Scalloped fingerboard

[LiamO]

I want to scoop out the end of my F style fingerboard. Some folks say use a Dremel router and some say use a drum sander. Any thoughts or advice on this? I can't even imagine how to mount a router
Thanks!
LiamO

[earthsave]

FRETS.COM (http://www.frets.com)

[earthsave]

If you having trouble with that link, this'n will take you right there..Scooping out the fretboard extension at FRETS.COM (http://www.frets.com/FRETSPages/Luthier/Technique/Mandolin/DropTongue/droptongue.html)

[LiamO]

Earthsave,
Thanks a bunch! That helps a great deal!!
LiamO

[sunburst]

A method using hand tools. (http://www.hamlettinstruments.com/repair_detail.php?ID=7)

[Doug Hoople]

Just cut the extension off altogether and bind the stub. The extension's nothing but a nuisance, and even more so when the frets are gone.

Does it alter the sound of the instrument? Why yes! As Roland White once told Sam Bush (who told us), "It doesn't make that clicking sound any more!"

[grassrootphilosopher]

As far as the mentioned Frank Ford website and the recomendation to cut the extension off (like the Sam Bush mandolin) that would probably be the way to go. On the other hand I would like to advocate to leave the extension on and learn to live with it. Maybe adjust your picking style. I hate to see instruments butchered. And even though it´s a harsh word I think you are compromising the instrument that way. If you do not like an extension trade your instrument for one that doesn´t have an extension. They are out there.

[mercenarymandolinist]

I've been playing around with a F-4 longneck prototype, trying to achieve that warm round oval hole tone while trying to get the projection and playability of the F-5. The original F-4 soundhole was obstructed by the fretboard extension and the finger rest.

[sunburst]

Olaf, could you help me understand why it's OK to have a short or scooped extender as "original equipment" while shortening or "scooping" a long extender is butchering?
I don't quite see the distinction between doing it during construction as opposed to after construction.

[Doug Hoople]

I hate to see instruments butchered. And even though it´s a harsh word I think you are compromising the instrument that way.
"Compromising the instrument" could mean a lot of things. Depends on the f-style, and depends on how skillfully the extension cutoff is.

If it's a Gibson, especially a vintage Gibson, then the extension should be left alone and not even scalloped (although scalloping seems actually to be an accepted practice). The collectible quality of these instruments is one of the elements of their value, so it DOES compromise the instrument to get rid of the extension.

If it's another, more modern, f-style, and especially if you can convince the original luthier to do it, and it can be done with some grace, then there's nothing wrong with getting rid of the extension. It's not butchery to do so, and the instrument's not compromised then.

If the concern is that the SOUND of the instrument will be changed, then the instrument is not being compromised at all.

[MikeEdgerton]

...If it's a Gibson, especially a vintage Gibson, then the extension should be left alone and not even scalloped (although scalloping seems actually to be an accepted practice). The collectible quality of these instruments is one of the elements of their value, so it DOES compromise the instrument to get rid of the extension...
Why? If you own, intend to play it, want to remove it why does it being a Gibson of a certain vintage mean you shouldn't? Why wouldn't the same thing hold true for a Gilchrist or a Nugget? Just because it's old doesn't mean it has to be original. There isn't an original Stradivarius violin anywhere in the world. Why is it that these instruments can't be modified? If the bridge was bad would you keep it because it was original? If the tuners wouldn't work would you keep them because they were original? I'd say you'd repair or replace them. If someone wants to make their instrument into a shrine and never change it, so be it, but the truth is these are tools that were meant to be played. If the extension gets in the way then have it. If you own it, it's yours. I don't buy the idea of being a caretaker.

[MikeEdgerton]

I want to scoop out the end of my F style fingerboard. Some folks say use a Dremel router and some say use a drum sander. Any thoughts or advice on this? I can't even imagine how to mount a router
I used the Frank Ford method above to scoop my Gibson. I used a laminate trimmer as it is a smaller router. I basically built a box over the top of the mandolin protect it during the process. I finished with chisels, files and superfine sand paper. I wouldn't use a drum sander. The toughest part is getting past that last moment before you slide the router across the fretboard. It was worth the trouble.

[TomTyrrell]

One thing to check before you chop off the extension is the finish on the top under the extension. I've seen a lot of mandolins that aren't finished very well under there. Even more that aren't buffed. Not a problem if you have all the right equipment but most people who ask this question don't have all those tools and stuff.

If you don't want to mess up the top while you are doing this wrap the body in a pillow case or something like that. The experts might be comfortable working without a net but they also have the needed equipment to repair a scratch from a slipped tool.

If you don't have a bunch of tools you can do this entire scooping operation with sand paper and sanding blocks. It will take longer but how much do you pay yourself an hour?

