bang for buck

[jds4peace]

i've searched the forums and could not find a post to answer this question...

At what point does the cost of a mandolin shift from musical quality to cosmetic embellishment(sp?)?

I started playing mandolin a little over a year ago when my gal bought me a Fender FM-52E and i'm just about ready for an upgrade....any thoughts? I basically want the best mando you can get before the cost starts including frills and other useless junk...

[jds4peace]

did i ask this question in the wrong forum?

[Chris Baird]

I would say you get into diminishing returns after $2k-4k depending on whether it is an A or F style.

[garyblanchard]

I am by no means an expert, but I have a feeling that this is a tough question to answer and has as many answers as there are people on the board. I'm sure someone will chime in here on this.

[Bob DeVellis]

Unfortunately, I don't think there's a simple answer. At a $500 price point or a $5,000 price point, there will be cases where you're mostly paying for substance and others where you're mostly paying for glitz. It might be easier to list things that add cost with little or no effect on sound or playability. Pearl comes to mind. A tree-of-life inlay won't make an instrument sound a bit better and, if anything, it might make it tougher to play because you don't have clear, obvious position markers. Binding will not make an instrument sound better and, in my experience, contributes little to playability. A bound neck may be marginally more comfortable but a well-built unbound neck should be fine. Gold plating is not likely to have much effect on tone. Instruments with highly figured backs/sides/necks are not likely to sound very different from those with plainer wood of the same species. Scrolls and finishes are a bit more controversial. Personally, I don't attribute much difference in sound to the presence or absence of a scroll per se. I think they're mostly visual. Finish will affect tone but one isn't necessarily better than the other. A good lacquer finish and a good varnish finish should both allow the instrument's voice to diplay itself. But there may be tone coloration and a given player may prefer the tone of one over the other. Lacquer, most will agree, is more durable. Finishes that are way too heavy can seriously impair tone and most such finishes are lacquer. But a good lacquer finish can be great as far as tone goes.

Having said all of that, it's worth pointing out that "all else being equal" rarely applies. It's kind of like buying cars or TVs. Most add-ons -- essential and frivolous alike -- tend to be bundled. With mandolins, a high-end instrument within a given manufacturer's line may get not only more pearl and more highly figured wood, but also, more care in graduating the tops and more attention to optimal playing feel. So, it's not that unusual for a glitzier model from the same builder as a plainer model to actually sound better as well as look fancier. But there are certainly exceptions. Also, on a custom build, you can specify the things that matter (e.g., attention to getting the action just the way you like it, responsiveness to a certain string guage you prefer) without paying for other features you don't care about. But off the shelf, the pearl and wood figure are seldom (but not never) the only differences between pricier and less expensive versions of the same instrument.

Some price differences represent substantial sound differences. The best example is carved vs non-carved construction. Carving backs and tops takes a lot of time and trouble and those instruments naturally cost more. They also have a distinctive sound, especially if they also have f-holes rather than round soundholes. Whether the cost is worth it depends on the sound you're looking for. But the extra cost of the carved back and top isn't just paying more for a different look. It's a structural and tonal difference, as well.

Finally, purely cosmetic features can add considerably to the enjoyment of an instrument. Everybody has their own trade-offs for appearance and cost, of course, but most people would pay something extra for a nicer looking mandolin. How much extra and how much nicer looking are personal decisions, but for a given owner, paying for extra cosmetics may not be throwing money away, but an integral part of getting an instrument that will be totally satisfying.

Hope these ideas help you think about things.

[BenE]

That is a tough question....
I would say in the upper tiers of mandolins that every cent you spend gets you something in return....Think about it...all mandolins are gonna have the same basic hardware, binding, tuners...ect #You might spend $100 for a tailpiece as opposed to a $30 tailpiece...you can upgrade tuners but there is only so much you can do with upgrading the hardware.....but once you get into a good mandolijn that offers all the hardware you desire.....then it would seem that you are paying for sound...looks are just the icing on the cake. #There don't seem to be that many "extra" frills that you can do to a mandolin beyond tuners, tailpieces, bridges, and saddles.....and this is no place to scrimp in the first place....My two cents worth....

