Antonio Stradivari Part 2

The numismatist knows full well how, on the coins used in various countries, the masters of ba.s.so-relievo had concentrated their skill on the subject. The balance of projection and depression for good and proper effect under different situations of light and shade, or even independently of them on occasion--is of paramount importance in all branches of art in their widest range. The omission of proper thoughtful attention in this direction is one of the obstacles to success among copyists in any direction of art. In architecture the imitator or restorer of some early English mouldings has often made ignominious failures from the non-application of knowledge of this kind: just a trifling variation from the original while in progress being deemed of little consequence, but when finished and left for exhibition under the truth testing rays of the sun, the qualities that should have been there are, as the saying is, "conspicuous by their absence." In full view of the above and with an intelligence unsurpa.s.sable, Antonio Stradivari so arranged his forms and ma.s.ses in construction that under fair usage and wearing down of the projecting parts, the original beauty of the whole should be retained as long as possible. A fine Stradivari much worn still retains its air of distinction, and very much of its material must have disappeared under bad treatment to make it beyond recognition almost at a glance.

There can be very little question of there being more than mere admiration for the appearance. Simply viewed, there is the spice of romance in connection with it, the history is written in language more or less intelligible of the knocks and bruises inflicted, unwillingly in most instances, but not invariably so. And here attention may perhaps be appropriately drawn in these pages to what has been a.s.serted by a few, very few, dealers and others, whose general intelligence should have been a guarantee against the dissemination of utter nonsense and which has even been in print! that--just think of this--Antonio Stradivari, the acknowledged master liutaro of Cremona in his own day, and of whose growing fame no one can foretell the limits--actually imitated wear and tear of varnish on his violins. I have not the print at hand, and so cannot give the exact words in which this sc.u.m from the boilings of a distorted imagination was conveyed; nor point to the first unfortunate who let it flow abroad. In all probability it came from the same old source, a desire to lift up to a high level worthless imitations of the master, confuse the public mind so as to make it more and more difficult to tell "t'other from which."

A fine specimen, and well known, of Stradivari's art was once lying on a table before me. An amateur of considerable attainments and honesty of purpose then present was dilating upon its many beauties and fine preservation; he, I soon found, had by some means become infected with the absurd notion of the varnish having been artistically pecked away by the original maker! Just fancy this--Raphael slitting a hole in his chef-d'oeuvre to make it look old--Michael Angelo chipping some bits from the ceiling of the Sistine just before the scaffolding was removed, or Phidias snapping off a limb and browning the raw surface to please future connoisseurs.

They might all have done this with an equal deficiency of reason and consistency if we allow for one moment any possibility of the genius of such a stamp as that of Antonio Stradivari descending to such depravity.

Those who have lent themselves to this incongruous notion, hastily generalising from insufficient particulars, have strangely overlooked the fact that the same kind of chipping is seen on the violins of other masters, Joseph Guarnerius, Carlo Bergonzi, and others of the Cremonese and Venetian School, besides--going far back--the older ones of Brescia and Pesaro, any number in fact over all Italy.

CHAPTER VI.

SOME MODIFICATIONS IN STRADIVARI'S WORKS--VARIATION IN FINISH OF DETAILS--THE INTERIOR OF HIS VIOLINS--THE BLOCKS AND LININGS--THICKNESSES OF THE TABLES--HEADS OR SCROLLS OF HIS DIFFERENT PERIODS.

We will now resume our consideration of the handiwork of the Cremonese master as regards other details. We left him steadily working through his so-called "Grand epoch" or, more strictly speaking, his period of finely settled designs in outline and modelling. He had arrived at the goal of his ambition and produced works of excellence which--taking them as a whole--it seemed impossible to improve upon. He was henceforth content to put into them such slight modifications as would prevent too great similarity. Thus we find some were flatter in the arching, others a little shorter, being a trifle under the usual fourteen inches, others again were over it, but there was the same general contour, his now well-known accentuated design, complete as possible in all its details.

