chaldo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 295
Registered: 2-13-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: archaic mood
|
|
Georgi Hanna Nahat oud label.......
George (Georgi) Hana Nahat's labels intrigue me.
He clearly looks old on my 1950 label, while on an older 1958 he used a much younger picture of himself. More on, on a 1928 oud label he looks older
than the 1958 oud label. that is weird, why is he interchanging the pictures?
Anyone has info or labels of George Hanna Nahat?
Anyways, here are the labels so you get my point...
thanks go to doc.oud source: http://www.droud.com/george.htm
|
|
|
chaldo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 295
Registered: 2-13-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: archaic mood
|
|
1950 GEORGE (GEORGI) HANNA NAHAT
Oldest look of the 3.
|
|
|
chaldo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 295
Registered: 2-13-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: archaic mood
|
|
1958 GEORGE HANNA NAHAT
Youngest look of the 3
|
|
|
chaldo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 295
Registered: 2-13-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: archaic mood
|
|
1928 GEORGE HANNA NAHAT
This is the earliest oud of the 3 and he's using a relatively older picture (but not as old as he looks in the 1950 one).
|
|
|
Adel Salameh
Oud Junkie
Posts: 235
Registered: 4-18-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Hi Chaldo,
George hanna nahat labels were stolen at his time....oud makers made ouds and used his label while he was still a live......although George was not
one of the great nahat makers..... never the less he belonged to that family....and makers just used his label in many ouds which had nothing to do
with him.....
now a days, you can see on the net many ouds which are sold as nahat ouds but again has nothing to do with the family or at least many things has been
changed on the oud that it's difficult to say that it's a nahat oud...
Best wishes,
Adel
|
|
|
chaldo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 295
Registered: 2-13-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: archaic mood
|
|
1961 George Hanna Hanat
I just found a new one on the internet... a 1961 and he's using a the exact same picture used on the 1958 one...
|
|
|
chaldo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 295
Registered: 2-13-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: archaic mood
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Adel Salameh
Hi Chaldo,
George hanna nahat labels were stolen at his time....oud makers made ouds and used his label while he was still a live......although George was not
one of the great nahat makers..... never the less he belonged to that family....and makers just used his label in many ouds which had nothing to do
with him.....
now a days, you can see on the net many ouds which are sold as nahat ouds but again has nothing to do with the family or at least many things has been
changed on the oud that it's difficult to say that it's a nahat oud...
Best wishes,
Adel |
I agree with you. It'd be wise to check the ouds beforehand... but..what if they are real ones? The 3 first ouds mentioned here are real GHN's or at
least have many reasons to be.
About the quality issue... True,,, one known Farid oud was a GAN and not a GHN. nevertheless you could be right about him not being the best luthier
in the family.
Thanks Adel for your input.
|
|
|
Adel Salameh
Oud Junkie
Posts: 235
Registered: 4-18-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
most of Farid Al Atrash ouds were George nahat.....it's very good for his style of playing the oud.....
I had bought many George nahat ouds ....but sold all of them apart from one which I kept for historical reasons.....
in these labels which you posted something very strange....you have 1958 label which carries the number 2264 and then 1961 label which carrys the
number 2327.....that means in 3 years he had made nearly one thousand ouds ....this can't be correct unless he had a factory.....
for goerge hanna nahat oud, I advise anybody to see the oud, check it and play it before hand+ask some one who knows alot about nahat ouds to see the
oud....that means...label, oud+sound...and if you are satisfied then buy it....
Best wishes,
Adel
|
|
|
chaldo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 295
Registered: 2-13-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: archaic mood
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Adel Salameh
most of Farid Al Atrash ouds were George nahat.....it's very good for his style of playing the oud.....
I had bought many George nahat ouds ....but sold all of them apart from one which I kept for historical reasons.....
in these labels which you posted something very strange....you have 1958 label which carries the number 2264 and then 1961 label which carrys the
number 2327.....that means in 3 years he had made nearly one thousand ouds ....this can't be correct unless he had a factory.....
for goerge hanna nahat oud, I advise anybody to see the oud, check it and play it before hand+ask some one who knows alot about nahat ouds to see the
oud....that means...label, oud+sound...and if you are satisfied then buy it....
