What the dickens..?

[matesic]

This came from Amati's last "single owner" sale, no visible ID marks inside or out. LOB 354, fluting to about 20.30. Do we know of any makers who place the nicks the wrong way round?!

[jacobsaunders]

That looks heavily revarnished & reworked. Also some pillock has re-cut the f holes, so that your question is redundant. Dustbin.

[matesic]

57 minutes ago, jacobsaunders said:

That looks heavily revarnished & reworked. Also some pillock has re-cut the f holes, so that your question is redundant. Dustbin.

Rubbish!

Seriously, I can't see that the f-holes are wide enough to have been completely recut with new nicks. Any comment on the wood of the back or the crazy original position of the G string peg hole? Of course it sounds great!

[reg]

Yay A Barney, a barney!

[Blank face]

1 hour ago, matesic said:

Rubbish!

Seriously, I can't see that the f-holes are wide enough to have been completely recut with new nicks. Any comment on the wood of the back or the crazy original position of the G string peg hole? Of course it sounds great!

 

I would say that there’s absolutely nothing original anymore. „Sounds great“ compared to what?

[matesic]

24 minutes ago, Blank face said:

I would say that there’s absolutely nothing original anymore. „Sounds great“ compared to what?

I was joking. I guess you mean it's had a whole-body transplant.

[reg]

Hardly dustbin though?

[Dave Slight]

3 hours ago, matesic said:

Rubbish!

Seriously, I can't see that the f-holes are wide enough to have been completely recut with new nicks. 

Moving the nicks does not require the sound hole to be made wider.

The usual way it is done is to fill the existing nick, then recut a new nick in a different place.
I cannot tell from the low resolution pictures and re-varnish if this has been done, but it is the most obvious answer to how the nicks are now arranged. They are high in relation to the length of the sound hole.

Looking at the instrument as a whole, it would not surprise me if it originally had a longer string length.

What Jacob has said, is not rubbish at all.

 

[matesic]

1 hour ago, Dave Slight said:

The usual way it is done is to fill the existing nick, then recut a new nick in a different place.
I cannot tell from the low resolution pictures and re-varnish if this has been done, but it is the most obvious answer to how the nicks are now arranged. They are high in relation to the length of the sound hole.

Looking at the instrument as a whole, it would not surprise me if it originally had a longer string length.

Ah yes, I see it now, clear as day. A sliver of wood has been grafted onto the inner side of the f-hole and a new nick made further from the bottom end. There's also an earlier bridge footprint on the afterlength side so it did once have a longer string length.

The most informative guess I've had so far is that it could have been made by a part-timer somewhere like Scotland or Ireland. 

 

[David Burgess]

It looks to me like an amateur-made instrument, which someone later heavily modified.

[Wood Butcher]

7 hours ago, reg said:

Hardly dustbin though?

Depends on the level you operate at.

[matesic]

15 hours ago, David Burgess said:

It looks to me like an amateur-made instrument, which someone later heavily modified.

Neck grafted, peg holes rebushed, f-holes modified, revarnished, what other modifications do you see? To me the carcase looks remarkably intact and the workmanship more accurately described as "artisanal" than "amateur". I gather there were plenty such violin-makers in 19th century Britain, but could it possibly have another nationality, somewhere with limited access to quality maple? One-word answers on a postcard please.

[David Burgess]

3 hours ago, matesic said:

To me the carcase looks remarkably intact and the workmanship more accurately described as "artisanal" than "amateur".

I see. Wasn't Stradivari an artisan?

[LCF]

4 hours ago, matesic said:

Neck grafted, peg holes rebushed, f-holes modified, revarnished, what other modifications do you see? To me the carcase looks remarkably intact and the workmanship more accurately described as "artisanal" than "amateur". I gather there were plenty such violin-makers in 19th century Britain, but could it possibly have another nationality, somewhere with limited access to quality maple? One-word answers on a postcard please.

Compromise: made by a tyro. 

[matesic]

42 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

I see. Wasn't Stradivari an artisan?

Yes indeed, quite an accomplished one I believe. Did amateur (dilettante) violin makers actually exist before the 1890's? What I imagine I see is a fluency in the shaping, a bit bit rough in the finishing, that suggests to me the maker knows what he's doing and doesn't want to waste time on niceties. The arching is quite full and beautifully symmetric, top to bottom and side to side, and the scroll has real character. The shape is quite similar to my 1790 William Forster so I'm thinking probably based on the grand Amati model which became pretty unfashionable during the 19th century. That's the sum total of my wisdom.

