By Laurie Niles: Lately on Violinist.com a spirited debate has developed on a discussion thread called I don't think $100 violins are as terrible as people say.
Is it possible that a $100 is "not terrible"?
I thought it would make for an interesting vote and opportunity to share experiences with cheap violins.
![cheap violin]()
While a cheap violin might sort of "work" for a while, it's generally a false economy, as I've illustrated in this article. If you are buying a $100 new violin, you'll probably have to spend $300 fixing it up, and even then it will disappoint in the end due to the poor craftsmanship, materials, etc. etc.
But there might be some circumstances under which a $100 violin is not so bad. For example, if an innocent non-musician was selling her grandfather's Stradivari from the attic for $100, not knowing it was actually a real Stradivari. Or, if the violin was being sold for $100 in the year 1840, when $100 was more like $3,500. Or...
You catch my drift. I've structured this vote to allow your creativity, and that's what I expect! Under what circumstances can you imagine a $100 violin being a decent instrument? Or is this just not possible? Or are you okay with a very cheap fiddle?
Also, you are welcome to share your experiences with very cheap violins, whether for yourself, a child, a student or an acquaintance.
You might also like:
