Varnish? Lacquer?

[lindensensei]

I guess I am fairly new to the high end market but what is the difference between an instrument finished in lacquer as opposed to varnish? #Besides the obvious, of course. Why is the varnish so much more expensive?

[SternART]

A lot of folks consider varnish to sound better and many of the top tier luthiers use it....but as I understand it, varnish is tricky & time consuming to master it, and more labor intensive....but you know, there are also very expensive great sounding mandolins in lacquer, for example Monteleone's. If done correctly and applied thin a lacquer finish can also be very good. There were so many instruments ruined with THICK lacquer finishes that I think there is a backlash & luthiers are moving towards French polish varnish ala Gilchrist, etc. Then of course there is the whole Loar mystique as well & matching how they were built that adds into the equation.

[Peakbagr]

John Monteleone's comments during the Commando Luthier's summit last year:
" The finish question has been going on for years. I suspect that it will continue especially as newer finishes are forced along the way to us luthiers. Of course, varnish is perhaps a safer alternative than lacquer
regarding the legal use of certain volatiles.
The success of any of these two catagories depends mostly on how well they are applied. The family of varnish is vast. Even lacquer qualifies as a varnish by definition. I have used nitro-cellulose lacquer almost since the beginning. I did use a varnish on the first five or six mandolins and then switch over. The formulation for lacquer was seemingly better in those days. It was far easier and faster to use of course, but the coatings had
a warmer transparency similar to the warmth of varnish. The finish thickness was about the same for both. Each of these finishes can be built up too much easily and too fast. Thick challenge for any finish is to offer good
protection but to be at its thinnest to not interfere with the performance of the wood.
I have not been too impressed with the way that lacquers have been formulated these days. They are having to conform to legal issues, which effects the product. It's still pretty good but it will change I think in the near future. I do like varnishes and I have been considering them again once I have arrived at a useable formula. I have always used a particular violin varnish that I've made specially for them. I wouldn't use the same formula for mandolins. It is too soft. I like a harder and more brittle finish on a plectrum instrument. Bowed nstruments sound less harsh with a softer varnish. And there's the matter of being used to using the materials that work best for you, and that you are most familiat with. You learn to handle them accordingly. So, I'll stick with nitro lacquer for the time being. It works for me."
J. Monteleone
Q - Why do you prefer lacquer to varnish?
A - The finish question has been going on for years. I suspect that it will continue especially as newer finishes are forced along the way to us luthiers. Of course, varnish is perhaps a safer alternative than lacquer regarding the legal use of certain volatiles.
The success of any of these two catagories depends mostly on how well they are applied. The family of varnish is vast. Even lacquer qualifies as a varnish by definition. I have used nitro-cellulose lacquer almost since the beginning. I did use a varnish on the first five or six mandolins and then switche over. The formulation for lacquer was seemingly better in those days. It was far easier and faster to use of course, but the coatings had a warmer transparency similar to the warmth of varnish. The finish thickness was about the same for both. Each of these finishes can be built up too much easily and too fast. Thick challenge for any finish is to offer good protection but to be at its thinnest to not interfere with the performance of the wood.
I have not been too impressed with the way that lacquers have been formulated these days. They are having to conform to legal issues, which effects the product. It's still pretty good but it will change I think in the near future.
I do like varnishes and I have been considering them again once I have arrived at a useable formula. I have always used a particular violin varnish that I've made specially for them. I wouldn't use the same formula for mandolins. It is too soft. I like a harder and more brittle finish on a plectrum instrument. Bowed instruments sound less harsh with a softer varnish.
And there's the matter of being used to using the materials that work best for you, and that you are most familiat with. You learn to handle them accordingly. So, I'll stick with nitro lacquer for the time being. It works for me."


And from Peter Coombe:
Question "What are the various merits and disadvantages of varnish and lacquer? To those using varnish, what varnish do you use?"

Answer:
"The advantage to varnish is the tone. Everything else about it is a negative. It's hard to mix, almost impossible to apply correctly, takes years of training to get it right. You almost have to become an alchemist. It's fragile when cured, is easily bruised and scratched, turns white with moisture, prints in the case when warm. But, it's all
worth it with the tone. You can't beat it and I would recommend going through the hassle if you want your instruments to sound the best they can."

[lindensensei]

Boy, that last post was inspiring, who the heck is Peter Coombe? #And what does Gibson have to say? #They want about $3500.00 more for an F5V (varnish) than an F5L (lacquer?) and though my wife says I can get what I want... with the hurricanes we've had and the one still to come, I'm stiil thinking about the price and the value. #C'mon, Charlie and Big Joe, tell me why I should put off a new roof and get the big dog.

[Jim Hilburn]

That last answer was actually from Charlie Derrington.

[peter.coombe]

Boy, that last post was inspiring, who the heck is Peter Coombe?

