mysterious secrets of new violins

[nathan slobodkin]

Reading books about instrument making is like reading books about playing golf. While you may learn something the knowledge isn't very useful unless you do something with it. I know several people who make good violins despite being functionally illiterate but many more who can discuss the fine points til the cows come home yet have never made a decent instrument in their lives.

[James M. Jones]

Why doesn't Maestronet have a like button? 

"we" tried that ...once for about a month ...was not good , while most folks respected it , some ( just a few) used it to promote their selves and friends , the result was bad,arguments ensued and the tab was removed  , In the end it turned out fine , most of us already know who to listen to who to ignore and who to wonder about.

[Stephen Faulk]

The most interesting thing about Appalachian dulcimers is nobody in Appalachia ever heard of or saw one before about 1969.

 This is absolutely not true. 

 

Speaking of masturbating, perhaps you could take a break from the 'flips of the wrist' that David so fondly speaks of  and investigate some real organology tomes. 

 

The revival of the Mountain Dulcimer was brought on with the general Folk - Blues revival of the 1960's. The dulcimer by the time of the first World War had reached a point where it had structurally become boiled down to two body types. Previously in the 18th and 19th centuries the dulicmer was a popular instrument played regionally and with many regional variants most of which were inspired by Scandinavian and German immigrants bringing formally made instruments with them, which resembled dulcimers. The dulcimer music culture emerged as regular people, not specialists, began to copy these German instruments, and a few generations they were making free form copies of copies which led to all kinds of interesting diversity of shape. Along the same lines the violin was copied and interpreted by the same Appalachian groups and a school of folk fiddle making  arose in the same regions. 

 

The dulcimer however was known as a part of that App. culture because as early as the Fin de Sicle museums and collectors were receiving authentic old dulcimers in their collections. The beginning of Smithsonian collections were begun at this time and the instruments entering museums during WWI were often a hundred years old or more.  The collection at the Smithsonian had already been well established by the 1930-40's well ahead of the Revival period of the late 60's. The dulcimer was apparently so well known and identified with this region that those people had the foresight to save this little bit of culture that was in decline. 

 

Anyway, I could go on about this subject but I won't bore you all. I traveled to DC one summer in part to have an informal personal study of dulcimers and ship half hull models etc. in the Smithy. The other part was a blonde girl who was an art history major.........

[Stephen Faulk]

Ahhh, very good, Stephen, the abbreviation suits his posts. 

   He's still teasing a Replicant like me about my mother, this is a bad idea. hahaha

[Ganymede Piggot]

 This is absolutely not true. 

Believe whatever you want. No skin off me.

[Berl Mendenhall]

I agree with Mike Jones above. It doesn't take long to separate the wheat from the chaff on here. Some people I read everything they wright and others I rarely ever read anything they wright.

[Stephen Faulk]

Believe whatever you want. No skin off me.

 

 

That's not an argument which uses research or information, it's just your opinion based on nothing you present to hold up your case. When you say that people in Appalachia did not know what a dulcimer is until the 1969 that information is based on what facts?  The history of collecting them says otherwise and that early collectors preserved a bit of rare culture that had existed in 18th and 19th centuries. 

 

Perhaps the invention of the radio changed the music making habits of people in those areas from the 1920's to the 60's. It's well known that radio was a contributing factor to the decline of families and friends playing music together in the home and community. Previous to radio, folk idioms abounded, but most were lost due to the dwindling lines of musicians that passed them on, dying before the invention of good field recording devices. 

 

If Zoltan Kodaly, Bartok and others had not recorded the folk musics they found in their regions it would be simple for someone to say they never existed, There would be no evidence of these handed down by rote music cultures. I have a copy of the catalog raisonne' of the Smithsonian collection and several other in depth books on the history of Appalachian music and your supposing that people had not heard of it before the 1960's is false.

 

Several musicologists and instrument collectors did travel to Appalachia before the 1960's to track the dulcimer and other music in that region. The researchers found the last few remaining legacy builders of folk instruments, tracking them down by asking people in small towns where they could find the instrument makers. Travelers from as far away as Japan were able to find these groups of semi isolated instrument makers simply by asking around. It would seem that in fact the towns folk knew who made dulcimers because they were able to direct outsiders to find the houses of instrument makers. Thus the research collected by these early collectors preserved the names of the families and individuals who were famous dulcimer makers and other folk instrument makers far back into the 19th century. Many collected dulcimers are not attributable to a certain individual makers, but because this curatorial work was done long before the the 1960's, long before, many dulcimers can be attributed to certain families, towns or valleys. 

 

So it does make sense to me that this is no skin off you, because you have no skin in the game of understanding the dulcimer legacy. No skin in, no skin to take off. 

 

It's not any skin off me either for that matter, but is has given me a chance to elaborate on a very cool and deep part of North American Organology and folk tradition. I hope someone gets interested enough to track down and further investigate this for themselves. It is very exciting for instrument makers. The authentic 19th century dulcimers are a beautiful folk art, we are lucky to have extant instruments. 

