Talk:Stradivarius

Stradivarius listen for yourself

"According to their reputation, the quality of their sound has defied attempts to explain or equal it, though this belief is disputed.[1][2][3] The many blind experiments from 1817[4][5] to as recently as 2014[2][6][1] have found no difference in sound between Stradivari's violins and high-quality violins in comparable style of other makers and periods, nor has acoustic analysis.[7][8]"

'No difference' is disputable, while which one is 'better' is of course subjective. I'm not sure this link belongs in wikipedia but one can quite trivially find comparisons to listen for yourself on youTube, such as this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9e0Tuvitkgs — Preceding unsigned comment added by CW (talk • contribs) 11:53, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Modern Strad or Baroque? Re-converted?

Most of the Strads are in the hands of Modern Violin players, and therefore were adapted to modern playing, being substantially modified, mostly in the 19th century. Just a few of them- if any of them- remain in original setups, as baroque violins.

I think that this should be pointed out really well. Also, in the list of known Strads, there should be a column specifying if these instruments are either original, converted to modern instruments, or reconverted into their original baroque setup.

I would like to point out that this is something crucial to know how actually these instruments were conceived. -Francisco

Prices of Strads

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-13258256 "An exceptionally well-preserved Stradivarius violin, the Lady Blunt, which fetched $10m at its last sale in 2008, is to be auctioned for charity." "The Lady Blunt set a record price every time it was sold last century." These values seem way bigger han anything currently quoted in the article.2.24.54.216 (talk) 15:21, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I think this section needs updating. The article says that "the highest price paid for a Stradivarius was £947,500 ($1.6 million) for the "Kreutzer Strad" at Christie's in London, 1998", but just off the top of my head, Joshua Bell sold his 1732 Strad violin for over $2 million and bought the 'Gibson Ex Huberman' Strad for perhaps a little less than $4 million. A quick look at his website seems to confirm this.

NEW YORK - A nearly 300-year-old Stradivarius violin sold Tuesday for more than $3.5 million, shattering the record for the highest amount paid for a musical instrument at auction, Christie's said. The instrument, made in 1707 by Italian violinmaker Antonio Stradivari, sold at Christie's auction house for $3,544,000 after less than five minutes of bidding.

Construction, etc.

The statement + - :"Recent studies indicate that Antonio Stradivari may have used wood from an old cathedral for its construction which might be a reason for its sound quality." + - needs explanation (What about the wood from an old cathedral is so special?), and a source--it's definately not common knowledge. —siroχo 07:12, May 13, 2005 (UTC) +

To hell with you internet geek-savants. You want all sort of citations, but admit it, you would never read the whole thing through. You foul Wikipedia with your pseudo-literacy. You should limit your vain comments to computer subjects since about 1995, which are the only subjects you can comprehend, due to your lack of liberal arts training. Mea (talk) 01:18, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

- * Yeah, calls for research. My recollection is that wonderful things happen as wood ages long enuf, changing from a composite material made of fibers bonded to each other to something that at least resembles (and perhaps actually constitutes) a crystalline structure. That may be some help. + - : I also think i heard yet another theory recently that involved getting access to wood intended for the Venetian navy when they cancelled a planned expansion:--Jerzy·t 02:44, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Recent indicam que Antonio Stradivari pode ter usado a madeira de uma catedral velha para sua constru��o que p�de ser uma raz�o para sua qualidade sadia." necessita a explana��o (o que sobre a madeira de uma catedral velha � assim especial?), e uma fonte -- n�o � definately conhecimento comum. [ [ User:Siroxo|]]�< pia batismal color=#627562>siro< pia batismal color=#627562>χ[[Special:Contributions/Siroxo|< pia batismal color=#627562>o ] ] 07:12, maio 13, 2005 (UTC)

yeah, chamadas para a pesquisa. Meu recollection � que as coisas maravilhosas acontecem porque a madeira envelhece o enuf longo, mudando de a [ [ material composto ] ] feito das fibras seligaram-se a algo que se assemelha ao menos (e constitui talvez realmente) a uma estrutura cristalina. Aquela pode ser alguma ajuda: Eu penso tamb�m que eu me ouvi contudo uma outra teoria recentemente que o acesso come�ando involvido � madeira pretenda para a marinha venetian quando cancelaram uma expans�o de planeamento. -- [[User:Jerzy|Jerzy ] ]�[ [ usu�rio talk:Jerzy|t ] ] 02:44, 1 junho 2005 (UTC)

These naive excursi simply arise from hearsay of the properties of well-aged wood. All the first-rank cabinet-makers of Stradivarius' time had timbers seasoning in covered, ventilated sheds behind their workshops, a major item in inventories. The magical "cathedral" element appears to come from some credulous editor's DRB. --Wetman 23:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

---

The old cathedral wood theory came from a believe that a bell tower structural wood was absorbing vibrations and contributing to the quality of the wood resonance.

please do not remove other people's comments from discussion page. --JeremyLydellHaugen 05:35, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