Me! And yes it was inspiring, and true. The more I get into varnish the more complicated things get. The search for the perfect varnish is never ending. What has fantastic tone, looks beautiful, is hard and resilient to scratches and knocks, and is resistant to sweat, and easy to apply. Answer - nothing.

[SternART]

Peter Coombe builds very soulful sounding A model mandolins, sometimes out of exotic Australian woods. Check it out:
http://www.petercoombe.com/


Rarely seen on the used market.......hmmm what does that tell you! I had the honor of hosting a Comando gathering in Peter's honor when he visited the SF Bay Area.

[lindensensei]

Wow, I am honored to be talking to such great mandolin guys. #(Embarrassed as well...) Okay, Mr Coombe likes varnish for some things and lacquer for others ,but overall isn't satsfied with either - Mr Derrington feels that varnish is harder to work with and requires more expertise and time, hence higher price - I've heard mention of issues with binding as well... #Good stuff to think about. #Thank you very much.

[peter.coombe]

Well... that is not quite true. I go for sound first, therefore I have only ever used a varnish finish on my mandolins. The quest has been to find a varnish that is more resilient than a french polish finish (i.e shellac or seedlac), but sounds just as good. The finish process I use now is somewhat complicated, and the resulting varnish is certainly far more resistant to sweat, which was the main problem, but good old french polish is still the final coat. Sound is still there with the latest finished mando sounding better than any others I have made. A few steps down the long road towards the perfect varnish.

[Dave Cohen]

With regard to sound, the whole varnish/lacquer debate is a good example of how anecdotes become mythology. It is absolutely amazing to me how people are convinced that they can hear a difference between the different finishing materials. Yet no one seems to have given any thought to eliminating the effects of the contributions of other variables. Every instrument is different in detail from every other. So how does one know that the sonic differences between instruments which they are hearing can be attributed to the finishing material(s)? One possibility would be a blindfold listening test, with, say, 30 expert listeners, 30 varnished mandolins, and 30 lacquered mandolins. Of course, you wouldn't want to tell the listeners which is which. If such an event occured, I would be eager to wager on the outcome. It would be safe to bet that the listeners would be wrong as much as 70% of the time, i.e., at the level of absolute guessing. How do I know that? Blindfold tests have been done in the violin world to see if expert players/listeners could distinguish the Strads or Guarneris, or whatevers, from some good quality violins made in the mid-to-late 20th century. Yep, you guessed it; they were wrong about 70% of the time.

I had a conversation in May with another builder who insisted that he could hear a substantive difference between varnished and lacquered mandolins, and he related to me that a third builder of my acquaintance had observed that substantive difference also. When I saw the third builder in July at the GAL convention, he asked for my take on finishes. I replied that I thought that a thin finish was a good finish. He immediately agreed, sharing some anecdotes about the subject with me. He related that he had tried finishing some mandolins with barely enough finish on them to protect the wood, and he though that those mandolins sounded "better" than others with thicker finishes.

[Chris Baird]

Seems to me someone would have to hear a lot of lacquer mandolins of the same model in order to compare the difference that varnish would make in that same model. Being that there are so many varnish recipes and techniques it seems just as possible that there is a "varnish" tone as there is an "F-style" tone. In other words, I highly doubt anyone could differentiate blind folded, varnish from lacquer in a variety of makes and models. I think a builder or a privledged player may be able to discern varnish from lacquer in their own model but not in just any make or model. I've applied lacquer, oil varnish, and shellac to 1/8" x 6" x 6" pieces of cedar with the following results:
Oil varnish shows very little warpage upon application and takes on some slight warping once dry.

Shellac creates a very drastic warp in the plate upon application. Almost a half cylinder. It then flattens out some upon drying.

Lacquer created about half as much warpage as shellac and also flattened out a little once dry.

In both the lacquer and shellac plates there was a signifigant amount of tention created which seemed to remain even after dry. The oil varnish created almost no tension on the wood. How this all relates acoustically I don't know. I use oil varnish because I like working with it and just feel better having it on my mandolins. I guess you could say it is intuitive. Perhaps unfounded, perhaps not.

[Big Joe]

On our varnish instruments we use our own formulation. We use some base coats of varnish and then top coats of french polish. Contrary to Mr. Cohen's remarks, many of us can clearly tell the difference in tone and playability from varnish as compared to lacquer. While it may be subtle to some, to many it is clear. There are many exciting sounding lacquer finishes, and a properly appied lacquer will sound better than a poorly applied varnish. However, the difference is quite clear when you play a fern and then a varnish fern. It's like someone turned the tone light on. Both sound great, but there is a remarkable difference.

