Old or new violins?
I, myself, prefer newer violins. I'm not sure why...
What is your preference?
Replies (56)
...I like both...but I'd buy a new one over an old one in need of repair...sound aside...
I play on a 1999 violin, and I love it. Really beautiful tone, very rich for such a youngster!
I like both, but I bought new. I love it and its history begins with me :)
I used to have an old violin, and it sucked. So now I have a modern violin and I love it. But I also love old violins. You know, Strads and Guans... the works.
I do prefer "new" in terms of ownership and to play upon. To find an old instrument that is (i) in excellent condition (ii) sounds even better than a high quality hand made new one (iii) does not cost as much as an apartment....well, I haven't found one of those yet in 23 years of looking. The best new violins are far better than myth would have us believe. That said, the best old violins are of course better again if you can afford one - and the ongoing insurance costs. So although I prefer old, for practical purposes I prefer new. I should add though that I would not feel comfortable performing solo on a new violin in public until I had played it in for a few years, as they do usually take a fair bit of working in to consistently respond to your commands.
Hi,
Personally, to me, it doesn't matter as long as the instrument is good and has the proper resonance. I don't think that it is a question of age really. But, that is personal of course.
Cheers!
I prefer old, pure and simple. They always just feel better.
I like new Violins for all that it's worth. I'm looking into a new violin, any suggestions?
Mark- beginner, intermediate, advanced, or professional?
i tend to like old better, but i've played some really nice modern instruments. but there's something really amazing about playing on a really fine old instrument, they usually have a huge range of color and dynamics.
There is a happy medium, which is to purchase a new violin crafted in the style of the old violins, right down to the cosmetics. There are several violin makers who work in this vein, one that I have worked with in the past is Borman Violins. Beautiful instruments! You get the look and sound of an old master with the new "bones" for strength and stability.
Mark,
Whatever you purchase, please make sure that the setup was done by a professional luthier. The setup is key.
Yes, good point, Michael. A good setup makes all the difference in any particular fiddle.
Stradivarius crafted new violins.
To my knowledge, that's not so important. It is important to own a violin that creates a voice you want in a way that it is suitable for you. It can be described as 'fine violin'.
I described this phenomenon in an article Fine Violin.
Anyway new violin is better - creates less problems.
Dr. Ces Kul, violin maker
Everyone! Please check Dr. Kul's web site given above.
Read his article on Ideal Violin Sound:
http://www.kulviolins.com/sound.htm
Very provocative!
Thanks Ces for (IMHO) a truly enlightening web site.
PS: I own a new instrument.
Personally I like old violins. They may be more expensive, but the wood had more time to mature, thus creating a warmer, more vibrant tone. I have a 7/8 violin made by Johann Georg Meisel in 1781, and it has a beautiful sound. Can anyone tell me what they think about it?
I often subscribe to the "old Italian fiddles are overhyped" school of thought. BUT, let me relate this experience. In 1980 I was trying out violins at Weaver's when they were still in downtown Washington, DC. I was talking to the salesman when someone started playing in the next room. I heard this huge, dark sound coming from around the corner. Wasn't sure if it was a violin or viola. I remember saying something like "Wow, that sounds fantastic. What is it?" The salesman said oh, it's just a late period Guarneri del Gesu. (!!) Hmmm. I did not know someone was going to play and had absolutely no way of knowing what the instrument was, I couldn't see it. I was reacting only to the sound.
Some of the most fascinating sounds I've ever heard have been from new violins. And from old violins.
There are good old violins and of course, good new violins. Good old violin often have a mellowed sound (and for someone: a soul), good new violin not. And it's all. For this mellowness we must just pay 2 (old German violins)-200 (18th century italian violins) times as much.
This mellowness makes player's ear happy, but not necessary people's ear. In many situations, use a good new violin has more effect to spectators since their sound are usually louder, stronger, and more projective with a lot of complexity.
Good new violins need time to reach its best. Hill said they need 40-80 years dependent on with model, with graduationsystem..and it's needed time for mellowness only. Otherwise they only need 3 months - 3 years to reach its sound (without much of mellowness) if the "breaking-up" was good- by good violinist, of course.
So it's why Tetzlaff, 2 players of Emerson quartet, 3 player of Alban Berg Quartet,... didn't play Strads, del Gesus or early 18th century italian violins anymore.