From the great number of finished works that were turned out one after another, it is quite reasonable to a.s.sume that there would be occasionally some little evidence of extra pressure of business and consequently less time spent over minor details. That this actually occurred at times there is no doubt and can be perceived clearly when looked for. One instance occurs to me in which the purfling had been cut off a trifle short at the corners and did not quite fill up and make a good mitreing, otherwise all along the border the easy, swift, yet powerful stroke was maintained up to his usual standard of accuracy. In other instances the point or "bee-sting," as it is sometimes called, is not so sharply defined perhaps in two corners, while the others were the perfection of minute finish.

It seems fairly certain that the great Cremonese was not at the time thinking of the almost microscopical scrutiny of critics certain to occur one hundred and eighty or so years in the future. These little differences in accuracy of unimportant detail or accidents of work may be taken as evidence that Stradivari was labouring day by day to meet the requirements of patrons different in disposition and perhaps patience. When at the same period he has been allowed to put his full time and attention to his work, then we find the four corners of equal unsurpa.s.sable finish, and other minute details over the whole structure so intently studied that nothing could possibly go beyond. These should really and appropriately be termed his "grand pattern." There is present in those instances the combined excellences in the highest degree of mechanical precision, beautiful proportion and drawing, such as no master designer of the Renaissance could surpa.s.s, the choicest materials, including splendid varnish, the whole united and capped with that essential, a beautiful tone.

A few words about the interior of Stradivari's instruments; one kind of work is perceptible in all of them. There is not, as we may see in the works of other masters, that off-handed, or even slovenly want of finish inside while the whole attention of the maker has been concentrated on the exterior. With Stradivari all is well done, the blocks, end and corner ones are carefully faced and have little, if any can be seen, of the tool marks left upon them. The linings let into the corners are in every instance done with minute exactness. The wood of these and the blocks is a kind of Italian poplar, sometimes called willow and by the French sallow; it is light and has no threads like pine to cause difficulty in the manipulation. Too much importance has been attached by critics to the presence of this wood in Stradivari's violins. That it had nothing whatever to do with the excellence of tone quality is clear from the fact of makers of inferior skill and less renown for tone having used it in the same parts. The most likely reason is--as most repairers have concluded--the absence of thread, its lightness, pliability and evenness of texture, being thereby adapted for the necessary long strips for fitting round the curves. Some makers used it invariably, while others did so occasionally, perhaps not always having a stock on hand. When for some reasons, such as being worm eaten or badly fractured, it has been found compulsory to remove them and subst.i.tute others in their place and of other wood, there has been no perceptible deterioration in the tone either as regards quality or quant.i.ty. Not only so, but there is the fact that many of the Italian masters and their numerous pupils, to say nothing of makers of a lower order, as often as not sent forth their violins without linings, some even without corner blocks. In most of these instances, however, the ribs were left very stout in substance in order to retain a sufficient holding surface for the glue. The subtle curvings of the ribs of an Amati, and more so of a Stradivari, almost precluded the use of a very thick material, especially so when the curl or figure was bold and elaborate. In consonance with this, we find with Stradivari that the thin plate or veneer from which the ribs have been cut is not thick, but of accurate and equal measurement along its course. The linings being equally true and fitting in the closest manner to the ribs, are in their original state somewhat stouter, the middle or waist ones parting slightly on approaching the corner blocks each way and thus giving a gradually increasing area of attachment (diag. _h_). All of the four blocks are well trimmed off and their surfaces levelled, being quite regular in their form and size and trimmed to proper measurement. The end blocks serving to sustain the greatest amount of strain longitudinally, are also found well finished, in contrast with so many seen in instruments by makers of eminence that are simply hacked roughly into size and shape. They were carefully estimated in their proportion for strength sufficient to resist the strain caused by the size, length, and pull of the strings in use at the time of Stradivari, and with something to spare, so that even now, under the enormous strain of the modern high pitch, when in perfect and original condition they are equal to their task. In a number of instances, when much repairing, good or bad has been done, the end, and often the corner blocks, have been replaced by modern ones. There is, of course, under these circ.u.mstances less of Stradivari present, but it has often been a case of painful necessity or question of expense as to the choice between two steps for restoration to health and particularly for strength. The form viewed vertically adopted by Stradivari was that of a parallelogram with two rounded corners (diag. _i_.). The upper block was left a little thicker, the junction or root of the neck necessitating this. The renewal of one or both of these has also been caused incidentally by the deep insertion of the modern and longer neck, thus lessening much of the grip or purchase of the block on both upper and lower table. The same may be said of the nut over which the tail string pa.s.ses, this being--owing also to the rise of the modern tone pitch and increase of tension--much larger than in Stradivari's day, and he may in a sense be said to have had to buckle to modern requirements.

