Selecting top quality woods

[bardia parmid]

The market for old violins is very prosperous. Some profiteers and fraudsters use special methods to deceive others. It is true that old makers such as Stradivarius and Guarneri made very good violins, but among the works of these same makers, ordinary and weak violins have also been seen. Currently, there are manufacturers who make exceptional and extraordinary violins that are not only not inferior in sound quality and beauty to the violins of Stradivarius and Guarneri, but sometimes even better. To value a violin at twenty million dollars is nothing but a scam. No reason or logic accepts this because the buyer can buy a better violin for a hundred thousand dollars... The astronomical price of old violins is a pure scam that unfortunately has many fans all over the world. Because some people always keep this market alive by telling stories. We remember a test conducted several years ago in which a number of famous violinists were asked to play different violins (old and new) in the dark and give their opinions. The interesting thing is that the result was that most of the violins made by new violin makers were recognized as better than the violins made by Stradivarius and Guarneri. This incident has not been pleasant at all for profit-seeking businessmen and owners of old violins.

[Don Noon]

On 11/10/2024 at 8:40 PM, Alireza kazemi said:

If possible, please explain further.

By "that kind of stuff" I mean various prescriptions, formulas, "secrets of Stradivari", and other similar things, almost always offered as surefire ways to obtain spectacular results, and promoted by people who are not recognized top makers.  I try to quiz any reputable makers that I can, and they don't have these kinds of rigid methods... it's a whole lot of little details gained through experience.  I'd rather go with the pros rather than someone who writes a book or makes a youtube video (that's not to discount books or videos by pros, like Sora).

[violins88]

Deleted. Feeling grumpy still.

[bardia parmid]

23 hours ago, Don Noon said:

منظور من از «این نوع چیزها» نسخه‌ها، فرمول‌ها، «رازهای استرادیواری» و چیزهای مشابه است که تقریباً همیشه به عنوان راه‌های مطمئن برای به دست آوردن نتایج شگفت‌انگیز ارائه می‌شوند و توسط افرادی تبلیغ می‌شوند که سازنده‌های برتر شناخته شده نیستند. من سعی می‌کنم از سازندگان معتبری که می‌توانم سؤال کنم، و آنها این نوع روش‌های سفت و سخت را ندارند... این جزئیات بسیار کوچکی است که از طریق تجربه به دست می‌آید. من ترجیح می‌دهم با حرفه‌ای‌ها به جای کسی که کتاب می‌نویسد یا ویدیوی یوتیوب می‌سازد (که به کتاب‌ها یا ویدیوهای حرفه‌ای‌ها، مانند Sora تخفیف داده نمی‌شود) بروید.

I have been making violins for twenty years, but I still find myself incapable (very incapable). I always try to deal with scientific issues. I do not easily judge the work and methods of other makers. But I strongly believe that if a violin maker does not define a specific method and principles for himself and does not have a correct method in making his violins, he can only make excellent violins by chance. Tuning the violin's frets must be based on principles and methods within the framework of scientific and experimental issues. Otherwise, the violins made will differ in terms of quality level. Because the character (density and stiffness, speed of sound... and overall acoustic properties) of the wood used in a violin differ from each other.

[Don Noon]

1 hour ago, Alireza kazemi said:

Tuning the violin's frets must be based on principles and methods within the framework of scientific and experimental issues. Otherwise, the violins made will differ in terms of quality level. Because the character (density and stiffness, speed of sound... and overall acoustic properties) of the wood used in a violin differ from each other.

Although I try to apply science and engineering principles to making violins, there are some severe limitations...

1.  The goal is to make instruments that musicians and listeners prefer, and that can not be defined in terms of the instrument's physical properties.  And it varies depending on the personal preferance of who you ask, and what the instrument is to be used for.
2.   Wood varies.  It's not just density and speed of sound (which is hard enough get 2 pieces of wood identical), but the crossgrain, damping, shear, etc. as well.  Throwing in damping as a function of frequency, and the variables are infinite.  No matter how hard you try, each instrument will be somewhat different.

Martin Schleske probably put the most effort into controlling and tuning things in a highly technical manner in order to try to duplicate known fine instruments.  I think it is telling that he has gone in a different direction now.

[bardia parmid]

49 minutes ago, Don Noon said:

Although I try to apply science and engineering principles to making violins, there are some severe limitations...

1.  The goal is to make instruments that musicians and listeners prefer, and that can not be defined in terms of the instrument's physical properties.  And it varies depending on the personal preferance of who you ask, and what the instrument is to be used for.
2.   Wood varies.  It's not just density and speed of sound (which is hard enough get 2 pieces of wood identical), but the crossgrain, damping, shear, etc. as well.  Throwing in damping as a function of frequency, and the variables are infinite.  No matter how hard you try, each instrument will be somewhat different.

Martin Schleske probably put the most effort into controlling and tuning things in a highly technical manner in order to try to duplicate known fine instruments.  I think it is telling that he has gone in a different direction now.

I agree with your words 

The complexity of the violin structure 
The many parameters that exist in this musical instrument.

