Self-taught violin makers; seconde parte

[Rico Suave]

I came across this thread;  https://maestronet.com/forum/index.php?/topic/340149-self-taught-violin-makers/  and rather than resurrect it, I would like to ask a little different question:

What are the 5 or 6 (or 10 - or more?) most common stylistic errors that a self-taught novice is likely commit?

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

 

 

 

 

 

[Wood Butcher]

This is going to be a difficult list to make, but there are some very common issues we see.

1. Wrong dimensions.
Most amateurs seem to end up making things that have grown bigger than they are supposed to be. Constant errors in measuring and shaping, particularly of the ribs, leads to a bloated instrument, which is sorely in need of a diet.

2. Poor joints/centre joints.
It's a difficult skill to learn, and people struggle with this. Often taking shortcuts, or simply getting frustrated after many hours, and having a 'that will do attitude'. Some woods are difficult to deal with, and this exacerbates the lack of skill.
Linings don't fit well, with numerous gaps.

3. Strange arching.
Most amateurs produce a typical type of arching, with very little recurve, which looks nothing like the arching of a good instrument. It might rise too abruptly, or be too flat, but a lack of knowledge always betrays them.

4. Poor wood finishing.
Frequently, amateurs don't know how to sharpen tools correctly, and the wood often ends up torn from the plane, or grim scraper marks all over the place. Finishing the scroll seems to present great difficulty too, and one of the most obvious sign of amateur work, where there is a distinct lack of confidence in the cutting, and a limited understanding of how a fine scroll looks from all aspects.
Fingerboards, often exhibiting a lot of tear out, combined with too much sanding and an inconsistent shape.

5. Neck shape.
I would probably put this above anything else. It seems that for amateurs, this is one part that they never get right. A clubby neck, like half a circle, with a poorly shaped, straight sided board plonked on. Dreadful shaping at the chin and heel. Neck shaft very unevenly shaped, usually asymmetrical too.

6. Set-up.
A real art in itself, and something which can make or break any instrument.
Cheap bridge, poorly fitted, set at the wrong angle. Often the radius is wrong, and the sole focus is on getting the strings certain heights from the fingerboard, even if that means the bow will hit the edge, every time you try and play the E string. Soundpost never fits, wrong tension. It's hard to do, so just give up. It's inside anyway, so who can see...
Nut shaped so that it is wider than the fingerboard, too high or low, string grooves of the wrong diameters, not evenly placed. Corners of the nut sharp like a razor.

7. Varnishing.
As much as the varnish itself, usually the colour is just gruesome. An odd mix of pale and pasty, combined with a colour tone that is very unnatural. Lacks any kind of depth optically.

8. Pegbox shaping & peg holes.
Often the walls are too thick, and the peg holes set wrong in relation to the pegbox floor / ends. Often resulting in strings binding against the pegbox floor under the pegs. Pegs don't fit either, often with the shafts all chewed up by a blunt shaver, and the collar of at least one peg chipped. String holes drilled too far over, so that soon, the pegs have moved in so far, that the string ends start to bind on the opposite side of the pegbox.
Peg holes poorly placed, so that the strings are dragging over the other pegs. Results in tuning problems, and string breakage.

9. Saddle.
Keeps coming loose and tilts over. Seems easy to cut a neat rebate, and then plane two faces of the saddle square to each other, but when you are working in a shed, and using 60g sandpaper instead, well, the results are inevitable...

10. We could go on, for the reality is, that each and every part of it could be wrong, and probably is, to an extent.

 

[Violadamore]

3 hours ago, Wood Butcher said:

This is going to be a difficult list to make, but there are some very common issues we see.

1. Wrong dimensions.........................

10. We could go on, for the reality is, that each and every part of it could be wrong, and probably is, to an extent.

 

You mean like how Antonio Stradivari's fiddles differ considerably from a Rugeri, and even more from an Amati? 

[Guido]

Just one to add: Many beginners end up with long corners.

[Michael Darnton]

 

In the style department the biggest factor that I see is that it takes a long time for someone new to really understand what a violin looks like to someone who knows what a violin looks like. That encompasses almost everything you can see.

