ANOTHER Bass ID Thread

[Matthew Tucker]

Please examine these links/pics carefully and see the difference between natural aging/markings and artificial pre-aged markings such as scratches, dents and varnish touch-ups.

Ken, I find it hard to examine any of your basses in real detail, much as I'd like to, because the pics are not that big. eg: Looking at the pic of the Bisiach back is like looking at the bass from ten feet away. They're nice pics of lovely basses, but IMO you can't really expect us to see the detail that you can see.

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Matthew Tucker

Ken, I find it hard to examine any of your basses in real detail, much as I'd like to, because the pics are not that big. eg: Looking at the pic of the Bisiach back is like looking at the bass from ten feet away. They're nice pics of lovely basses, but IMO you can't really expect us to see the detail that you can see.

Right click on any pic. Choose 'save image as..' then click save on the lower right 'save image' window. Then, on the 'Downloads' window click 'Open'. After it opens in the 'Window Picture and Fax Viewer' use the + feature to blow up the pic. Clarity may be a problem but still, you can blow up the pic. I do this exact same thing when I look at other Basses on the 'net. You don't need perfection to catch a fake. You just need experience.

A few years ago from pics just like the ones I posted I sent pics printed off my computer to Paul Biase. They were worse than the ones on my website. He called me and said, "I know that Scroll, that's a new Hungarian Bass"!.

If you want to count the growth rings of a piece of wood, then you need the pics to be clean when enlarged. For seeing the style of the Bass, it is not necessary. What you can see is just that. What you can see.

I have given my opinion on many Basses here online with even less to go on than the pics I have shown of my Basses. It just takes time, experience and a good eye. Not great focus though, just good enough. I wear glasses to see distance and reading but shapes and color, I can see half asleep.

[LouisBarnes]

As far as I know the bass had a new bass bar/sound post/bridge when it was at Bridgewood & Neitzert. The back and ribs are a lot darker than the bass bar, but it doesn't look like the inside as aged as much as the outside "appears" to have done. One of the cracks in the ribs is clearly pre-refinish, and the ribs feel like they've "moved" and twisted a little over time. It's so difficult to tell what's going on under the varnish (which seems a trifle thick).

Comparing it to your photos, it's definitely had some antiquing done to it, but it seems like they've done such a good job that it's hard to tell what is or isn't authentic aging. It doesn't look as old as the Morelli when comparing the backs with each other, but it looks older than the Pollman. I find that the gloss varnish really throws me off though!

[David Powell]

I'm definitely no expert, but my first impression looking at those photos was that I've seen basses from the 40's and 50's that looked older than that one. It's a beautiful instrument in any case. The flaming and coloration remind me of Ken's Pollmann a bit.