In 1845 I became personally acquainted with Ole Bull, at Vuillaume's, in
Paris, where I then had my first opportunity of hearing and admiring an
artist on the violin. I learned then to appreciate the beauty of both
arts, and the sublimity of attainment in either to be a violin virtuoso
or a perfect violin maker. The latter art engaged my whole attention,
and it was my greatest aim to reach to the highest point of perfection
therein.
I also found that Ole Bull took special interest in the different forms
of violins, and I remember that as early as 1841, at which time I worked
at Pesth, my employer made the so-called "Ole Bull's bass-bars" in
violins, the ideas of Ole Bull concerning violins then being accepted as
authority. Ole Bull subsequently made many experiments regarding tone,
especially upon new violins, in order to reproduce the same character of
tone, then considered lost, peculiar to the Italian instruments. Knowing
that all experiments made since the death of the celebrated Italian
masters had proven unsuccessful, he undertook to construct a violin of
very old wood, but was soon convinced that he had not obtained better
results than others; he therefore decided the project to be an
impossibility, and having arrived at this decision, his opinion was
generally conceded to. Since then, doubtless, he found out that to make
a violin was a more difficult task, for him, than to play on one. As a
virtuoso, however, he obtained a celebrity which will make his name
immortal, and as he was an artist in his own peculiar way, his name will
live forever in the memory of men. Nature has endowed many men with rare
gifts, each one possessing a talent peculiar to himself: but we know how
long it requires to perfect one's self in any given art, and it
therefore cannot be expected that a great violin virtuoso should at the
same time be proficient in the art of violin making, the two arts being
totally different. It is, however, generally believed that the
assertion of Ole Bull had more weight with many violin players and
amateurs than the most adequate knowledge of a violin maker. I admit
that Ole Bull had some experience with violins, but had he obtained
sufficient knowledge he would have easily understood that many of his
ideas were not based upon principles which he thought had remained
secret to all investigators on the subject, as the greatest authorities
have acknowledged the tone in George Gemuender's violins to be of the
same quality as that characteristic of the best Italian instruments.
This proves that violins are judged the best when they are mistaken for
Italian instruments and prejudice only is the actuating motive when the
declaration follows that the instrument is a new violin. If, therefore,
the knowledge of tone could have proved more reliable, prejudice would
not, in many cases, have appeared so severe, and embodied itself so as
to degenerate into fanaticism.
Violins made of healthy wood and according to the rule can never lose
their tone. It is, however, something different if they are carelessly
treated.
When an Italian violin, which lay untouched in concealment for fifty
years, was shown to Wieniawski at the Russian court, and he was asked
what he thought of it, he said, after trying it: "The violin has a bad
tone." "Well," said the Emperor, "let us put it back in its old place.
If it had been good I should have presented you with it." Wieniawski,
greatly surprised, replied: "Oh, when I play upon it it will regain its
tone." Here vanity and ignorance are shown at once; for if that artist
had had any knowledge of violins, he must have known that the violin was
not in good order, and that it was first necessary to have it put in a
good condition by a professional repairer; but instead of making such a
proposal, he thought to make an impression by his renown, and that he
would improve it by playing upon it.
I mention this because it contains two points: firstly, because,
especially here in America, great stress is laid upon the opinions of
such artists, but it proves that artists do not always have a knowledge
sufficient to enable them to give a correct judgment of violins;
secondly, if this violin had been new, many would have thought that it
was made of chemically prepared wood. A violin, however, of such
defective wood, can never give a good tone; because the life is taken
out of it when it is made. If such artists would make themselves
acquainted with a professional violin maker, many of them would get more
light on this matter, but since they consider themselves to be
authorities on the subject, there is very little prospect of visible
progress. It is, therefore, a rarity when an artist is found who is able
to judge of the quality of tone, whether the wood is chemically prepared
or not, and although this is easily to be distinguished by the practiced
ear, a peculiar experience is required for it nevertheless. Many,
however, believe that he who plays the violin to perfection, and
especially the player of renown, must be acknowledged as a judge of
tone. I admit that many violin players are judges of tone, but not
beyond a certain degree, as the greater number of them hear their own
instruments only and are taken with them; but he who possesses a feeling
of tone, and into whose hands violins of all shapes and qualities are
falling, whereby he learns to distinguish the different characters of
tone, is to be considered a connoisseur of tone; he must, however,
possess some knowledge of playing, although it is not necessary for him
to be a solo player, for with how many solo players have I become
acquainted who have no more judgment of tone than children.
For musicians and solo players it is very difficult to find out how far
the tone of a violin reaches. Many a player, having no experience in
this regard, plays in concerts on a violin which sounds like an echo,
but if the instrument is called Stradivarius or Guarnerius and $3,000
has been paid for it, and besides it has a "history" attached to it,
then, verily, it must sound. The critic, however, does not blame the
violin, but the player, for weakness of tone, and in that respect he is
right.
For solo players who still use such echoing violins in concerts, it
would be of the greatest importance to make themselves acquainted with
the quality of tone which is fit for concerts, for most Italian violins
which are used in concerts prove either too old or of too thin wood; but
most players are accustomed to the fine, tender, echoing tone to a
degree that the true concert tone appears quite strange to them.
