Some of the more ambiguous and problematic questions about the violin, particularly concerning the state of the art today in relation to other periods in history, what direction instrument making is taking and where our traditions stem from.
(excerpts from a lecture, fused from semi-plagiarisms and various "truths"with forgotten origins in the late eighties)
It has often been said that violin making is a decidedly conservative occupation, and to the uninitiated often seems a logically negative criticism. However many people hold the opinion that the conservatism that the art is stamped with should be revered as its most desireable attribute, since it keeps alive a tradition that is long dead in other walks of life. Also the obvious limitations to the rendering of the basic baroque shapes of the instrument, seem to many to be too constricting and show a stagnation in the developement of style in line with changing times. Music, architecture, pictorial arts and the artifacts of a specific period in history, do after all generally reflect the frame of mind of the age. However, there is a line of thought which says that within a restricted form, there are inexhaustible possibilities for interpretation, much as peoples eyes are, in their general shape and content the same, but nonetheless have an infinite variety for expression and radiance. Perhaps we could draw a parallel with musical repertoire. Our age is in fact characterized by an almost endless array of attempts to re-interpret the classical repertoire, but there seems to be enough motivation to find new truths within those restrictions. Contemporary works are of course becoming thrilling again for many involved with music after a period of composition marked by an approach where form became more important than content. It was perhaps a natural tendency as music was struggling to recreate itself as a modern idiom. Modernism has taken the length of time, long enough to be defined as a period in itself, to be infused by the consciousness of the public at large. Have we composed all the melodies or non-melodies ,all the harmonies possible? Have we already drained the possible variations of aesthetic proportions in the making of our instruments? and will violins look and sound the same in times to come without evolving. Can violins evolve at all without a change which will change the essence of their being? Perhaps the answer lies in the infinite variety of expression possible within a restricted form.
One interesting example of the capacity for the inventiveness of humans, although it might not be wholly conscious is this; Give five cooks exactly the same ingredients and the same equipment and you will invariably be presented with five quite different versions of the dish. Give five luthiers exactly the same mould, wood, measurements and varnish and you will without exception have five completely different instruments. The same applies to music-making.
The classical period of violin making saw the spontaneous and almost miraculous creation of the archetypes of the musical instruments of the violin family , based on some of the predecessors such as the medieval fidel, the rebec, and later the lyra da Braccio amongst others.
The seventeenth century is the century of baroque architecture and theviolin is a typically baroque instrument.. Painting and sculpture show us that through the ages musical instruments exhibit the architectural lines of their ages no less than articles of domestic furniture. The shape of the violin, the curves of its outline, and the convexities of its back and front, are characteristically baroque.
The thing that characterized the way in which our renaissance counterparts learned their trade was an apprenticeship from an early age. It took the pupil through each fundamental stage of the preparation of the making of an instrument, from sawing rough wood, making glue, basic joinery and use of tools, templates and an aquisition of knowledge of the materials such as the wood, the various resins, oils and pigments, as well as the making of strings and bows. After a considerably long period of preparatory work, the apprentice was allowed to work on the basic parts of the masters work, such as bending ribs, glueing blocks and preparing the necks and plates. In the final stages of the actual learning process the pupil was initiated into finalizing complete or almost complete works which were then finished by the master. Later the apprentice was in fact involved in all the processes of construction, sometimes the instruments were even labelled as the work of the apprentice under the guidance of the master. This learning process would sometimes last for up to ten years or so, and when the master had given his blessing on the merit of craftsmanship and artistic skill of his pupil, he would decide whether in fact he was worthy of the status of master himself. Apparently many never reached the status of master and ended up becoming migrant workers travelling from one violin making shop to another with a consequetial level of wages. However when the status of master had been achieved the maker would invariably set up on his own with the consent of his master of course, and mostly strive to develop and enrich his own personal style and method, eventually taking on apprentices of his own.
In these times the high quality of aesthetics and sound were motivated by the possible patronage of the upper classes and nobility, where musical life was an important part of courtly activity. Later on in the classical period, a higher demand for quantity arose owing to the changes in the status of musicians as professionals and the development of musical forms, from sitting room performances to full-scale orchestral and operatic environments. The period was characterized by a passionate explosion of artistic and cultural activity. The teaching of music in this era began in convents and orphanages until the birth of the academies.