[Doug Hoople]

Why? If you own, intend to play it, want to remove it why does it being a Gibson of a certain vintage mean you shouldn't? Why wouldn't the same thing hold true for a Gilchrist or a Nugget? Just because it's old doesn't mean it has to be original.
Agreed. I think my point had to do with addressing the nature of "compromising the instrument," which to my mind came in potentially three parts (in no particular order) 1) collectibility, 2) cosmetics/aesthetics, and 3) effect on sound.

First, you're right in that a Gilchrist or a Nugget (or any from a number of now-legendary builders) will fall into the same category as a Gibson, except to the extent that you can call Steve and Mike to get their go-ahead for an alteration, but you can't call Lloyd Loar for the same (by any means I'm aware of, that is http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif ).

But vintage Gibsons in particular retain value in part by their fidelity to their original form, so alterations have a larger effect on their resale value than perhaps on other instruments. Obviously, the more distressed a particular instrument is, the less "fidelity" value it will carry, unless, of course, the distressing was done by a famous player. But if you've got a sweetie, and it has the old Handel tuners, and the original pickguard, and the finish is still undamaged, and the OHSC in reasonable condition, do you think you should be pulling out your Dremel on it?

As far as cosmetics/aesthetics are concerned, again the concern would be resale value as much as what you like personally. Thus, scalloping, which has become an accepted practice, would probably be preferable to shortening, as fewer of us are alarmed by a scalloping job than a shortening job. However, if you're not planning on re-selling, then this is less of a concern.

Finally, as a matter of sound, there is no effect from either scalloping or shortening, so this should not be part of the considerations at all.

As an advocate of "cutting the cussed thing off," I'm obviously of the same school as Mike... namely, that mandolins are to be played, and should be thought of as tools, to be modified as needed to make them better playing instruments.

I personally think that fretboard extensions, while they look good (scalloped or unscalloped), are functionally foolish things. I'm happy to see modern luthiers producing instruments without them. My own recently-acquired instrument has a very short extension, and while I'm happy with that, I'd be happier if it had no extension at all.

[MikeEdgerton]

But if you've got a sweetie, and it has the old Handel tuners, and the original pickguard, and the finish is still undamaged, and the OHSC in reasonable condition, do you think you should be pulling out your Dremel on it?

Yes, if you want to. That's the part I object to. If in fact you own something and you want to change it then by all means have at it. What others hold in reverence is for others. I seriously doubt that anyone would call and ask permission of the builder to change something. If you wanted to put different seat covers on your car would you call Ford? If Norman Blake followed those rules Sam Bush might not be playing the mandolin he plays today. I have to believe that there are Loars out there with replaced fingerboards.

[MikeEdgerton]

If you don't want to mess up the top while you are doing this wrap the body in a pillow case or something like that.

A Pillow case won't stop a tool from marring the finish. I used a piece of formica. That won't stop a router but it offers protection from a file that might slip.

[Doug Hoople]

I seriously doubt that anyone would call and ask permission of the builder to change something.
It happens fairly often, actually. I personally know of at least two separate cases where the owner sent his mandolin back to the builder for exactly that. I don't recall the models, but I'm inclined to think a Heiden and a Nugget.

And I've heard the question asked "What would scalloping do to the value of this instrument?" any number of times.

I agree though, Mike, that it's kind of a silly question, for all but the most perfect of vintage collectibles.

[sunburst]

The mandolin part on the left was removed at the owner's request, the mandolin part on the right was not.

[MikeEdgerton]

It happens fairly often, actually. I personally know of at least two separate cases where the owner sent his mandolin back to the builder for exactly that....

And I've heard the question asked "What would scalloping do to the value of this instrument?" any number of times.

I agree though, Mike, that it's kind of a silly question, for all but the most perfect of vintage collectibles.

Sending it back to have the original builder do the work and asking permission to have it done are separate issues. Who does it isn't an issue, having someone else tell you what you can do with an instrument you own is another.

I'm not addressing value. What it does to the value isn't even a question.

[Doug Hoople]

I'm not addressing value. What it does to the value isn't even a question.
It isn't? That's news to me and anyone else who's tried to trade up (or down) (or out).

[MikeEdgerton]

The original post is as follows:

I want to scoop out the end of my F style fingerboard. Some folks say use a Dremel router and some say use a drum sander. Any thoughts or advice on this? I can't even imagine how to mount a router

I don't see anything about it the value of the instrument in that question. In one answer the value comes up. My feeling is that you own you own it. It's yours. No need to call the builder and ask permission no matter who made it. Pretty simple actually. If you choose to not modify your instrument then that is your choice as well. This is all about choice.

[Doug Hoople]

I don't see anything about it the value of the instrument in that question. In one answer the value comes up.
You're right... the OP didn't bring it up. The observation about "compromising the instrument" was what triggered the discussion about ALL the pros and cons of such modifications.

If you've got so much money that you can completely ignore the value component of modifications you make to an instrument, then chapeau, man. I'd like to be that rich some day. I've got a day job and a wife, and I'm not planning on being buried with the instrument I'm currently playing. Those three things keep retained value pretty high on my list when considering modifications.

