Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

STRADIVARIUS IN THE BASEMENT ....WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS?


Schwartzinc

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 322
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I’m in Florida the fiddle is not so I can’t send high res I’ll see what I have on my phone. The fiddle is up north.

One scientist in particular looked at the violin with X Ray spectrometry. Portable X Ray spectrometry he had never tested a violin. The same tool used at the University of Pavia Italy where we had the complete report done. The scientist said the documentation we have could sell a 100M Picasso. I told him the micro violin market is under tight control. He was 85 years old in 2018 PHD in material science and surfaces, paintings frescos etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TK1 said:

I’m in Florida the fiddle is not so I can’t send high res I’ll see what I have on my phone. The fiddle is up north.

One scientist in particular looked at the violin with X Ray spectrometry. Portable X Ray spectrometry he had never tested a violin. The same tool used at the University of Pavia Italy where we had the complete report done. The scientist said the documentation we have could sell a 100M Picasso. I told him the micro violin market is under tight control. He was 85 years old in 2018 PHD in material science and surfaces, paintings frescos etc.

Fake Picassos are probably easier:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TK1 said:

I’m in Florida the fiddle is not so I can’t send high res I’ll see what I have on my phone. The fiddle is up north.

 

See, this is an example of unbelievability.  This is why you sound not credible.

You're literally in the business, and investing, your time and probably your money in convincing global experts that this violin is a real Stradivarius. (Which it may very well be, but you're representation is lacking.  Presentation is 85% of representation).

The answer, I'll see what I have on my phone, isn't an answer someone of your position would reply.

You would literally have perhaps hundreds if not thousands of photos of this violin, from every angle, every zoom level etc. The answer should be, yes I have them right here and I will post them now.

I simply ask for just one, high resolution image, and close up of the top grain.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. I hadn’t been following this thread because I figured “what’s going to be any different in this thread from the countless others about “found Strads”?” Then last night I noticed it had hit its 12th page, so I was curious. What a wild ride, and it keeps getting crazier!

The most amusing part to me is that the plaintiff claimed that the experts were trying to shoot this violin down because they wanted to buy it. Of course there are cases where this actually happens, but given the shadiness of the speculation on it, I can’t imagine the experts would have wanted to touch it, even if it had miraculously turned out to be genuine.

It’s not at all uncommon for people who are up to no good to make use of imprecise old documents from shops to pass things off. Just a year ago, there was a violin that came in with a letter (not a certificate) from an expert that declared the violin to be an excellent example. When we got in touch with the expert, he asked that the letter be destroyed because it did not provide enough information to positively identify the instrument, and he knew that there were people who would use that letter to try to “authenticate” other instruments without batting an eye.

It’s also entertaining to watch as vague discussions with experts and inconclusive test results keep morphing into putative certainties.

As a lawyer once told me, “People can sue over just about anything they want. Winning a lawsuit is another matter.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The case brought by Peter Zaret under the influence of TK1 aka Terrence J Kavalec, if you read through it in detail, is staggering in its imbecility.

The precise circumstance was that they wanted to consign the violin to Bromptons. Peter Horner did a kind of spot check with Charles Beare by sending him a couple of photos - Charles Beare didn't like the violin for Stradivari so Peter Horner declined to take the violin to be auctioned as a genuine Strad.

That this should be construed as "tortious interference" on Charles Beare's part is ludicrous, especially as it accords to Charles Beare precisely the level of "final word" expertise which the plaintiffs wish to deny him.

It seems that Florian Leonhard and David Bonsey were to be sued for failing to agree that the violin was a Stradivari.

Joe Robson was to be sued for stating on Maestronet that he didn't wish his name to be used in support of the violin.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has to be up there, as one of the most bizarre threads ever on M’net.

The whole story reads like something you would read in a trashy magazine, while waiting to be tortured at the dentists.

So we have a violin, where a couple of people, have decided themselves, they have hit the jackpot, and will be able to retire to Maui (once rebuilt :(), on the proceeds of the sale.

But…

…There is a proverbial fly in the ointment. Those horrid, world leading violin dealers, are being naughty and unfair, by refusing to agree the violin is a Strad, despite the owners having an envelope of old bits of paper, which refer to a Strad. What rascals! How dare they?

