Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, jacobsaunders said:

I wonder who varnished it?

 

Looks like someone from the Caussin school.

But other than that it does look like a Viennese violin to me, outline, scroll etc look right, at least to my eyes maybe a later Thir or something like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, feelingfaceform said:

I am interested in your opinions on that violin. Some experts (Benjamin Schröder Frankfurt) say it is by Sebastian Dallinger. 

http://m.ebay.at/itm/Viennese-Violin-ca-1800-with-papers-Dorotheum-Ratcliff-Machold-Kodaj-/272660668310?nav=SELLING_ACTIVE

I think OP's sincerety is nicely presented in his post, asking for opinions on a violin like it wasnt his. He tried to sell this for a while and could not, so he tries a sneaky way of marketing it here.  I like Peters report :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well ....

Number 1. Benjamin Schroeder does not "think" - either he writes a certificate or he doesn't.

Number 2. Peter's dendro is unequivocal and rules out any alleged "Thir Workshop" - I never heard of a Thir workshop.

Number 3. Machold insurance valuation and Zoltan's insurance valuation - neither claim any provenance for the violin. An insurance valuation is not a very reliable document at the best of times, owners like to insure their violins for what they think they are worth.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rudolf Hopfner via E-Mail

"Sehr geehrter Herr Herr Nantschev,

Der Meinung von Herrn Schröder kann ich mich nur anschließen. Die stilistische Nähe zu Johann Georg Thier ist nicht zu übersehen, allerdings spricht das dendrochronologische Gutachten dagegen. Es ist gut möglich, dass die Geige von Dallinger stammt. Immerhin hatten M. Thier, F. Geissenhof und Dallinger für kurze Zeit ihre Werkstätten sogar im gleichen Haus. Mathias Thier würde ich ausschließen. Ich kenne keine Geige aus seiner Werkstatt, die diese Qualität aufweist.
 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
 
Rudolf Hopfner
_________________________________________________________________
Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien
 
HR Dr. Rudolf Hopfner
Sammlungsdirektor
Sammlung alter Musikinstrumente"
 
Google translate:
"

I can only agree with Herr Schröder's opinion. The stylistic proximity to Johann Georg Thier is not to be overlooked, but the dendrochronological expert opinion speaks against it. It is quite possible that the violin comes from Dallinger. After all, M. Thier, F. Geissenhof, and Dallinger had their workshops even in the same house for a short time. Mathias Thier I would exclude. I do not know a violin from his workshop that has this quality.

Best regards,

Rudolf Hopfner
_________________"

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Stavanger said:

I think OP's sincerety is nicely presented in his post, asking for opinions on a violin like it wasnt his. He tried to sell this for a while and could not, so he tries a sneaky way of marketing it here.  I like Peters report :) 

I don't know if it goes along with forum rules to set a link to one's own Ebay listings, nor if it's something what we would agree on to be ethical. However, I could ask a friend to do the same for me, most likely nobody would notice this, so never mind.B)

Reg. the opinions on the violin, with all respects to Herrn Hopfner, who should be considered the most knowledgeable expert in this field, a reported email opoinion that it's "quite possible" to be a Dallinger ain't the same like "Hopfner is of the opinion it is a Dallinger" or a written and paid certificate.

With the same right I could tell everybody here, based on my experience it's quite possible that it is a Mittenwald Verleger violin inspired by some Viennese makers, couldn't I? The varnish would support this, because it's of the typical Mittenwald appearance for the period, as well as the dendro.

Actually I don't say it is, only it's quite possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One gets rather dazzled in this listing by the crowd of people cited, either in or out of context. Schröder, Ratcliff, Machold, Kodaj, Nantschev, Dorotheum, Kugler, etc., in no particular order. So much so, that one is almost distracted from looking at the instrument, since one can imagine all sorts of scenarios, how such a crew might come together.

 

Many years ago, I confronted Charles Beare about something he had been quoted as having said, and he told me (yes, oxymoron coming) that “there is nothing that Charles Beare has said, only what Charles Beare has written.”

 

Normally I would have trouble taking an argument, if something was from Thir or Dallinger, all too seriously, since they were related, and worked together in the same workshop, and any flies on the wall are long no longer with us. I would have thought this somewhat dummy argument conveniently distracts from the fact that the instrument has a bogus label. I would also (as mentioned above) have a question mark next to the varnish. Should I ever need a reference example for Dallinger, I could get on the bus outside my house, and ride to the Kunsthistorische Museum, where they have several.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jacobsaunders said:

One gets rather dazzled in this listing by the crowd of people cited, either in or out of context. Schröder, Ratcliff, Machold, Kodaj, Nantschev, Dorotheum, Kugler, etc., in no particular order. So much so, that one is almost distracted from looking at the instrument, since one can imagine all sorts of scenarios, how such a crew might come together.

