Weber gallitan

[Rick Schmidlin]

How would this sound in Cedar and compare wih the Collings MT.

[seanonabutton]

i have a maple gallatin and still wish i had gone with the MT...

[Aran]

I played a Gallitan but had the dosh for the Yellowstone, which had far superior tone as well as fancier finish.

Saying that the Gallitan was a nice mandolin.

[opie wan]

I'm certainly not someone to make statements about how a mandolin plays or how it sounds. I have a Gallatin.... but it's the only mandolin I've ever played. I like it. I have the bridge set as low as it'll go and I think it's still higher than 1/16th at the 12th fret. The folks at Weber told me its supposed to be at 1/16th there. I'm primarily an electric guitar and nylon string guitar player so I'm used to a very easy and low action. My mando action seems a little high below 12 and the neck is straight and true. That being said, it's very playable and I like the tone just fine. It's a mahogany version. I bought it used and think, based on what I've seen on the internet, that's it's a great value.

[Dave Cowles]

My Gallatin is an '05 model, with cedar top and mahogany B/S. It is an astoundingly great sounding mandolin for just about any playing style, although since it is an f-hole style, it won't have the sustain of an oval. It is loud, loud, loud. I own a custom built, one-off Loar style F5, and use my ToneGard on it. The Gallatin, without a ToneGard, is louder than the custom F5.

The tone of the Gallatin is full and woody, with great balance across the registers. It can be soft and sweet or sharp and crisp. It is just fine for bluegrass, despite the lack of purist materials like maple and spruce.

I put it up for sale a couple weeks ago, but changed my mind. I'm keeping it.

Dave

[tango_grass]

I've been lucky enough to play a Gallatin right next to an MT. The MT blew it out of the water, tone, volume, looks. All in my opinion.

[GRW3]

I've been lucky enough to play a Gallatin right next to an MT. #The MT blew it out of the water, tone, volume, looks. #All in my opinion.
Mahogany or Maple Gallatan? There is a substantial difference in tone between the two wood types with the latter being much more agressive and punchy. My friend Ron had his choice of the two when he bought the maple version.

[oldtimestrings]

I just finished a mando search, and considered both of these instruments. In a shop that had a bunch of Webers, but no Collings, I liked the mahogany/spruce Gallatin the best, except maybe for a cedar-topped Yellowstone. But in shops that had both Collings and Webers, the Collings beat the Webers every time. Louder, clearer, punchier, better playability, nicer finishes. The Webers were nice mandos, to be sure, and once they all open up, who knows. But from what I played and for what I was seeking, the MT was clearly the better choice in that price range (unless you just have to have a scroll, in which case you should save up for an MF).

Edited after I noticed that the original poster already has an MF5. Apparently I'm preaching to the choir. OTOH, the mahogany-backed Gallatin would give you a more drastically different sound from what you currently have, and there may be something to be said for that.

[tango_grass]

I've been lucky enough to play a Gallatin right next to an MT. #The MT blew it out of the water, tone, volume, looks. #All in my opinion.
Mahogany or Maple Gallatan? There is a substantial difference in tone between the two wood types with the latter being much more agressive and punchy. My friend Ron had his choice of the two when he bought the maple version.
It was Maple.

Of course, it could have been that mandolin in particular, who knows what another Gallatin could have been like. This was just one shopping experiance.

[Kevin Briggs]

I've played a few MTs and I like them very much. For $2,000 or thereabouts, they are consistently a great, great value.

I have a buddy who bought a Gallatin last year when they were still being made with the Mahagony/spruce combo. It is set up with Thomasticks and sounds incredible. It has thick tone and plays great. The chop is nice and bassy and has lots of oomph. But, it's way different than any MT I've played, which are going for that airy woof.

The Gallatin is the latest Weber mandolin to undergo a major overhaul. It is now the same price as it has been, but it comes standard with a maple back, and still has the standrad spruce top. Visually, the peghead is now the snakehead look, instead of the rather odd look the Gallatin peghead used to have. The result is a mandolin that looks a little bit more like traditionalists expect, and that will benefit bluegrass players with the maple back.

I think a cedar top on a Gallatin would be great. I'm a proponent of spruce, but the cedar would give that immediate gratification that we all seem to have. With MAS as prevalent as it is, instant gratification may be a necessary commodity.

As far as how the new Gallatin and MT compare, that's obviously debatable. It's also a futile discussion, because it comes down to preference. For me, I read all about how the MF5 (lacquer) is a future collectable and a professioanl grade this and that. I've played a few and believe they are great mandolins. However, I chose my custom Fern over one because the complexity of the Weber tone is undeniable. It is "different" and that's worth the money to me. It also costs about $2,000 less than the MF5. Likewise, the Gallatin is about $300 less than the MT.

My vote on the comparison is this:
1. Weber has a less expensive product
2. I prefer the Weber tone
3. Fit and finish is equally impressive
4. Both are high quality instruments
5. It comes down to preference