honegger Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 Hi everyone, I am considering a few 18th century violins in the upcoming T2 Berlin auction and would appreciate your expert eyes on their origins and characteristics. 1. Lot 199 (Unlabeled, c. 1780, LOB 35.6 cm): This one has a broad model with relatively high ribs and a large scroll. To my eyes, the scroll work suggest a Mittenwald or South German origin, but the overall proportions feel a bit more "Italianate." Does this look like a solid workshop build from the German school, or is there any Southern influence here? https://t2-auctions.com/auctions/lot/?csid=2200616960&cpid=4336828416&filter_key= 2. Lots 193 & 198 (Labeled Testore, 18th Century): Both are large-format violins (35.8 cm and 35.7 cm). Lot 193 has the Testore label but seems more refined in some details. https://t2-auctions.com/auctions/lot/?csid=2200616960&cpid=4289953792&filter_key= Lot 198 features the C.A.T. brand and very flat arching. https://t2-auctions.com/auctions/lot/?csid=2200616960&cpid=4301291520&filter_key= In your experience, how do these "labeled/branded" Milanese style instruments from this period usually fare in terms of authenticity vs. style? Does the work on 198 look consistent with the Testore workshop, or are the brands likely later additions to a generic 18th century Italian/Milanese body? I’m looking for a "player's instrument" with good structural "bone" and projection. Any red flags or insights on the wood quality and arching of these three would be incredibly helpful. Thank you!
Vafan Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 You will probably not get too many answers from the real experts until the auction is over. - Why are you interested in 18th century violins which lack any real attribution? You'll be probably better off with a "contemporary" violin, i.e. from the 20th century. My "second-best-sounding" violin is from the 21st century, and it's top just consists of two pieces... - Have you noticed the base bar crack on one, how thin the top is apparently on another, or signs of worm damage? - I'm not a professional in the violin world and frankly would not bid on any one of them (precisely because I lack the knowledge of a luthier to assess the instruments properly). EDIT: And they may sound like a half-dead cat.
duane88 Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 39 minutes ago, Vafan said: . EDIT: And they may sound like a half-dead cat. Which half? It matters...
honegger Posted February 12 Author Report Posted February 12 Thank you for the reply and the reality check I totally get that modern violins can be more reliable and even sound better in many cases. But after trying out a lot of stuff, I just find myself more into that specific old wood sound from the 18th century. Don't worry, I have no intention of buying a violin that needs a massive amount of repairs. I'll be checking for cracks and worm damage very carefully. I'm just really curious about the history of these instruments, especially the short vertical f-holes on Lot 199. I’m not far from Berlin, so I'll be there to see if they really sound like half-dead cats. lol And trust me, I’ve tried plenty of Grancino, Balestrieri, and Landolfi violins that sounded like dead cats or muted dogs... but on the other hand, the best violin I’ve ever played in my life was also a Landolfi (better than some Strads I tried!). So there's really no other way than to just go and try them.
Jeny Mahon Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 26 minutes ago, duane88 said: Which half? It matters...
Violin216 Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 In my opinion, it's too much of a gamble to buy something at auction if you're looking for a player's instrument - even if you're buying something authenticated. There are plenty of instruments by famous people that just don't sound very good. And then again, if you're looking for sound, why do you care about attribution? Speaking form experience - go and try it. It's totally worth the trip. I ended up buying a bow that was about 1/4 of my budget just cause it outplayed everything else.
Violadamore Posted February 13 Report Posted February 13 5 hours ago, duane88 said: Which half? It matters... Bravo!!