It was my content that I deleted, and as there is no system of authority in the artisan fields, there aren't any references. I can tell you the names of some respected luthiers who know the principle as a fact, but I'm sure that wouldn't be enough. Which is why this information stays esoteric, and is why I removed my entry. - Uvirith

please do not remove other people's comments from discussion page. Also I would say the larger goal of projects like Wikipedia are the elimination of the unknown and of esoteric knowledge, so deleting info of this type is unacceptable in this fourum. Further, I'm restoring the last deleted section, although I would like some references to back up the assertions made (studies, etc.) --JeremyLydellHaugen 03:40, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Davidov cello

Re Davidov I gots no source & i won't make the change even to "being played by", but i'm pretty sure (even if i may have originated the wording "owned by") that i recently heard Ma has it on indefinite loan, i suppose from her estate. (I think what i heard also said he usually chooses a custom made modern instrument over it.) --Jerzy·t 02:44, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• the article is correct as it is, everything I read suggests she left it to Yo Yo Ma who now owns it. Paradiso 08:34, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• I might add that Yo-Yo Ma uses the Davidov in slightly modified form as his Baroque cello. His main cello is a 1733 Montagnana. --JeremyLydellHaugen 05:43, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Removed entry

re: Joban-Horsteiner-Stradivarius. A German made violin built almost 100 years after Antonio Stradivari's death is outside the scope of true Strads. I have removed the reference. Listed instruments should be confined to Stradivarius instruments made during the lifetime of Antonio Stradivari by AS in Cremona, Italy (or in later years with help from his sons Francesco and Omobono). --JeremyLydellHaugen 05:40, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Verfiability and Citations

Currently, this page's ranking is about 0% on the verifiability scale. While it's somewhat common knowledge that there are really nice old musical instruments called Stradivarius in existence, practically everything else included in the article is not. A vast majority of the listed extant instruments link to empty pages (where no citations will be found) and we have only the word of the editor who included them to document that these instruments do, indeed, exist. This simply isn't acceptable. Tomorrow I will remove any instruments which link to empty pages since they aren't supported with citations, and will then remove any who do have individual pages which don't include citations. They can be added back in once citations are available. Freaking Wonderful 18:34, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

The bulk of links on the Stradivarius page are placeholder links based on a common naming scheme for Strad instruments. To say the least, creating linked pages for almost 700 or so odd Stradivari instruments is a heddy job. Some of the instruments link to specific external articles regarding some piece of trivia regarding the instrument, but the bulk of them are just yet-unwritten internal wikipedia links. Adequate proof of most of these instruments existence can be easily found ([1] for example lists 682 - which often includes photos and a list of prior owners), especially when associated with a current musician. All the instruments that I have personally made notes on do indeed exist. While I certainly would not mind removing links on instruments that do not yet have any internal wikipedia page, to delete anything that doesn't currently have an external link seems extreme. --JeremyLydellHaugen 19:48, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Removing red links is fine but there is no reason to delete instruments. I'll put the cozio.com link at the bottom of the article, it helps with verifiability. Paradiso 03:13, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Is it just me or does the detailed theories and reproduction attempts section sound like they came from a paper someone written for class? The style of writing doesn't feel like it was written for an encyclopedic medium. It also utilizes the first person.129.21.189.174 19:16, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Violin materials

The two references I added contain information on the type of wood used. The National Geographic article states Stradivari used violins built from spruce wood contemporary to his lifetime, while the Physics Web article says: The front plate of the violin is carved from a solid block of fine-grained pine. Maple is usually used for the back plate and pine for the sides., which seems to distinguish them. If Strads are or were indeed distinctive in this way, it should be pointed out. The Wiki article says that the top is usually spruce, so perhaps the Physics Web article stumbled on this (though it won an award from the Acoustical Society of America). I am happy to defer to experts who can sort this out. --Blainster 17:26, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I'll agree that a section of information on materials is a good idea, but there seems to be a lot of conjecture and rumor about Strad instrument materials, almost to the degree of myth. It would seem that AS used many woods for his instruments (spruce, maple, pine, poplar), and there is no definitive commonality between all of them, and so the section would have to reflect that. Comments on the varnish, workmanship, etc. would also be useful. Modern instruments are much the same way, most, but not all being a spruce top and maple back and sides. I wouldan expert on the subject should be asked to contribute, and that most certainly is not me. In the meantime, perhaps links at the bottom to the two articles you mention... --JeremyLydellHaugen 21:54, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

harps

if Stradivarius never made any harps, then why is there even a section about it? I see no reason to have the "harps" section in the main article and am requesting it be removed. i will check back here in 5 days and see if anyone objects to having the section removed. Osmo250 04:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Antonio Stradivari made A SINGLE harp in his lifetime. He did make ONE (at least if the source material is accurate). There's even an external reference listed, which leads to this quote: "Stradivarius made over 1,000 instruments, 600 of which are known to have survived, including two guitars and a very ornamental harp.". That's why the section is there. --JeremyLydellHaugen 07:35, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

