Sebastian Kloz violin

[Blank face]

39 minutes ago, martin swan said:

Perhaps we could spin some cool tunes together!

We could start covering "Sound of Silence", maybe with different lyrics, like

"Hello fluting my old friend/I've come to carve you to the end.." Sad that noone will hear it.

[Delabo]

46 minutes ago, Blank face said:

We could start covering "Sound of Silence", maybe with different lyrics, like

"Hello fluting my old friend/I've come to carve you to the end.." Sad that noone will hear it.

LOL !

[Danube Fiddler]

10 hours ago, Blank face said:

The dorsal pin is, as you might have learned, as an important constructional trait discussed latest since the 1980s (s. Roger's essay, too), nothing ridiculous.

It was clear, that you misunderstood, what I have said : 

It is ridiculous, to take the dorsal - pin as proof for an apprenticeship of Stainer in the Amati shop. Something similar is told by Dilworth. Naturally I never said anywhere, that the dorsal - pin would be ridiculous. The opposite is true : I even consider the dorsal - pin as eventually much more important than any expert ever publically told, so far as I know.

10 hours ago, Blank face said:

You missed the point completely - it's not prove about a direct workshop apprenticeship in the case of Stainer, but a strong evidence to count him to the Amati school, which could be also a chain of apprenticeships.

1) We should let speak experts about this, and I never read about Stainer as member of the Amati school, written by any important expert - but very frequently the opposite, Stainer as top-protagonist of the German school.

2) The dorsal pin for its alone is not evident to count Stainer into the Amati school, even not some inner working-techniques. Deciding are the sound-related effective working-techniques, mainly archings, shapes and graduations and also some basic aesthetical things in general appearance. This is, what the little club doesn´t understand : the functional aspects of the violin ( sound and aura). Here the schools have their real game - naturally. 

 

 

[jacobsaunders]

7 minutes ago, Danube Fiddler said:

It was clear, that you misunderstood, what I have said : 

It is ridiculous, to take the dorsal - pin as proof for an apprenticeship of Stainer in the Amati shop. Something similar is told by Dilworth. Naturally I never said anywhere, that the dorsal - pin would be ridiculous. The opposite is true : I even consider the dorsal - pin as eventually much more important than any expert ever publically told, so far as I know.

1) We should let speak experts about this, and I never read about Stainer as member of the Amati school, written by any important expert - but very frequently the opposite, Stainer as top-protagonist of the German school.

2) The dorsal pin for its alone is not evident to count Stainer into the Amati school, even not some inner working-techniques. Deciding are the sound-related effective working-techniques, mainly archings, shapes and graduations and also some basic aesthetical things in general appearance. This is, what the little club doesn´t understand : the functional aspects of the violin ( sound and aura). Here the schools have their real game - naturally. 

 

 

Bollocks

[martin swan]

Well it's easy enough to put to the test. We simply need to get a bunch of violins together and get Danube Fiddler to play them blindfold ....

If he can tell us who made them then he must be right.

[Blank face]

1 hour ago, Danube Fiddler said:

Naturally I never said anywhere, that the dorsal - pin would be ridiculous. The opposite is true : I even consider the dorsal - pin as eventually much more important than any expert ever publically told, so far as I know.

Now I understood - you are Donald Trump!

[martin swan]

We {the sound-deniers) are arguing that Stainer's construction method puts him in the Amati school.

Danube Fiddler seems to be arguing that Stainer's construction method doesn't prove that he was an apprentice of Amati.

Since we are arguing totally different points, it's no wonder we can't reach agreement.

 

[reg]

Can I join the 'Little club'?

[martin swan]

If you can accept that your violin is "Kloz school" rather than "German school" then you're in ...

[Danube Fiddler]

4 hours ago, martin swan said:

We {the sound-deniers) are arguing that Stainer's construction method puts him in the Amati school.

Danube Fiddler seems to be arguing that Stainer's construction method doesn't prove that he was an apprentice of Amati.

Since we are arguing totally different points, it's no wonder we can't reach agreement.