Far from an expert, but I think you could argue that some of the "fit and finish" details add considerably to the cost with limited return in sound.

[doanepoole]

I think this is a hard question to answer because few builders really offer too many options in terms of "levels of cosmetics". #Weber is the obvious exception here, and to a lesser extent Gibson. #On top of that, list prices for mandolins vary greatly from builder to builder, so there are just to many variables to pin down a specific price range.

[jds4peace]

thanks for the replies, i really am trying to figure out the best combo for me...

Some makes tout their models as no frills, like mid-missouri, and gibson's A-9, F-9, thats where i got the concept...I'm looking for a mandolin
that keeps the look of real stained wood, has no fancy inlays, but sounds like the ones that do. I'm just trying to tap all the resources that
i can in coming up with the make/model of choice. Any comments on mid-mo or the A/F-9?

[John Flynn]

It's a good question, but don't think the answer is a simple one. The way I see it, there are different "plateaus" of quality and some options are frills for some people and real quality issues for others. Also, the Asian-built instruments like MK and the used instrument market have really skewed the whole cost/quality scale.

Here is MHO to get the best deal:
> Decide on what your priorities are in terms of tone and playability, but not looks
> Ignore body style, F versus A.
> Be influenced by a quality nameplate, but not by a "hot" nameplate
> Be tolerant of a few dings and scratches, but don't pay extra for "distressing."
> Have any instrument you are thinking about buying evaluated by a pro who is not trying to sell you anything.

[Bradley]

My opinion isnt that mando's change prices due to cosmetics (which I would deem as inlays or ornamentation)
as much as quality of the products.

With a higher priced mandolin you get better woods and hardware...with these you incorporate #more detailed workmanship by higher skilled tradesmen who hold to much tighter specifications, which shows in the finish and playability of an instrument...and all put together makes for a more "perfect" instrument upon completion which will show in sound ,value , and appearance.(Before the hate mail starts I am not saying lower priced mandolins cant sound good)

As you start looking at the upper scale of mandolins (6K and up)there are definet differences between them and mando's that cost less...that doesnt make any one of them bad.

Are there differences between the quality of a Lexus and a
Kia? #sure there is....to some people these differences mean nothing,but to others its worth $30K more.Just like a
Gilchrist cost $15K more than alot of low end mando's...to some its worth it, and others are happy playing their Korean/Asian mandolins.....Just my .02

[BenE]

Good post Bradley!

[Lee]

I'd go a bit lower than Mandoplyr. There are any number of small builders, and even a few bigger established names, that can produce darn-fine sounding and playing A-style mandolins in the mid-teens.
I'd love to get my hands on Laura Ratcliffs #24 and compare it to my BRW #24. Laura's #17 will give many higher priced mandos a good run for their money, wonder how much better she's gotten.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws....y=10179 (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3706293240&category=10179)

[ethanopia]

very very tough question here...

My thought is that generally adornments don't have much to do with sound. ie Inlay and binding, but Tailpieces and Tuners affect the sound a little more.

bang for your buck those New collings look like a heck of a lot of mando for the money but I haven't seen one in person yet...

http://www.elderly.com/new_instruments/items/CMT.htm

Now that being said there are many more builders that will build an A for that price that will have a more hand built approach.

So I'm not sure that your question really applies to mandolins since most builders are trying to approch the design of the instruments based a set of standards laid out in the 20's by Gibson.

I've seen builders in the $3500 that can craft an instruments that is comparable to instruments in $10,000 range, and I've heard $10,000 instruments with more tone than a Loar....

All in all instruments are like people, every one is different, some you like, some you don't, some smell bad, some look funny, some look pretty, but they all have pretty much the same parts.

and oh yeah most of the tone is in your hands

[Bobby Brite]

I just purchased a Carlos Bunch F-5 copy. While the bining isn't exact and the scroll is a little ruff it is the best sounding mandolin I have played. I think it certainly depends on your preference. I paid for the sound with this one. And the ruff workmanship actually helped me to obtain this great sounding mandolin at a decent price.

