David Runnion wrote:

>The "curved" bow was the predecessor to the modern bow, it was shorter
>and more, well, curved than what you see today, as well as considerably
>lighter, which gave it less power and volume.  The articulation is
>different on one of these bows, as well, less sharp and accented as
>is possible with modern bows.

and then Chris Bonds wrote:

>This is the so-called Bach Bow, which was a 20th-century design intended
>to make it possible to play simultaneous 3 and 4-part chords on the
>violin....  I didn't know there was a contemporary recording of someone
>actually playing on one.  It has absolutely nothing to do with HIP
>practice, since there was no such bow in Bach's time.

I'd guess that, depending on how one interprets Don Satz's original
question, both gentlemen are correct.  Certainly the "Bach bow" (something
about which I posted a friend's observations a few years ago) was a
solution to a problem that didn't really exist.  But OTOH one does see in
old paintings and other illustrations the type of bow David mentions, which
has the wood in a reverse curvature so that it looks more like an
arrow-shooting bow.

>Some modern-instrument cellists I know simulate the effect of the curved
>bow by gripping the stick of their modern bow some inches further up, away
>from the frog, than normal.  This reduces the attack from the frog of the
>bow and the weight of the bow on the strings, and produces a more Baroque-y
>sound.

I've also seen violinists do this, including those playing what I thought
were Baroque-style instruments.  Is it something that would be appropriate
for the lower-pitched, lower-tensioned gut strings of a Baroque style
fiddle?

(In fidibus fidem!)

Bill H.