Undocumented 1724 Strad in auction
1724 Strad is being auctioned at Skinner in their Boston October auction. Its estimate is between $650k-$850k. While this is alot of money, it seems way below what a Strad should sell. Its scroll was apparently a "del Gesu" scroll but replaced by Peter Beare. I guess this makes it a "composite". My question is whether this change would have any affect on the sound of a violin like this. Its a beautiful looking instrument. Cozio says this instrument is "undocumented". All of this apparently affects the price. Any observations from those more knowledgeable than myself.
Replies (42)
What is the exact language of the attribution to Stradivari? That will tell you something.
Charles, there's a number of Strads that sell in this range which aren't of the special type... not all greats are the great concert instruments people say they are.
Wow, I'd love to try out that fiddle. Its previous owner, Lorand Fenyves, was Canada's foremost teacher pretty much up until his death a few years ago. It would be an honour to own a piece of "Canadiana" like this.
Preston
Hi,
Preston, I know what you mean. Yeah, it is the Fenyves Strad. Beare replaced the scroll with a copy of Strad scroll that is modern, so the scroll is not original, nor Del Gésu - I think that Del Gésu scroll is either being sold seperately or teamed up with a Del Gésu which doesn't have an original scroll. All of this may go into the pricing thing, which would explain it's low estimate.
Cheers!
Who was this Fenyves? Sounds Hungarian... :)
Market value usually depends on things like how much of the violin is original, its history (who's owned it), what period of Strad's life it was made in, how much wear and tear is evident, how much repair it has and how good the repair was, how much of the varnish is original versus how much is retouching, who has certified it, etc.
Tone may factor in to the hammer price somewhat if players are bidding at auction, or if it sounds uncommonly good or uncommonly bad.
I'd love to have seen the original scroll on the instrument.
Stradivari had a big workshop, and there were all sorts of people doing all sorts of stuff. Who's to say that Stradivari carved ALL of his scrolls?
Couldn't it be possible that one of his skilled workmen or his sons could have carved the original scroll on this violin?
And of course the controversial wild speculation: the Casa Guarneri was physically close to the Stradivari house. Was there absolutely no contact whatsoever between the two neighboring shops?
Hi,
Kevin, it appears that the scroll was changed in the 19th century, most likely in France. The Del Gésu scroll does not belong to this Strad, but apparently does to a Guarneri out there without an original scroll.
Maura, Fenyves was of Hungarian origin. He was concertmaster of L'Orchestre de La Suisse Romande during their hey-day, before moving to Canada. He acquired his Stradivari during tenure as concermaster.
Cheers!
After emigrating to Canada, Lorand Fenyves taught at the University of Toronto for many years, and when he retired from that post, started teaching at the University of Western Ontario. I first met him when auditioning for the National Youth Orchestra in the early 70s, then again in the mid 80s while I was working in Toronto. I didn't know he'd passed away, but I've been out of touch with the music scene for quite some time.
Here's a link to a copy of Lorand Fenyves's obituary in The Independent (London)http://www.jmi.org.uk/suppressedmusic/newsletter/obituaries/lorandfenyves.html
The scroll usually will not affect the sound, but it will affect the valuation.
I heard Fenyves play the complete Beethoven sonatas on it in a concert series back around 1970. I think the fiddle players around me said it was a good Strad. He had many students who are familiar with it. They know the instrument and could weigh in on the subject.
"The scroll usually will not affect the sound, but it will affect the valuation."
The reason for the change in valuation is because of the factor "original or not". So can I assume that it would depreciate the value? How about a real Strad/Guarneri scroll on a unlabelled violin? If the scroll is identified as authentic, will it increase the value of the "no name" violin?
Vivian, your comment reminds me of a luthier I know who told me that the marks made by a maker underneath the scroll is extremely characteristic. Even with the same scraping instrument, the marks are extremely individualistic.
The "luthier I know" was at a violinmaker's competition when he noticed that the top 4 violins, by 4 different makers, all had the same markings under the scroll. He noted this to the judges and had all 4 makers disqualified. Apparently the rules of the competition stated that the work had to be entirely one's own - scroll included.
