PuareVIOLINS (VIOLA, VIOLONCELLO) Perhapsno sis the history of Western musical instruments has hhad greater impact on subsequent musical thought and practice than the ‘emergence, in the sixteenth century, of the violin family. ‘Theexact time-and-place circumstances of that appearance are stil not fully established, although the belief is generally held that the family folved from both the lowly rebec and the lofty lira da braecio, and that the first violins were of the ‘viola’ range, the other members of the family developing up and down in pitch-sizes from these. The first ‘small violas? nos") were, in fact, three-stringed, although no early violin in od state is known to survive. There were also members of the family other than those which now form the classic quartet, that is, violin, viola, and violoncello (the double-bass is really a modified orchestral variant from the viol family, ** there being no true contrabass violin). The extension of the tonal range of these three main divisions, however, meant that the intermediary instrument sizes, such as the tenor violas, the violoncello piceolo, and violino piccolos, were in effect made redundant. he early violins, in England particularly, suffered tonal comparison with the gentle concord ofthe viols and viol consorts. At frst, the violin’s more incisive, ‘of the dance, and that, according to the lawyer Roger North (1653-1734), at rather a low social level: ‘the use of the violin had bin lite in England except by Common Fidlers’, and even Mersenne (1636) thought that ‘the violin is too crude’. ‘Thomas Mace, whose enthusiasm for the viols we have already encoun tered, was equally scathing and reactionary. The ‘scoulding violins which made his Ears Glow" and filed hi however, a good deal less brilliant and penetrating in sound than the instrument we ourselves are used to hearing, a violin which in turn lacks something, of the silvery mellowness and warmth of its baroque pre- decessor. Apart from the considerable acoustical developments accom- plished by the great Cremonese masters, this difference in sound is, to a large degree, due to the major structural changes imposed upon the violin by the increasing technical demands, and changing tonal criteria and pitch levels, ofits later players ‘These structural modifications, which had been made by about 1800, included the replacement of the eld bass-bar with a longer, stouter one, the lengthening of the finger-board, raising of the height and camber of the bridge (thus once and for all stressing the instrument's role as a ‘melodic one), and, most crucial ofall to the instrument's outward design, the lengthening, re-angling, and recontouring of the neck. This last is of ‘great pertinence here, as such alterations to old instraments inevitably ‘obscure some of the designer’s original geometrical plan. Tonally valued instruments rarely escaped this ‘neck surgery’, which cither involved remodelling and re-angling, or, more frequently, complete replacement of the original neck, with the old head being grafted on to the new, extended, neck, ‘The unfortunate aesthetic aspects ofthis modification are demonstrated by Figs. 47 and 48, an original neck and a modified neck, respectively. It “brains full of Friskes' were, 6566 Fie 47, Original frm of vit neck and Fingerboard © Anemgts ut odesining’ the istranent ‘in the inate eentary wore mde by e- Spectr uct Cano, Sart, and Sule. They consid of velutons othe mex ody tine a more rational, fan Stuer were of itr ete shape Sra Himsa raided wie tt Sort wa rape fom Beth yes ate reported fvouraly i “behind the Curtin ‘out ats prota ihe abv fay degree wcetance inthe neste ‘oncrativ wor ofthe muscn, will be observed at once that the organic harmony of head-neck-body is lost with this alteration. In Fig. 47 the join between the neck and the later discarded finger-boart wedge isin line with the seam between table and ribs. In profile, the slope of board and neck each taper on either side of this, line towards the head, the more organic taper ofthe original neck having ‘greater sympathy with the curving taper of the head, from the checks round into the scroll. Moreover, the original wedge (supporting the older, more delicate finger-board) reconciled, by means of its arched underside, the curve of the table-arching with the straight line of the finger-board top—an aesthetic nicety that was overlooked with the ‘improvement’, Fig. 48, where the straight back of the new linger-board juts out lunsympathetically over the contoured modelling of the table. The Cremonese Violin ‘The extreme diversity of form which characterized the early development of the viol finds no true parallel in the formative years ofthe violin family ‘The essential shape of the violin was formalized eatly, with no subsequent deviant enjoying any measure of success.