I'd work from biggest to smallest, outside inwards, so Wood Butcher's dimensions and arching are near the top. Maybe then outline and edge shape, and corners because they're edge. And so on. And don't ever think that you've got it now because the things you think you don't need to watch are the first things to bite you.

[Nick Allen]

4 hours ago, Wood Butcher said:

This is going to be a difficult list to make, but there are some very common issues we see.

1. Wrong dimensions.
Most amateurs seem to end up making things that have grown bigger than they are supposed to be. Constant errors in measuring and shaping, particularly of the ribs, leads to a bloated instrument, which is sorely in need of a diet.

2. Poor joints/centre joints.
It's a difficult skill to learn, and people struggle with this. Often taking shortcuts, or simply getting frustrated after many hours, and having a 'that will do attitude'. Some woods are difficult to deal with, and this exacerbates the lack of skill.
Linings don't fit well, with numerous gaps.

3. Strange arching.
Most amateurs produce a typical type of arching, with very little recurve, which looks nothing like the arching of a good instrument. It might rise too abruptly, or be too flat, but a lack of knowledge always betrays them.

4. Poor wood finishing.
Frequently, amateurs don't know how to sharpen tools correctly, and the wood often ends up torn from the plane, or grim scraper marks all over the place. Finishing the scroll seems to present great difficulty too, and one of the most obvious sign of amateur work, where there is a distinct lack of confidence in the cutting, and a limited understanding of how a fine scroll looks from all aspects.
Fingerboards, often exhibiting a lot of tear out, combined with too much sanding and an inconsistent shape.

5. Neck shape.
I would probably put this above anything else. It seems that for amateurs, this is one part that they never get right. A clubby neck, like half a circle, with a poorly shaped, straight sided board plonked on. Dreadful shaping at the chin and heel. Neck shaft very unevenly shaped, usually asymmetrical too.

6. Set-up.
A real art in itself, and something which can make or break any instrument.
Cheap bridge, poorly fitted, set at the wrong angle. Often the radius is wrong, and the sole focus is on getting the strings certain heights from the fingerboard, even if that means the bow will hit the edge, every time you try and play the E string. Soundpost never fits, wrong tension. It's hard to do, so just give up. It's inside anyway, so who can see...
Nut shaped so that it is wider than the fingerboard, too high or low, string grooves of the wrong diameters, not evenly placed. Corners of the nut sharp like a razor.

7. Varnishing.
As much as the varnish itself, usually the colour is just gruesome. An odd mix of pale and pasty, combined with a colour tone that is very unnatural. Lacks any kind of depth optically.

8. Pegbox shaping & peg holes.
Often the walls are too thick, and the peg holes set wrong in relation to the pegbox floor / ends. Often resulting in strings binding against the pegbox floor under the pegs. Pegs don't fit either, often with the shafts all chewed up by a blunt shaver, and the collar of at least one peg chipped. String holes drilled too far over, so that soon, the pegs have moved in so far, that the string ends start to bind on the opposite side of the pegbox.
Peg holes poorly placed, so that the strings are dragging over the other pegs. Results in tuning problems, and string breakage.

9. Saddle.
Keeps coming loose and tilts over. Seems easy to cut a neat rebate, and then plane two faces of the saddle square to each other, but when you are working in a shed, and using 60g sandpaper instead, well, the results are inevitable...

10. We could go on, for the reality is, that each and every part of it could be wrong, and probably is, to an extent.

 

I'm guilty of doing all of these things at the beginning. The list has shrunk considerably, but some of these still apply in some small way or another. 

[Nick Allen]

Also, even some of the most experienced makers of very fine violins out there still can't do ebony work for shit. Look at nuts and saddles of some very nice contemporary stuff and you'll see that they are usually an afterthought. Either that, or the maker doesn't bother because he/she knows that the shop they're selling to is going to redo all of the setup anyways, I suppose. 

[Rico Suave]

Thanks WB!

re; #3 - Arching. Many a novice will start out using Ossman's or Strobel's arching diagrams. Are these sufficient or deficient to create a good sounding instrument that also looks good to the educated eye?  Followup inquiry; can they be improved upon, extant?

