Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Sebastian Kloz violin


reg

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 143
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

5 hours ago, jacobsaunders said:

Hamma included the whole K&K Monarchy in his "Deutsche Geigenbau" book. I don't know why.

May be he had some fine reasons and he seems not to have been a dilletante. 

Everywhere there was the "Holy Roman Empire of German Nation" until Napoleon ( ~1800 ), additional a consistent German language area until Vienna and further the close cultural connection between Prague, Budapest and Vienna as important towns of this "Holy ..." yet before the K&K monarchy was born.

7 hours ago, martin swan said:

Not by anyone I know ...

There is some commonality with Vienna, but Austria is not Germany.

 Stainer on the the top of German school located in Absam near Innsbruck  - in this times all "Holy Roman Empire of German Nation". Today one can say " not Germany" but "Austria" ---> Stainer not German school ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Danube Fiddler said:

Stainer on the the top of German school located in Absam near Innsbruck  - in this times all "Holy Roman Empire of German Nation". Today one can say " not Germany" but "Austria" ---> Stainer not German school ?

Yup. Stainer was of the Amati school, and being without any direct students his own school is found nearly everywhere from Britain to Italy or in France, so it's nonsense to call him "top of German school". There's not a big relation between a Hopf f.i. and Stainer when you look at it with a clear mind. The same applies to the Holy Empire, which was a dead horse latest since the Reformation. Or you should even Strad call "German", because he was paying his taxes to the Emperor in Vienna for a certain period.

All what you are referring to are some weird 19th century nationalistic ideas, which I didn't want to discuss here furthermore (and which Hamma and others might have had in their mind, too). Please stay at your "sound valuation".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Danube Fiddler said:

 

 Stainer on the the top of German school located in Absam near Innsbruck  - in this times all "Holy Roman Empire of German Nation". Today one can say " not Germany" but "Austria" ---> Stainer not German school ?

 

By your logic you might as well call him Hungarian!!

Stainer was one of the (very few) Tyrol makers, not German. 

I am not aware of any "German" school - only of disparate traditions and methodologies  existing in what we now call Germany, or in countries where at one time German was spoken.

From the point of view of identification, scholarship and understanding, I'm sure you can see that these schools are distinct from each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Blank face said:

 Or you should even Strad call "German", because he was paying his taxes to the Emperor in Vienna for a certain period.

Scrap.

Cremona had changing political circumstances in ~ Stradivaris time - while Tyrol and some other referred areas have been continously part of the "Holy Roman Empire of German Nation" for centuries, not to forget, that Stainers Tirol area is/was German language area all the time until the present day. This term "Holy ....." and the underlying historical political circumstances are not from me -  I don´t know if YOU are the person to question it.

May be it would be interesting for you, what the Tyrolian State Museum writes about Stainer

"Vater der deutschen Geige"  ( "Father of the German violin" )

http://musikinstrumente.musikland-tirol.at/content/musikinstrumenteinhalt/jakobstainer/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In terms of the study of violin making and the different schools, I don't think the language spoken is very relevant.

For example the Prague makers are tied together by construction method and stylistic traits, but some spoke German and some spoke Czech. They have absolutely nothing in common with the Saxon makers, all of whom (we assume) spoke German. 

There is very little in the way of common ground between Stainer and Albani, yet both were Tyrolese and, I assume, both spoke German. One influenced pretty much all violin-making north of the Alps, not just in Germany, the other gave birth to the Venetian school and to various sub-branches of Italian making. 

To try to lump together all violin-making within what was for a time the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation seems to be a revisionist and politically inspired exercise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, martin swan said:

By your logic you might as well call him Hungarian!!

Scrap - historians speak of "Holy Roman Empire of German ( not Hungarian ) nation ". 

14 hours ago, martin swan said:

Stainer was one of the (very few) Tyrol makers, not German. 

First part right - second part wrong, naturally.    Stainers native language was German, Tyrol was part of the "Holy Roman Empire of German nation....", Federal Republic of Germany was not existing. 

14 hours ago, martin swan said:

I am not aware of any "German" school - only of disparate traditions and methodologies  existing in what we now call Germany, or in countries where at one time German was spoken.

