Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Interesting violin


Landolfi
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have this interesting violin. At first glance, i thought it is another Factory made German violin.  But the purfling is well made and the varnish doesn’t look like my other German violins.  It has Stainer label and inscription, but the relatively flat arching definitely rules out Stainer as the maker.  Any thought about the possible origin of this fiddle?

0E466B95-E8E5-4158-830C-EF4486D14279.jpeg

EF0E8473-B80A-4F13-A02A-FD0987671011.jpeg

93E5915E-2A37-40FC-9F2E-E38129B45F6D.jpeg

4493AF0E-0E7D-48E1-A709-09342EA09C9F.jpeg

0469471E-33A8-4A85-B432-DB28DFE7D94B.jpeg

C9D6FBD3-788A-4ACE-AF0D-067AE0A5EF0A.jpeg

0EFE46D8-D250-4EED-874A-F250C2D8AEB6.jpeg

3542F2A7-9191-4162-81F1-DD7C9F6B7FD8.jpeg

539DAF62-CE4C-489A-8B8B-CF814BF476AC.jpeg

4D05D7DE-78C6-4E63-9B3D-56BC669641D0.jpeg

AFB6D254-14CD-427B-8493-27B572FCF549.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Landolfi said:

I have this interesting violin. At first glance, i thought it is another Factory made German violin.  But the purfling is well made and the varnish doesn’t look like my other German violins.  It has Stainer label and inscription, but the relatively flat arching definitely rules out Stainer as the maker.  Any thought about the possible origin of this fiddle?

It looks like what you thought at your first glance. Markneukirchen / Schonbach.
Does it look like it has been revarnished to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Landolfi said:

It is interesting to me, and i am sorry to hear that you do not share the same intellectual curiosity

It is not that, rather every time that someone has something which they do not know what it is, the term interesting is used. After seeing the term ten million times, I feel it is over used on M'net!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Wood Butcher said:

It is not that, rather every time that someone has something which they do not know what it is, the term interesting is used. After seeing the term ten million times, I feel it is over used on M'net!

In your opinion, what would be a more appropriate verbiage to use

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Landolfi.

You got some dutzendarbeit and you thought it was interesting because it had been revarnished?  I mean, the Stainer stamp should have been waving a yellow flag at you, right? I'm not any kind of expert (but read Jacob's work religiously), and even I can see this.  Then, the back of the scroll, the corners.  What, really, did you think this was?  Some nice wood, and it might be an awesome player--sometimes these are.  The purfling does indeed look unusually good for this sort of fiddle, to my not-expert eyes, but other factors are more significant.  The "interesting" thing to me about this violin is that most of these stamped faux-Stainers have ridonkulous arching, but this one looks closer than most to real Stainer arching, which is not all that different from Amati arching (isn't it?).  So, ironically, it could be argued that this "resembles" a Stainer more than a lot of these do.

On 8/22/2020 at 3:45 AM, Landolfi said:

Why put a Stainer label when it doesn’t even resemble a Stainer fiddle?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, palousian said:

Landolfi.

You got some dutzendarbeit and you thought it was interesting because it had been revarnished?  I mean, the Stainer stamp should have been waving a yellow flag at you, right? I'm not any kind of expert (but read Jacob's work religiously), and even I can see this.  Then, the back of the scroll, the corners.  What, really, did you think this was?  Some nice wood, and it might be an awesome player--sometimes these are.  The purfling does indeed look unusually good for this sort of fiddle, to my not-expert eyes, but other factors are more significant.  The "interesting" thing to me about this violin is that most of these stamped faux-Stainers have ridonkulous arching, but this one looks closer than most to real Stainer arching, which is not all that different from Amati arching (isn't it?).  So, ironically, it could be argued that this "resembles" a Stainer more than a lot of these do.

The part that has intrigued me the most is the detailed purfling work that it has veen done on a fiddle of this origin, plus the selection of wood.  Lastly, if you are going to copy something, make it as closely as the original, yet this fiddle is so obviously not a Stainer.  So i have found it interesting that the amount of time and details that the maker put in on the purfling, yet labelled it a Stainer while there was no resemblances to a Stainer.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The selection of wood is not in the least surprising.  Some of these makers had great wood to work with.  But then you say--

5 minutes ago, Landolfi said:

Lastly, if you are going to copy something, make it as closely as the original, yet this fiddle is so obviously not a Stainer.

