Prescotts and other 1800s Yankee Basses

[Paul Warburton]

Kenny, gimme a couple of days. As I remember, the pics are pretty dark. Also, I don't know where in hell I got the word 'feathered' I meant 'scarfing,' not in terms of eating, but in terms of using 'new' wood melted into the 'old' wood on the top.

[KSB - Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Paul Warburton

Kenny, gimme a couple of days. As I remember, the pics are pretty dark. Also, I don't know where in hell I got the word 'feathered' I meant 'scarfing,' not in terms of eating, but in terms of using 'new' wood melted into the 'old' wood on the top.

Do they mention anywhere in the article about the FFs being filled and re-cut. I would assume if they went to that much trouble to re-store the Bass, the original Ffs would have been saved. No matter how hard I look at the pics of this bass, I can't see how it would be possible to change the FFs without any visible scars.

We all loved Scotty's playing so let's not mix Music and Bass Pedigrees here. My main concern is the Originality of this Bass and it's Pedigree. I don't care if it was a German Bass or a Prescott of a composite with a replaced top. It will not change the history Scotty made. I just wanna confirm this Bass and the work done to it. That said, I stand by my opinion that the FFs on that Bass are not Prescott. The purfling also looks a bit different as well compared to the ones that I have seen. The Placement of the FFs to the edge and the edges them selves seem more rounded with more 're-carve' than the Prescotts I have seen. Prescotts are usually flatter around the edges. I just looked at 6 of them on line and they all looked similar with the 7th being different, Scotty's!
Standard Prescott Edge/FF/Purfling; http://www.nahrmannbass.com/basses/P.../jdsc_0418.jpg

Scotty's Bass for comparison; http://www.kolstein.com/instruments/...87/b1287_7.jpg

[Silversorcerer]

Ken, I very well follow you on this one. I guess the scroll on SF's bass was a Prescott type but not the rest of the bass. It seems like if Kolstein went inside that bass there would be more tell tale signs, such as American species blocks versus European varieties. Certainly there are clues beyond the f holes but those don't look like the same maker at all.

I have another question about Prescott idiosyncracies in the scroll area. There is a kind of scooping in away from the outside of the pegbox into the first turn of the scroll. Do you know if Prescott originated that type of scroll detail or if he took it from an earlier example? Would it be correct to say that that characteristic of the scroll is purely American in origin?

[KSB - Ken Smith]

Silver, It was written somewhere that it was believed that Prescott copied an old English Scroll for his model. I don't know if they are referring to Basses or Gambas on this one. I have seen other American Scrolls with carvings as well. Some have 4 and even 6 turns at the Head. I have seen Italians with an extra turn but never with 6. This seems to be mostly early American. Prescotts Scrolls vary from period to period but they are always the same idea. Scrolls are carved in at the top with inlaid plates for all that I have seen. FF holes are wide and short looking and usually upright but some have a bit of slant. Most that are un-altered are attached to the top at the ends.

I see the most variation on the neck block and back construction. Some backs are double thickness with the ribs bent around them using the back lip channel as the bending form. My Batchelder is made that way. Some have neck blocks that from the outside seem to be the original design while many others have raised upper ribs at the neck suggesting they were made 'blockless'. Ofcourse these have been 'blocked' at the first chance during its earliest restoration. My Prescott was cut down and the original Purfling only shows in the corners and the 'button' area. We will try to figure out what shape and size this was originally if at all possible once the top is off.

The other thing that varies with these Basses are the sizes he made as well as design. Gamba and Busetto were made as well as two different Block/less designs. I have seen a 3/4 Gamba the huge ones on line over 7ft Tall and the cut versions like mine. I would guess he made mostly 7/8-4/4 sizes with some 3/4 and some 5/4 models over his life span.

[Bassphil]

Originally Posted by arnoldschnitzer

Phil--nice bass! I'd not heard of Allen being involved with Prescott before. Do you know any more about that? He was known as a "maker of scientific and musical instruments", and supposedly has a microscope in the Smithsonian museum.

That's exactly what I know about him. A few years ago when I was in D.C for a gig, I stopped by the Smithsonian, but they were incredibly unorganized. They couldn't tell me what they had in their collection at all. Tom Charlap once told me that he only knew of three existing J.B. Allan basses- his, mine, and one at the Smithsonian.

