A university setting for violin knowledge

[Jeffrey Holmes]

Should I offer condolences?

I have all three in University at the moment. I haven't added up their combined tuition costs but it will still be dramatically less than one of your higher priced Master's!

Still...you guys have much better shopping than we do...

 

I will accept condolences or a couple stiff drinks.  My last (of three) graduates in December.  Two from state schools, one from a liberal arts college (I won't even go into how much those cost!).

[skiingfiddler]

Expertise in violins is a very very small field, and the knowledge can only be gained through hands-on experience of vast quantities of instruments either in daily use or zealously guarded.

Very few people are prepared to dedicate themselves to acquiring this highly specialist knowledge unless it also makes them a living.

What is shareable without forfeiting a commercial edge is already shared - the rest is business.

For these reasons I believe it will never become a university subject.

 

Restoration and making, in combination with applied acoustics, are taught adequately in violin schools and high-level workshops.

Martin,

 

Yes, true violin experts, especially in violin identification, are a very small group of people.

 

That leads to this question:  What happens when one of those people reaches the end of his/her career? Death comes to all, even experts.  Where does that knowledge go?   They're not pouring their knowledge into writing.  Yes, I know, there are some experts which do write an article here and there for inclusion in some books or The Strad.  But the books and articles are rather rare in occurrence. (Before I get jumped on, I will admit that Roger Hargrave may well be the exception in generating a great many articles, and he values their dissemination enough to offer them for free.  But he's just one person.)  The violin expert, winding down his/her career, shares only what they want to share with the larger world when they want to share it, and, most probably, share their most prized expertise with the heir to the business.  After all, your offspring or a favorite colleague deserves an advantage, if you can give it to them.

 

How different that is from the academic model where your knowledge isn't worth anything unless it's made public, and made public as soon as you feel certain about it so others can evaluate it.  If one of the top physicists in the world dies, that may be a personal loss to that person's family and friends, but it's not a loss to physics.  In order to become a top expert in physics, that physicist had to publish their knowledge throughout their career.  There's no holding privileged information back, giving it only to the deserving few.

 

The violin world, like any field of knowledge, needs a place where knowledge can reside, can be collected, regardless of whether the experts are now alive or not or whether they are still mentally at their peak.  That's what a university is.

 

Your second point, that to become an expert one needs to see a great number of instruments, also deserves some consideration.  It's undoubtedly true. 

 

But, I believe it was Roger Hargrave who pointed out in a post that getting access to that stream of instruments, especially the top end instruments, like the classic Italians, is getting harder and harder for anybody interested in violins because those instruments are disappearing into large private collections where access is very limited.  The instruments are not going into public museums or staying among players and thus appearing regularly on the market.  How will expertise in the classic Italians be maintained if you can't see the instruments no matter who you are?  You might as well move the study of the classic Italians to the university from dealers.  The university, in its institutional influence, might be able to arrange seeing those classic Italians better than a private dealer can.

[Conor Russell]

Yes of course, when we die the knowledge (and nonsense) in our heads is no more, unless it is passed on in some way.

 

All of the experts that I know are, first and foremost, passionately enthusiastic lovers of violins.

 

You say that the experts are 'not pouring their knowledge into writing' , but what about the Hills, Eric Blot, Carlo Chiesa, Charles Beare, Sacconi, and the dozens of others who have taken the time to publish the very best of what they know, just for the love of it? And do you really think that their books are their most important legacy?

 

All through the world centres of excellence spring up, always around these enthusiasts,  invariably in workshops, where, through intimate contact with the instruments, they teach the next generation who become the custodians of our violin heritage. 

 

These are the people who can, because of the trust they have earned with the instrument owners, put together the marvelous exhibitions where we can see the very best of the various schools, and learn from them. The great museum collections too, open for all to visit and study, have been put together with their advice and support.

 

I sometimes think that there's an uncomfortable feeling abroad that all this violin expertise is something of a closed shop, and that these people are feathering their own nests by keeping their knowledge to themselves, and between some elite group of insiders. This is not my experience at all. Most of those I've met are just like the rest of us. They love to talk about fiddles, and share their knowledge with enthusiasm.

 

Do you really think that a university course could ever hope to equal this school?

[Ben Hebbert]

I remember a school assembly when I was a little me, in which the headmaster gave some kind of talk about the remarkable ability of human beings to be whatever they want to become. It was an absolute truth of the wonder of being human, the only condition is that you want to want it enough. The genius of the talk (he got it out of a book, I wouldn't credit that headmaster for much creativity himself) was the counterpose to this. The truth of human beings is that they will settle where they are happy: I may 'want' to become prime minister of Great Britain one day, but if I don't 'want' it enough I'll find something else instead, which requires less hard work to get, and suits my temperament better. I know it's a philosophical hyperbola, but I think that there is an solid grain of truth to it as a vision of how to set your sights.  