 

[Michael Szyper]

7 hours ago, Nick Allen said:

Also, even some of the most experienced makers of very fine violins out there still can't do ebony work for shit. Look at nuts and saddles of some very nice contemporary stuff and you'll see that they are usually an afterthought. Either that, or the maker doesn't bother because he/she knows that the shop they're selling to is going to redo all of the setup anyways, I suppose. 

do you know shops in the us which redo the setup on a regular basis? 

[Christopher Jacoby]

4 hours ago, Michael Szyper said:

do you know shops in the us which redo the setup on a regular basis? 

Yes, lots. Naming them would be unwise, maybe. But an maker's instrument once paid for by the shop is prey to their tonal needs and desires. What sells in LA might not sell in Boston, and setup that sounded good in Mirecourt might not sound good in Louisiana or Utah.

[Nick Allen]

8 hours ago, Michael Szyper said:

do you know shops in the us which redo the setup on a regular basis? 

Yeah, Chris is correct. If the setup doesn't meet the shop standard, it's likely to get redone. It's one of those things that doesn't affect the value or original state of the instrument anyways. Bridges, sound posts, ebony, fittings... None of it is terribly pertinent to the instrument's integrity as an artistic piece. If the fiddle needs to sell, then things will be done to make that happen, barring any real modification to the violin proper. 

[Melvin Goldsmith]

Available evidence seems to point towards Stradivari being 'self taught' He didn't do too bad!

Anyone who is taught should aim to be better than their teacher. Of course that does not always happen but often if it does that involves a degree of self teaching....but of course that self teaching cannot happen in a vacuum.

It is not a rare phenomenon of course for an amateur maker to lock themselves away in a fantasy world avoiding proper musicians and luthiers who might know better while at the same time imagining they are doing great work....we all know a few of these and that nature of vanity can effect us all at some points if we are not careful!

[Violadamore]

35 minutes ago, Melvin Goldsmith said:

Available evidence seems to point towards Stradivari being 'self taught' He didn't do too bad!

Yup.  That was my point, earlier.  His origins as a maker are not at all clear.  There's several other "name" Italians who don't seem to have done a proper apprenticeship in violinmaking.  

And how about whoever it was who first quit making lutes and viols to invent the violin? 

We're all artistically descended from a complete maverick. 

[David Burgess]

1 hour ago, Violadamore said:

Yup.  That was my point, earlier.  His origins as a maker are not at all clear.

While his origins as a maker are not clear (at least not yet), hardly any expert or accomplished maker is of the opinion that he could have just jumped to his level of making, from out of nowhere.

[David Rosales]

19 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

While his origins as a maker are not clear (at least not yet), hardly any expert or accomplished maker is of the opinion that he could have just jumped to his level of making, from out of nowhere.

Not unless he sold his soul to the devil…

[Andreas Preuss]

On 1/9/2023 at 8:15 PM, Rico Suave said:

I came across this thread;  https://maestronet.com/forum/index.php?/topic/340149-self-taught-violin-makers/  and rather than resurrect it, I would like to ask a little different question:

What are the 5 or 6 (or 10 - or more?) most common stylistic errors that a self-taught novice is like commit?

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

 

 

 

 

 

A novice, regardless if on an amateur path or a professional path, will make mistakes at the beginning. The difference though is that at a professional training course you start with better tools and somebody will tell you right away what is going wrong. Additionally it became very rare that an apprentice is alone with the master. Students in the schools can exchange their ideas and/or rival with each other. All this accelerates the learning speed.

Bad amateurs mostly jump on the line that technique is not necessary for a good sound and it is more important to be ‘inspired’ (whatever that means)

Good amateurs basically mimic as good as possible a professional atmosphere. Pinpointing mistakes and weaknesses in their work to improve whatever they find important. Compare their work with good work, trying to get feedback from other makers and musicians. Some of them had already a background in woodwork so that they didn’t start from zero.