My old bass teacher, Tony Leonardi, sold the bass to me, and he also passed along an old bass appraisal from David Horine of Cincinnati's Bass Viol Shop. Here's what Horine had to say:

This instrument was New England made. The maker had to have worked with Abraham Prescott because of:
1. The way the head of the scroll is scooped in
2. The bar across the bottom of the scroll
3. Wide purfling
4. Outside lining

Other distinguishing characteristics:
F holes are long and flowing similar to the maker Klotz, but his were not joined. Wood and workmanship also identifies it as New England made.


There was an article and expose on a J.B. Allen bass pretty recently in the ISB magazine, but I can't seem to find it right now. I'll try to dig it up.

Originally Posted by Ashly Long

Hasn't Dominic Duval got a Prescott.

Yep, Dominc's bass is a Prescott. He came over to my house for a rehearsal with my wife (who's a pianist) and we compared axes. His was a little older than mine from what I remember (mine was made in 1842).

Originally Posted by arnoldschnitzer

I believe this refers to Prescott's church basses, which resemble a cello with a short neck. I've seen several Prescott double basses with original necks featuring about a 43" string length. The double basses were not made for singing accompaniment; the church basses were.

That's the truth! It's hard to sing on an instrument when you have to stand on your toes to get into the upper register! My bass has a short neck, but still had a 44 inch vibrating string length. Recently, I had David Gage put a new neck on for me to release some of the string tension- it was a REALLY tight bass.

It's even louder than before, now that it has a better neck angle and normal string tension. The last time that I subbed with the Vanguard Jazz Orchestra, they asked me to turn my amp down. Then funny thing was, I wasn't using an amp at all...

[KSB - Ken Smith]

Phil, I blew up pics of your FF holes and Scotties I found on the web b4 the crash; http://www.geocities.com/chuck_ralston/12slfpho.htm

His FFs and Scroll resemble your JB Allen more by far than Any Prescott in existence. I now see how this Bass could have been mistaken for a Prescott. It has been a common mistake to call a Bass a Prescott when it has similarities due to lack of knowledge of the other makers of his time influenced by him. Your Bass being Branded and similar to the one Robbie MacIntosh restored not at Arnolds make me believe the Lafaro bass is actually a contemporary Prescott copy made by JB Allen.

Have I gone too far? Did I cross the 'line'? Did I step on any toes? This in no way devalues the Lafaro Bass. If anything it explains why the FFs are different. Go ahead and Google Scott Lafaro and blow up every pic you see with that Bass.

Phil’s FFs; http://www.philpalombi.com/images/ba...thumb_1267.jpg
http://www.philpalombi.com/images/ba...thumb_1279.jpg
Lafaro’s FFs; http://www.kolstein.com/instruments/...87_7_thumb.jpg
http://www.kolstein.com/instruments/...87_1_thumb.jpg

These Basses are very similar right down to the scratched Purfling on Phils and the Purfling on Scotties if it is original.

Whether it be a Tewksbury, a Dearborn, a JB Allen or an Actual Prescott the Bass is still a great old New England Bass. Both Arnold and Upton currently have an old Yankee Bass that has at one time been called a Prescott Bass but actually isn't.

Not every Bass from Milan in the 18th century was a Testori, etc..

[Eric Rene Roy]

Speaking of the two Prescott school basses we have, and other I have seen, why is it they have a common character in that the volute has been severed from the pegbox and reglued.



&



At least for the two basses I have to look at daily, the volute and pegbox are original wood...but the grain is ever so slightly off enough to say that about 5mm or so of material was removed. Or another theory I have is that it was not removed...but rather it is original to the maker and the volute was carved separately?

[Matthew Tucker]

His FFs and Scroll resemble your JB Allen more by far than Any Prescott in existence.

I'm intrigued by this detective story too.

Ken, I lined up the pics of the Palombi/Allen f (left) and the Kolstein/Lafaro f (right) and what leaps out to me is the different way the tabs are cut.

You can see on the shot of Lafaro that the tabs are cut the way they are on the Kolstein/lafaro bass.

In terms of placement and angle, the Kolstein f's appear more upright and closer to the C than on the jb Allen, and appear to match those on Lafaro's bass pretty well.

Where do you find the similarity with the jb Allen fs?

