Don't do this! (But then again, you probably wouldn't.. also posted on TB)

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Eric Swanson

Interesting point. I went back and forth with Mr. Pasewicz, over a few days, on that very issue. I was concerned about both being a good steward for the bow and with resale. I was also concerned with his opinion as a craftsman, as to which would yield a more "sound" bow.

He said, that in this case, the devaluation would be a "wash." The original frog had nickel mounts. The new frog (with matching nut) would have silver mounts, hence, higher value. He also said that a modern frog and nut would yield a more structurally sound bow, in his opinion.

Thus, in either case, he estimated a drop in value of about 15%; either with the restored frog and nut (with nickel) or the new frog and nut (with silver)

He also, with some humility, said that while the repaired frog would look almost as good as new, in a few years, there may be even better adhesives/technology for such restoration efforts. He talked about the significant advances that have happened in the world of epoxies, within the last few years.

He was willing and able to complete either option. The new frog will actually cost more than a rebuilt one. It seemed as if it would yield a more stable bow, however, of similar (but, as you say, reduced) value.

I am certainly no expert on these things. I am only sharing the little information/perspective I have on this particular case.

Personally, I would go with the restored way BUT, I haven't seen the damage so I'm shooting in the dark here.

[Eric Swanson]

Turns out I misunderstood (not my first time, either ); the structural integrity will be the same, whether its a new frog or a restored one. I was talking with Jerry Pasewicz yesterday about it, as we were discussing the job.

In light of that, I am also inclined to go with a restored frog, just to keep as much original material in place as possible. My concern is that if the restoration doesn't happen now, the original frog may never be fixed. So, as the bow's current steward, I feel somewhat obligated to have it mended, rather than as a collection of broken parts.

Interestingly, Mr. Pasewicz mentioned that many players routinely have him make reproduction frogs, for daily use, so that they may keep their original frogs safe and out of harm's way. Perhaps, after I have the original restored, I will also go with the duplicate frog approach.

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Eric Swanson

Turns out I misunderstood (not my first time, either ); the structural integrity will be the same, whether its a new frog or a restored one. I was talking with Jerry Pasewicz yesterday about it, as we were discussing the job.

In light of that, I am also inclined to go with a restored frog, just to keep as much original material in place as possible. My concern is that if the restoration doesn't happen now, the original frog may never be fixed. So, as the bow's current steward, I feel somewhat obligated to have it mended, rather than as a collection of broken parts.

Interestingly, Mr. Pasewicz mentioned that many players routinely have him make reproduction frogs, for daily use, so that they may keep their original frogs safe and out of harm's way. Perhaps, after I have the original restored, I will also go with the duplicate frog approach.

Like I said, I haven't seen the damage so I can't comment on the usage part. If he mentioned it can be restored for less than making a new Frog then gee, it's a no brainier. Frogs don't usually get banged around and the Glues out there are stronger than the wood itself so it's a no brainier in my book.

[Thomas Erickson]

Originally Posted by Eric Swanson

many players routinely have him make reproduction frogs, for daily use, so that they may keep their original frogs safe and out of harm's way. Perhaps, after I have the original restored, I will also go with the duplicate frog approach.

I find this interesting - granted, I know little about fine bows and the preservation/restoration thereof, but I have to wonder about the value of a fine old bow (or instrument) if it isn't being used to create music. To me, that's a very stark line. Personally, I would not buy an instrument (or bow) that i didn't intend to use, if even minimally, because to me it seems like turning instruments into "commodities" is a disservice to our community in the long run.

[Eric Swanson]

Originally Posted by Thomas Erickson

I find this interesting - granted, I know little about fine bows and the preservation/restoration thereof, but I have to wonder about the value of a fine old bow (or instrument) if it isn't being used to create music. To me, that's a very stark line. Personally, I would not buy an instrument (or bow) that i didn't intend to use, if even minimally, because to me it seems like turning instruments into "commodities" is a disservice to our community in the long run.

I probably expressed the idea badly. It happens with me sometimes.

What Mr. Pasewicz said was that some players have a reproduction frog made, and fitted to their bows, for daily use. This occurs most often with expensive bows that are out in the world, being played, in harm's way.

[Thomas Erickson]

Originally Posted by wayne holmes

Once again, Thomas, you make a lot of sense. Is preserving the original frog and using its twin---would that fall into the kludge zone of things?