*® The crucial evolution of the instrument, both acoustic and aesthetic, from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries was therefore accomplished within comparatively narrow and infinitely subtle constraints. Accordingly, I have decided to examine this gradual development through four instruments, dating from 1564 to 1703, instruments from three makers united by the most important and innovatory tradition of violin-making, the Cremonese school. The four violins are the Andrea Amati of 1564, a Nicola Amat €-1670, and two by Antonio Stradivari, one of 1666, and the ‘Emiliani’ of 1703. Ex. X Figs. 49-54, PI. X VIOLIN (SMALL MODE ANDREA AMATI HILL COLLECTION, ASHMOLEAN A Ace. No.: 10 ). ITALY, CREMONA, 1564 UM, OXFORD, Our first example selected from the violin family is one of the earliest of remaining stringed instruments. An exquisite violin from the hand of Andrea Amati, it dates from 1564, and is one of the thirty-eight instruments made by that great master for King Charles IX of France. ‘The back and ribs bear traces of the painted royal insignia and motto, “Pietate et Justitia’, used by the young king (only fourteen years old when, thisinstrument was completed) and his mother, Catherine de Medici, who ‘most probably commissioned the ‘thirty-cight” (twelve small violins, twelve large violins, six tenors, and eight basses) to be used by the ‘musicians of the French court. The sound of this body of strings must have been ‘royal’ indeed. Alas, only a handful of these Charles IX Amatis survived the dispersal and destruction of court property brought about by the French Revolution,ANALYSIS OF INSTRUMENT EXAMPLES ‘The Hill collection at the Ashmolean Museum, however, includes two Charles 1X instruments: a magnificent large viola (one ofthe six ‘tenors’ and this beautiful instrument, one of the twelve small-pattern violins which would have played the upper-treble parts in the royal concerts, Despite its extremely early date, this violin is a fully developed instrument, the product of over thirty years’ experience of a master luthier, perhaps the first great violin-maker to gain widespread recog- nition for his work. Its geometry is rather complex, lacking the elegant economy found, for example, in the design of the Maria treble viol, or the geometrical facility displayed in the more complex scheme ofthe tenor viol by Jaye. Like both these instruments, however, but unlike the other violins here to be discussed, this Amat still retains a trace of the great-circle geometry which we shall also encounter in the Brescian viola by Maggini. The great circle (radius body-length, centre C)is no longer used here as a centring. uide for the middle-bout ares, but does still provide the foundation of the outline, the ares of origin, in Fig. 49 arcs HDH’ and GBG Itis this term, radius CB, or CD, which becomes the largest term. doin a seven-part ¢ series governing the upper-bout design, and, to a lesser extent, the position of the holes and the radii of the minor ares of the middle bouts. The vectors, in millimetres, of this $ series are: de: ILS, daz 106, $4: 65.5, fo: 40.5, a2 25, fs 15-4, $5 95, Fig. 50 shows the scheme for the upper bouts. The composite curve C's is initiated by the upper arc of origin BG’, centre C. Cis also the centre of the model, and thus the radiusofarc BG’ ishalf body-length, 171.5 mm or ‘te. Point £” on radius CG’ is a ¢ division, and is the centre for are G'M', radius 4 (CE’ is the 4s radius of an important construction circle which is discussed below}. The upper-bout curve then shallows with are M’N’, centre 1. on the centre line, and therefore of radius half upper-bout width. This radius, like that of the small counter-curve are N’S’, has no ‘numerical relationship to either the ¢ series or any other major vector used in the design 67 48, Moxiication of viotn neck and Fingerboard Fic, 5068 ANALYSIS OF INSTRUMENT EXAMPLES Fig. 51 examines a further use of the ¢ series. A circle of radius gs, centre C, pierces the hole at its centre V" between the middle notches, whilst a circle of radius 4, also centre C, pierces the lower hole centring, W'. The important gs circle mentioned earlier is shown here as arc E'P'0 which together with the body length defines the hypothetical vertical aggregation of four 4 rectangles (for clarity, only half the symmetrical plan is shown), whose diagonals, BP’ and DP’, pierce the corners S" and T’ respectively. The establishment, in this way, ofpoint P” (and, ofcourse, its lateral inversion, P) is of great importance in determining the vector which is to complete the plotting of middle and lower bouts, as w shall see. ‘This vector could be described as being distantly related to the ¢ series discussed above, Mathematically, it is in fact } of 6s (Fx 106 mm 70.666 mm, or 70.7 mm), with an additional commensurable relation- ship with the body length of which it is one-fifth (J 353 mm 70.6 mm). Geometrically its value, and relationship to the body outline ‘and the series, is demonstrated in Fig, 52 by drawing the vesica piscis on the horizontal centre line, between the two corner-piercing ¢-rectangle diagonal points P and P’ (Le. on line PCP’). The common radits of the vesica piscis circles is equal in value to the vector that we seek. The relationship between the ds radius circle, the vesica piseis, and the outline is shown in Fig. 52 by the lines of intersection—QQ'Q” and RRR”. ‘The lower and middle bouts are completed in Fig. 53 with this major vector of 70.7 mm. The are H’R”, radius 70.7 mm (measured as 70.5 mm), centre K’, continues the ‘great circle’ are of origin DH’. The counter-curve RT’ completes the lower bouts, The radius ofthis are, like its upper-bout counterpart, is mathematically unrelated to the other values used in this instrument Pua, 52 Hare H'R” andits lateral inversion HR, radii 70.