FYI I'm also attaching a small pic of Lafaro which shows the *bottom* of the f-holes, (which the same pic on Chuck's site doesn't seem to show).

[KSB - Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Matthew Tucker

I'm intrigued by this detective story too.

Ken, I lined up the pics of the Palombi/Allen f (left) and the Kolstein/Lafaro f (right) and what leaps out to me is the different way the tabs are cut.

You can see on the shot of Lafaro that the tabs are cut the way they are on the Kolstein/lafaro bass.

In terms of placement and angle, the Kolstein f's appear more upright and closer to the C than on the jb Allen, and appear to match those on Lafaro's bass pretty well.

Where do you find the similarity with the jb Allen fs?

FYI I'm also attaching a small pic of Lafaro which shows the *bottom* of the f-holes, (which the same pic on Chuck's site doesn't seem to show).

If you look at the JB Allen on Arnolds Gallery page you will see another variation as well. What I do see it the same hand making the cut. The center Swell on the Allen FFs look similar on both pics but NEVER on a single Prescott. Believe me, I have looked 100 times at all these pics and I don't wanna burst any bubbles here. I just want people to free their minds and look with open eyes.

The 5-string Gagliano in the Elgar Bood turns out to be a Joseph Panormo now. The Nicolo Amati used by 'Virtuoso de Roma' on all the Vivaldi recordings of the 1950s-'60s is now attributed to CG Testori. This happens alot with old instruments attributed to famous makers. If we never saw a JB Allen or Dearborn we would most likely call them all Prescotts. There is nothing bad here, just open minds looking for truth in Bass making history.

[KSB - Ken Smith]

Now if you can, post these two side by side and turn the JB allen straight.

JB; http://www.philpalombi.com/images/ba...thumb_1267.jpg
Lafaro; http://www.kolstein.com/instruments/...87_7_thumb.jpg

Tell me what you see now...

[Eric Rene Roy]

Hey Ken,

Maybe this helps?

[KSB - Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by eroy

Hey Ken,

Maybe this helps?

Wow, is that one over the other? Only the upper and lower holes seem slightly different but I also see the same 'Idea' (as some call it in the business) with either of the two.

Now, to back up my theory, take any "confirmed" Prescott in the world and lay Scotties FFs over the 'Prescott' FFs and tell me if you see a single 'ounce' of Prescott's design on the Lafaro FFs at all.

PS: When you get the chance, tell me if the FFs on your Prescott School mystery Bass have been altered like I asked you last week. Then, lay them over this JB Allen as well as Arnolds JB in his Gallery page that he has on consignment. Let's see if we can't pin a Name or shop on your Bass as well. Arnold also has a Prescott School Bass much like mine but the FFs and Scroll are wrong. I will ask him if he and the owner have any interest to get into this game.

Still, I would love to see a 'confirmed' Tewksbury' Bass if not a few of them. Also, Jason Syphers' Bass (The TalkBasses II Page/Gallery; http://www.thetalkbasses.com/ ) looks halfway between the JB and Dearborn (Add: and a tad like my Batchelder) in the FFs as well but that's going to be another chapter in this 'wood hunt'!

[Eric Rene Roy]

Here are the pics for now. I'll play with photoshop later. I gotta get this bass done for a Saturday pickup!!!


http://www.stringrepair.com/images/db10/MVC-756F.JPG


http://www.stringrepair.com/images/db10/MVC-757F.JPG


http://www.stringrepair.com/images/db10/MVC-758F.JPG


http://www.stringrepair.com/images/db10/MVC-759F.JPG


http://www.stringrepair.com/images/db10/MVC-760F.JPG

[Jeff Bollbach]

[quote=KSB - Ken Smith]If you look at the JB Allen on Arnolds Gallery page you will see another variation as well. What I do see it the same hand making the cut. The center Swell on the Allen FFs look similar on both pics but NEVER on a single Prescott. Believe me, I have looked 100 times at all these pics and I don't wanna burst any bubbles here. I just want people to free their minds and look with open eyes.

