2 Sides to Every Story[edit]

What a great scientific explanation; "...This has also been proved false by simply examining Stradivari's instruments and noticing that many of them had very thick rings in the wood." How about RELATIVITY to specific trees? How about that is a WIKIPEDIA site where people like you can give out false information? Weasel words? I wrote it in the least biased way possible, not to mention that scientifically it makes sense! I mean, we can walk on the moon, fit thousands of songs into tiny computers, but we can't reproduce a violin. If that is true, how can you tell me it isn't because of nature, something out of our control? The bottom line is, whether you agree with me or not, you shouldn't be removing the information from the website when it is a disputed subject! People need to hear two sides of the story, not one opinion based on pseudoscience to make sure some famous violin maker holds credibility. Take a look at this: <http://www.primidi.com/2003/12/06.html> or this <http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/biology/b103/f03/web3/s1kim.html> Clearly, you cannot just look at an instrument and make such a presumption that disqualifies any scientific explanation. And we are talking about wood density, and not just the space between tree rings, but the thickness or lack thereof of the tree rings themselves. You have demonstrated the fundamental flaw of this website, and the fact that u flagged the page is completely ridiculous. - "spin move"

Slight ambiguity in a statement in Marrriage and Early Carrier[edit]

There is this sentence relating to Stradivari's wife and her late husband: "Francesca was the young widow of the burgher Giacomo Capra, with whom she had two children, and who had been shot by Francesca's brother on the Piazza Garibaldi (formerly the Piazza Santa Agata)." The sentence doesn't make it clear as to whether Francesca or Capra was the one who was shot. I'm assuming it was Capra who was shot, but I don't have the book used as the source so I can't check this. If it was Capra who was shot, the removal of "and" in " and who had been shot by Francesca's brother...". Similarly, the sentence also suggests to me that Capra died because of this, but isn't clear in saying so and therefore I think a more definitive statement on this fact. Any help in clarifying this would be greatly appreciated.IrishStephen (talk) 20:05, 13 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can someone clarify this sentence, please? Birth interval? Him and his wife? "It is to be noted that an age difference of four to nine years was uncommon between wedded couples at the time." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenif (talk • contribs) 19:11, 23 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

top painting[edit]

The painting at the top of the page should be identified as a romantic painting, created long after his death, or removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1010:B124:7FEF:7462:15D1:42C0:1644 (talk) 22:43, 27 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Playing old violins...[edit]

About a decade ago I started our article on Andrea Amati, grandfather of the Amati who may have been Stadivari's mentor. I wrote that some of his violins can still be played.

I think this is an important question that all of the articles on the old respected luthier should link to... What kind of maintenance is required to keep fine old instruments playable? Is it true that fine old instruments need to be played, periodically, to remain playable? Of course strings wear out, but over the course of centuries don't every other part wear out, doesn't the varnish wear off? If an old violin has to have its backplate replaced can it still be considered a stradivarius?

If a previously fine old instrument is found, that is too fragile to play, can it be restored? If the restoration is extensive, will it sound like a stradivarius? If it does not sound like a stradivarius, would it remain more valuable as an unrestored artifact?

I am going to keep my eyes peeled for RS that address these questions, and I request other interested parties do so as well.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 20:24, 19 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categories