[doanepoole]

I'd go a bit lower than Mandoplyr. There are any number of small builders, and even a few bigger established names, that can produce darn-fine sounding and playing A-style mandolins in the mid-teens.

Just to add to this thought, there are alot of struggling builders who can and do build mandolins of similar quality, certainly in terms of sound, as the high end makers. The market is so flooded with builders now that they just can't find room, and have to keep prices low. These guys are harder to find, but they I think are where the real values are at today.

[Lee]

Let's also include established respected foreign small builders who are just breaking into the US market.

[craigtoo]

Hey,

Heck if you factor in exchange rates on this the threshold could get even lower. #For Celtic, or just a great flatop all around; Look at Davy Stuart's prices in NZ. #Easily what I would describe as a nofrills professional instrument. #Just ask Andy Irvine.

For carved tops and As and Fs look at some of the Czech builders websites. Lebeda, Capek...these guys are turning out some of the finest instruments around! #

One other thing to consider; longevity. #Some of things that look great do have a functional quality that will really last the lifelong test of Jamming/Sessioning. #Waverly tuners for example. #They look great and are machined to such tolerances that they'll probably last longer than the "no frills off the shelf brand". #Bindings help stop the propegation of cracks etc. etc.

If you know you're going to sell the instrument in a few years though than this might not be an issue.

And just for me personally, that threshold always seems to be a moving target. #Unfortunately, it's always moving UP!

craig

[Dioptase]

To answer your question about specific mandolins...

Mid Mo's seem to have one of the best track records of any instrument on this board. I don't think I've ever seen a negative comment about their instruments. That being said, they are flat top oval hole instruments, not suitable for playing bluegrass. More suited to folk and celtic styles of playing. A beautiful tone with more sustain and less attack.

I recently upgraded myself to an A9. I'm very happy with the instrument. It gets a nice deep chop sound, but also has a singing sustain when called upon. I'm really in love with the tone, as are most of the other A9 owners on this board. Personally, I love the no frills look. A good used A9 is one of the better values in the market today in my opinion.
But if you look at discussions on the A9, you'll see that my opinion isn't shared by everyone. Dale, who is a prominent cafe member and mandolin dealer has mentioned several times that the A9 just isn't his cup of tea. But I really couldnt' be happier with mine.

If I had the money, I'd probably jump on that Laura Ratliff on Ebay right now. But there's a number of good Mandolins available at reasonable prices. I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Rigel yet in this thread-- their A+ has been touted time and again as one of the best values in the mandolin world. Not my first choice, but it is for many. Breedlove also makes some beautiful instruments at very reasonable prices. And if you've got the cash, those new Collings are definitly worth investigating.
Micah

[Bowzette]

I agree with the responses to your question. But let me
rephrase your question. What would be a significant
upgradefrom your present mandolin that would be well made,
sound and play well without paying a lot of money for "looks". Not that looks are not
important, but it will materially impact the cost.
Breedlove Quarts models, Gibson 9s, Rigel Natural, and now
the new plain versions of the Collings IMHO all meet the
criteria set forth above. Additionally, depending upon
the stlye of music you play, Gibsons from the teens are
a great buy, if in good condition. The Mid-Mo and used
Flatiron Cadets also may work well for you. I have a Cadet
that is 8 times cheaper than my Phoenix. Does my Phonex
sound and play better? Yes. Does it sound and play 8 times
better? No. Is the Phoenix worth what I paid for it. yes.
But a lot of work went into a carved top and back and
varnish finish. And if you want a chop, it isn't going to
happen well with the Cadet.Just got a F-9 yesterday that sounds as
good as the Phoenix with better G string and bark on
the chop for a lot less, but visually it is not the work of
art the Phoenix is. "Works of Art" cost a lot more but
Collings, Rigel, Breedlove and Gibson realize there is
a good market for the basic sound and playability of a
good mandolin. Note: I have not stated that the above
referenced models compare, generally speaking, with
expensive mandolins-it is a question of deminishing
returns for me and I suspect most of us.When i listen to
mandotasting I beging thinking a lot of the differences
in getting great tone and volume is in the player. while
they sound different only a few jump out at me as really
outstanding or inferior.

