[F] A potent factor in retarding a general recognition and revival of tone is that modern violin makers are all too frequently looked upon—and look upon themselves—as mere carvers of wood, and are judged almost entirely from that standpoint. Perfection of workmanship and such artistry as each maker may achieve, rather than the tone-merit his instruments may possess, seems the only existing method of indicating his status as a violin maker. Aside from other considerations, this renders his position difficult in the extreme, the violin offering little scope (as in the plastic and kindred arts) for originality; and any departure from convention is apt to be characterised as freakish, whilst all possible refinement of detail seems long since anticipated.
[G] These principles, as we have endeavoured to explain, are as old as the violin itself.
[H] It has long been considered by many who seek to duplicate the tone of the old master violins that the more perfectly size, outline, arching, thickness—or model—is copied, the more chance of securing the desired tone. Notwithstanding the lack of success attending such efforts, copying is still extensively practised and relied upon for tone production.
[I] Many violins of little tonal worth, but by a more or less famous ancient maker, are advertised in a manner calculated to fire the imagination of the reader and effect a sale through an appeal to romantic sentiment. It is for this reason that so much is said about the maker, his times, master, family, etc., and so little about the tone of the particular instrument.
[J] “The copies of Stradivari by Jacob Fendt are among his best efforts. The work is well done; the dicoloration of the wood cleverly managed, and the effect of wear counterfeited with greater skill than has ever been done before or since, and finally, an amount of style is thrown into the work which transcends the ingenuity of any other copyist.”—“The Violin,” G. Hart, page 297.
[K] “Violin Making as it Was and Is,” Ed. Heron Allen, London, 1885.
[L] A rather popular belief is that all old violins by a certain celebrated maker, or new ones by a modern maker, are alike in tonal worth. This is not the case, and the fact should be carefully remembered. The variation is not due so much to the vicissitudes of a long and strenuous existence on the part of the instrument as to those human limitations which render it impossible for a master in any art to copy himself with unfailing regularity and success.
[M] This number may appear large, but we believe it is under, rather than over, the mark. Some of the makers of later times, now, however, ranking as “old,” turned out from their shops as many as 2,500 instruments. If the 900 makers produced an average of 100 violins each during their lifetime, the total would amount to 90,000.
[N] While most of the great dealers throughout the world are either good judges of tone themselves, or employ those who are, they cannot, as vendors, be considered impartial. It is only fair to say they recognise this, and prefer that the prospective buyer form his own opinion.
[O] In the Correspondence Department of The Strad for May, 1916, we find the following: “I think his (Stradivari’s) varnish was purely and simply got by a visit to his fowl-shed, and the selection of half a dozen brown-shelled eggs therefrom, simply breaking in a dish, beating the contents well together, removing the froth, and applying the residuum at once to his finished violins.... I believe this is the long-sought solution of the means employed by Strad to finish off his violins.”