Prescott Bass Restored by Lou DiLeone

[ctcruiser]

Last weekend, I had the opportunity to go and meet Lou DiLeone at his workshop in a nearby town. While he is retired, he is still working on a few select basses to keep active.

He has recently completed a restoration of a Prescott bass. Originally a 3-string bass, he converted it to a 4-string. The flat-back body and headstock/scrollwork are original, while he has replaced the neck. He still has the original neck and tailpiece in his possession.

The interesting thing to see with the bass is the way he covered the original 3 peg holes with wood inserts that are flush with the headstock instead of using metal plates.

The bass sounds as good as it looks. He is selling the bass through his friend David Mix out of Branford, CT.

Here is a link for pictures I took of Lou and the Prescott bass:

http://new.photos.yahoo.com/w_keith_...60762386543575


He has several other bass restorations at his workshop. He has completed an Austrian Lemböck along with a Juzek. On two work tables, he had two Italian basses that are in different stages of repair. I think he mentioned that one of them was a Palotta (sp?). I took pictures of the Lemböck that I will post when I get a chance.

[Ed Fuqua]

The scroll on that sucker is huge, how heavy is the bass?

[ctcruiser]

Originally Posted by Ed Fuqua

The scroll on that sucker is huge, how heavy is the bass?

Not sure. It was heavier than my Engelhardt which weighs about 40 pounds.

[Alex Scott]

I would love to see the Lembock pics, My bass has a Lembock label (A photocopy) and I would like to see what a real one looks like.

Also did he revarnish the Prescott? I can see no marks of age, or is that just the photos?

[ctcruiser]

Originally Posted by Alex Scott

Also did he revarnish the Prescott? I can see no marks of age, or is that just the photos?

Yes, he did revarnish the bass. He told me about how he makes his own varnishes. I did notice a few age spots on the scroll. But, the body of the bass looks as good as the photos. He is very meticulous in his workmanship.

[PB+J]

Wow--that's beautiful--thanks for posting it.

When was that Prescott made?

[Jason Sypher]

That bass looks so much like mine which is a relief because I get a lot of detractors that think it's not a prescott. The arching is of particular interest as they are both so high. The f holes on mine dont connect but the shape is identical. My scroll is enormous as well. Thanks for posting that, I'll pass it on when someone asserts that I have a "blockless wonder".

[D McCartney]

Originally Posted by ctcruiser

The interesting thing to see with the bass is the way he covered the original 3 peg holes with wood inserts that are flush with the headstock instead of using metal plates.

I can't see the headstock, where is it?

[billyfalconer]

I'm surprised he revarnished it. Doesn't that automatically devalue the bass to a fraction of what it would have been with the original varnish? Were there extreme problems with the original finish?

[bassist14]

Originally Posted by billyfalconer

I'm surprised he revarnished it. Doesn't that automatically devalue the bass to a fraction of what it would have been with the original varnish? Were there extreme problems with the original finish?

+1
same with the lemböck in the other thread.
i cant understand this, what a pity.

[ispider6]

I've heard that Lou does this to most of the basses that he restores. I've heard (and yes this is a rumor) that he believes his varnish will improve the sound of the instrument. I suppose that is up for debate but I don't think you can debate that it affects the value of the instrument negatively. I've watched antiques roadshow enough times to know that when you strip and revarnish antique furniture, the value is greatly affected. It's kind of like Thomas Kinkade painting one of his (way too popular) winter scenes over a Van Gogt. Sure it looks okay but you've ruined a masterpiece! Look, don't get me wrong, I've heard that Lou is a legendary restorer and trust that his expertise is second to none but I just don't understand why he does it.

[bribass]

Originally Posted by ispider6

I've heard that Lou does this to most of the basses that he restores. I've heard (and yes this is a rumor) that he believes his varnish will improve the sound of the instrument. I suppose that is up for debate but I don't think you can debate that it affects the value of the instrument negatively. I've watched antiques roadshow enough times to know that when you strip and revarnish antique furniture, the value is greatly affected. It's kind of like Thomas Kinkade painting one of his (way too popular) winter scenes over a Van Gogt. Sure it looks okay but you've ruined a masterpiece! Look, don't get me wrong, I've heard that Lou is a legendary restorer and trust that his expertise is second to none but I just don't understand why he does it.