• ok, thanks for the reply. when i made the post, all that was said in the harps section is that he never made one, thats why i wanted it removed.Osmo250 01:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I added a foot-note on the single Strad harp. It is in the Naples music conservatory. I have a photo of it. Not quite sure where to load it. Jeffmatt 06:02, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Another stradivarius

It appears a violin by Stradivari has been found in the hungarian city of Debrecen, which was left in a cellar by a jewish musician before he was taken to the WWII eastern front for slave labour, where he was killed. His grandson found it a month ago. Many are skeptic of this.

http://groups.google.co.cr/group/rec.music.makers.bowed-strings/browse_thread/thread/2724938b21d67b62/844169537ae4eed0?hl=es#844169537ae4eed0

213.178.103.162 12:08, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

That violin is said to have been made in 1727. It is claimed the great grandfather of the family, a violinist himself, became a POW in the WWI, where his russian captor gave him this violin from war loot to him, so he can amuse the prison camp guards. He was able to return with the violin to Hungary during the turmoil of russian bolshevik revolution and white-red civil war. It is said the violin was recently authenticated also by a certain Bela Szabo living in the Uzhgorod region of Ukraine, he is a elderly master violin maker who has already restored two confirmed Stradivariuses, one in 1963 and other in the late 1970's, so he should know the issue. 213.178.103.162 12:17, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I remember seeing a Stradivarius violin named Elphinstone, but I do not see it on the list. Is this violin not a real Strad?

Red links

Is there a good reason to have so many red links to articles for individual instruments? Might we at least thin the ranks to those that are likely to be created soon (or are of particular importance and ought to be created)? —ptk✰fgs 12:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

One in particular looks incorrect, Jhon Paul Reynols, under Daniel (1713), would appear to be spelled incorrectly. Before I changed it, I wanted to know what it should be changed to or if the link should be removed. Tannermyoung (talk) 19:52, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Known Missing/Destroyed Strads

Both the instruments of Thibaud and Neveu were destroyed in known air crashes; maybe there should be a section for strads confirmed lost forever. (Anon)

Lord Dunn-Raven?

Sure sounds like Lord Dunraven to me. (America's Cup trivia runs in my family.) --Wetman 09:16, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Antonio with no cirumflex

Antonio has no circumflex in Italian, thus it should be corrected.

One unsourced sentence not enough

I will make this as brief as possible: One sentence does not explain a disputed and deep scientific theory about how he may have made his violins. Take a look at the following websites, and tell me where somebody gets the power to write off this complex theory with one completely basic, weak, and unsupported claim: http://www.primidi.com/2003/12/06.html http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/biology/b103/f03/web3/s1kim.html

What about the fact that you would not build them the way Stradivarius did? From what I have heard there was virtually no sanding but rather many repetitions of shaving and planing the wood with successively smaller tools. When I prune bushes around my house, I use only manual instruments. Therefore you could attempt to copy how I prune a bush, once you see exactly what I have done. But when you do one on your own, your approach will be based on the tools you are using. Mea (talk) 01:06, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

List merge

Much of the content in the list in this article overlaps the list in Antonio Stradivari. Anybody want to attempt a section merge? If not, I can do it, but somebody might be planning on reworking the list anyway. — atchius (msg) 21:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I think a separate page "List of Stradivarius violins" is appropriate here, since there are so many. ALTON .ıl 01:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

The two lists are overwhelmingly similar, and maintenance of two separate lists is an unnecessary duplication of effort. I would support the creation of a separate page titled "List of Stradivarius intruments". On a separate note, the design of the table in Antonio_Stradivari#Stradivarius_instruments is more visually appealing. +A.0u 01:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the two lists should be merged onto this page (Stradivarius). The layout should be redone as a table for clarity (as on the Antonio Stradivari page). Columns should include 'Instrument' 'Year' 'Current Owner/Current Player' and 'Notes' All instruments that do not already have an individual entry (those with 'dead' links) should have the links removed. Great stress should be put on making sure there is verifiable citations where they exist, and an overall progress in getting outside citations for all instruments should be made. Instruments should be grouped by type and then sorted by year of manufacture first and name second. All references to 'The' can be removed (except with a titled as opposed to named Strad - 'The Lady Tennant' strad for example is probably better rendered as that full title. Any reference in the name to Stradivarius can be assumed and dropped. Any 'ex' at the beginning of the name (where it is the only name associated with the instrument) can be assumed and dropped (but left on where there are two or more names associated with it, as in Gibson ex Huberman). Biography of Antonio Stradivari should be largely confined to his bio page and the list and history of his instruments should belong on the Stradivarius page. Quotes in names should be eliminated. Internal wiki links on the year entry can be dropped. --JeremyLydellHaugen 23:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Removed "Airwolf" trivia

I removed the following trivia about the show "Airwolf":

The fictional character of Stringfellow Hawke serenaded eagles with his Stradivarius cello in the TV series Airwolf.

