I hear quite often "no one can make an exact replica" But of course in the art world, this happens all the time. My comments are merely to point out that not only is it possible, but that it has been dome already. I honestly don't know what the big deal is.
David v.O. comments are certainly interesting, the best people at making fakes were other lute builders. I hadn't thought of that, but of course it is true. But my idea is much simpler. Say you have a bunch of lutes in a museum. Some of them are fakes. But because they are the good fakes, not the ones that say "Kmart" on them or are made with Ace hardware hinges, there is absolutely no way to tell which ones are real. They have yet to be identified as real or fake. They are just lutes (or any other instrument) in a museum.. There is no sign on them that says "this us a fake". There is no entry in a museum catalog that says "Fake" (and the musea, as I have said before, have EXTREMELY low standards for instruments) And that shows, I believe, that it is possible to make an exact replica. Because it has already been done. The fact that we don't know which ones are real proves, for all practical purposes, that it can be done. Unless you think they are all real. But if everyone thinks they are all real, that also proves that it can be done. The only scenario in which it CAN"T be done, is the one in which all of the instruments are subjected to stringent scientific testing. All the fakes are weeded out. But that will never happen. Museums have absolutely no incentive to devalue their collection and admit that they were fooled. Bad for fundraising. And if it did happen, which it won't, there is still the possibility that the fakes were made using original materials and techniques. Which of course, they were, the good fakers do exactly that, or they did at at the same time, so they HAD to use original materials and techniques. In fact, some of the fakes from the renaissance are worse than modern copies! It would also be possible to compose a fake Dowland piece, even a fake Bach piece. Lots of Josquin, Handel and Corelli fakes floating around. The ones we know about, anyway. Happens all the time, has happened, will happen. dt At 12:51 PM 2/7/2009, you wrote: >That I don't know. >But Edlinger would certainly have put Tiffenbreucker labels on the >instruments he made from scratch. >RT > >----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Batov" ><alexander.ba...@vihuelademano.com> >To: "lute-cs.dartmouth.edu" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu> >Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 9:43 AM >Subject: [LUTE] Re: was trench fill now exact replica > > >>You mean (or whoever, from where you quoted from) that Edlinger's >>manufactured "conversions" are somehow different from genuine >>"earlier Tiffenbrucker" instruments? Or was that just a theory that >>he was involved in a business of "manufactured conversions"? >> >>AB >> >>----- Original Message ----- From: "Roman Turovsky" <r.turov...@verizon.net> >>To: "lute-cs.dartmouth.edu" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>; "Alexander >>Batov" <alexander.ba...@vihuelademano.com> >>Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 2:06 PM >>Subject: [LUTE] Re: was trench fill now exact replica >> >> >>>As I recall - Edlinger routinely manufactured "conversions" of >>>"earlier Tiffenbrucker" instruments. >>>RT >> >> >> >>To get on or off this list see list information at >>http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > >
