Foro Flamenco
Posts Since Last Visit | Advanced Search | Home | Register | Login

Today's Posts | Inbox | Profile | Our Rules | Contact Admin | Log Out



Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira and Philip John Lee who went ahead of us too soon.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.





an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez   You are logged in as Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >>Discussions >>Lutherie >> Page: [1]
Login
Message<< Newer Topic  Older Topic >>
 
eccullen

 

Posts: 90
Joined: Aug. 14 2007
 

an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez 

Here's another guitar in need of restoration.
We have a reliable opinion that its not authentic, not made by Santos Hernandez himself.
Does anyone have an idea what it is? What its origin might have been? Its value if restored?

Ed









Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px

Attachment (4)
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 21 2020 17:52:16
 
Echi

 

Posts: 826
Joined: Jan. 11 2013
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

Pictures themselves show a generic studio flamenco guitar of many years ago. Label and headstock suggest it’s not an authentic Santos at the same time (as they are not original) the guitar cannot be easily attributed to a defined luthier.
You should look inside the guitar to find evidence of a different maker (either a stamp or a signature or a detail in the bracing).
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 21 2020 18:50:09
 
RobJe

 

Posts: 711
Joined: Dec. 16 2006
From: UK

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to Echi

Before dismissing this guitar out of hand it is worth looking at "La Guitarra Espanola” published in 1991 by the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The 1903 Santos shown there has the same three piece back and rosette and was his personal guitar. It was once owned and played in concert by Virginia Luque and was definitely not a studio guitar. The interior construction includes a slanted harmonic bar.

If you don’t have the book you can find pictures of the guitar at

http://www.theguitarsalon.com/guitars/HernandezSantos_1903.html

Rob
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 21 2020 22:44:52
 
Echi

 

Posts: 826
Joined: Jan. 11 2013
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

The 1903 Santos guitar is coherent with the studio guitars of that age.
Later on Manuel Ramirez will use the same simple concentric rosette, generic headstock and 3 piece back for his studio guitars.
Btw the entry level Conde Pozuelo guitars (we are speaking of ‘64 now) will have same headstock and 3 pieces back with the only plus of a spine motif in the centre of the concentric rosette. Just to say that these elements are typical of many studio guitars in Madrid and allow to use smaller pieces of cypress and to cut the labour down.
Not surprised Santos kept for himself just a studio model (together with “la inedita”). Even “la leona” of Torres at the end of the day was his personal studio model.

In the case of the guitar of this thread, the headstock is shaped with a motif Santos will use years later and for his premium models and the label should be different. At I’ll there is the remote chance of a modification done by a third person on an original studio Santos but you have to assess the inside to support the theory.
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 22 2020 0:28:07
 
RobJe

 

Posts: 711
Joined: Dec. 16 2006
From: UK

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to Echi

The label looks identical to the one used by Santos when he first moved from Calle Nicolas Salmeron to the Aduana address in 1921.



Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px

Attachment (1)
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 22 2020 22:35:07
 
Echi

 

Posts: 826
Joined: Jan. 11 2013
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

You are right, it’s a good find.
Again, the inside bracing or other details would be helpful to made an idea up. It looks like there are glue residues all around the label. Who knows.
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 23 2020 10:47:51
 
RobJe

 

Posts: 711
Joined: Dec. 16 2006
From: UK

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to Echi

I agree that all could probably be answered by a close inspection of the guitar.

Of course it’s fun to speculate ….

Santos worked for various luthiers in Madrid and Granada before having to undertake 5 years of military service starting at the age of 20 going to Cuba as an artilleryman defending (unsuccessfully) the last remnants of the Spanish Empire. He returned in 1998 and set up a workshop Calle Nicolas Salmerón. A luthier with no reputation for making guitars under his own name would have had to be economic with the quality of materials and the time spent on making each guitar if that was how he was to make his living. So it is not surprising to find the 1903 that I posted looking as it does. It was/is by reputation a very fine guitar.

In 1905 he began his 15 year association with Manuel Ramirez and then Manuel’s widow. He was making great guitars but not receiving the credit. It is not surprising that he wanted to re-label the guitar he made for Segovia during this period when it came in for repair.

And so he was back at his workshop Calle Nicolas Salmerón in 1920 with no access to the Ramirez family stock of wood and the prospect of having to build a name for himself. So perhaps (if genuine) it is unsurprising that the 1922 guitar in the original post looks like the 1903 one.