This sentence felt tacked on to its paragraph, and is niether relevant or significant but quite possible the dumbest trivia I have ever read. Thanks for taking a part of my life that I will never have back.

Found Stradivarius

My grandmother is in the possession of a Stradivarius not in the best of conditions, I checked and inside the violin is a Stradivarius label. Who, where, and how can I verify if the violin is authentic or a copy?

Sharain Jones <email address removed>

Thanks

There is a modern instrument brand named 'Stradivarius'. Most likely, that is all it is, especially if it has a label on the inside. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.91.70.187 (talk) 15:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

One to add

1727 “Vesuvius” (or “Vesuvio”) ex Brosa, left by Remo Lauricella to the comune di Cremona and now in the collection “Gli Archi di Palazzo Comunale”.

A good bit more on the violin and its owners at http://www.arteliutaria.it/article_lauricella_page_1.shtml (and the three pages following; text in both English and Italian). Cozio.com page is [2]. I’d add it myself, of course, but I am not quite sure how the table is intended to work.

Incidentally, does anyone know what relation Cozio the collector was to Carlo Cozio (also count of Salabue) the chess player? —Ian Spackman 21:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Goddard and Lauterbach violins

I am concerned that hoaxes may have been inserted in the article. I have no expertise on the subject, so I'm reluctant to take action myself. I am referring to:

1. Edits [3] and [4]:this is highly likely to be a hoax.
2. Edit [5]: This would be a very elaborate hoax. I have also found a page through google:[6] where ostensibly the same person John A. Thornton claims to be in possession of the violin and presents some history. See also:[7]

--Atavi 14:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

The (2) edit seems plausible. There is evidence that such a violin was owned by Henryk Grohman.--Atavi 15:03, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