((Like a mathematical problem with n equations and n unknowns))

Conditions that make work and research difficult for the manufacturer 

I don't know Martin Schlesek
but it seems that he has strayed from the main path 
According to your words, I became very eager to know what work and research he has done so far and where he has reached now? 

Thank you for your explanations and attention

[bardia parmid]

1 hour ago, Don Noon said:

اگرچه سعی می کنم اصول علمی و مهندسی را در ساخت ویولن به کار ببرم، اما محدودیت های شدیدی وجود دارد...

1.  هدف ساخت سازهایی است که نوازندگان و شنوندگان ترجیح می دهند و نمی توان آنها را بر اساس ویژگی های فیزیکی ساز تعریف کرد. و بسته به ترجیح شخصی که از چه کسی می‌پرسید و برای چه ابزاری استفاده می‌شود، متفاوت است.
2.   چوب متفاوت است. این فقط چگالی و سرعت صدا نیست (که به اندازه کافی سخت است که 2 تکه چوب یکسان را بدست آورید)، بلکه دانه های متقاطع، میرایی، برش و غیره نیز وجود دارد. میرایی به عنوان تابعی از فرکانس، و متغیرها بی نهایت هستند. مهم نیست چقدر تلاش می کنید، هر ساز تا حدودی متفاوت خواهد بود.

مارتین شلسک احتمالاً بیشترین تلاش را برای کنترل و کوک کردن چیزها به روشی بسیار فنی به کار می‌برد تا بتواند سازهای خوب شناخته شده را کپی کند. فکر می کنم گویای این است که او اکنون در مسیر دیگری رفته است.

In addition to making violins, I do a lot of research and try to connect with good violin makers, which is of course difficult because they don't have time to teach others. I am very interested in growing in violin making and making better violins every time. This worries me that I will be stuck in the same place and not make any positive progress, and worse, I will go astray... I cannot say anything here and name anyone because some famous people led me astray for a long time and wasted a lot of my time and energy... In a way, I am not at all interested in working in a student and traditional way because I know very well that every wood used to make a violin has its own unique character, from the speed of sound in the longitudinal and transverse directions, the damping coefficient, the elastic modulus, the microscopic structure, and... and... and... and... and...

[VicM]

On 11/11/2024 at 7:04 AM, Alireza kazemi said:

We remember a test conducted several years ago in which a number of famous violinists were asked to play different violins (old and new) in the dark and give their opinions. The interesting thing is that the result was that most of the violins made by new violin makers were recognized as better than the violins made by Stradivarius and Guarneri. This incident has not been pleasant at all for profit-seeking businessmen and owners of old violins.

The test was complete nonsense. The players who KNEW violins figured it out immediately. Do not trust "media".

[VicM]

1 hour ago, Don Noon said:

And it varies depending on the personal preferance of who you ask

When you ask the right people "personal preference" narrows a lot. 

[bardia parmid]

1 ساعت پیش VicM گفت:

تست کاملا مزخرف بود. نوازندگانی که ویولن را می‌دانستند، آن را فهمیدند. به "رسانه ها" اعتماد نکنید.

We don't believe the media!!...We trust you.

[VicM]

46 minutes ago, Alireza kazemi said:

We don't believe the media!!...We trust you.

Thank you   but best is to trust nobody and form your own opinion based on your own research. You may also chose a good shortcut : trust people who actually know what they are talking about, like the best soloists of the past and present.

[David Burgess]

2 hours ago, VicM said:

The test was complete nonsense. The players who KNEW violins figured it out immediately.

Evidence to support this claim?

[VicM]

1 hour ago, David Burgess said:

Evidence to support this claim?

Are you asking if there is evidence ? Yes, there is.

[sospiri]

4 hours ago, VicM said:

The test was complete nonsense. The players who KNEW violins figured it out immediately. Do not trust "media".

Did the old violins have a musty aroma?

[bardia parmid]

43 minutes ago, VicM said:

آیا می‌پرسید آیا مدرکی وجود دارد؟ بله وجود دارد.

Let him think it's a lie or let him think it's the work of the newspapers and let him think it's nonsense. Your time is very valuable. Use it for important issues. Some fanatics consider anything that doesn't align with their thoughts to be nonsense.

[La Folia]

43 minutes ago, VicM said:

Are you asking if there is evidence ? Yes, there is.

Well, that settles that. 

[bardia parmid]

Some people idolize the great old makers. Exactly, fictional stories.... It is true that Stradivarius and Guarneri were capable makers and made very good violins, but they also have mediocre and even poor violins in their repertoire. Currently, there are violin makers who make very excellent and distinguished violins. The value of their work is no less than theirs...

[bardia parmid]

49 minutes ago, VicM said:

آیا می‌پرسید آیا مدرکی وجود دارد؟ بله وجود دارد.

Some people idolize the great old makers. Exactly, fictional stories.... It is true that Stradivarius and Guarneri were capable makers and made very good violins, but they also have mediocre and even poor violins in their repertoire. Currently, there are violin makers who make very excellent and distinguished violins. The value of their work is no less than theirs...