(7) mm, centres K’ and K respectively, are produced to form circles, they will cross on the centre line at point F. This point is the centre ofa circle piercing the upper and Jower centrings of the -holes. Its radius is 53 mm, which is the distance KK", and, incidentally, twice the ‘equivalent? distance FE” (see Fig. 50)in the upper-bout construction,ANALYSIS OF INSTRUMENT EXAMPLES. ‘The middle bouts are also analysed in Fig, 53. The main are ¥'Z" is of radius 70.5 mm (70.7 mm} which, as discussed above, is the radius, too, formain lower-bout are H’R’. The minor ares completing the curve of the middle bouts, S°X’, XY’, and 2'T", all have radii of ¢-series values: 4, 425 and 4, respectively. ‘This completes the analysis of the somewhat tortuous geometry of this instrument's body design. ‘The neck of this Amati, like that of so many other fiddles, hus been lengthened and repositioned according to modern praetice.**In the main drawing (PIX) its present position is shown to the left of the centre line; to the right | have indicated its probable original length (approximately 5 mm shorter than present condition). No geometry was found to correlate the total length, nut position, or string length to the schemes used in the body design, The head of this instrument has a crisp, delicate beauty, suggesting an itlusion of its growth out of the wood, rather than its having been carved from it. Traces of the original painted decoration remain in the spirals of the scroll. The head, like the other parts of this violin, seems to demonstrate a ruggedly independent geometry; none of the radii of its ares has any relationship with the various vectors of the body scheme—it is a complete and separate conception. ‘The analysis of the head is shown in Fig. 54, where it is contained ‘within two rectangles of the same (1.342) proportion, annexed long side to short side: QRST, which contains the spiral of the scroll, and POTU, which contains the peg-box. The spiral Itself Is that of the usual classic Ionic volute, traced in Fig. 34 by the smaller dotted line (the larger dashing representing the bevel ofthe scroll, which corresponds visually to the inner line ofthe volute). Its conformity with el (rectangle ASTI is also 1.542 in proportion). ‘Thence, the radii of the ‘subsequent arcs conform to 1.342 series based on the sides of this system of rectangles. The progression in whole-number millimetre values is: 19, 26, 35, 47, 63. Thus, the spiral is continued by are AB, radius 26 mm, centre K; are BC, radius 35 mm, centre J; short straight line CD, to counter-curve are DE, radius 35 mm, centre N. The upper curves of the peg-box are equally elegant of construction are FG, radius 19 mm, centre J; counter-curve arc GH, radius 47 mm, centre 0; and finally are Hl, radius 63 mm, centre M. POT, Doo 69 1 Sec nreductry note tthe vil rou (pp. 65-66 abve with velrence to Pip. 4? sna ssANALYSIS OF INSTRUMENT EXAMPLES Ex, XI Figs. 55-58, PL. XI VIOLIN. ITALY, CREMONA, 6.1670 NICOLA AMATr PRIVATE COLLECTION, LONDON Between the last violin and this present example lies a period of about one hundred years of development, and two generations of the Amati far Nicola was the grandson of Andrea, through Hieronymous (of the ‘brothers’ Amati, Antonius and Hieronymous), and is the most uni- versally celebrated member ofthis illustrious Cremonese family. This fame arises not only from his magnificent instruments, and the great tonal advancement they represent, but also from the considerable influence he was to have as teacher and model for the succeeding generation of lthiers, who were to bring the Cremonese school of violin-making to an unrivalled zenith, Music itself had hardly stood still during the century or so which ‘Separates these two Amatis. The increasing demands for greater power ‘and brilliancy from its players are reflected in the broader proportions and lower arching of the later violin, This example, which misleadingly bears an earlier label of 1664, is @ so-called ‘grand-pattern” Amati, and it was probably made in 1670 when the master was well into his seventh decade. As with the previous example, the neck has been lengthened, here probably by about 5 or 6 mm; this supposed original position ofthe