[Ill.u.s.tration: DIAGRAM _h_.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: DIAGRAM _i_.]

While the seat as it were of our criticism is at the present moment in the interior portion of the admirable structures bequeathed to us by the great Cremonese, we may consider further the surface work of this part.

Everyone knows that the interior of a violin is left unvarnished by violin makers. Stradivari was in no way anxious to become an exception to this rule. The reasons for its adoption were, and are, still obviously wise, although not necessitous. He knew that his work, in common with that of other craftsman, would be liable to fracture, and that in the process of restoration the surfaces and junction of parts must be laid bare, and varnish where not obviously necessary would be an obstruction.

For the satisfaction of the anxious inquirer it may be stated that varnishing the interior has, to my knowledge, been tried by an excellent modern workman as an experiment and did not bring any adequate reward by perceptible improvement in tone quality. In another instance, to prevent the encroachment of the collector's arch-enemy, the worm, the innovation seemed to have proved ineffectual. Stradivari may have tried this and perhaps, for once at least, met with failure. The bar--there is but one--ofttimes erroneously called sound-bar or ba.s.s-bar--is, in common with all the violins of the old Italian school, quite inadequate for modern requirement, that of supporting the upper table on the fourth string side against the pressure caused by the tension of the third and fourth, the heaviest strings.

That the length, thickness and disposition of the bar has much to do with the good going order of every violin there is no disputing.

Stradivari did not live long enough to make acquaintance with the numberless proposals for acquiring his quality by making this part longer, shorter, thicker, or thinner, besides various modes of attachment. That some of them would have raised a smile on the features of the veteran Cremonese, we may be quite sure. That he was quite content with the size of the bar in general use during his life-time there can be no doubt, as there is no record or evidence of any experiments having been made by him, fair argument that none were considered necessary; the instruments finished, the ordinary bar of the period was inserted and there was an end. The whole of the interior indicates an absence of any question of improvement on what had been done before by his master Nicolas Amati and his predecessors, apart from good finish.

A few words as to the thickness of the upper and lower tables. Of this much has been written, an extremely small portion being from actual observation, and most of the other parts being reiterated a.s.sertions started many years back by people whose supposed knowledge rested solely upon simple conviction, without an iota of _bona fide_ evidence in support. To them the fact, well known to everyone engaged in the manufacture of sound-boards of musical instruments, that a very thick sound-board produces different results to that of a very thin one, was sufficient, therefore the secret of Stradivari with regard to his tone, was "the adjustment of the thicknesses," whatever that may mean. The a.s.sertion seeming perhaps rather bare, and wanting some sort of support, was bolstered up with another no less instructive, that if you "pinged,"

or tapped the separated upper and lower tables of a Stradivari so that they each gave out a note there would be found the difference of a tone between them! Here was something for the "babes and sucklings" of the craft of violin making to swallow. It was stated also which table would give the higher tone. Unfortunately for some would-be Stradivaris, the particulars of the tonal difference were copied loosely and reversed and so came "confusion worse confounded."