For those of us who prefer a varnish mandolin it is hard to play a lacquer finished instrument with the same ease and enjoyment. It is a different animal altogether. The only real way to tell which is better for you is to have a chance to play a varnish one for a bit. You can always come to the Gibson Bluegrass Showcase and play a few varnish instruments. You may also find a good Gilchrist somewhere or a Master Model and you will quickly see it is different from lacquer mandolin. Whether that is better or not to you is the question. For some there is no question. For others, the lacquer is still king. It is partly a matter of taste and a matter of what one is used to.

When I first began playing a varnish mandolin I had a hard time telling that much difference. If it had not been for Charlie Derrington advising me to get my first varnish mandolin (Gilchrist) I would never have tried. I bought it from Butch Baldasarri for $3500 and thought that was too much for a mandolin. Was I ever wrong. It did not take long for me to see what an improvement it made in my playing and my ear. The same is true with my MM. A great mandolin is worth every penny it costs in my opinion. It does not matter if it is a varnish fern or a Loar. If one has the means and loves mandolin, I don't think they will ever be sorry. We do have requests to take lacquer instruments in trade from time to time, but I have not had a varnish one brought in for trade yet. Must be a reason. Just my two cents worth. Of course, with inflation, that costs three cents in todays market http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[peter.coombe]

Well I think the best way of examining the merits or otherwise of varnish vs lacquer is to finish a mandolin with one, then remove the finish and apply the other. This has already been done. Result - varnish won easily. Lynn Dudenbostle once told me he finished a guitar in varnish and it was by far the best sounding guitar he had ever made. I think he now offers a varnish finish on his guitars. Now of course these are just one off examples which are only pieces of evidence, but add it all together with what Charlie and Joe have said and it starts to look more convincing. I don't think you will find too many Gilchrist owners willing to offer their mandolins to be finished in Lacquer. The sort of experiment Dave suggests I suspect would just prove that all mandolins sound different, unless all the test instruments were identical and had been made by the same maker from the same tree. We are not very good at evaluating mandolin sounds just by listening. Sometimes we can't even tell an oval hole from an F. One of my oval hole mandos was mistaken for Loar on this very BB, which greatly amused me!

[lindensensei]

Well,
I didn't actually expect to get this much great information. #I believe that I will definitely come up to Nashville and take a tour , play both, and then make up my own mind. #My wife probably wont ever speak to either Charlie or Big Joe if I decide on the Varnish, though. #Might not ever talk to me again. #Thanks everyone!

[Dave Cohen]

Joe, you claim that you can hear the difference, but you didn't address the issue of a blindfold test.

It would seem that I need to amplify the point about the 30 mandolins in each finish. If one were to conduct a blindfold test with just one varnished mandolin and just one lacquered mandolin, the results would be meaningless. Differences in the materials and construction of each instrument, as well as variations in the application of the finish, would bury any sonic differences actually attributable to the finish material. Having auditioners listen to a sufficiently large number of instruments would in principle tend to average out the unwanted differences. The reliability of any measurement increases with the square root of the number of such measurements. If you do an acoustical measurement on a mandolin just once, you have a relative reliability of, say, "1" for that measurement. To double the reliability, you would have to do 4 repeated measurements. To increase the relative reliability tenfold, you would have to do 100 repeated measurements. Now, those measurements could be repeated in a number of different ways. You could have the requisite number of different listeners audition the instruments, or you could have an auditioner listen to a requisite number of instruments. As those are different experiments with potentially different outcomes, it is better still to have a requisite number of auditioners listen to a requisite number of instruments. The number 30 was an arbitrary one. The more measurements, the better. In practice, the number of measurements made is limited by time and cost, so some compromise between reliability and time and cost has to be struck. In making measurements, signals that are buried in noise can be extracted from the noise by averaging a sufficiently large number of maesurements. So my contention is that a number of varnished and lacquered mandolins would have to be compared blindfolded, and the more the better. Comparison of just one pair can only result in an anecdote, and the argument will never be settled with anecdotes.

Peter's suggestion that a single instrument be finished in lacquer, auditioned, refinished in varnish, then auditioned again would be an improvement, but is not without problems. As he also pointed out, human audial memory is extremely poor. We usually can't compare sounds as similar as two mandolins or two speakers heard 5 minutes apart. Given the amount of time necessary to refinish an instrument, the experiment would require some kind of measured acoustical signature. SPL (sound pressure level) spectra might be capable of recognising a difference, though I am not sure about that. Having done holography and having acquired SPL spectra on a number of mandolins by now (including a '24 Loar), I am inclined to think that the differences, if any, would be minimal.

Mr. Vest, a title is not necessary when referring to me or addressing me, but if you are going to use one, it might as well be the correct one. It is "Dr. Cohen" - an earned academic title of which I am justly proud.

[Jim Roberts]

Seems like the the builders who don't offer a varnish finish on their instruments are the ones who claim there is no difference in tone.

