Sell Your Stradivarius ASAP

(Photo: ZakVTA)

Does it make sense that we have gotten worse at making violins over the last 300 years, when we have gotten so much better at making just about everything else? Not really. Finally there is some experimental data on the subject, and it doesn’t look good for those who pay top dollar for fancy old violins.

(Hat tip to Dean Strachan)

TAGS:

Leave A Comment

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

 

COMMENTS: 17

View All Comments »
  1. Chris McCracken says:

    I don’t know much about violins, but I do know guitars.

    Cheap, modern instruments don’t have the build quality of gear from the 50s or 60s (at least the reputable brands of the time). But it is true to say modern handmade gear is as good or better.

    The biggest difference is – as Raymond alludes in the top comment – is materials. The woods available now are quite different to what was available as little as 20 years ago. As species become endangered or expensive, we start using different woods.

    The other thing, which Raymond also alludes to with his drying comment, is the wood age. Wood sap crystallises over time. This can take 50 years in some cases. It is well documented that this changes the sound of an instrument and is very difficult to do any more quickly.

    As for whether the violin is worth the money, I don’t know. I don’t play violin. I can tell you I have played a few vintage guitars that people paid tens of thousands for. Some I liked. Some not so much. I can’t say I would pay that much for them, though.

    Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
  2. YX says:

    I wonder if this logic apply to art… or if we should treat Stradivarius more like art than functionally.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  3. balint says:

    I concur that age does not define quality of an instrument alone. However, I cannot accept the article implying that historic instruments are overpriced. Pricing is based on scarcity for sure in my interpretation.

    So do not buy a Stradivarius, unless you are a collector.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  4. Paul says:

    Seems a moot point. Dr. Levitt should point out that only very wealthy people buy antique violins; which applies to no one I know. Additionally, for folks to remove human emotion and psychology from art (or any other hobby for that matter, such as baseball card collecting) wouldn’t make it much worth doing. All sounding virtually the same, wouldn’t you prefer the instrument with emotional or sentimental value? A generational hand-me-down, or a brand new one? Even on a discounted shelf-quality being even-one would expect that you pick the item with emotional value. This article seems more of the class warfare strain then about quality of instruments. More about the jealousy of the nations wealthy? I say bravo to those who can afford such exquisite pieces-play on Yo Yo Ma!

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  5. linda wright says:

    a friend of mines father was in the d day invasion of france some how aquired it and sent it back home i have seen it and herd him play the cotton eyed joe with it he is interested in selling it if the price is rite

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0