button purfling idea

Don Harris · #1 10-23-2007, 07:27 PM

Here's what I think I'm going to do with the purfling on the back of the bass I'm building. I did a test run on a piece of maple and I'm really glad I did before I cut into the real bass. Learned a few things not to do. I'm also testing some varnish on it.

I forgot to mention that I shamelessly stole the purfling idea from this guy: http://www.cranfordpub.com/otis/_violins.htm

Jake deVilliers · #2 10-23-2007, 08:01 PM

That looks good Don. I like the way you've fattened it up to better suit the bigger instrument.

Great site too. Thanks!

Marcus Johnson · #3 10-23-2007, 08:36 PM

Looks wonderful.

Eric Rene Roy · #4 10-23-2007, 09:35 PM

I like it Don, not a lot of bending, but lots of miters!

I was looking at some of David Wiebe's new pics on his site and he did this one:

Bob Branstetter · #5 10-23-2007, 09:47 PM

It should look really nice on your bass. That design should allow you to avoid being too close to bottom the button. I hate to think about how many buttons I've had to repair because of breaks right on the purfling line directly below the button.

**Matthew Tucker** · #6 10-23-2007, 09:58 PM

I love David's purfling ... but that button shape is a bit unfortunate.

Don, I love your pattern. But doesn't the top crossover of your centre cross need to be the other way, so that the strip going from bottom left to top right goes OVER the other one?? That might be one of the things you learnt in your test run ...

Also, to my eye, the way the shoulder purfling breaks away and curves into the main drawn pattern doesn't look quite right yet. A bit crowded near the top of the pattern.

I think I'd try to get the upper curve matching the curve of the upper edge of the main pattern, to do this the shoulder purfling would need to stay with the edge a bit longer and curve down more steeply. Might not work, but that's where I'd be fiddling. Your test run looks better than the pencil work in this respect.

I was going to do some fancy purfling on my bass, but in the end I decided simple was better.

Don Harris · #7 10-23-2007, 11:06 PM

Thanks for the comments guys.

<<I was looking at some of David Wiebe's new pics on his site and he did this one:>>

I've been watching his site to see if any new pics were up. I'll have to head over there now. I have no idea how he bent the purfling like that! I've not been able to bend very far without everything separating or breaking. (now, looking at it again, he must have cut out the white center part and inlaid it instead of bending??)

You're right Matthew. The pencil lines connecting to the edge purfling were just a rough thing before I taped it onto the actual back. That's something I'll have to play with when I draw it out on the back.

Don Harris · #8 10-23-2007, 11:08 PM

<<doesn't the top crossover of your centre cross need to be the other way, so that the strip going from bottom left to top right goes OVER the other one??>>

Not sure I follow. Could you clarify?

edit: I get it. The Celtic knot thing. I didn't think that through enough, obviously. Glad you mentioned it. I was starting from the upper left side and always letting the first "pass" take precedence instead of making sure that the overs and unders were alternated. That's what I love about TalkBass.

**Matthew Tucker** · #9 10-23-2007, 11:22 PM

usually, a gaelic-style pattern like that goes under, over, under, over etc

Start on the top left "stalk" and trace your finger down the line. The first crossing it comes to, it crosses OVER two lines; but I think it should go UNDER the first line.

Then you have a perfect UNDER OVER, UNDER OVER, UNDER OVER, UNDER OVER

instead of OVER OVER, UNDER OVER, UNDER OVER, UNDER UNDER

But ... it doesn't have to be like that. It depends on how you see things

Don Harris · #10 10-23-2007, 11:51 PM

Got it. Thanks.

KSB - Ken Smith · #11 10-24-2007, 01:58 AM

My Gilkes completed in 1814 was masterfully inlaid with 7-layer purfling with paper thin layers (4 black lines, 3 white lines). The Button design looks to maybe be a Diamond Necklace. What does it look like to you?

The Bass was cut around 1870-1880 and as you can see, the original Purfling runs off the Bass under the Neck. We can only imagine what the original Button looked like with its Cello shoulders. Still, I think this is the most expertly performed Purfling Job I have ever seen on any String Instrument. Gilkes' Purfling work has been compared to Strad by the critics and after looking at the Back of a 1694 Strad, I saw first hand how similar the execution of the work is.

Here is one of the Back Corners showing the 7-layers as well with the miter fading away into the corner. Its 193 year life shows a bit of shrinkage as well.

If Samuel Gilkes could do this nearly a century before electricity was invented then why don't wee see more work of this level today?

**Matthew Tucker** · #12 10-24-2007, 02:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KSB - Ken Smith

I think this is the most expertly performed Purfling Job I have ever seen on any String Instrument [...] If Samuel Gilkes could do this nearly a century before electricity was invented then why don't wee see more work of this level today?