[Jim Hilburn]

I've just completed my second varnished mandolin (oil) and I have some observations.
I use a piece of flexable plastic to seal off the f-holes, and when I remove it, I have a sample of the finish deposited on it, because I spray on my finishes. When you peel off the lacquer, it's a thin, stiff layer that will snap in two as you bend it. Brittle and hard. when you peel off the varnish, even after significant drying time, it's supple and rubber-like. On the surface, it will sand and buff to a high gloss, but the actual stuff is very plyable. Further, in my spray room,I have a tray that catches the drippings from my gun, and the puddle of varnish there feels about like latex or rubber gasket material.
The next point has to do with some observations by Cafe members who have had the good fortune of playing or owning both Loars and early post-Loar ferns. They seemed to all agree that the Ferns sound generally brighter than the Loars, and speaking of the earliest examples, there wasn't a great deal of difference in how they were constructed, with the finish being the main difference. To me ,this is some significant evidence, although still anecdotal.
So the question that never gets answered is if varnish sounds different, then why? Now if an instrument was finished with only french polishing, then how heavy the finish is may be the answer, but I don't believe Loars were done this way. Most say they were oil varnish with french polish topcoats. Jamie Wiens did a couple of purely frenched mandolins and realized it was quite a task on an F. I don't really know how Gilchrist does his finishes, but from an early 80's article,he said he did "6 coats of spirit varnish".
My theory is that lacquer projects more high frequency right off the surface of the instrument, while the lower frequencies are produced by the body cavity and interaction of the plates. When a very vibrant instrument is made,but finished in lacquer, it may posess a very full range of tone, but if it's overbuilt, as many factory instruments are, there's a good chance of it being overly bright, even shrill. If the same vibrant instrument is finished in varnish, it may be stronger in the lower registers, and what high end it has may be more pleasing and less bright. In other words, you may get an instrument that has that "dry, woody tone"
One the other hand ,there are countless lacquered mandolins that do posess "the sound", and also, most varnished instruments are made by very experienced luthiers that can dso a good job on all aspects of the instrument.
Anyway, none of this is science, just my thoughts.

[Dave Cohen]

I have never claimed that lacquer "sounds better". I dislike the stuff. I dislike its toxicity, its flammability, and I dislike the cost of the explosion-proof fan and the hassle which the electrical inspectors gave me when I installed the thing. What I do claim is that the objectivity of the claims (one way or the other) is supect, and that I have not seen any attempts made to make them verifiable.

[JimW]

Dave, while I respect and appreciate all the research, the scientific experiments, and the data collecting you've completed on many mandolins, I think you tend to over analyze certain aspects of your craft. While I'm sure the differences could be measured to some degree, the instruments themselves could never be enough of an exact clone to be measured accurately. While one could finish a mandolin with lacquer, take measurements, then strip the lacquer and refinish with varnish and take measurements again, there would be subtle differences that would flaw the statistical data. Example, the mandolin would not be the same as if it were finished from the start with varnish. Why? Because it had lacquer on it originally and then the instrument was stripped of its original finish and then it was refinished.

I think the closest we will get to being able to accurately measure the differences would be with a Gibson Fern, or Collings. These instruments are built exactly alike; the only difference would be one in lacquer and the other in varnish. Actually, Collings would probably be a better example, as Gibson's, I believe, are more handcrafted. Collings uses CNC and supposedly every top plate, tone bar, back, etc are exactly the same.

Again, we can all over analyze this varnish vs. lacquer argument. I think it really comes down to the individual and what they hear. Some will prefer lacquer and some will prefer varnish. I personally think the finish affects the sound, playability and the look of a mandolin. I also personally think varnish sounds better, looks better, and also plays better. Although these are my personal observations, I have no analytical data to support any of my preferences. But, I really don't need statistical analysis or scientific research to convince me, because I use my ears, eyes and touch to make the decision.

Jim Watts

[Charlie Derrington]

Dave, you and I have had this discussion before.

My take is still, "One cannot quantify art".

My opinion on varnish vs lacquer is just that, opinion. Take it or leave it. Just be aware that I have worked on many, many Loars and lacquer Ferns, and taking into account that every mandolin sounds different, there is still a tonal difference (to MY ear). I prefer varnish. And yes, I approach this with a fundimentalist zeal. Even if you showed me "scientific" data that was the opposite of my opinion, I'd say your data was incorrect because.........one can't quantify art just as one can't quantify faith.

Charlie

[onlyagibsonisgoodenuff]

I have absolutely no qualifications when it comes to why one sounds better than the other, but some common sense would tell me what might have been missed in all these posts. Since varnish is more plyable than lacquer, perhaps it allows the wood to move more efficiently. Maybe a bit simplistic, but it works for me.

