Bowlback Spot The Difference

[Martin Jonas]

I've been talking in the Classical forum about my latest Ebay purchase, an undated Neapolitan bowlback with a makers label saying "Carlo Rinaldi". As I've now finished setting it up, I thought it might make an interesting series of photographs to compare and contrast it with my Ceccherini bowlback (also an Ebay purchase). These two are remarkably similar in design and decoration, which makes the incidental differences stand out more prominently side by side.

To start with, here are both mandolins from the front. Ceccherini left, Rinaldi right.

Martin

[Martin Jonas]

Next up, both backs. Rinaldi top, Ceccherini bottom.

Martin

[Martin Jonas]

Probably the greatest difference: the headstock shapes are completely different, and the Rinaldi (right) has a somewhat inelegant stamped metal decoration that does not really match anything else on the mandolin.

Martin

[Martin Jonas]

The headstocks from the side show three interesting differences:

1) Both have brass nuts that act as integral nut/zero fret compounds. #However, on the Ceccherini (bottom) this is a finely worked single piece of brass, whereas the Rinaldi (top) has two separate pieces of brass, with much simpler workmanship.

2) This photo nicely shows the fret spacing (bar frets, of course) of the first few frets. #The Rinaldi has a significantly shorter scale length than the Ceccherini (about 13' to 13 1/4').

3) The Ceccherini has a waferthin ebony fretboard; the Rinaldi a somewhat thicker rosewood fretboard.

Martin

[Martin Jonas]

The scratchplates, bridges and string down-holders. The Rinaldi (left) has inlays only below the soundhole, the Ceccherini all around. The actual inlays are extremely similar in design, but slightly more intricately worked on the Ceccherini.

Martin

[Martin Jonas]

Tailpieces and back of bowl. #The Ceccherini (left) has eight pegs, the Rinaldi only four. #Although both have the same number of staves and the same style of skirting, the shape of the bowl is somewhat different, with the sides of the Ceccherini being more upright.

Martin

[Martin Jonas]

The sides of the bowls: Ceccherini (left) is water-cooled, Rinaldi (right) vented. #Also nicely visible here is the fact that cant on the Rinaldi is a good deal further forward than on the Ceccherini, in keeping with the shorter scale length which isn't matched by a correspondingly shorter bowl.

Martin

[Martin Jonas]

Last one: the Rinaldi label and a close-up of the Rinaldi scratchplate.

Martin

[Eugene]

I have handled a few-several de Meglio mandolins. I've seen several Ceccherini mandolins pictured, but personally only handled one (thank you, Victor). Your Rinaldi, Martin, is absolutely identical to the entry-level de Meglio mandolins I've seen.

[Martin Jonas]

Thanks, Eugene -- that's very helpful. I guess that would point towards Rinaldi being a reseller. Did the de Meglios you have seen have the squarer headstock and the metal decoration as well?

Martin

[Eugene]

Squarish headstock: yes; decorative metal plate, once (although I may be confusing it with one that was labeled for a UK distributor, I'm not certain now).

[Jim Garber]

Here is a de Meglio headstock prob from eBay dated 1898. Looks virtually identical to the Rinaldi.

Jim

[Jim Garber]

There is a completely, non-de-meglio Rinaldi here (http://homepage2.nifty.com/eiyamak/colle17.htm#rin). Unfortunately the photos are very small.

Jim

[Martin Jonas]

Thanks, Jim and Eugene. That all points towards the builder being de Meglio, the Rinaldi name being a distributor, and the headstock being original rather than a replacement as I had suspected. All of which is rather satisfying. The main bit is the playability and tone, of course -- playability is fine, tone is still a work in progress after who knows how many years or decades of inactivity. It's pleasant enough right now, if a bit metallic, and may well mellow further with playing.

Martin