When do you reach a point w/ an instrument where the original varnish is so trashed that the refinish , if done expertly, would not harm the value and maybe actually enhance it?

I pose this question because I own a Prescott that is very similar to the Gamba model that Lou restored in those pics.

My bass has, over it's long years, been repaired extensively. So many of it's repaired cracks have been overvarnished to the extent that there is not much of the original finish that is not covered w/ layers of dark varnish, slopily applied. However, this has aged into a patina and along w/ it's incredible sound, the bass has alot of great Mojo to be sure. But under intense light you can see all the layers of heavy handed repair varnish and I can't help but wonder what it would be like to rescue the orig. varnish out from under those layers. Marty Confurius said I could have it "wet sanded". I'd probably never touch it, but this thread has maid me curious about this question of original, but damaged vs. re-varnish (or wet sanding off overvarnish) issue and where exactly is that devalue/enhance value (or sound FTM) threashhold is.

BG

[musicman5string]

I'm not a fan of that varnish color.

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by bribass

When do you reach a point w/ an instrument where the original varnish is so trashed that the refinish , if done expertly, would not harm the value and maybe actually enhance it?BG

It's always preferable to have original varnish, but having been trained by a master violin maker, I've had a chance to examine some fine old instruments that have been re-varnished by some of the best. I've been told by master violin makers that the majority of the classic period instruments have either been totally re-varnished or because of many past repairs have little if any of the original varnish left on them. I do not believe that these instruments have lost any significant value because of this. IMO, the Prescott bass that Lou DiLeone restored most likely gained value rather than lost value. Unrestored instruments may have potential value, but only a few player/collectors like Ken Smith are willing to buy an instrument in unrestored condition.

However, there is no question that instruments that are re-varnished by non-expert, DIYers usually do lose significant value and many are in fact permanently damaged to the point that even an expert can not erase the damage. I don't even want to think about how many otherwise nice old basses I've had come into my shop that have been "restored" by amateur "luthiers" that made me want to cry.

[ispider6]

Originally Posted by Bob Branstetter

IMO, the Prescott bass that Lou DiLeone restored most likely gained value rather than lost value.

I think this is valid assuming that the original varnish was in bad shape. Unfortunately, we can no longer tell unless we ask Lou. On the other hand, I've heard that Lou revarnishes as a general rule (as a final step in his restorations). If that is true, then there must have been plenty of occasions where the varnish could have/should have been left alone. Oh well. Just some speculations on my part.

[Uncletoad]

Originally Posted by Bob Branstetter

It's always preferable to have original varnish, but having been trained by a master violin maker, I've had a chance to examine some fine old instruments that have been re-varnished by some of the best. I've been told by master violin makers that the majority of the classic period instruments have either been totally re-varnished or because of many past repairs have little if any of the original varnish left on them. I do not believe that these instruments have lost any significant value because of this.

So how do you make those kind of choices? What criteria do you apply or what circumstances have to be present to go one way or another?

[toman]

Just my two cents on the subject, but I personally would never buy an insturment like that if it had been re-varnished. (if I ever had that kind of money...) To me, it completely devalues the bass. So what if it has tons of repairs and "touch ups", that's just the history of the bass. IMO, it's better to leave the instrument alone and have it look "ugly" than to to strip it and re-finish it.

[bribass]

Originally Posted by Uncletoad

So how do you make those kind of choices? What criteria do you apply or what circumstances have to be present to go one way or another?

Take a look- http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/Albu...&a=32068858&f=
Whataya think, would you;
[*]re-varnish completely
[*]wet sand and try to get down to "original" varnish
[*]leave it alone!

(how do I put up one of those poll thingies?)

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by toman

Just my two cents on the subject, but I personally would never buy an insturment like that if it had been re-varnished. (if I ever had that kind of money...) To me, it completely devalues the bass.

You might not even suspect that it had been refinished. I've had some come into my shop that I didn't even suspect refinishing until I had the top off and found remnants of the original varnish.

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by Uncletoad

So how do you make those kind of choices? What criteria do you apply or what circumstances have to be present to go one way or another?

Refinishing would always be a last resort situation. If french polishing or touchup won't give you the desired results, there may be no other choice. I can't imagine a situation where I would refinish a customers instrument, but if I (or rather my shop) owned it, I might consider refinishing if it would increase the sales potential. It would have to be an unusual case since to do the job right, it is a very time consuming operation and like any other business, time is money.