 

I suppose that this is really at the core of my discontent about the whole university course thing. I don't want to sound like a prize bitch (I'm writing this with a smile, not a grimace), but the bottom line is that if Ski really wanted to develop expertise he would spend more time earning money to enable himself to travel, communicate and look, and less time arguing the semantics of whether a course at a university would be a good idea. In this world, the people who have really been driven to call themselves experts, taken the knocks and kept going, have put in the work and made it in as close to a truly egalitarian way. Those who have (from a positive or a negative point of view) decided that this is not the path for them, have gone down it as far as they have wanted and found something that makes them happier in life. 

 

The other core of my discontent is that I don't see how - even in a utopian idealistic world - the fundamental experience of looking at hundreds of violins year after year can be distilled into two semesters worth of teaching of any kind. Even sitting in the basement of Chi Mei or the National Music Museum for that amount of time with the best teacher would be useless without a fundamental grounding and experience to know what you were looking at. That takes years of dedicated accumulation of knowledge.  

[yancypup]

The cost of university in America is completely off the charts these days due to decades and decades of tuition raises that were many times the rate of inflation.  It has been an exponential growth.  Unless they are from a rich family, I couldn't advise anyone to attend one.  I know people who graduated 20 years ago and are still paying off their student loans.  Post secondary education in the US needs radical change.  This is a real peeve of mine.  OK, off the soapbox now.

[Rue]

...The violin world, like any field of knowledge, needs a place where knowledge can reside, can be collected, regardless of whether the experts are now alive or not or whether they are still mentally at their peak.  That's what a university is...

The violin world is 1) too small and 2) has a large 'craft' component. It's really not a University type course of study. Although I suppose you could stick it in a Fine Arts college as a major of some sorts...

Still...as I mentioned earlier, I think a two year course of study with history, sociology, chemistry and biology would be an excellent background to have (for any one interested in any aspect of it)...and then you get on to the practical part of it (for luthiers, restorers...and any one interested in that aspect of it)...

University is not the be-all end-all of education. It serves well for certain disciplines and not so well for others.

[Rue]

...I'll add this:

Medicine is actually somewhat similar...it's a hands-on craft.

 

Currently you need a Bachelor's degree (any discipline provided you have certain core courses) to apply to medical school.  If you get accepted, after 4 years you graduate with a second Bachelor's degree - this one in Medicine.

 

The first 2 years of medical school are spent  primarily in the classroom.  The final two years are spent primarily out in the field honing your craft.

 

Then you do an internship and a residency to further develop your skills.

 

So, in essence you have 6 years of classroom study...and 4-5 years of crafting (apprenticeship, journeyman...whatever you want to call the equivalent).

 

Now...the difference is...medical doctors are in high demand (and doctors often garner high salaries as a 'reward').  So the school has built itself up and modified itself around the high demand.

 

That demand is just not there for violins.

[deans]

I can easily see somebody carving out a faculty position as an expert in violin history, identification, making. There may be room for 3-4 such academics throughout the colleges in the US. They could offer a course or two to music/arts majors, publish papers on sorting out different makers, differences in M-wald vs Mark, which moulds Strad use , etc. But I don't see any chance or use for a degree of any sort in "violin expertise".

 

I'm surprised that somebody hasn't done this. In academics its often a matter of creating your own niche, somebody would just have to want to do it. Of course it would not pay well, you couldn't make as much money with your expertise as you can as a dealer, and many universities might frown at having a side-line. Such an individual would probably need an advanced degree in arts or music, but I think many violin experts do.

[franciscus]

Might surprise you ( and it surprised me at the time ) but a lot of Russian players considered fitting a post or making a bridge something the player does.

I am not surprised at all. Those are things I learned from my teacher when I was in musical school back then in 1960/70's. My teacher was Czech, educated in former USSR. When I was some 13-14 years old, I was quite able to set the post (using the setter that I made by myself), make a bridge (I always had to have at least one spare bridge in the case) and fit the peg (both using the pocket knife, piece of broken glass and sandpaper, that were the things that I had to have in the case too), glue the open seam (using the hide glue, of course) and clean everything that should be cleaned, including the bowhair. Of course, all those operations have been intended to keep the instrument in working order, nothing more, but nothing less, also. That "survival aspect" of old Russian approach to education is something very underestimated, unfortunately, in recent trends.

[Violadamore]

That "survival aspect" of old Russian approach to education is something very underestimated, unfortunately, in recent trends.

I'd bet you know what all the fiddly bits in the AK/SKS cleaning kit were for, too.    I personally find it deplorable that a student can get from rank beginner to concert soloist without being able to maintain their instrument beyond changing a string.  It's a hole in our programs, from what I've seen.