I suspect it would be very possible that a strad scroll on an unnamed instrument could be worth as much as a strad scroll on nothing at all.
I'd be curious to hear from the luthiers out there...
Hi Terry,
I think I understood your overall point in the post regarding scroll, but I am not sure I know what's meant by "the marks made by a maker underneath the scroll". Where exactly is the place underneath the scroll?
Thanks.
A real luthier would know more than me. My understanding is that it's the space between the peg box and where the scroll is. It's a rather tight spot and has to be carved out with a very fine tool.
A good violin-maker will try and balance the frequency of the fingerboard (and the tailpiece too) with that of the violin's plates.
It's moving off-topic, but that may not actually be true, though it did receive a lot of attention when info on board tuning was first published.
I have some friends who have been checking it out with numbers of violins and it seems that some players really like a violin that's been tuned that way, and on the other hand, some really don't. There's an effect, that's for sure, but whether it's good or bad. . . . it's personal, at least.
Additionally, the effect gives the player a certain type of feedback, but doesn't seem to affect the way the violin sounds at a distance much, if at all. I find that interesting and unlikely (most any change has some tonal effect), but it's definitely appearing to be the case in their trials.
for the luthiers,
what is the function of the tailpiece exactly? anyone ever experiment without one, or fashion an extremely long or short tailpiece? one of my violins has the tailpiece adjusted so that the strings are "tuned" behind (away from fingerboard) the bridge, and i haven't decided whether it has produced a huge difference in sound or not.
Interesting Michael. I was using the phrase 'good violin-maker' in the most general of ways, i.e., that a maker would simply be aware of such possible change. Your being aware of it, as you are, would be more the direction where I was leaning. Whether a good maker would implement it or not would depend on a number of factors.
That said I have done done my own experiments and found that having a 'tuned' fingerboard and tailpiece can add resonance and, in some cases, projection to the instrument. And I was just reading (a few weeks ago, and sorry I can't remember the source) about a Strad that the owner was complaining about and which he thus took to a shop. The shop supposedly tuned his tailpiece with glorious results.
As I think you're alluding to (i.e., the "first" published info), there are numerous articles in, say, the Catgut Acoustical Society journals for instance, that take a scientific standpoint to the necessity of such considerations.
In a manner more explicitive of what I really think, I would think that other types of performance enhancements should and can be attempted first, before the fingerboard and tailpiece...such as the bassbar...
Jim, the tailpiece has evolved over the centuries to being used mainly as an anchor for the strings to help stabilize them and the bridge. Though there are exact measurements involved, and acoustical physics do enter into the equation, that is the main usage.
Tailpieces vary quite a bit in all their dimensions, so there are lots of things you can do with them in adjusting without too much fuss, but the most basic thing is to adjust the length of the vibrating string between the bridge and the tailpiece.
This is done both by adjusting the tailgut, and by choosing a tailpiece that's the appropriate length--they're available in increments between 105mm and 112mm, usually. This is an adjustment that is sometimes hard to hear on some violins, other times, not, and has mainly to do with the upper frequencies and response. The usual starting distance is about 55mm, and that works well for a lot of violins.
Violas and cellos don't follow the same rules.
For what it's worth, among my professional maker and adjuster friends (which is definitely not an amateur crowd), I'm not aware of a single one who tunes fingerboards in any way, other than the ones who are experimenting with the procedure.
There are some basic rules for making boards, though, and you deviate from them at your peril. One of the things that my friends are figuring out is that hitting the right tuning may be bad, but being in the right neighborhood is good, and this may be one of those many things where generations of makers have sort of figured out what the right thing to do is without knowing why, as it is with so many things. People who read about this sort of stuff may remember that research into "bridge tuning" turned up the same thing--the top shops were already doing the right thing, without knowing why, by the bridge cutting models they'd developed that worked well.
Both of these situations may be examples where doing the right things give the correct results for those who really know what they're doing and work in a tradition, where those who don't know how things have evolved have arcane and difficult procedures to do almost the same thing.
