. Some 800 and I had quite a few days in the 50 to 100 range. The enormous majority of the instruments I had in my hands were pretty mundane stuff and mostly not in playing condition. No Strad discovered. :)

 

The only explanation for your superior achievement is that you are a dealer. And Beares irritates you. You shouldn't let it get to you - I've seen much worse.

 

By the way, are you really sure that you owned more instruments than I had in my hands ?????? 'cause that'd be A LOT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One way to understand it might be that high-priced violins are inevitably Italian, generally Cremonese or North Italian - there can be no geographical bias since there's no competition in that price range.

Because "Italian-ness" is associated with the highest quality, people with smaller amounts of money also tend to look for Italian violins. In fact their money would be far better spent (from a strictly musical point of view) on the best 18th and 19th century instruments from Prague, Budapest, Vienna, London, Paris .... but geographical prejudice wins out.

Is that what you are saying?

Yes, Mr. Swan; that is more or less what was intended. "Smaller amounts" does refer to relatively lower priced instruments. Thank you for the helping hand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not completely agree that there is a definitive correlation between tone and price but I do agree that there is a correlation between what a violin is worth and the certification it bears. As has been stated before and confirming what stradbergonzi implies, an early Hill , a Rembert Wurlitzer, a Charles Beare paper are still the gold standard for expertise and there are other younger experts today who are also making their name. They are not valuablet because the certificate has an intrinsic worth but simply because all other violin experts i.e. their peer group, recognize these experts knew what they were talking about. Many other certificates are useless, misleading, even deceitful.

The question is whether a Beare paper signed by another person whether from 1940 or 2014 is worth as much as one signed by Charles Beare, especially if one is not told who signed it, or who is doing the expertise (assuming it is 'out of house' as some people seemingly in the know have asserted) is surely a reasonable topic for debate?

Incidentally a check at Companies House will confirm that the present company trading under the name J&A Beare is 16 years old. Started on 02/01/1998. This company is not over 120 years old.

Dr. Watson,

You have made things a bit more confusing. Are you saying that Beares is only 16 years old and not more than 120? How can that be?  And if so, what possible explanation could Mr. Morris provide to justify the misleading information that still exists to this day on the company website? It strikes me that expertise in the violin world is a rather grey area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where's Vda and her box of popcorn?

 

I certainly understand the desire to qualify one's views and opinions, but are we really going to resort to a version of "... I see that your Schwartz is as big as mine. Now, let's see how well you handle it." (Spaceballs; Mel Brooks) on the forum?

Ok, was busy with Thanksgiving.  Jeffrey, having examined the evidence here under high magnification, I find nothing to interest me :lol:  :P .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was just mulling over some of the exact same sentiments expressed by violin aficionados and militaria collectors... :rolleyes:

 

The commonality being to preserve history...

 

Which is a lovely sentiment...and better than a commonality of using the object of our attention as weapons...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dr. Watson,

You have made things a bit more confusing. Are you saying that Beares is only 16 years old and not more than 120? How can that be?  And if so, what possible explanation could Mr. Morris provide to justify the misleading information that still exists to this day on the company website? It strikes me that expertise in the violin world is a rather grey area.

Dear stradbergonzi, why do you doubt what I am telling you?  Here is the proof….

16 years old! Why not be proud of being such a new company? Why hide who is signing certificates? Why keep Charles Beare’s name on foreign websites when they are removed from the English version? A few of many questions that have still not been answered.

 

J & A BEARE LIMITED

 

03487761

 

Registered Address: 30 Queen Anne Street, London, W1G 8HX

 

Accounts

Filed up to 2013

Type

Private limited with Share Capital

Age

16 years (Incorporation date 02/01/1998)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As most people on here will already know, Beares were taken over by messrs Morris and Smith in 1998 hence the incorporation starts from then. I haven't posted on this site for over a year but I do so now in exasperation at this dredging up of the same old allegations over and over. We got the point.

All organisations will throw around some 'puffs' we are the best, this is the finest. Just accept it. I know why you think this isn't acceptable but for me it's just business.

Beares were established over 100 years ago yet the present entity dates from 16 years ago - it's easily visible on the web. Many still buy Rolls Royce, Bentley, Range Rover and Jaguar cars in the UK, none of which has anything to do with the original company. They trade on their heritage, reputation etc. Again I understand why you think differently.

Can we move on?

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Victordriver; As I understand it, the "new" company was formed in '98, a while after Francis Gilham joined the firm, and when Morris and Smith merged their company with it (I don't quite see that as being "taken over").  Charles, Peter and Francis subsequently left the company two years ago.

 

As for the rest of it, I agree.  I left this thread standing in order that the subject (expertise) could be discussed.  If this turns into a venue for rehashing the previously locked thread, I will close it as well.

 

Move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As most people on here will already know, Beares were taken over by messrs Morris and Smith in 1998 hence the incorporation starts from then. I haven't posted on this site for over a year but I do so now in exasperation at this dredging up of the same old allegations over and over. We got the point.

All organisations will throw around some 'puffs' we are the best, this is the finest. Just accept it. I know why you think this isn't acceptable but for me it's just business.

Beares were established over 100 years ago yet the present entity dates from 16 years ago - it's easily visible on the web. Many still buy Rolls Royce, Bentley, Range Rover and Jaguar cars in the UK, none of which has anything to do with the original company. They trade on their heritage, reputation etc. Again I understand why you think differently.

Can we move on?

Mike

A reasonable and true point but I think the irritation is with the emphazizing by this new company of its long history, exceptional expertise etc and using quotes from a period long before the present directors were any part of the firm. The analogy of the car industry is very apt but there we find open discussion about the merits of this company or that. When a great car company, indeed an institution like Rolls Royce is 'taken over/merged' there is much discussion in the professional press, Jeremy Clarkson will have his say (sorry Jeffrey, he is another British institution). If a great designer, engineer, leaves a company and is replaced by someone inferior (or better) then that is a matter of open discussion and it is not secret. So the Silver Ghost Rolls Royce was considered the best car in the world, many years later the same company produce a car reviewed as follows below: If this were a violin business being discussed would the 'thread be closed' or would people say do not write this, it might damage the business, surely it is constructive criticism? Certainly the cars they make today have improved.

37. Sbarro Rolls-Royce Camargue
 
s3mhzvhrggiqmcx4ge8e.jpg
 

Year Introduced: 1980

Why It's Terrible: It took all the class, pomp, and circumstance out of the Rolls, and simply replaced it with disgusting excess and hideous door rails. Franco Sbarro, a Swiss coach builder, transformed this Rolls-Royce Camargue into a hunting car for an Arabian aristocrat. Its considered unholy by anyone with taste. Proof that money can't buy everything.

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...