An ABS certification above the current Mastersmith designation?

[Kevin Jones]

Do you feel there would be benefit from creation, testing and certification of "Grand Master" (for lack of a better term) that would elevate and recognize deserving ABS Mastersmiths above that current designation?

The ABS website currently shows 116 ABS Mastersmiths whose talent I feel ranges from those smiths whose knives are amazing and as perfect as could be expected from a human being to those who can make one wonder how they ever passed the testing and/or who were awarded their "MS" stamps years ago and knives are not up to current "MS" standards.

Perhaps 10% of current masters world wide could fall into a Grand Masters category.

It's been my opinion for years that this would be beneficial to everyone; collectors, purveyors, JS smiths, current MS smiths, definitely the top MS smiths and the ABS as it would create more interest for the organization.

I don't see any downside.

What's your opinion?

I thank you in advance for your interest, views and opinions!

 

[HallHandmade]

I'm not a forging guy myself, but when I have free time I most enjoy viewing the work of ABS smiths and the like.

I would say that there is a group that stand out, the ones that have pushed their skills higher and higher as hard as they can nonstop for years, decades. As a fan of these makers and knives, I would definitely appreciate seeing a list of those particularly deserving, if anything just to bring them to my own attention.

I would be concerned that it is tightly focused on those perfecting the craft itself. I'm not implying that any ABS panel would break integrity because of popular demand for a smith to be inducted, just that there are some smiths that are pillars of the community that may be treasures in ways other than pushing the craft- but there still may be strong demand to induct them.

I would say perhaps drill down what specifically sets someone above, I honestly don't know, maybe this is something that somewhat needs to be a popularity contest. Perhaps the community could vote for nominees each year to be reviewed by a panel for induction.

That said I might like to see some emphasis on virtuoso talent, those that are able to complete extremely intricate complete works via sole authorship are what impresses me the most personally. I'm also impressed by those that work at a true master level in many different styles, or those that practice/revive/research "dead" arts or techniques both as historians and as pioneers.

 

[jdm61]

What kind of additional testing would be required? What would the additional standards be? Perhaps most importantly, who would judge the initial applicants? Currently a JS cannot judge an MS candidate, right?

 

[Gary Mulkey]

Kevin,

I understand your desire for the rating but let's look at it from the perspective of the ABS. The main reason for the two ratings is to test the ability of the maker to complete knives of a certain standard thus proving their ability to do so. Currently the test for MS requires 5 knives of different styles each with 300+ layers of Damascus and one of which must be a quillon dagger which is one of the hardest knife styles to build. Each of these five knives (in addition to the performance knife) must be virtually flawless.

What standards would you ask of anyone testing beyond Master Smith? Those passed for the MS are pretty comprehensive already. [Remember, this isn't nor should be an embellishment exercise.]

Gary

 

[Don Hanson III]

I think we already have one Grand Master, do we really need more?

 

[billf]

I think Joe hit it right on the head - "who judges the Grandmaster" will be the hardest thing to work out initially

Personally, I agree with Kevin that they ARE Mastersmiths who would be worthy of a GM title, and I do think that would help create interest.

My proposals would be these:

Don't think any more blade "tests" need be required - at this level Cutting is not going to prove anything new.

I would think one should have at least 5 years of being an MS, be active (i.e. still producing knives on a regular basis) and be voted on by his/her peers in some fashion.


my personal idea on that would be something like the "Best Bowie" contest, but done like this - anyone who qualified and was interested could post quality pictures of 5 knives.

A preliminary round of votes would then be open to all ABS MS - secret ballot, online or however. Top 5 vote getters could bring their knives to Blade - all present MS could see

the knives and vote yea or nay secretly. Do it like the Hall of Fame - anyone who gets over 80% yes is a new GM.

True, there is some opportunity for "politicking" ....but at some level, I think we would have to trust the character of the collected MS wisdom.

Maybe only do this every 5 Years to make it special, or 2 or whatever



obviously not a perfect solution but at least it's a starting point for discussion!

Everyone have a great Memorial Day Weekend, and thanks to all those who have served our great country!!