Having taught apprentices I see the goals in three simple steps

1. Proper tool setup. Simply learn to sharpen tools in an efficient way. If a tool doesn’t work one can’t expect a proper result. It’s also important to learn what tool can perform which task the best. The crash test is to set up a jointer plane so that making a joint for a violin back plate takes 10 minutes. This exercise trains not only how to adjust tools but also how to strategically use them. And everyone can measure the efficiency by how many minutes it takes. If all tools are precisely adjusted to the job they are supposed to do things become very easy.

2. Coordination between hands and eyes. I have seen that apprentices who can make drawings, have by far less problems to create better violins. When I made them drawing f-holes, scroll volutes and corner inlay, the execution on those stylistic elements improved rapidly. In the next step I would make them execute f holes and purfling inlay on guitar boards. It’s very important to get a dead proof feeling for proportions and the flow of lines.

3. Learn to reflect on the tool handling to develop ‘automatic tool handling’ which leads to think with your hands. It’s a process which requires patience and endurance. As we say in German ‘there is no true master who fell from heaven.’

All this contains the different specific problems and it’s in my view a bit useless to list them all up. Once the mechanic and eye guided woodworking basis is established more complicated things can be attacked.

 

[Davide Sora]

14 hours ago, David Burgess said:

While his origins as a maker are not clear (at least not yet), hardly any expert or accomplished maker is of the opinion that he could have just jumped to his level of making, from out of nowhere.

Yep, and the stylistic similarity of his early instruments suggests that it is quite unlikely that he did not pass through the Amati workshop.

Anyway, I think every luthier is self tought, if you don't have the skills to learn by yourself there is no hope. The preparation provided by any school is not enough, workshop training is better but a workshop is not really a school so the willingness and ability to teach depends on who runs it, and how long you will work in that workshop

[David Burgess]

15 hours ago, David Rosales said:

Not unless he sold his soul to the devil…

His workshop and home was across the street from a church. One of his sons became a priest, and one of his daughters went into a convent. Hmm..

[David Rosales]

2 hours ago, David Burgess said:

His workshop and home was across the street from a church. One of his sons became a priest, and one of his daughters went into a convent. Hmm..

Evidence of a guilty mind? Desperate attempt for atonement? 

[Violadamore]

19 hours ago, David Rosales said:

Not unless he sold his soul to the devil…

I'd expect his success came from Divine Providence. 

1 hour ago, David Rosales said:

Evidence of a guilty mind? Desperate attempt for atonement? 

No, the exact opposite. 

[Don Noon]

1.  Doing what looks good to you, even though it's a significant departure from normal.

[Greg Sigworth]

On 1/9/2023 at 4:46 PM, Wood Butcher said:

This is going to be a difficult list to make, but there are some very common issues we see.

1. Wrong dimensions.
Most amateurs seem to end up making things that have grown bigger than they are supposed to be. Constant errors in measuring and shaping, particularly of the ribs, leads to a bloated instrument, which is sorely in need of a diet.

2. Poor joints/centre joints.
It's a difficult skill to learn, and people struggle with this. Often taking shortcuts, or simply getting frustrated after many hours, and having a 'that will do attitude'. Some woods are difficult to deal with, and this exacerbates the lack of skill.
Linings don't fit well, with numerous gaps.

3. Strange arching.
Most amateurs produce a typical type of arching, with very little recurve, which looks nothing like the arching of a good instrument. It might rise too abruptly, or be too flat, but a lack of knowledge always betrays them.

4. Poor wood finishing.
Frequently, amateurs don't know how to sharpen tools correctly, and the wood often ends up torn from the plane, or grim scraper marks all over the place. Finishing the scroll seems to present great difficulty too, and one of the most obvious sign of amateur work, where there is a distinct lack of confidence in the cutting, and a limited understanding of how a fine scroll looks from all aspects.
Fingerboards, often exhibiting a lot of tear out, combined with too much sanding and an inconsistent shape.

5. Neck shape.
I would probably put this above anything else. It seems that for amateurs, this is one part that they never get right. A clubby neck, like half a circle, with a poorly shaped, straight sided board plonked on. Dreadful shaping at the chin and heel. Neck shaft very unevenly shaped, usually asymmetrical too.