Can you explain what impresses you with the Gilkes purfling?

It may be the angle of photography, but in the pics you show it doesn't look particularly special, in fact the diamond back looks to my eye decidedly awkward in the way the purfling lines cross, or do they just touch, or do they run through or around each other? The whole diamond arrangement looks quite assymetrical, and the width looks very uneven in the pictures you show.

(Perhaps, consistent with work done by candlelight??)

The diamond, to me, looks like the back has been removed and the centre seam planed and re-glued.

KSB - Ken Smith · #13 10-24-2007, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Tucker

Can you explain what impresses you with the Gilkes purfling?

It may be the angle of photography, but in the pics you show it doesn't look particularly special, in fact the diamond back looks to my eye decidedly awkward in the way the purfling lines cross, or do they just touch, or do they run through or around each other? The whole diamond arrangement looks quite assymetrical, and the width looks very uneven in the pictures you show.

(Perhaps, consistent with work done by candlelight??)

The diamond, to me, looks like the back has been removed and the centre seam planed and re-glued.

Matt, he did it in 7 paper thin layers! That in itself is amazing. Inlaid into the corners as if it grew there! The Button area has a repair/graft inlay. Might have some touch-up around the center as you mention but the Back is glued solid. I had it in my hands during the restoration. Amazing work. One dealer came over from London to visit about 2 summers ago and could not believe the Purfling work. I usually give the person looking a flashlight and magnifier glass to see the detail and layers. It is simplistic but artistic. I think the crossover is done that way to resemble a twisted neckless chain. I am not really sure, no one to ask as they are all gone. Gilkes died in 1827 and took his craft with him.

It is noted in the book 'The British Violin' (pg. 80) and I quote, "Gilkes, however, was one of the finest cello makers of his age; indeed, he is in the first rank of English cello makers of any age. His sophisticated copies of Stradivari with a fine oil varnish are particularly successful."

This Bass was made during his employ in the William Forster shop which closed about 1819. Gilkes had his own shop on the side as well that he opened in 1810 around the same time he went to work for Forster. In 1820 he took on by contract (for 5 or maybe 7 years) a young John Thomas Hart as an apprentice at age 15.

This is Hart's only know personal work or at least his earliest dating between 1825-1830. We are using the date of c.1830 to be conservative for several reasons.

It now looks like this;

Not quite the level of Gilkes but sill by the grade of wood and the missing inlay in the half diamond, it was a special commission just like the Gilkes of 1814. Maggini model Basses from BF Fendt, Kennedy and even William Gilkes (b.1811, son of S.GIlkes) come a bit later in time.

Matt, come look at the Gilkes with your own eyes if you can. The workmanship throughout is breathtaking.

**Damon Rondeau** · #14 10-24-2007, 08:30 AM

Purfling has come a long way in 175 years!

**Matthew Tucker** · #15 10-24-2007, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KSB - Ken Smith

Matt, come look at the Gilkes with your own eyes if you can. The workmanship throughout is breathtaking.

OK. Don't move, I'll just put my flippers on, I'll be around in ... ooooh ... about 3 months?

Some time ago, I tried a test of 7-layer purfling after hearing your description. It was hard to make up, but not so hard to bend as the layers are so thin. But I didn't really like the effect much as the contrast between the layers was hard to see, and under varnish may have been even harder. Are you able to post better pics (use macro setting and lots of light) of the Gilkes purfling so we can see the layers? Can you tell if it is made from wood? Or has he used paper or card in the layers? how wide is the purfling channel?

And is the purfling added after cutting the shoulders in the same style and dimension?

KSB - Ken Smith · #16 10-24-2007, 10:54 AM

The width of the 7-layer is almost 1/16". The new Purfling after the Shoulder cut is about the same width but only 3-layer. Arnold did meet with this 7-layer Purfling while repairing one of the Corners on the Top. Maybe he can tell you what it was but I am thinking it could be paper. I can't do better pics. I am not that good with a Camera. Feel free to take pics when you visit.

On Damon's comment about how Purfling has come a long way in 175 years, I beg to differ. The work of greats like Strad and even Gilkes is still hard to match when you look closely into the corners.

**Damon Rondeau** · #17 10-24-2007, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KSB - Ken Smith

On Damon's comment about how Purfling has come a long way in 175 years, I beg to differ. The work of greats like Strad and even Gilkes is still hard to match when you look closely into the corners.

Just seeing if your leg has any stretch to it. Seriously, though, your Gilkes photos don't do any justice at all to the detail of that purfling work -- the opposite, in fact. If you're using a digital snapshot camera it is probably a very simple turn of the switch to put it in macro mode -- it's something those cameras do well and easily with no techno-fuss. That will let you show the detail I'm sure is there.

I like Don's purfling design, but I really like that Wiebe work (BUTTon and all!)