bulerias1981
Oud Junkie
Posts: 770
Registered: 4-26-2009
Location: Beacon, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: John Vergara Luthier Lord of the Strings instrument making and repair
|
|
Case for a supposed "1906 Abdo Nahat oud"
Hello all. This is a thread long over due.
Back in late February I received a supposed 1906 Abdo Nahat oud from a friend. He said the deal was slightly shady. He received it from someone in
Syria that claimed it was an old Nahat. So he was a bit weary. The oud needed to be repaired, and I did just for my friend.
During the repair certain things became obvious.
The repair included removing the peg box, and replacing the back pieces of the peg box due to missing wood and large cracks. I also installed new
pegs. I added a bone on ebony cap to the peg box in efforts to dress it up a bit. Fixed 2x loose braces.
First glance at the instrument, you'll notice a plastic laser cut rosette. Initially this didn't mean anything to me about the authenticity, because
this could have been a later addition. But I had to remove this rosette to not only repair loose braces, but to also further inspect the
authenticity.
Here is the label.
I feel the smoking gun in this case was the tail block. Perhaps the first part to be fabricated in the production of an oud. The wood was very white
(new looking.. not 100+ years old) having horizontal grain. But the biggest problem I had with the tail block was the small holes from pushpins. Here
is the history of pushpins http://inventors.about.com/od/pstartinventions/a/Push_Pin.htm
So basically pushpins were invented in the U.S. in the year 1900 only small quantities. The chances of Push pins reaching Damascus by the year 1906,
and the chances of oud makers using them by that time are even slimmer. There is a chance that small nails were used, but I also find this unlikely. I
believe using pushpins to hold ribs in place is a fairly recent development in oud/lute bowl making. Maybe last 50-60 years. Of course there is also a
chance that the tail block was replaced, but small chance. Also regarding the tail block was a block of wood about 25x25x110mm glued to the top of the
face corner that meets the tail block. Not sure what that was about?
Continuing on the case of authenticity is the adhesive used to glue the ribs together. Small beads of squeeze out was present in the inside of the
bowl. I've taken samples and inspected them. They appear to be plastic. That means synthetic glue, which is fairly modern. In 1906, any luthier would
have had to work with hyde glue and Titebond or Elmer's would not have been an option.
Furthermore, I tested the melting point of this small bead sample of glue by putting it into my hot hyde glue pot, and it did not melt.
Another interesting aspect of this oud was the neck block. Also wood being very white and new in appearance. Horizontal grain. Not having any holes
for dovetail or even dowel!. Unless the hole for the dowel didn't penetrate through the entire width of the block. That's a small possibility.
So overall. The oud having an untrustworthy source. Supposedly it was repaired in Syria. Although it is not known what those exact repairs were. And a
lot seems to be repair work, but very sloppy craftsmanship.
Sloppy repair work done. Neck was not straight to the body being off by some degrees. Over sized bridge. Bottom platform being 26.6mm wide, top
platform width being 11mm, bottom length being 150mm top length being 124mm bottom height being 7.5mm, top height being 16.8mm. Along with the sloppy
repair work was excess synthetic glue smudges on the bridge, peg box, rosette, inside where bowl meets the top.
Here are some photos of the peg box that I repaired.
The bracing were not bullet shaped, bur very squarish having excess bulk.
It is possible for the oud to have been under major repair, and the top being replaced, and even blocks being replaced. Again, the full extent to what
was repaired is a part mystery. A lot of the work clearly screams sloppy repair work. But were the blocks replaced at some point? Was the face
replaced (most likely the face was). Not much here seems to be Nahat quality at all. Even the bowl.
For all these reasons, I've mostly concluded this is a false among the many.. and a bad one as well! Your thoughts?
|
|
|
Alfaraby
Oud Junkie
Posts: 796
Registered: 9-18-2009
Location: Holy Land
Member Is Offline
Mood: Cool
|
|
Well-done, John dear; both the thread & the restoration work.
You're 100 % right, it's a low quality ill made oud. It's not even a Nahat replica, since a replica is a copy closely resembling the original
concerning its shape and appearance, while this wreck does not resemble any Nahat I've ever seen.
Nahat replicas are still made in Syria till this very moment, trying to meet the increasing demand for Nahat ouds, some of minor success but generally
of none. "There are no more original Nahats in Syria nor in Lebanon. They have all been sold" - Adel Salameh was quoted more than once & he's
absolutely right. I have been negotiating the owners of an all original 1918 Abdo's for more than a year now, and the negotiations have not yet
concluded a thing. Why ? "Because this is one of the last if not the last Abdo's in Damascus", said the mediator who's a very known Nahat expert, "
& they know that very well". In short, it's not likely to find an original Abdo's in Damascus & if ever, it will not cross the Mediterranean,
since tens would jump at & grab it in the midway.
Not being a luthier, I would not have gone this far to judge this oud. Just by looking at its face, I'd say it's not a Nahat at all & Abdo's, all
the more so .
The whole scene is poor, the bridge, the pickguard & the rose are far from looking like something close to the tremendous almost unbelievable work
of uncle Abdo.
The Nahats used the same famous bridge throughout their career & never changed it. We might have seen various pickguards -but not various bridges
- but none of which looked like this sloopy one.
Back in 1906, there was no "Abdo Nahat oud". Naht Bro. was still an active workshop of the two associates Rofan & Abdo & their younger
brothers Antoine & Hanna working under their supervision.
The photo on the label is a mockery. This is not Abdo Nahat we know, as seen in Nahat Bro & Abdo's labels. Abdo has never been seen with a fez.
The rose is a very ill made copy of the original. Its Arabic calligraphy is weak and it's not laser cut either. It says Abdo Nahat & sons, while
in 1906 his eldest son Elias was 4 years old while George had not been planned yet, & born only in late 1907 !
No matter how you'd look at this oud, you'd jump into the same conclusion & no mak-up whatsoever would make the lady what she's not.
Great job though, youngman.
Yours indeed
Alfaraby
alfarabymusic@gmail.com
|
|
|
bulerias1981
Oud Junkie
Posts: 770
Registered: 4-26-2009
Location: Beacon, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: John Vergara Luthier Lord of the Strings instrument making and repair
|
|
Dear Jamil,
Thank you very much on your input. I knew you'd enlighten us about the label. Its funny to imagine Abdo in a Fez! Perhaps one day we will encounter
Abdo with a blond wig!!!
I didn't know that there are practically no Nahats left in Syria. What a shame.
When I received this oud, I was 98% sure it was a fake, but had to remain objective. Incredibly enough, the sound is decent. So my friend wanted me to
repair it.. fake or no fake.
I knew the rosette and top weren't original for sure, but I had to be somewhat open to the possibility that the bowl might be original.. which after
the analysis, it cannot be.
|
|
|
Dr. Oud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1370
Registered: 12-18-2002
Location: Sacramento, CA, USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: better than before
|
|
I concur with Jamil that this is a poorly executed fake. I was in Damascus in 1996 and found several "Nahats" for sale, none of which were authentic.
Some had pirated shamsiya or labels, but none were made by any of the Nahat family. This oud may have good tone due to its age nonetheless.
|
|
|
Brian Prunka
Oud Junkie
Posts: 2939
Registered: 1-30-2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: Stringish
|
|
The only part of this that looks like it could be a Nahat original part would be the bowl, but from the pictures it appears to lack the signature
recurve in tail end of the bowl.
|
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xmbprobrown/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
