Binding around the scroll [Archive]

jiffyfeet

Jul-12-2004, 3:35pm

Recently I have decided that maybe I do want an F style mando after all. I have look at several Webers, one Gibson, one Collings and many random mandos I've never heard of. I have, of course, also seen about a million pictures of F styles, most of which show close-ups of the scroll.

Out of all the ones I've seen first hand, the only one that had perfect binding work in the tight part of the scroll was the Collings MF5. Many of the mandos I have seen are priced at $2,500 and up, yet the binding around the scroll looks approximately equivalent to mandos costing more like $500. Even a Weber Fern I looked at was ######.

So what gives? I can only imagine it is exceedingly difficult to get that part just right, but I could never imagine spending thousands of dollars on something that has a flaw right in one of the coolest parts of the design. So my question is - do you really have to spend $7,000 to get quality binding work on the scroll, or have I just seen some poor examples of these companies' work?

I would really like to buy an F style mando in the $2-3K range, but could never justify it with that imperfect binding.

mandoJeremy

Jul-12-2004, 4:11pm

Check out Jim Hilburn! His are very close to perfect in every way!

Spruce

Jul-12-2004, 4:30pm

"I can only imagine it is exceedingly difficult to get that part just right, but I could never imagine spending thousands of dollars on something that has a flaw right in one of the coolest parts of the design. "

How about 100K??
It's the going price these days (if not more) for the pic of the binding in the scroll area I just posted here...
And it's pretty funky...

"Out of all the ones I've seen first hand, the only one that had perfect binding work in the tight part of the scroll was the Collings MF5."

Ironically the product of a machine....

"So my question is - do you really have to spend $7,000 to get quality binding work on the scroll, or have I just seen some poor examples of these companies' work?"

I recently saw a Eastman that had some nice binding work in the scroll area...
And it was in a blonde to boot...
They didn't get the curl of the scroll right at all, but the work on what they did was pretty impressive for a mando under 2K.

wallflower

Jul-12-2004, 4:36pm

There's no question that Collings binding work is terrific. #If you saw how they do it, it would demystify it a bit. #It's pretty ingenious...

mandoman4807

Jul-12-2004, 6:13pm

To me it`s all about the playability and acoustics. What good is the appearance if the sound #####. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Darrell

MandyLynn

Jul-12-2004, 6:16pm

wallflower, you've piqued my interest. so, how *do* they do it?? http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Scotti Adams

Jul-12-2004, 6:46pm

..is it Collings that uses just one piece of binding per top and back and its pre formed to fit so there is no miter joints and such?...I know I read of this technique somewhere...maybe not Collings...I dont know http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

wallflower

Jul-12-2004, 7:28pm

You got it.

The binding is pre-formed to exactly fit the scroll, thus eliminating much of the tedium and inexactitude of the binding process.

Dan Adams

Jul-12-2004, 9:06pm

I've noticed the 'poor' scroll work on most new mandolins and I've had the same questions. It is interesting that this thread was right next to the Hilburn thread. Jim's scroll work is some of the best I've seen. I was fortunate to play #25 a few times one evening. One of the sale points for my Fisch was the workmanship on the scroll binding as well as everywhere else on the instrument. It's real close to the work of Jim Hilburn or of Collings. Of course I agree with the tone and volume aspects of good instruments. Some might look like ####, but sound unbelievable.

The fun is in the search, Dan

maroon

Jul-12-2004, 9:16pm

Very interesting topic. When I bought my starter carved top Pacific Rim for about $750 (Morgan Monroe MMS-2), the only finish blemish was deep in the scroll. I asked the vendor about this and was informed that at the lower end of the price spectrum, this is to be expected. I accepted this answer at the time. I now feel even better knowing my little mando shares this flaw with mandos costing many multiples more.

Spruce

Jul-12-2004, 9:20pm

"The binding is pre-formed to exactly fit the scroll, thus eliminating much of the tedium and inexactitude of the binding process. "

The tedium and inexactitude of the binding process is the result of having to cut the binding notch in an area that is very difficult to work in...

I'm sure Collings has solved this problem by cutting the binding notch very accurately with a CNC router--a match made in heaven.

That would be the ideal way to do the job...

Chris Baird

Jul-12-2004, 10:40pm

Here is a frets.com link showing some collings mando construction. Lots of cnc. http://www.frets.com/FRETSPa....08.html (http://www.frets.com/FRETSPages/Features/2001Collings/2001collings08.html)

MandyLynn

Jul-12-2004, 11:22pm

thanks, y'all!http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

wallflower

Jul-13-2004, 5:41am

Correct as usual Bruce!

