Violin Forum/Message Board

[CT Dolan]

The below has been taken directly from something I wrote elsewhere, written in response to a question posed by another. Anyway, I thought it worth putting up here as well, to see what some on this forum would have to say on the topic. I used to obsess over such things (and I suppose I still do to some extent, otherwise why would I write?), but I no longer think about it to quite the extent I once did, realizing as I have the futility of striving to split the atoms of ancient Cremonese construction, when I can scarcely manage much simpler and more meaningful things. But, on to the topic…

With regard to outlines, I see nothing to suggest del Gesu used more than one mould. What I believe del Gesu did do was make up rib sets ahead of time and have them hanging around the shop for use when ready, necks nailed in and all. I may have heard this theory mentioned elsewhere before, and maybe that is where the seed was planted, but what really made me consider this seriously is the section on the Vieuxtemps instrument in the Biddulph publication, and my inability to believe that del Gesu would have deliberately lengthened the upper bout on this instrument. After all, why would he have done so, even if it did cause the Vieuxtemps to conform to the outline of an earlier Brescian instrument (this being the supposed goal of his entire career, to become the one to weld the best of the Cremonese and Brescian schools into one)? No, sarcasm aside I think this is the general form the rib structure had when it was taken down for use, and he (or Katerina???) just did not bother to force it into a pre-determined shape as defined by the mould. Rather, the corners were roughly positioned as things in general were brought into place, and the work proceeded from there. Anyway, this is my own opinion…good, bad or otherwise.

By the way, I should also mention that I remain unconvinced of Katerina as a main influence in the shop of Mr. Guarneri, but it is curious that the outlines decay somewhat in the latter portion of del Gesu’s career (along with a whole lot of other things). Truly, though, I don’t have a problem with Katerina having played a major role, it is just that to my eyes the arching does not suggest another person having taken over, and as for f-holes, who among you would leave this most personal aspect of realization to another? Not many, I would think. But again these are just my opinions, that’s all.

[CT Dolan]

One more question...there were more than two makers of violins working in Cremona in the 17th and 18th Century, makers other than Stradivari and del Gesu, correct? Just wondering...

[Michael Darnton]

That idea of hanging rib sets around for use probably you read from me, but the idea of having necks on them already is all yours.

There were a lot of makers in Cremona at the time. It depends on exactly what years you're talking about. In general, the people whose name went in the violins on the label let the individual makers who were actually doing to work show their own style, which is why we know there were different makers, and how experts have been able to sort out the individuals involved, in spite of the labels.

[CT Dolan]

I think you are right, I may have read about ribsets being made up ahead of time in one of your posts (I seem to vaguely recall having read it somewhere before), but I will take credit for the neck part, thank you. Actually, it just makes sense to me to put the neck on then as well, but I've never actually tried to follow their methods (or that of anyone else...don't tell) so I am only imagining what may have been.

Interesting comment regarding labels. With regard to the two-maker thing, I was being a little sarcastic as the names Stradivari and del Gesu are about the only ones that seem to get tossed around (and I'm as guilty as any on that count). Not that they weren't great, but at the same time it seems we may be neglecting a lot of other great things that were happening back then, among other makers.

[Janito]

Before going too far with the 'garland+neck hanging from a peg' idea, consider the conditions in a workshop in Cremona at that time.

My suspicion is that the extra weight of the neck under humidity cycling would have been found to create much rib distortion and would have been abandoned pretty rapidly (if it was ever tried).

This hypothesis is easily testable.

[John Cadd]

I have seen a reference to back wood not influencing tone recently and would like to direct you to a guitar site for some interesting sounds. If you look on the Zavaletas guitar site there is a sound sample page where each instrument is provided with the wood for top and back. (initials are the indicators) I can clearly distinguish the difference between a mahogany back and a rosewood back.The maple back has a clearly familiar sound quality.One favourite of mine is the cocobolo back with cedar wood top. There is a village in South America where a maker uses cedarwood for all his violin bellies.I think his backs are Palo Escrito.As long as one uses resonant wood the sound quality should acceptable , different but also maybe enjoyable. The Spanish Cedar used in flamenco giutars would be a very interesting alternative for the backs.
While learning unfamiliar skills the result will give you a good get out clause and maybe a surprise.Lets face it who hasn`t heard of a screechy violin with spruce and maple.Cedar tops will give a softer smoother sound as in guitars.Spanish Cedar is not like the Cedar top wood by the way.It is lighter and much harder.

[John Cadd]

I DO apologise I meant this last post as a new topic and have landed here.Is there a way to pull me out of an embarrasing situation.
Help!

[CT Dolan]

"My suspicion is that the extra weight of the neck under humidity cycling would have been found to create much rib distortion and would have been abandoned pretty rapidly (if it was ever tried)."

Yeah, it could be easily tested, but there's no point because you are correct. However, if you were to hang it with the neck upright, it would not really matter. But, who's to say they had to hang it on a wall in the first place? I do remember a picture I saw once of Ignacio Fleta's shop (a Spanish luthier trained as a violin maker, turned guitar maker) wherein there was a ribset with the neck attached mingled in with other paraphernalia (partially-cut neck blocks, etc.), none of them hanging from the wall, all just lying around the shop. But, when you get right down to it, this is a very trivial thing. That is, unless one goes to the point of suggesting that del Gesu intentionally altered the outline of his instruments in order to obtain a certain end, or as a recent article in the Strad suggested, that he swiveled his forms. I think this might be considered an example of not being able to see the forest for the trees, or am I alone here???

[Michael Darnton]

I think you're right about the one-form idea, which has been kicking around for a while, and there are obviously a bunch of different sizes of instruments made on it, by various stretching methods. If I were doing it I'd leave anything like the neck that would make things more fragile until as late as possible in the process.

[CT Dolan]

The question is, was alteration of the outline done on purpose for a specific reason, or by chance? I suspect a little of both. For one, the middle bout width seems to have been altered in a somewhat predictable fashion over the years (especially earlier on). But, I don't think things were changed in a deliberate way to nearly the same extent some have suggested.

A pretty bold claim for someone with no real, practical experience, huh?

[Michael Darnton]

The later ones are generally longer. Widening the shape facilitates that, so length and width go hand-in-hand.

[CT Dolan]

It would seem that one good thing about the use of a common mould is, given the rib garland was accurately formed upon the mould when assembled (prior to removal), the internal volume of an instrument becomes based upon rib height and arching alone, as alteration in the shape of the outline of the free rib garland would not have the ability to alter the area contained therein. In other words, even though the shape of the garland may have changed between the mould and final form, nonetheless it would have to contain the same area in section. Not sure of the actual value in this, but it does result in one variable having been removed from the process.