Nah, not really - It just seems to me like making music with a good old instrument or bow, and repairing/maintaining it through its life, is more in line with "preserving" it, as opposed to taking pieces off and leaving them in a drawer someplace so they don't get damaged. I mean, if we're too scared of hurting these things to take them out and play them, then why are they really so valuable? And I don't mean to be critical or anything, of course - I can't fault someone for being concerned for the safety of a nice instrument or bow!

[Eric Swanson]

Thank goodness we can all make our own choices.

For me, I will continue to choose to wear a seat belt, to wear steel-toed shoes at work, and to strap my young daughter into her car seat.

Once it is restored, I will try to keep my bow from further damage, in any way I can. I plan to continue to use it, daily. I am very fortunate to own such a bow; my recent experience nearly destroying it, through my own thoughtlessness, has simply provided a clear wake-up call. It may be that nobody besides me needs such a warning...

My hope, in starting this thread, was to underscore the frailty of such precious things (including, apparently, my short-term memory ). It is my wish that the discussion may help someone else from making such a grotesque error.

[Thomas Erickson]

Last I checked, to err is only human... and instruments can almost always be repaired. I often find more artistry in the repair than the original work itself...

I hope to some day own a truly great instrument, and that when I do I'll have the confidence to take it out and use for the purpose it was made for. And further, that if I happen to break it, I won't feel too bad about it.

[Eric Rene Roy]

Originally Posted by Thomas Erickson

...It just seems to me like making music with a good old instrument or bow, and repairing/maintaining it through its life, is more in line with "preserving" it, as opposed to taking pieces off and leaving them in a drawer someplace so they don't get damaged. I mean, if we're too scared of hurting these things to take them out and play them, then why are they really so valuable? And I don't mean to be critical or anything, of course - I can't fault someone for being concerned for the safety of a nice instrument or bow!

Sometimes the original materials are banned now...and taking them out of the country is risky if you don't have the proper paperwork. I know very good dealers who have had tortoise shell or ivory frogs confiscated by customs...even having what they thought to be the needed papers!

[David Powell]

Years ago I did the same thing with a nearly brand new Gossen Luna Pro light meter. That was in the ancient times when measuring light was a prerequisite for getting a photo;- on a curious material called gelatin-silver "film". Of course there were autos back then, but these had distributors, points, etc.; - but I digress. I took a light reading for a late evening shot at my parents' house, set the meter on top of my station wagon and then took the shot. In the meantime, it got too dark to see it easily and then I loaded up to drive over 200 miles, my brother following me in his car about 50 yards behind for the first several miles. Once we hit highway speed it flew off my car and bounced off his windshield. He flashed his lights and we stopped. He didn't know what it was but it was apparent that it had come off of my car and then I thought back and figured it out. 2 weeks later I came back to the same spot where we had stopped and searched for it. Miraculously the Luna Pro survived the incident, and it was many years before it finally stopped working.

These things always happen when we break a routine that usually keeps us out of trouble. In this case it was a rare fleeting sunset, for Eric, a bassbag with no bow case pocket. It can happen to anyone for the odd reason. I'm glad to hear that the stick was intact, Eric. It will play again.

Ken, one of my favorite bass-on-the-roof-of-the-car stories is from Danny Thompson. He has an old French bass that he had no idea what it was when he bought it (£5) because it was covered with some cheap black paint. He routinely drove it to gigs strapped to the roof of some tiny English car that was the only vehicle between all of his band at the time. One evening they chanced into a rather persistent deluge on the way home and the paint started coming off revealing the 200+ year old varnish;- on a Gand. Apparently is survived intact and he still plays it to this day.

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by David Powell

Ken, one of my favorite bass-on-the-roof-of-the-car stories is from Danny Thompson. He has an old French bass that he had no idea what it was when he bought it (£5) because it was covered with some cheap black paint. He routinely drove it to gigs strapped to the roof of some tiny English car that was the only vehicle between all of his band at the time. One evening they chanced into a rather persistent deluge on the way home and the paint started coming off revealing the 200+ year old varnish;- on a Gand. Apparently is survived intact and he still plays it to this day.

A Gand? Would love to see that. Most basses called or attributed to Gand are not. Real basses by Gand are rare.