I've read the reference to a "Bach Bow" in a link associated with the "bow technique" inquiry made earlier as well as some on-line discussions of the subject. I just put together what I hope will be a functional bow in this style yesterday.

It seems to be the most logical first effort by any party seeking to make a violin bow who is uninfluenced by the design developed by the French bow makers of centuries's past. The bow does not have so much tension on it that one must fear the consequences if either end should slip free from the string, or the string should snap, due to high tension load, while in proximity to one's face.

The bow is easily connected to the bow hair material in a manner that enables one to relieve all tension and prevent loss of elasticity due to deformation during intervals of disuse. I have to wonder if the reason why such bows have not survived to the present is simply a matter of the Bach bow being one that would have been perceived as a "folK" bow rather than that of a professional musician during a prolonged era when support of the arts by noblemen, church aristocracy, and others with great wealth might have made them frown upon any party not using the latest and most evolved equipment. Bach was, after all, from a large, musical family in Germany. He would have likely encountered a cousin now and then who was using equipment of a cruder make than that produced in major cities. Would he not then have exploited the related possibilities?

There is also the basic assertion that a baroque bow is not a "Bach Bow" that may merit some contemplation. Why not? If a baroque bow is a curved bow under tension, as it has come to be presented today, what basis is there to assert that all bows made in that era conformed to the same level of tension and curvature? Images would not necessarily convey the type of wood, thickness, length and degree of curvature of all such bows produced in a given era. Indeed, if we take the violin bow to be modeled, to some extent, on the archery bow, nothing is more consistent than a long, relatively slim bow element that is used to create tension in a bow string. One would naturally be inclined to experiment with the amount of tension and the level of curvature of the bow for use with a muscial instrument. Is it not reasonable to question whether what we now call the modern bow or represent as the "baroque" bow is not merely the product of centuries of musical bias with regard to how a violin bow should be constructed and how a violin can and should be played?

At the same time, arguments for arpeggiating chords seem perfectly reasonable. Instruments that are strummed, such as the ukulele, produce an elegant effect when chords are arpeggiated rather than quickly strummed. Did Bach leave no instructions in this regard in his manuscripts?

The 'modern' violin bow was developed by Francois Tourte in the first half of the 19th century. Indeed, Paganini was one of the first violinists to own and use this 'new' style of bow (examples from this development era still exist in musuems). It was developed in response to changes in playing styles, which in turn were a result of the more legato romantic music evolving at the time. Concert halls were getting bigger and musicians need to project a greater volume of sound. The higher tensioned hair and longer length of the Tourte bow allowed the violinist to 'lean into' the strings a lot more, producing more volume and allowing the long sweeping production of perhaps twelve individual notes in one bow stroke. The comparatively short and low-tensioned Baroque bow, didn't lend itself to this style of playing.

In short, no. Bach wrote music that was very free as far as its instrumentation was concerned. In fact, the majority of Baroque music was written in a manner that would allow it to be played by a variety of instruments. For example, the Toccata and Fugue played on the organ and attributed to Bach (although there is no facsimile or manuscript to prove it was written by him), has received much research in recent decades. The style of its writing suggest that originally, whoever the composer was, it was probably intended to be played on the violin with arpeggiated chords, as opposed to the organ with its thick and heavy sounding chordal clusters.

So if this "Bach bow" I just assembled works, I'm getting back to the roots of the violin? I like that.

Yes and no. The violin, contrary to popular opinion, did not descend from the viol it was an instrument that developed seperately. However a viol bow and an early violin bow are very similar in their design and and size, but you also need to be aware that a Baroque violin is very different from a modern violin, not so much in the body shape, but the neck shape and angle, the tailpiece, the fingerboard and the strings.

You can see that the entire thing becomes a bit of a chicken and the egg question.

Okay, here's a link to me moments after I first rosined my nylon/polyester/poly-pro twine strand bow string attempting a chord based version of "Aloha Oe", one of my ukulele favorites.

You can find the link at:

http://ukulelenow.freeprohost.com/page63.html .

These are the "Huayin" strings they sell very inexpensively on E-bay. (That's why I chose "Aloha Oe". I wanted something that would sound "Huayin"...hee hee!)

This violin I built is just loud enough to be heard, but not so loud (without an amplifier/speaker system to be annoying). I recorded this using my computer microphone without any special effort to amplify the result. I suspect I'll improve my technique at least slightly with time, or find a way to use real horsehair with this bow instead of several strands of twine. (Perhaps both?)

This Bach (or low tension baroque) bow is a blast! (I slap the bow strings with it lightly on each stroke, and it is enough to deflect the highly flexible bow around the strings without any sense of significant impact. Its a lot like playing a ukulele, although I've been informed that the "romantic" style of violin performance is preferred here. I'll have to wait for my 1/10th bow - 17.5 inches - to arrive for that - a short bow due to proximity of the instrument to me, and the desire to keep the weight low because it will be supported by the side of my forefinger. I'm not looking forward to the usual beginner violinist sound of a screeching cat. I may just stick with the baroque bow and my chord based playing.)

Note: I took up ukulele as the closest thing I felt I might be able to play to a violin, which was my great-grandfather's instrument, before television abruptly interrupted the musical tradition. I decided to build this violin and use GCEA tuning to make it possible for me to adapt my ukulele chord and note position knowledge to the violin. (My wrists don't flex very much, so I had to build one tall enough that I could prop it up on my knee and play it vertically. It works! Nice to find a music store open on New Years Eve with the bow rosin I needed.) This isn't classical violin by any means, but the length of the soprano ukulele fretboard and that of the 4/4 violin fingerboard seem very close, so its not that hard to make the transition without tying on fishing line frets.

HAPPY NEW YEAR!