Violin Forum/Message Board

[actonern]

I always love anecdotes about this topic!

Best regards,

Ernie

[polkat]

Well, I've seen a lot of 'modern' violins that I would not call artistic but that had very nice tone. And I've seen some beauty's that sounded like...well, I won't say it here.

To me, playing a well made violin with no tone is like driving a Lamborghini without an engine. Looks great but you'll never get anywhere, and neither will the best of players.

Except for those famous players with the funds (important here) to acquire a well built and also good sounding instrument, I can't understand why anyone would choose looks over tone.

School me!

[Chet Bishop]

[Chet Bishop]

[ctviolin]

[ctviolin]

[ctviolin]

Ok, I admit it, I'm rambling.
(and editing...)
I can't help it, its my brain.

(Or lack thereof...)
_________________
Look,
Listen,
Learn.

[Lemuel]

How violinists choose violins? It’s a loaded question of course, and as Michael says, there’s no way to
properly make a statement about how musicians choose an instrument. There are so many unique
musicians (categories and subcategories) in the world, all with different character makeups.

I can truly identify with some of the thoughts in this thread. The topic of how to choose a violin or what
makes a “good” violin sound has also challenged and bewildered me. But something freed me of it, and
this post is my feeble attempt to express it. I really didn’t expect to write such a long post. Starting
out with only a few lines have turned out to be like an article.

Matching Violinist to Violin – What is your type? (Perspective 1)

When it comes to accomplished violinists, many choose a violin that responds to his/her technique to
draw out certain emotions or sentiments, and special sound effects they desire to express. By emotion,
I mean sentiments of the heart like joy, tranquility, love, victory, sadness…etc. By special sound effects,
I mean things like glissando, staccato, harmonics, tremolo…etc.

I’ve found out that this is a function of both the instrument, and the technique/ability of the player (not
counting the bow and strings). It’s possible for a violin to have potential, but the violinist is unable to
draw it out. Likewise, it’s possible for a violin not to have the inherent potential for which a skilled
violinist wishes to draw out.

For this post, I’m assuming that we’re dealing with pretty decent violins. I’m sure that as the quality of
the violin goes down, the probability of a violinist being able to draw out the sound he/she desires
decreases. Likewise as the quality of the violin goes up (i.e. “sharp knives), the probability of a violinist
being able to draw out desired sounds increases. (By the way, Michael, I’ve never seen anyone build a
violin with a dull spoon. I would call this amazing ).

I’d say from a musician’s point of view, a “good” violin is a violin for which the violinist is able to make
the violin respond to all the various types of emotions and sound effects he/she desires to express.
The instrument is really tailored to the playing style of the musician. They’re just interested in finding
shoes that fit them. This being said, it’s not hard to see two accomplished violinist choose two different
violins. This is because of their unique emotional makeup and techniques.

Violinist “A” chooses violin “A” because it responds better to him/her in playing the fast-paced Sarasate
or Paganini. Person “A” can also play the slower paced, mellow Baroque style music as well, but
doesn’t enjoy it as much or is not as refined technically to express it. Person “B” chooses violin “B”
because he/she likes Baroque style music, and the instrument responds well to his/her technique. So
how would you define the “best” violin of the two in this case? In a competition, both would be playing
what they consider their “best” instrument, expressing their greatest emotion and using their finest
technique.

Then you get violinists who are technically capable of playing many things, but can’t find a sole violin
that can respond to all they desire to express. So they search for a second, a third, and maybe a fourth
violin that can respond “excellently” to these specialized areas. That explains why great violinists have
more than one violin. What do you think the violinist would say, if you asked him/her “Which violin, do
you like best?”

Finally, you get cases where the musician’s bias clouds his perception of the true potential of the
instrument. It’s possible to have a violin optimally setup, but the violinist is dissatisfied. He is looking
for a certain sound because that’s what he enjoys. After a few adjustments back and forth between
luthier and musician, he becomes satisfied, but the instrument is not optimally setup. What do you
make of this? Imagine a few violinists in a competition with sub-optimally setup violins. Which violin is
would be “best”?