The ill.u.s.trations of sound holes, or _f f_ commonly so called, will, it is hoped, be interesting as showing the modification or development from those of Nicolas Amati to the latter part of the period of Stradivari's career, called "the grand." They are all reproduced from fine specimens of the great Cremonese masters, and are the exact size of the originals. The first (_a_) shows the _f_ of a violin of the Nicolas Amati's late period, 1663, unaffected--at least in this detail--by the individuality of his hereafter eminent pupil. (_b_) While still going under the name of Nicolas Amati, 1678, the _f_ shows the actual interference of Stradivari, it is more vertical, but the peculiarities of the upper and lower wings are retained. (_c_) 1684. The design is quite changed, there is some return to the flow or inclination of Amati, but the whole thing is more extended, is slender, and the upper and lower wings are widened, this modification was retained for a permanency. (_d_) 1690. There is some return to the vertical design, but the width of the wings is retained, while the lower part of the design is of larger proportions. (_e_) 1700. The design is more equalised and is more substantial. (_f_) 1715. The same proportions are kept with an increase of gracefulness. It will be perceived the lower wing approaches at its lowest part the opposing curve more closely, the upper one likewise; in some specimens of this period it is still closer. (_g_) 1725. While the upper part is very like the preceding, the lower part is more contracted and curled up. There is a somewhat heavier expression about the upper part in consequence.

[Ill.u.s.tration: _a_ _b_ _c_ SEE PAGE 48.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: _d_ _e_ _f_ _g_ SEE PAGE 48.]

History does not relate which of those parties who may have practically followed up the experiments were successful in arriving at the goal of their ambition; they may even still be continuing the struggle for supremacy with their master.

We have not to look far for ascertaining whether these a.s.sertions have borne fruit. There has been time enough for works built upon these so-called discoveries of fixed principles to have settled down, and the popular verdict now is--that those which guided Antonio Stradivari have yet to be discovered. The numbers of announcements of fresh discoveries--repeated _ad nauseam_--are in themselves some evidence that what has gone before was founded on deceptive evidence, and therefore to begin anew was the only course left.

The ill.u.s.trations of scrolls by Nicolas Amati and Antonio Stradivari, being from good specimens by the masters, will be interesting as showing the progression of the modification in detail under the hands of the latter. In fig. _a_, Nicolas Amati, c. 1670, it will be seen that the first or smallest turn after leaving the axis or "eye" is kept for some distance rather close. Every effort seems to have been made for keeping the turns or winding from being too circular, there being a general dip downward and forward. The gouging is deep from the commencement. The aim of the artist in the whole design appears to have been towards perfection of gracefulness.

Fig. _b_. Antonio Stradivari, 1683, the openness and bold swing of the first turn at once on leaving the "eye" is very striking, it also commences higher up, there is almost an absence of flow or downward tendency. The throat underneath the volute is very ma.s.sive, although all the edges are finished off with the utmost delicacy and sharp tooling.

All the details of scroll carving by Stradivari at this period are marvels of mechanical dexterity of handling. The different depths of the gouging are carefully calculated for solidity of effect, each portion being deep in proportion to its width, the smaller turns thus having less depth than the larger. With the Amatis there seemed to be a striving after attainment of the greatest depth possible in the smaller gougings, those nearest the axis reaching frequently to almost the same depth of level as the outer or broadest one. In no part of his work does Stradivari show more clearly the result of careful calculation after closely studying the work of his master and others that had gone before.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. _a_. SEE PAGE 49.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. _b_. SEE PAGE 49.]

