" Name That Bass " aka "This OLD Bass"

[Brian Glassman]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

On my Bass it also has some old style French flavour in the upper back in both shape and bend style. The Back bends gently from the corner block to the neck block which is French in tradition. The Ribs are 8.5" from the lower block (endpin) to the upper bout corner and then tapers to 5.75" at the neck. The French and some English moved back and forth learning from and working with each other. That is fact and not speculation. Germany was also a big trade partner with England as well. Many visiting Orchestras and Musicians came to London as well as several from Italy. It is this 'visiting' factor from France, Germany and Italy that gave London its flavor more so than any Londoner traveling thru the continent which was not the case at all.

If you look closely at my Bass you will see French, Italian, Germanic and English flavors all rolled up in one Bass (the Yankee flavor being only later modifications and not in the making). You almost never see any English flavor in the other countries mentioned. Why is that? Because they had their own recipe and English was never a flavor in the continent with the exception of New England Yankee Basses which were a mix or English and German mainly. The English were mainly Copyists, period! Makers often copied Stainer and Amati in the same shop with the occasional Strad. The French thing is not that common with the exception of a few that may have worked there or with someone from France in the UK. This Bass is somewhat of a 'melting pot' example with the 'gamba flavor added both inside and out. When I showed the C-bout corner block to Jeff Bollbach up at 'Biasie's, he mentioned he has seen this style only in old French and English Basses and furniture as well.

So, with that 'brief' explanation, how does London/Corsby style sit now in your mind?

I do see what you mean about all the different influences.
I'm not so experienced w/ 'f' hole ID, but to me the upper bout shape definitely has a French feel to it. Almost "Lamy"-like http://www.contrabass.co.uk/2453.htm , although we know that this bass is earlier. How about these English guys?; http://www.contrabass.co.uk/2114.htm , http://www.contrabass.co.uk/1900.htm , http://www.contrabass.co.uk/2657.htm ,or these German guys?;
http://www.contrabass.co.uk/2657.htm , http://www.contrabass.co.uk/2579.htm

Bri

[David Powell]

Just looking at photos and not considering the other clues that point to England, the f holes are the most similar characteristic to the G. Corsby DB. The arching also looks similar. The outline just doesn't seem the same at all. The bouts are almost taken from a perfect circle on the mystery bass. The Corsby is much more anglular in the bouts. But shape alone doesn't necessarily mean that much. Weren't the shoulders of the mystery bass altered as well?

The Prokop bass certainly has a lot of the same general shape characteristics, but the other details of making don't really match at all. The shape is definitely heading the same way, but the mystery bass has bouts that are much closer to the same size. Also, I would reason that it makes sense that outlines might be copied more frequently than construction methodology. So you see borrowed forms "by the English hand" so to speak. In any case, it has one of the most pleasing outlines that I think I have ever seen. I guess there are only a few makers that could have plausibly made that bass given the factual evidence of it's origins, the wood type, etc. So it is at least narrowed to an English maker. If not Corsby, then who? That becomes the question. So we look at the f-holes again.....

[Ken Smith]

Brian, thanks for the links of reference. Period wise, we are near c.1800 or earlier on this Bass. As you can see, so many Bass have sloped shoulders that are actually taken from the Viol family and not the Violin. Many Northern English makers worked on German patterns while the London School favored the Italian style and often Maggini within that school. Basses from London in the Gamba form are usually closer to c.1800 or earlier. Cello form was used in both London and Germany as well but not much after 1800. When a dealer sees an English Bass with Gamba form, he cries out 'Northern England or English midlands'. When they don't see the English connection right away or at all, they usually jump to Bohemia or Germany. It is not always as simple as that all the time and the Bass of mine is a clear example of straying from the norm in every possible way!

David, the bouts were not actually Altered other that Wear or trim at the outer Purfling line of each side on the upper and lower bouts. No more than 1/4" from what I can see from where the Purfling runs off the Bass. The C-bout is warn as well but I can see all or most of the Purfling on the inner curve where mainly only the edges are worn.

One point I was trying to make is that I cannot find a single Northern Maker of Basses that made FFs like this or a bass for that matter. Not a single person in the world to date has shown me anything similar as well is a Bass inside or out.

The original internal construction, some of which only has 'scars' left in place is something else I have not seen in any other Bass or at least all of these in one single Bass. Clearly, this Maker made Viols in the olde English tradition which died out in the 18th century for the most part.

On the subject of Hill, I don't doubt him as a possibly either as well as Corsby. I just wish there were other Basses like it in some way to make better comparisons.