Deciding on the violin is a very special and personal kind of question. Everyone is looking for different things in an instrument. Old instruments are just as different from one another as new onces. Some people are looking for comfort, some for the sheer projection factor in large auditoriums. And that is one aspect of the new violins that has been relatively successfully matched to that of the "good, old italian onces" New fiddles come with no sounpost cracks and rarely with badly damaged backs, so a violinist with a good modern instument often will not have trouble striking through with orchestra. but... here is the thing. so far i have not come across a modern fiddle that would be both loud in the hall and have a soul. By soul I mean that special tembre that is so characteristic of many good italian fiddles. the 18th century french, some german/austrian and some other smaller schools´ fiddles also have that soul but it is invariebly different from one another. or at least i think so. So to sum up I want to say that some of the modern makers´ violins will age well and will become semimodern and later our grandchildren will refer to them as the good 20th century fiddles, but for me, if you tie my eyes and lay out on the table in a room with dry acoustics a very good Del Gesu, a very good Strad, and the best current mainstream modern fiddle (sygmantowitch, etc. whichever you prefer) I promise I will be able to choose the one that I like the most and it will be Del Gesu. And you know how? THE SOUL...
just realized that my contribution to this discussion is almost identical to that of Felix Lichtenstein. my opologies. see ya
The argument is almost rhetorical. Tetzlaff et al don't only play greiners and zygmuntowiczs, because they like them better than, say, strads. In fact, if those guys had the money/were willing to spend that kind of money on a strad, something is telling me, that they wouldn't think twice. Hey, Volkswagen gets you places without breaking down in the middle of the road, but if you could have a Lamborghini...However, owning a fiddle (especially a modern one) is truly liberating. Many of you may know what torture and humiliation we go through just to get our hands on a strad, or an instrument of that stature. Once obtained one is never sure how long the "bliss" will last - usually it's only for a couple of years - there is still an old-fashioned notion, that if you play 100 concerts a year, surely you are just waiting to splash out 4 million for a "good instrument"...Owning a violin obliterates all worries of that nature.
I agree with Dima - there is no competition between the best modern fiddles and the Cremonese, however as I have been playing a 2004 Russian fiddle for a couple of months after having had a Strad for 6 years, I noticed how quickly it undergoes, the sort of "puberty" as it were, how it opens up, blooms... And I cherish the realization, that I don't have to force it when I play it with an orchestra - the feeling I never quite got close to experiencing. Sure, it doesn't have te colors of Strad, and the difference is, well, audible, but I tell you, it's not a 3.2million-dollar difference...
Would I still try to get a Cremonese? You bet. However, the feeling of playing something that's younger than you, a "baby" essentially, seeing it grow is a very special feeling, and I am not ready to let go of it...
Hi,
Ilya, I really like your post and your honesty. Kudos to you!
Cheers!
Christian
Hi ilya,
You are right. Of course if i'm a tycoon, let say, like William Fulton, i will find the best Del Gesu for me, for whatever it costs. But I'm not, so i don't like to spent 100 concerts a year for a Strad and then must care about it every bit and all the time. I love that I can sleep all nights well, without care about my violin.:)
I play a new (2 months old ) violin and it sounds like a female lion (bright and hard)- worse than my 100 years old Markneukirchen factory (in fact I haven't found a new violin which sounded smoother and more mellow than my factory one). But I love the way it answers me, very closed to my ex-girl friend :D
Maestro Gringolts!
I like what you are saying in your post about the feeling of puberty of the violin. nice comparison. In some countries you may even have to do a jail sentence for this "sentence". I must admit that I never played a brand new instrument long enough to live to appreciate its afterpubescent "opening-up", but I have played for some years a Russian (in fact the guy was from Georgia) instrument, that, based on the sound qualities alone, could easily pass as a decent Italian grown-up. The name of the maker is Polianich. It was made in 1920,s (approx) and is remarkably difficult to play. but once adjusted to its LADA style handling the reward is amazing. Many a time I managed to dupe people into thinking I had a Cremonese fiddle. When they hear and see it from a distance it has that effect. I see what Felix Lichtenstein is saying. And to compile it with everything else I say to you, my friends, for me the violin is a woman, not a child. and as far as my women go, I prefer them a bit older... if I can afford one... :)
Torch, I find violins quite a bit easier to understand than women (would I go to jail for this too?:) Besides, if people are mentioning young female felines here, I am definitely safe...As to duping people into thinking you are playing a Strad, I know very well what you mean:) After all the Heifetz's famous "I don't hear anything" is very true to this day...
gring, ty sha gde?
Hi, Ilya's impression that his new instrument is
opening up is certainly also due ot him simply
getting used its sound, and having acquired
the ability to deal with the instrument.