head, as well as the original outline of the right-hand upper bout (somewhat reduced by wear and repairs), are therefore given in the main drawing. ‘Theresa markedly more relaxed approach to the geometrical planning Of this instrument than there was in the complex harmonic organization of vectors found in the Andrea Amati previously discussed. It was discovered that the body plan of the Andrea was governed by a seven-term ‘pseries, with the important lower-bout and middle-bout are (in that small pattern, 70.7 mm) being mathematically related to it, and commen surably related to the body length. In this instrument, as we shall see, the minor vectors are not incorporated in the smaller four-termed ¢ progression, but, like the equivalent lower-bout term (here 71.5 mm), ‘appear to resolve themselves into whole-number and simple fractions of a unit relating to, and here expressed in, Brunswick inches, the resulting, scheme being @ somewhat unlikely mixture of rational and irrational mathematical valu ‘The other great difference in planning occurs with the centring of the lower-bout arc of origin. In the Andrea it was centred at C; the centre of the model, and therefore related to the great-circle geometry found in contemporary and later viols (Ex. Il and IV). In the Nicola Amati, however, this centre has shifted upwards on the centre line to a golden-section division of the model, thus giving a shallower start to the lower-bout curves and a deeper start to the upper-bout curves, This centring point is shown, point F; Fig. 55, governing the arc of origin of the upper and lower bouts (GBG’ and HDI’), F divides the body length, BD (355 mm or 44), into two ¢ values: ED = 219.5 mmm or dy and EB = 135.5 mm or gy. This last term, 44, is the radius of uppei bout arc of origin BG, and halved (allowing 0.25 mm error) gives the Fa $5 aANALYSIS OF INSTRUMENT FXAMPLES radius, measured a8 68 mm, of the following arc, G’M’, centre Q" (41 — 67.75 mm), The curve then shallows with are M'N’, centre I, on the centre linc, and of radius 84 mm, the value gy which completes the four-term ¢ series fa: 355 mm, fa: 219.5 mm, $4: 135.5 mm, J: 84 mm {all values taken to nearest 0.5 mm). The curve is then completed by counter-curve arc N’S’, radius 30 mm, which can be interpreted as 1} Br in. the first of the smaller vectors, harmonically unrelated to the ‘These simple fractions of Brunswick inches are also found (Fig. 36) in the radii of the minor arcs of the middle bouts: $'X’, radius 12. mm (f Br. in.); X’Y", radius 30 mm (14 Br. in., and equal to upper-bout counter-curve N’S"); and the lower are 2°1, radius 18 mm (2 Br. in.)- ‘The main arc, ¥’Z’, ofthe middle bouts is of radius 68 mm, which is the ‘same a that of the main upper-bout arc G’M’, that Is, 443. ILis centred at J’, point equidistant from 4-point and centre-point C on the centre! (sce locating arcs n Fig, 56). A line drawn from J across to the centre line 56 ‘meeting at 0,and alline dropped from J’ to the base fine meeting at I', form ‘a hypothetical rectangle of ¢ proportion, DO, whose sides relate to the instrument's bridge and nut position. ‘The long sides of this rectangle, OD and J'T', measure 195 mm, which Is also equal to the important bridge-locating factor, BV (see also Fig. 57), The probable original nut position, A, approximately 6 mm lower on the centre line than at present, ‘would also be in ¢ relationship to BV, so that AB = (120.5 mm) : BV = 195 mm as OF (or DI’) :00 (or J". ‘The construction of the lower bouts roughly corresponds, in its disposition of radii and arcs, to that of the upper bouts (their proportional interrelationship is, of course, quite different. This differ from the scheme used by Andrea Amati in the small-pattern violin previously analysed, where the main lower-bout arc HR" in Fig. 53)continued from the are of origin to the counter-curve of the lower corner. Here, in Fig. 37, theANALYSIS OF INSTRUMENT EXAMPLES comer counter-curve ‘°R’ mirrors its middle-bout neighbour, Z’T’, having the same radius, 18 mm ( Br. in.), and leading into an Intermediary are, R’P", centred, like its upper-bout cousin, on the centre line, at U. This are, half the lower-bout measurement = 208 mm. (82 Br. in.) can be produced to the centre line, where it crosses at C, the centre of the model. ‘The principal lower-bout arc, P’H’, contre K’, is of radius 71.5 mm (measured), which, though unrelated to the progré sion; is expressible in Brunswick inches (3 Br. in. = 71,34 mm), and ‘again, as in the previous violin, will divide the body length by 5 (here, 4356 mm = 71.2 mm). ‘The lower bouts of the instrument are completed by arc of origin DH’, ‘centre B, radius 219.5 mm, or 4, the only main-series harmonic value to ‘occur in the lower-bout scheme. The main ¢ division of the body length, ‘BD, which gave point E, can also be inverted; this gives point F, the centre of the circle which pierces the upper and lower centrings of the f-holes ‘The head-design