I had a similar experience with plate tuning once. Someone came through my shop, noticed a little stack of tops and backs I'd finished, and asked if he could tap them. He took a while, then declared they were all tuned exactly correctly. Of course, I've never tuned a plate in my life, but I do make good violins following good models with proper arching and graduations, and the results are good. You've got to wonder how all those old Italian makers managed to do anything good without all this fancy new science stuff....
Does anyone take the Zaret bar seriously?????????
Hi,
On topic though, it would appear that the Del Gésu scroll that was on the Fenyves Strad actually belongs to the Del Gésu currently owned by Kennedy. I wonder what Nigel will do...
Cheers!
Off and on topic (at least Strads to some extent)
Personally I look at all 'improvements' with some scepticism. If the method proves to have merit and it is openly discussed I can change my mind. But I'm definitely not into secrets. There is an abundance of science already available and this makes such secrets rather uninteresting.
That being said, many tests have been done on Stads, DGs, and Amati's (etc.) and the results have shown that even though they didn't study the science behind eigenmodes or Chladni patterns, they nevertheless appear to have incorporated it. My reasoning to explain this merely simplifies the obvious. (1) their violins for the most part use a distributed system of apparently random graduations, (2) since their violins have consistently good acoustical qualities this system was not random but methodical (3) that over time, as with everything, the old Cremona makers, having started with a slower process of using eyes, ears, and hands were able, through experience, to reduce the process to mostly that of touch.
To me this makes sense since starting with totally scientific principles and tone testing each change I make in the final steps of the violin (including not just the plates but the whole violin clamped/glued, since the thicknessing of the edges is critical for the clamped condition yet not for the single plates, where thicknessing from the center is more important) I think that I will, eventually, be able to determine using eyes and hands (i.e., by bending, studying grain, and feeling the wood) what needs to be done without need for much if any scientific equipment (other than to prove myself able to do it).
I'm with you on most of this, except the thing on graduations. If the graduations are magical, I want to know, since many Cremonese instruments appear to be regraduated, who was the wonderful person (not the maker, I guess) who did this to make them all right.
I think they're randomly graduated because the graduation was done with coarse measuring tools and not considered excessively important, except that the basic plan be correct. That it isn't important is demonstrated by all the regraduated instruments that work beautifully, instruments with patches, etc.
I think that eventually it will be figured out that a good or better yet, perfect, arching, graduated reasonably and approximately according to a simple rational plan does the job. That is, it's more a matter of shape than thickness.
That's my experience, anyway.
As you might gather, I think the folks who are working at this from the graduation angle are working backwards: trying to fix loosely conceived arching with specific graduation, instead of building careful arching combined with casual graduation. It's a lot more work to make something work when it's not done right, which is why they make it so hard for themselves with machines that Stradivari couldn't possibly have had access to. :-)
I'd compare it to building a bridge: you can design the structure right, and build it simply, or you can design it wrong, and then shore it up with random braces in the areas that start collapsing until it works, maybe. The second approach is plate tuning.
christian,
the last i heard was that nigel kennedy bought the scroll a while ago- which was why the fiddle had to be fitted with a new scroll.
Hi,
Thanks Sharon!
Cheers!
it is a composite, because from what I recall a long time ago being said by a reknown french luthier, the top is not an original of strad either, but of a later period...But you must be very cautious about old italians violins...many , many of them are composites...and have been retouched all the way...Big money and a market of initiés...
Regarding the tailpiece discussion - I routinely make minor tweeks of the bridge to get the pitch of the afterlength of the G string to a D pitch. This comes out to almost exactly 55 mm. When in this range the resonance of the violin is noticeably improved when the pitch is within +/- 10 cents of perfect D. Unfortunately the afterlength pitches on the other strings are almost a tone low even though the afterlength measurement is the same.
Kennedy plays the Lafont del Gesù...In the pedigree, noone of the "famous experts" ever complained about the scrool which was ,as usual during the 1732-38 period,ascribed to his father...Strange world, these experts...A del Gesù usually has this characteristic: the wood ( maple) of the back, sides and scroll, do not match...Of course, there are very few exceptions, like the Canon for instance.
Marc
after verifications, it seems that the violin was sold to Tamsey Waley-Cohen, a 20 years old violinist and student in London, for 1.44 millions U.S.!!!