[jds4peace]

i like the rephrasing...

i've been leaning toward the F-9 or the A-9...but the Weber Gallatin is still in the running...

[Bowzette]

the Weber certainly fits the list of mandolins I was trying to describe and it an excellent value. If you could go to Elderly or Mandolin Brothers you could find what really appealed to you
within that price range and concept. but for most of us
that is not practical. You could also order 3/4 of the ones you
are interested in and ship the ones back you reject. This requires the funds or credit to cover the initial purchase
and lots of shipping cost, but it may be worth it.

[PCypert]

I know this isn't exactly what you asked, but its a personal opinion of mine. Buy used. You get more bang for your buck. Not only do you get more instrument for less. If you shop smart (shop S Mart - name that film) you'll be guaranteed the amount put in back or more. The point you're making could be analyzed if you take a look at the Rigels.

The A Natural is very basic. Paying for a solid handmade American mandolin. Not paying extra for gloss(though you get gloss on new ones), finish, gold tuners, ebony bridge and fretboard, etc.

The A+ Standard has upgrades in finish, gloss, fretboard, factory installed pick up, etc.

The A+ Deluxe adds more color options, Gold hardware, fancier woods, different neck construction, and a bone nut.

I was looking at getting bang for my buck a little while ago. Love no frills. I have a D03E Larrivee that's more than enough guitar. Can't see paying extra for inlays and fancy binding. So I was drawn to the Gibson A9 and the Rigel A Natural. They both sound great, but I needed a pickup. Came across a A+ Standard and couldn't justify the extra bucks for the Deluxe. The Standard had everything I needed. To me some of the extras were frills, considering I really would have been happy with the Natural if it came with a pick up. I'm actually dissapointed with the gloss finish (though this Rigel has by far the best gloss I've seen as do most Rigels). I'm a big matte fan. So they have options you can decide. You know you're getting a solid American hand made mandolin. You get to decide to what level frills you are comfortable paying for.

I'd say go with a used Rigel/Breedlove if you're into Bluegrass, but also into others. Good no frills instruments. Get the Gibson if you're traditional bluegrass. But check it out first as they vary in set up and playability (as do all mandos). You may even luck into a flamed back A9. My .02
Paul

[mikeomando]

I think you should set your maximum price according to your budget, and then take a look around at what ballpark you're in. I also think that if I personally were in the market for a mando, I would look for a structurally sound but cosmetically beat-up instrument that sounded great. Probably you're greatest bang for the buck. Different people look for different things. If you are a collector, it's all about condition and rarity and appointments. If you are a player, it's all about the sound, first and foremost.
What kind of music are you into? That's the first question because you should probably look for a mando that complements that style.

[Bob A]

I bought a Unicorn F5, made after Gerhardt sold the company. It was cheap, relatively, yet fancy in terms of appointments. It plays well, and serves my needs. In many ways I got the best of both worlds.

BUT it will never have the retained value of a Gibson mando, or even one of the boutique makers, because there are so few around, and the maker is not building any more. Unless some monster player buys it and appears with it on stage, it will sort of hover around the same relative level I bought it at.

The point is that it ought to be the instrument that you're buying, not the label. (Try telling that to someone with a Loar!). You can get a darn good instrument if you let your hands and ears do the selecting. On the other hand, there are lots of good reasons to go for the name. Usually the reputation is well-deserved, so you have an assurance of a certain level of quality; then too, resale is easier, if it comes to that.

I've seen some incredibly ornate bowlbacks that were basically decorative trash, and some very plain ones that were wonderful instruments. Again, a combination of reputation and handling/playing are the best tools for selection. If you can't play them all, you can be comfortable choosing an instrument by a maker with a good rep.

Mostly I buy used instruments, from dealers. I drool for a while, send off some bucks, and play for a day. If it speaks to me, I keep it - if not, I send it back. If I can, I go to a shop and mess with a bunch and decide if any are "The One".

