Pressenda
Combined
impact Despite his instruments showing very little difference in form,
Giovanni Francesco Pressenda was one of the most idiosyncratic
– and innovative – Italian luthiers of the 19th century. Drawing
on 20 years of research, Tsutomu Miyasaka reveals how his style
reflected both the French and Italian makers of his day
T
he work of Giovanni Francesco Pressenda
(1777–1854) is a high point in 19th-century
Italian violin making. He was highly respected
during his lifetime for the quality of his work,
and his style strongly influenced all the violin
makers in Turin who came after him. It has
also attracted the attention of many violin
lovers through the ensuing years and decades.
My own research into the luthier, which has been ongoing for the past
20 years, now encompasses observations of 228 violins, 17 violas and 13
cellos. This has allowed me to compile a detailed study of the evolution of
Pressenda’s style and working methods, both statistical and observational
in nature.
Pressenda was born in Lequio Berria, a town in north-west Italy, and
This 1834 violin
exhibits many moved to Turin in around 1818. Although he had already turned 40 it was
typical Pressenda only then that he began to learn violin making, receiving training at the
characteristics
(see page 43) workshop of the French luthier Nicolas Lété-Pillement. It is possible that he
also worked in partnership with Joseph Calot before setting up his own
workshop in around 1821. As Turin had spent twelve years (1802–14)
under the rule of Napoleonic France, French culture and business had
permeated every walk of life. We can therefore see French influence in
Pressenda’s craftsmanship: like French masters such as Jean-Baptiste
Vuillaume (1798–1875) his work often combines flawless finish with a
All photos and images Tsutomu Miyasaka
mathematically refined form. Conversely, whereas Vuillaume would utilise
various Cremonese and Brescian models over the course of his career,
Pressenda always consistently used the same few patterns. The influence of
the old Italians can most clearly be seen in his varnish: Pressenda conducted
several experiments with different recipes, and on the process of applying
the ground. Not all these innovations were successful, and there are
instruments where the varnish has absorbed ambient moisture, resulting in
a sticky surface. Interestingly, we cannot find any apprentice or co-worker of
Pressenda who ever shared their master’s varnish recipe, as I will discuss later.
36 the strad march 2019 [Link]
Pressenda
Number of
Period I Period II Period III instruments of
unknown date (not
included in graph):
violin 17, cello 4
Number of instruments
Date (year)
Maker's age 45 50 55 60 65 70
The above bar chart shows the distribution of the number of
known instruments (violin, viola, cello) made by Pressenda each
year throughout his working life (1820–50). The data is based on
my own research into Pressenda instruments that are either owned
by private owners and/or players, or which have come up for sale in
auctions and shops over the past two decades. Some instruments
remain in pristine condition, still bearing their original necks and
untouched varnish. Although most have certificates from renowned
experts, some of the violins have disputed authenticity, owing to
the quality of their varnish and certain points of craftsmanship.
Genuine instruments showing the hand of Pressenda can be
identified without much difficulty, from elements of their
construction, carving, edgework, varnish type and so on, all
of which are highly consistent in his work.
Of the 258 instruments included in this research, there are Front of
the 1834
21 for which the date could not be established. A relatively large violin
number of Pressendas still bear his original labels, a testament to
how his products have been treasured by players and collectors over
the years. An approximate date of manufacture can also be
estimated from the type of wood figure in the back plate.
Pressenda’s work can be divided into three distinct periods. The
first, ending in 1825, is characterised by variations in the soundbox
pattern, most having more rounded C-bouts, and the choice of
wood for the back plate: maple with either narrow or broad flame.
The second period (1825–29) is easily discernible by the use of the
Stradivari pattern, with square C-bouts and use of narrow figured
maple that is frequently marked with a sap line. His most prevalent
model, a blend of Stradivari and Guarneri ‘del Gesù’, is first seen in
1831; he continued to use it until the end of his career. As shown
by the graph, Pressenda was a prolific maker for 20 years from 1826
to 1846, with a particular leap in activity from 1828 to 1837.
