1796 Giovanni Battista Fabricatore mandolin

[Alex Timmerman]

Hi Marijan,

To answer your to your two questions; I can inform you that the ebony frets which are glued at the sound table are original. There are exceptions (sometimes we see ivory or silver used for these frets), but usually this is the way the Neapolitan luthiers worked. The highest (10th) metal fret is always slightly longer than the others, as is also the case with your Fabricatore.

With regard to your second question I would say; yes please, stay as close to the original used materials. Indeed "chopping old piano and it`s keys", using the same woods and same kinds of Mother of Pearl etc. Work in exact the same manner as it was done in 1796 by Gio. Batt. Fabricatore and the craftsmen in his atelier.
Restoring in this way will also give the instrument its historic importance and value (money wise speaking) back.

And don't worry; restoration work will always be 'visuable' if one has the eye for it. And that's OK for that is the instrument and the 'aging' of it. And of, course, if the owner wants it to be a playing instrument.


Best,

Alex.

[Marijan]

Thank you Alex, for both answers.

Do this kind of frets, presuming that the position, height and width are correct, present any kind of problems for you musicians? I mean, could I expect any complaints about those by one who will play that mandolin one day, if I make new frets out of ebony and not silver. I don`t know what is a difference in sound character between ebony or metal.

Anyone selling old piano? Button box with tortoise shell cover?

Best,
Marijan

[Alex Timmerman]

Hello Marijan,

No problem what so ever; the ebony frets - indeed - if placed right, are strong enough for another 100 years or so. Also, on your Fabricatore silver for the highest sound board frets was never used. They should simply be made of ebony.
Only the 1st string (and perhaps a few notes on the 2nd string) will occasionally have notes that high - metal 10th fret (d''') up to the ebony 11th and 12th fret (e''').

It is also good to be aware that in the last two decennia of the 18th century the Early Neapolitan mandolin is in its final state of development ánd that in the original repertoire for that type at that time there are only very few compositions with high notes that need to have these ebony frets. So, there will be almost no wear on the ebony frets. The difference in sound character between ebony, ivory or metal, is frankly not a matter of real importance.


Best greetings,

Alex.

[Marijan]

The difference in sound character between ebony, ivory or metal, is frankly not a matter of real importance.


Best greetings,

Alex.

Thanks Alex, it`s a professional deformation. No such a relaxed attitude in violin making unfortunately.

Best,

Marijan

[etbarbaric]

Hi Marijan,

After looking at your photos, I agree with Alex about your frets being wooden (ebony, probably). To be clear, *some* Fabricatores do have metal table frets, and some even have both!. My 1793 Fabricatore clearly had metal table frets throughout. My unlabeled instrument (likely from the Fabricatore Atelier) actually has both metal (4) and wood (3) table frets. It looks almost as if the maker set the metal table frets over the end block (where he would have had some support for banging them in) and then glued the rest.

Metal table frets usually have a little hook at the end, leading some to call them "staple frets". Those little hooks actually dig down into the table wood to hold the fret in place, and often even make little splits in the spruce. Glued-on hardwood frets (whether actual ebony or some other stained hardwood) are traditional in the lute world, for what it is worth. I personally prefer wood frets as they do less to disrupt the instrument.

As Alex points out, you will almost never encounter those frets when playing the music of the time, so they are largely ornamental.

Best,

Eric

ps - In case you can't tell, Marijan, we are most pleased to encounter a luthier with interest in the mandolin. Who knows... perhaps this will lead to other lines of business for you? :-)

[etbarbaric]

Interestingly, the 1797 Fabricatore at Vintage Instruments (which is very similar in design and ornament to your instrument) clearly has metal table frets, while yours are clearly wooden.

Best,

Eric

[Marijan]

Eric,

if you look at fourth fret from the neck toward the sound hole on my last photography, there are marks on its ends, that I thought at first, to be an indication of staple fret cuts. I must admit I didn't take a closer look yet, but I`ll put ebony ones in any case.

I decided finally, to do the restoration job by myself. Tried to contact few suggested restorers, but got no respond. I`ll start with top, it`s enough job there to keep me busy between pauses in my violin making work, for a while. I`ll do my best to check the neck joint and decide if it needs to be redone, before refitting the top. I luckily got ivory piano keys, I ordered few variants of mother of pearl...