[Rue]

I find that dichotomy in thinking odd too.

 

So...in Russia a 13 year learns to cut a bridge.

 

In North America...we're told never to even attempt to cut our own bridge...it needs the touch of a professional with 20,000 cut bridges to their name!

 

...anyone know Maxim V...what's his take on it?   I'll assume Siberia counts as 'Russia'...

[franciscus]

I'd bet you know what all the fiddly bits in the AK/SKS cleaning kit were for, too. 

Yes, I know, I would like to not know, but we are where we are. This kit is very inferior to the kit that accompanies the Yugoslavian version of Kalashnikov (AP M70), where the cleaning rod is the part of the riffle and serves as an additional guide for the bayonet, so almost all of those fiddly bits (parts of the cleaning rod) have been replaced by the ordinary cleaning rope. 

[franciscus]

I find that dichotomy in thinking odd too.

 

So...in Russia a 13 year learns to cut a bridge.

Rue, I was in Bosnia back then, but our educational system was mostly based on Russian one. In addition: when I was 13 years old, I became a member of Symphonic orchestra, but, firstly, in a little unusual way: I participated just in a rehearsals, using the bow that my teacher gave to me - bowhair was coated with soap. My teacher was sitting next to me so he could hear what I'm playing (or what I try to play).

[Rue]

Well that for sure is a new approach for me!  I honestly never would have considered doing that!

 

The world (even the small violin world) is full of surprises!

[Bruce Tai]

The violin world is 1) too small and 2) has a large 'craft' component. It's really not a University type course of study.

 

I could not have said it better.

Perhaps it is worth to offer courses at music conservatories to help string players gain some knowledge about the hardware aspects of their trade. 

[franciscus]

I could not have said it better.

Perhaps it is worth to offer courses at music conservatories to help string players gain some knowledge about the hardware aspects of their trade. 

I honestly think that this have to be a compulsory part of the curriculum.

[Conor Russell]

But you know, a group of us violin and bow makers here have had makers days in a couple of music schools, and it's remarkably difficult to get the teachers, let alone their students to come to the talks and exhibitions. Such a pity.

[Rue]

It is a pity.  I agree.

 

But...what could be done is develop a few on-line style courses (not my favourite at all, but they'd serve a need in this instance) - that cover the basics that ALL those interested in the violin (for example)  would need. 

 

Example:

 

1. Violin history

2. Basics of Construction, Repair and Maintenance

3. Biology of Tonewood, Chemistry of Varnish, Physics of Sound

4. Sociology (Performers, Teachers, Retail, Customers and Audience)

 

So now all students are on the same page with the basics.  Then they branch out into their disciplines - performance, making, restoration, etc.

 

It would work.  Anyone could take them - even the layperson.  Since they are on-line, anyone can access them.  Might even be economically viable that way.

 

If you ONLY took those courses...and nothing else...you wouldn't have a degree or a  diploma...you'd only have the courses under your belt.  So it doesn't give anyone any special advantage at that point.  Or...the institution running the show could add a couple more classes or electives and if you did well and passed you could have a certificate.  Again, a certificate wouldn't get you further - but it would show you did the work.

 

The Master Gardener program works a bit like that...you have to take courses in all the basics...then you get a certificate. 

 

I would take those courses for example.  It would provide a framework for learning and ease the wading through endless  material that as a layman you have no idea of what's important and what's not.  I could take those courses in my spare time.  Work on them in the evenings.  Hopefully file away an official looking document at the end of the program, printed on nice paper...Addie?  Listening?  Possible business venture...

[Blank face]

I am not surprised at all. Those are things I learned from my teacher when I was in musical school back then in 1960/70's. My teacher was Czech, educated in former USSR. When I was some 13-14 years old, I was quite able to set the post (using the setter that I made by myself), make a bridge (I always had to have at least one spare bridge in the case) and fit the peg (both using the pocket knife, piece of broken glass and sandpaper, that were the things that I had to have in the case too), glue the open seam (using the hide glue, of course) and clean everything that should be cleaned, including the bowhair. Of course, all those operations have been intended to keep the instrument in working order, nothing more, but nothing less, also. That "survival aspect" of old Russian approach to education is something very underestimated, unfortunately, in recent trends.

 

Sorry, but I cannot appreciate this very much. I had and have so many times to struggle with all the damages caused by self-cut bridges and soundposts leaving big holes in the belly or broken pegbox walls from pegs fitted with the pocket knife or glass method. Maybe you learned to do it properly, but I won't recommend to encourage every student to maintain her/his instrument this way. Some can, many more can not.

[Rue]

They would have to learn...early on...and learn properly...