Well, for one thing, I explained one aspect of this fiddle that does indeed resemble a Stainer, but you've been on M'net for awhile.  You know the drill, c'mon.  They didn't make these as copies.  They made a ton of fiddles and wholesalers/distributors put whatever label in them to sell them.  That's it.  When Sebastian Kloz made a "Stainer copy," he was making something that was, yeah, more like a copy of a Stainer--that's a whole different thing.  Your anonymous luthier hacking out a fiddle every day was making fiddles, and they could call them Amatis or Stainers or Gibson Mastertones.  Whatever sold.  Obviously there were various grades, and I agree that this looks like a nice one.  If it sounds good, then it is worth something.  But it is what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, palousian said:

The selection of wood is not in the least surprising.  Some of these makers had great wood to work with.  But then you say--

Well, for one thing, I explained one aspect of this fiddle that does indeed resemble a Stainer, but you've been on M'net for awhile.  You know the drill, c'mon.  They didn't make these as copies.  They made a ton of fiddles and wholesalers/distributors put whatever label in them to sell them.  That's it.  When Sebastian Kloz made a "Stainer copy," he was making something that was, yeah, more like a copy of a Stainer--that's a whole different thing.  Your anonymous luthier hacking out a fiddle every day was making fiddles, and they could call them Amatis or Stainers or Gibson Mastertones.  Whatever sold.  Obviously there were various grades, and I agree that this looks like a nice one.  If it sounds good, then it is worth something.  But it is what it is.

Perhaps i didn’t make it clear in my op.  Clearly it is not a Stainer, and based on the wood selection and the quality of purfling, i would expect this to be an above average grade copy.   But what i am intrigued about it (not about the violin), is the fact that if the maker is talented enough, and had access to great materials, why made this fiddle so obvious a fake/copy?  Why not find a label that is more resembled to this forger’s style if work and make it more believable?   I know perhaps i put too much thoughts into this, and i apologize if i have wasted everyone’s time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are missing the point.  These people were not making copies, they were making violins as well as they could, at breakneck speed.  I believe that they were paid by the piece (or by the dozen--hence, "dutzendarbeit").  No one was making copies of anything, and certainly no one was making anything like a forgery.  They were making generic violins. Then someone else decides to stamp it "Stainer" or "Conservatory" or "Paganini," or the brand name du jour.  If calling it a "Ford Mustang" sold more fiddles, that's what they would have called it. 

But take a look at some actual Stainers, like the one at the National Music Museum.  Not that different an arch, IMO.

https://emuseum.nmmusd.org/objects/7891/violin?ctx=0e0c2d5c-c08c-40de-8400-5da3b7c88147&idx=0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Landolfi said:

The part that has intrigued me the most is the detailed purfling work that it has veen done on a fiddle of this origin, plus the selection of wood.  Lastly, if you are going to copy something, make it as closely as the original, yet this fiddle is so obviously not a Stainer.  So i have found it interesting that the amount of time and details that the maker put in on the purfling, yet labelled it a Stainer while there was no resemblances to a Stainer.  

Neat purfling is par for the course. They did it day in, day out, and consequently got very good at it. Nothing unusual there.

As for the materials, they had access to good wood, which was probably not as expensive when buying it by the tonne. Again, nothing unusual in the materials.

If you look at other violins from the Schonbach & Markneukirchen area, you will see this for yourself on tens of thousands of other violins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like many others that landed here I have a violin that was recently received and belonged to a grandparent. My mother new nothing of it other than she and her sisters were forbidden to touch it growing up. Neither of my grandparents played it so it likely belonged to someone else before it came to them.

After reading several posts I am very confident I have yet another old replica, the back is stamped, the label is not hand written and marked with an open ended date that was not completed lol. It is identical to many of the other replicas including the one in this thread. To me and the family it was "interesting" (sorry I had to), but I more so wanted to say thanks for this forum. The family was running wild with expectations of a found fortune but I expected otherwise.

The copy I have looks very very well used, so someone clearly enjoyed the crap out of it. The neck is bare wood in some areas!

Thank you to everyone here for the information, saved me a lot of time!

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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...