It`s interesting to look that Fabricatore at vintage instruments. The main thing that strikes me is the condition of top, like the old finish was striped of and perhaps varnished with clear coat. On my mandolin, and all the others I was able to see on photographies available on the net,there is a dark, very light and fragile finish, and you can tell easily that no actions where taken on the tops surface. I do not know what is condition of that other mandolin, but it looks simply to light in color to be originally 200 years old. Again, I may be wrong. All the others including mine and yours have darker tone, you can see on photos I posted along this thread.

Thanks for P.S. line I appreciate that.

Best,
Marijan

[Margriet]

I luckily got ivory piano keys

On my mandolin, and all the others I was able to see on photographies available on the net,there is a dark, very light and fragile finish, and you can tell easily that no actions where taken on the tops surface. I do not know what is condition of that other mandolin, but it looks simply to light in color to be originally 200 years old. Again, I may be wrong. All the others including mine and yours have darker tone, you can see on photos I posted along this thread.

Marijan

Alex, Eric, Marijan,

how do you know that ivory is used ? On what things you can see that Marijan's Fabricatore has ivory and my Vinaccia bone or maybe baleen (of whales) ? Is it only the color? or the matter of equality on the surface? With bone there are also differences, in color, in being more or less equal.

About the top and varnish: mine seems to be unvarnished.

Frets on the top: Alex told that these only or mostly were used for the highest strings. If you have a proper look on the Vinaccia, you can see that there seem to be traces of frets on the other side, at the lower strings. For a left- handed lady ? If you look on the scratchplate, there are scratches on that side as well.

Another question: the rosette is still very nice. Though there is a bit of red-brown mastique missing. What you would suggest, how to repair ?

[Margriet]

some more photos

[Marc Woodward]

Beautiful instruments - and I love the case with Margriets Vinaccia: something of the medieval torture chamber about it!!

Marc

[Marijan]

Alex, Eric, Marijan,

how do you know that ivory is used ? On what things you can see that Marijan's Fabricatore has ivory and my Vinaccia bone or maybe baleen (of whales) ? Is it only the color? or the matter of equality on the surface? With bone there are also differences, in color, in being more or less equal.

About the top and varnish: mine seems to be unvarnished.

Frets on the top: Alex told that these only or mostly were used for the highest strings. If you have a proper look on the Vinaccia, you can see that there seem to be traces of frets on the other side, at the lower strings. For a left- handed lady ? If you look on the scratchplate, there are scratches on that side as well.

Another question: the rosette is still very nice. Though there is a bit of red-brown mastique missing. What you would suggest, how to repair ?

Hi Margriet, I`am no expert, one can tell the difference between ivory and bone easily. For me it`s hard to tell, in particulary because this pieces are so narrow and thin. But you can identify bone with god percentage of certainty by looking the remains of the canals which used to transfer nutritions through the bone. On hte surface, those can be detected as tiny holes coming out from the inside of the bone. On the surface there will be small black spots, all over the piece, when looking through the strong magnifying glass.
On ivory there are some kind of "grains" running along the piece and lines that run perpendicularly to those, forming a sort of pattern. Surface is clean and smooth. Again, hard to see either of those growth lines on such a narrow pieces, but it can be detected at close inspection.
In any case, higher grade substitute, if I do make a mistake, is probably more acceptable by my opinion, than lover grade. So I will use ivory.
Filling missing parts of the rosette. I used black mastic only till now. Hide glue based, mixed with ebony powder (don`t sand, file it). For this one I`am planing to make samples firs, using casein, small amount of ebony powder and natural red, dry pigment I still need to choose. It will take some time to determine transparency, correct pigment and consistency, but with few tests I`am sure I`ll find good match.

Best,
Marijan

[etbarbaric]

Hi all,

I'm tight for time today, so I'll try to keep this short... and offer some opinions only...

Marijan, yes, I looked carefully at your photo, and I can see the marks that you mention near the fourth table fret. They could have come from a metal fret, but they also might be some errant tool marks... or just a coincidence. In this case, since you clearly have ebony frets largely in place (the fourth fret is one of the complete ones), I would recommend staying with wood as you suggest. I'd further suggest keeping as much of the existing table frets as possible... and maybe not worrying too much if your replacements are not an exact match as to color. That will perhaps inform future owners as to the work you end up doing.

