Mario Gadda Cello 1960's

[myrte]

I am considering buying this Mario Gadda cello.

I was told that Mario Gadda cellos in 1960's are very rare and precious, and is worth more than $70,000.

Could you discern that this is a genuine one? I attached the pictures of labels and body.

And I am afraid the gap between the strings and fingerboard is rather large. Is that the characteristic of the maker?

Sincerely,

Thank you!

 

Edited July 27, 2019 by myrte

[hendrik]

There are all kinds and sorts of "Mario Gaddas".

[Pate Bliss]

"And I am afraid the gap between the strings and fingerboard is rather large. Is that the characteristic of the maker?"

If the bridge is normal height or shorter and the strings are higher than normal, it needs some expensive work. 

[martin swan]

I would never in a million years buy a "Mario Gadda" without an independent certificate.

He is one of the most commonly faked makers (in the sense fo people putting a Gadda label into a cheap modern cello) and was also a bit fly himself, issuing fake certificates and even passing off factory violins as made by him.

It seems a rather routine piece of work without the features we associate with this maker - the varnish particularly is quite tradey. You might see this in the 1980s but not in his earlier work,

Mario Gaddas from the 60s are not that rare, and a cello in mint condition would be quite a hard sell at $60k.

What are the circumstances of the sale? it all seems more than a bit dodgy to me, though maybe the hi-hat in the back of the shot is prejudicial!

[jacobsaunders]

49 minutes ago, martin swan said:

I would never in a million years buy a "Mario Gadda" without an independent certificate.

 

Personally. I do not know anyone I take seeriously who would certify a Gadda instrument

[cellopera]

1 hour ago, jacobsaunders said:

Personally. I do not know anyone I take seeriously who would certify a Gadda instrument

Blot, Gindin, Kōstler?

[jacobsaunders]

I take them all seriously, don't know if they certify Gaddas though

[hendrik]

Bruce Carlson refuses to certify any Mario Gadda; I think he mentions it in a thread here somewhere.

[jacobsaunders]

In order to confidently authenticate anything, one needs to know, or better have, a few reference examples. The stuff that comes attributed to Gadda is such a varied mishmash that one can scarcely form an opinion what a genuine one should look like, even including those with a certificate from Gadda himself

[myrte]

Wow, thank you very much for the comments!

I was offered a very cheap price, and that is the reason which makes it hard to believe that this would be a genuine one. I was told that there was a certificate for this instrument, which I could not tell significant or not.

Anyway, even though it may be a genuine one, I do not think I would buy this because the strings are too far from the fingerboard, which would not be easy to fix.

Thank you again for sharing your high quality information!

 

Edited July 29, 2019 by myrte

[martin swan]

Jacob's right that it's a bit of a mess, much of Gadda's own making.

 I am happy to offer this one as a reference example https://www.martinswanviolins.com/mario-gadda-violin/, and would point to this more "del Gesu" model in the Cozio archive as being quite typical in exactly the same way : https://tarisio.com/cozio-archive/property/?ID=85165

Of course Mario Gadda picked up his loose ways from his father Gaetano Gadda, who continued to make and sell Stefano Scarampellas many years after Scarampella's death ...

[jacobsaunders]

Are you suggesting that I don't take you seriously Martin?

[martin swan]

I would hope that if I thought to certify a Gadda you would piss yourself laughing ...

[Violadamore]

6 hours ago, martin swan said:

I would never in a million years buy a "Mario Gadda" without an independent certificate.

He is one of the most commonly faked makers (in the sense fo people putting a Gadda label into a cheap modern cello) and was also a bit fly himself, issuing fake certificates and even passing off factory violins as made by him.

 

 

2 hours ago, jacobsaunders said:

In order to confidently authenticate anything, one needs to know, or better have, a few reference examples. The stuff that comes attributed to Gadda is such a varied mishmash that one can scarcely form an opinion what a genuine one should look like, even including those with a certificate from Gadda himself

 

1 hour ago, martin swan said:

Jacob's right that it's a bit of a mess, much of Gadda's own making......................................Of course Mario Gadda picked up his loose ways from his father Gaetano Gadda, who continued to make and sell Stefano Scarampellas many years after Scarampella's death ...

 

Judging by some things I see occasionally, the Gadda school seems to have many descendants these days. 

[ClefLover]

Back flame looks a bit more like a lower quality selection, but maybe it’s just the picture.  I would think any cello worth more than $10k would have better wood selection.  Is this fair to say?

[Pate Bliss]

On YT there are several Mario Gadda violins for sale demo'ed.  They all or mostly seem to me to have a characteristic quality of sound.  Maybe this is the one case where it would be best to identify an instrument by its sound? 

 

[twcellist]

8 hours ago, myrte said:

Wow, thank you very much for the comments!

I was offered a very cheap price, and that is the reason which makes it hard to believe that this would be a genuine one. I was told that there was a certificate for this instrument, which I could not tell significant or not.

Anyway, even though it may be a genuine one, I do not think I would buy this because the strings are too far from the fingerboard, which would not be easy to fix.

Thank you again for sharing your high quality information!