There's very little on a Collings mandolin that has not been touched by CNC.

Pete Martin

Jul-13-2004, 7:06am

The best hand work on the binding I've seen was by Steven Andersen. While his sound was not the greatest, his workmanship and detail were spectacular!

Bobby Brite

Jul-13-2004, 8:46am

I recieved my new Glenn Mandolin about two months ago and while the binding on the scroll is not perfect(although ver good IMO) it is the best sounding mandolin I have ever played to my ear. I would not trade it because of a cosmetic imperfection. This one will be passed down.
I totally agree with the above mentioned sound over sight.
You can see some pictures on the "post a picture" forum.

jiffyfeet

Jul-13-2004, 8:48am

Interesting about Collings' method, no wonder it looks so good. Well, I guess I'll just have to deal with sub-par work then if I buy an F, since I won't be spending $5k or more. It sure would be nice to have one of those Hilburns, though!

Darryl Wolfe

Jul-13-2004, 9:01am

Wayne Henderson is no slouch...but Gilchrist is hard to beat

Henderson Mando scroll

jiffyfeet

Jul-13-2004, 9:11am

To those saying the sound is more important than the looks - of course it is. However it should be obvious that a visually pleasing, wonderful sounding mando is preferable to a wonderful sounding mando with a hatchet job on the scroll.

Bobby Brite

Jul-13-2004, 9:17am

That is True Jiffy. I think the main point here is the perfection of the scroll. I certainly do not want a hatchet job an the scroll but I would take one of those before I took a perfect scroll mandolin with an OK?? sound.

jim simpson

Jul-13-2004, 5:41pm

I think Collings are fabulous even if most of the work is done on a CNC machine. I guess the high pricing is justified because the result seems perfect, the sound superior, and those machines must be quite an investment!

Big Joe

Jul-16-2004, 7:31am

We route the binding slots by hand and we apply and cut the binding the same way we did in 1922-1924 for a purpose. That is how it was done on the Loars and that is our model. We could build them so the binding at the scroll might be a little cleaner (though I've never had a problem or complaint about it) but that would not be the way we want it done. That is not to say others need to follow our example, just that we make every attempt to build our mandolins as close to the original as we can. That dictates some of what we do...even the imperfections that have nothing to do with tone or sound quality. We have discussed cleaning the joint some, but have decided to leave perfection alone. Thank you.

mandough

Jul-16-2004, 9:35am

Hey Big Joe,
Are you actually saying that it is your "intention" to leave imperfections in your mandolins?
I can't imagine that you would reject a mandolin for having a perfect scroll.
"That scroll work is too perfect, back to woodpile!!!"http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

AlanN

Jul-16-2004, 9:40am

Steve Gilchrist

Jim Hilburn

Jul-16-2004, 11:02am

Here's how it starts out for me.
You have to have a concept, then from there you can move forward to an idea, and finally on to a plan.

jiffyfeet

Jul-16-2004, 11:03am

Joe, I appreciate your response, but I find it beyond absurd. #To say that you "leave perfection alone" is just ridiculous. #The whole point is that it isn't perfect. #Just becuase Lloyd himself was incapable of doing it perfectly doesn't mean that having a serious finish flaw is desirable. #There are people out there who get it right by hand, and Gibson is no less capable.

I am almost insulted by your response, actually. #You're telling me that you make them look bad on purpose?

Jim Hilburn

Jul-16-2004, 11:09am

I had a Gilchrist and a Wiens at the house the other day, and there was 2 good examples of well-done scrolls. They're influencing me.
Left to right there's my "A", the Wiens, my #30, and the Gil.

Jim Hilburn

Jul-16-2004, 11:11am

Wow, didn't mean to get in the middle of a "Big Joe " thing.

Dfyngravity

Jul-16-2004, 11:18am

i think thats very cool, gibson's philosophy that is. because i have always said as many others have, "imperfections are a sign of handmade". and thats the exact reason for people buying custom instruments, they want something that is hand built and something they know the builder took their time and efforts into each and every aspect of building the instruments.

jiffyfeet

Jul-16-2004, 11:19am

Jim, I liked your answer a lot better. It's good to know that somebody who expects to be highly paid for their work (and justly so) would try their best to build it right. To think of somebody asking for $5k+ for a mando where they didn't even try to make the binding on the scroll look right is unsettling. If the answer was that it just isn't possible to get it right, that would be one thing, but to say "we do it wrong on purpose" smacks of "we tried, but can't get it right so we'll act like we do it on purpose."