Margriet, I can also see what you are saying about there being some glue or finish traces of a former fret on the "left" side of the instrument (as seen from face-on). It is hard to say if it was only on that side, or whether the residue simply flaked off the other side... It is also hard to say whether these table frets are original, or if these are the original table frets (two questions, eh? :-)). Can you tell if the neck frets have been replaced? Do I see part of an ebony fret right up against the last metal neck fret? Or is that just some mastic infill where some ornament is missing? (it looks like ornament in that spot on the right side... so perhaps the latter.)

Both of these questions lead to some of the difficult decisions that must be undertaken in the case of a restoration. IMHO one needs to start these projects with a firm decision to "do no harm", to borrow a phrase from the medical community. One also needs to try very hard to differentiate the truly "original" features of the instrument, from things that may have been done later in the decision making process. For that we have to look to other verified examples by the same makers, other instruments from the same time, and consult folks who have looked at lots and lots of these instruments (e.g. Alex). In most cases, and even in cases where originality may be in question, I like to err on the side of preserving "existing" features (as compared to "original" features) as they reflect a part of the instruments history (rather than an ultimately subjective restoration). Sometimes you just can't tell... and I like to err on the side of being conservative...

For example, I initially wanted to discard and replace the odd hitch pins on my Fabricatore... as they were clearly similar to guitar hitch pins... and *could* have been added later. Upon reflection, these hitch pins had clearly been with the instrument a long time... and where better to find guitar hitch pins laying around than in the Fabricatore workshop! Taking time to learn, reflect, and understand is a firm recommendation before the knives come out! :-)

Tops on these instruments were typically left unfinished, or at most very lightly finished with an egg tempura or perhaps very lightly french polished. For this reason, many of them end up looking very dark over time with accumulated dirt and oxidation. Some look better than others, depending on the conditions they've been subjected to. I would _not_ encourage any "refinishing" of any sort beyond some very light cleaning, as that will certainly detract from value. Also, unlike violins (which vibrate *very* differently), oil varnishes are considered death to tone woods for historic lutes and mandolins, etc.

There are many approaches to mastic. Larry Brown came up with an ingenious solution that was both a solution for missing mastic, and even missing tortoise shell... but I don't want to pass on his trade secret without his permission.

There are ways to tell ivory from bone, from baleen... but I am not the best person to advise at that level. Bone, I think, has more of a visible grain than ivory.... but don't quote me...

Best,

Eric

[Margriet]

Many thanks, all you, looking so thoroughly and giving advices so clearly.
I really love this thread....

Margriet, I can also see what you are saying about there being some glue or finish traces of a former fret on the "left" side of the instrument (as seen from face-on). It is hard to say if it was only on that side, or whether the residue simply flaked off the other side... It is also hard to say whether these table frets are original, or if these are the original table frets (two questions, eh? :-)).

I cannot see any marks of a fret on the right side of the ornament. Maybe it flaked off, as you say, Eric, but I do not see anything, so I suppose we can only guess.

Can you tell if the neck frets have been replaced? Do I see part of an ebony fret right up against the last metal neck fret? Or is that just some mastic infill where some ornament is missing? (it looks like ornament in that spot on the right side... so perhaps the latter.)

I do not know whether the frets are original. Maybe there was some repair in the past. There are pieces of ebony at the three last frets, just beside the silver ones.

For that we have to look to other verified examples by the same makers, other instruments from the same time, and consult folks who have looked at lots and lots of these instruments (e.g. Alex).

I agree.

In most cases, and even in cases where originality may be in question, I like to err on the side of preserving "existing" features (as compared to "original" features) as they reflect a part of the instruments history (rather than an ultimately subjective restoration). Sometimes you just can't tell... and I like to err on the side of being conservative...

A bit problem with the language.... do you say in some cases to accept and keep some later repairs? Or to stay close to the original ?

Larry Brown came up with an ingenious solution that was both a solution for missing mastic, and even missing tortoise shell... but I don't want to pass on his trade secret without his permission.

I understand. We will explore and try - and a lot and many times -before to use it on the instrument. Maybe rosin can be used.

Thanks again,

Margriet

[etbarbaric]

Hi Margriet,

A bit problem with the language.... do you say in some cases to accept and keep some later repairs? Or to stay close to the original ?

