Played an 05 gibson mm and am a bit mystified...

[bjewell]

I read the MM vs. custom-made thread and found it most interesting. #So today, I went over to Ishibashi Music in the Ochanomizu district of Tokyo and tried one out. #It sat at another of their outlets for years, but at two-million yen -- about 17 large -- there was no way I was gonna buy it, so I never looked at it.

What I noticed first was the gloppy finish. #The instrument has yellowed significantly, the ivoroid binding is a brownish yellow. #The binding was poorly executed, especially around the scroll, it was plain bad. #Many of the binding corners on the mandolin were not very good. #The wood was decent, but the side wood did not match in any way the back. There were visible tool marks under the finish as well as unfinished wood inside and next to the scroll.

I played it, but nothing much came out of the box. #It made mandolin sounds, but that was about it. #FWIW, the serial number is V70431, dated February 7, 2005 and signed by D something, I could not make out the signature.

I'm 62, have owned literally hundreds of guitars, mostly vintage or high end, and have had many, many Gibson products. #This particular mandolin in no way reminded me of anything from Kalamazoo, it looked and felt more like a shop project by a talented high-school teacher. #I don't say that in mean spiritedness, it's just how it looked and felt.

Hopefully the mandolins made in the earlier part of the decade are great, beautifully made instruments. #This particular F-5 seemed pretty sad. #Maybe it could be re-bound and refinished, but as it stood it wasn't worth a thousand dollars to me, let alone nearly 20 grand.

YMMV #and that is fine! :- )

[fredfrank]

I have had a similar experience with the Master Model. After I bought my Varnished Fern, I tried out a MM and found many of the same problems. Now after I had the Fern for a while, I noticed that the gloppy varnish does smooth out from constant use, and in fact, I even wore some of it off where my hands and arm rubbed on it. I imagine that would happen with the MM, too.

The sound issue is one that I have struggled with on many high-end mandolins. How does one know if an expensive mandolin will open up and be a monster later on? The MM I was trying out was very tight and not even in the same ballpark as my Fern. I have owned a couple of mandolins that were horrendously expensive and remained tight after a couple years of playing time. The best mandolin I have ever owned (which I happen to have right now) sounded incredible right from the first note.

I didn't think the binding on the Master Model I tried was bad. I think that the poorly applied varnish made it look a little funky. I wonder why Gibson doesn't rub these finishes out to even things up. Collings' varnished instruments are done so well, it's hard to believe they were done by humans.

I would imagine the signature you were looking at was Danny Roberts. He signed my Fern and I had to ask somebody what the signature said. The MM I tried out was a Charlie Derrington signed mandolin. I don't really know if Gibson's standards of acceptability are different from other makers, but it sure seemed like the finish application process could be improved.

Hopefully this thread won't turn into another Gibson bashing romp. I was just struck by the similarity of your experience to mine. Incidently, I really liked my Varnished Fern for many years until I got my Red Diamond.

[G. Fisher]

I have played several Gibson mandolins and have really like the sound of many of them. However, I also have found the binding work less than stellar. It has been mentioned before that there are people in the production of these mandos that only do binding, sanding, finish, etc. So, my question is if they have done several hundred or thousand mandos why aren't they bound better. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Not bashing just curious.

[Bernie Daniel]

fredfrank: The sound issue is one that I have struggled with on many high-end mandolins. How does one know if an expensive mandolin will open up and be a monster later on? The MM I was trying out was very tight and not even in the same ballpark as my Fern. #I have owned a couple of mandolins that were horrendously expensive and remained tight after a couple years of playing time. The best mandolin I have ever owned (which I happen to have right now) sounded incredible right from the first note.


This is just my opinon on this. #

I agree that a mandolin like all wooden instruments will "open up" over time with playing. #

But I think as well that there is a large dose of subjectivity in just how much it changes and exactly when this magic happens.

So if a $15K+ mandolin does not sound exactly "right" and absolutley wonderful on day ONE right there in the store I'd say leave it there.

I also have a Fern (2002) also signed by Danny Roberts (not a "V" model) and again, like yours it has always, from the first time I touched it, sounded absolutely GREAT.

It has that GIBSON sound and there is nothing else like it no matter what you pay. (I said this was my opinion didn't I?)

[Crowder]

Your observations match my own.

[f5loar]

I would think the dealer(if indeed a Gibson dealer)would send back such a mandolin with that many problems and have them send another. There really is no excuss in one being that bad off being sent in the first place however two wrongs don't make it right. Car makers make lemons too and ususally there is a huge discount to them or they are sold at auction. My recent trip to the Gibson Mall store found two 2005 Fs, a DMM and a Lawson model and they were offered at 30% off list. That is a deep discount in Gibson's new pricing structure. One must ask with the demand in great high end Gibson why these 2 year old models were still there.