After 20 years of searching for Pressendas, and noting the dearth
of new data recently, I estimate that the number of instruments
[Link] march 2019 the strad 37
Pressenda
presented here corresponds to more than 70 per cent of the and stop lengths (1b). The graph also shows the number of
total number of instruments made by Pressenda. Possibly the one-piece and two-piece backs, denoted by a circle and a
total figure would be around 320 instruments in his 30-year triangle respectively. Pressenda preferred to use one-piece backs,
career. This number also gives us cause to speculate about using plates with vivid regular flame. In this graph, 200 of the
Pressenda’s collaborations with pupils Joseph Calot, Pierre 228 violins (almost 90 per cent) have one-piece backs. All the
Pacherele, Leopold Noiriel and Giuseppe Rocca. Writing in violins were made with a standard back length of 14 inches
The Strad in November 2007, Christophe Landon concluded (355±1mm). The stop length, which is also consistent, is in
that, based on similarities in the workmanship, it was likely that most cases shorter than 195mm, varying in the range
Pacherele supplied instruments in the white to his master, 193.5±1.5mm. Rocca also consistently worked with a 14-inch
which Pressenda varnished and labelled. I, however, believe that body length but with a stop length set at c.195mm. Other
such a collaboration with Pacherele (and possibly other measurements, such as the lengths of C-bouts, rib heights and
contributors) must have been limited to just a few Pressenda f-holes, also show Pressenda’s fondness for consistency. The sole
instruments. There is no doubt that Pressenda’s peculiarly soft exception I have encountered has a back length
varnish, an important feature of his instruments, was made of 360mm. It was certified by Hill’s as a
and applied by Pressenda himself, as none of his pupils Pressenda, but its authenticity is disputable
ever used the same varnish recipe. If he had had a serious owing to its construction (one-piece
working relationship with a co-worker, and was making spruce table etc.) and a false label.
full instruments himself, then 10–15 instruments per year, The dimensions of his violas are
as seen in this graph, would be too small a figure. If we similarly consistent. Pressenda made
include the speculative instruments that I have not yet found, small-size violas, which seems to have
the per-year maximum could be around 20 – still unlikely, been the fashion in France during his
but it would be a reasonable number for a single maker. lifetime. He favoured a one-piece back,
As regards Rocca’s contribution, however, there is a broad the length of which never exceeded 400mm.
peak in activity in the period 1830–37 and a drop in later There are 15 violas with known dimensions,
years after Rocca had left the workshop. There is a particular and 12 of them have very similar back lengths:
drop in the numbers of violas and cellos in 1838–39. their average length is 393mm with the largest and
Hence, it may be speculated that Rocca was helping to shortest 395mm and 390mm respectively. The
produce instruments in the workshop in 1837, resulting in remaining three violas are exceptionally small in size:
a pronounced increase in activity. 382mm to 385mm, which are too small for today’s
Tsutomu Miyasaka
player. All were made in 1837, when Rocca must
A
noteworthy aspect of Pressenda’s instruments is have been assisting in the workshop. As for the
the consistency of their dimensions. Figure 1 cellos, back lengths are fairly standard: 13 examples
shows the distributions of their body lengths (1a) (half of them with a one-piece back) are in the range of
Pressenda preferred to use one-piece
backs with vivid regular flame: 200 of the
228 violins have one-piece backs
FIGURE 1a Body length of Pressenda violins arranged FIGURE 1b Stop length of Pressenda violins arranged by year.
by year of making. Circles denote a one-piece back; Diamonds denote a one-piece back, and triangles a two-piece
triangles are two-piece backs back. The blue bar shows the average stop length: 195mm.
364 198
362 197
360 196
Back body length (mm)
Stop length (mm)
358 195
356 194
354 193
352 192
350 191
348 190
Caption 1815 1820 1825 1830 1835 1840 1845 1850 1855 1815 1820 1825 1830 1835 1840 1845 1850 1855
Year of making Year of making
[Link] march 2019 the strad 39
Pressenda
740±5mm – which is smaller than the average French Two 1834 Pressendas
instrument at the time. made from the same
To summarise, Pressenda’s craftsmanship is characterised by batch of wood, held by
Tsutomu Miyasaka and
his use of a consistent model with almost no deviation from his Patricia Kopatchinskaja
favoured dimensions. It has been suggested that players and
collectors of that time would have been asking the maker for
particular models such as a ‘Long Pattern’ Stradivari or a
compact Guarneri, but this research seems to refute that theory.