I can say for sure that unless Big Joe tells me he was kidding, I will write Gibson off my short list of builders from whom I would like to buy an F style mando.

twaaang

Jul-16-2004, 2:11pm

Please, enough with the brinkmanship. I read Joe's remark as a nice wry remark, and enjoyed it for its sense of play. If you're concerned about how his company does the task, all you have to do is inspect the individual instruments for the one that meets your standards, you don't have to write off the entire line.

It's five o'clock on Friday, who's up for a beer? -- PDW

duuuude

Jul-16-2004, 2:35pm

Hmmmm, I suppose my F-9 musta slipped by the "imperfection inspector" since it's scroll work looks perfect to me. Honest, I've been looking for something wrong since reading this thread but just can't seem to find it.
http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

jiffyfeet

Jul-16-2004, 3:14pm

Gibson's binding work is better than most builders' I have seen, I'm not trying to bash Gibson, as seems a popular passtime around here. I don't however, like being told that a builder doesn't even make an effort to do perfect work, preferring to do sloppy work and write it off as staying true to the design. I would bet my life if Lloyd could have gotten that binding perfect with the tools he had to work with, it would have been perfect.

I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers in here. All I want to know is who DOES do perfect work, other than Collings. I couldn't care less if it's done by hand or machine.

Django Fret

Jul-16-2004, 3:30pm

That is not to say others need to follow our example, just that we make every attempt to build our mandolins as close to the original as we can. #That dictates some of what we do...even the imperfections that have nothing to do with tone or sound quality. #
Big Joe, why doesn't that apply to putting Virzi Tone Producers in today's Gibson models?

MikeB

Jul-16-2004, 3:34pm

I usually don't get into this kind of thread, but the way I read Big Joe's comment, it said nothing about "doing sloppy work." He said, "That is how it was done on the Loars and that is our model. #We could build them so the binding at the scroll might be a little cleaner (though I've never had a problem or complaint about it) but that would not be the way we want it done."

I took it to mean they could do it by machine, but prefer to sell the work of their best craftsmen--handwork.

I own a Collings F, but certainly have no criticism of Gibson, or any other builder because they do things differently.

I sometimes wonder why in the world Big Joe (and Charlie) keep popping in here, when they so often become targets of someone's misplaced bias. I love the fact that they do, but I doubt I would want the beating they seem to have to take, over and over.

mandoJeremy

Jul-16-2004, 5:23pm

Exactly MikeB!

pickinNgrinnin

Jul-16-2004, 10:03pm

[QUOTE]I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers in here. All I want to know is who DOES do perfect work, other than Collings. I couldn't care less if it's done by hand or machine.

Check out Bruce Weber and Company

mandoJeremy

Jul-16-2004, 10:31pm

I also think Darby is doing a great job with the scroll work. Rose mandos.

mandoJeremy

Jul-16-2004, 10:34pm

....and just my opinion but out of the picture above I think that Jim's mando looks the best all around even though the Lewis and Gilchrist are almost exact in symetrical appearance! Great scroll Jim!

Scotti Adams

Jul-17-2004, 4:49am

..now Jeremy..you must have better eyes than me..cuz I cant tell what the scrolls looks like from lookin at that pic....no doubt they are about as perfect as perfect can be seeing who built them....

mandoJeremy

Jul-17-2004, 6:11am

Well I can Scotti. Also looks like the Hilburn is a little wider in the body compared to the Lewis or my bad eyes are just playing tricks on me.

mandoryan

Jul-17-2004, 7:18am

I believe the Lewis your referring to is actually a Wiens. There's a Wiens and a Gilchrist other than Jim's two.

Jim Hilburn

Jul-17-2004, 7:43am

Let me credit Steven Stone for stopping by with those two instruments. He owns the Wiens and has the Gil on loan. Jamie's mandolin is one of the nicest sounding mandolins you'll ever lay your hands on.
Jeremy, the classic Loar body width is 10". My mold measues 10 1/16" at the widest, but I tried to get a symetric look even with the points. They're usually a pretty tight fit in a Calton. Both Steve and Jamie have had Loars to measure, while I modified a Don Mcrostie print, and know full well it's not exactly to "Loar specs".
But I think mostly your seeing a different angle on those mandolins as they were sitting on the couch.

