Luigi Azzola violin 1916

[BassClef]

1 hour ago, chiaroscuro_violins said:

@BassClef

Perhaps you could refrain from pressuring people into posting photos when it isn't relevant to the topic at hand.  

LOL settle down. There was no pressure. I enjoy seeing photos, have a nice weekend.

[BassClef]

23 minutes ago, martin swan said:

I would echo Jeffrey's statement.

I don't think there's any need to ramp up the tension.

The consensus seems to be ... show it to Dmitry or Eric as there is significant room for doubt.

I would be surprised if the OP has been taken for a fool with regard to this violin. But if he has, it's better to know.

 

“Taken for a fool” - Way to ramp up the tension Martin! I am not an expert and I wasn’t casting shade, you can reread the responses to see who was. Have a nice weekend.

[Alexander James Stew]

2 hours ago, BassClef said:

OP, how are you feeling having read that both your bow and violin are not what you thought, according to MN Experts? MN's experts regularly dish out sobering information and I am sorry you are reading this and that I may have caused you heartache by asking you to post images.

Dear BassClef,

I was having problems accessing my former account so I formed a new one. Unfortunately the pictures I have of my Luigi Azzola violin were taken back in 2013 and the colour of the varnish is not like this. It's more golden.I must post better pictures to do the violin justice.

I posted the photos because you asked and not because I was looking for the experts here to condone the violin.... to be quite honest am intrigued with a lot of the comments here.

This Azzola is an early example of his work. He was but 33 years old when he made the violin. Eric Blot has seen the violin and when I have a moment I will get a certificate from him. and I doubt anyone here has seen such an early example of this maker...This is 100% authentic. I bought the violin in 1996 and at that time Azzola was relatively unknown. There are very few authentic examples of his work as Eric Blot states. But you will be surprised over the last 25 years how many "genuine" instruments have surfaced.

So I am not concerned with others passing judgement. I know what I have and am proud to share it with you. By the way it's a terrific sounding instrument. Yes the work is somewhat crude in places but it has masses of character.

As regards my Morizot bow. This was purchased in Paris in the late 1950's I just don't know which Morizot made it. If you would like to see better photos of my violin I would be more than happy to post more up to date ones. But as stated am not concerned with the various opinions doubting it's authenticity. And by the way I had a test done on the label... The paper is over 100 years old.

All the best

[BassClef]

10 minutes ago, Alexander James Stew said:

Dear BassClef,

I was having problems accessing my former account so I formed a new one. Unfortunately the pictures I have of my Luigi Azzola violin were taken back in 2013 and the colour of the varnish is not like this. It's more golden.I must post better pictures to do the violin justice.

I posted the photos because you asked and not because I was looking for the experts here to condone the violin.... to be quite honest am intrigued with a lot of the comments here.

This Azzola is an early example of his work. He was but 33 years old when he made the violin. Eric Blot has seen the violin and when I have a moment I will get a certificate from him. and I doubt anyone here has seen such an early example of this maker...This is 100% authentic. I bought the violin in 1996 and at that time Azzola was relatively unknown. There are very few authentic examples of his work as Eric Blot states. But you will be surprised over the last 25 years how many "genuine" instruments have surfaced.

So I am not concerned with others passing judgement. I know what I have and am proud to share it with you. By the way it's a terrific sounding instrument. Yes the work is somewhat crude in places but it has masses of character.

As regards my Morizot bow. This was purchased in Paris in the late 1950's I just don't know which Morizot made it. If you would like to see better photos of my violin I would be more than happy to post more up to date ones. But as stated am not concerned with the various opinions doubting it's authenticity. And by the way I had a test done on the label... The paper is over 100 years old.

All the best

That’s wonderful, I imagine some “experts” will be distancing themselves from their provocative comments shortly, it’s already happening. I appreciate your contributions and willingness to share this wonderful violin. I never questioned your screen name or violin that was someone else and for what reason I have no idea. I do respect the experts here and their opinions however in this case we may have a backfire brewing, and not in your direction. I was mostly interested in seeing reference photos for this maker and learning about any tool marks there were to be seen. Thank you and have a nice weekend. Glad to see you’re not getting phased by the aggressive input by others who may have been too quick to judge. A good lesson to all reading.

[martin swan]

17 minutes ago, BassClef said:

That’s wonderful, I imagine some “experts” will be distancing themselves from their provocative comments shortly, it’s already happening. I appreciate your contributions and willingness to share this wonderful violin. I never questioned your screen name or violin that was someone else and for what reason I have no idea. I do respect the experts here and their opinions however in this case we may have a backfire brewing, and not in your direction. I was mostly interested in seeing reference photos for this maker and learning about any tool marks there were to be seen. Thank you and have a nice weekend. Glad to see you’re not getting phased by the aggressive input by others who may have been too quick to judge. A good lesson to all reading.

BassClef, just ease off on the drama pedal. 

I think you'll find that both Jeffrey and I allowed for the fact that this might be an early work that didn't show the influence of Fagnola.