This is a complex topic... and one that you ultimately have to grapple with as regards your specific instrument. People in everything from historic architecture to toy trains struggle with similar issues. You have to ask yourself honestly how much you really know about the original configuration.... and where you are forced to guess about details. The instrument represents its own history now... its builder, time, previous owners and their changes repairs, etc. to adapt the instrument to their needs. Even a well-intended restoration represents change for the instrument. We should take care in this responsibility. What will people think 100 years from now about the changes we make? What are your goals? Playability? Cosmetic perfection? Historic accuracy? All of these can conflict and represent trade-offs.

When faced with missing or incomplete information, we have to decide what to do. Sometimes you can make an informed choice based on other information (other close surviving instruments may point the way, for example). In other cases you have to simply make the best decision possible. Table frets are perhaps an interesting example. Even if these instruments are returned to playability, what is the chance that the table frets will actually be used? If the answer is "not much", then do they really have to be restored, or are they OK as is?

I'm just saying that sometimes (not always) it is perfectly fine to leave old repairs, and even old modifications, if they are sound and represent something interesting. Sometimes the modifications themselves are quite intriguing and historic. Sometimes trying to take an instrument back to some original historical "ideal" can end up being more destructive, and can involve more subjective speculations than simply letting the instrument be what it is. Think of everything on the instrument as _potentially_ interesting in a historic sense.

For instance, my suspected late Fabricatore came complete with a bridge and nut that are clearly cut for four (4) individual strings (not doubled courses). On the other hand, as a Neapolitan mandolin, the instrument was clearly _originally_ built for four doubled courses (it has eight peg holes). The bridge and nut are quite old... and the mark on the table from the bridge makes it clear that the bridge has been with the instrument most of its 200+ years. It makes an interesting story now, but if I restore the instrument, I will have to decide which course (so to speak :-)) to take... Is the "story" of its adaptation more important than the original form of the instrument? Is there a way to accomplish both?

As another example, what do your "left-handed" table frets tell you (assuming that is what they mean)? Was your left-handed lady the original owner? Was it an adaptation for a later owner? Was she a lady at all? :-) Are there other adaptations on the instrument that might point to it being a "lefty"? For instance, are there asymmetrical ornament, or internal barring patterns that are reversed from what the maker typically did (which might indicate a custom instrument for a left-handed client)? Or did the fret simply fall off on the other side, taking its glue traces with it? It is fun to speculate, but many of these things simply are not knowable in the end.

Best,

Eric

[Margriet]

Eric,
in Dutch there is an expression: do not go over ice that exists only one night.
I feel very respectful and grateful to be able to have this instrument and I want the best. So it will take time to make these decisions. I am happy that other people, like you, are willing to look and think with me and shine light on diverse aspects.
One choice I can make: I should like that the mandolin will play again. In the case it would be made - or remade, changed- for a lefty person, I would not make/keep it for a lefty, if there is not a lefty person who will play it. And - as you say - we do not know for sure.
I am still in the phase just to look and look and try to hear what the mandolin tells from it's history.
No hurry at all, very good to go through that period thoroughly.
It must be the same feeling of responsability and respect that makes you being involved in this thread. Thanks again.

Margriet

[etbarbaric]

Hi Margriet,

A wonderful expression! Thanks again for sharing your instrument with us. It is very special.

Best,

Eric

[etbarbaric]

Hi again Margriet,

Since your instrument seems to have an intact nut, what
(if anything) can it tell you about how the strings were run?
Are the slots in the nut wider on one side than the other?
I cannot see this level of detail from the photographs.

Best,

Eric

[Margriet]

Since your instrument seems to have an intact nut, what
(if anything) can it tell you about how the strings were run?
Are the slots in the nut wider on one side than the other?
I cannot see this level of detail from the photographs.

Eric

a bit short reply (not much time at the moment).
I post a photo that I got from the seller. Later we will make more photos, from a different angle.
On the photo you can see that there is broken a piece of wood at the level of the higher strings. It is hard to see if the slots are wider at the lower strings. If so, there is very small difference. When we were at Alex, he noticed that there are slots between the pairs of strings as well ( thanks, Alex).

Margriet

[etbarbaric]

Thanks for the photo Margriet. It is difficult to tell anything about string size, or likely stringing order. A clean new bridge might well have different-sized notches for the range of string sizes... but a nut of this age has seen many things over its lifetime, eh? And yes, the broad "chunks" taken out between the doubled courses are interesting... or at least odd.