 

You seem to not have understood, neither what a member of the little club stated in this discussion : 

On 2/18/2019 at 9:28 AM, jacobsaunders said:

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

.nor which position I had supported : 

1 ) Yes, that an apprenticeship of Stainer in the Amati shop is not proved 

2) Stainer is not member of the Amati school but top-representative of German school, as all know since ever - with the exeption of the little club.

3) the use of a dorsal pin or inside-mold is unimportant for school-participation. Important is the final character of the instrument in functionality ( sound and appearance ).  This depends much lesser on working -techniques than on the underlying musical taste ( sound - ideas ) and the aesthetical taste ( optical and eventually haptical taste ). The German school has had different targets - these made the difference. Nearly no client in history or in presence has had any interests in molds or pins, he can´t see.  But he is interested in some particular characters in sound and appearance of the final instrument - and the different schools evolved in satisfying these ( often locally differing ) interests. Even when Stainer actually  should have been pupil of Amati, he would not be Amati school any longer, when he after his (technical ) apprenticeship aimed for different targets and therefore was perceived as a contrast to the Cremonese world - which apparently was the case. Showing up e.g. in the fact, that old Mittenwald makers built a Stainer vs. an Amati model.

4) The term "school" in violinmaking was not invented by me, it is not a precise term. 

[Blank face]

7 hours ago, Danube Fiddler said:

Important is the final character of the instrument in functionality ( sound and appearance ).  This depends much lesser on working -techniques than on the underlying musical taste ( sound - ideas ) and the aesthetical taste ( optical and eventually haptical taste ). The German school has had different targets - these made the difference. Nearly no client in history or in presence has had any interests in molds or pins, he can´t see.  But he is interested in some particular characters in sound and appearance of the final instrument - and the different schools evolved in satisfying these ( often locally differing ) interests.

This sounds() like a typical post-truth argumentation - don't mind facts if feeling and sentiment are telling me different.

If it's real that there are particular musical, aesthetical, optical and haptical "taste" and "targets" you can surely define them more precisely, and , of the same importance, tell exactly what separates them from other places where they copied Stainer (Venice, Rome, London, Paris and more). Obviously there must have been different targets leading nonetheless to the same violin model.

You should clarify why the examples I gave in a former post about important not-Stainer alike historical german making are less typical than the proposed and to describe taste and targets.

BTW, my "The Strad violin calendar" about Stainer and his influence  from 1999 pictures, beside some original Stainers, Widhalm and Mausiell as well as Gabrielli, Gigli, Tecchler, Duke and Barrett.

[jacobsaunders]

7 hours ago, Danube Fiddler said:

 

.nor which position I had supported : 

1 ) Yes, that an apprenticeship of Stainer in the Amati shop is not proved 

2) Stainer is not member of the Amati school but top-representative of German school, as all know since ever - with the exeption of the little club.

3) the use of a dorsal pin or inside-mold is unimportant for school-participation. Important is the final character of the instrument in functionality ( sound and appearance ).  This depends much lesser on working -techniques than on the underlying musical taste ( sound - ideas ) and the aesthetical taste ( optical and eventually haptical taste ). The German school has had different targets - these made the difference. Nearly no client in history or in presence has had any interests in molds or pins, he can´t see.  But he is interested in some particular characters in sound and appearance of the final instrument - and the different schools evolved in satisfying these ( often locally differing ) interests. Even when Stainer actually  should have been pupil of Amati, he would not be Amati school any longer, when he after his (technical ) apprenticeship aimed for different targets and therefore was perceived as a contrast to the Cremonese world - which apparently was the case. Showing up e.g. in the fact, that old Mittenwald makers built a Stainer vs. an Amati model.

4) The term "school" in violinmaking was not invented by me, it is not a precise term. 

Judging 17^th & 18^th C. craft/culture, using a 19^th C. map, will not enable you to pass any description of intelligence test, and will earn you the derision you reap here.

 

A “school” implies some sort of Master – Apprentice/Journeyman relationship, or even a group of Masters – Apprentices/Journeymen. This can, in the absence of written contemporary documentary evidence, best be defined by comparison of the building method taught/learnt.