(To confuse matters more, many famous violin teachers say that the beauty of the tone depends more
on the bow and the bowing technique. Although pretty true in my experience, I can’t imagine how to
quantify it.)

Matching Tonal Quality to Violinist - Living beyond your means? (Perspective 2)

Much of what I’m about to write has been new to me in last few years; hence
my feeble attempts to express it. So I may not be communicating my thoughts in the clearest way.
However, I hope you can read between the lines.

As I mentioned earlier, it’s possible for a violin to have potential (tonal quality), but the violinist is unable
to draw it out, because of his playing style. Well, we have beginner and intermediate violins that
respond very well. The tonal quality is good (i.e. resonant, clear, relatively average color). Any average
violinist could draw a good tone out of it, and they would all sound beautiful.

Then we have more advanced violins that have better tonal quality (i.e. more resonant, clearer, greater
tonal range, body and power). The strange thing is that they may not respond as readily as the
intermediate violins. Higher tonal quality doesn’t necessarily mean ease of play. The reason is because
it takes more work and skill from the player to bring it out. But once it’s drawn out, you can then hear
the difference in the tone.

One factor contributing to this (physically speaking), is the extra work required to get the belly of the
violin vibrating. It could be more mass, thickness or stiffness. But once it vibrates there’s more body in
the sound, intensity or power (acoustically speaking). I’m simplifying things of course.

So if a player is used to light bowing (versus someone who can put a lot more into his bowing), you
would likely miss the potential of this instrument, if he played it. It’s the same as drawing a 16 oz
hammer versus a 20 oz hammer.

I’m willing to bet that many aspiring violinists miss this point. Many times, price appears to have a
psychological effect on the judgment of tonal quality. Then when it comes to playing a higher priced
violin, they can’t figure out why it’s not responding the way they like it to. Sound familiar? What
they’re really trying to do is buy a violin that would handle all musical demands, a pair of shoes that can
handle all situations. They’re depending more on the instrument than their technique or skill. So they
wind up buying something way beyond their means.

Going back to violin competitions, is it possible that some violins have better tonal quality than
another, but the violinists are not drawing it out? Are we judging the musician’s ability to draw out the
sound? Or are we judging the violin’s true potential? How do we tell? Are they separate or one?

How about the way a luthier judges a violin? Is it only by hearing alone? Or is it also by visual inspection
and touch? I cannot speak for myself, but only what I’ve seen, heard and learned from two luthiers that
I work with - Leif Luscombe is one of them, and the other his teacher from Yogoslavia.

In brief, it’s by all three – hearing, visual inspection and touch - that one can sum up a violin’s true
potential. A trained ear is definitely a must. Besides recognizing the sound print of every instrument
they deal with, they can pretty well sum up an instrument’s current condition and most of its potential
by hearing it. As a musician, I don’t have this sensitivity and have to depend on them (but over the year
of training, I’m hearing things I could not before). To get the rest of the story, they must inspect and
touch the instrument, particularly the violin top.

Is choosing a violin really “subjective”?

Yes and no.

To a musician who knows what sounds he/she desires to express, it’s not subjective. To an
accomplished luthier, it’s not subjective. Both know what they’re looking for. The only difference
between the two is that luthiers know which violins will fit a violinist. It’s like a show expert knowing
which shoe will be most appropriate for a particular activity (running, soccer, walking…etc).

It only becomes subjective if you don’t know what you are looking for, or you start to question whether
the sound you like to hear is the “best”, because everyone else likes something different. But what is
the “best”? Take two very good instruments – one setup especially for Baroque music, the other for
solo Paganini. Both perform very well for what it can do. If you don’t like Baroque, you’re definitely
going to choose solo Paganini!

[ctviolin]

[johngia]

Thanks Lemuel !!! Fascinating. So much to learn.

I will read and re-read your post again and again.

Fascinating. So much to learn !!

Thanks to all for your insights into this subject.