I think that focussing on appearance will do you a disservice. Ultimately, it's how you sound together that is important. And if it is important to you, take the time to turn it into a Quest - blow some time checking out what's available, in person. It will be an interesting experience, you'll learn a lot, and it'll be a more satisfying relationship between you and your mandolin.

[fatt-dad]

My opinion is that if all you have to judge it by is your Fender, you may be surprised to find that another several-hundred-dollar mandolin makes a big difference. Used and good playing Kentucky, Ibanez, and Flatirons can be had for under $1000.00. There are others too. Go to a music shop and play a few.

f-d

[Frank Russell]

So far, I've owned two of the mandolins you have mentioned, a Gallatin and recently an A9. I loved my Gallatin, and have had 5 Webers so far in a short mando-buying adventure. I am a big Weber fan, their finish and workmanship is usually flawless, and all the ones I've owned had a beautiful sweet tone. Having said that, the A9 I just got from a classified ad sight unseen absolutely blows most of them out of the water both volume and bluegrass tonewise. Before anyone jumps in to defend their Webers, remember I'm also a fan. For me, my A9 was good enough to justify a trade for an F9 which is on the way. Yes, it's not as pretty, but I'm finally getting over the "shiny, must have it" phase of my mando education. Either way, you will get a quality, American made instrument, made by people who clearly love mandolins. If you go Weber, go used if possible. The recent price increase seems pretty substantial. I just sold a great Absaroka, and I thought it sounded better than my old Gallatin, for the same or less money. Hope this helps, Frank

[jasona]

I'd go a bit lower than Mandoplyr. #There are any number of small builders, and even a few bigger established names, that can produce darn-fine sounding and playing A-style mandolins in the mid-teens. #
I'd love to get my hands on Laura Ratcliffs #24 and compare it to my BRW #24. #Laura's #17 will give many higher priced mandos a good run for their money, wonder how much better she's gotten.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws....y=10179 (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3706293240&category=10179)
When I had a Steve Smith bridge and new nut fit to Ratcliff #6, the luthier commented that it had "outstanding tone, very favorably comparing to a Smart and a Tucker" he had seen recently. Unlike the Smart and Tucker, my mando cost a single grand. I think its developing Nugget-like tone--not saying its the equal to the Nugget, but I am saying that it is a super value.

(By the way, the seller of that Ratcliff is Ken Ratcliff--he forgot his old eBay password or something. And NFI)

[Dioptase]

Jds4peace--

You've never mentioned to us what style of music you're interested in playing. That will have all the effect as to what mando is best suited for you.

The Gallatin is a beautiful instrument. As far as looks go, I think it's one of the sweetest mandolins around. Like I said, I enjoy that rustic appeal. If you're looking to play Bluegrass, keep in mind the standard model has a mahogany back, which will produce a warmer and less aggressive sound than what you'd want for a bluegrass instrument.

For other styles, it would be a great instrument.

I have seen custom Gallatins floating about with a maple back, but usually command extra $$.
Micah

[jds4peace]

Right now i'm jamming with a local old-time band and its a great time and i can probably attribute a majority of my progress to them. But...I'd like to start playing more bluegrass though, but i still love old time...
When I upgrade i'll be upgrading to a bluegrass mandolin...and eventually i'd like to have a nice old timey one too...which mid-mo seems like the best route in that category...

[mrbook]

Many companies (Gibson, Weber, Collings, Rigel, etc.) have instruments at many price points. The simpler and less expensive models may give you all you need in terms of sound and playability, without the high prices of their beautiful top models. There are also a lot of independent makers whose work doesn't command high prices, especially in the used market, but they are worth a look. I don't think of instruments in terms of makers or models, but as individuals - try each and see what you think. I've bought quite a few by mail, and never returned any - some needed a little setup, others a little playing time to get to know them, but I've bought carefully and loved them all, each in their own way.

[ash]

I purely listen for what sound I want. Of course I'd like one that is beautiful, but there's a point where it's not a priority next to sound.

I was choosing between a Weber Yellowstone F and a Collings A. My other mando was an A and I was lookin to get an F, but the Collings's sound was so tasty, I didn't think twice. The Weber looked great, but I just went for sound and I haven't regreted it once.