[jasona]

Human perception is a funny thing. Getting a Loar or a Fern into your shop probably colors how you would expect them to sound, even if on a subconscious level. To really KNOW I agree with Dave that you should do the experiment. See if people really can tell the difference.

[onlyagibsonisgoodenuff]

I agree with Dave that you should do the experiment. See if people really can tell the difference.
On the other hand, since people are buying varnish finish mandolins, why burst my bubble? (I mean, their bubble.)

[Charlie Derrington]

Actually Jason, that is my point. Human perception is a funny thing. Market demand is not driven by scientific surveys. It's driven by perception (and a host of other economic criteria). In a very general way, I do expect Ferns to sound different than Loars, but, try and explain why that expectation doesn't come into quite as much play when we certainly hear some Ferns that sound better (subjective) than other Ferns, and some Loars that sound better (subjective) than other Loars. Remember, we are talking averages, and I would hope that by now (having worked on or played over 150 or so of these great instruments), I'm not quite so swayed by the supposed novelty of having one or two of these in the shop.

Fred may be correct. I don't know for sure why varnish sounds better (subjective, but remember marketing), but I suspect it's the exact reason he states.

And Dave, even if you had all of the scientific data to suggest the exact opposite, you'd have a heck-of-an uphill battle to convince the market that yours was the definitive answer. Just like you'd never be able to convince a believer in creationism that evolution was fact.

Charlie

[Jim Hilburn]

Fred, I can't imagine how a THIN lacquer finish can impede the motion of a lightly built mandolin, I mean the kind where you feel the excursion of the back against your body.(and if you have one like that, I suggest you get a Tone-gard.

[onlyagibsonisgoodenuff]

Fred, I can't imagine how a THIN lacquer finish can impede the motion of a lightly built mandolin, I mean the kind where you feel the excursion of the back against your body.(and if you have one like that, I suggest you get a Tone-gard.
Actually, I have a tone gard, but with the mandolins I own I am only improving on perfection. Gibson varnished Fern and Collings lacquered MF-5. I know the two sound pretty different from each other, but it's a good difference. Kinda like a catalog of Victoria's Secret models. Try picking the best one. Hmmm.

[onlyagibsonisgoodenuff]

I know that comparing two different mandolins even though they may be the same make and model wouldn't be very scientific, but I had a chance to do just that this past summer. Gibson has stated that they use identical graduations, etc. on their instruments, so that in itself may be pretty close to being a good standard of comparison. During a festival this summer I exchanged my varnished Fern for another fellow's lacquered F-5L for a couple of tunes. I can report there was a vast difference in the sound. Not even a scientific point of view could dispute it. Even the other guy remarked on how alive my mandolin sounded compared to his own. Whether or not this was due to the varnish, I can't say, but that was the biggest difference between the two. They were the same age, made by a company that uses a pretty tight bunch of specs for their instruments (Loar measurements), and so on. I know this could be debated for an eternity, but I know what I have experienced, and so I am a great believer in varnish. That's not to say that great builders cannot make great sounding mandolins finished with lacquer, but just think how great they'd be if they had only used varnish! http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/coffee.gif

[Charlie Derrington]

First off, Fred, let me say that I agree with your assesment that varnish sounds better than lacquer. But remember, we're still talking opinions.

Where we disagree is that you can make this judgement based on two mandolins. Even (and I say this with a big IF, because even two perfectly identical mandolins will sound different. Wood densities vary, as do grain structure, etc., and you give us way too much credit on being able to exactly replicate perfectly, Loar specs on every mandolin. The human element prevents that from being an exactly recreatable {is that a real word ?} result. It is a goal that we try to meet every day, but even the Loars had a variance of graduations from whence I obtained the average graduation spec for our instruments.) if we were able to do as you say, each mando would still sound different. I think the quality of the difference is what we are really trying to ascertain. As an average, varnish has a different tone than lacquer, not necessarily better. And I contend this difference has more to do with material and less to do with thickness. Of course others will disagree, and that's good because it forces discourse.

Charlie

[onlyagibsonisgoodenuff]

The human element prevents that from being an exactly recreatable {is that a real word ?}
Not according to Merriam-Webster. But I know what you mean.

My only contention was that there was such a huge difference between the two instruments in question, I had to blame it on something, and so I chose the finish method as the culprit. Hopefully the other fellow is considering trading up to varnish.

Do I get a commission if he does, Charlie?

[jasona]

Charlie, excellent point about the subjectivity of the market.

[Jim Hilburn]

Fred, I realize I addressed my post to you, but the Tone-gard part was really intended for the entire mandolin community, not at you personally.

[onlyagibsonisgoodenuff]

Thanks, Jim. I took no offense at your post. I am a great believer in Tone-gards. I use them everytime I play. In fact, I believe a lot of folks who play low-end mandolins would be amazed at the improvement in sound facilitated by this invention. Not to mention high-end mandos as well.