PATI Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 Im just starting out with that hobby, so don't listen to me. I would like to share my observations. Im sure a lot of it is completely wrong, so your feedback is highly appreciated! At the moment Im watching videos/reading forums to learn more, spot the differences, etc. But it's so much to learn with information scattered all over the place. 199 Grain seems a bit wide. From this forum, grain width is not the only factor, but in general a bit tighter grain is preferred. Back flame is nothing dramatic. Again, while not the most decisive factor, it adds up. Purfling is slightly inconsistent around the edges. F-holes are hand-cut, slightly asymmetric. Could be cleaner job. Small damage on the wings. Notches could be sharper (age?). Holes are very straight-up (idk what make of it? German/French style?) and maybe slightly high up? Scroll seems to had a repair or maybe replaced entirely. Not the cleanest cut. From the side, arch at the back in the middle seems a bit flattened. Should I take I wild guess, it's a French violin of average/lower quality. 193 Without going so much in details, this doesn't seems to be the best workmanship. Scroll, shape, purfling, corners, pegbox. With that said, it might be genuinely old violin that would be interesting to play and determine by the sound if it's worth it or not. 198 Uneven wood on the top. Wider in the middle (the opposite is preferred). More open c-bouts (Del-Gesu-isk). Inconsistent purfling, bee-sting. I really like bass f-hole, but treble could have been more elegant. Back is not evenly cut. Not often I've seen that. No idea if that matters, but I assume evenly cut is preferred to have more even sound. This might sound funky cause of that. Scroll is not very consistent. Personally I don't like the look of it, but again, what do I know? Once again, I'm not trying to tell anyone about those violins, but asking for feedback on my observations for learning purpose. Thank you so much!
Stephen Fine Posted February 21 Report Posted February 21 Interesting. With estimates that low, surely they must either be bad or obvious fakes? I'm confused... It would be very tempting to buy a "Testore" with Hill papers for a cool $6,000 if the violin sounded good. Even in unplayable condition, a Testore would be worth the purchase... I'd think. But what do I know?
Blank face Posted February 22 Report Posted February 22 On 2/21/2026 at 7:22 PM, Stephen Fine said: It would be very tempting to buy a "Testore" with Hill papers for a cool $6,000 I'm not very tempted to buy a photocopy of an unpictured Hill certificate for 6K, even not together with a violin of unknown age and origin. I thought it was common knowledge, meanwhile, that the Testores didn't ink the purfling, but scribed it. Otherwise a certificate by the infamous "Expertenkammer" can be seen as a very big red flag, too. Just saying.
Stephen Fine Posted February 22 Report Posted February 22 1 hour ago, Blank face said: I'm not very tempted to buy a photocopy of an unpictured Hill certificate for 6K, even not together with a violin of unknown age and origin. I thought it was common knowledge, meanwhile, that the Testores didn't ink the purfling, but scribed it. Otherwise a certificate by the infamous "Expertenkammer" can be seen as a very big red flag, too. Just saying. This is why I don't bid on these things. My first teacher, the daughter of a luthier, taught me to buy from a luthier in an established shop. She taught me further that it's worth paying a premium for quality. "He who buys expensively, buys cheaply."
st_violin Posted February 23 Report Posted February 23 23 hours ago, Blank face said: I'm not very tempted to buy a photocopy of an unpictured Hill certificate for 6K, even not together with a violin of unknown age and origin. I thought it was common knowledge, meanwhile, that the Testores didn't ink the purfling, but scribed it. Otherwise a certificate by the infamous "Expertenkammer" can be seen as a very big red flag, too. Just saying. Believe it or not, after a fierce bidding war, this very instrument sold for over €19k on the November 2025 Berlin T2 Auction, but the buyer decided not to go through with the sale, I guess, so here it is again.
st_violin Posted February 26 Report Posted February 26 Lot 198, the Testore labelled violin with the Hill photocopy letter certificate sold for €30.000, another Milanese looking violin, with an apocryphal Carlo Antontio Testore label for €20.000.. Crazy...
Blank face Posted February 27 Report Posted February 27 6 hours ago, ibrusz said: Lot 198, the Testore labelled violin with the Hill photocopy letter certificate sold for €30.000, another Milanese looking violin, with an apocryphal Carlo Antontio Testore label for €20.000.. Crazy... No, the inked purfled with the Hill sold for 20 K (so similar to the former), the last one for 30k. The winner’s bidder name could give a hint to what it might be, or a rough direction.
st_violin Posted February 27 Report Posted February 27 12 hours ago, Blank face said: No, the inked purfled with the Hill sold for 20 K (so similar to the former), the last one for 30k. The winner’s bidder name could give a hint to what it might be, or a rough direction. Yes, you’re right. So: Lot 198 - Testore label, no certificate -€30,000. Lot 193 -with a Hill certificate - €20,000. Lot 197 - fake Postiglione with a fake Bisiach certificate - €23,000. Quite a lucrative business, selling questionable violins with dubious certificates. Now that the auction is over, I am very interested to hear what experts such as yourself make of Lot 203, labeled “Bernardus Calcanius fecit Genua Anno 1737.” I recall seeing this violin discussed on the forum some time ago, particularly because of the back stamp featuring the coat of arms of the German Empire. However, I cannot remember what the consensus was regarding its origin.