Bill Flynn

 

[betzner]

No one here has mentioned the verboten word "art" once. And that's what it all boils down to, whether mentioned or not or whether you like it or not. You can train or be trained to be an expert at blacksmithing, bladesmithing, etc. But few people can be trained to have that eye for design, curves, angles, etc that takes the skill to the level of an art. You either have it, or you don't, in most cases. And adding another designation is not going to create it. There are plenty of ABS Mastersmiths that are "artists", ie, they have the "eye", but there are so many more that are not.

At some point, it becomes the collector's "job" to seek out the best of the best, through purchases.

edit: And after years and years of thinking otherwise, I will be the first to admit that embellishment has nothing to do with the "art" I speak of here.

 

[Patrice Lemée]

For me, at this level of skill, it's up to individuals to decide for themselves like Betzner said. We all have a list of makers that we think of as Grandmaster, regardless of their ABS stamp or lack of.

 

[Kevin Jones]

Kevin,

I understand your desire for the rating but let's look at it from the perspective of the ABS. The main reason for the two ratings is to test the ability of the maker to complete knives of a certain standard thus proving their ability to do so. Currently the test for MS requires 5 knives of different styles each with 300+ layers of Damascus and one of which must be a quillon dagger which is one of the hardest knife styles to build. Each of these five knives (in addition to the performance knife) must be virtually flawless.

What standards would you ask of anyone testing beyond Master Smith? Those passed for the MS are pretty comprehensive already. [Remember, this isn't nor should be an embellishment exercise.]
Gary

Hello Gary, "embellishment exercise"; if a "MS" applicant's twisted gold wire is miss-applied to the handle on their test Quillon Dagger is that not likely to fail them? How about the sliver wire inlay on the handle of the Bowie they submitted? How about shotty engraving on their guard?

As far as what the standards would be for Grand Master, I hope to see some discussion and opinions here regarding such.

 

[Kevin Jones]

At some point, it becomes the collector's "job" to seek out the best of the best, through purchases.

Good point, however collector purchases can be more based on a knifemaker's popularity than the quality of their knives.
Many of us know of knifemakers who sellout immediately at shows and/or have long waiting lists, however upon examination of their knives one wonders why.

 

[betzner]

Good point, however collector purchases can be more based on a knifemaker's popularity than the quality of their knives.
Many of us know of knifemakers who sellout immediately at shows and/or have long waiting lists, however upon examination of their knives one wonders why.

Still, in any given group of skilled workers, some have art in their soul and it manifests in their work, while others simply do not. And you cannot train it. And another designation ain't gonna change that.

Then again, it's also true that there are collectors that have little or no appreciation for a maker's truly artful rendering (or call it soulful rendering if you can't use the word art), but instead for a Bowie that looks like every other Bowie on his or her table, no matter how technically perfect.

 

[LongDog]

I think you kinda answered your own question Kevin, when you explained how there are roughly 110 mastersmith's with a massive range of skill levels.....
The ones who are at the forefront of the craft and are continuously pushing the limits are noted quite regularly here on the forums and other knife related cliques within our community.
I think the "creme of the crop" naturally stand out on their own, so an official "stamp" or "rating" seems kinda silly at that point....

Im with Betzner on this topic. I think he hit on the nub!!
Much of it is up to the customers ability to Discern quality and talent.

However just to entrain the idea, I think a vote amongst the makers peers (ie. other mastersmiths) would be most appropriate.
And it should be a review of the makers work over a length of time, not just 5 knives he/she specially prepared for a "review"

edit: Maybe the title is more appropriate as an award rather than a rating... IDK its interesting subject no doubt

 

[brownshoe]

The Grandmaster concept is just to help insure a knife's continuing value for collector/investor/knife flippers.

The concept of older Master Smiths not being up-to-snuff is insulting because it paints with too broad a brush. Have the guts to name those you think should lose their MS rating.

What other professional organizations do for a "certification" is to require recertification every 3-5 years.

 

[Park Swan]

I was not going to comment in this thread due to my lack of experience with the ABS, but seeing the word "art" touched my tender spots. I'd venture to say that, based on what MS work I've seen, the knives of that class are more often than not already an "exercise in embellishment," and work that is sublime enough to distinguish itself among just over 100 is not going to necessarily receive more recognition or value through a voting process that would involve many makers who have extraordinary skill but lack taste. 110 is already a pretty small group.

 

[SharpByCoop]

An interesting discussion, and one I recall coming up at least ten years ago.