'While I agree to some extent - the term "German school " was not invented by me but is used frequently. When you and Blankface know it much better than Hamma and e.g. the Tyrolian State Museum, which tells, that Stainer was "school-building" in Germany, Austria and some more states, even in Italian areas to some extent and in longer times. All not new, often read, but may be new Blankface and you know it better.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, martin swan said:

In terms of the study of violin making and the different schools, I don't think the language spoken is very relevant.

(Native) language is a very common descriptive of areas and persons, particularly in the earlier not so globalised world. It is highly correlated with cultural phenomenons.

 

1 hour ago, martin swan said:

For example the Prague makers are tied together by construction method and stylistic traits, but some spoke German and some spoke Czech. They have absolutely nothing in common with the Saxon makers, all of whom (we assume) spoke German. 

May be we could relieve your pain by speaking of more than one single German school ( the same could make sense for other countries or schools). But why we are discussing ? All these questions are answered by leading experts like e.g. Hamma. Which is your intention ? To know it better than those or only to know it better than me ?

To finally repeat : If one likes it to speak of a "German school" at all ( as common use ) , NATURALLY old  Prague, Budapest and Vienna makers would be important parts of it and Stainer NATURALLY would be the head or father of such a "German school". 

Why I have to discuss such matter of course with you ? 

1 hour ago, martin swan said:

To try to lump together all violin-making within what was for a time the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation seems to be a revisionist and politically inspired exercise.

To make your abberation and ignorance of a common terminology to any political topic about my personality will not work. To be clear, I am not a revisionist - there is nothing to revise, all happened a long time ago and many things were not fine. B.t.w. I am not a great admirer of the "German school".

I know, your point of argumentation is desperate, but I would have expected higher level from you than such political imputations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Blank face said:

Yup. Stainer was of the Amati school, and being without any direct students his own school ...

I don´t understand what your opinion is : 

a) Stainer was of Amati school   ?    or

b) Stainer had "own school"  ?

When Stainer had "own" school, then it was not the Amati school and then this school was developped by a German-speaking person, living, working and born in a German-speaking area, therefore a German school. Exactly that way it is called all times.

Nothing new - but may be for you.

Enjoy your soundless world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Danube Fiddler said:

 

 

6 hours ago, Danube Fiddler said:

 

 

 

5 hours ago, Danube Fiddler said:

 

 

5 hours ago, Danube Fiddler said:

 

 

If you think I'm gonna read and answer all your uninformed stuff, you're just wrong. This thread was about something more interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Blank face said:

 This thread was about something more interesting.

Naturally - and it was me, who could get out of Jacob Saunders, what he at first didn´t want to tell but the OP liked to know ( so far as one can expect in a thread )

On 2/16/2019 at 6:11 PM, jacobsaunders said:

 The OP didn’t ask for a certificate and will be happy to have a nice late 18th C. Mittenwald violin.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Danube Fiddler said:

I don´t understand what your opinion is : 

a) Stainer was of Amati school   ?    or

b) Stainer had "own school"  ?

When Stainer had "own" school, then it was not the Amati school and then this school was developped by a German-speaking person, living, working and born in a German-speaking area, therefore a German school. Exactly that way it is called all times.

Nothing new - but may be for you.

Enjoy your soundless world.

That Stainer was part of the “Amati School” is a straigtforward fact, just like all the Italians with the ubiquitous pin in the centre of the back are lumped together as “Amati school”.

 

We discussed this in detail, that Stainer worked for Amati before, starting here

https://maestronet.com/forum/index.php?/topic/333000-stainer/&do=findComment&comment=687987

 

 

We know from Sainer’s personal correspondence that he had no assistant or pupil

https://maestronet.com/forum/index.php?/topic/333000-stainer/&do=findComment&comment=688355

 

He was nevertheless, despite having no pupils, a role model for makers, just about everywhere, throughout the 18th C.

 

If you imagine that you have a monopoly on “sound”, you are a deluded pillock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are in danger of slipping into some parallel universe here ...

