Have new basses always come apart?

[toman]

A spinoff of the other recent thread. I'm curious, 200 years ago, when people didn't have climate controlled houses, quallity bass bags, hygrometers, dampits and all the other stuff we have today, did new basses fall apart and have to be rebuilt after a few years? Because it seems to me like I see a lot of people who feel that it's perfectly acceptable for basses under ten years old to have problems like braces coming out, backs caving in, multiple wing cracks, loose tail blocks, repeatedly warping necks and fingerboards, chronic open seams needing the whole bass opened up to relieve tension, and more. Are all of these things just inherent in double basses? It doesn't seem like I see friends with newer cellos and violins with these problems, and yet it seems to be common in the bass community. I wonder if there's just an accepted lower standard in new double basses than other instruments, or whether it's just the nature of the beast. Just to be safe, I'm not pointing a finger or making any inferences about specific makers, companies or factories, this is just a question about double basses in general.

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by toman

A spinoff of the other recent thread. I'm curious, 200 years ago, when people didn't have climate controlled houses, quallity bass bags, hygrometers, dampits and all the other stuff we have today, did new basses fall apart and have to be rebuilt after a few years? Because it seems to me like I see a lot of people who feel that it's perfectly acceptable for basses under ten years old to have problems like braces coming out, backs caving in, multiple wing cracks, loose tail blocks, repeatedly warping necks and fingerboards, chronic open seams needing the whole bass opened up to relieve tension, and more. Are all of these things just inherent in double basses? It doesn't seem like I see friends with newer cellos and violins with these problems, and yet it seems to be common in the bass community. I wonder if there's just an accepted lower standard in new double basses than other instruments, or whether it's just the nature of the beast. Just to be safe, I'm not pointing a finger or making any inferences about specific makers, companies or factories, this is just a question about double basses in general.

You really can't compare how instruments held up 200 years ago with those today. 200 years ago, the instruments generally were made in the same region of the world where they were kept and played. That trip across the pond introduces problems that the old masters never had to think about. Different climates can put a lot of stress on a string instrument.

I've done a lot of repairing for local school districts and they are constantly buying new basses and cellos. The instruments they buy are best described as middle of the line from well established manufacturers. I don't see that there is a higher percentage of bass defects, but flatbacks do tend to have more problems than other basses. I see plenty of cellos with problems too. I would estimate that 15-20% of all the new instruments (both bass and cello) they buy develop some sort of structural problems within the first 1 to 3 years. I believe that some of these problems can be traced back to the failure to relieve stresses before the ribs are attached to the tables. Possibly stretching and bending ribs that do not exactly conform to the outline of the tables and depending on glue to hold everything in place. I also question if the wood used is always properly aged before being made into instruments. There is no question that some manufacturers cut corners to cut costs. I doubt if there would be any "affordable" instruments if they didn't. What else is new? YMMV

[toman]

Bob,

I hadn't even considered that, really. In your experience, how far away does an instrument have to go from where it was made in order to have issues, assuming of course that decent wood and acceptable produres were used in making it? Is it just an over-seas thing, or would say east coast to west coast be a problem?

[Bruce Lindfield]

I haven't heard of this happening in the UK - where our climate is moderate and damp!!

There has to be some advantage!!

[Paul Warburton]

Originally Posted by toman

Bob,

I hadn't even considered that, really. In your experience, how far away does an instrument have to go from where it was made in order to have issues, assuming of course that decent wood and acceptable produres were used in making it? Is it just an over-seas thing, or would say east coast to west coast be a problem?

Sorry to butt in BB....Toman, it's not about being "far away", it's about taking the bass from a relativley humid area to a dry area. The radically drying out is what makes the wood crack. Take a bass from NY to here in Colorado without slowly drying it out with damp-it's or some kind of slow humidifier type drying out and...look out!!