 

[Strad O Various Jr.]

Well the date would have made that pretty obvious, no? That it was pre Fagnola if it were genuine

[BassClef]

4 minutes ago, martin swan said:

BassClef, just ease off on the drama pedal. 

I think you'll find that both Jeffrey and I allowed for the fact that this might be an early work that didn't show the influence of Fagnola.

 

Not sure why you were using such divisive language with OP like “taken for a fool” I suspect you can heed your own advise in this case. You jumped in with an opinion and some intense language, time to reflect.

[Jeffrey Holmes]

31 minutes ago, BassClef said:

That’s wonderful, I imagine some “experts” will be distancing themselves from their provocative comments shortlyThank you and have a nice weekend.

...Glad to see you’re not getting phased by the aggressive input by others who may have been too quick to judge. A good lesson to all reading.

Hmmm... seems like pretty provocative statements above.  In my opinion, much of this thread mirrors a conversation I'd expect to have with colleagues... Sorting out observations and stating what we haven't seen, or have. I find individuals have varied ways of expressing concern for the unknown.

Glad the OP has a positive opinion from one of the very few who, in my opinion, are qualified to make one. Had I a modern Italian that was outside the norm (something I had not seen), I'd check with Eric or Dmitry too (Gee, I think I pretty much said that earlier, didn't I...).

I believe Martin said "he would be surprised if he were", BTW

[BassClef]

9 minutes ago, Jeffrey Holmes said:

Hmmm... seems like pretty provocative statements above.  In my opinion, much of this thread mirrors a conversation I'd expect to have with colleagues... Sorting out observations and stating what we haven't seen, or have. I find individuals have varied ways of expressing concern for the unknown.

Glad the OP has a positive opinion from one of the very few who, in my opinion, are qualified to make one. Had I a modern Italian that was outside the norm (something I had not seen), I'd check with Eric or Dmitry too (Gee, I think I pretty much said that earlier, didn't I...).

I believe Martin said "he would be surprised if he were", BTW

Fair enough, I guess it remains to be seen who will be “taken for a fool” in Martin’s words. As Mr. O Various Jr. pointed out the date was there for all to see. Have a nice weekend. Nothing wrong with being provocative now and then, not many on this thread can claim they have never done so. 

[BassClef]

2 hours ago, chiaroscuro_violins said:

@BassClef

Perhaps you could refrain from pressuring people into posting photos when it isn't relevant to the topic at hand.  

Also (much to your dismay?) if I hadn’t asked and if OP had not been kind enough to share Jeffrey and Martin (and the rest of us) would never know what a pre-Fag. Azz. looks like, so just enjoy the ride.

[Jeffrey Holmes]

19 minutes ago, BassClef said:

As Mr. O Various Jr. pointed out the date was there for all to see. 

 

Your point? I don't think anyone was claiming genius do to their ability to read, though I will willingly admit I have not before seen an Azzola label that early.

[BassClef]

7 minutes ago, Jeffrey Holmes said:

Your point? I don't think anyone was claiming genius do to their ability to read, though I will willingly admit I have not before seen an Azzola label that early.

The opinion of doubting what something is unless it is what it says it is on the label is a curious one at best. I’ll leave this thread for now for the rest of you to make sense of. Have a good weekend.

[Blank face]

It’s obvious that we all would bow for the (written) opinion of Eric Blot. OTOH I don’t think that I would need to revise anything of what I’ve written here, especially not when all was in regards to the less than perfect photos and also pointing out that I could be wrong from the start.

 I would be very curious, too, what sort of test was done to the paper of the label? And BTW is there enough paper from the period available from old books or documents which can be and is used for re-Prints, so paper alone can’t give any prove for sure. Just to pick this point alone, even after looking at the print again several times I still can’t imagine that it was made in any other way than I described, seeing all the blurry and saw-toothed lines.

Just for the danger to be the fool here, that‘s simply what I‘m seeing.

[Jeffrey Holmes]

3 minutes ago, BassClef said:

The opinion of doubting what something is unless it is what it says it is on the label is a curious one at best. 

Huh? 

[BassClef]

1 minute ago, Blank face said:

It’s obvious that we all would bow for the (written) opinion of Eric Blot. OTOH I don’t think that I would need to revise anything of what I’ve written here, especially not when all was in regards to the less than perfect photos and also pointing out that I could be wrong from the start.

 I would be very curious, too, what sort of test was done to the paper of the label? And BTW is there enough paper from the period available from old books or documents which can be and is used for re-Prints, so paper alone can’t give any prove for sure. Just to pick this point alone, even after looking at the print again several times I still can’t imagine that it was made in any other way than I described, seeing all the blurry and saw-toothed lines.

Just for the danger to be the fool here, that‘s simply what I‘m seeing.

I respect your opinions and judgments beyond what I can describe here in this post, my curiosity wasn’t directed at your observations when dealing with photos that were not focused enough. I’ll see myself out now. Cheers.