JGWoods

Jul-17-2004, 8:24am

I was surprised by Big Joe's remarks, because I am always surprised when someone doesn't use the best available technolgies to do their job. I'm no luthier so take it for what it's worth, but some old ways of doing things add value, and some don't. Why not leave behind the ones that don't?

A hand rubbed varnish finish probably adds value; using hide glue probably adds value; but hand work in the scroll, which often produces something imperfect...why not leave it behind for a new found clever solution that gives consistently better results, and gives a talented luthier more time to spend on tap tuning and shaving braces and all the skills that really distinguish such folks from the rest of us?

So Joe and Charlie- do you make the F5L using the same handwork? Or have you taken up more modern methods at some price point in the model line?
best,
gw

Charlie Derrington

Jul-17-2004, 9:18am

MikeB

Jul-17-2004, 10:57am

(Quick, before the snipers jump in) Great answer, Charlie! #Truth is, you don't have to justify whatever Gibson decides to do. #You flatter us by doing so. #

Years ago, before I took up mandolin playing again, I remember reading the National Geographic Article about you restoring Monroe's F5 (oh, God, I hope I have this right) from the wood chips left by that lunatic. #I was SO impressed then--and for what you've been doing at Gibson since. #You will always get your due respect from ME, at least!

You bring something to this website, I dare say, that few can. (I wish there were an icon that was tipping its hat to you. It would appear here.)

Mike Buesseler
L-00
1920-A

mandoJeremy

Jul-17-2004, 11:08am

Oops, yeah a Wiens. Don't know why I said Lewis! Anyhoo!!!!

sunburst

Jul-17-2004, 12:36pm

This has become a discussion that is a good one to stay out of, but I'll try to stay out of the fray and go back to the original questions and comments and give my two cents.

First the facts:

It is very difficult to bind the scroll area of an F style mandolin relative to most other binding chores.
No binding is perfect. It is not possible to do perfect binding work in the scroll area or anywhere else. It is, however, possible to do excellent work.
Excellent work can be done by hand or by machine. Poor work can also be done by hand or by machine.
CNC technology is expensive in terms of money, time for set-up and programing, and shop space. It can only make economic sense if enough product is produced to prorate the expense over many parts.
The advantages of CNC or other mechanical technology are in speed and repeatability. Precision is obtainable with other methods as well.

Now for my opinions:

To have excellent binding in the scroll area the builder must have talent, skill and experience and spend a lot of time on it. The builder can also use CNC or whatever, which is expensive as mentioned above and requires talent, skill and experience to set up.
Either way, you can't do it and make inexpensive instruments.

Larger manufacturers have employees of different skill levels, talent levels and experience levels. There is turnover in their work force so consistent results can be difficult.

Standards are not the same for different people. Some say "that's good enough" before others do. Some are not capable of the same level of craftsmanship as others.

Some builders are capable of excellent binding on an A but not on an F. The market, however demands Fs, so some builders are building Fs with poor bindings instead of As with excellent bindings.

I don't think you have to spend $7000 to get excellent binding work, but a builder with the talent and experience to do it is probably undercharging in the $2000 to $3000 range.

I don't think a builder's early mandolins should be Fs because the lack of experience is so evident in the scroll area. A good clean A style seems better to me than a mediocre F from a new builder.

For what it's worth:

So you'll know that I've at least done this before, here's one of mine. Far from perfect, but OK I think. It's one of the things I'm still trying to improve on my mandos through practice and better tooling.

Dave Cohen

Jul-17-2004, 1:42pm

John, the digital jaggies obscure the fact that the binding on your mandolin is probably better than what the photo can show.

sunburst

Jul-17-2004, 2:52pm

Dave, yes it does look better than the digital pic.

Nick Triesch

Jul-17-2004, 9:40pm

This thread has come up before. It took me a while to get it but I finally do. Other builders can make their mandolins perfect. That is their style. Gibson mandolins of the 1920s were not perfect but were made very well and came with their trademark sound. Charlie and Co are recreating the 1923 Gibson F style mandolin. They have the means to make their mandolins look like a Collings but then it would not be a true 1923 copy. When I first saw the new Gibson mandolins a few years ago I thought that they were defective. They just were not as clean as my mandolin. But after I played the Master model, Fern, F5G, Wayne Benson, and the F9 I realized that they all sounded wonderful. That's how I see it. Nick

JGWoods

Jul-18-2004, 11:36am

Of course we use modern methods......... but we use them to try and have the end result of a product that's as close as possible to (what I consider) the perfect model. I don't believe you can improve on the Loar and everything we build will follow that belief... "snipped by gw
Being Gibson affords us the the lattitude to restrict our designs. How's that for a paradox? http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Charlie"
Now Charlie- take a look at the picture posted by Bruce- the third messge in this thread. That mandolin may fetch $100,000, but I say it is spite of the scroll work, not because of it.
I think it can be improved on, and I think you do too.