Best wishes,
Adel |
Adel, you are right, the last label (the 1961) was taken from http://www.chamusic.com/oud_nahat.html and it clearly looks like a fake. I mean it looks exacly like the 1958 one...
but our problem is still not solved... why the pictures are changing in this way... hmmmm
|
|
|
Adel Salameh
Oud Junkie
Posts: 235
Registered: 4-18-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I am afraid to say and I hope I am not doing any harm to any person....these are copies of a copy of a copy......
I can tell you something as an oud player when their is an Abdo nahat oud for sale.......
a genuine Abdo nahat oud.......and oud players know about it.....this oud never goes on the net ...becuase before anybody knows about it will be
gone....
I will be interested in seeing some photos of the 1950 oud ....
Take care,
Adel
|
|
|
c_haloun
Oud Admirer
Posts: 9
Registered: 5-7-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
i think the 1928 is a fake label
and here is a pic to orginal label since 1934 for Jorje Hana Nahat
|
|
|
Dr. Oud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1370
Registered: 12-18-2002
Location: Sacramento, CA, USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: better than before
|
|
Assessing an oud from pictures is difficult, but it looks authentic to me. There are not enough examples of labels to say whether this one is real or
not, If he used an older picture of himself on this one and a younger picture on a later one, so what? The real proof is in the sound, it should be
rich, deep but slightly edgy, as other Nahats seem to be. The pickguard may have been replaced, it's commonly done. The rest of the oud is similar in
shape and detail with other GHN ouds. It's true there are many counterfits, but they are usually different is shape and detail. As for the serial
numbers, I think Adel made a math error there, 63 ouds sems reasonable to me. If it has that big sound, my vote is for authentic.
|
|
|
Adel Salameh
Oud Junkie
Posts: 235
Registered: 4-18-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Dr oud , I agree with you that it's very difficult to judge by a photo and this is the reason I said you should play the oud+check the label +the
sound, and take some one with you to make sure it's a Goergy nahat oud....as I know very well his labels were stolen at the time when he was still a
live....
their are 2 lables here with the question
1958 with label number 2264 oud and a 1961 oud with label number 2327....that means GHN made almost a thousand ouds in 3 years time...which is
impossible unless I say it again he had a factory.....
another thing , if you look very carefully in some of the old Syrian ouds.....the makers copied nahat ouds at their time....so making a copy of nahat
ouds was something very common.......
the third label here shown in 1928 is fake...it's a photocopy....
how many counterfits nahat ouds has been shown on the net? how many of the ouds that we see are original?????
it's a great insult to the nahat family to show some of these ouds ...
best wishes,
Adel
|
|
|
Brian Prunka
Oud Junkie
Posts: 2916
Registered: 1-30-2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Member Is Offline
Mood: Stringish
|
|
| Quote: |
1958 with label number 2264 oud and a 1961 oud with label number 2327....that means GHN made almost a thousand ouds in 3 years time
|
2327-2264=63
am I missing something here? How do you get "almost a thousand" ouds?
|
|
|
Adel Salameh
Oud Junkie
Posts: 235
Registered: 4-18-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
sorry I did a mistake on this one.....yes it's 63 ouds...........just spent 2 weeks in the studio recording and came out last night.....
Dr oud and Brian you both are right about this......
Best wishes,
Adel
|
|
|
ALAMI
Oud Junkie
Posts: 643
Registered: 12-14-2006
Location: Beirut
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I agree that it is difficult to have a safe opinion based on photos, but still some details can be disturbing.
I have a very similar GHN oud to the one in the above link, mine is a 1957 and I have enough good reasons and experts opinions to believe it is an
authentic GHN.
The site is saying that the small rosettes are not the original ones, which is obvious, The big rosette has the exact same design as mine but with an
obvious difference in quality...
I heard that Nahats used to "outsource" some of the inlays and the rosettes work...
Is the oud on the site authentic but was made quickly or is it a vintage fake ? I don't know, what do you think ?