In fact, both of these are related because
you sound better if you are happy with the
result.
Torch, ny. didn't get to see you in L
There have been a lot of good points made here. I definitely agree that older violins have more soul to them and they have so much history behind them.
I think why I prefer newer violins is because, like C.Lee, the history starts with me. Another reason is because, well, with me, I'm so clumsy. So I would hate to end the long history of an older violin. So newer violins are more fit for me.
I am enjoying how my 1999 instrument is "opening up." Also, I'm realizing that I can be more active in making it happen.
I honestly thought, when the maker (David Scroggin) told me, "This instrument will begin to sound like you after a while, even if someone else plays it, it will sound like you," that he was full of hokum. But I am realizing, slowly, the ways in which I can shape and refine this fiddle's voice. How thrilling!
I am waiting to receive a 1987 violin on approval after playing a 1754 fiddle for more than twenty years. I love my sweet Thier fiddle, but I am excited to play on an instrument that will give me more, richer sound and not have the difficulties that come with older instruments -- previous repairs, finicky adjustments, crankyness over weather and temperature, etc. I'll report back in a week after playing it! (It's a Whedbee.)
I just stumbled across this discussion and wanted to ask Brian Hong about that Meisel - I'm wondering if he still has it as I'm currently playing on an instrument that meets his description. If not, what happened to his? Just curious...
The very premise of this question doesn't make sense. Comparing old to new violins is like comparing apples to...cheeseburgers.
It's like comparing old and new wines. It depends on the wine and how good it is to begin with. A 1964 Cabernet could be fantastic. But a Burgundy from 1964 would probably taste like vinegar.
I tend to prefer old violins, old cars and old clothes, for similar reasons: no break-in time, no depreciation, and they're cheaper.
My favorite violin is an ebay special that ran me $350. And it even has a Stradivarius label.
>>>The very premise of this question doesn't make sense. Comparing old to new violins is like comparing apples to...cheeseburgers.<<
Then how come, in blind listening tests, modern violins get rated better than old ones about as often as old ones get rated over new?
I play on a Youngin'. New or old it doesn't really matter in and of itself. There's something about holding a piece of history, but there is ALSO something about being the very 1st home for a fine new violin that is just as special.
I love the color of golds and ambers and reds that run through spruce and strongly curled maple-especially when the wood/varnish doesn't look like it was beat with a length of chain. My violins colors are treated to give all those colors-but not look beat up, like many old violin look.
Michael, do you like apples or cheeseburgers better?
It's not age, it's sound. But An old violin possibly has improved with age; a new one is still more of an unknown. There's the $$ factor, too. And the "glamour" attached to an older violin that shows its use and long life. I have an older violin I like a lot, but I choose where I play it, since I'm around kids or in bars, tents and fields a lot (fiddler in a band.) My newer violin (or my yardsale one)goes there. Sue
Michael,
Listening tests comparing old and modern violins aren't necessarily that productive. All things being equal...well, they never are. It depends on WHICH violins you're comparing. You could very well be comparing a great modern fiddle to a mediocre fiddle.
Scott, there have been a number of published reports of public trials of modern vs "Old Master" violins where the results were indeterminate at best. No mis-matches.
I have personally witnessed back to back comparisons of a good Rocca and a Peter Guarnieri with a modern violin of modest cost. Even the owners of the expensive violins found the modern violin easily the equal of the older ones.
Additionally, I can privately name a number of touring soloists and principal chair players of major orchestras who could have their choice of instruments and yet play modern instruments of relatively modest cost. You might be surprised by some of the names.
>>>Michael, do you like apples or cheeseburgers better?<<<
Depends on the cheeseburger - and the apple. Mushy apple vs backyard grilled burger? Micky D's vs crisp, juicy Granny Smith?
Old violins and new violins are as comparable as a Rembrandt van Rijn and a Jackson Pollock, as long as they are made by the hands of an artist.
Exactly my point.
I have had a 1694 Albani and a 1776 Gragnani (both from utterly reputable sources) and they were both pretty horrible in their own particular ways. In old violins, one of my my best tonally is a Simon Kriner of Mittenwald, circa 1840, beats the above two hollow at a small fraction of the price.
The modelling, structure and wood are everything, whether old or new (and I suppose the varnish too).
My favourites are 1948 and 1996 Gadda violins, a 2008 (yes!) Mazzotti from Cremona/Piacenza, and a 1948 Pedrazzini/Novelli of Milan which is not very subtle but definitely has the goods. French violins from the 20th century are often good value for money.
