EFFECT OF AGE ON TONE
It has always seemed to me that theories dealing with the effect of age
upon the tone of the violin are lacking in conviction, and that most of
them are held as mere beliefs, founded upon a larger experience of the
old violins than of the new. Many celebrated players have expressed the
opinion to me that age alone gives to a violin its mellowness, or
richness, of tone; some, indeed, adding that the instrument must also be
much played upon. As to this last, it would appear disproved when we
consider the few magnificent examples of the old masters’ work which
have come down to our times almost untouched, and with the tone of which
we have heard no complaint. Manifestly, then, the theory refers to the
age of the violin, that is to say, the age of the wood of which it is
constructed. To accept this theory would be to say the old violin had no
mellowness, or richness, of tone when new, a statement impossible of
proof, as no living man has seen or heard it when fresh from the maker’s
hands. Documents exist which go to prove that the violins were quite
satisfactory from a general tone point, and were much sought after
solely on that account, even when their makers were living. But if we
take refuge in the hypothesis and say that age of wood is responsible
for mellowness of tone, how do we account for the failure, in this
respect, of violins constructed from materials one to two hundred years
old, and in some cases even older? Everybody knows these fiddles are not
one whit better in mellow, or any other kind of tone, than those made
from new, but thoroughly seasoned, wood.
It is because of these contradictions between theory and fact that we
cannot accept the idea that age is solely responsible for mellowness of
tone--even were we not possessed of concrete evidence to the contrary.
There is no denying the lack of mellow tone in many new violins. One
would hardly expect it in machine-made and spirit-varnished factory
fiddles with plates arched by compression between hot iron moulds, and I
shall presently indicate the reason why it is so seldom found in
handmade instruments of a higher grade; but to say the bulk of new
fiddles have little or no mellowness of tone is, after all, only what
may be said regarding the bulk of old violins, and brings us no nearer
a solution of the problem.
Mellowness, softness, richness, or whatever it may be termed, appears to
me as merely one of those elements which, like purity, adds one to the
total of desirable features which we look for and expect in a violin of
Quality. It may appear reasonable to assume that time might improve one
or all of these features, provided they originally existed, or act with
more potency on the quality of mellowness; but it is against experience,
as well as reason, to say that time is an unfailing creator of them,
else mellowness would not be absent in the tone of hundreds--not to say
thousands--of hand-made violins constructed prior to 1800. Furthermore,
should we accept this theory we must be prepared to believe that the
greatest makers of the olden time were not the masters of tone we have
always supposed them to be. Again, how does it come about that time has
selected the violins of certain old makers, and not always the best
workmen either, while the violins of others just as old, or even older,
remain untouched by this miraculous, mellow-producing elixir? If it be
said that certain conditions in the structure of the instrument are
unfavourable to the action of age, is it too much to ask that these be
pointed out to us?
This question of age and tone is but one of the many and much-debated
aspects of the violin which resolves itself when considered from the
standpoint of tone-creation advanced in these pages. In whatever age a
violin maker (if he be also a capable tone-builder) may work, he will
construct his tonal edifice according to his ideals. He may hold every
desirable element as an ideal save mellowness, while another may develop
much of that quality and little else. To hold the balance evenly between
all the desirable elements of tone is, therefore, no easy task, and we
may well marvel at the genius of the great ones who accomplished the
feat, and even admire those who succeeded only partially. We can also
understand why the copyists, those who work without tone ideals, fail so
often in the production of a mellow quality, and, on the occasions when
they do produce it, remain in ignorance as to how it was done.
I do not think many will object if I state that it takes a certain
length of time for a newly made violin to settle down to its work; that
the fullest measure of its tonal beauties become available to the player
only after the instrument becomes accustomed to the tension of its
strings, and when the varnish is settled and seasoned. All this is
purely mechanical. There is no creative force at work. It is simply an
adjustment of the various parts to the work for which they are intended,
and, after much experience, I find the time required for these
beneficent changes to be from three weeks to three months, depending on
the season. I have even known instances where they became operative
within the space of a few days. After this the violin may be expected to
improve slowly, or not to improve at all, for about a year, depending
upon the instrument, and the amount of time required to put the final
seasoning touch to the varnish, and accomplish the last adjustment of
its various parts under the strain of concert pitch and use.
The effect of age on tone is, therefore, practically nil. It does not
and never has created it. The instrument may, indeed, be consumed by the
rotting of its wood, or fall to dust through the corroding influence of
time, or be totally splintered by an accident, or even injured by fire
when, without any doubt, its tone will disappear. I have indicated
wherein and why time may be of some aid to tone, but the idea that it
takes a lengthy period to “bring out the tone” in a finely constructed
and properly tone-developed violin, in whatever age its maker lived, I
characterise as sheer nonsense.
Let me make this appeal to all lovers or owners of a violin, old or
new, or to all who contemplate the purchase of either: Do not allow the
inexperienced, self-constituted expert, who usually appears in the guise
of a “candid friend,” or one who possesses that type of knowledge which
is little and dangerous, to lead you astray on this matter of age and
tone. If your violin is a year old you may consider its tone has
acquired from age all it is ever likely to receive. If the instrument be
heavily built it may be extended to eighteen months. In any case, such
improvement as the tone will receive after this will be so small as to
be scarcely worth considering. Remember that tone is _not_ created by
age, nor has age any power (other than that which I have indicated) to
destroy it. In a word, if your fiddle be well built, its tone (whether
good or bad) _may_ improve slightly, and it will not deteriorate if the
instrument receives ordinary care.