I am attaching a side by side.
|
|
|
c_haloun
Oud Admirer
Posts: 9
Registered: 5-7-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
also here there is a label for George Hanna Nahat since 1954 and its orginal label
http://mikeouds.com/messageboard/viewthread.php?tid=7929#pid52596
|
|
|
chaldo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 295
Registered: 2-13-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: archaic mood
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Dr. Oud
Assessing an oud from pictures is difficult, but it looks authentic to me. There are not enough examples of labels to say whether this one is real or
not, If he used an older picture of himself on this one and a younger picture on a later one, so what? The real proof is in the sound, it should be
rich, deep but slightly edgy, as other Nahats seem to be. The pickguard may have been replaced, it's commonly done. The rest of the oud is similar in
shape and detail with other GHN ouds. It's true there are many counterfits, but they are usually different is shape and detail. As for the serial
numbers, I think Adel made a math error there, 63 ouds sems reasonable to me. If it has that big sound, my vote is for authentic.
|
doc, thanks for your input, sound is definitely a decisive but not perfect indication to know whether it is or not a fake oud, indeed they could copy
a label but could they copy the craftsmanship? If they did copy the craftsmanship, then why bother labeling it a Nahat? I mean if you can build your
ouds as masterfully as the Nahats did, what's the matter... one would answer that the Nahat ouds were probably good sellers back in the days (as they
are today!).
I agree with you that there could be no specific reason why he'd choose one photo instead of another. Although in some cases, this could be taken to
prove that it's a fake if we can ever find a general rule (like when did he start using this or that one)... and that with some research, which we are
clearly not at now. ex: He clearly uses his young boy picture after the 50's (hypothesis)
chaldo
|
|
|
chaldo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 295
Registered: 2-13-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: archaic mood
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Adel Salameh
Hi Chaldo,
George hanna nahat labels were stolen at his time....oud makers made ouds and used his label while he was still a live......although George was not
one of the great nahat makers..... never the less he belonged to that family....and makers just used his label in many ouds which had nothing to do
with him.....
now a days, you can see on the net many ouds which are sold as nahat ouds but again has nothing to do with the family or at least many things has been
changed on the oud that it's difficult to say that it's a nahat oud...
Best wishes,
Adel |
Adel, I think you are completely right about the fact that some of his ouds were copied even when he was alive... As I said, Nahat ouds were probably
popular back in the days (especially when Farid, among others masters, would play Nahat ouds) although we'd need to support this.
chaldo
|
|
|
chaldo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 295
Registered: 2-13-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: archaic mood
|
|
Alami thanks for sharing, here is my rosette 1950 GHN.
|
|
|
chaldo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 295
Registered: 2-13-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: archaic mood
|
|
aRE the 3 photos of the same person?
It's hard to figure out with the older Mr. Georgi.
|
|
|
Adel Salameh
Oud Junkie
Posts: 235
Registered: 4-18-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Hello again everybody,
this is a very sensitive subject.....I do tell myself to keep out of it but I can't ...
the fact is that Nahat ouds has been very popular in the past and many great oud players has used these instrument made them very expensive even at
their time.....
Abdo nahat oud was sold for 3 golden Lira, the simple oud and 6 golden Lira the decprative one.....that of course when Abdo was still a live.
when I talk about Abdo he had 2 things, superb workmanship and sound....no mistake....very very clean maker...his sound is out of this world...
it's very difficult to copy Abdo nahat even though many oud makers tried to copy his work....
here we are talking about GHN which was not one of the great makers of the nahat family....and had many problems while he was a live......people
copied his ouds, his labels...the end result is something not very great.......some of the labels Chaldo has shown are a photocopy ....this label
which is suppose to be 60 years old and looks very white and clean?????
the lable of the 1950 oud, I have seen some GHN ouds in that period but have never seen that kind of label..I have never seen any photo of GHN like
the 1950 one....so for me that label is not correct.
when you look at these shamseya's which are posted here you can clearly see that they are very badly made.......
for many years I did not buy more nahat ouds from Syria....as most of the ouds which are sold either fake or in a very bad shape....or have been
worked on that you can't even recognise the oud...
If I talk about the nahat it's because I love these ouds and it's very sad what we have done to these instruments.....
Best wishes,
Adel
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xmbprobrown/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