Fig. _c_. The period 1715 shows the result of further calculation for general effect and a consequent modification in respect of minor details; there is present, as always, the sufficiently bold swing of the first turn from the axis. In choice specimens the point of commencement is as sharply and clearly defined as the mitreing of the purfling at the four corners of the body of the violin and which it seems impossible to excel. The throat, with the whole of the peg-box, is reduced slightly but consistently with strength and beauty of appearance. The public verdict has remained unshaken with regard to these scrolls being in respect of the combination of excellencies the best carvings of the great artist. They are in the most trifling degree smaller than those carved before the period of 1700. Among those cut about the 1710-15 period, or even later, are a few that seem to have been intentionally both smaller and more upright. Although having all the essential excellencies of detail they can scarcely be considered as coming up to the standard of the others in respect of refined grandeur. This type may be said to be mixed up and continued with more or less persistency to the last, and of this Fig. _d_ gives a good representation. There is frequently a more emphatic or energetic gouging at the commencement of the turns, a more developed "ear" as it is often termed. It is gouged with quite as much care as the rest. Speculation has been rife as to the possible influence or even personal help of Joseph Guarneri at this point, but there is no solid foundation for surmising the presence of one or the other. If the gouging of this part may be said to bear any sort of resemblance to the emphatic or impetuous touch of Joseph, it is confined strictly to this portion; other essentials are wanting that would be absolutely necessary for crediting artists of distinctly opposite tendencies with--it might be almost rightly termed--tampering with each other's designs.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. _c_. SEE PAGE 50.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. _d_. SEE PAGE 50.]

But if the name of Carlo Bergonzi is brought into the field of speculation--granting for a moment that Stradivari was not very likely to step aside occasionally from his accustomed groove--then we have much more of a possibility or even probability in the matter. It has always been a.s.serted, and I believe never contradicted, that Carlo Bergonzi was for a time actually working in the atelier of Stradivari--whether as pupil or only a.s.sistant matters not--but we have in the fact of his presence a distinct factor in any of the supposed anomalies of the later periods of the grand Cremonese master. To this, however, we may put some consideration further on. There is further in these later scrolls a modification, alteration, or supposed attempt at improvement in the edging of the turns, these being left a trifle stouter than at the commencement of Stradivari's career.

This is continued along over the top and down the back of the scroll to the sh.e.l.l, which seems to be a little less elongated than the early specimens. It may be more apparent than real in most instances in consequence of the bolder edging. The hollowing of the "sh.e.l.l" is seemingly less delicate, but this may be taken as a natural result of the foregoing. Further on these details will come in again for review.

To continue our remarks on the question of "thicknesses and their adjustment" with each other. This is a department of the luthier's art, to which perhaps much more attention has been directed by theorisers than by practical workers. The latter cla.s.s have no doubt been influenced by the former to a considerable extent, oftentimes having their views expressly carried out under their personal supervision. By musical amateurs it is found to be a good theme for conversation when the excellencies of the works of various masters are dilated upon. That the richness of quality in a "Joseph" is the result of his having left "his wood" thick in certain parts and not so much in others, and that this, combined with the flat modelling, was the secret, and that it was written that some of the Josephs were too thick in the back, and therefore the freedom of the vibration was checked and the tone to some degree stifled and deficient in penetrative power.

Among my early musical acquaintances, I remember an amateur violinist who would "wax eloquent" on the power of his Strad, a.s.serting that it was owing in a great measure to its having been "left thick by the maker" all round near the border. This, no doubt, many other amateurs, acquainted with what used to be in print on the subject, will recognise as being in opposition to what had been accepted as being the rule generally observed by Stradivari, that the arching in its thickness gently decreased towards the border where it was about a third less than at the centre. This gentle gradation was said to be the cause of the beautiful "silky" and "sympathetic" quality so prominently characteristic of his instruments. The explanation of "the thing in action," as mechanicians would term it, was thus--the greatest thickness being at the part all round by the feet of the bridge, was able to sustain the vibration, or the successive shocks caused by the bow, which were transmitted through the wood of the upper table and were gradually lessened in intensity as the thickness decreased toward the border, where they subsided, or were lost.

I do not know what explanation was given, if any, of the "system" of thickness adopted much by some of the Milanese school, which was that of hewing away the wood until it was thinnest at the part all round by the feet of the bridge and thickest by the lower wings of the sound holes.

Judging by the before mentioned a.s.sertions as to the a.s.sociation of power of energetic vibration with the thickest wood under the bridge, these Milanese makers were acting very wrongly, but, strange to say, many instruments of very great power were made by them under these conditions.

