Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Smith
On the 3-string theory, I don't buy it. Most Germanic Basses and almost all Bohemian Basses were made a 4-strings. The 3-string was in wider use in England, France, Spain, Italy and USA. Germany and eastward were mostly 4-string by then with some 5s as well.
|
Well yes, precisely. That's exactly the reason why I started to think that maybe it really is English rather than German after all. Then when I saw your comments on the "unknown bass" thread about the low-set f-holes of your bass compared with the Corsby, which mine also has, and combining that with the luthier's certainty of 200 years old based on the body interior style and workmanship, it started to get interesting. But this is where we came in...
Alternative hypothesis is that mine is indeed German and therefore not a 3-string. But then you need to explain the limited space available for the four strings, i.e. the closeness of the bass bar to the center line. The luthier found that even his narrowest bridge for 3/4 bass was too wide, he had to use one intended for a 1/2 bass, measuring only 3 3/4 inches between feet centers. He thought nobody would build a 4-string bass that narrow, but it would be normal for a 3-string. That sounded logical to me, what do you think?
BTW, I don't think the back is plywood. When I look at my modern hybrid, I can clearly see the plywood layers running parallel at the edge of the back, whereas at the edge of the carved top I see perpendicular grain. On the old bass we're discussing here, I see perpendicular grain at the edges of the top and the back. Am I right in assuming that's a reliable way to distinguish solid from plywood?