of this Nicola, like the planning of the body outline, betrays a rather more casual approach to schematic geometry than we found in the Andrea Amati. The work itself is careful enough, and the result very beautiful, though ofa different character from the marvellous “Alard’ scroll of 16:49 ; perhaps in the later scroll one can see something of the Stradivari heads to come, Fig. 58 shows the head outline contained in two annexed rectangles scroll, ORST, and peg-box, POTU. In the Andrea Amati, the equivalents of these two rectangles were found to be of the same proportion, and together with a third, inscribed, rectangle of similar ratio provided a series which governed the radii of the head and peg-box. Here there Is no such organization. The two annexed rectangles are harmonically unrelated, as are the radii of the various component ares, whose centres, like the Andrea scroll, take no heed of the containing rectangle, ‘The Ionic volute ofthe scroll represented in Fig. 58 by the dotted lines terminates at A, where it is continued by quadrant are AB, centre K, radius 27.5 mm. Arc BCis centred at Jand is of radius 46.5 mm; a short Straight line, CD, connects BC with the countercurve are, DE, centre M, radius 31 mm, Point M is also the centre for upper peg-box are IH, which is therefore partly concentric with are ED; IH has a radius of 54 mm. The peg-box design is completed by straight line HG and terminating are GF, centre L, radius 13 mm. No mathematic or harmonic scheme could be found to unite these values, which, with the exception of line RS, the depth ofthe head (48 mm or 2 Br. in.), also failed to comply with whole or simple fractions of Brunswick inches of the kind seemingly used in the smalller vectors of the body scheme. One interesting factor tocmerge from the head analyses ofthe first three examples (Ex, X, XI, and XIt) of violin here given is that the length ofthe head was found to be half the maximum width of the lower bouts. 2BANALYSIS OF INSTRUMENT EXAMPLES Bx. XII Figs. 59-62, PL. XIT VIOLIN. ITALY, CREMONA, 1666 ANTONIO STRADIVARI PRIVATE COLLECTION, LONDON Much has been written about Antonio Stradivari, a man whose contribu: tion to the development of the violin, and thereby to music itself, is inestimable, and whose profound artistry, unerring intuition, and li less energy became as legendary in his long lifetime as did his consequent and unspoiling wealth.” Given, then, his ‘key-tigure’ status, 1 have decided on two contrasting Stradivaris to complete the developing sequence of Cremonese violins; the first isa rare early work of 1666 (the ‘year before his first marriage), the second a celebrated violin of 1703, an Instrument which reflects the full illumination of his genius. Despite the most exhaustive researches, much of Stradivari’s early life stil rests in obscurity. From the instruments of his old ages where the master proudly declares the total of his years beneath the date of making,** it has been established that he was born in 1644, but no definitive account of his early training has yet been made, From the character of his early work, it has been concluded that, like many of his silted contemporaries, he must have been a pupil of Nicola Amati. This is supported by the label of this early Stradivari, which reads: Antonias Sradiuarios Ai ‘Nicolaij Amat, retentt s the ‘ALoMNes’ meaning “oster-son’ or ‘disciple’. Indeed, the debt to Nicol can be plainly seen in the design analysis ofthis violin, together with the own emerging personality: accepting some elements, ind rejecting other parts of the inherited pattern. Comparing the contemporary Nicola violin with this 1666 Stradivari, the hat they are at once ike and very unlike. Already there isa feeling of length and clegance® in the latter work, although it is only a fraction longer and narrower than the Amati. The effect, as the geometry reveals, is made almost entirely by the more shallow treatment of the middle bouts. The young Antonio’s attitude towards proportional geometry, like his master Nicola’s, appears to be freer than Andrea's, for once more we can frace no attempt to organize the small vectors harmonically, as were organized those ofthe very carly Amati. Nevertheless, the handling ofthe geometry is rather more careful than that of the Nicola. ‘The main zgolden-section body division (point £, Figs. 35 and 59), for example, is the focus, in the case of the Stradivarius (Fig. 59), for two converging lines hich passexactly through the upper and lower /-hole centrings, whereas the same focus in the Nicola Amati occurs 2-3 mm above point E. In the Stradivarius, too, the maker's regard for the basic proportions of length is demonstrated by the harmonie organization of overall length to body length, a disposition not considered in either of the two Amatis here 7 cco come Sava actualy entered the Crmonese rere “Gor such stunt which was abd the yea ofr his death, ‘tai 92 aed ah of 17 Sreivart his i deserted sal nd