I think it's possible that Danube Fiddler just misunderstands what is meant by a "school" in the context of a historical analysis of violin-making. I think it's a very common misunderstanding, and the term has been used very loosely by authors, museums, auction houses erc, all of whom may at times have agendas which are not purely scholarly.

My definition, and I think the widely shared definition, of a violin making school, is a tradition, method and style of building violins - it is a chain of connection through apprenticeships.

A school of making, in the correct sense, is defined by whether it uses an inside mold or an outside mold or no mold, how it arranges the inner work, how the tools are used, what stylistic quirks it manifests (scroll geometry or f-holes being the most easily observed) etc etc.

You could identify a Kleynman for example as being a violin of the Dutch school because it is visually Amatise, because it's built on the back, because the scroll geometry is "just so" and because it has whalebone purfling.

Obviously there have always been misunderstandings of what is meant by "school" - auction houses are notorious for using the term loosely (to imply valuable connections where there are none), and when I joined MN all those years ago Jacob rightly berated me for my ignorance in talking about the Tyrolese school.

There are various distinct schools which evolved from the Fuessen diaspora (Prague/Vienna and Mittenwald being German speaking) and many other schools heavily indebted to it (Rome and Genoa come to mind). The Venice school was also very closely connected to German-speaking antecedents through Albani and Gofriller.

However, none of this adds up to a "German School", and the fact that Hamma lumped a lot of disparate traditions together is neither here nor there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, martin swan said:

My definition, and I think the widely shared definition, of a violin making school, is a tradition, method and style of building violins - it is a chain of connection through apprenticeships.

Quite right, that's why I set the "school" of Stainer into inverted commas.It was just more or les exactly imitating his models (he had different) using the local construction methods.  I think that there aren't so many misconceptions about any other maker. This might be due to these millions of "Sta(e)iner" branded Dutzendarbeiten as well as to the fact that his name was so often abused to describe all kind of models and traditions being without any relation to him. Much of this might be caused by the (as I wrote similar above) 19th century nationalisms, when everywhere self-declared experts tried to separate violin making into national "schools" and to give them self-invented characteristics without considering the complex structures of the craft in earlier times, with travelling journeymen and wide-spread trade relations.

I would be very careful, too, lumping Füssen and Mittenwald together. As Jacob once described in his "Hans Ott and early Füssen" thread, the Füssener had a very different method in the early 18th century, building on the back without linings, just using triangular cleats, while Mathias Kloz and the Mittenwald making had from the early beginning the Cremonese inner mould system. This is very detailled described at the website of the Mittenwald Musikinstrumentenmuseum by W.Zunterer here, also that they were so different from Stainer's violins that he excludes a direct influence of Stainer on the beginning of the Mittenwald making  http://www.geigenbaumuseum-mittenwald.de/index.php?id=104

This might be more relevant than any websites of Heimatmuseums and the like, which are usually just copying nonsensical stuff of other sources without any own investigations.

The odd stereotype that there was a "German school" recognizable by things like high archings or slavish copying Stainer seems to be the more absurd if you consider that the earliest instruments of the Freiberg Dom have a more Brescian appearance, what applies to early Saxon/West Bohemian instruments of the late 17/early 18th century, too, the very idiosyncratic Allemannische Schule in the Black Forest and Switzerland, that there was Buchstetter and his pupils working after a flat arched Strad model close to the mid of the 18th century and that you can find, between all sorts of lower or higher archings in the Vogtland region, Ole Bull alike GdG f-holes at many David Hopfs of the ca. 1800 period.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Blank face said:

 

I would be very careful, too, lumping Füssen and Mittenwald together. As Jacob once described in his "Hans Ott and early Füssen" thread, the Füssener had a very different method in the early 18th century, building on the back without linings, just using triangular cleats, while Mathias Kloz and the Mittenwald making had from the early beginning the Cremonese inner mould system. This is very detailled described at the website of the Mittenwald Musikinstrumentenmuseum by W.Zunterer here, also that they were so different from Stainer's violins that he excludes a direct influence of Stainer on the beginning of the Mittenwald making  http://www.geigenbaumuseum-mittenwald.de/index.php?id=104

This might be more relevant than any websites of Heimatmuseums and the like, which are usually just copying nonsensical stuff of other sources without any own investigations.