I would submit that build quality is a single subset of a GMS designation. From the website, the ABS's mission statement allows:

ABS Bladesmiths represent the cutting edge of forged blade performance and design on six continents. Our mission is preserving and promoting the ancient craft of forged knives through education, testing and certification.

Our passion is crafting knives featuring forged blades in the pursuit of the ultimate high performance cutting tool.

Going further up the scale, much like scouting, I would think there would be a series of 'merit badges' needed to be earned to acquire and be designated at the very top level of Grand Master.

(Just brainstorming here. Nothing really well thought out.)

• XXXX hours of teaching at seminars
• XXXX numbers of JS applicants tutored to passing, or ABS members sponsored.
• XXXX number of charity benevolence monies raised in support of the ABS or OTHER needy charity in some form. (Knife auction, director of such charity, etc.)
• Extreme build quality on a set of themed knives with beyond-the-norm innovation.
• IMPECCABLE business ethic.

There are probably other items to add to make it next to impossible (LOL!), but you catch my drift; it's a combination of all of these which would elevate and give this designation the prominence WELL above a just a super-built knife.

Some MS may build the very cleanest knife in the world, but hasn't spent any time 'giving back' and might have shady dealings. On the flip side there are others who have or would fulfill the other benevolent or educational aspects beyond reproach, but their build quality is 'classic' at best.

There is no simple answer, but it deserves discussing.

Good thread.

Coop

 

[Kevin Jones]

I think you kinda answered your own question Kevin, when you explained how there are roughly 110 mastersmith's with a massive range of skill levels.....
The ones who are at the forefront of the craft and are continuously pushing the limits are noted quite regularly here on the forums and other knife related cliques within our community.
I think the "creme of the crop" naturally stand out on their own, so an official "stamp" or "rating" seems kinda silly at that point....

I don't believe "MS" smiths whose talent surpasses other "MS" smiths by huge margins would think an elevated certification is silly.

Im with Betzner on this topic. I think he hit on the nub!!
Much of it is up to the customers ability to Discern quality and talent.

As I stated earlier, it's sometimes more a popularity contest when it comes to purchasing knives than an effort to discern quality and talent.

 

[Lorien]

I don't believe "MS" smiths whose talent surpasses other "MS" smiths by huge margins would think an elevated certification is silly.

I think it's silly.

 

[Kevin Jones]

The Grandmaster concept is just to help insure a knife's continuing value for collector/investor/knife flippers.

The concept of older Master Smiths not being up-to-snuff is insulting because it paints with too broad a brush. Have the guts to name those you think should lose their MS rating.

Where did anyone in this thread say any mastersmith should lose their MS rating? This thread is about the possibility of creating a higher rating.

 

[Kevin Jones]

An interesting discussion, and one I recall coming up at least ten years ago.

I would submit that build quality is a single subset of a GMS designation. From the website, the ABS's mission statement allows:



Going further up the scale, much like scouting, I would think there would be a series of 'merit badges' needed to be earned to acquire and be designated at the very top level of Grand Master.

(Just brainstorming here. Nothing really well thought out.)

• XXXX hours of teaching at seminars
• XXXX numbers of JS applicants tutored to passing, or ABS members sponsored.
• XXXX number of charity benevolence monies raised in support of the ABS or OTHER needy charity in some form. (Knife auction, director of such charity, etc.)
• Extreme build quality on a set of themed knives with beyond-the-norm innovation.
• IMPECCABLE business ethic.

There are probably other items to add to make it next to impossible (LOL!), but you catch my drift; it's a combination of all of these which would elevate and give this designation the prominence WELL above a just a super-built knife.

Some MS may build the very cleanest knife in the world, but hasn't spent any time 'giving back' and might have shady dealings. On the flip side there are others who have or would fulfill the other benevolent or educational aspects beyond reproach, but their build quality is 'classic' at best.

There is no simple answer, but it deserves discussing.

Good thread.

Coop

You make good points Coop.
Your list is along the same line as our application used to choose finalist for the CKCA-Jerry Fisk Cutlery Challenge. BY the way we will be presenting our finalist their $20,000 checks next Thursday night at the CKCA banquet.

 

[Chuck Gedraitis Knives]

I think that Kevin is onto something. I can think of a particular maker who received his MS stamp last year that would already be worthy of a "Grand Master" title. Guesses?