Thus, violins of chemically prepared wood will never do for concerts,
and it is a great mistake to believe that such violins have ever
produced as good a tone as good Italian violins do. Ignorance and self
interest have launched this untruth into the world. For violins made of
such wood produce short vibrations--a muffled color of tone similar to
that of impaired Italian instruments. Vuillaume put all the world in
commotion with his violins of chemically prepared wood, and all the
world sang hosannas. But when it was found that such instruments kept
this tone only a short time, there arose a general prejudice against new
violins and no one would play on them.
In order to remove all such ideas and prejudices I can safely assert
that violins of a free, high, clear and powerful character of tone, with
a quality which thrills the heart--such tone as my instruments produce,
and which qualities are now seldom found in the best Italian
violins--can never be obtained by any artificial preparation of the
wood, but only by way of science according to acoustic principles.
Of course it is the wood more than anything else which is to be taken
into consideration; for without the right sort of wood all science will
be unavailing, and _vice versa_. Many violin makers can get the best
wood, but where there is no talent applied in the construction, nothing
very good can come forth.
Of all productions of art, the violin is the most difficult to judge,
and I have nearer illustrated the different characters of tone which
violins produce, and tried to make these things more comprehensible, in
order that this medley of opinions and judgments which have been given
may be put in a clearer light.
I was highly astonished at the manner in which my "Emperor" violin
("Kaiser" violin) was judged, which was sent to the Exhibition of Vienna
three weeks after it had been finished. The violin had attracted not
only many admirers, but also a great number of gazers who have no idea
of a violin, and who stared at it only on account of its price.
Thus, the New York _Staats Zeitung_ had a correspondent in Vienna, who
also stared at the violin from the same reason. His ignorance, which he
exposed in his correspondence to the newspaper which he represented, led
him to make the following remark, which was published on the 27th of
June, 1873, and runs as follows: "From Salzburg several violins, mostly
the former property of Mozart and Beethoven, were sent, and the one
which Beethoven owned was made by Hellmer, at Prague, in 1737, as was
noted on the label, (saleable for 200 Florins,) while for a Gemuender
violin in the American division of the Industrial Palace, $10,000 (!)
are asked. Of course, everybody laughs at the simpleton who believes
this is the only curiosity of the kind, and thinks he can obtain such a
fabulous price for it. The Commission that for this time has made us
very ridiculous with our 'Go ahead,' should remove that label as soon as
possible, that one of the exhibitors may not become a public laughing
stock." But that writer soon found how much this violin was admired; he
learned to see that it was the only curiosity of the kind, in fact, for
soon afterward I read again in the _Sontag's Staats Zeitung_ that "the
violin was admired very much."
This violin was exhibited by me for the purpose of proving to the world
that I can make violins that have the tone which has been sought for a
long time since the death of the celebrated Italian masters, since which
all attempts have miscarried, and I confirmed this fact in a circular
added to it.
But what was the result? It was not believed. In the Exhibition of
Vienna my violin was mistaken for a genuine Cremonese violin, not only
for its tone, but for its outer appearance, which was so striking an
imitation according to Joseph Guarnerius, that a newspaper of Vienna
made the observation: "George Gemuender cannot make us Germans believe
that the violin sent by him is new; a bold Yankee only can put his name
in a genuine instrument, in order to make himself renowned!"
Although this was the highest prize which a violin maker had ever
obtained, it was no advantage either for me or the public; for the art
of violin making was not furthered by it, but rather still more impaired
by the correspondence of the _Staats Zeitung_ and the New York
_Bellestristic Journal_. The latter writes as follows: "S. F.,
Pittsburg.--G. is a pupil of Vuilliaume; his violins are much demanded,
but their prices are so high that purchasers are frightened!"
Thirty years ago I sold violins at from $50 to $75; ten years ago I sold
violins at from $100 to $300; now I sell them at $100 and upwards; and
violin makers here and in Europe ask the same prices. Nay, amateurs who
do best in their ignorance, ask still higher prices. Wherein, therefore,
do we find that which frightens the purchasers? The effrontery of
writers who make such statements as the above will bring them no honor.
Many may still remember that I had determined to send six violins of
different forms, copies of the best old master-violins, to the Vienna
Exhibition, and intended myself to take the matter in hand, but, owing
to an accident, I was compelled to give up this intention. In
consequence, I resolved to send only one violin. To select one of them,
artists such as Wollenhaupt, Dr. Damrosch, Carl Feinninger and others
were consulted, but they differed in their opinions, which may be taken
as a proof that the instruments were very much alike in character; they
are also witnesses of the fact that I made them. In order to call
attention to the one selected, I noted the price "ten thousand dollars!"
Nobody, however, was charged to dispose of it, although three thousand
dollars were offered.
The circumstances connected with the construction of this violin gives
it more than an ordinary interest. Ridicule and praise in the highest
degree are interwoven with its history; therefore, it has been hitherto
the most interesting new violin in this century. Why I could not be its
representative and had to leave it to fate can be learned from what I
have already written about it, and how I have judged every thing
connected with it. I was, however, sure of one fact, namely, that it
would be acknowledged as a production of art. The admission must then be
made, and the claim is amply justified by facts, that, as new violins
are frequently mistaken for genuine Italian instruments, even when most
particular attention is given to the varnish, the art of violin making
must no longer be considered as a lost one.
May the foregoing satisfy all doubters and those who have lately,
especially in America, written about the lost art of varnish and tone,
and may it cause them in future to refrain from investigating into the
so called lost arts. He who would give a scientific explanation of this
art and be a critic, must be thoroughly acquainted with it.