 

Hi there. Welcome to the forum. I'm also a rather new member and I certainly am no expert, BUT I just want to mention an experience I am having right now with the strings being too far from the finger board and one post mentioning it could need "expensive work". I have my cello in the shop because the A string's distance was very far from the fingerboard and it was also causing rubbing on the c-bout. The problem is because the angle of the neck is completely messed up and the neck is sinking (which I was told is not uncommon and happens over time on some cellos) So the Luthier had to take off the neck and do a neck raise and putting in a wedge. This work was $1000. Now, I'm not saying this could be the issue with this cello, but I just thought you might want to know this could be one potential issue. (FYI... he said the overall geometry of the neck is good and if I really want to fix the problem to be 100 perfect a new neck is needed and that's around $3,000. However, this I guess alternative fix will make things better.)

Other forum members here have raised various good points and I agree with the most of the sentiment here. I wouldn't buy this instrument unless you had a "reputable" authority backing it and I would certainly hope the person your dealing with is a reputable (i.e. If it's a store/luthier with a name and reputation I would think they would try to stand by what they are selling as they don't want to have their reputation damaged.) Lastly, if you didn't know sound quality isn't the main determinate in value, but it's the condition. Granted this a rather newer instrument so in theory it shouldn't have as much damage as say a 300 year old instrument, but if there are any major cracks or damage (even if it has been repaired) it will really hurt the value. So there really is a lot you need to watch out for. And then I hate to mention it, but there are lots of fakes out there!  I recommend you bring at least someone who more knowledge (at minimum a cello teacher, but better someone who has more experience spotting condition issues like a luthier) to look at the cello. 

[nathan slobodkin]

On ‎7‎/‎29‎/‎2019 at 1:01 PM, ClefLover said:

Back flame looks a bit more like a lower quality selection, but maybe it’s just the picture.  I would think any cello worth more than $10k would have better wood selection.  Is this fair to say?

No.

[ClefLover]

3 hours ago, nathan slobodkin said:

No.

It was a huge generalization that I used.  I understand that flame does not dictate quality, especially since, traditionally, more than just a few wood types were used.  However, my experience when looking at better contemporary makers, in general, is that they choose more “attractive” woods; i.e., tighter grained top spruce and highly flamed maple.  Because quality comes in many materials and “attractive” is a preference, there are exceptions in contemporary instruments, but I think that the generalization is fair?

[ClefLover]

On 7/29/2019 at 4:07 AM, martin swan said:

I would never in a million years buy a "Mario Gadda" without an independent certificate.

He is one of the most commonly faked makers (in the sense fo people putting a Gadda label into a cheap modern cello) and was also a bit fly himself, issuing fake certificates and even passing off factory violins as made by him.

It seems a rather routine piece of work without the features we associate with this maker - the varnish particularly is quite tradey. You might see this in the 1980s but not in his earlier work,

Mario Gaddas from the 60s are not that rare, and a cello in mint condition would be quite a hard sell at $60k.

What are the circumstances of the sale? it all seems more than a bit dodgy to me, though maybe the hi-hat in the back of the shot is prejudicial!

Do you think Gadda is commonly faked because a clean Chinese instrument shares many characteristics? The Chinese seem to do a pretty good job overall in making a clean symmetrical instrument, and a $1,000 can go far, which can buy better looking scroll, wood choice, etc

[duane88]

On 8/16/2019 at 6:20 AM, ClefLover said:

It was a huge generalization that I used.  I understand that flame does not dictate quality, especially since, traditionally, more than just a few wood types were used.  However, my experience when looking at better contemporary makers, in general, is that they choose more “attractive” woods; i.e., tighter grained top spruce and highly flamed maple.  Because quality comes in many materials and “attractive” is a preference, there are exceptions in contemporary instruments, but I think that the generalization is fair?

Willow, Poplar, Beech, all usually plain but make great celli. For a cello I wouldn't use a "tighter grained top spruce", I'd choose slightly broader.

I know someone who has a tree that allows one-piece cello backs. Not the most beautiful wood, but they do sound and sell for a healthy sum.

[Grandini]

Going back to the question of 1960s Gadda cellos.  I looked at one recently which looked and sounded very good.  This whole thing with the fakes and the question marks regarding his later work and certificates puts me off though. 

So how are his 1950s/60s  instruments viewed? built shortly after he took over the business from his father. Is this a period where his instruments are more consistent?  

 

 

[twcellist]

There is a cello on Tarisio that's labelled Ernesto Pevere, but Tarisio says it's by Mario Gadda. 

https://tarisio.com/auctions/auction/lot/?csid=2199126016&cpid=3655139328

So I'm trying to understand what's going on here. Are they basically saying that Mario Gadda copied Ernesto Pevere and that he created a fake certificate saying the cello is by Ernesto Pevere when he's the actual maker? I've been reading a lot a threads about Mario Gadda and how there so many fakes. Obviously, this is very concerning ...  Curious to understand how this affects the value of the instrument given all this uncertainty... 

 

[Michael Appleman]

I had a very good friend (sadly passed away) who was a co-principal of a major US orchestra, who "sold down" after he moved to France, going from a Montagnana to a Tecchler first, then selling the Tecchler for a Mario Gadda later on. The Gadda came from one of the top London dealers, and was not what I considered "cheap" at the time (some 20 years ago). It was in some ways typical of what Gadda was up to. It was made in the style of Cesare Candi, and had an authentic Candi label and brand stamps, as I think I read somewhere that Gadda married Candi's daughter. In any case, I was a bit shocked when he showed me that cello and was surprised he chose it since for the price he was paying he had a pretty wide choice of 20th century italian or 19th century French cellos, but he seemed to like it very much.

[Three13]

It seems like there’s no shortage of Mario Gaddas and “Mario Gaddas” lately. I’m not sure I understand the appeal, even when they’re great.