[James M. Jones]

That's not an argument which uses research or information, it's just your opinion based on nothing you present to hold up your case. When you say that people in Appalachia did not know what a dulcimer is until the 1969 that information is based on what facts?  The history of collecting them says otherwise and that early collectors preserved a bit of rare culture that had existed in 18th and 19th centuries. 

 

Perhaps the invention of the radio changed the music making habits of people in those areas from the 1920's to the 60's. It's well known that radio was a contributing factor to the decline of families and friends playing music together in the home and community. Previous to radio, folk idioms abounded, but most were lost due to the dwindling lines of musicians that passed them on, dying before the invention of good field recording devices. 

 

If Zoltan Kodaly, Bartok and others had not recorded the folk musics they found in their regions it would be simple for someone to say they never existed, There would be no evidence of these handed down by rote music cultures. I have a copy of the catalog raisonne' of the Smithsonian collection and several other in depth books on the history of Appalachian music and your supposing that people had not heard of it before the 1960's is false.

 

Several musicologists and instrument collectors did travel to Appalachia before the 1960's to track the dulcimer and other music in that region. The researchers found the last few remaining legacy builders of folk instruments, tracking them down by asking people in small towns where they could find the instrument makers. Travelers from as far away as Japan were able to find these groups of semi isolated instrument makers simply by asking around. It would seem that in fact the towns folk knew who made dulcimers because they were able to direct outsiders to find the houses of instrument makers. Thus the research collected by these early collectors preserved the names of the families and individuals who were famous dulcimer makers and other folk instrument makers far back into the 19th century. Many collected dulcimers are not attributable to a certain individual makers, but because this curatorial work was done long before the the 1960's, long before, many dulcimers can be attributed to certain families, towns or valleys. 

 

So it does make sense to me that this is no skin off you, because you have no skin in the game of understanding the dulcimer legacy. No skin in, no skin to take off. 

 

It's not any skin off me either for that matter, but is has given me a chance to elaborate on a very cool and deep part of North American Organology and folk tradition. I hope someone gets interested enough to track down and further investigate this for themselves. It is very exciting for instrument makers. The authentic 19th century dulcimers are a beautiful folk art, we are lucky to have extant instruments. 

I concur.... considering the background of immigration it's almost impossible to assume they did not bring music and it's process with them. it's not exactly a recording type instrument , more of a quiet- personal living room thingy as well .... so it's documentation might well lag behind some of the more bodacious instruments like banjo and guitar, that are more suitable to larger public events.

[David Beard]

"we" tried that ...once for about a month ...was not good , while most folks respected it , some ( just a few) used it to promote their selves and friends , the result was bad,arguments ensued and the tab was removed  , In the end it turned out fine , most of us already know who to listen to who to ignore and who to wonder about.

I forget the details, but it didn't come across as a normal 'like' button. Somehow ended up feeling like an accumulating approval scorecard for the poster.

It still might be nice to have a normal Facebook style 'like'.

Seems to work well on most of the web without becoming a pissing contest.

[Ganymede Piggot]

That's not an argument

Right, and I'm not interested in arguing.  I'm not even interested in discussing with somebody who reads like a nutcase, who is hijacking my thread.  This was a serious forum at one time.

[Stephen Faulk]

It's still serious, if you would bother to read more carefully before dispensing insults. 

[Aivars]

Those baffled physicians should have referred him to a veterinarian. 

Mr. Molnar did You received my message about your problem:   'My claim to fame (notoriety?) is explaining the Star of Bethlehem." (michaelmolnar.com)

 

Very simple:

 

A star of Bethlehem "was a group of shining angels, but the wise men did not know this."

 

http://text.egwwritings.org/publication.php?pubtype=Book&bookCode=HH〈=en&pagenumber=22

[Marty Kasprzyk]

I concur.... considering the background of immigration it's almost impossible to assume they did not bring music and it's process with them. it's not exactly a recording type instrument , more of a quiet- personal living room thingy as well .... so it's documentation might well lag behind some of the more bodacious instruments like banjo and guitar, that are more suitable to larger public events.

Did you folks ever see the movie "Songcatcher"? I wonder if our look at history would be different if everything had been made out of pressure treated wood, stainless steel, and everybody had an iphone.

[Will L]

 

 

At least the mastubartory whimsical la-la-land of late Victorian romanticism allowed people to be free and artistic with their approach to violin making, even if that did lead to pariahs like Walter Mason...

 

 

Mayson.

 

It is Walter Mayson, and I am being picky because I'd hate to think that some innocent fellow named Mason might be blamed.  

 

The book is Violin Making and published in recent years by Orpheus Publications in 1998.  So it can still be found; but IFFF found it should be shredded, burned, and buried, with appropriate magical incantations read over the site!  (My humble opinion) 

 

On the other hand, maybe it should be required reading in our violinmaking schools; a sort of "HOW NOT TO" book. 

[martin swan]

Ahem, Walter H Mayson I think you'll find ...!