Music Trade Review

Music Trade Review -- © mbsi.org, arcade-museum.com -- digitized with support from namm.org
THE MUSIC TRADE REVIEW
PUBLIC TESTING OF VIOLINS BY A "SELECTED" VIOLINIST.
The Interesting Views of August M. Gemunder on This Subject as Expressed Some Time Since
in the Violin World Make Pertinent Reading for Musical Merchandise Trade.
The most recent form of controversy between
adherents of old violins and loyal supporters of
new violins is the "public test." In Paris and
other European cities, and in one or two American
c'ties, "'contests" have been held, wherein some
one player goes behind a screen, or plays in the
dark, a number of new and old violins. Each
spectator is supplied with a pasteboard on which
he or she is to designate by number which of the
several instruments he or she likes best. If you
had one of these pasteboards and, after hearing
the whole twelve or fifteen instruments played, you
decided the sixth one played seemed to you to be
the best of the batch, then you would set down
No. G as "best." After the performance, or per-
formances, the ballots are tallied up and the vote
for each instrument announced. It has happened
that the winners in a majority of these contests
proved to be modern violins and the losers old
violins.
Considering the number of these contests that
have been held, and knowing that the modern vio-
lin has been voted the best at a majority of these
contests, many are inclined to think the contro-
versy is settled—that the modern violin has vindi-
cated itself and proven its superiority over the
old. Against this verdict I have no fault to find.
In fact, I am inclined to readily agree that the
modern violin is the best violin. But against the
method of arriving at this conclusion I have de-
cided objections.
Let us go into this unique testing method a lit-
tle further, and learn if the dear old violins and
the interesting new violins had the same chance.
In the first place, all the instruments to be tested
at any "contest" are played by one ''selected'' vio-
linist. In the second place, this one player tests
all the instruments in the dark, or else he is blind-
folded. From quite an extensive acquaintance with
violinists of all kinds and classes—from student to
virtuoso—I am of the opinion that the blindfolded
player doing the test will instinctively play best
on the instrument which appeals most to "his"
touch. As the player is either blindfolded or in
the dark, his eyes are not in position to bias his
fingers. His sense of touch is his only guide to
what sort of instrument he has in his hands.
I take it to be a self-evident fact that this player
vill play best on the instrument which most nearly
meets and responds to his individual touch.
And this, I take it, proves nothing concerning
the remaining number of instruments tested. It
merely proves that the fourth one, .or the sixth
one, or whichever one adjudged "best," was ad-
justed so this indirtdual could get best results from
it. And that's all it proved. I venture to say that
were I allowed to talk, before the performance,
with the man who was to do the testing, and al-
lowed to get his views on "response" in violins,
learn the gauge strings he preferred, the weight
of bow he was accustomed to using, and observe
the size of his left hand, the strength of his bow-
nig, I could so adjust the twelve or fifteen instru-
ments for test that any one I choose to adjust to
suit this individual tester would win. There's no
doubt in my mind on this point.
These tests are competitive in name only; as a
matter of fact they are not at all conclusive as to
the merits of the respective violins tested, or as
to the comparative merits of new or old violins.
The blindfolded or "dark-roomed" player who
plays on a dozen instruments is in precisely the
same position as the average violinist who starts
out to test violins with a view to purchase. He
invariably buys "by touch"—for the instrument ad-
justed to "his" touch is the one he will play best
on. What appeals to his touch will almost invari-
ably appeal to his ear. Where his fingers feel "at
home" and his bow arm gets ready response, there
his ears invariably give the verdict—not because he
47
judges by the "touch"—but because he gets best
tonal results from the instrument best adapted to his
touch. If these public tests really proved anything,
all one would need do would be to send to various
makers for new and old violins, invite one's
friends around, blindfold one of them and have
him play all the collected instruments, and on the
verdict of our assembled friends we would make
our purchase. Simple, isn't it? Yes—but con-
clusive only to the simple-minded. Imagine Kube-
lik, Ysaye or Kreisler buying or choosing an in-
strument after this fashion!
A satisfactory violin is one that "appeals'" per-
sonally to and satisfies the players in every respect.
To prove this: Many times noted players have
borrowed noted Strads or other fine instruments
for a certain performance, and then failed to arouse
the enthusiasm in their audience which they
anticipated. The public comes to hear the violin-
ist and doesn't care a fiddle string who made the
violin. A good player with a good instrument—
and he alone is the one competent judge of what
is a "good" instrument for him—will get the ver-
dict of popular applause and appreciation.
In fine, individuality among players calls for in-
dividuality in violins. Violins certainly do possess
individuality—a wide range of it. Seldom will
three or four sound alike, and very seldom do we
find two exactly alike.
So, our "public tests," like private tests made
by individuals about to purchase, generally ter-
minate by the instrument best adapted to the indi-
vidual player being the winner in such contests.
We must disregard the public test, so far as prac-
tical results go, and stick close to the practice of
each individual buying and playing the instrument
which appeals to him most—providing he has some
technique and tone knowledge for an instrument to
make its appeal to. Or, in the absence of real
knowledge on the part of the player about to pur-
chase, reliance should be placed upon the maker
and he be allowed to adjust the selected instrument
to the purchaser's physique and technique. The
old reliable way is still the best.
Bell Brand Harmonicas
"Made in America"
Have won a national reputation because of their remarkable and durable
qualities. They are not the best merely because they are American made,
and the only harmonicas made in this country, but they stand competition
with the products of the world, embodying the very best musical qualities
and workmanship.
BELL BRAND HARMONICAS
CAN BE PROCURED FROM THE FOLLOWING WHOLESALE HOUSES:
C. BRUNO & SON, New York City, N. Y.
BUEGELEISEN & JACOBSON, New York City, N. Y.
OLIVER DITSON CO., Boston, Mass.
C. H. DITSON & CO., New York City.
W. J. DYER & BRO., St. Paul, Minn.
J. W. JENKINS SONS' MUSIC CO., Kansas City, Mo.
THE RUDOLPH WURLITZER CO., Cincinnati, O.
ROBT. C. KRETSCHMAR, Philadelphia, Pa.
KOERBER-BRENNER MUSIC CO., St. Louis, Mo.
LYON & HEALY, Chicago, III.
C. MEISEL, New York City, N. Y.
SHERMAN, CLAY & CO., San Francisco, Cal.
JOS. W. STERN & CO., New York City, N. Y.
TONK BROS. CO., Chicago, 111.
THE RUDOLPH WURLITZER CO., Chicago, III.
The National Musical String Co., S