[AlanN]

Everybody has their own ideas, which is the way it should be. But, there it is again, the "Gibson sound".

I swear, I do not know what this is. Is it like

"that Budweiser taste"?
"that Ford quality"?
"that Sherwin-Williams coverage"?

[red7flag]

I don't have a Gibson mandolin. My Stanley has much of the same quality of sound that I expect in the Gibson. I was recently at the Gibson booth at IBMA. There was a similarity of sound from the RSDMM right down the line. Some were louder, some sharper, but all had that Gibson sound. The only disappointing one was a Bush that really just didn't get it. I would have a hard time describing the sound, I to my ears it definitely exists. In the past, I saw some early DMMs that had really poor fit and finish. There was a great improvement in the two I saw at Gibson booth at IBMA. I still think they over do the burned-bubbled look on the headstock, but that is just a taste issue.
Tony

[Nuages]

Everybody has their own ideas, which is the way it should be. But, there it is again, the "Gibson sound".
I swear, I do not know what this is. Is it like
"that Budweiser taste"?
"that Ford quality"?
"that Sherwin-Williams coverage"?
Or is it like a 1918 A-1 sound?
or a 1924 F-4 sound?
or a 1950 F-12 sound?
or a 1975 A-5 "mouse ear" sound?
or a 2005 DMM F-5 sound?

Not much in common there - what is it exactly?

[jbrwky]

"Charlie somebody.." ?? Sheesh. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[Bernie Daniel]

AlanN: Everybody has their own ideas, which is the way it should be. But, there it is again, the "Gibson sound".
I swear, I do not know what this is. Is it like
"that Budweiser taste"?
"that Ford quality"?
"that "?

Well OK, you are in luck then. #If you cannot hear it then you there would be no advantage for you in owning a Gibson.

In addition I cannot prove there IS a Gibson sound -- but I think I hear it.

Budweiser taste? #might be one but is it worth knowing about?;

Ford quality? #is that a oxymoron?

Sherwin-Williams coverage? #seems to me like that is in the past their new paints do not cover as well.

These are all my opinions.


Nuages: Or is it like a 1918 A-1 sound?
or a 1924 F-4 sound?
or a 1950 F-12 sound?
or a 1975 A-5 "mouse ear" sound?
or a 2005 DMM F-5 sound? #


This thread is not about Gibson oval hole or even A-models is it? -- the discussion was Gibson F-style - F-hole mandolins. #So you'll have to answer that one yourself I can't help you. #I think ovals and f-holes are different regardless of brand.

As to the 1950 F-12, I have a 1952 F-12 and yes it has the Gibson sound -- deeper then my F-5l but its true to the brand.

I will concede that some other manufactures might carve a a top for an F-model in such a manner as to give something similar to the Gibson sound. #This is all opinion.

My main point is that Gibsons all tend to have it I expect.

[foldedpath]

I have played several Gibson mandolins and have really like the sound of many of them. However, I also have found the binding work less than stellar. It has been mentioned before that there are people in the production of these mandos that only do binding, sanding, finish, etc. So, my question is if they have done several hundred or thousand mandos why aren't they bound better. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Not bashing just curious.

That may be the problem right there: the repetitive nature of the job. I get the impression that binding and scraping may not be the most fun part of the job for many luthiers. But at least a luthier working in a one man shop gets to move around to other steps of the building process. They don't have to do that one thing, over and over. Repetition should build experience and better work over time, but it may be difficult to maintain a level of care and attention if the person isn't really into it. So maybe it's just boredom setting in, or that person was having a bad day and they normally do great work.

At any rate, someone should be doing a QC check on anything leaving the shop, deciding if the instrument meets the standard the company is shooting for. That's the real point of failure when things like this happen.

[AlanN]

Well OK, you are in luck then. #If you cannot hear it then you there would be no advantage for you in owning a Gibson.
I own 73675, does that qualify?

I did not question your statement to rattle you, just I have seen this term..."Gibson tone"...used all over the place, and I, like Nuages, feel there is no one characterisitic that defines that, certainly with the various models made, and woods used, over the decades.

[testore]

AlanN is right.The same thing is applied to violins with the oversayed "Italian sound". Though I'll admit there are GENERAL sounds that do apply to countries (especially France) but there are way too many instruments that DON'T sound the way their fellow countrymens' violins sound to make that wide of a statement. There is a bluegrass sound, an oval hole sound an f hole sound but there again only in general terms. Good and not so good sounds from everyone.