Blank face Posted February 27 Report Posted February 27 7 hours ago, ibrusz said: Now that the auction is over, I am very interested to hear what experts such as yourself make of Lot 203, labeled “Bernardus Calcanius fecit Genua Anno 1737.” I recall seeing this violin discussed on the forum some time ago, particularly because of the back stamp featuring the coat of arms of the German Empire. However, I cannot remember what the consensus was regarding its origin. I don't recall that this particular violin was discussed. It seems to have a later (ungrafted) neck and scroll, but otherwise it's often a guessing game by these unsufficient auction photos, which are usually made to look better than a violin often is. Very seldom the other way round.
honegger Posted February 27 Author Report Posted February 27 (edited) I think you're referring to this thread: https://maestronet.com/forum/index.php?/topic/356193-brandstamp/ It’s true that someone asked about this specific brand back in 2022. That being said, while the violin looks good, it's actually very muffled in person. In my opinion, it's just not good enough to play on stage. Edited February 28 by honegger
st_violin Posted February 27 Report Posted February 27 31 minutes ago, Blank face said: I don't recall that this particular violin was discussed. It seems to have a later (ungrafted) neck and scroll, but otherwise it's often a guessing game by these unsufficient auction photos, which are usually made to look better than a violin often is. Very seldom the other way round. I found it: It was nearly four years ago, but I remember it clearly, as that was when I learned that the double-headed eagle is associated with Austria, whereas the single-headed eagle represents Germany.
Blank face Posted February 28 Report Posted February 28 How can I remember every little detail I once commented on The violin doesn’t resemble a Ficker at first sight (though it seems to be built on the back). Much too roughly made. But as I said, hard to tell from the pictures.
Violadamore Posted February 28 Report Posted February 28 5 hours ago, Blank face said: How can I remember every little detail I once commented on Keep notes, review old threads, stuff like that. I often go read my old postings when answering recurrent questions, because there's no point in "reinventing the wheel".
Blank face Posted February 28 Report Posted February 28 12 hours ago, Violadamore said: Keep notes, review old threads, stuff like that. I often go read my old postings when answering recurrent questions, because there's no point in "reinventing the wheel". I‘m getting more often than not a new pov on a matter, so don’t get stuck on some nonsense you wrote the other day. You can not step twice into the same river.
Violadamore Posted February 28 Report Posted February 28 1 hour ago, Blank face said: I‘m getting more often than not a new pov on a matter, so don’t get stuck on some nonsense you wrote the other day. You can not step twice into the same river. True, but I've noticed that while answering recurrent questions on Mnet (e.g., "attic Strad" posts), one can step in the same substance over and over again.
Stephen Fine Posted March 4 Report Posted March 4 On 2/27/2026 at 3:53 PM, honegger said: I think you're referring to this thread: https://maestronet.com/forum/index.php?/topic/356193-brandstamp/ It’s true that someone asked about this specific brand back in 2022. That being said, while the violin looks good, it's actually very muffled in person. In my opinion, it's just not good enough to play on stage. Did you play either of the "Testores"? I assume they were players for how well they sold.
honegger Posted March 4 Author Report Posted March 4 5 hours ago, Stephen Fine said: Did you play either of the "Testores"? I assume they were players for how well they sold. Yes, I did try the Testores. Lot 193: I’m not sure if it’s the wood itself or the setup, but this violin felt very "tired." It was muffled, slow to respond, and lacked vitality. I couldn't imagine playing any concerto on it, so I put it down after just a minute. Lot 198: This is a violin with great performance potential. The tone is bright, focused, and brilliant, with a very quick response. The G string speaks easily even in high positions; it’s quite powerful. On the downside, when playing certain repertoire, the high register can feel a bit thin. While the tone is sparkling, for works like the Tchaikovsky or Brahms concertos, I would prefer a broader sound-line. One thing I noticed is that the top plate (table) is extremely thin, which explains why the instrument is so easy to play and so inspiring. However, such a thin top also raises concerns. Does it sound loud under the ear but lack projection in a hall? And will there be structural or stability issues in the future? I wonder if a thin top plate is a characteristic of Testore? A few years ago, I borrowed a Testore from a foundation, and the top on that one seemed quite thin as well.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now