If you lack the experience or knowledge to question my edits, then please leave them alone! I'm not familiar with all this "computer language": - Anyone who can help me with instructions as to how I may post photographs of archival documents relating to the research I've conducted and other available information, I will be more than happy to provide it. This ongoing effort to locate and recover lost, stolen, or missing violins is NOT a hoax. If I were trying to perpetrate a hoax or insert dis-information in this archive, I most certainly would not sign my name to it.

```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnAThornton (talk • contribs) 09:26, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi JohnAThornton. As I've said on your talk, I'm going to seek help on your behalf.--Atavi (talk) 11:19, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I am now completely convinced that John A. Thornton has acted in good faith in adding the information about the Lauterbach Stradivarius. Per the above policy I should have assumed so. Citations and documents are still needed of course.--Atavi (talk) 11:44, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I am baffled by this forum topic.--Atavi (talk) 13:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

And this one. John Thornton is stradivari1719.--Atavi (talk) 14:27, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I think John Thornton is trying to perpetrate fraud by claiming to "own" the Lauterbach Stradivari (he is known to sell violins). Let's think about this a second... if the provenance in the article is correct, why would anyone claim to have this violin is his/her possession? If the verifiable chain of custody goes from a Polish museum, to a Nazi officer who "stole" it, doesn't mere possession of this violin amount to "receiving stolen property"? Thus the claim to "own" it is *highly* suspect. John Thornton has been banned from at least four violin forums (at least that's what Google knows about!) and seems to be a crackpot, never being able to supply any documentation on the history or provenance of violins he claims to have discovered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by IMSA Dude (talk • contribs) 21:48, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Edit: Friday, May 25, 2012: To Mr. "Unsigned" - from John A. Thornton. There is a huge difference between what "you think" and what I know to be factual information, gleaned through hard nosed research into every available microfilm document pertaining to the subject, in the OMGUS archives, dating from WWII and afterwards. John A. Thornton, Brewton, Alabama.

---

I am most certainly not trying to perpetrate a hoax regarding the 1719 Stradivari I personally identified during the last week of December, 2004 and physically recovered, taking possession on Jan. 7, 2005. I cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this particular violin is the "Lauterbach", but no one can prove it isn't. No living violin dealer has ever seen the "Lauterbach" Stradivarius and there are no "known" photographs of it, according to James Warren, a violin dealer in Chicago, Ill. I know this for a fact through a telephone conversation I had with Mr. Warren in 2007. In fact on August 17, 2007, William M. Townsend, an internationally known Violin~Maker and chairman of the Amati Foundation visited me that he might see the violin with his own eyes as well as a 1741 Guarneri del Gesu that I also identified and recovered in 2006. (The 1741 Guarneri del Gesu has now been certified as authentic by Mr. Gerard Murphy, Atelierviolins, Bushey, U.K.) That said, rest assured I am by no means a hoaxster but a serious minded collector and connisseur dedicated to finding and recovering lost, missing, and stolen 18th century Cremonese Italian violins. JohnAThornton (talk) 08:30, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Assuming the above to be true, would it not constitute "original research", which Wikipedia works so diligently to exclude from its pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.249 (talk) 22:53, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Andre Rieu

Andre Rieu claims to perform with a 1667 violin made by Antonio Stradivarius. This isn't reflected in this article.

http://www.andrerieu.com/site/index.php?id=music-violin

24.128.237.232 (talk) 22:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure the article absolutely needs to have this piece of information, especially since it's not complete, i.e. we only know the current owner and the date of manufacturing and not much else.--Atavi (talk) 12:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

San Lorenzo

Sorry, I don't know how to edit the table- the news reports that David Garrett damaged the San Lorenzo Strad have now changed - it was in fact a Guadagnini, so somebody should take that out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.30.249.139 (talk) 14:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC) Also, the article links to the wrong David Garrett —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.30.249.139 (talk) 16:11, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Corrected. Thank you for pointing it out. Oda Mari (talk) 17:02, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Akiko Meyers and the Royal Spanish

This past weekend, Akiko Meyers played her strad here in San Diego and they both did quite well. From her website: In 2005 Anne was fortunate to acquire the "Royal Spanish" violin made in 1730 by the legendary Italian maker Antonio Stradivari. The "Royal Spanish" earned its name because it previously belonged to the King of Spain. Shouldn't it be on the list? 207.167.97.18 (talk) 22:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)mike207.167.97.18 (talk) 22:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Stradivarii

Category:Stradivarii has been nominated for renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. –

The question at this point is whether it should be Category:Stradivari violins or Category:Stradivarius violins. Your input would be much appreciated. Cgingold (talk) 02:41, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Need Information About My violin

I have my violin since the age of 10 years old. The violin has a lable inside that reads "antonius stradivarius cremonensis faciebat anno 1713, made in czechoslovakia." On the corner left side of the lable it has a loin with its pews on a shield, on the bottom lignalone, St 103-6418. I need information about my violin.

Thanks Mornstarjdh (talk) 06:22, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Another Strad

Recently attended a concert by the Perlman Music Program at Metropolitan Museum of Art. In the bio for Kristin Lee, currently studying at Juilliard, it states she "is currently playing on a 1697 Antonio Stradivarius through the generous support of the Juilliard School." There are no 1697's listed in the article.

--74.73.140.216 (talk) 03:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

1723 Antonio Stradivari "Ex-Keisewetter"

• Virtuoso to play, thanks to driver who returned $4M violin. Ling.Nut (talk) 02:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Joseph Nagyvary

This section has been moved to Mr. Nagyvary's page, since it is about him and his experiments, which have been controversial within the musical/lutherie community and have been rebuked. Makers who are indeed getting much praise for their modern instruments are Samuel Zygmuntowicz, Stefan-Peter Greiner, Joseph Curtin and Gregg Alf to name a few. These makers are also involved in intensive scientific research of old instruments.

