Mid-Mo vs. Eastman 504?

[Santiago]

First mando. I know I have to try them both and make a personal decision, but I also wanted to hear about the experiences of others. A lot of people who know their stuff recommend the Mid-Mo, but those Eastmans -- even the cheap ones -- have nice wood to them.

[stevem]

Can't go wrong either way, IMO. Ask yourself what sort of sound you want. Traditional bluegrassy? Go with the Eastman. Sweet, pleasing flattop sound (less bark, more ringing sustain)? Go midmo.

[RichM]

I have owned both, and they are both nice mandolins-- in fact, I would probably peg these two as the best of the "budget" mandolins. I still have my Mid-Mo, and the only reason I don't have my 504 anymore is because I replaced it with a 514. My preference would be for the 504, but not because it's a "better" mandolin, but because I love that old-fashioned oval hole look. It really comes down to which one speaks to you.

[Stephen Perry]

They really look like different instruments to me. I enjoyed my Mid-Mo very much. Excellent simple workmanship, nice tone, etc. A different character than the arched instruments. I strongly second the "figure out what sound" comment above, factoring in what will continue to look right to you.

[Santiago]

Thanks. As a violin and Gibson 335 guitar player, I'm used to flame maple archtops with antique finishes, but I am leaning toward an oval hole mandolin. It's going to take a considerable ride for me to hear these two together -- though I may have to. I suspect I'll end up with the Mid-Mo 11, partially because I like its sound and partially because if I stick with mandolin, as I sense I will, I'm going to want to upgrade to a f-hole archtop F some day, so why not start with something appreciably different that provides a real alternative.