[Doug Hoople]

There isn't an original Stradivarius violin anywhere in the world.
Not true. The Messiah is essentially unmodified. And it seems to be holding its value better than the ones that are getting played.

Just a data point, not a recommendation for what to do with your mandolin.

[Jonathan Peck]

I once bought a mandolin with the extension hacked off and a nice scar from the blade on the top. I didn't pay any less for it because of the modifications. I added Waverly's and a James tailpiece and sold it for what I paid plus the cost of the upgrades. I listed it in the classifieds and it sold in twenty five minutes to someone who had played it at a jam and liked what it had under the hood.

[MikeEdgerton]

Yes Jonathan and the guy that bought it still plays it. So much for that theory.

[Doug Hoople]

I once bought a mandolin with the extension hacked off and a nice scar from the blade on the top. I didn't pay any less for it because of the modifications. I added Waverly's and a James tailpiece and sold it for what I paid plus the cost of the upgrades. I listed it in the classifieds and it sold in twenty five minutes to someone who had played it at a jam and liked what it had under the hood.
That's actually nice to hear. Must've been a pretty nice instrument on its playing merits and very fairly priced to boot.

[MikeEdgerton]

Those three things keep retained value pretty high on my list when considering modifications.

And so it's your right to not modify your instrument as you choose. It's anyone elses right to modify their old Gibson no matter what condition it's in. There's no reason why anyone has to follow anyone elses idea of what is right or wrong when it comes to making modifications. You said:

"If it's a Gibson, especially a vintage Gibson, then the extension should be left alone and not even scalloped (although scalloping seems actually to be an accepted practice)."

Basically that's your opinion of what you should do. If someone chooses to scallop or otherwise modify an old Gibson they own it is simply their choice. Nothing more, nothing less. There's no validity in the argument beyond your personal choice.

[Doug Hoople]

Yeah, Mike, I think you've effectively established your opinion on this point by now.

You own it, you can do as you like with it. That's always been the case. I don't disagree.

In fact, I opened with a suggestion that the extension be eliminated. So I'm not sure why we're stuck on this.

[TomTyrrell]

If you don't want to mess up the top while you are doing this wrap the body in a pillow case or something like that.

A Pillow case won't stop a tool from marring the finish. I used a piece of formica. That won't stop a router but it offers protection from a file that might slip.
The pillow case might keep your piece of formica from scratching the top.

[bryankimsey]

I used to do it the Frank Ford way, but these days I just do it on the curve of the belt sander. You'd better be pretty steady and pretty comfortable with your sander, though! Good idea (actually, pretty much essential...) to cardboard and tape over the body before doing it. Something I did for the first time to my daughter's KM-1000 was to just sand with the frets in place. This left the tangs of the fret in the slot and gives the extension of still being fretted. I used to remove the frets and then fill the slots with holly or maple strips and then sand, but on her KM, I thought "Why not just do this?" and so I did. Looks great and gave plenty of relief.

And FWIW, I'm only going to scallop a "non-essential" mandolin.

EDIT: Here's some pictures of the KM-1000 post scalloping. It looks good from the front and the scallop is enough, but not overly aggressive.

http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh62/NM_HighPlains/Guitar/P1010005.jpg

http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh62/NM_HighPlains/Guitar/P1010007.jpg

[Brandon Flynn]

Fingerboard extensions that are not scooped make the instrument unplayable for me. One thing I do like about the scalloped extension is that it forced me not to pick as deep in order to eliminate the click, which has made my right hand picking smoother and has increased my speed and overall technique in my right hand.

[LiamO]

WOW, Thanks for all the info!!! It's hard to absorb it all at one sitting but I will go through all these replies and figure out what I want to do.
LiamO

[Jonathan Peck]

I thought you guys were talking about doing this

[Doug Hoople]

I get the bends just looking at that! http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Pipeous]

Part of today's research.... deciding whether to scoop or cut off my extension. the more I play the more I hate the extension

[Loudloar]

I'll weigh in with my opinion. (Remember advice is worth what you paid for it. In this case zero.) It seems to me that using power tools to scoop an extension is potentially dangerous and actually unnecessary. I scooped my Kentucky and it took about 30 seconds to pull the frets with a pair of end cutters, and about 6 minutes to carefully trim the fingerboard down to the bottom of the fret slots using a sharp gouge. I finished with a file, fine sandpaper, and a wipe of mineral oil.

I agree that you should do what you want with your own mandolin. I'll never scoop my 1924 Loar F-5. It wouldn't look right to me and it doesn't bother me. On the other hand John Rieschman has a replacement fingerboard on his Loar, with the original fingerboard in safekeeping. The new fingerboard is oval and scooped. That's what he needs to make it playable. Nothing wrong with either approach.

Steve