2 minutes ago, LCF said:

Compromise: made by a tyro. 

What makes you think that?

[Gtone]

Hi matesic,your e.string...hanging out of the nut

 

[LCF]

It's hard to say what it might once have been but it seems to have been horribly rebuilt and refinished. 

 

[jacobsaunders]

30 minutes ago, matesic said:

Yes indeed, quite an accomplished one I believe. Did amateur (dilettante) violin makers actually exist before the 1890's? What I imagine I see is a fluency in the shaping, a bit bit rough in the finishing, that suggests to me the maker knows what he's doing and doesn't want to waste time on niceties. The arching is quite full and beautifully symmetric, top to bottom and side to side, and the scroll has real character. The shape is quite similar to my 1790 William Forster so I'm thinking probably based on the grand Amati model which became pretty unfashionable during the 19th century. That's the sum total of my wisdom.

What makes you think that?

A more plausible hypothesis would be that your VSO started life as a modest tradey instrument, that some nut case got hold of and sanded the varnish off, and generally revved up with the success that it landed in one of James’ sales as ”a violin, ten quid”. I don’t think anyone outside of Ann Arbor will be in danger of confusing it with a Strad

[matesic]

6 minutes ago, Gtone said:

Hi matesic,your e.string...hanging out of the nut

 

Yes it is. The the e-string groove in the nut is cut too close to the a-string. To get enough finger room I prefer to leave the string outside which causes a bit of a kink in the forelength.

9 minutes ago, LCF said:

It's hard to say what it might once have been but it seems to have been horribly rebuilt and refinished. 

 

Yes the varnish is lurid and the neck graft is clumsily done but the rest seems all original to me.

[matesic]

15 minutes ago, jacobsaunders said:

A more plausible hypothesis would be that your VSO started life as a modest tradey instrument, that some nut case got hold of and sanded the varnish off, and generally revved up with the success that it landed in one of James’ sales as ”a violin, ten quid”. I don’t think anyone outside of Ann Arbor will be in danger of confusing it with a Strad

I'm getting real value for my £10! 

I assume "tradey" includes provincial 19th century British makers mainly working for retailers in towns, so yes that does seem to fit the bill.

Another possibly relevant fact - the depth front to back is about 6.3 cm which is more than all my other violins.

[Dave Slight]

If you are enjoying it, then it is impossible to fault the value to you at £10 +22% commission and vat.

 

 

[bick]

2 hours ago, jacobsaunders said:

A more plausible hypothesis would be that your VSO started life as a modest tradey instrument, that some nut case got hold of

I agree with this assessment. Someone looking to practice repairs on a violin they got cheap by chance. 

Nicks redone as a result of measurements being off from their neck graft maybe?

[David Burgess]

3 hours ago, matesic said:

What I imagine I see is a fluency in the shaping, a bit bit rough in the finishing, that suggests to me the maker knows what he's doing and doesn't want to waste time on niceties. The arching is quite full and beautifully symmetric, top to bottom and side to side, and the scroll has real character. The shape is quite similar to my 1790 William Forster

You seem to be quite the optimist!

2 hours ago, jacobsaunders said:

I don’t think anyone outside of Ann Arbor will be in danger of confusing it with a Strad

A fiddle looks like any other fiddle purdy much, don't it?

[matesic]

1 hour ago, Dave Slight said:

If you are enjoying it, then it is impossible to fault the value to you at £10 +22% commission and vat.

Well, a bit more than £10.

22 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

A fiddle looks like any other fiddle purdy much, don't it?

The books tell you such-and-such a maker worked to a "model", be it Strad, Amati or what have you. This one definitely couldn't be a Strad, but what? I don't think provincial British makers can have had much access to posh violins to copy, they just learned from their elders what shape to make a violin. Would you agree this one is closer to Stainer than Amati, with prominent blade edges that my Forster absolutely doesn't have?

https://newacoustics.org/jakobstainer.html

[Blank face]

In the actual state it is nearly impossible to tell wether all parts belonged together at all from the start, or were assembled later before it got the new varnish, so it's all useless specualtion. It needs also a lot of fantasy (or wishful thinking) to recognice any particular model here.

At least the mitred ribs don't point to any British amateur maker, just in case they are belonging. You could look inside if the linings are morticed into assymetrical cornerblocks, if anything the stubby corners and high edges could be Mittenwaldish, but OTOH it misses the one piece lower rib and inserted saddle as it was common there.