[Jeffrey Holmes]

1 minute ago, Blank face said:

 I would be very curious, too, what sort of test was done to the paper of the label? 

Just for the danger to be the fool here, that‘s simply what I‘m seeing.

I was curious as well...

No danger of that in my opinion.  My comments also stand.

 

[Blank face]

6 minutes ago, Jeffrey Holmes said:

I was curious as well...

No danger of that in my opinion.  My comments also stand.

 

So we can give us all the benefit of (well founded) doubts , and stand curious.

[Blank face]

11 minutes ago, BassClef said:

I respect your opinions and judgments beyond what I can describe here in this post, my curiosity wasn’t directed at your observations when dealing with photos that were not focused enough. I’ll see myself out now. Cheers.

No need to explain anything here. Stay curious .

[Shelbow]

Always good to be curious and discuss these things. There is no harm in being cautious. I have learnt a lot from this thread.

Glad to hear that the OP has done his research, consulted the right expert and is 100% happy with what he has.

[martin swan]

41 minutes ago, BassClef said:

Also (much to your dismay?) if I hadn’t asked and if OP had not been kind enough to share Jeffrey and Martin (and the rest of us) would never know what a pre-Fag. Azz. looks like, so just enjoy the ride.

 

1 hour ago, BassClef said:

Not sure why you were using such divisive language with OP like “taken for a fool” I suspect you can heed your own advise in this case. You jumped in with an opinion and some intense language, time to reflect.

 

Well ...

First of all, I suppose after many years now spent in the business (though I am a greenhorn compared to Jeffrey), I don't hold much sway with "Eric Blot said" or "One day i must get a certificate". No offense to Alexander, but we hear this sort of thing every day. There is a famous quote slightly ungenerously attributed to Charles Beare : "Charles Beare doesn't "say", Charles Beare writes ..."

So you will forgive me for not being so certain yet that Alexander has an early Azzola. I'm probably unduly cynical, but this is how I avoid making costly mistakes. Second had spoken opinions on Maestronet are not a good place to work on one's reference library.

To clarify the statement I made about Alexander most likely NOT being a fool, I intended to convey my opinion that someone like him, a professional musician with a family background in instruments, most likely either had a solid opinion for the violin or didn't pay too much for it.

You can leave the debate as much as you like - equally someone might do a noxious fart and then leave the room ...

 

[jacobsaunders]

3 hours ago, Wood Butcher said:

Does this violin have upper corner blocks?
 

Still waiting for an answer

10 minutes ago, martin swan said:

 There is a famous quote slightly ungenerously attributed to Charles Beare : "Charles Beare doesn't "say", Charles Beare writes ..."

He said that to me personally in his Vienna hotel room, so there is nothing "ungenerous"

[BassClef]

11 minutes ago, martin swan said:

 

Well ...

First of all, I suppose after many years now spent in the business (though I am a greenhorn compared to Jeffrey), I don't hold much sway with "Eric Blot said" or "One day i must get a certificate". No offense to Alexander, but we hear this sort of thing every day. There is a famous quote slightly ungenerously attributed to Charles Beare : "Charles Beare doesn't "say", Charles Beare writes ..."

So you will forgive me for not being so certain yet that Alexander has an early Azzola. I'm probably unduly cynical, but this is how I avoid making costly mistakes. Second had spoken opinions on Maestronet are not a good place to work on one's reference library.

To clarify the statement I made about Alexander most likely NOT being a fool, I intended to convey my opinion that someone like him, a professional musician with a family background in instruments, most likely either had a solid opinion for the violin or didn't pay too much for it.

You can leave the debate as much as you like - equally someone might do a noxious fart and then leave the room ...

 

So you are “not quite certain” if OP is “a fool” but you stated that he is most likely “not being a fool.” Speaking of effluvium… 

[martin swan]

1 hour ago, Strad O Various Jr. said:

Well the date would have made that pretty obvious, no? That it was pre Fagnola if it were genuine

 .... I think that's what we were saying. 

We are only familiar with the Azzolas that were made during or after his time with Fagnola, they are massively different from this violin, and if this is indeed an early Azzola, then his early work looks a bit self-taught. Take the narrow pegbox or the rather crude f-hole tongues that stop so far short of the eyes (no offense intended to the OP). Or the irregularity of the outline and the corners ...

This is a really common story amongst modern Italian makers - a lot of amateur makers for instance went into the Bisiach circle making pretty humpty violins and came out doing much more refined work in the manner of their employers or patrons.

[martin swan]

1 minute ago, jacobsaunders said:

 

He said that to me personally in his Vienna hotel room, so there is nothing "ungenerous"

I couldn't remember where I had heard it ....!

[martin swan]

2 minutes ago, BassClef said:

So you are “not quite certain” if OP is “a fool” but you stated that he is most likely “not being a fool.” Speaking of effluvium… 

I would rather discuss the violin than engage in this byzantine deconstruction of things I didn't say.