[arnoldschnitzer]

It's a basic rule in woodworking that you avoid joining pieces of wood at perpendicular angles. This is because wood swells and contracts mostly in width, and pieces joined at right angles will work loose or break over time. In a bass these types of joints occur where the ribs join the blocks, where the neck joins the body, where the top and back plates join the rib assembly, and in the case of flatbacks, where the braces join the back. So if the bass goes through rapid changes of heat/humidity, something is going to give. Nature of the beast. In the case of violins, they are so small that this effect is less problematic. But it does occur to a lesser extent. This is why it is important to use fairly weak glues when assembling instruments, and why monitoring humidity is crucial when you own a fine bass.

[Matthew Tucker]

Also ... the basses that fell apart 200 years ago probably didn't survive very long! I don't think anyone could claim that every instrument made 200 years ago was great. Its just that the ones that were great, were looked after and survived.

The other thing about basses is that although they're made of the same wood, the physics of them is somewhat different to fiddles because the wood used is *relatively* thinner and the structure of the wood is *relatively* finer than the smaller instruments. If the wood shrinks say 1% on a fiddle, the wood can probably just cope with it. But the same 1% shrinkage on a bass back is about four times the size ...

[Matthew Tucker]

Originally Posted by arnoldschnitzer

It's a basic rule in woodworking that you avoid joining pieces of wood at perpendicular angles.

Er ... depends what you're making, doesn't it?

[WillBuckingham]

Originally Posted by Bruce Lindfield

I haven't heard of this happening in the UK - where our climate is moderate and damp!!

There has to be some advantage!!

+1 Most of Western Europe has a maritime climate with relatively consistent weather year-round, while most of the U.S. and Canada have continental climates with more drastic changes in weather across the seasons.

[Bruce Lindfield]

Yeah - in other words it's always fairly wet - especially in Manchester!!

But we have been told that "Global Warming" is changing the South of England, to a dryer climate more like the Mediterranean - a double-edged sword?

[Bob Branstetter]

In the years before conglomerates took over most of the quality independent string instrument makers/importers/wholesalers, it was common practice for the instruments to be shipped from Europe with the tops and back just tack glued on. The instruments would be stored in the importer's warehouse for a year or more which gave the instrument time to adjust to the new climate (in locations such as Cleveland, Ohio). When sufficient time had passed, they would properly (hide) glue up the instrument as the first step in their shop adjustment. Unlike today, shop adjustment (from the wholesaler) meant something. I seldom had to do anything to the instruments prior to sale back then. Today, the vast majority of production makers use some type of white or yellow glue because it dries much faster and speeds up production. That is one of the main reason why we don't see as many minor seam openings today, but we do see more serious structural problems when they do break loose. Those are some of the places they cut corners!

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by KSB - Ken Smith

My point with Bob B. is that even if kept in one area in its life, Basses do move and crack.

Who said they didn't? The topic I was addressing concerned the first few years of a basses life. IMO, what happened to your basses over the next century or so is an altogether different topic.

[Damon Rondeau]

Originally Posted by Matthew Tucker

Er ... depends what you're making, doesn't it?

It's not that you shouldn't join wood with the grain at right angle. It's just that those sort of joins need to be designed with wood movement in mind. Something like the classic frame-and-panel door is a good example. The panels and stiles can move with the humidity but the movement isn't going to wreck the joints in 10 years. It might take 200.

[arnoldschnitzer]

Originally Posted by Bob Branstetter

In the years before conglomerates took over most of the quality independent string instrument makers/importers/wholesalers, it was common practice for the instruments to be shipped from Europe with the tops and back just tack glued on. The instruments would be stored in the importer's warehouse for a year or more which gave the instrument time to adjust to the new climate (in locations such as Cleveland, Ohio). When sufficient time had passed, they would properly (hide) glue up the instrument as the first step in their shop adjustment.

This reminds me of a question I hear about once a year: "I've brought in a bass from Europe--shouldn't I have the top seams opened and let it sit for awhile (to relieve tension so it doesn't crack), then have it glued back up?" My response is "No." When the instrument sits around unglued, the rib assembly shifts like crazy. OK, so this relieves "tension". But how do you glue the bass back together now? Of course, you push and pull the ribs around until the top fits again--reintroducing the same or even more tension you are supposed to be relieving. A better plan is to humidify a bit more than normal for a few months, and gradually wean the bass down to average conditions. Bob is right about overly strong glues that prevent seams from opening being the cause of a lot of cracking of commercial instruments. A similar problem is basses built with outside linings, which do essentially the same thing. Popping seams are safety valves!