Best,

Eric

[Margriet]

the range of string sizes...

There were small ends of 3 pairs of strings still attached, when we obtained the mandolin. You can see them on the photo. This will not be a proof for the order of strings, as you can easily take the pins in and out. When we cleaned, we noticed that some pins fit better in other holes. We kept the ends of the strings, they are rather light.

Margriet

[Marijan]

It`s very helpful to hear advices stands and opinions from competent people, opinions that are not of strictly technical nature, but can and do guide and dictate decisions of restorer to some extent, in particularly when part of the restoring process or resolving of the problems that occur, can be solved on more than one, but still historically appropriate or acceptable way.

I did set a priority range to myself, regarding this restoration and goals that are to be met. When you are mentioning cosmetic perfection, playability and historic accuracy, Eric, I have little doubt, that reverse order needs to be the goal. The highest possible historic accuracy must be kept and achieved, playability, if restoration job, from technical point of view in particularly was done well, will probably be a consequence of that, and cosmetic perfection should be the final touch and sign of god, if it has been done so, restoration job.

For me, the questions that has to do with actual constructional restoration, will be sometimes harder to answer or decide which way to chose. Those are the ones that bothered me when I was deciding wherever to do this by myself or not. I will change the bass bar in violin if I determine that it doesn't function as it should anymore. I know when the change is needed if I want the violin to be in god playable condition. I don`t have that experience with mandolins. Different purpose, different function, different down force distributions etc., different approach to repair. I know what kind of patch, if needed, I`ll use on violin top crack, I know I can use studs to reinforce the repair. What about here? And so on and on... So great amount of data collection and learning will be involved in the restoration process.

As Margriet said, no hurry.

I opened the top yesterday, so I`ll be able to post few photographs of bracings and interior in next days.

Thanks,

Marijan

[etbarbaric]

Hi Marijan,

Eric, I have little doubt, that reverse order needs to be the goal. The highest possible historic accuracy must be kept and achieved, playability, if restoration job, from technical point of view in particularly was done well, will probably be a consequence of that, and cosmetic perfection should be the final touch and sign of god, if it has been done so, restoration job.

I certainly agree with your priority ordering, and that is how I have tried to approach the restorations that I have been involved with.

For me, the questions that has to do with actual constructional restoration, will be sometimes harder to answer or decide which way to chose. Those are the ones that bothered me when I was deciding wherever to do this by myself or not.

These are healthy (and ethical!) reservations. That said, I think as a luthier, most of the techniques will be largely similar. Yes, there may be some insight that a lute or guitar builder might bring that might differ from that of a violin maker, but I think the opposite is also true, and these differences can be easily managed. From what I've seen, crack repair is viewed similarly. Table cracks are often cleaned, reglued, and then "cleated" from below (I think this equates to your term "studs", where small reinforcing blocks are glued across the crack, and then worked down with a chisel?). Violins have rather flexible ribs.... mandolins typically don't. Sometimes a crack simply cannot be closed without distorting the instrument. In those cases I have seen splines inserted with success to close a crack. On my Fabricatore, Larry closed and cleated some cracks, and at least one was splined.

In my experience, the bars on a mandolin top mostly are there to resist the downward pressure of the strings and "shape" the top, but they also define what areas of the top can move freely in response to the strings. In many cases of older instruments -- and particularly those which have been subjected to later high-tension strings -- the bars have simply come loose on the ends, and regluing them is sufficient for them to once again do their job. Unlike the rocking motion of a violin bridge (with sound post and bass bar to transfer vibrations), mandolins are fairly simple acoustically.

I completely agree that it is essential to try to understand the pressures and tensions that are placed on the instrument. One of the areas where I am continually surprised is with the "weight" of these instruments. They were built extremely lightly, and sometimes it is tempting to reinforce things that seem structurally under-built. I think it is _generally_ worth resisting that temptation. My little Cremonese mandolin has a top that is less than a millimeter in thickness... Not only does this work, but it produces a very loud little instrument that seems just impossibly small. Your point is well taken that it is through maintaining historical accuracy that we learn valuable lessons like this.