Maybe even a bigger difference than varnish.

[lindensensei]

What a great discussion. #But can I get you guys back to the main topic idea? #Is the extra cost for the varnish worth the price? #If I have only $6000.00 to spend is it an F5L new and in the box, or is it a few more years saving and depriving the baby of new shoes? #(Just kidding) #And please don't say that it depends on the instrument. #We have no (repeat) NO! F5Ls or F5Vs in this state in any music store, anywhere, so I have to travel a thousand miles just to see one. #I'm willing, but only have so much time. #Again, thanks.

[Dave Cohen]

Statements like "one can't quantify art" or "you overanalyze this" are simply attempts to dismiss what one doesn't want to hear. I am always surprised, though no longer blindsided, that non-scientists can be so certain that science will not be able to deal with such-and-such or so-and-so. And that on the basis of no familiarity with the literature. It is ironic. In science, there are no absolutes; everything must be falsifiable. Yet the fuzzies insist with great certainty and always without justification, that science can play no part in anything to do with the arts. Nonsense! There is a long history of interaction between the sciences and the arts, going back to DaVinci and before. Besides, dealing with the vibrational motion of an object, whether a musical instrument or an aircraft, is arguably an exercise in applied physics.

[jasona]

What a great discussion. #But can I get you guys back to the main topic idea? #Is the extra cost for the varnish worth the price? #
That's entirely up to you. If I had had the extra money at the time, I would probably have gotten varnish based on the seeming consensus of players whose opinions I respect. Almost did get one anyway, until I heard the one I bought played over the phone--it said "buy me". Its lacquer and has a slightly "fuzzier" (overtones versus strong fundamental) tone than the only two varnished mandolins I've played (a Givens and a Master Model--which I still drool over). Is this "fuzzier" tone due to the different finishes or the different tone wood ( red spruce in the aformentioned varnished mandos, Italian in mine)? Probably so.

Can I tell a difference between Grisman's Loar and Bush's Fern? Yes, but man, do they play differently stylistically. Can I tell a difference between Bush's Fern and Benson's Loar? Not so much, because they have a very similar playing style. And do keep in mind--I've only been playing 2 years, and my ear is still learing how to listen to music critically. Charlie's been at this for a very long time, and I do respect his opinion. (But I'm also a scientist and "prove it" seems to be my motto... http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif )

What should YOU do? No idea. I'm a hobby player, not a pro, so my needs are different. I don't spend money for its own sake. My mando speaks to me. I'm keeping it, lacquer and all. Would you be happy with it? I'd like to think so, but its an intensely personal decision and lots weighs into it.

[onlyagibsonisgoodenuff]

Well put.

[Charlie Derrington]

Nope Dave.

Just not so simple attempts to dismiss what can't be quantified. IMHO .... never said it shouldn't be studied. After all, that's what I've done my whole life.

Charlie http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Cactus Jack]

Well I'm just waiting for enough of the Collings varnished mandos to appear so that people will start comparing them to the Collings nitro finishes. Oh boy, another interesting thing in the world of mandos to look forward to....

[lindensensei]

I have been playing mandolin for 35 years, guitar longer. #This is my lifetime instrument. #Big Joe, Charlie, all you Nashville guys, I'm planning a trip. #I'll be the big, big, guy that looks like an unmade bed.
See ya soon. #Get 'em ready.

[sunburst]

What I have learned from this thread:

1. A lot of people don't have a good understanding of scientific method, as evidenced by their apparent difficulty in differentiating between anecdote and evidence.

2. Opinions can be strongly held and can get in the way of learning.

3. Varnish sounds better to some people

4. Lacquer sounds better to some people

5. Some believe (rightly in my opinion) that the tonal difference in well applied finishes is minimal.

[Jim Roberts]

Jasona: #Since you're a scientist, do we address you as Mr. or Dr.?


I've been thinking about buying a sax...something I gave up (darn it) about thirty years ago but want to give it another shot. #I've got it narrowed down to three saxaphones of the many I've test driven and will be pulling the trigger on one of the three in the next few days. #All three SOUND and PLAY great and it's a tough call on which one to select. Now that I've read this thread, I guess I better contact a few scientists before making my purchase!!!

Cheers.

[Ted Eschliman]

Jim, as a music retailer who has sold saxes and band instruments for over 24 years, I think you can trust me on good advice.
Don't get one with a scroll; it's not worth the extra money.
Besides, you hook the strap on the back, anyway...
http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mandosmiley.gif

[lindensensei]

Sunburst,
If you didn't know all that before this thread, this was a great thing for you to discover.

I never thought for a minute that the greats of this industry would actually answer a question that I would ask.

My discovery process is equall to those that the NASA people use... and I truly do like the scientific process... Have you ever seen 'The Red Violin?http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif #What an interesting thing... the acoustical engineer using scientific process... even if this is not truth...