Yes it's 80 years old, and some of its funkiness comes from age, but to my (admittedly uneducated) eye that was never good work.

Credit to you/Gibson for knowing the market you serve- that folks who buy the Master Model want a reproduction of the Loar.

If I had the money, and the talent as a musician, to order up the best from Gibson, it would be a modified Master Model- give me a radiused fretboard, fatter frets, and don't leave any imperfections in there as a nod to tradition.

Your answer above, which followed my previous post, wasn't clear to me one one thing: I assume (danger!) that you use more CNC, or machine work of some sort, on your less expensive F series mandolins- that, for instance, you might be pre-bending and cutting your bindings in some efficient way that gives good results for less labor time spent. Is that so? do you have quicker, accurate ways of doing scroll binding, but choose to do the Master Models the "old way" ?

Thanks for your insights and explanations- thay are appreciated by many.
best
gw

jasona

Jul-18-2004, 12:07pm

Haha, you folks with your scrolls and all! I thought Jim's A style on the left was the epitome of mandolins in that photo. If its all about the tone (and not the perfect of the scroll binding) why even worry about the scroll in the first place? I mean, Chris Thile (from the greatest Bluegrass band in the world!) wound up busting his off his headstock, and still sounds much better than that hack Rickey Skaggs!

(Yes! Hopefully we can get a Gibson, Nickel Creek, Rickey Skaggs, and A vs. F fight going in the same thread!)

jim simpson

Jul-18-2004, 2:05pm

The thing one must remember is that most F-scrolled mandolins are individually hand carved and appointed. The fact that the loar illustration shows a shabby job should not be an indicator that they all were done as badly. The icing on the cake might not be as pretty but the cake still tastes way better than average. I am sure Gibson craftsman and other good makers strive for the best job each time they do one. I can't imagine anyone being satified with an average job when you know that you're going to be judged by your work.

Big Joe

Jul-19-2004, 8:17am

Wow...this will teach me to be gone for a day or two!!! First of all, I did not say our scroll work was inferior to anyone. In fact, I prefer it to the CNC cut that gives a sterile (to me) appearance. I appreciate those who like the sameness of a cnc built instrument, but I prefer the hand work. I also don't wear quartz watches. I only wear hand made automatic watches. Yes, I am odd. I prefer to own a product that I can look at my instrument and think of the workers who make these wonderful items. Each stroke of a chisel gives a new thought of who may have been involved and what their life may be like. What were they thinking of? What is it that makes them chose doing this over something else that may have better pay or more glory or fame? I see my watches and wonder about those men and women who sit there and work on something so delicate and can actually make them work and make them work more accurately than any other man made machine on the planet. I am fascinated by that. So, I don't see a binding joint in the scroll that is by some ones standards imperfect as being that at all. To me it is perfection. It is not less functional or ugly, just different.

Now that I've said all that, the scroll area is not made improperly, wrong, or to some kind of substandard means of appearance. We have made decisions on how we wished to do it and our way is what we chose. We have a standard of excellence and that is what we adhere to. We could build to the stanard anyone else wants, but we choose this standard and will stay with it. It is, to us, perfection personified. That's my two cents worth.....oh, one last addition. We could use a cnc machine to do those chores for us and it would be cheaper and easier but that is not what we think makes a great instrument. I chose the handbuilt method over the sterile sameness of a cnc made nstrument. That is my opinion and I speak for me only. There is a market for all of us and we each have to chose what we like, but that is what I like. Thank you.

amowry

Jul-19-2004, 10:03am

Just to briefly add my two cents as an (inexperienced) builder, I agree completely with Joe that the Collings scrolls are in danger of looking sterile. That's not to say I don't use them as a model, and I would be delighted to be able to build one instrument that clean, but I find the complete absence of makers marks and variety somewhat unappealing. Don't get me wrong, I love Collings mandos and they are certainly technological marvels, but I believe there should be a balance between perfection and character. I might even say that character can be a component of perfection.