[Brian Glassman]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

The original internal construction, some of which only has 'scars' left in place is something else I have not seen in any other Bass or at least all of these in one single Bass. Clearly, this Maker made Viols in the olde English tradition which died out in the 18th century for the most part.

On the subject of Hill, I don't doubt him as a possibly either as well as Corsby. I just wish there were other Basses like it in some way to make better comparisons.

Well, yes. I think it's closer to that Joseph Hill bass than the Corsby. Are the F's that different? Imagine this Hill Bass w/ more rounded upper bouts..pretty close.

From the pics the back has an almost Pearwood look to it. Is it deffinately Sycamore? If so where else could there be fine Sycamore during that period?

It's shape deffinately doesn't point one way or another too clearly.
Is there anything else that points to some other early European school like Dutch or Scandinavian, Vienese? or does it only seem English or Germanic now?

Sounds like you'd need to explore that viol/gamba or bass violone transitional period a bit more, but I wouldn't leave out that same period in France either. I don't know now, the more I look at the your bass the more it's outline feels French to me.

W/ it's large dimensions and internal bracketing issues could it only be a true double bass or may it have actually been a modified later Bass Viola Da Gamba or "Bass Violone" of some type?

BG

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Brian Glassman

Well, yes. I think it's closer to that Joseph Hill bass than the Corsby. Are the F's that different? Imagine this Hill Bass w/ more rounded upper bouts..pretty close.

From the pics the back has an almost Pearwood look to it. Is it definitely Sycamore? If so where else could there be fine Sycamore during that period?

It's shape definitely doesn't point one way or another too clearly.
Is there anything else that points to some other early European school like Dutch or Scandinavian, Viennese? or does it only seem English or Germanic now?

Sounds like you'd need to explore that viol/gamba or bass violone transitional period a bit more, but I wouldn't leave out that same period in France either. I don't know now, the more I look at the your bass the more it's outline feels French to me.

W/ it's large dimensions and internal bracketing issues could it only be a true double bass or may it have actually been a modified later Bass Viola Da Gamba or "Bass Violone" of some type?

BG

I don't know how big a Bass Violone would be. I have seen only a few and only one was DB size. Viol d'Gambas were small like Cellos I think. As far as the English thing goes and not French or otherwise the materials and Viol construction all point to England according to Biase. On the Back wood, it is the same highly flamed Sycamore as seen on the inner Ribs. If it is French then it would be an 18th century Bass before all the Bernadel, Gand etc type makers with that Cello outline. This Bass from LeJeune (Paris, c.1785 from World of Basses, Germany) looks slightly similar and completely different that the later French Basses we are used to seeing. Look at the LeJeune and the Mystery Bass side by side!





On another website (Healey Violins, UK), we fine the exact Bass in different lighting and also dated c.1790.



On the LeJeune, it has a clear angle break in the upper bout and not a long gentle bend like my Bass.

[David Powell]

Is it possible to learn anything more definitive about the age of the top, perhaps through dendrochonology (I think that's the word), you know the way they look at annual rings and match them to the pattern in instruments with known dates of make.

It is plausible from the shape that it could be a converted violone. The back construction is more like a double bass though. There were not too many standardized forms of violones and there are records of very large violones with mensurs of up to 114 cm. In Bach's time in Germany the violone grosso was a four stringed instrument tuned in 4ths from low C. These were definitely double bass size instruments. Probably the reason not too many of these large violones are still around is because most of them might now be living out their lives as double basses. But were any of these in use in England and at what period and what configuration? Isn't the first reference to the "great dooble bass" pretty early on in England?

I'm thinking if there were a way to nail down the age of the top within a few years. Attributing the bass to a "best guess" builder would be easier if we knew when the tree lived. Even then, the wood could have been seasoned for many years before use. The age, the remnants of the original methodology of construction, the origin of the wood? I guess if there is no documentation at all, this is real detective work.

[Ken Smith]

My Bass would measure about 118-119cm or 121 or so over the buttton. The Top is over 119cm to the tip so the Back is close to that. I have heard of Violones in England as far back as the 17th Century but not much before that. I don't know what this was originally other that just 'BIG'.

On the Top age, we know it's from very old growth but being as wide as it is and relatively few cracks and no sinkage, it was something that was either well aged and/or something that came from an old Building and was cut way way before the bass was made. Luthier Peter Eibert told me the Top was so strong because or the winter growth rings combined with the species, age and grade of the Spruce combined. The 'patina' of the Top shows signs of a long life but part of it sheltered in storage. The Varnish is fantastic. Original golden Varnish under the later added red which almost looks original except for in a few spots. This Varnish has help to protect the instruments wood thus far.

I have owned many Basses in my life and have seen tons more. Nothing like this has ever crossed my path.