If there were no such direct communication between Pressenda
and his clients, it can be assumed that he was selling violins
ready-made from his shop ‘Pressenda & Co’ rather than
working to commission. The business was helped by his
relationship with violinists G.B. Polledro (conductor and
concertmaster of Turin’s opera house) and his successor,
Guiseppe Ghebart, who mediated sales of Pressenda
instruments to their members and pupils. Furthermore, it is
known that Luigi Tarisio was a client at Pressenda & Co, possibly in order to satisfy the increasing demands of soloists
buying instruments by him and selling them outside Italy, such as Paganini. The violin shown on pages 36 and 37 dates
some being acquired by London-based violinist August from 1834, his most prolific period, and is one example of an
Wilhelmj. It is also possible that Count Cozio di Salabue, being instrument made for powerful sound production. It is a twin to
Piedmontese like Tarisio, also patronised his shop although he the one owned by Patricia Kopatchinskaja, from the same year
was getting on in years by this point. Finally, from a note by the and the same batches of wood. The table is made from two
Turin-based maker Evasio Guerra, it is known that Nicolò pieces of spruce of very wide, broad grain at the flanks, and
Paganini tried an 1837 Pressenda (later owned by Wilhelmj) fairly thick maple. The use of soft, wide-grained spruce of low
when he visited the workshop during his performance at the density is effective in enhancing bass sounds, similar to the
Teatro Carignano, and that he admired its quality. If Pressenda violins of ‘del Gesù’, and may have been selected by the maker
had success with clients such as these, he would have been for its acoustic merit. Dendrochronological analysis of the top
encouraged to stay with a model that worked for him, rather by John Topham has shown good matching of the ring pattern
than experimenting with variations. with that of other Pressendas, but there is no correlation
with any of the Cremona violins he has analysed, indicating
T
his is not to say that Pressenda never tried out new that the wood used by Pressenda came from a different source.
ideas. On the contrary, it seems he conducted many (According to Eric Blot’s 2001 book Liuteria Italiana, his wood
experiments to improve the acoustics of his instruments, was supplied by French dealers such as the Thiriot family.)
FIGURE 2 Thickness distributions
for the 1834 Pressenda violin.
The back plate's thickness reaches
5.85mm in the soundpost area.
Bass Treble Treble Bass
Images courtesy Tsutomu Miyasaka
[Link] march 2019 the strad 41
Pressenda
Left The 1829
Pressenda (top) has a
pin below the button,
cutting through the
purfling edge. On
Stradivari’s 1716
‘Messiah’ (below) the
pin has been cut by
the purfling
Right Pressenda labels
from 1834, 1837
and 1846
The plate thicknesses also evince Pressenda’s desire to build Pressenda always used two small pins in the upper and lower
an instrument with a powerful sound. The thickness maps in back to fix the plate, which are put inside or almost touching
Figure 2 (page 41) demonstrate that, while the table has a the purfling. Unlike Amati and Stradivari, who inserted the
moderate thickness range of 2.4–3.0mm, the back plate varies purfling after pinning the plates and completing the soundbox
in thickness from 2.8mm to 5.8mm around the soundpost area. (see above), Pressenda would put pins into the back plate after
Reflecting this thickness, the back plate weighs 123g, which is adding the purfling, but before assembling the soundbox. This
fairly heavy and indicates good density and hardness of the became the general way for later Italian makers. Here, the
plate. The combination of a strong back plate and soft top plate purfling has been inserted cleanly with thin dyed wood
may have some effect in enhancing the acoustic power of the sandwiching the beech ‘white’. The bee-stings in the corners
soundbox. It can be assumed that Pressenda was aware of the have their tips directed to the centres of the corner edge, unlike
structure of the ‘Cannon’, which is also peculiar in having a the manner of Stradivari, who oriented them towards the inside
thick back plate (up to 6.3mm) and wide-grained top spruce. of the C-bouts instead. Pressenda also often left double lines
The arching of the table is characteristic of Pressenda: it starts from a purfling tracer, which extend into the corners. Such
immediately inside the purfling at the flanks, and rises to a wide marks are considered a flaw in craftsmanship, but he did not
plateau around the centre, which creates a glamorous seem to mind leaving such evidence of his handiwork behind.
appearance as well as making the C-bout look relatively wide.