[fwoompf]

I've never even played a MM but I can't help but wonder how many of these "issues" are caused by general set-up things and EXTREMELY old strings in the case of instruments having sat at a store for "years"

[Bernie Daniel]

AlanN: I own 73675, does that qualify?

I did not question your statement to rattle you, just I have seen this term..."Gibson tone"...used all over the place, and I, like Nuages, feel there is no one characterisitic that defines that, certainly with the various models made, and woods used, over the decades.

Yeah, I guess we can let you slide by with that!! #I'll bet it even has "that Gibson sound"! http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

My appologies.

Actually I'm not rattled as much as wondering what was wrong with me to even enter these waters. #

I am a scientist so I tend to believe what I can prove in the physical world that is. # Since I cannot prove the Gibson sound what am I talking about it? (don't answer that).

Maybe there IS a Gibson sound that exists in the imagination of some and not in others. But in the end what is more important is do you like to play your mandolin? and does its sound please you? #That is all that is important.

Play the mandolin that makes you happy. #

I have no more "intelligent" tibits to add to this. The cupboard is empty now -- if it wasn't before.

[AlanN]

Nah, don't go away. It's the stuff that dreams are made of <g>. I work with scientists (chemists) too, and if results ain't starin' you in the face, they don't wanna hear it.

I even have trouble staying with a 'Loar tone'. Not sure what that means, but I guess you know it when you hear it. As Lee Trevino used to say,

"You can feel it when you drive!"

[johnM]

Quote
AlanN: Everybody has their own ideas, which is the way it should be. But, there it is again, the "Gibson sound".
I swear, I do not know what this is. Is it like
"that Budweiser taste"?
"that Ford quality"?
"that "?

Dude, you crack me up...........

JM

[Bradley]

We are doing a project in the studio and I took my MM and a mandolin of another make that is often praised on the Cafe...The sound engineer told me that I was free to play what I wanted, but please consider putting the other mandolin away and getting the Gibson out as it sounded so much better than the XXXXXXXX named mandolin....Guess it had that Gibson sound....

[Links]

Maybe I am not typical, but when I bought my DMM, I picked it up, looked at it, played it, "listened" to it, "felt" it, and generally determined that it was a great mandolin. I certainly looked at the overall construction, but did not nit-pick (my words) every minute detail to see if it were perfect. I have picked up "perfect" mandolins (construction and detail-wise) before and put them back down when they just did not "feel" right or sound "right (to my ear). I certainly admired the craftmanship, but I was looking for more than just great construction detail. Some mandolins have both perfect detailing and wonderful sound (Gilchrist & Dudenbostel, just to name two), both of which are almost double the price I paid (not retail) for my DMM. I have also picked up very good sounding mandolins where the craftmanship was just not acceptable (no names here), usually about 20% of the cost of my DMM.

I guess the bottom line is that if the sound, feel, and craftmanship do not suit you, by all means pass them by and get something that does. I certainly understand that they are not for everybody.

[Ivan Kelsall]

I've never owned a Gibson Mandolin & i'm probably never likely to do so,not because i
don't like them,but because of the cost of a really good one. I have had 3 Mandolins,
my prefered 2 i've still got,but all 3 sounded good from the word GO !.My Fern sounded superb straight out of the box & has continued to improve tonally,my Beartooth has been the same.
Just from my (non-Gibson experience),i would have thought that if a top quality Mandolin such as a MM (for example), doesn't sound good from the start,it's not going to improve much in the near future.
If the Mandolin doesn't sound good in the shop,who's going to buy it & take a chance that in maybe 2,3 or more years,it's going to be a great sounding instrument ? - not me,that's for sure !,
Saska

[ipmala888]

You can read my reply at the 'MM vs. Really Good Luthier'.
I own an absolutely 'freak' cannon of a MM...but it was
'handpicked' by Charlie Derrington and the guys at Gibson.
All the MM's and DMM's are considered exceptional--but,
some are definately considered better than others, at least
in terms of tone quality. Regarding the issue of 'fit and
finish', I would compare it to the old Italian violins--ie.
Stradivarius vs. Guarnari Del Gesu. The Strad has a much
finer look (fit & finish) because he built them for royalty.
The Guarnari has a much rougher look (fit & finish) because
they were being built for the common man. And there are far fewer Del Gesu's out there than Strad's. The Guarnari is much more rare an instrument, has a sweeter tone, and sells for 2-3 times more than a Strad does at auction. I have
played some MM's and DMM's that I really would not care to
own--mostly due to tonal quality--ie. when they're brand new
out of the box...either they 'bark' or they don't.
http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/coffee.gif

