What does the term "factory/shop Bass" mean?

[Big Red Bass]

I have read here the term “factory/shop Bass” used. What does that exactly mean? I have searched the DB forum for a definition of the term but couldn’t fin one. I have even “googled” the term and can’t find an answer. I am just curious where it came from/originated. Thanks.

[toman]

Well, they're sort of self explanatory. A factory bass is one made in a factory, probably on some sort of assembly line, by many different people. A shop bass is simply an instrument that has been made in a shop, maybe by one person maybe by several, and is accredited either to the shop as a whole or the shop owner/luthier himself even though he may have had little part in actually making the bass. The next "level" is an instrument made start-to-finish by one luthier.

[KSB - Ken Smith]

To add to the well explained definitions above I want to mention the 'Cottage industry' which actually aided both 'Shop' and Factory made instruments.

Often (going back 100-150 years ago in Germany and somewhat in France) you had people that either made a particular part by skill or trade or by Guild or Union. I have seen the exact same Scroll on three different German brands. Obviously they all bought the Scrolls/Necks from the same maker/supplier/shop (whichever it may be) and fitted them to their Basses. This was going on with Violins thru Cellos as well.

In France, varnishing was done by those in Finishing Guild/Union and Scrolls done the same way by the Carving Guild. I have seen identical French Scrolls/Pegboxes on several individuals Makers Basses as well.

In Germany, different parts could be made in several peoples houses and assembled in the main shop of the makers brand.

An individual maker makes everything himself with the exception of help from his workers or apprentices. Alessandro Gagliano migrated north from Naples and worked for 30 years in Cremona training in the 2 biggest shops at that time as well. First with Niccolo Amati (teacher of Strad) and then in the Shop of Stradivari as well. Gagliano could not make a name for himself in Cremona with all the local competition including the shops of the Guarnieri family so he went back to Naples (c.1694/5) and and founded the second biggest tradition in the history of the Italian Violin, 'The Neapolitan School'. None of the Violins he worked on in Cremona with Amati or Strad were ever credited to him. Perhaps he just did some roughing out of assisted in the making but in either case, the Violins from these Shops say Amati (d.1684) or Strad. (d.1737).

Even with some of the most famous names you have a 'Shop'-type environment. The English mastered this work method in the 18th and 19th century with shops often employing some of the greatest individual makers. Many of them supplied instruments in the white to be completed for various shops as various grades as well who then put their own stamp and/or label in them.

I personally find this interesting having owned several old English Basses as well as inspected others from the same School. These Basses rank amongst the best instruments produced in the late 18th and early 19th centuries made anywhere.

The most famous American Bass (and Church Bass/Cello) maker in the early 19th century was Abraham Prescott who worked in this manner as well having several shops over a 35 year period in New Hampshire.

[arnoldschnitzer]

If I might add a bit to Ken's good exposition above; this was related to me by Gunter Krahmer (Pollmann) on a trip to Germany. For centuries German farmers, having little to do in the winter, have taken in piece work to keep busy and make a little money. The piece work might be sewing, assembling, document copying, etc. Wood carving (schnitzing) has always been a big crafts business in Germany, and so carving has also been done by farmers in winter. So has making of violin-family parts (there are even families that do nothing but scraping and sanding). There developed a small network of assembly shops where standardized necks, rib assemblies and top/back plates were turned into finished instruments, then varnished and set-up. This is one of the types of businesses which made "factory/shop basses". Nowadays, with the advent of duplicating equipment and changes in agriculture, I believe this system is just about extinct, though there are still certain artisans who take in "farmed-out" work (such as the chip-carved decorations on Pollmann basses).

[Martin Sheridan]

I think it may have been Roger Hargrave, the well known modern maker and writer, who stated that the idea of one person working alone in a shop making the instrument from start to finish is a relatively recent development. Strad Magazine, a few years ago, had an article on a Carlo Bergonzi violin. Near the end of the article it was mentioned that experts today believe Bergonzi may have purchased the violin "in the white" from the Stradivari shop, and finished it himself. Since he himself was a good maker they speculated that he made have had an immediate order to fill that was facilitated by buying the white violin from the Stradivaris.