It is probably not fair to label the 1903 guitar as a ‘studio guitar’. Santos was fiercely secretive and was certainly working alone trying to build his reputation and business. They were probably not outsourced and certainly not built be an apprentice They were probably the best that he could do in the circumstances (time, quality of materials vs what he could charge as a relative unknown) during these two ‘startup’ phases of his career. That was the way things worked in those days. It contrasts starkly with people who make guitars for a hobby these days being able to afford (through other means) good quality materials.

Santos lived until he was 70 but the last 7 years came during the Spanish Civil War and the start of WW2 – a period when few guitars were made generally and selling them must have been pretty hard.

The rest is as they say, history – or?

Rob
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 23 2020 15:26:45
 
eccullen

 

Posts: 90
Joined: Aug. 14 2007
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

Rob and Echi: thank you very much for your replies and insights! I truly appreciate them.

Here is a photo of the bracing: what a mess!
Does this lead to any clarification of the ambiguous authenticity?

Ed



Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px

Attachment (1)
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 24 2020 1:53:07
 
Echi

 

Posts: 826
Joined: Jan. 11 2013
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

Rob, the question here is: was it Santos to make Manuel Ramirez great or viceversa? I am for the latter.
I think the genius here was Manuel Ramirez both for vision and know how. Santos and Esteso learnt more than the job from him and inherited the market niche after his death.
Ron’t get me wrong: Santos deserves the fame of being one the best makers ever and will achieve success also with his own firm.
Yet in your picture it seems like Manuel took advantage of the skills of Santos and I think it’s the opposite: the guidance, discernment of what works and what does not, the know how he learnt from Manuel.
The school matters, and much more one hundred years ago.
The same I’d say for Barbero or Arcangel. Without their master’s shop they would be not remembered.
The same for Ramirez III and his journeymen become later famous on their own (Bernabe, Contreras).
Many guitar makers of Granada couldn’t express their talent at all without the guidance and the shop (I refer mainly To the know how but also tools, moods and business) of Ferrer, Montero or Bellido.

Ecullen, sorry but It’s still hard to guess: I can say it’s compatible with a Santos guitar. If the label is authentic you won the lottery if not you must prove it’s a Santos by small evidences in the building details like the shape of the bracing, the shape of the block inside, linings etc.
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 24 2020 7:18:05
 
RobF

Posts: 947
Joined: Aug. 24 2017
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

quote:

We have a reliable opinion that its not authentic, not made by Santos Hernandez himself.

quote:

Here is a photo of the bracing: what a mess!
Does this lead to any clarification of the ambiguous authenticity?

quote:

..sorry but It’s hard to guess: it’s compatible with a Santos guitar. If the label is authentic you won the lottery.


Should not the opinion of a reliable source who has actually examined the instrument hold some weight here?

Or is this one of those things where small pictures get shopped around the internet until someone hears what they want to hear? If the holder of the original “reliable opinion” isn’t good enough, then each major continent has qualified persons who can examine the guitar and confirm whether this matter is worth pursuing, and can also recommend necessary following steps.

Sheesh...no offence, but this is ridiculous. I realize it might all be in fun, and may be with the best of intentions, but it’s off. The only advice worth its salt here is that if someone wants to evaluate their latest “find” they should bring it to an expert for a hands-on examination and recommended course of action. Someone has already examined the guitar and offered the opinion that it is not authentic. Out of respect for them, perhaps differing opinions could be be left to experts who have been given the same courtesy as the original evaluator and have been allowed to examine the instrument in the flesh? Otherwise, the Foro is potentially being abused as a bully pulpit.

The above rant is just my opinion, of course, and maybe I’m speaking out of turn, so apologies in advance...but the original request for information should at the very least be accompanied with better pictures and a lot more background. Again, just IMO.

*edit* I see you’ve added to your response while I was typing mine, Echi. Agreed, much more detail is required, and even more important is the onus for proof. The Foro is not capable of providing much more than well intentioned advice and direction.

*edit #2* P.S. my response was originally intended for Echi, but to save time on the quote insertion it ended up being directed to Ed. But, it probably just can be read as a response to the thread itself. I got thrown because it was implied that the guitar has already been examined by an expert and the opinion offered that it is not authentic. Then the bracing picture is accompanied with a reference to the authenticity as being “ambiguous”. I don’t know...