[David Burgess]

2 hours ago, VicM said:

Are you asking if there is evidence ? Yes, there is.

Are you capable of presenting this evidence, or will it remain just one more claim amongst a host of  unsubstantiated claims in the fiddle business?

[Dr. Mark]

18 minutes ago, Alireza kazemi said:

Some people idolize the great old makers. Exactly, fictional stories.... It is true that Stradivarius and Guarneri were capable makers and made very good violins, but they also have mediocre and even poor violins in their repertoire.  Currently, there are violin makers who make very excellent and distinguished violins. The value of their work is no less than [those of Strad and del Gesu]...

If by 'value' you mean the price that many are willing to pay, the utility as an investment, or the desire to own such an instrument and satisfaction of ownership - I would argue that you're mistaken.  On the other hand, the value to a player as a means to express his art is difficult to assess since so few have a choice in the matter.  Among those who do have a choice - maybe you know, I think I've heard of one - how many have selected a modern maker as a principal performance instrument in lieu of a top Strad or del Gesu?

Given that nearly all del Gesus were re-graduated I think assuming that he made mediocre or poor instruments is pure speculation due to lack of data.  Given restoration work on many damaged Strads and lack of information on many of the 650 or so remaining, a paucity of sufficient pertinent data to draw a conclusion may also be a problem here.  But maybe you know of a pristine Strad or so  that came off the bench as a mediocre or poor instrument...?

So - IMO you're speculating, and have reached a conclusion that satisfies some notion that you want to be true, or simply haven't thought through.  I can be convinced otherwise but you need at least references and preferably data....

 

 

[VicM]

1 hour ago, Alireza kazemi said:

Some people idolize the great old makers. Exactly, fictional stories.... It is true that Stradivarius and Guarneri were capable makers and made very good violins, but they also have mediocre and even poor violins in their repertoire. Currently, there are violin makers who make very excellent and distinguished violins. The value of their work is no less than theirs...

One thing to keep in mind is that we mostly hear recordings of GREAT players and from time to time live performances of ( sometimes ) great or at least very competent players. They for the most part play old Stradivarius or Guarnerius violins. These violins have their specific tone. Also, new violins have their specific tone as well. But we do not hear new violins played by the best players. This is how we are programed to believe there is only one kind of acceptable tone - that is something I disagree with, personally. I play cello and piano and the tone of pianos also varies a lot. But with some attention they all get the job done. Many times in Bach, Beethoven or Brahms I much prefer a more "steady" violin, more uniform note to note and I know from reading old books that the bright Italian violins were not liked by everybody but a more subdued tone was in fashion. Because of the fashion and fascination of old violins, new violins are not allowed fair chances by TOP players.

[VicM]

26 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

Are you capable of presenting this evidence, or will it remain just one more claim amongst a host of other unsubstantiated claims?

I am perfectly capable.     But I think what you wanted to know is if I am wiling.  

[David Burgess]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Mark said:

Among those who do have a choice - maybe you know, I think I've heard of one - how many have selected a modern maker as a principal performance instrument in lieu of a top Strad or del Gesu?

There are some really good copyists out there, good enough that performers will use these instruments without any fear of audiences or music critics knowing the difference.

I am not a copyist, so this comes from my knowledge of the business, and not from having any dog in this fight.

[VicM]

8 minutes ago, Dr. Mark said:

If by 'value' you mean the price that many are willing to pay, the utility as an investment, or the desire to own such an instrument and satisfaction of ownership - I would argue that you're mistaken.  On the other hand, the value to a player as a means to express his art is difficult to assess since so few have a choice in the matter.  Among those who do have a choice - maybe you know, I think I've heard of one - how many have selected a modern maker as a principal performance instrument in lieu of a top Strad or del Gesu?

Given that nearly all del Gesus were re-graduated I think assuming that he made mediocre or poor instruments is pure speculation due to lack of data.  Given restoration work on many damaged Strads and lack of information on many of the 650 or so remaining, a paucity of sufficient pertinent data to draw a conclusion may also be a problem here.  But maybe you know of a pristine Strad or so  that came off the bench as a mediocre or poor instrument...?

So - IMO you're speculating, and have reached a conclusion that satisfies some notion that you want to be true, or simply haven't thought through.  I can be convinced otherwise but you need at least references and preferably data....

 

 

Maybe I am wrong but I do not think he was trying to convince you of anything. He was expressing his opinion. That Strad and DG made violins of variable quality is a fact. But maybe their "mediocre" is not what you are used to.

[VicM]

2 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

There are some really good copyists out there, good enough that performers will use these instruments without any fear of audiences or music critics knowing the difference.

That is absolutely true. I know of a number of such instruments and collected recordings of them. I also know who the maker(s) is. For a couple of cases I tested if a "specialist" could tell. He could not tell is a new violin but could only tell is a bit "tired" or somehow not quite there and needs adjustment / attention etc. "Not one of the good Strads" - that was about it.