" Texas A&M University biochemist Joseph Nagyvary succeeded in making a violin somewhere near the quality of a Stradivari by leaving the wood to soak in brine. Because of the lack of land in Venice, during that period imported wood was often stored in the seawater of the Venetian Lagoon, where a type of decomposition had a slight effect on the wood. Nagyvary managed to acquire wood shavings from a Stradivarius violin, and under a microscope he found the natural filter plates in the pores between the tracheids were gone. He also treated the wood with a preparation of borax in the manner of Stradivari, who used it to prevent infestation.

By late 2003, Nagyvary refined his techniques and produced a violin that was tested in a duel with the Leonardo da Vinci of 1725, an instrument not from Stradivari’s golden period. Both violins were played in each of four selections of music by violinist Dalibor Karvay behind a screen to an audience of 600 attended by 160 trained musicians and 303 regular concert goers. This was the first public comparison of a Stradivari with a contemporary instrument before a large audience where the audience would cast ballots on the performance quality of each violin. The consensus was that Nagyvary's instrument surpassed the Stradivarius in each category by a small margin.

" Milliot (talk) 20:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

References

Edvin Marton

The Stradivarius on loan to Edvin Marton is billed as a "1697 Stradivarius" on loan from a "Swiss Bank". Since Marton and his Strad are involved in the winning song "Believe" in the 2008 Eurovision contest— a Strad makes everything so tasteful— shouldn't we identify the Strad in question— "it was actually played by Paganini over 300 years ago" says Marton here (hmm)— in the table of this article?--Wetman (talk) 05:21, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Footnoted quotes

I was interested to see that a recent edit, which made a number of improvements to the article, also removed the quotes from three citations in the entry for the Artot-Alard violin (1728). The sources and quotes were added by me in a series of earlier revisions.

Although such an alteration would not normally concern me unduly, there are some considerations that might not be immediately apparent from the edit history. It may therefore help if I try to explain some of the circumstances and reasoning involved at the time I made the edits.

Background to Artot-Alard revisions

The revisions were made in response to a previous edit by 83.61.219.190, which stated that the Artot-Alard was owned by one "Louis Von Spencer IV". The claim was unsourced, and a web search for that name (even without the "IV") yielded only a couple of references to a facebook user.

The Artot-Alard entry at Cozio.com gives "Andre Balogh" as the name of the current owner and player. This information might normally have been enough to run with, but I was conscious of directly contradicting a fellow editor's statement, and felt that any supporting citation(s) should be reasonably watertight. I was also somewhat troubled that most of the top Google hits referred to André Balogh, the professor of space physics—with only a handful of matches relating to violins. After some further digging, it eventually became evident that the first name of Balogh (the musician) is actually Endre.

Nevertheless, Cozio seems a reputable source for this kind of information, and the linked entry was retained as an initial source. Additional citations were sought, however, to indicate that our use of the name "Endre" was not erroneous—and that Cozio's Balogh was the same as ours. On locating a couple of decent supplementary sources (one identifying the owner, the other confirming him as the current player), I realised that the story they told was probably of sufficient interest to warrant a mention in the Notes column. (It could even be used to help expand the Artot-Alard Stradivarius stub, should anyone have some time on their hands...)

Supplementing citations with quotes

Given the possibility that my revisions might result in some kind of dispute, I assumed the burden of evidence to help readers find the text supporting the statements made, and included direct quotes from the sources. Even without the potential for disagreement, I believe there were other good reasons for using quoted material:

• While the Cozio entry is from a generally reliable source, the name of the owner/player does not fully match that in the Wikipedia article. Without some form of acknowledgement of this, a casual observer might be forgiven for assuming an error, either typographical or citational, on our part. To avoid this, the quote was presented in a way that discreetly indicated our awareness of the difference.

• The linked feature story "The Mysterious Technology of the Violin" was initially added to confirm Endre Balogh's ownership. It's a sizeable piece of about 32 KB that might, were it a Wikipedia article, begin to raise readability and technical issues. With such a large body of text, the inclusion of a relevant quote to help readers locate a particular passage seemed reasonable.

• The final citation links to Balogh's illustrated piece, "Will The Real Stradivarius Please Play An A?" This supports the story from the preceding source, and confirms the owner's player status. The quote focuses briefly on the similarity between the original and replica instruments, and points to Balogh as the current player of them both. Like the other quotes, it was intended to highlight the relevance of the citation in relation to the referenced statements.

To quote, or not to quote?

I hope the above helps to clarify why, after due consideration, I included quotes with the citations in question—and why I still feel they should be retained.

I'm aware of legitimate concerns over the way footnoted quotes are sometimes used, and agree that care should be taken to avoid the inclusion of extraneous text, the gratuitous bloating of reference sections, and the risk of copyright violations. On the other hand, I believe that relevant, carefully selected, and judiciously edited quotes can reinforce citations and enhance their overall usefulness. The trick, as ever, is in finding the right balance.

Since my revisions were introduced with these points in mind, I'm a little puzzled by the removal of the quotes. I was unable to find any discussion here to suggest some earlier consensus on citation formats, and have not managed to deduce a reason from the edit summary. No matter. I'm sure none of this should be a major issue, anyway—and the situation may just be the result of a misunderstanding. I'm therefore restoring the quotes on the basis of the rationale described above.

My apologies for the rather long-winded explanation. If I've missed or misinterpreted anything, please feel free to set me straight.

Thanks. --Error -128 (talk) 23:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