I am not quite sure what you mean by your last sentence.
Just to clarify, I am totally independent and I do not get influenced by what I am old about an instrument, neither before nor after a test, and I am not part of any "crew".

The dendrochronological results, when conclusive, as these ones were, are what they are, and it was the seller's sole choice to divulge the information contained in the report.

He didn't have to, and for that, I can only applaud him.

At least the results in this case negate speculative suggestions prior to a given date which, in this case, is useful.

I wonder whether the discussion would have taken a different stance had he not done so?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Peter, I'm sorry, crew is an unfortunate choice of words. By him reproducing your certificate, you are surely one of those who is quoted IN context. Personally I would be less keen on a headline “papers by...”, unless it clearly emphasised what I had concluded

Link to post
Share on other sites

The violin is also on Facebook at a price of €9500, with the cited papers as justification for the price.

I agree it's a good thing that the seller has cited the dendro and thereby undermined the majority of other documentation offered. But the sales pitch is definitely suggesting that this is a Dalinger, when in fact everyone knowledgeable is saying "I don't recognize this violin".

I'm sure Ben Schroeder said something like "Well if you want it to be a Dalinger you need to find a twin" - I can just see him smiling wryly.

Herr Hopfner is saying that he is not familiar with violins of this quality from Matthias Thir - he is not saying that the violin is of high quality.

in this business you get very good at speed-reading bullsihit.

So, to clarify, NO EXPERTS SAY it's a Sebastian Dalinger. We have answered your question, and you might be courteous enough to revise your Ebay listing ... 

dalinger-scroll.thumb.jpg.6e90102e10b32301540075f247d0dafe.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, martin swan said:

 

Herr Hopfner is saying that he is not familiar with violins of this quality from Thir/Dalinger et al - he is not saying that the violin is of high quality.

in this business you get very good at speed-reading bullsihit.

Now I'm getting more and more a precise idea about BS-o-meters...;)

BTW, the original sentence by Dr. Hopfner in german is a bit ambiguous or cryptic. It can be interpreted in both directions, the quality is too high or as well too low for a M. Thir. Because I'm regarding Dallinger somehow superior compared with Mathias (not Johann Georg) Thir, I'm a bit confused. But maybe this is Haarspalterei only.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, martin swan said:

 

I'm sure Ben Schroeder said something like "Well if you want it to be a Dalinger you need to find a twin" - I can just see him smiling wryly.

 

I am sorry to say this, but here you are wrong. This where not his words and he was not smiling wryly, whatever wryly means.

He said it is a beautiful violin sounding very good and that in his opinion is by Sebastian Dallinger. I would suggest to find a twin with an original label. He asked me to leave the violin over a weekend to study it.

10 hours ago, martin swan said:

 

 I never heard of a Thir workshop.

 

 

Regarding Mr. Hopfner there is a Thir workshop. 

8 minutes ago, martin swan said:

 

Herr Hopfner is saying that he is not familiar with violins of this quality from Thir/Dalinger et al - he is not saying that the violin is of high quality.

 

Herr Hopfner is saying that he doesn´t think it is made by Matthias Thir. As he never saw such an instrument by Matthias Thir with that quality. 

So of course you can start discussing what he means by quality :-)) Haarspalterei

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK I am speed-reading too fast!

By "Thir Workshop" perhaps I am understanding this in the UK trade sense, in other words that there are violins made by Thir, and then a lesser grade of violins made in the Thir workshop. This is the concept I was challenging, since it seems a way of saying something is a Thir yet isn't. I would understand something like "made by an apprentice/follower of JG Thir".

As regards Ben Schroeder. did he suggest finding a twin or did you? And after he had it for a weekend, what was he prepared to put in writing? If after the weekend he was still of the opinion that it was Sebastian Dalinger, why not get a certificate?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look I have no objection to the violin or to the price either, just to the way you are using inconclusive documentation to lead to a conclusion. You don't need all that, and personally I think it makes the violin look worse not better ...

But it's your business. i saw the violin on facebook and said nothing because facebook is just a chamber of horrors. You asked our opinions here on Maestronet - that's a different story.

You really just need one simple piece of paper from someone who is respected saying "this violin is a fine Viennese violin of the early 19th century, original in all parts" and you're away ...

in my experience "it might be this and it might be that but it can't be the other" just confuses people and makes them suspicious. A buyer will ask "why has someone put all that work into collecting pseudo-appraisals unless it's a problem fiddle".

Of course, if the violin doesn't belong to you and you are selling it on consignmnent, it can be difficult to explain all this to an owner.

Link to post
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.