We will all chime in with our opinions and experiences... but we are not all luthiers, so you will have to sort out what responses to follow, and which to ignore. :-)

Best,

Eric

[Marijan]

This is nice example, to clarify what I meant, saying that I need to learn during the restoration process, about the function of instrument and role that individual parts of mandolin construction play in assembly, and what influence those have on the performance of the instrument. If my second most important goal is authentic playability.

This lower sound hole bar has a split that occurred somewhere in those two centuries of it`s existence. Top is straight across it`s width at the bar position. So I can`t just simply glue that crack under the force. It would cause a bending of the top. I need to remove the bar. I could re glue the crack after removing it, and end up with the bar that is bent slightly on it`s base. Suppose I`d like to keep the bar, for a reasons of originality, age of wood, sentimental reasons or whatever... In any case I need to straighten the bar by planing it on the gluing surface, so it can be glued without any unnecessary tension. By planing it I`am lowering it for lets say two mm on the middle point. Now, what is effect of my intervention and intention to preserve original piece, to playability. I simply don`t know. That is why I need to include some kind of learning process in the job. To know, is it OK to do it that way, or easier one, make a new one. It`s simple and quickly performed task to replicate the old one with a piece of 150-200 years old wood.



Again, I don`t expect to be assisted on strictly technical, luthier points here (I`d be glad though if some of opinions does occur occasionally), I know well enough, from violin making, that even after few hundred years of making history, we still struggle with full understanding of the instrument function.
Just simply pointing out that for me, at least some understanding of changes on playability I`ll make be deviation from the original state or measurements (like that bar), is essential to make decisions on which way to go with repairs.

Yes, cleats are studs.

Thanks again Eric, and others, for really helpful participation on this tread. Great place. I`ll try to stay away from my "philosophical" insights from now on, as much as I can and concentrate to occasional informations and photographs of restoring process itself.

P.S.
I hope I`am not bothering you guys too much, Eric and Alex, If I ask again for the photographs and measurement of the bridge and nut.

Best,

Marijan

[etbarbaric]

Hi Marijan,

No problem at all. I enjoy these conversations very much (as I know Alex and others do). I'll look around for the details of the bridge and nut measurements that we used on my Fabricatore. They were taken from Alex' 1794 example which had its original nut and bridge.

As to the bar, I would approach it slightly differently. Unlike a violin top that is carved to a rather fixed shape, these mandolins had very thin (and fairly uniformly) thicknessed tops. This means that they are extremely flexible in a longitudinal direction (across the short dimension of the top). If the bars were off, you would be able to bend the spruce top back and forth easily with your hands (along the grain, not across). This flexibility seems alarming at first, but it is perfectly normal. In most cases, the top is designed to take its shape from the bars. You will notice that these bigger (taller) bars are on either side of the sound hole... no doubt to reinforce the top where it is missing a large chunk of wood!

The bar is there not only to reinforce, but also to "tension", or stiffen, and give the top its shape. In other words, the bar _intensionally_ has a curved "face" that is glued to the underside of the table, and that curve should not be removed. The idea is for the flexible top to conform to this curve once the bar is glued in place. The top may well be flat now, but it likely was initially slightly convex (curved outward in a longitudinal dimension). This curve not only helps the top resist the downward pressures it must, but it also "tensions" the top to make it stiffer, which helps in sound production. Think of the bar as a little wooden spring. Of course, this is also why the ends of these bars typically come loose (or split) over time, since they are under tension.

That said, depending on the glue joint, you may well want to remove the bar, reglue the split, and then reglue the bar to the top. If you look back at the thread about my 1793 Fabricatore, you'll see that one of the bars on my instrument had an unfortunate knot at the end, which had long since popped out due to the tension (in almost an identical location to your split!) Larry chose to fabricate a new bar in that case since material was actually missing from the bar. In any case, the curve of the bar should be retained, IMHO.

Let me know if this doesn't make sense.

Best,

Eric

ps - What does your neck block look like from the inside? :-)

[etbarbaric]

Hi again Marijan,

I looked more closely at your photo, and its seems to me that *both* of the bars below the soundhole are loose on the end, and both are slightly split. Again, this is not a surprise. If one bar failed, it increased the job that the other bar had to do. To my eye, neither of them needs to be replaced, but simply repaired. If you do replace one or both, I would recommend copying the curve when making the new bar. In my opinion, the fix vs. replace decision should be based on whether you think a new bar will hold up better than a glued bar. Here then, is the playability vs. originality trade off! :-)

Best,

Eric