The design of the classical instruments was of course influenced by renaissance thinking, where mathematics, harmony and knowledge of aesthetics was fused from a variety of disciplines including architecture, painting, astrology and music. In these times it was quite common for a chemist to delve into music, philosophy and painting, and a painter to study astrology and mathematics. There is strong evidence to support the fact that the classical violin makers employed geometric construction involving the influence of the early greek and roman theorists such as Pythagoras, Plato and Vitruvius, although there seems to have been a fairly free execution of these principles.
Through the age of enlightenment, where the teachings of scholars influenced by Newton and those who followed, had such an incredible effect on the world view, there was in violin making a further perfection of forms and improvement in the models, archings and thicknesses of the early makers instruments. The distribution and control of the craft was still governed by a guild patronage accompanied by the protectionism regarding the "secrets of the trade". It is interesting to note that the term secret in those days didnt have quite the meaning of the word today, the meaning having been more on the lines of "knowledge" but nonetheless aprentices were on oath it seems, not to devulge the knowledge they had gained in the workshop of their master to other regions, and the oath if broken could have serious consequences.
By the dawning of the industrial revolution and into the latter half of the 19th century we saw the creation of new standards of constructional principles as a result of changing musical directions and a further increase in the need for power of tone as well as an increased standard of pitch. This period is also marked by changes in working methods and learning procedures. The initiation of a violin maker was either in the workshop of a master violin maker as before, but now also in establishments where specific tasks as carving scrolls, arching, thicknessing or purfling were delegated to individuals. The construction was less influenced by the character of a specific maker than in the case of an apprentice working for a master a hundred years earlier. In this period we see a gradual but distinct dissappearance of the craft guilds.
In the past decades we are witnessing a period of high levels of quality in the profession and no doubt there are many factors contributing to this. It is clear that the system of traditional aprenticeship is almost a thing of the past. Violin making schools have taken over the as the main venue for the teaching of the craft. In a school environment we find some aspects of the teaching of violin making which are quite positive, for example the opportunity to make mistakes for 3-4 years without too much responsibility for damage, a possibility to work intensively at the job with optimal concentration, and the chance to learn much about the peripheral aspects of the art such as style as well as having the means to experiment freely in a creative atmosphere in close contact with fellow makers on an international level. Of course there are negative aspects to all this as well, for instance the danger of the dissapearance of national traits and cultural characteristics which unfortunately seems to be the trend. It wouldnt be surprizing to find the re-introduction of formal apprenticeships in coming years perhaps in conjunction with schooling. There is a lot to be said for learning on an individual , personal basis.Many violin making students find employment after school with firms involved with the restoration and commerce associated with old instruments. These firms have become almost an extension to the schools, giving valuable training in the domain of repairs and restauration, and often deepening a makers understanding of classical works, but to some this sometimes leads to the tendency to put too much emphasis on peering into the past. We must remember however the in the time of Stradivari repairs were almost nonexistent in relation to todays standards and a broken belly in those times would more often than not have been replaced with a new one, whereas today most violin makers are almost exclusively involved with repairs and commerce.
What many violin makers are trying to acheive these days in aesthetics is quite interesting because it is an attempt to re-create the"feeling" of spontanaiety and artistc drive through research on the working methods and idiosyncracies of the old masters by an emulation different in its essence to the mere copying of old instruments. An extremely thorough examination of the tools, forms, measurements of the great masters works, has lead many of the "new age copyists" to infer a method of construction and made it possible to deduce practical reasons for various stylistic tendencies of old examples. This has led to a deeper understanding of the working methods and as a consequence a better visualization of why and how a certain style is created. Also it has made many realize that one of the reasons for the decline in artistic quality in certain epochs was in fact the loss of the ability to see the balance of proportion and harmony from too much emphasis on the caliper and the rule. Some of the more pragmatic spokesmen of violin making say that we should be content being craftsmen that the violin is a tool to do a job, not neccessarily an ornament to look beautiful. Approaches differ considerably, and whether the maker is building his or her views on on the examination of old working practice or on mechanical pragmatism or even artistic inspiration, all agree that mimicry of peripheral details, such as shapes and thicknesses of the old masters is futile.