Ken, I agree with you 100% on the issue of looking at the hand instead of the general characteristics. Almost all makers regularly experiment with variables on the effs. Let's try 'em a little wider, more erect, bigger eyes, shrink 'em on down-whatever. What doesn't change is the maker's hand and his genetic expression of a curve. This stuff is very subtle. Certainly the effs are the single most defining aspect of an instrument. All curves on a bass can be telling- the arch, the c-bout, the turn of the volute etc., but the eff is the closest execution to freehand drawing which would most reveal the maker's hand. I definately see the similarities of which you are speaking.. That being said I do not believe the Lafaro bass to be an Allen. There are other factors that can add up. I was involved in the restoration process of Scotty's bass and I have had the opportunity to examine the MacIntosh restored Allen closely.Given the total picture, I can't see that the same anal retentive maker that made the known Allen bass made the Lafaro bass. Attention to detail is also a hallmark and the inside of the Scott bass did not bely what the Allen bass did. By a large margin. Is it a Prescott? Who knows. It's a rare instrument where all the hallmarks point in a definitive direction. That's why we have the caveat "School of".

[Matthew Tucker]

Originally Posted by KSB - Ken Smith

Now if you can, post these two side by side and turn the JB allen straight. [...]
Tell me what you see now...

yep that's what I did, I've been overlaying f's with photoshop all afternoon and all I can say is ... well, its not science, is it? I do see that where the tabs form on the Lafaro bass the narrowing of the f's is much finer and flows a longer curve into the tabs.

I don't see the similarity you see with the JB Allen f's either. Whoever cut the Lafaro f's had a very elegant hand, to my eye, and I don't see that on the Palombi jb Allen.

But then, I'm only looking at pictures, and i'm not a luthier.

[KSB - Ken Smith]

[quote=Jeff Bollbach]

Originally Posted by KSB - Ken Smith

If you look at the JB Allen on Arnolds Gallery page you will see another variation as well. What I do see it the same hand making the cut. The center Swell on the Allen FFs look similar on both pics but NEVER on a single Prescott. Believe me, I have looked 100 times at all these pics and I don't wanna burst any bubbles here. I just want people to free their minds and look with open eyes.

Ken, I agree with you 100% on the issue of looking at the hand instead of the general characteristics. Almost all makers regularly experiment with variables on the effs. Let's try 'em a little wider, more erect, bigger eyes, shrink 'em on down-whatever. What doesn't change is the maker's hand and his genetic expression of a curve. This stuff is very subtle. Certainly the effs are the single most defining aspect of an instrument. All curves on a bass can be telling- the arch, the c-bout, the turn of the volute etc., but the eff is the closest execution to freehand drawing which would most reveal the maker's hand. I definately see the similarities of which you are speaking.. That being said I do not believe the Lafaro bass to be an Allen. There are other factors that can add up. I was involved in the restoration process of Scotty's bass and I have had the opportunity to examine the MacIntosh restored Allen closely.Given the total picture, I can't see that the same anal retentive maker that made the known Allen bass made the Lafaro bass. Attention to detail is also a hallmark and the inside of the Scott bass did not bely what the Allen bass did. By a large margin. Is it a Prescott? Who knows. It's a rare instrument where all the hallmarks point in a definitive direction. That's why we have the caveat "School of".

Jeff, first off, thanks for coming up and sharing your insight and revealing your involvement with the Lafaro Bass. I would like to point attention to another 'known' Allen Bass owned by Phil here on TB. That has a different Varnish and less detail than the Restored one at Arnolds. The Restored Bass has Purfling and a lighter re-fined Varnish as well as an extra 'added' upper 'false' busetto. Phil's Bass has scratched lines instead of purfling like we see on some Prescotts, as it is known he did not put purfling in all his Basses. Phil's Bass also has the makers brand that says "Manfactured by ...". When I see the word Manufactured I think of a business and not someone in his basement making a single Bass. I also think he may of had employees to use that term in his label. I could be wrong about the shop size but never the less, Phil's Bass is branded JB Allen and has much less fancy detail than the Restored Bass at Arnolds. This to me shows that in his lifetime he could have easily made more than one grade of Bass. I would not rule out Allen so quickly if the FFs, being an important ID factor are so close on both the Lafaro Bass and Phil's JB Allen.

JB Allen is definitely Prescott School as is Dearborn, Tewkesbury, Batchelder and Scotty’s Bass whom ever made it but I would rule out Prescott before any of the others due mainly to the FFs.