6. Set-up.
A real art in itself, and something which can make or break any instrument.
Cheap bridge, poorly fitted, set at the wrong angle. Often the radius is wrong, and the sole focus is on getting the strings certain heights from the fingerboard, even if that means the bow will hit the edge, every time you try and play the E string. Soundpost never fits, wrong tension. It's hard to do, so just give up. It's inside anyway, so who can see...
Nut shaped so that it is wider than the fingerboard, too high or low, string grooves of the wrong diameters, not evenly placed. Corners of the nut sharp like a razor.

7. Varnishing.
As much as the varnish itself, usually the colour is just gruesome. An odd mix of pale and pasty, combined with a colour tone that is very unnatural. Lacks any kind of depth optically.

8. Pegbox shaping & peg holes.
Often the walls are too thick, and the peg holes set wrong in relation to the pegbox floor / ends. Often resulting in strings binding against the pegbox floor under the pegs. Pegs don't fit either, often with the shafts all chewed up by a blunt shaver, and the collar of at least one peg chipped. String holes drilled too far over, so that soon, the pegs have moved in so far, that the string ends start to bind on the opposite side of the pegbox.
Peg holes poorly placed, so that the strings are dragging over the other pegs. Results in tuning problems, and string breakage.

9. Saddle.
Keeps coming loose and tilts over. Seems easy to cut a neat rebate, and then plane two faces of the saddle square to each other, but when you are working in a shed, and using 60g sandpaper instead, well, the results are inevitable...

10. We could go on, for the reality is, that each and every part of it could be wrong, and probably is, to an extent.

 

What a depressing list but true; at least for me being a "self taught" violin making person, whatever that means. I at least have identified these areas as important and needing to be worked on. That is some consolation and hope. I have had and need to have input to help identify needed areas. I show my work to people of knowledge and listen to what they say, even though my pride gets in the way. Sharpening the tools and then knowing how to use them in the hand with the eye guiding has to be taught or guided by someone who knows. That is so needed. You make a violin to be the best one you have made and then try to figure out what is wrong with it and make the next one better. Does this process ever end? I hope not!

[jacobsaunders]

20 minutes ago, Greg Sigworth said:

What a depressing list but true; at least for me being a "self taught" violin making person, whatever that means. I at least have identified these areas as important and needing to be worked on. That is some consolation and hope. I have had and need to have input to help identify needed areas. I show my work to people of knowledge and listen to what they say, even though my pride gets in the way. Sharpening the tools and then knowing how to use them in the hand with the eye guiding has to be taught or guided by someone who knows. That is so needed. You make a violin to be the best one you have made and then try to figure out what is wrong with it and make the next one better. Does this process ever end? I hope not!

Probably the best short cut is to get hold of a nice old violin, that you can have on your bench during the making process, which you can refer to all the time, rather than relying on your own personal god-given genius

[Violadamore]

29 minutes ago, Greg Sigworth said:

What a depressing list.................

However true it is, IMHO, it's a pompous and pretentious pile of pontification, apparently designed to discourage (and irritate) every amateur luthier on this forum.  It certainly could have been presented more diplomatically.

 

9 minutes ago, jacobsaunders said:

Probably the best short cut is to get hold of a nice old violin, that you can have on your bench during the making process, which you can refer to all the time, rather than relying on your own personal god-given genius

Yup.  That, and study all the publications and videos provided very generously by many of the very experienced and successful professionals who frequent this forum.  Those materials are far more constructive and encouraging than posting a scathing critique of amateur luthiers. 

[Bodacious Cowboy]

9 hours ago, Andreas Preuss said:

 

2. Coordination between hands and eyes. I have seen that apprentices who can make drawings, have by far less problems to create better violins.

 

This is an interesting observation. I know some really fine makers who have professional level visual arts skills. And other fine makers who couldn't draw to save their lives. Which is kind of weird, really.

8 hours ago, Davide Sora said:

Anyway, I think every luthier is self tought, if you don't have the skills to learn by yourself there is no hope. 

Some of the wisest words I've seen on this forum.