wow...lot's of words. i can boil my response down to just a few sentences. it's basically duplicating information, creating a redundant repository for information that already exists. the article is already dreadfully slow to load--not everyone has t1 internet access--and it really doesn't add any legitimacy to the claim, particularly since one must still click through to validate whether or not the quote is accurate. in an article that basically amounts to a 'list'--one of the lowest categories of articles in wikidom--each line item is not intended substitute for an article. if there's more than a couple points to make, either 1) include the data in the article already created for the instrument (particularly so with the alard-artot), or 2) create a new page and include all the details you can find. cheers --emerson7 05:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I take your point about the size of the article and its list status. (Editing the long list of violins alone can be a somewhat cumbersome process.) I also appreciate that a link must still be followed for verification—even though I maintain that a brief, carefully selected quote can sometimes provide a useful, at-a-glance snippet that points to relevant content (particularly in controversial cases, or when the link connects to a sizeable article).

In view of the constraints here, the Artot-Alard article probably is, as you suggest, a more appropriate place for this more detailed information. The stub is sorely in need of fleshing out anyway, and the story about the replication of the instrument is an interesting one. Commitments elsewhere generally preclude any prolific editing on my part, but I'll endeavour to have a crack at the article as time permits (assuming nobody else gets there first)...

Thanks for the explanation, and for the speedy response. --Error -128 (talk) 13:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Ex-cess

Simple question. Why do many of the instruments have "ex-" as part of their soubriquet? What does it mean? 91.105.14.40 (talk) 20:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This indicates a subsequent or other owner/user/name association. These instruments have been passed down over generations, with multiple musicians and collectors possessing them. If the owner is noteworthy, the name is appended to the most common name used to identify the instrument. --JeremyLydellHaugen (talk) 22:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Should "Stradivarius Myth" be included?

Should "psychoacoustics" be mentioned as a possible explanation for the unique sound of Stradivarius violins? Here are some possible references: Telegraph article, Reader's Digest and Forbes article mentioned here, and this radio interview. There may be more, I just saw one and then took the other two from the top two google links. --Bescoto (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I added the Telegraph article (which I should have done earlier). The second one has an off-putting polemical quality, and I don't have the patience to listen to radio interviews unless I'm in my car, but maybe the third one should go in. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 04:15, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Martinelli-Gingold

The Martinelli-Josef Gingold violin (1683) is lent to the winner of the Indianapolis Competition: it should be listed by someone more competent than I.--Wetman (talk) 14:21, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

"Age of instrument" hypothesis

I have always heard that one reason Stradivarius' are so highly valued is that the sound of any good violin improves as they age. There are many reasons suggested for this. I don't know if this is true, but it seems to be widely believed, and should probably be included among the hypotheses for the quality of the sound. Does anyone have a reference? —MiguelMunoz (talk) 01:23, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

1732 "Baillot"

Just added the "Baillot" of 1732, which is under ownership of Fondazione Casa di Risparmio in Bologna, Italy. I took this information from the liner notes of Giuliano Carmignola and Viktoria Mullova's Vivaldi double violin concertos CD from last year. I'm not sure who to reference as the author of the booklet (the overall booklet, not the booklet's essay, which was written by Linsday Kemp), so I used the booklet editor's name: Eva Zollner. Mikenike504 (talk) 05:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC) I need information about my violin.

I have a violin since my father past away in 2001. The violin has a lable inside that reads "antonius stradivarius cremonensis faciebat anno 1713, made in Italy. I need information about my violin still in a very good conditions. Who, where, and how can I verify if the violin is authentic or a copy? Thank you. <email address removed>

Intro

shouldn't the intro in some way mention that it is a violin, and not some unique instrument called the Stradivarius? 188.176.142.95 (talk) 09:12, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Probably. I just changed it. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 15:26, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Wood density

At different points in the article it talks about violins having exceptional sound quality because the wood used for their construction is either high density or low density. This obviously seems a little counterintuitive. Can somebody confirm this is correct? –CWenger (talk) 02:34, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Good point. High density, low density, or consistent density. Maybe the real question is the one brought up by Badger Drink: How much discussion of the reasons for Strads' superiority should the article have when the evidence suggests they're not superior? —JerryFriedman (Talk) 03:36, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Stradivarius museum

The following text was removed from Violin#History. It may be useful in this article:

---

Stradivari has his own museum in which it was named after him, the Stradivarius Museum which is located in Cremona, Italy.

The history of the Stradivarian Museum began in 1893, the year in which the town of Cremona accepted Giovanni Battista Cerani's donation of moulds, patterns and various tools that had belonged to Cremonese violin makers, including some of Antonio Stradivari's. But the most significant part of the Museum is represented by the artefacts originating from the collection of Ignazio Alessandro Cozio, Count of Salabue. Born in 1755, he is considered to be the first great violin making scholar. Purchasing what remained of Stradivari's workshop, Alessandro Cozio was able to foster the great interest he had always shown in violin making and he soon became a personage of rare competence on the subject. The Salabue Collection, composed of wooden moulds, paper patterns and various tools which had been used for the construction of violins, violas, cellos and other instruments, was finally sold in 1920 by the last heir to Cozio, the Marchioness Paola Dalla Valle del Pomaro, to the Bolognese violin maker Giuseppe Fiorini for the sum of 100,000 lire. Fiorini was faced with numerous difficulties in trying to set up an Italian school of violin making which could avail itself of this precious material. After several attempts in different Italian towns, Giuseppe Fiorini donated the entire collection of artefacts emanating from the great Cremonese violin maker to Cremona's Municipal Museum in April 1930. On 26 October 1930 the senator Alfredo Rocco, at that time Minister of Justice, inaugurated the Stradivarian Room in the Palazzo Affaitati, that had only recently become the seat of the Muncipal Museums, where the Salabue- Fiorini Collection was exhibited together with the items from the previous donations. After moving from its original location to the Palazzo dell'Arte, the Stradivarian Museum returned to the Palazzo Affaitati, only to be transferred to the rooms once occupied by the State Archives in Via Palestro in 1979. Since 13 December 2001 the Museum has been definitively housed in the noble, eighteenth-century rooms of the Palazzo Affaitati. The Museum is organised in three sections: • an itinerary that explains the construction of a contralto viola in accordance with the tradition of the classical Cremonese school; the equipment for the contralto viola of 1690 was chosen for this first section, as it is one of the most complete sets among those kept within the museum; the itinerary has also been studied and organised for the blind and those with poor eyesight; • the group of instruments which represents mainly Italian violin makers active from the second half of the 19th century to the first half of the 20th century; • the Salabue-Fiorini Collection, displayed in sixteen showcases containing 710 artefacts, originating from the workshop of Antonio Stradivari.