[Ron1]

I recall the previous thread.  Then, as now, too many posters mistakenly talk about repairing and making, and that violin expertise can only be acquired by hands-on experience with vast quantities of instruments, etc., etc.  The point is completely missed.  I think the OP is talking about acquiring knowledge, not ability.  Instrument-making workshops and schools do touch on this type of knowledge, but their real emphasis is on building the instruments.  I disagree that the market (potential students) for a credited course is too small- in addition to the many who are just plain interested, I think many, many professional makers and dealers would avail themselves of such a course, in order to increase their knowledge and thus augment their business abilities ($).

[actonern]

Might a University Administrator ask about the enrollment trend in string music programs before committing to such a venture?

[Ben Hebbert]

Ron, 

 

Universities are increasingly run as businesses finding ways to make money, or attract funding from their resources, without the sentimentality of holding a loss leading position just because it is invaluable to the cultural fabric of the world. In fact, because of the independence of all universities, there is no particular university that has to 'take a hit' for the common good by creating a loss leader. It's a pity. The argument always stands that if it was so important, some other university would have got there first. 

 

So, whilst we might think (I don't) that there are enough course fees to cover the cost of faculty, use of office space, purchase of resources and lecture room resources, the university sees it differently by asking how much money a faculty, or an individual professor has the capability of generating. The arguments are analog to Christie's Sotheby's and Bonham's abandoning the musical instrument auction market: It's not that instruments are bad business - far from it. It's just that a good sale might be £3million, when the same man-hours of resource can be put into creating a £250million art sale. There's just no contest, and no reason why a university would look benevolently on the project. If, however, it came with a significant endowment that would be a different matter. 

 

Here are the going rates of endowment at Duke University - one of the few along with Yale, Harvard, Michigan and South Dakota and Oberlin in the United States that has a museum-scale collection of musical instruments: 

 

Faculty Chairs

• $1,000,000 will establish an endowed chair to support a visiting professor.
• $1,500,000 will establish an endowed chair to support an assistant or associate professor.
• $1,500,000 will establish an endowed chair to support a professor of the practice.
• $2,500,000 will establish an endowed chair to support a full professor.
• $3,000,000 will establish an endowed chair to support a university professor with appointments in more than one discipline.
• $5,000,000 will establish an endowed chair to support a faculty member holding the distinguished designation of dean.

As thats endowments in an established department, I'm guessing that you are looking anywhere between $10m and $50m before a university will even contemplate the idea of a permanent research centre for violin expertise. Otherwise, why forfeit the desk space when it could just as capably be taken up by other endowed chairs that bring in this kind of cash, and have a more direct appeal to donors because of the numbers of students they directly impact.  

 

So, before we even ask what the annual fees are going to be to go on a course like this, anyone got any good ideas about how to endow it in the first place?

 

Just askin'.

[Michael Richwine]

Learning about violins, to me, is very similar to learning about antique Asian ceramics or Japanese netsuke (erstwhile passions of mine). I studied and studied the books, but until I started owning good pieces, the book knowledge was of little value, and I didn't retain it well. It takes hands-on experience, and lots of it.

 

A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, and even doing a good setup requires a fairly rare aptitude. I can't see people with no aptitude, no skills, and no experience trying to fit a sound post. 
Even people who actually have tool skills and aptitude take quite a while to learn to do better than student work.

 

Teachers and performers are generally qualified to evaluate tone and playability, but there are not many who take time to learn the market and evaluate price, and even fewer who have the talent and motivation to learn how to do their own adjustments. Most of them just don't "get it".

[Jeffrey Holmes]

 

 

But...what could be done is develop a few on-line style courses (not my favourite at all, but they'd serve a need in this instance) - that cover the basics that ALL those interested in the violin (for example)  would need. 

 

Example:

 

1. Violin history

2. Basics of Construction, Repair and Maintenance

3. Biology of Tonewood, Chemistry of Varnish, Physics of Sound

4. Sociology (Performers, Teachers, Retail, Customers and Audience)

 

So now all students are on the same page with the basics.  Then they branch out into their disciplines - performance, making, restoration, etc.

 

 

 

Ummm.. If one really has the interest,why not just attend a violin making school?  The basics is really about what you get out of 3 years.  It's a trade school, so the tuition isn't as terrible as a liberal arts college.

 

I mentioned on the other thread, when this all came up (again), have at it...  I have no interest in the teaching of expertise or theory/procedure in a university setting and cannot fathom either the viability nor the productivity of doing so... but if others do, so be it.

 

As for the other subjects mentioned in this thread; Teachers and students can be informed of the basics within a workshop (I've done it in the past at a couple Universities and at summer programs).  I've declined inquiries to join a university staff (teach a formal course), as I doubt I'd get anything done for myself and I doubt many, if any, students there would retain much.  I do pop in for a lecture at studio classes every now and then.

 

So....  have at it.