Many years ago I was conversing on the subject of thicknesses with an English maker of experience and who seemed to believe in certain "thicknesses," and having then as yet made no practical experiments myself in the matter, I put the following to him. There are many violins to be met with that through ill-usage and pressure on the bridge have depressions instead of the level wood at the part we should expect it to be, and yet the tone is considered fine, how is this? The answer was remarkable, and not unworthy of the cla.s.s of makers to which he belonged--that although the wood had become thinner from pressure, "the original amount was all there," it was only squeezed closer together.

The instruments were, no doubt, "rightly gauged" in the first instance.

"Now there," he said, pointing to a 'cello hanging up almost out of reach and looking in rather a woe-begone condition, is a ba.s.s that "never would go well because it was badly gauged when first made." Age and usage were to be of no avail in bringing this wretched piece of workmanship up to the standard of the average.

This last a.s.sertion might have been of considerable weight had the maker been a personal pupil of Stradivari, but the public verdict has been that there was a great gulf between the two, and that the first had not been initiated into the secret of the others. Foreign as well as English makers have announced in the most impressive manner at their command that their instruments were identical in all respects, including the system of thicknesses in the originals, buy them, use them, and be convinced that in time they would be just as good as the real thing.

The foregoing is perhaps enough to indicate whether or not the secret of Stradivari, or indeed any of the other Italian masters, great or small, had been discovered by caliper measurement. It is strange that the impression has held sway so strongly that the genius of the great master lay in his manner of distribution of the thick and thin parts of the upper and lower table. The first thought in this direction would be that if the theory was good, its practical application with ordinary skill and care would be sure to bring about the desired result. But more than this has been done in experimenting on originals and copies from time to time. We have within a mile of Charing Cross no lack of workmen capable of gauging and copying with sufficient exactness the thicknesses of any Stradivari brought to them, if that were all, or the princ.i.p.al means necessary for reproducing the famous qualities of the great Cremonese. It seems to be forgotten that hundreds of clever workmen have lived since his time, in his own as well as other countries, who have given the most a.s.siduous application to the making of exact copies and with a like result--that of total failure. For a moment let us turn our thoughts to the nature of the materials comprised in the sum total of the structure known as a violin. We have for the upper table, or front, a thin slab of wood known as pine, from a species of tree that grows all over the world. The varieties are, however, innumerable and the purposes to which they are put, equally so. For the lower table, or back, a more dense and tough wood is used. That the particular kind used in the construction of the famous instruments of the great masters, and mostly that known as curled maple or "hare wood," was chiefly on account of its beauty, is evident from the fact that all the best Italian makers had recourse at times to other and less showy wood. Beech was occasionally used by Carlo Bergonzi. Other tough woods grown in Italy, even poplar, have been used by some makers, seemingly when the supply of better looking material ran short. That there are extant some "Strads" with backs of some plain wood other than maple is more than likely. We have, then, for the upper table of the violin a wood of soft but elastic consistency, the strength of which lies mainly in the threads running lengthwise, and which, when the wood is cut in the manner usual with all violin makers since its invention, serve the purpose of small joists running from end to end of the upper table. The soft material lying between these is very susceptible to damp, especially when fresh cut.

Thus, if a piece of pine be cut ever so smooth with a sharp gouge or chisel, a slightly wetted brush drawn along the surface will at once cause the softer parts to swell and so leave a ribbed or "corduroy"

appearance when it is dry. This will serve to show how far this wood is suitable for regulating by such very minute differences as would be necessary when the thicknesses theory is confided in and efforts made to reduce it to practice. The exactness reasonably expected of such a master of quality as Stradivari would be upset in an instant by the application of a little moisture, and which either by accident or during the process of repairing would be fairly certain to occur some time or other to every violin that left the hands of its maker.

CHAPTER VII.

STRADIVARI'S TONE AND SYSTEM--THOSE OF HIS PUPILS AND a.s.sISTANTS--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 circ.u.mstances we should expect to find a variation in the thicknesses of different violins of Stradivari, which is in accordance with fact.