[Cullowheekid]

I wonder at the validity of the original post in terms of sound quality since the original poster states in another Cafe thread that "he's new to the mandolin thing".I think it takes some time playing in many different situations to form an educated opinion of what a "good" mandolin should sound like,especially if it's a Gibson MM built on the model of a 20's Loar.A number of great builders have studied the construction of Gibson Loar mandolins to try and get the "Gibson sound".That sound is the benchmark of a good mandolin if you play and listen to bluegrass music,no matter what the name on the mandolin.I'm a little biased though, since I play Gibson and Martin and live south of the Mason Dixon line.Rave on.E

[Andrew Faltesek]

Martin products(guitars, old & new) I've seen over the years seem to be almost "perfect" if there is such a thing, and the Gibson(guitars, older) were very close.

The one Gibson mandolin I played was very attractive at first, but after the awe wore off a bit I began to notice some things I thought were off. The finish was uneven in spots, binding and fit issues. Nothing a deal-breaker, but at the sky-high price I was re-evaluating my lust for Gibson.

My modest STE has VERY neat construction, fit, and finish. The smaller shops may well have the upper hand for quality control.

I suppose its tempting for me to criticise high-end Gibsons totally out of my reach(like bashing the rich); but I would be wondering If I spent $$$$ on a Gibson MM with noticeable flaws and some harmonica player from MN sat down next to me with a $ STE that looked great all over.

[mand0l1n]

"What I noticed first was the gloppy finish. The instrument has yellowed significantly, the ivoroid binding is a brownish yellow. The binding was poorly executed, especially around the scroll, it was plain bad. Many of the binding corners on the mandolin were not very good. The wood was decent, but the side wood did not match in any way the back. There were visible tool marks under the finish as well as unfinished wood inside and next to the scroll."

I had these similiar experiences trying out Gibson mandolins. I made reference to this in a post about a year ago and was just being honest and also made some reference to this in the Master Model versus a really good luthier post. And then the all Gibson warriors took it personally declaring that real men play master models, and only a Gibson is Good enough which obsviously is not true and could never be backed with facts especially since so many people know that their quality has wavered substantially throughout the years.

But I will NOT say that I have never played a good one though. I have played some really good Gibsons. But I have seen and played far more bad ones than I have good ones. IN MY OPINION- They are not the best mandolin maker in the market. And I have never had a bad experience trying them out in Nashville, Merelfest, and other festivals where they had a booth set up.

I have also played many Gils, two Dudenbostals, and a couple of Loars. Honestly, more of the Gils that I played were not what I expected. One of the Dudenbostals that I played was not overly exceptional either. The Dude had good tone, but was very weak sounding. One of the loars I played had amazing tone and good volume and the other one was not near as good. But all of those intruments had exceptional craftsmanship.

In Gibsons defense, no mandolin maker can have a building career without making some that are not that great. But I agree that if your going to pay that kind of money, the craftsmanship at the very least better be good.

As far as the "Gibson Sound." Behind a curtain, Id be willing to bet most could not pick a Gibson sound from a Gilchrist, Dudenbostal, Collings, Randy Wood, or any of the great mandolins being made today.

Not Bashing, just being honest about shared experiences.

[MikeEdgerton]

One of the things I like about Gibson is that you can actually play the mandolin before you buy it. That's not taking anything away from the fine custom builders out there but when I played every Gibson on the wall at Mandolin Brothers the one that stood out was the one I bought. It is unfortunate that you can't always do that with a small builder.

[jim simpson]

"Behind a curtain, Id be willing to bet most could not pick a Gibson sound from a Gilchrist, Dudenbostal, Collings, Randy Wood, or any of the great mandolins being made today".

- mand0l1n

I think this would be a great way to shop for an instrument in a shop. Have someone play the various models you've picked out while you sit on the other side of the curtain and select with your ears. I've had my wife listen from another room to a-b which sounds the best and she has always been right-on (and she's not a player).

[Andrew Faltesek]

I hope I don't sound like I'm too critical over Gibsons. I think it is more that my perception and desire for a Gibson (or Martin) instrument was built up and elevated to such a high status for so many years it needed a bit of a reality check. All my friends had nice Gibsons, Martins, or Fenders...and boy did I covet them!

I think that as we all get older and wiser, we can look at instruments from a more informed and savvy position, and are more likely to critically examine our desire and opinions. Gibson has a deservedly fine reputation and history, so its hard to go wrong with one.

We also tend to sing the praises of our own particular mandolin makers or models, as I am certainly guilty of in regards to Weber mandolins.