Everyone appreciates the ability of those who can and do make instruments completely from scratch, but in the final analysis the instrument is a tool to be used by musicians to make music, so I've never quite understood the fuss made about factory or shop instruments, or perhaps I should say the put down they receive. They are what they are and we've all seen some really good ones and some really bad ones, not to mention that many factory instruments have been made better through the hands of competent makers and repairers.

[KSB - Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Martin Sheridan

I think it may have been Roger Hargrave, the well known modern maker and writer, who stated that the idea of one person working alone in a shop making the instrument from start to finish is a relatively recent development. Strad Magazine, a few years ago, had an article on a Carlo Bergonzi violin. Near the end of the article it was mentioned that experts today believe Bergonzi may have purchased the violin "in the white" from the Stradivari shop, and finished it himself. Since he himself was a good maker they speculated that he made have had an immediate order to fill that was facilitated by buying the white violin from the Stradivaris.

Everyone appreciates the ability of those who can and do make instruments completely from scratch, but in the final analysis the instrument is a tool to be used by musicians to make music, so I've never quite understood the fuss made about factory or shop instruments, or perhaps I should say the put down they receive. They are what they are and we've all seen some really good ones and some really bad ones, not to mention that many factory instruments have been made better through the hands of competent makers and repairers.

Carlo Bergonzi worked and trained in the Strad shop and after Strad died the shop was sold to him by Strad's widow. He may have inherited unfinished instruments and then completed them. How good is the source fo your information.

[Martin Sheridan]

Originally Posted by KSB - Ken Smith

Carlo Bergonzi worked and trained in the Strad shop and after Strad died the shop was sold to him by Strad's widow. He may have inherited unfinished instruments and then completed them. How good is the source fo your information.

I didn't save the magazine itself but I have the fold out of the violin dated 1731.Unfortunately the fold out is not dated, but it was in Strad Magazine perhaps mid 1990s? The article itself may have been written by Roger Hargrave. I believe it was Stradivari's son Paolo who told Count Cozio Salabue that the workshop was rented to Bergonzi after the deaths of Omobono and Francesco. If memory serves, and it often doesn't, Paolo Stradivari was negotiating the sale of the remaining Stradivari instruments, tools and drawings to the Count (the tools and drawings went from the Count to his son in law and then to Fiorini and are now in the Stradivari Museum in Cremona, Italy). I think the Count mentions the rental of the shop and that Paolo Stradivari tells him that some of the tools and molds were not returned by the Bergonzi.
Count Salabue's notes and writings on violins were encompassed in a book edited by Andrew Dipper and David Woodrow entitled Observations on the Constrution of Stringed Instuments and Their Adjustment...." I'm not sure if it is still in print. I gave my books away when I moved to Mexico. Count Salabue is considered the first violin collector and made detailed notes about all of the great Cremona makers. He employed G.B Guadanini to make violins for him using Stardivari's molds and designs. He also encouraged him to use the old Varnish which Guadaninin used in his youth, but I can't remember if he was successful in that endeavor.
Interestingly Salabue also employed the Montagazza(?spelling) brothers whom he said improved the tone of many of the old instruments through regraduation.
I'd put the book on the "must have" list of anyone interested in the makers of the golden age. I'll add as a final note that he has a varnish formula in it that was claimed to be that of Stradivari but I think the editors noted that a varnish could not be made with this formula. He was a great lover of violin family instruments and many of those that he purchased later went through the hands of Tarisio to the shops in Paris and London.

(edit) I just looked at the Bergonzi picture and though the fs are Stradivari like they are more open with greater space between the wings of the f and the top which could have been easily done with a knife. The purfling also is not as finely done as that of Stradivari. Perhaps Stradivari agreed to sell this violin because it did not meet his standards?