But I am an artist, and a pro player... and I want a world class instument to play on stage before I end my career. #I'm getting old... and if the big guys seem to think that a Varnish finish is the way to go, well, I'm willing to give them a try.

I should mention that I own about nine or ten guitars. #Not one of them is made out of mahagoney. #I don't like the way it sounds. #I have guitars made out of maple, cherry, ceder, koa, and rosewood. #I understand that 98% of all guitars are made from mahagoney (sp?). #Okay #What does that mean and what will it mean to me when I hear an F5V for the first time in person? #I believe that it is the perfect synthesis of art, ear, process, design, love, like and (hopefully) fingership (my word). #Give it hell, play like a demon and rise up like an angel... I hope I meet you some day.

[sunburst]

For the record, I am building two mandolins now, and plan to varnish one of them. It will be the first mandolin I have varnished, and I don't expect it to sound drastically different from what I have been building.
You may ask "why, then, am I going to varnish it?"
Well, for the same reason we play Fox on the Run at gigs. Thats what they want to hear.

Yes, I saw The Red Violin. I thought it was a great movie.

I don't think the "greats of this industry" are deliberately not answering your question, I think instead that your question has no clear cut answere.

As for my opinion of whether varnish is worth the extra money, no, I don't think it is in terms of sound alone, and given it's lesser durability, it can even be a negative for a pro musician.

[jasona]

Jasona: #Since you're a scientist, do we address you as Mr. or Dr.?
Good lord, hopefully neither. This is a net chat, and we're all mando friends. Only people who I make use titles are salesmen and adminstrators.

And if those Saxes all SOUND and PLAY great, good on you! Grab the prettiest one. Now if you assert that chrome finished saxes sound superior to brass finished saxes, then you'd better call Dave and his oscilloscope over http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[mandoJeremy]

Okay, first off Fred. I dated a Victoria Secret model and don't ask me the page number she is on like my dad did. Of course, notice the term "dated" as in past tense! And Ted, if he did buy the right sax the scroll would be all wrong! Now to the reason of my post. I only feel qualified to post because my prototype #2 Bush model was built in early 2000 and it was of course lacquer. I sent it back to Gibson after almost four years of hard playing and it was well broken in. Even Charlie or Danny emailed me after it arrived and said, "WOW, what a mandolin!". And it was but it went back for a varnish finish instead of lacquer and what I received when it returned was a totally different beast! I don't know really how to describe the tonal differences but they were drastic on my particular mando and for the better. Still had the bass tone but even more and much more balanced, the mids were much more pronounced as well as the treble. After playing it for BigJoe he said that it sounded just like Hoss!(He could have just been trying to make me happy even though he didn't have to) So, there IS a difference and just because I can't explain in words doesn't matter and I can promise you that none of it was hype because I was getting a "varnish" Bush. So, same mandolin, different finish, and much different sound in which I am very pleased! I will tell you again Dan, go to Nashville and play them both and judge for yourself and if it just happens to be the right weekend when I am in town playing let me know and I will bring my Bush for you to compare with the lacquer Bush models they have in stock.

[lindensensei]

Thank you, I will keep in touch and look forward to meeting you.

[mikeyes]

Dan,

I had the same experience as Jeremy when I first saw my Fern V. I did travel thousands of miles to find the instrument, but it was for a different purpose (moving our son). I went into Fuller's Vintage Guitars in Houston just to kill time and saw a wall full of signature Gibson mandolins, all of which were lacquer. I played them and was not impressed - they were not as good as my 87 F5L - when the salesman walked up to "bother me" asking if he could help. Just to get rid of him I asked if they had a MM in stock (knowing that the likelihood was slim and then I could gracefully exit before they pressured me a little more) and they said, "No, but we have this" pulling out a Fern V that had been in the store for a while. Long enough to have scratches and dings on it.

From the first note I played I could tell a substantial difference in sound and feel. It may be unscientific (and I have been a research scientist with "Dr." in my first name too) but it was artistically satisfying. The entire wall of signature mandolins lay down in homage to that mandolin.

I left without the instrument but my wife (who is also "Dr.") bought it for me over the phone later on and it continues to improve daily. My F5L is still a great mandolin but I don't think it will reach the potential that the Fern V will in a few years.

Anectodal? Yes. Poor scientific technique? Yes. Biased observation? No, in this case I had never knowingly heard a varished mandolin but I have had the pleasure of hearing a number of the greats in person without knowing what their mandolin's construction was. I agree with the experience of the Gibson team, I love the varnish finish.

So, if you are asking if you should get a varnished instrument and if the price differential is worth it, my answer is a resounding "yes". I suggest that when you make that Nashville trip you ask Big Joe where one is besides the company store. I got a pretty good deal on mine because it had scratches on it due to the varnish finish being so vulnerable. A little of the Valley Arts polish did a lot for it but I was told not to polish it until it is at least a year old which this one was.