[Matthew Tucker]

Originally Posted by arnoldschnitzer

A similar problem is basses built with outside linings, which do essentially the same thing.

Why is this? Because the gluing area is bigger and the seams stronger??

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by arnoldschnitzer

This reminds me of a question I hear about once a year: "I've brought in a bass from Europe--shouldn't I have the top seams opened and let it sit for awhile (to relieve tension so it doesn't crack), then have it glued back up?" My response is "No." When the instrument sits around unglued, the rib assembly shifts like crazy. OK, so this relieves "tension". But how do you glue the bass back together now? Of course, you push and pull the ribs around until the top fits again--reintroducing the same or even more tension you are supposed to be relieving. A better plan is to humidify a bit more than normal for a few months, and gradually wean the bass down to average conditions.

I agree with you that opening the seams and letting an instrument sit is not a good idea, however tack gluing worked quite nicely for that large Cleveland based wholesaler. I'm sure that they also controlled the humidity in their warehouses. Many of their employees were trained in Germany and the company brought them over and helped them become US citizens. They weren't dummys and the company had been in the business in the US since the 1920s. I certainly never experieced the kind of problems we see today when I was selling their instruments in the 60's and 70's.

Added 8/25/2006

I occurred to me after I wrote the above post that it is doubtful that they would have a humidity controlled warehouse in 1960 and even more doubtful that they would have had controlled humidity back in the 1920s when when the company was created. With the high cost of skilled labor today, a humidity controlled warehouse would no doubt to be far more economical than paying for the labor to reglue the tables on every instrument they sold. Ofcourse today the (conglomerate) company is more likely to be operating on "just in time" delivery.

[arnoldschnitzer]

Originally Posted by Matthew Tucker

Why is this? Because the gluing area is bigger and the seams stronger??

Yup.

[nicklloyd]

Central air (and heat) has caused more damage to basses and furniture in the last 50 years than the previous 200. (This is the idea of Robbie Macintosh...) Air conditioning, forced hot-air furnaces, and top-notch insulation have created humidity zones in people's homes that more extreme than typical outdoor conditions. Wood is still a plant, and although not connected to soil, it is a living thing.

[Bob Branstetter]

Originally Posted by nicklloyd

As an aside... I really doubt any warehouse involved with the import of basses had humidity control in the 1960s. How are you sure of this, Bob?

You need to look at my message again Nick.

[Silversorcerer]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

Why did the Gilkes NOT Crack? The plates were overly thick for one.

Not to change the subject, but the original question was did new basses always crack. And in pursuit of an answer Ken points out that a thickly carved or heavily wooded top is less likely to crack than a thinned one. Which begs the corollary question, are today's basses that crack easily just carved too thin in some cases? Is it possible that in pursuit of maximizing the responsiveness of new instruments that some makers regularly deliver instruments that are more crack prone than the instruments that are more conservatively carved and more heavily wooded but have promising tone, even though these are less responsive?

While I understand what Ken means in the quoted line above, it almost seems to indicate that if the Gilkes bass was not "overly thick", it would have cracked. Given the cost of crack repairs, I'll take the overly thick DB with plenty of wood on the top, please. The happiest medium for me starts with durability. I mean what good is an instrument that is always in the shop for plate crack repairs? Living/playing between downtime is certainly not a lifestyle I would choose if I have a choice.

I think the idea that moving the instruments out of their born environment is quite plausible as a reason for more crack proned instruments and so is the effect of forced air heating and AC. But I would proffer that a 3rd reason is the current era's push for immediate gratification. Today's makers competing to have the best sounding new instrument in the showroom might be taking off a little more wood than is healthy for the longevity of some of these instruments.