 

Trying to define a school by arbitrary verbal diarrhoea about “Sound” will not achieve any coherent result.

[martin swan]

9 hours ago, Danube Fiddler said:

 

3) the use of a dorsal pin or inside-mold is unimportant for school-participation. Important is the final character of the instrument in functionality ( sound and appearance ).  

This is one of the strangest and most absurd claims anyone has ever made on Maestronet. All the leading experts in the world would laugh in your face.

I don't know how you have argued yourself into advancing these ideas, but it's all reeking heavily of a hidden agenda.

9 hours ago, Danube Fiddler said:

Nearly no client in history or in presence has had any interests in molds or pins, he can´t see. 

Once again, this statement is so far from the truth that it can only be some kind of smokescreen.

You're sounding more and more to me like some kind of player-dealer who "sells on sound" ie. on the strength of their own arrogance.

 

[Danube Fiddler]

3 hours ago, jacobsaunders said:

A “school” implies some sort of Master – Apprentice/Journeyman relationship, or even a group of Masters – Apprentices/Journeymen. This can, in the absence of written contemporary documentary evidence, best be defined by comparison of the building method taught/learnt.

Your understanding is to close : The same as in basic scholar education one teacher and one apprentice, even three or four are not a school, not a highschool nor something similar.

To be "school" a certain spread is needed, a big number of "learners" which show, that the "learning-contents" are sufficient acknowleged by a wide circle of persons, showing, that the learning-contents are important in efficiency (  in our field that means: producing different sound and appearance-outputs, which make a difference in the market, being perceived as different in important points by musicians/clients  ).

This is the main thing in "school" :

- any master + any learner is not sufficient to make a "school"

- learning contents must be important and asked/ shared by many persons, at the best in wide areas or in many areas ( a wide spread is an indication for importance )

Therefore a direct connection between master and student even is not necessary at all. It is enough, that some important learning-contents are learned/ imitated, to build or to sustain a school. In the case of the German school the contents are well-known and extremely spreaded. The learned contents have been in high demand until ~1800 and normally are described as sound-related. If one speaks of German school in certain cases or of German - influenced schools or German-influenced making in certain areas like Venezia, probably depends on many things. 

When you develop a certain working-step or procedure and share it with your regrettable apprentice, this is not yet a school - you understand ? 

[Danube Fiddler]

 

1 hour ago, martin swan said:

This is one of the strangest and most absurd claims anyone has ever made on Maestronet. All the leading experts in the world would laugh in your face.

Unti now we see your "little club" in contradiction to these experts, e.g. : 

On 2/16/2019 at 6:52 PM, jacobsaunders said:

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

To the point "about me" - why I discussed here your qualification the first time in many threads. It was after you and your little club repeatedly tried to disqualify my personality.  Only after a lot of time seeing that, I thought, it would be helpful to bring you back on the ground of YOUR poor qualifications : 

Martin Swan 

- No abilities in making

- Not any or at the best quite poor abilities in playing ( a torture for any violin in your hands )

- but considerable experience as DJ

Not having any real access to the violin - family, you naturally are not able to recognize any functional or aesthetical dimensions in these instruments. But at least it is great qualification for the "little club" !

 

[Felefar]

1 hour ago, Danube Fiddler said:

...

When you develop a certain working-step or procedure and share it with your regrettable apprentice, this is not yet a school - you understand ? 

NO, I don't understand.

The aim of violin-making is to make instruments which sound like violins. That does not mean all luthiers are in the same school.

 

However, details of the construction method, especially the little hidden seemingly unimportant bits, are exactly what you would look for to identify a school - no matter how tenuous the historic link is. So when Stainer shared many of these small details with the Amati makers, he can be assigned to the "school of Amati". The hundreds of German-speaking Geigenmacher who copied Stainer's archings but none of his construction methods can NOT be said to belong to a common school.

[reg]

13 hours ago, martin swan said:

If you can accept that your violin is "Kloz school" rather than "German school" then you're in ...

Mittenwald Circa 1900 (labelled Kloz)?

