2 mins
HOW VOIRIN CHANGED BOW AESTHETICS
Throughout Voirin’s career he upped the general precision and consistency of what a bow maker’s output could be. After leaving Vuillaume’s shop in 1870, Voirin made a number of changes to the aesthetics of bows, some of which also affected playability. Voirin totally re-envisioned what a bow head could look like, probably drawing inspiration from a style of Tourte bow from just before Tourte developed the ‘hatchet head’ model. Along with the mature Tourte, Dominique Peccatte is a classic example of what a bow looked like before Voirin changed how a bow looks and plays. Here are some of the ways a mature Voirin head is different from a Peccatte head.
Voirin head
Pre-Voirin head (Peccatte)
A contemporary bow by Yannick Le Canu
which effectively combines masculine and feminine elements, along with a recent bow by the author
CREDIT
Voirin frog
Pre-Voirin frog (Peccatte)
LE CANU BOW COURTESY YANNICK LE CANU. WEHLING AND PECCATTE BOWS COURTESY THE AUTHOR, OTHER BOWS NATHAN TOLZMANN FOR KENNETH WARREN AND SON VIOLINS LTD CREDIT
For many years, bows that followed Voirin’s lead have often been referred to as ‘feminine’ and bows that pre-dated Voirin, such as golden-period Tourte and Peccatte, have been thought of as ‘masculine’. Because these gendered terms have been used historically and continue to get used, it’s good to understand what they mean and where they came from. In the examples above, most of the changes Voirin made in his bows (which became the stylistic norm for eight decades) might have been considered ‘feminine’ traits.
An example of a historical maker who does not really fit into either category would be Étienne Pajeot, a fascinating maker whose work is full of exceptions that prove many a bow making rule. And in the past few decades there have been a number of contemporary bow makers playing with the idea of combining elements of many styles in one bow, taking the curves of the lighter post-Voirin style and mixing them with the overall size and heft of a pre-Voirin bow. This can be very pleasing if done well.
(Please note that in the above table I am only referring to Voirin’s frogs that are made in a standard style, not to frogs made in the Vuillaume style. After leaving Vuillaume’s in 1870 he made a larger percentage of standard frogs than he had previously. The characteristics of the Vuillaume-style frogs did not change nearly as much as Voirin’s work of revamping the standard frog.) Thanks to Jeemin Kim for discussions on the role of gendered language in bow terminology and layout assistance.