http://www.gbhembree.com Maker of Fine Violins and Bows Wed, 08 Sep 2010 01:44:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 http://www.gbhembree.com/bows/hill-bows/comment-page-1/#comment-234 uwe kinderdick Wed, 28 Apr 2010 04:35:01 +0000 http://blog.gbhembree.com/?p=8#comment-234 I think a lot of these informations are fakes without any knowledge about the biographical dates of these bowmakers,for example: William C.Retford(b.1876):W.C.Retford started to work for hill much later,the praxice of stamping the hillbows with codes at the tip started around 1900. William Watson:b.1930!Watson started his career in the hill-firm as a bowmaker(last pupil of W.C.Retford) in the mid-fifties. I think a lot of these informations are fakes without any knowledge about the biographical dates of these bowmakers,for example:
William C.Retford(b.1876):W.C.Retford started to work for hill much later,the praxice of stamping the hillbows with codes at the tip started around 1900.
William Watson:b.1930!Watson started his career in the
hill-firm as a bowmaker(last pupil of W.C.Retford) in the mid-fifties.

]]> http://www.gbhembree.com/bows/hill-bows/comment-page-1/#comment-29 Andrew Bellis Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:49:00 +0000 http://blog.gbhembree.com/?p=8#comment-29 As an English bow maker/repairer of some 30 years experience and trained by Arthur Bultitude I have some observations of your notes on Hill bows. 1. Not all Hill bows are date stamped - not before WW1 or much after WW2. 2. I have never heard of any 'registration marks' and would suggest that a 'Hill' bow with them is a fake. 3. There are no makers marks on the nut ('frog'), only on the head face of the stick, it is impossible for anyone not in the workshops or closely acquainted with them to tell who made the nuts. I can't. But there are assembly (usually letter) marks on the lining ('slide') to keep nut and stick together once they have been mated. 3.There are some Hill bows with ivory faces from new. Your listing of head face marks originally came from Arthur Bultitude but it opened the door to fakery. I have seen a third - in my experience - fake Hill bow earlier this year, and out of London, that's a lot. Let me know if you need any more information. The (relatively) new book "Arthur Bultituce and the Hill tradition" by Richard Sadler is worth reading. As an English bow maker/repairer of some 30 years experience and trained by Arthur Bultitude I have some observations of your notes on Hill bows. 1. Not all Hill bows are date stamped - not before WW1 or much after WW2. 2. I have never heard of any ‘registration marks’ and would suggest that a ‘Hill’ bow with them is a fake. 3. There are no makers marks on the nut (’frog’), only on the head face of the stick, it is impossible for anyone not in the workshops or closely acquainted with them to tell who made the nuts. I can’t. But there are assembly (usually letter) marks on the lining (’slide’) to keep nut and stick together once they have been mated. 3.There are some Hill bows with ivory faces from new. Your listing of head face marks originally came from Arthur Bultitude but it opened the door to fakery. I have seen a third - in my experience - fake Hill bow earlier this year, and out of London, that’s a lot. Let me know if you need any more information. The (relatively) new book “Arthur Bultituce and the Hill tradition” by Richard Sadler is worth reading.

]]>