Sam Nolan

Tony Esparis, Artisan of Historical Instruments specialising in Historic Brass and Timpani is the craftsman responsible for reproducing the 1631 bass sackbut of Hans Hainlein. Based in Galicia, Spain, Tony has been building instruments in his historic workshop since 2013.

I asked Tony about the Instrument Reproduction Project, how he approaches instrument construction and his thoughts on the 1631 bass sackbut.

You’ve been building instruments now with your own company since 2013, what was the first project you worked on and how did you find the experience at the time? 

My first project at the beginning of my company was to make a tenor sackbut made by Drewelwecz 1595.

I remember that it was the longest project I had worked on. At that time, each piece that I completed was a victory, but when I assembled all the pieces and played with it I had mixed feelings.

I was euphoric about having finished my first instrument but discouraged because the result was not what was expected.

Being a perfectionist has its pros and cons, the positive part is that my perfectionist part did not cloud my sight and I realized that I had a lot to improve.

That must have influenced how you think about the building   process. What is your philosophy for building period instruments?

When building an instrument, my main concern is to reproduce the techniques used in the manufacture of the original instrument. This must be reproduced since the construction technique directly affects the sound and response of the instrument.

In this sense, my instruments are manufactured 100% artisan, giving the instrument the sound and response closest to the original   instrument.

Could you share how your workshop is set up and how you work?

My workshop is not the typical workshop that you enter and see only machine upon machine to manufacture all the necessary parts to build a sackbut.

My workshop has only the tools that artisans had in the 16th-17th century. This implies that most of the time I invest it in the workshop is forging and hammering on the anvil the pieces of brass to give them the desired shape.

We are looking at reproducing the 1631 of Hans Hainlein, what are your thoughts about the instrument?

The bass Hans Heinlein made in 1631 preserved in the Leipzig museum is still pending reconstruction.

The importance of the reconstruction of this instrument lies among other things in who built this instrument. The Hainlein Dynasty was one of the most renowned in Europe between the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

With the reproduction of this sackbut, I hope to reproduce a new acoustic quality since the builder. Hans Hainlein, had his own dimensions, materials and manufacturing techniques with which he managed to conquer Europe, acoustically speaking.

What do you think of Hainlein's design to have the instrument play in multiple keys with the use of crooks?

In the 17th century it was very common to play in different groups and places with a multitude of different tunings. On the other hand, composers were at the time experiencing all the options that multiple instruments offered and it is here where the virtue of having an instrument that you can adjust to any tuning and tonality is. But, even with that facility, they tried to play with different settings and tunings that gave it different acoustic capacities.

In this sense, Hans Hainlein's bass is an instrument with many characters to choose from, it remains to investigate what configuration can be used in different pieces.

What is the process for building an instrument like this? Are there any special building techniques required?

In the instrument on which we are working, the appropriate techniques must be used so that the difference between the historical and the original is imperceptible even to the ears of experts.

The manufacture of the bell has to be entirely hammered on the anvil, the use of a lathe in the manufacture of the bell would give extra hardness to the bell that would add shine to the sound and directly affect the expected result. That is why the correct choice of manufacturing techniques is of great importance.

This is also the same for the slide, which you will hand hammer. How does this make a difference as apposed to the way modern machine pulled slides are made today?

The great difference between the traditional hand hammered slide and the modern polished slide is the irregularity of the metal.

It is important that the metal have different thicknesses so that when making the slide as polished and straight as possible on the outside, all the irregularities remains inside the probocanth tube, multiplying the sound waves, which adds a multitude of harmonics to the sound.

In other words it generates a much sweeter sound!

So its a vital part for this instrument to be an authentic reproduction?

Yes, it’s incredibly important that we try to match the original makers manufacturing techniques as close as possible.

For me this instrument is something that I have been excited to play for some time. I wonder what is something that you as an artisan are excited for or hope to achieve out of this project?

For this project I am excited to be able to recover the sound of an instrument nearly 400 years old that is no longer played. A kind of time machine that will bring back the sound of the authentic baroque.

I also hope to improve my understanding of instrument design. The materials, dimensions and techniques used by the master builder are not random; they are the result of empirical work that still has many mysteries to solve.

You can find out more about Tony Esparis, his workshop and instruments at his website - tonyesparis.com