[Paul Warburton]

Jeff, can you tell us more about your involvement with Scotties bass?
I couldn't find that ISB with the pics and story on the restoration. Since you were there, i'd love to hear more about it.

[Jeff Bollbach]

Originally Posted by Paul Warburton

Jeff, can you tell us more about your involvement with Scotties bass?
I couldn't find that ISB with the pics and story on the restoration. Since you were there, i'd love to hear more about it.

That bass was a wierd thing, cuz it was stored in view right above where I usually worked. The neck was burnt away and the treble upper bout and adjacent top plate was charcoal. You'd come into work every day and see the thing knowing somebody had died with it. That was a little trippy. Well, it was stored for years [don't ask me why] until it was finally rebuilt. At the time I hadn't yet developed any real chops so I didn't get to do any of the more difficult work. Basically the bass needed a new rib, a graft into the top and a new neck[I can't remember if there was a new neck block but that would be likely] with the most challenging work being the graft into the top. It was a sizable chunk. BTW, here's my little contribution to history, ignominious though it may be. When the piece was grafted on I was given the instruction to use a Jap saw to cut off the excess. Well I had never used one before and didn't understand how they work. Theses saws are deeper at the end which is the reverse of western saws. It' hard to explain exactly how this happened but as i was cutting off the piece I didn't realize that the end of the saw was cutting deeper and as a result it cut into the old wood of the top. If you look at the repair today you'll see the grafted wood and starting at the glue joint will be a dead straight saw kerf extending about an inch into the old wood. That was fun to look at everyday for years to come!

[KSB - Ken Smith]

Jeff, thanks for the 'human' input you had with a most historical Bass. It is nice to hear some info after decades of silence about it other than what Barrie writes.

Now, as far as Prescott restorations go, mine was just opened up. Arnold reported some interesting discoveries. The Top still has some evidence left of the Bass having Rabbit joints on the Top as well as the Back where the ribs were bent around the plates instead of using a form. This Bass was reduced in size overall and must have been trimmed just inside the Purfling line and re-carved internally to even the Bass out by that Joint. This means that this is an earlier Prescott than originally thought. We originally dated it due to the Dearborn Label as maybe old stock when the Bought the Shop from Prescott in 1845 or so but not have a different viewpoint on it's age. This also means it is a Deerfield Bass and not made in Concord. We now believe this early 4/4 cut down Prescott to be c.1810-1820 as his later Basses also have a lighter Varnish and different construction. I have seen one other Bass pictured with this Varnish dated c.1810.

Arnold also found an old repair label inside from O.H. Bryant, August 1941. Bryant was the main repairman for the Boston Symphony. He died in 1943 at the age of 70. He was 68 when he worked on this Bass.
This Prescott of mine has had many alterations. It currently has a replaced Neck (graft), Neck Block, Size totally trimmed and reduced, Bass Bar replaced (but very old), Converted from 3 to 4 strings in the latter part of the 19th century with French gears and the Upper Ribs re-bent and sloped inwards as it is evident in the lighter Varnish color of the upper Ribs.

The Cross Bars in this Bass are Pine (as is the Top) and will be replaced as they are literally falling off the Back. The Bass Bar might remain but I have to look at it along with the Graduations which are almost perfect. The Top being slightly thicker near the Bar makes me think that the person that 'might' have done a re-graduation on the Top worked around the Bar instead of removing it. This being an Early Prescott and in fantastic condition leads me to believe Prescott left the Top extra thick as it is 11mm on one spot but 7mm right next to it. Maybe it was 11mm at that point and re-graduated to 7mm as far as possible without disturbing an otherwise good Bass Bar. The Bar itself it crude according to Arnold and he may just re-shape it slightly and leave the Top as is. "Aint Broke, dont fix!".. The Bass will need a Neck-graft again to get the proper Bridge height, Neck-stand, D-stop and string length desired by today’s professional Orchestra player. A few cracks need to be glued, Blocks glued back, half edging on about 1/2 the underside of the Top and a host of other small but important details. I have asked Arnold to document his work as best possible on film as this Bass IS a real Prescott and maybe one of the oldest examples of a Yankee Bass we have seen from the inside.

[Paul Warburton]

Sorry about this everyone..i'm just fascinated with the fact that Jeff worked with, at, together with Kolstein. I suppose it's just that I consider Jeff on the same level (IMHO, higher )