Maybe violins get better for a few years or decades after their birth, but like us humans, it's all down hill after 50 or so - unless they've had the good luck to be little used, like the Messiah Strad. If I could get in a time machine and buy a brand new Strad or Guarneri, that would be much better than buying one with almost 300 years of wear, tear and oxidisation, to say nothing of human sweat etc etc.
I had a 1704 Matthias Albanus with a lifetime loan from a good friend. It is a quite good sounding instrument, though its design seems totally wrong. I kept it for several years and played it often, but the sad thing about it was, that it had to be played daily to keep its voice. I made myself a violin with similar tone characteristics without the bizarre arching shapes. After 7 years it sounded much better than the Albanus and I returned it to the family that had owned it since 1888. If a person is lucky enough to find and afford the instrument of their dreams, they are very fortunate. My bank account forced me to make one.
Lee-- did you have your instrument made for you or did you make it yourself? If someone else made it for you, who made it?
My personal preference for violins is from the mid 1900s. (Nice ones) have the tonals characteristics of much older violins, yet have the ability to expand/open up with time. I'm not positive though, if I were to find a 2006 or 7 violin and fall in love with it, I'm sure I'd buy it! Same with a 1770 or 1800 violin! It's all about the violin itself, rather than the specific time period it was made.
Adam, I switched from being a professional player to a maker several years ago. You can see some recent work on my website if you wish, www.nighviolins.com
You have a common sense approach to violin age that I agree with. Back when I was performing I went through over a dozen violins made in the 1800's, finding a better one each time at little investment. Of course, it is serendipity to find a good one that someone is willing to part with. I hope you find YOUR perfect violin.
I like new violins because I basically know exactly what I'm getting. Older violins require more expertise in discerning what's junk and what's a goldmine, what's worth fixing what isn't. What is being sold at fair value and what is being unfairly inflated etc... Maybe in a few more years my opinion will change.
I remember looking at an old German shop violin that was from a Sears catalogue being priced at over $2,000 in a violin shop. I couldn't in good conscience pay that without feeling like I've been hustled.
I don't think it matters if the violin is old or new. As long as the sound quality is acceptable and you feel comfortable playing it, it's probably good. I myself have a newer instrument and it sounds great but older instruments have been played on, and that may improve the sound. I'm not sure how but it happens. Personally, I wouldn't judge a violin by its age. Think about it, if you were asked to choose to play on either a Stradivarius or a violin made this year, which would you pick?
while searching for a good violin here in NYC i visited about 20 shops and tested numerous violins (this took me a little over a month) and i can say there isn't much of a difference.
in general, i found the majority of the very new violins (post-1960s) are lacking in personality unless they are quality instruments and have already been owned and "broken in" so to speak. i also found a majority of the older violins (pre 1960, 1800s-1600s) to show much more personality and life. however, i would occasionally find a dud in the old violins section.
so basically there were good violins from all periods, the duds made recently were probably due to no one playing them yet, and the duds made long ago lost their tone perhaps due to bodywork problems as a result of age wear and tear.
i ended up picking an 1800s copy of a great Italian maker which probably actually came from Hungary (or somewhere of that general region) according to the appraiser i talked to.
I prefer old violins.
Since inferior violins won't survive for centries, old violins tend to have good sound due to history screening.
As for aged wood may improve sound quality, I hope so, because I'm using a 1899 violin which sounds better than my previous violins.
Awaring that many violinists had expressed their emotions on this old fiddle, my feeling toward it is mixed with some respect.
There is excellent ones young and old!
Greetings,
I've followed the discussion in this forum for a while but this is my first post in the forum.
When I were younger I prefered old violin and did not comfortable at all to play a branch new violin. I were prouded to own of a violin circa 1650. It was a quite good one, very loud (!) but it had a lot of problem due to humidity change in Montreal. It's was a calamity.
My next one is a German factory made violin, circa 1920, stamped Andreas Morelli, Strad model. This violin is in very good condition, no crack at all, with a truly old looking. It has sweet and clear timbre, because of its age, I guess. But at its best, this violin still remains an advanced student instrument. There is something wrong in its construction, I don't know (wood quality, incorrect graduation, too thin plate etc...).
In 1997, I bought a branch new violin, just for encouraging my luthier. He was un-known (and still is today). He had to make his violin looking old, in order to satisfy my desire. I recall that at this time his violin sounded almost similar to my 1920 violin and but less louder. On the plus side, the sound is much more focused, and his violin speaks much more easy. I also noticed that vibrato was also much easier. In the first 5 years, the sound improved very fast, but it took nearly 10 years for his violin to open up and sounds much better. I believe that it will continue to improve a bit more, and probably reach its best for another 20 years.