 

 

Great essay - I think that says it all in terms of a "German School".

Zunterer makes my point better than me - that although 2 makers might live within a few kilometres of each other and speak the same language, they might have no common ground when it comes to their tradition of making. 

His description of commercial relations in 17th century South Central Europe also doesn't really tie in with the concept of a homogeneous "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This Holy Empire is a red herring. Beside that it's meaning changed much within the many centuries of it's existence, from an alliance between the biggest travelling warlord (the emperor) north of the Alps with the most important priest (the pope) south of them to confirm their powers, with a complicated system of medieval relations, competitions and interdependences, to a more statical construction in early modern times, split into many more or less independent dominions, we probably can't imagine what "nation" or "culture" meant in a time when most of the people didn't even know what was hidden behind the next hill. All this travellers, like craftspeople and merchants or musicians must have been a rather small elite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Blank face said:

This Holy Empire is a red herring. Beside that it's meaning changed much within the many centuries of it's existence, from an alliance between the biggest travelling warlord (the emperor) north of the Alps with the most important priest (the pope) south of them to confirm their powers, with a complicated system of medieval relations, competitions and interdependences, to a more statical construction in early modern times, split into many more or less independent dominions, we probably can't imagine what "nation" or "culture" meant in a time when most of the people didn't even know what was hidden behind the next hill. All this travellers, like craftspeople and merchants or musicians must have been a rather small elite.

Sounds like the EU:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, jacobsaunders said:

That Stainer was part of the “Amati School” is a straigtforward fact, just like all the Italians with the ubiquitous pin in the centre of the back are lumped together as “Amati school”.

 

We discussed this in detail, that Stainer worked for Amati before,

Any historical documents proving this assumption ?

One pin makes/ separates no school. Rather more some typical sound-functional things like archings and graduations as naturally the underlying sound-ideals and also asthetical things expressing in a lot of things ( where Amati and Stainer are not so close - may be you don´t have a sense for it )

B.t.w. : It is/was not my job to define the "school"-term. Others did it and some of them have been great authorities. Not such third rank makers like you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Danube Fiddler said:

Any historical documents proving this assumption ?

One pin makes/ separates no school. Rather more some typical sound-functional things like archings and graduations as naturally the underlying sound-ideals and also asthetical things expressing in a lot of things ( where Amati and Stainer are not so close - may be you don´t have a sense for it )

B.t.w. : It is/was not my job to define the "school"-term. Others did it and some of them have been great authorities. Not such third rank makers like you.

We went through that in detail in the thread I linked too. I have no time to give remedial instructions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Danube Fiddler said:

Any historical documents proving this assumption ?

One pin makes/ separates no school. Rather more some typical sound-functional things like archings and graduations as naturally the underlying sound-ideals and also asthetical things expressing in a lot of things ( where Amati and Stainer are not so close - may be you don´t have a sense for it )

B.t.w. : It is/was not my job to define the "school"-term. Others did it and some of them have been great authorities. Not such third rank makers like you.

I think you need to learn a great deal more about historical aspects of violin construction before you throw your weight around on Maestronet. But then again, no-one knows who you are so I suppose you can afford to play the idiot.

I have no personal experience of Jacob's own making, but even if he was a tenth rate maker this would have no bearing on his understanding of violin-making history. This kind of use of logical fallacy is why we consider you to be a troll. Pretty much everyone else is here to exchange ideas in a spirit of mutual respect.

A construction trait (such as the use of a central pin) IS documentation. If you can't see that you are stupid as well as obtuse. Perhaps you should read Zunterer's essay since he makes this very clear, and we know you respect him.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Danube Fiddler said:

 

B.t.w. : It is/was not my job to define the "school"-term. Others did it and some of them have been great authorities. Not such third rank makers like you.

Is there a connection between Danube Fiddler and Blue Danube violinshop, where you can by also a Stradivari conductor's baton and ask for masterclasses how to conduct an orchestra ? :D

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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...