At this point in the story, there are a couple of points to consider.
It may be that the historical paperwork does relate to the instrument, and at that time, was genuinely believed, by some, or a particular dealer, to be a real Strad. Current opinion and expertise, may no longer agree with past attributions.
We see this increasingly, as more information comes to light, and advances in science show instruments to be masquerading under false colours. It has to be said no expert is infallible, which is why it is important to have a consensus of opinion.

It may also be that the paperwork references another violin entirely.
Most players have more than one instrument, and it’s not unusual to have a number of letters, valuations, or other correspondence, build up over the years.
After you have died, who knows if the paperwork goes with the right instrument, or even if they still owned the instrument in the documents, at the time of their death.

Another possibility, is that it is a very nice Italian violin of the period, just not a Strad.

And finally, the violin may be hard to positively identify, due to some principal parts, not being original, or over zealous restoration work, which has led to doubts.

However, worldwide, there are quite a small number of shops and dealers, who regularly sell instruments by Stradivari. The list of people, to consult, would be fairly small.

From the limited information provided, it would appear that most of those people were not consulted, and the opinions of others, angrily dismissed. There has been a great deal of effort spent to find other people, who are not necessarily experts on violins, but who will agree it is a Strad :wacko:
Then we have the grim part, where we are told, it is necessary for Charles Beare to die, before the violin can be sold. 

So it seems currently, the possibility to sell the violin as a Strad is hampered, all hope is lost, we have reached an impasse, until…

…What if the people who disagree the violin is a Strad are sued? That could bring in some revenue :) 
That hasn’t worked out, but now we have an even greater amount of controversy. If we add to this, the possibility of a dastardly dealer conspiracy, there is all the makings of a cable television documentary.

Which begs the ultimate question, can you become rich by not even selling a violin? It seems there is some potential to do so, if the struggle to have it authenticated can be monetised.
I guess the movie about this would have already been made, had it not been for the writers, and actors strike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the court paper:

"In November 2015, Leonhard met with Kavalec and examined the violin, concluding that it was not a Stradivarius, but instead a copy of an 1890s German “Ruggieri” violin."

Could this be a wrong information given to the court?

Otherwise it looks that there is quite a big difference in the opinions of two big experts (though the second one haven't seen the instrument in person):

"A day later, on January 26, 2022, Horner informed Kavalec that Beare had concluded from the images that the violin was most likely the work of “one of the fine French [violin] makers,” not Stradivari."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, vlyosifov said:

From the court paper:

"In November 2015, Leonhard met with Kavalec and examined the violin, concluding that it was not a Stradivarius, but instead a copy of an 1890s German “Ruggieri” violin."

Could this be a wrong information given to the court?

Otherwise it looks that there is quite a big difference in the opinions of two big experts (though the second one haven't seen the instrument in person):

"A day later, on January 26, 2022, Horner informed Kavalec that Beare had concluded from the images that the violin was most likely the work of “one of the fine French [violin] makers,” not Stradivari."

One should consider that both of the named experts are specialists in Italian violins (what’s a large realm on its own), not in any copies or fakes. Should I risk a second guess, Leonhard could have thought of an 1890s German  „Schweitzer“ and confused it a bit . Hopefully I won’t be sued for such a public claim.:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read the legal document and I’m certainly not trained in law.  But this is what I took away:

- plaintiff believes they have a Strad

- plaintiff seemed to have a potential buyer to the tune of $9 million but the buyer said it’s contingent upon a Strad expert certifying it as a Strad

- the expert said it’s not a Strad

- the plaintiff sued a number of people for messing up the sale because they don’t think it’s a Strad

- the court told the plaintiff they have no case

Do I have that right?  So the lawsuit was for not agreeing with your belief that an item is something it isn’t?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Rue said:

That's pretty much my takeaway too.

But...to be fair...I'd also be dissapointed if my purported Strad was maybe French...or a Rugeri...or maybe a ....^_^ 

I guess it depends on whether they bought it because they were told definitively it was a Strad or they bought it speculating that it could be a Strad.  If it turns out it’s a Strad, could the prior seller sue THEM for not disclosing their belief it was a Strad at the time they bought it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...