In 2007 I asked him to build 2 more violins, but I will make a choice and take only one. Together we selected the wood, and I came very often to see him carving the backs and top plates. Once finished, at my surprise, he just hang on these plates for drying under the sun ray. The two violins were only assembled in next year, 2008. They have both branch new look, because I do not bother anymore about old or new look, not at all.
The result turns out very satisfactory, then we opened a bottle of wine for a small celebration, we just hope that they will last longer than us, and will bring pleasure to many players.
IMHO it is a true pleasure just to see your violin born from the wood you selected, and to hear its first sound, then seeing it growing up in time, just like a baby.
These two new violins sound great at their first day, and I believe they will be much better in 10 years. Luckily enough, I'm just an amateur and then I can wait.
Finally I take both violins, I told my spouse that they will be good for ... our two kids, in ten years. :-)
My 2 cents.
Now that is a beautiful story!
Thank's Kevin for your kind word.
Commissioning a new violin is in fact an interesting experience for me, particularly because the maker lives in the same area such that I can see him regularly.
The next interesting part of the story is the violin is taken care by its maker, like you buy a new car, and get the guarantee.
In fact he continues to verify the violin every year for me, re-working the pegs, re-adjusting the sound post, changing the bridge as long as the violin continues to change and open up, all this at ... no charge.
He told me that he will do it for me as long as he's still living. I was surprised to hear that, but recently I realized he wasn't joking, and he may do more than that:
I saw him last week, there was another customer who bought his violin 10 years ago. Now he brought the violin back just for changing the bridge.
The luthier is of course very pleased to see his customer and his violin again. Then he quickly verified the violin, played it via an extensive "test drive" (he is himself an accomplished violinist).
I believe the violin sounds very good, but he was not very satisfied with the response. "My violin must be much easier to play, could you please give me few days to fix it?', he asked the owner.
The next three days I continued to visit him, as a friend. In his shop, I saw him dis-assembled this violin, the top and the back - yes, the top AND the back - just for verifying the tap tone.
He told me that the tap tone of the top is un-changed, but the back is now nearly a ton higher. He explains to me that the back plate wood was relatively new cut at the time he designed this violin, he did not have enough time for drying the wood becasue the owner didn't want to wait. Now, after 10 years its tap tone becomes higher.
(For this reason, when he carved the back of my two violins, since the wood I selected were very new cut, he preferred to hang them on and let them dry at leat for 1 year, before re-tune them, now I understand his doing - please see my previous post on this).
The luthier re-tunes the back to his own correct tap tone and re-assembles the violin, and find it's now correspond to his own standard.
The next day when the owner took back his violin, he just saw a new Aubert Deluxe bridge on it. Of course the violin sounds better and the playing is much easier.
"I verified completely the violin for you, it is now OK", the luthier simply said, and added "If you could, please bring it back to me more often for a check, there is no charge".
The owner just said "thank's", he was of course very happy, and then quit the shop. I'm not sure if he really understands the luthier's meaning, I guess he may be back in another ... 10 years.
I was astonished, because I knew all the "back ground" story of this, the effort and the cost of doing such an operation...
I understand now, may be because the violin bears his name, it's not business anymore. I believe all conscientious makers would also do that for their violins, if it drifts from their established standards, and needs a fix.
BTW: I've read the post of Mr. Raphael Klayman on the OLD VS NEW WOOD. Imho, yes, there is different. At the starting point, when buying top quality tone wood, the older cut is always more expensive, their stock price is continuously increased year per year. Because the violin will open more quickly, due to older cut wood is less dampened. The design is also more stable, acoustically as mechanically. With newly cut wood, the tap tone may change, and the plate may difform a bit, if you are unlucky.
This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.
Violinist.com is made possible by...
Dimitri Musafia, Master Maker of Violin and Viola Cases
International Violin Competition of Indianapolis
Violinist.com Holiday Gift Guide
Violinist.com Holiday Gift Guide
Johnson String Instrument/Carriage House Violins
Subscribe
Laurie's Books
Discover the best of Violinist.com in these collections of editor Laurie Niles' exclusive interviews.
Violinist.com Interviews Volume 1, with introduction by Hilary Hahn
Violinist.com Interviews Volume 2, with introduction by Rachel Barton Pine
April 22, 2005 at 04:29 AM · I like older violins for the unsaid histories they bring with them. Dollar-for-quality, though, we're probably better off with the top new fiddles.