P.P.S. I agree with Echi’s sentiment concerning the association with Manuel Ramirez.
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 24 2020 7:45:51
 
Stu

Posts: 1843
Joined: Jan. 30 2007
From: London (the South of it), England

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

cool pic. I can make out the struts and bridge oviously, but what is all the rest? patch up jobs and repairs???
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 24 2020 10:06:52
 
RobF

Posts: 947
Joined: Aug. 24 2017
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to Stu

At any rate, from the bracing pattern, clearly it’s a Reyes.
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 24 2020 12:39:38
 
eccullen

 

Posts: 90
Joined: Aug. 14 2007
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

Again, I truly appreciate the insights of all. The foro is an amazing place.

And my apologies, I wasn't clear enough regarding "reliable opinion": this was based only on photos, and was expressed as an opinion, and not intended to be a definitive determination.

Yes, all the other messy stuff is patches, cleats, some very bulky.
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 24 2020 16:57:54
 
Echi

 

Posts: 826
Joined: Jan. 11 2013
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

Rob, I never meant to make an Online assessment . You may notice I didn’t give a definite answer (like yes it’s a Santos or viceversa) but just to share some considerations without any commercial purpose.
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 25 2020 8:10:40
 
estebanana

Posts: 7999
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

I’ve looked at the photos on my own and In my opinion this is a fake. I believe it to be a late 1940s lower tier Ramirez - very cheap- shop guitar.

The work isn’t Santos to me because it’s weak and looks like the headstock cutting is an afterthought.
The fingerboard, frets, rosette (color of the veneer and design) all look exactly like the low tier Ramirez shop guitars. The interior work looks like it too, the heel etc.

Reyes mentioned- doubtful- the work on Reyes guitars that are this age ( give or take 25 years) it’s much crisper. The bracing design isn’t exclusive to Reyes, this design old old older than Reyes. Manuel Ramirez guitars can be seen with this.

I have a tragically damaged 1948 Ramirez that looks exactly like this guitar.

_____________________________

https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 25 2020 9:33:27
 
RobF

Posts: 947
Joined: Aug. 24 2017
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to Echi

quote:

Rob, I never meant to make an Online assessment .


I know. I was just following rule 7 of the Foro TOS, which states no good deed is permitted to go unpunished. I was being a spoil sport, I guess. Sorry for coming across that way.

The Reyes comment was a joke, BTW. I was reminded of being once shown a violin and saying to the owner, hey that looks like a nice old Tyrolean fiddle, and the owner looked down at me and said, Noooo, it’s a mid 18th century Italian from (I can’t remember which region, I think it was Naples). I looked inside and commented that the label was also of a Tyrolean maker. The owner said, yeah, all labels are fake, this is clearly Italian. I figured it was time to keep my mouth shut, and shortly later excused myself. It was a nice fiddle, I liked it, it was pretty. I’m not an expert, but it was pretty clear it weren’t no 18th century Italian, everything pointed to Tyrolean, and it appeared to be an honest fiddle. So, maybe I was jumping the gun here.
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 25 2020 11:39:28
 
Echi

 

Posts: 826
Joined: Jan. 11 2013
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

How could I forget the famous rule 7?...
Thanks for the hint Estebana.
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 25 2020 13:59:43
 
estebanana

Posts: 7999
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

Santos was an artist. Even if he did something simple, he did it with panache. He gave it something.

I know a lot of these 1930’s 40’s Ramirez guitars that weren’t expensive. This non Santos may or may not be one, but it’s something similar and about that age. No great sin, except the label is curious, it looks real, but so torn up.

Rob F - heh I figured there was sarcasm lurking.

_____________________________

https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 25 2020 15:59:29
 
estebanana

Posts: 7999
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

Here’s a 1948 Ramirez rose from a lower tier guitar like the one we’re talking about. The color and line work is if not identical, very similar.
I saved this rosette from a top that someone sanded too thin during an amateurish refinishing adventure.



Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 25 2020 16:04:28
 
estebanana

Posts: 7999
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
 

RE: an inauthentic 1922 Santos Hernandez (in reply to eccullen

The odd fingerboard wood and copper frets - the board looks like wenge. Weird, like not every thing was available during the civil war.



Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
  REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |  Date Jun. 25 2020 16:10:57
Page:   [1]
All Forums >>Discussions >>Lutherie >> Page: [1]
Jump to:

New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET

0.078125 secs.