Marc
Was 1.44 million USD converted from pound? I don't know about pound, but USD has "depreciated" for quite some time now. If we take that into account, will this undocumented Strad be much more "affordable" than other well-documented Strads?
Geez, a 20 year-old student violinist? Wow!
Most Strads have been over the million mark for a number of years now (even back when the US dollar was stronger). Bell paid close to 4 million for his golden era 'Gibson' Strad. Last year the 'Hammer' Strad went for 3 1/2 million.
DG's don't even come up in auction any more, they're all sold privately. One sold in 2000 for 6 million.
it is 1.4 millions U.S... an article has been published in the Toronto Star not a long time ago about the sale...
Hi,
What was remarkable is that the 1.44 million mark way out did the estimate. It was also remarkable since all knew that the scroll was not original.
Bell paid 4.5 million for the Gibson Strad I think, but it was a private purchase, not at auction.
Cheers!
...when you think that in the early 70,s Szering paid 75,000 for the Leduc del Gésù, a truly great instrument, "il y a matière à réflexion!"
Marc
Bell bought the Gibson from J & A Beares. Go to their website
http://www.beares.com/notable_sales.html
to see some pictures of it and other great instruments,
MP.
The story of Bell selling his 1732 Tom Taylor Strad for a little more than 2 million to buy the twice stolen 1713 Gibson ex-Huberman Strad from Norman Brainin (Beares had it in their shop only on consignment) for a little under $4 million is a story that has appeared in 100's of articles.
That it was a private sale, as with the great Guarneri's, is the important factor to which I was alluding. These are the instruments that rarely make it to auction simply because a violinist (or unfortunately, sometimes a collector, as was going to be the case with the Gibson) will have been following these best of the best instruments for a very long time and would do everything in their power to stop them from coming to auction.
That composite Strads are going for 1+ million speaks of a certain fascination with 'name' and an almost desparate hope along the lines of the old idea that 'a great violin will make a great violinist' which is usual close to the reverse of the case (i.e., that a great violinist will usually play a great violin).
There are many parts of Strads and Guarneri's available here and there. It probably won't be that far off when someone will throw together a Strad scroll, with a neck by one of his sons, a top plate by some other maker in Strad's shop, a bottom plate by Guarneri, ribs by some modern Italian maker, and sell it for 1+ million...hey what am I bid????
My original inquiry was whether the scroll would have any effect on the sound quality of the instrument. This Strad, to the best of my knowledge only had the scroll as a "non-original" piece of it. The consensus of the responses was that the sound
would not be affected. I understand that alot of the composites have "non-original" top plates, ribs etc, all of which should have an effect on the sound. I e-mailed Mr Beare and he indicated that the original owner was very pleased with his work on this instrument. Thanks for all the input. Charles Bott
My original inquiry was whether the scroll would have any effect on the sound quality of the instrument. This Strad, to the best of my knowledge only had the scroll as a "non-original" piece of it. The consensus of the responses was that the sound
would not be affected. I understand that alot of the composites have "non-original" top plates, ribs etc, all of which should have an effect on the sound. I e-mailed Mr Beare and he indicated that the original owner was very pleased with his work on this instrument. Thanks for all the input. Charles Bott
I heard Mr. Fenyves playing chamber music in concert in 2004 and I remember the instrument was clearly superior in tone to the other instruments around, among them a Grancino, a Ruggeri and a Landolfi. I was lucky to study quartet playing with him at the University of Toronto when I was a member of the Tokai Quartet but never got a chance of taking a close look to the instrument. Maybe his luthier in Toronto might clear this point out.
Charles,
"My original inquiry was whether the scroll would have any effect on the sound quality of the instrument."
To your question- the scroll has very little effect on the sound production. Many say there is no bearing on the sound production.
The Gibson Strad is one of the best Strads I have ever heard live. That violin rocks!
Fascinating discussion! How much do people reckon it would have cost to buy just the del Gesu scroll?
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
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
September 30, 2006 at 08:01 PM · I'm no luthier, but I seriously doubt that changing the scroll has any noticeable effect on the sound...