Greg F.

Members
  • Content Count

    305
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Greg F.

  1. I liked 1 and 7 about the same followed by 6. Least favorites were 2 and 5.
  2. Neat video. I'm sure you could make my cheapie bows sound way better than I can.
  3. Is the adjuster silver? The stick has that pernambuco look to it. Aren't these the qualities of an above minimum bow? But again, I'm a novice re bows.
  4. I like it. But I know little about bows as well and my standards are pretty low.
  5. While looking for a stick to put the German frog on, I noticed another instance* of "misspelled" Roman numeral assembly marks, i. e. a frog with "IIIV" on a stick with "VIII". Weird. *In another thread I showed a frog with "IIV" on stick with "VII" on it.
  6. Another (if you can take it) frog from a broken bow. Although I'm leaning towards silver mounts, I'm not 100% sure. It doesn't have the greenish look I'd expect of nickel. One piece heel, but no pins that I can see (tarnish might be obscuring one, but maybe not). Two pins in the adjuster. No pins or screws for the underslide (indicative of really cheap bows???). The lapping on the stick reminds me of pictures I've seen for French factory bows, but this is still all very new for me. Broken stick is unsigned. Again, I appreciate any and all info. Broken bows, and your comments, are cheap education for me. Looking at the adjuster, I wonder if this might be Japanese??
  7. The screws are covered in "rust". They don't look to be brass, but could be nickel. The tarnish on the adjuster matches well to that of the other silver parts, so I would assume that they've been together for a long time. Anyway, c. 1900 is good by me. I plan to find an appropriate stick to put it on and add it to my growing "collection" of usable bows.
  8. Perhaps a toad, instead?
  9. For whatever reason, I've been having fun looking at junker bows (if nothing else, they're dirt cheap entertainment) and came across a broken one with a better than average (as compared with others in my pile) frog. It came with a stick that is missing the head. The frog and bow have matching #s (IIII), with the bow being stamped Tourte and Germany. It appears to be silver mounted. The heel plate is two piece with two pins for the larger part and one for the smaller. The slide is held with two screws. There is one pin in the adjuster. So, being as it's German, would this be a relatively new frog (post WWII) or perhaps pre-WWI? Or are frogs generally undateable? (There's a joke in that last question somewhere). Thanks in advance for any help.
  10. Bruce, Thank you for the detailed info. Regarding the ffs, they look (to me) significantly different (not just their placement). Is this to be expected? Greg
  11. Just a newbie commenting, but besides the location of the ff's their shapes (to my eyes) are also rather different. So was Guarnerius consistently inconsistent?
  12. Greg F.

    bow wood id

    I'd certainly like to know as well.
  13. Greg F.

    bow wood id

    Since it was suggested that bow #2 might be pernambuco, I've added a few more pics of this bow. I assume that it is a German trade bow as it is marked (faintly and worn in places) L. Bausch Leipzig. Thank you all for your generosity in replying to my newbie questions.
  14. The bow in this auction looked interesting, but it went for much more than my modest bid. French? Old? New? What are the tell-tale signs? http://www.ebay.com/itm/141910061749?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT
  15. Interesting thought about this perhaps being a viola bow. There is evidence that a winding was once present, but from what little I've read the older inexpensive bows were more likely to have tinsel rather than wire which might only add 1 gram to the weight rather than 5 grams. Or did I get this wrong? Also, I've seen it mentioned elsewhere that snakewood bows tend to be heavier in general and that amourette and snakewood are related. Is 727 mm (length without adjuster) reasonable for a violin bow?
  16. In general, is there any significance to the presence or absence of a black lining under the faceplate?
  17. Thanks for your comments and the pic. I agree, there is some similarity in the camfering. The head shapes are certainly different.
  18. Regarding screws, are older ones generally coarser thread than newer ones? Or is coarser more a sign of handmade versus machine made? Or does it mean nothing?
  19. This page is from the 1912 JTL catalog as reproduced on Roland Terrier's excellent web site. The adjuster shown therein has a very similar end to the 3rd adjuster above, although the threads do not extend as close to the opposite end. Does it mean anything? Beats me. http://www.luthiers-mirecourt.com/thibouville_1912_066.jpg
  20. Your opinion on the threads of adjuster 1 are the kind of help, though I assume are not conclusive, certainly can be an aid in identifying factory bows. Thanks.
  21. On characteristic that is mentioned often is the presence or absence of pins on the adjuster (which, of course, are easily changed). Here is a pic of some adjusters that were handy. Top was found with what I believe is a Japanese bow (pinned), middle was found loose and looks to be silver (pinned), and the bottom is from the bow above (no pin). Just something for comparison.
  22. This bow is being discussed elsewhere and it was suggested that I had hijacked that thread (which was not my intention). So anyway, one reader asked to see the head. Here are more pictures. I realize that it's not a rare or valuable bow (although from my perspective $200 isn't cheap...which is not to say that this one is worth such), but as a newbie I'm trying to get a better idea of how to identify bows by their likely place of manufacture. It's been mentioned that some of the "diagnostics" are muddled, especially in the 20th century, but I would hope that there is something one can go on.