P
The back is made from one piece of maple with a vivid regular ressenda’s varnish is very idiosyncratic and may have
flame, almost horizontal but somehow ascending to the right resulted from a considerable number of experiments
flank. This slightly slanted horizontal flame was a favourite intended to increase the value of his instruments. Amply
layout of Pressenda and frequently appears in his other works. thick oil-based varnish has a unique appearance on account of
The back is made from one piece of maple with
a vivid regular flame, almost horizontal but
somehow ascending to the right flank
The slightly slanted flame on the back plate
and ribs is a common Pressenda feature
42 the strad march 2019 [Link]
Pressenda
A knife-cut score line bisects the
corner-blocks in the 1834 violin
its reaction to the texture of the wood surface. On spruce,
coloured varnish tends to infiltrate the soft wood surface,
exhibiting an inverse change in colour density between spring Pressenda’s instruments
and winter grain (hard) and summer grain (soft). This results in
spring rings that are dyed lighter than the summer grain. Such display a high degree
varnish often turns out very soft, especially in humid, ambient of perfection in terms
air, and thus players need to protect the varnish from their own
sweat. This suggests that Pressenda was using a varnish recipe of balance of outline,
rich in hydrophilic ingredients. layout, shape, and
When a Pressenda violin from 1835 was opened up, it was
found that a part of the rib had suffered the penetration of choice of wood
liquid varnish from external surface to the interior surface.
Hence, the nature of this varnish and its application may not
work well for practical protection of the wood. In addition, we
find extremely dark varnish applied to the many violins he
made in around 1834. Although it is a mystery why the maker similar score on a corner-block in a Pacherele violin, and
tried such dark varnish, one possibility is that these violins were proposed Pacherele’s collaboration in making the soundbox of
made to attract players who prefer a more ‘masculine’ his master’s instruments. I agree that Pacherele was following
appearance and a dark, powerful sound inspired by the colour. Pressenda’s fashion in interior work of his own violins, except
The interior of the 1834 violin shows other habits of the that instruments completed by Pacherele hardly pass as
maker which can help with authentication. On the corner- Pressenda’s work by experienced eyes because the dimensions
blocks a knife has left a score-cut halfway up. Similar knife are different and so are various points of craftsmanship.
marks are often found in other Pressendas. As he was using an Needless to say, the varnish made by Pacherele and other
interior mould, he may have been cutting off the upper half of French collaborators are essentially different from Pressenda’s.
the block that appears above the mould, in order to facilitate Pressenda’s instruments display a high degree of perfection
the mould’s removal. Christophe Landon has discovered a in terms of balance of outline, layout, shape, and choice of
wood. On the other hand, he was not too concerned about
leaving toolmarks (purfling and interior) or pins, which are
looked on as flaws but in his case possibly left intentionally to
reflect his Italian artistry. Toolmarks add traces of a human
touch, as can also been seen in the work of the old Italians.
This is reflected in the sound qualities of Pressenda violins:
unique in terms of having a mixture of old and modern Italian
sound in projection. As Patricia Kopatchinskaja noted in these
pages (May 2017), a ‘characteristic of Pressenda’s instruments’
is a sound quality like ‘a mezzo-soprano, with a surprisingly
strong low register full of dark animal colour and drama’.
Pressenda’s violins are tonally rich in high notes while having
Inside this 1835 Pressenda, the liquid darker projection in low notes. This acoustic nature is just one
varnish has penetrated right through the more element that distinguishes Pressenda from the French
C-bout rib from the external surface
masters of his era.
[Link] march 2019 the strad 43