[foldedpath]

One of the things I like about Gibson is that you can actually play the mandolin before you buy it. That's not taking anything away from the fine custom builders out there but when I played every Gibson on the wall at Mandolin Brothers the one that stood out was the one I bought. It is unfortunate that you can't always do that with a small builder.
That's an advantage, yes. Also true of course for Weber, Collings, or any of the other mass-market builders.

On the other hand... when you place a custom order with a small-shop luthier, you receive an instrument with an approval period of (usually) several days, at minimum. You get to live with the instrument, learn to grow into it a little bit, and find out how it likes to be played. The instrument actually gets a better chance at showing you what it can really do, compared to the more limited time people usually have to play instruments in a retail environment. Yes, you don't get to hear it compared to what else the luthier has produced recently, like you do with a new Gibson. But if it's one of the better luthiers, there won't be any "duds" that go out the door. And the instrument you receive might even be designed towards your personal goal in tone, which is something you can't get from a mass-market builder. There is also no buyer confusion or remorse about which one of several instruments might have been the best choice. You have a simple, easy binary choice... it's either a great instrument for you, or it goes back.

Just presenting the flip side. I know many people want to hear what they're getting before any cash changes hands, and I can understand that approach.

P.S. my S.O. has been violin shopping recently, and it seems to be standard practice around here to let people take one, or even several fiddles home on approval for weeks at a time. I wonder why that retail tradition developed differently from the way fretted instruments are sold? Is it just because it's such a small (and ultra-picky) market?

[Jonathan Peck]

P.S. my S.O. has been violin shopping recently, and it seems to be standard practice around here to let people take one, or even several fiddles home on approval for weeks at a time. I wonder why that retail tradition developed differently from the way fretted instruments are sold? Is it just because it's such a small (and ultra-picky) market?
I've often wondered the very same thing. I brought this up once here on the cafe and was told that this isn't always the case. The violin shop near our home has a VERY generous trial policy and I feel that with higher end instruments, that this shouldn't always be the exception rather than the rule. Based on my experiences, I'd say that they have a customer for life.

On the topic of MM's, I was up to see Barry Mitterhoff yesterday. I told him that I had just gotten on a wait list for a custom instrument and that I'd probably be selling my MM after it arrived. I asked if he would play it and give me an honest opinion. After a few minutes, he told me that if I could find a way to keep the MM, that I should.

[alisterhrae]

Interesting reference to instruments opening up after playing.
If it's not good (or great) to begin with, it probably never will! Living in Scotland I have only seen a few Gibson mandolins for sale. Each one was poorly finished and I mean poor, when I commented on the fact to one shop owner he said 'yeah, they are all like that! " If you want a Gibson thats what you put up with" I could hardly belive it. Collings and many others make mandolins that look perfect and whats more- sound fantastic, I honestly can't think of a reason why Gibsons are so poorly finished, The same holds true for their guitars. I recently tried a Brazilian Rosewood Southern Jumbo at a dealer in Glasgow, £4.000 here $8,000 dollars ! Pickguard had slipped leaving a tan line and glue showing-neck was bowed and fretboard had shrunk, leaving protruding frets. The binding looked like it was put on by someone wearing boxing gloves. I know someone said they wern't knocking Gibson, but Gibson do it themselves!
As the winemaker from D R C in Burgundy once told me while trying barrel samples of his wine-'dont believe experts who tell you- you have to wait for a great wine to develop, if it's not great when its made it never will be great'

[mand0l1n]

Alisterhrae,
I could not agree with you more. I have experienced the same thing with most of the Gibsons I have played. And yes they have done it to themselves. What is even more bizarre is the how people get offended when your honest about this on the Cafe. I will not appologize for being honest about Gibson on the Cafe. If Gibson owners have a problem with it, I guess they will have to deal with it because this seems to be the General consensus among so many that I have talked with. If Bill Collings started making mandolins like many of the Gibsons I have seen, I would not be offended by people being honest about it. I would agree with them and say that it is a shame. And If I was a Gibson owner and was as easily offended as some on the Cafe about people saying anything about Gibson, I would contact Gibson and show them the numbers of posts, not just on this forum, but other forums as well about the reputation that they might be building, If they even care. I have played some good Gibsons, but I have never seen consistancy in their work like I have in Collings, Nugget, or Gilchrist.

[f5loar]

If the Gibson Guitar in Glasgow was in that poor of a quality condition the dealer should have phoned Gibson with your description and I'd bet they would say ship it back on their dime. That's why they have dealers. Now if it was used not much you can do but new there is certain warrenties they follow and this certainly sounds like it would go under it easily if even a full replacement vs. repair. Sounds to me the guitar suffered heat damage on a slow boat from China.