CHAPTER VII.
Stradivari's Tone and System—Those of his Pupils and Assistants—Qualities of Tone Produced in Different Localities.
WE may now refer to actual observation or close examination of Stradivari's work with reference to the question of system, whether there is evidence of its presence and how followed by him. That his violins should have been from time to time well measured by the very numerous army of identical imitators, fair copyists, and all sorts of connoisseurs and theorists during the present century will be at once admitted, and the results may be summed up in a few words. Stradivari did not leave clearly defined any evidence of a system of gauging which he strictly followed, at any rate in such a manner as to enable the least approach by such to be made by any followers in his steps with any measure of success. In short, he was guided by the exigencies of the moment as to the amount of wood left in his ordinary or choicer specimens.
It has been stated before that his quality of tone was one, not several, and for these his patrons flocked to him, as his admirers have also more and more earnestly sought for him since the supply has ceased. But it was not desirable that the greatest possible power should be given to instruments that were in many cases to simply charm a small family circle of friends in an apartment of modest dimensions. He would, therefore, naturally enough vary the amount of wood left. This would be quite in accordance with what is perfectly well known to all makers and repairers of experience—that with a violin if very "thickly timbered," the tone is less easy of emission, or actually weak. On the other hand, if too thin the emission is comparatively easy, but lacks intensity and is termed "hollow." Under these circumstances we should expect to find a variation in the thicknesses of different violins of Stradivari, which is in accordance with fact.
Some connoisseurs have been in their enthusiasm too hasty in their reference of general principles from a few particular instances and their researches—as time thereafter showed—did not bear the fruit so anxiously looked forward to.
An instance comes to mind of two well known dealers, one British, the other foreign, meeting together one day and opening some half-a-dozen Strads, that appeared up to that moment to have had their interiors undisturbed, or perhaps it might be said untampered with. What a meeting! and what a parting! let us hope that each table, upper or lower, that had so long been working in harmony, eventually became again properly mated and gave no cause for lawyers to "put their fingers in the pie." The results of the examination is related thus:—"In no two of the instruments were thicknesses alike; some had thick places and thin places; some were thicker on one side than the other; all were thicker in the centre of the upper table and all had these as three to five for the back."
Another is that of a well known continental repairer in his day, relating how he had repaired a very large number of real Strads and found the upper tables to be of the same thickness, two and a half m's. all over, but that the backs varied in thickness. Some discrepancies here seemingly. To add to this, a correspondent says the Strads he has measured "have certainly not been thickest in the centre of the upper table."
My own observations as to thicknesses I am afraid will not afford much comfort to those who have been hopeful at any time that the calipers would drag forth the precious secret. I recollect many years back seeing a very fresh Strad, and a hasty measurement possible at the time revealed too much wood, that is judging according to our modern ideas of regulation.