---

Blind tests

The statement about blind tests may contradict the article on blind tests which says one of the earliest suggestions that blind tests would be valuable came in the second half of the 19th Century. Were tests done in the first half of the 19th Century proper blind tests? None of this invalidates the suggestion that Stradivarius violins don't have unique sound quality. Proxima Centauri (talk) 07:48, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Your comparing wiki text to wiki text. Dont trust wiki; spend time looking up any sources you can find, form an openion an change whichever article as needed. Ceoil 07:53, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the citeneeded tag, as the year 1817 is in the citation given. Since the specific date, the more likely explanation was that the editors of the Blind Experiment article didn't happen to know about the 1817 Strad test or didn't think it was worth mentioning (thus "one of the earliest"). Nonetheless, I agree with Ceoil that the thing for you to do was a little research before editing articles on the basis of the most likely explanation or anything else.

Following up the citation in the article, I searched Google Books for "violin 1817 French Academy" and found this. I'll use it to improve this article and Blind_experiment#History "real soon now", unless someone else does or finds a better source or whatever. So I'm glad you brought this up. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 15:49, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Removed text on Westerlund

The following text was cited only to an e-mail on the violin maker's own Web site. I don't think we should use sources like that. A quick google didn't turn up any independent source.

A blind test in 2011 in New York with 21 instruments including 4 Stradivarius put a modern Stradivarius copy by Peter Westerlund as the winner.

—JerryFriedman (Talk) 04:30, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

References

recent anon edit reverted

Diff There are too many difficulties with these edits to make it worth while attempting to fix them in place. For one thing,

"The varnish. Many violin makers, luthier, say varnish is essential to the beauty of a violin, and the secrets of the varnish are jealously guarded. Luthier swear by oil-based varnishes. However, oil penetrates deep into wood, dries, becomes gummy and can dampen down the vibrations."

shows complete ignorance of the varnishing systems used on violins. Cooked oil/resin varnishes are applied over sealer and ground layers which prevent the oil from penetrating the wood.

Unencyclopedic tone ("tickle the ear and brain with their flickering, transient change") and possible copyvio ("© 2000 Discover magazine") are other problems with the reverted blocks of text. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 00:34, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Inconsistent/Contradictory Information

The Construction section states: "A recent study in PLOS ONE[4] found no significant differences in median densities between modern and classical violins, or between classical violins from different origins; instead the survey of several modern and classical examples of violins highlighted a notable distinction when comparing density differentials. These results suggest that differences in density differentials in the material may have played a significant role in the sound production of classical violins."

This is confusing. It says first that "no significant differences in density" were found between classical and modern instrument. Then is says that there was a "notable distinction" between the two groups of instrument when comparing "density differentials". There is no explanation of how "differences in density" denote something distinct from "density differentials". They sound like the same thing. If these are technical terms with distinct meanings, then the terms either need to be explained in the article, or more simply graspable colloquial/lay terms should be substituted.

The problem is compounded in the Theories and Reproduction Attempts section, which states" "researchers announced further evidence that wood density caused the claimed high quality of these instruments", and then goes on to cite the SAME STUDY as in the Construction section -- which earlier was cited as indicating that there were NO significant differences in density. If "density differential" is indeed a different quailty than "difference in density", then the term "density differential" needs to be used in both sections, else the information in the each section contradicts the other.

In any case, this needs to be cleaned up and/or clarified.

Haselfichte (bear claw, abete maschiatto)

I just reverted a good-faith edit which claimed "The spruce used was a particular form of spruce called haselfichte...", unsupported by WP:RS citation. Some Stradivari violins show this figure in the top wood, but not all. Michael Darnton, a respected Chicago luthier, has written that "this figure is favored by the Germans, but not the old Italians, which I don't consider to be a good sign." The first page of that Maestronet thread shows some images of spruce with bearclaw figure, if anyone wants to see what it looks like. Just plain Bill (talk) 23:24, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Recently added reference: "Distillations"

I am a bit uncomfortable with this source: "Distillations". It is a somewhat lengthy article; it would be nice if brief quotes could be included, showing where and how the article supports the encyclopedia's text. Of more concern to me is that it seems to be written for a popular audience, motivated by the story of the Ames Strad stolen from Roman Totenberg. The author seems to have done a fair amount of diligent interviewing and research, but his condensation or paraphrasing of some technical matters contains a few rookie-level simplifications which make me wonder if this source is suitable as a reference for this article. Just plain Bill (talk) 18:19, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Varnish

The seasoned woods may have been varnished with a mix of warm linseed oil and honeybee's wax (candle wax), with some coloring added from beetroots, grapes and carrots. The sound is always good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philotrio (talk • contribs) 01:45, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Wrong article linked for German language

Selecting the German language for this article from the English version, it links to a subsection on the article on Antonio Stradivari. This would be the correct article to link: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stradivari_(Musikinstrument) 84.57.69.250 (talk) 22:27, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

 Fixed. –CWenger (^ • @) 14:32, 20 February 2024 (UTC)