The classical instruments were a product of their time and each maker looked for his own style of work. There are those who believe that copying is sterile and unspontaneus. There is no need for extreme eccentric designs, but there is a crying need for freedom and creativity within the bounds of a limited form in a time when individual styles are ceasing to appear. We are showered with an incredible number of look-alike instruments, cloned from a pseudo-ideal and born from a hesitating mentality. The competitions for violin making bear part of the responsibility for this situation. In the creation of a "classical" look, freedom of creativity is stifled. Concerning newly made instruments, the violin maker has for generations struggled against deeply rooted prejudices. It used to be a common belief that in order to reach the noble tone, a violin needed to be at least 200 years old. Of course the noble tone is excruciatingly difficult to define to start with because of its extremely subjective character, but the fact remains that there are numerous examples of old instruments that simply do not sound very well, just as there are similar new ones. Acoustical research becomes more and more sophisticated with each passing year. Computer analysis has become an increasingly powerful tool for researchers. The enigmatic problem of violin sound has been tackled by scientific research from the 19th century until today with ever increasingly sophisticated means. The problem is not with measurement. Mountains of graphs, statistics and various data can be collected with comparative ease, especially nowadays with technology that was unimaginable only a few years ago. Objective analysis of the vibration of plates, behaviour of waves through the air and the workings of the human ear pose few practical obstacles. It is the subjective interpretation of all this information which is the main puzzle. The acoustical examination of the violin extends over 200 of its more than 400 years of existence, but it still defies analysis and complete understanding.The violin can be represented as mostly a resonant air cavity in a resonant wooden enclosure driven by vibrating strings. The apparent simplicity is misleading, since the number of parameters to be determined for full analysis is very great. Some distinctions can be made between good instruments and absolutely awful ones, but the subtle differences that make up a magnificent instrument is still the realm of the expert player, listener and maker. Any attempt to define the properties of a violin by physical measurements must start with a decision of what is to be measured. An immediate approach is to study the complete violin under playing conditions (either absolute measurements or comparisons between instruments) Some of the basic parameters that can be investigated are: The harmonic content of the spectral distribution, Transients, or the crucial evolution in time of the beginnings of a note, Loudness and amplitude distribution over the whole frequency range of the instrument, Ease of response and directional effects. Another approach is to measure the characteristics of its component parts separately, eventually relating these characteristics to the performance of the instrument as a whole.
Today violin makers are learning to make new instruments that sound. So much so that the great virtuosos of our day are increasingly resting their precious investments at home occasionally and getting rave reviews on the tone of their new instruments. However the critics are sometimes deceived because some (not all) of these new instruments are disguised as old ones. The practice of forgery has been apparent on a commercial scale since at least the beginning of the second quarter of the 19th century. There can be no denying that Villaumes copies were clever, he was however not a true villain in his attempt to emulate the old works as was often said, because his instruments had at all times far too definite and unmistakeable a character. Undoubtedly many copyists have exployted the psychology of a good many buyers, which appear to have an attraction for new instruments, bought from the maker, but distressed and antiqued to make them look like the work of a classical master. Many makers work consists entirely on this kind of look, but for many it was undoubtedly the sheer joy of making the perfect replica that motivated their work rather than the deliberation to deceive. Most buyers are attracted to imitations of the old but not all top players are persuaded that only the old is good. As a colleague of mine has said "It is really not at all presumptuous to design ones own instruments as some believe, but it is arrogant to claim that one is making an Amati, a Stradivari or a Guarneri".
Popular beliefs and folkloric imagery associated with violins seem to make a strong impression on the imagination. Modern day man generally is heavily influenced by a rational, scientific approach to knowledge, but is not completely convinced of its ultimate superiority and has at times cravings for intuitive,emotionally based methods. Many modern violin makers are attemting to find a new way of looking at their work, which is a fusion of these apparently quite different but not neccessarily incompatible approaches.
What is it about the violin that makes it one of the most mystical and enchanting of musical instruments, and how have the social, political and philosophical changes during the past three hundred years since the dawning of the classical period of violin making affected the approach to the work? How has the mystical nature of an age moulded by an ancient world view , managed to survive in our technologically oriented society, and is violin making, as a representative of a surviving tradition mostly intact, merely struggling to find its own identity, or is it perhaps able to relieve some of the anxieties of a frustrated objectively oriented modernity?