[Danube Fiddler]

10 minutes ago, Felefar said:

The aim of violin-making is to make instruments which sound like violins.

This is a quite modest target - you don´t want more ? 

[jacobsaunders]

1 hour ago, Danube Fiddler said:

Your understanding is to close : The same as in basic scholar education one teacher and one apprentice, even three or four are not a school, not a highschool nor something similar.

To be "school" a certain spread is needed, a big number of "learners" which show, that the "learning-contents" are sufficient acknowleged by a wide circle of persons, showing, that the learning-contents are important in efficiency (  in our field that means: producing different sound and appearance-outputs, which make a difference in the market, being perceived as different in important points by musicians/clients  ).

This is the main thing in "school" :

- any master + any learner is not sufficient to make a "school"

- learning contents must be important and asked/ shared by many persons, at the best in wide areas or in many areas ( a wide spread is an indication for importance )

Therefore a direct connection between master and student even is not necessary at all. It is enough, that some important learning-contents are learned/ imitated, to build or to sustain a school. In the case of the German school the contents are well-known and extremely spreaded. The learned contents have been in high demand until ~1800 and normally are described as sound-related. If one speaks of German school in certain cases or of German - influenced schools or German-influenced making in certain areas like Venezia, probably depends on many things. 

When you develop a certain working-step or procedure and share it with your regrettable apprentice, this is not yet a school - you understand ? 

I see little utility, arguing for the sake of argument, particularly with someone who spouts such nonsense. I have far more fruitful and enjoyable ways of spending my time.

 

One last analogy perhaps though; If you studied violin with Prof. Sabaini, I will think of you as a “Sabaini-Schüler”, and should you come around (don’t bother) would have a rough idea, what to expect

.

[sospiri]

47 minutes ago, Felefar said:

The aim of violin-making is to make instruments which sound like violins.

 

29 minutes ago, Danube Fiddler said:

This is a quite modest target - you don´t want more ? 

 

There is no more. In the hands of a virtuoso violinist a well made violin sounds wonderful. All of the stuff people write and say about superior sounding violins is hyperbole based on their emotions and preconceptions. Every violin sounds different, unique.

[Danube Fiddler]

2 minutes ago, sospiri said:

 

 

There is no more. In the hands of a virtuoso violinist a well made violin sounds wonderful. All of the stuff people write and say about superior sounding violins is hyperbole based on their emotions and preconceptions. Every violin sounds different, unique.

If you are wondering about your missing success - this probably is one and may be even the most important reason.

[sospiri]

2 minutes ago, Danube Fiddler said:

If you are wondering about your missing success - this probably is one and may be even the most important reason.

No, I'm not worried about my own work. I am worried about the nonsense people talk about violins in general. When you hear an "amazing sounding instrument" it's always attached to an amazing player. That is not a coincidence.

[Danube Fiddler]

26 minutes ago, jacobsaunders said:

One last analogy perhaps though; If you studied violin with Prof. Sabaini, I will think of you as a “Sabaini-Schüler”, and should you come around (don’t bother) would have a rough idea, what to expect.

This could apply in some students to a limited amount, in some more not.  As a leading member of the "little club" you probably wouldn´t recognize any differences at all.

[Danube Fiddler]

26 minutes ago, jacobsaunders said:

I see little utility, arguing for the sake of argument, particularly with someone who spouts such nonsense. I have far more fruitful and enjoyable ways of spending my time.

The same applies for me, there is much better way of spending time than discussing with third-rank-makers like you - I will stop this waste of time.

[Blank face]

2 hours ago, Danube Fiddler said:

In the case of the German school the contents are well-known and extremely spreaded. The learned contents have been in high demand until ~1800 and normally are described as sound-related. 

Obviously you are unable to give a more precise definition what you're talking about at all. No wonder, because this is possible only when leaving out all context, all real making and all historical evidence. That's what I would define (lending Jacobs words) as "verbal diarhoea", born of desperation and some intoxication of unknown origin.

I just started to have some pity - one person fighting alone for a lost case, in despair, cornered, weak and embarrassed.