If you believe me, Jeremy, Charlie, Big Joe and the fact that only one reader seems to dissent from the taste test, you can find a good deal out there.

[Big Joe]

While every mandolin does have its own voice, I still believe and without question I can tell the difference tonally in a good quality mandolin from lacquer or varnish. While Mr. .. er, uh.. Dr. Cohen may not be capable of such, some of us can. It is nothing more than having been exposed to both for many years and having played so many of them. Not everyone will hear the difference, but I guarantee some of us can. That is not a qualification for anything important in life, just a fact. I can do it blindfolded or with my eyes open. The feel and tone of a varnish instrument is different from a lacquer one. The way the strings feel and respond is different. Why? I don't know and I really don't care. I just know it does.

The real essence of this string is to determine whether one can tell the difference. Some of us can. Whether anyone in the audience can is another issue. I don't know and that is not my concern. I only know when I play I can tell the difference. I prefer the varnish and that answers the issue for me. Subjective or objective does not matter. I know the difference and what is important for me in a mandolin. To me, nothing else really matters.

If someone likes the lacquer as much, then that should settle it for them. It is a LOT cheaper and not as fragile. There is a reason some of us will not be happy with anything else and are willing to deal with the issues involved in owning a varnish mandolin. It's not just the marketing. It's not just the art. It's just personal preference. I need size 15 shoes. That is not a preference. It is a neccesity. I like Hawiain shirts. That is a preference. They make not make anyone else happy, but they sure do make me happy http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif .

[Jeff Hoelter]

I think the closest we will get to being able to accurately measure the differences would be with a Gibson Fern, or Collings. These instruments are built exactly alike; the only difference would be one in lacquer and the other in varnish. Actually, Collings would probably be a better example, as Gibson's, I believe, are more handcrafted. Collings uses CNC and supposedly every top plate, tone bar, back, etc are exactly the same.


It is my understanding that the CNC machines can only do so much and that the rest has to be carved by hand.

I hear Nugget gave Bill Collings a great jumpstart with lots of info on mandolin building and design - sounds like a recipe for success!

Jeff

P.S. #Both my mandolins are varnished! #;)

[mandroid]

Is the use of location specific finishing of the 2 choices done on the same instrument?
Varnish for the soundboard and lacquer for the back, and rim, perhaps ?
The thought arose because my '21 A's varnished back is a testimonial to moisture sensitivity.
I have to bring dry shirts to switch when I go off with the waterproof case cover and raingear when i'm on the bike.
I now try to cope with sweaty-picker syndrome, thru some planning and pastewax.

[mikeyes]

Dan,

By now you should have a good idea whether or not you are going to buy a Fern V. So here is a little tutorial for the first week of ownership. This purchase will change your life in ways you will not expect. In Chronological Order:

1) You will be playing the instrument at home on the first day when buyer's remorse sets in. "I could have sent my kid to Harvard for what this thing cost us", you will say. (Not strictly true, however, you would have had to buy four of them to cover the cost of Harvard. This way you can buy one and send your child to Rice University, the same education but the cost is substantially less.) But your wife, who has been anticipating this moment, will say to you. "That's alright, you said it was the best mandolin you ever played and I want you to have it. We will work it out."
By now you owe her big, she knows it, you know she knows it and there is nothing you can do about it.

2) You play the mandolin in every spare moment. Finally you have to write to Co-Mando and mandolincafe and ask "What is it about the varnish?" Mandojeremy will write you back and tell you how to care for the varnish finish by carefully cleaning the smutz with a clean soft cloth and a little bit of water (or just leave it alone). He will tell you that the finish is very soft and vulnerable to scratching, etc. so be extra careful with it. Another owner will tell you that he uses an armrest to protect the finish from sweat. You will get a lot of good advice from The Gibson crowd and then will look at the archives for more information.

3) A this point (day 3)you write to Charlie Derrington to tell him what a wonderful product Gibson makes and who is Danny (can't read the signature)? He will return a very nice note on the same day thanking you for buying the product and telling you that the name is Roberts (and not call you an idiot in the process.)

4) On day four you will change the stringes to J74s in an attempt to get rid of the harshness that the Monroe strings have. Mandojeremy will have already told you about the JS74s that he uses and you will find them at FQMS.

5) On day 5 you will attend your first bluegrass festival and while you are jamming someone will remark about "how loud" the mandolin is. You will smile and tell him, "This old thing? I found it at my wife's hairdresser in a little town in Florida. Only paid $125 for it."

6) On the second day of the festival you will see another mandolin player with a lacquer F5L. You will spend the next hour next to him and slightly behind him chopping chords each time he takes a break. Once he notices you (about three nanoseconds later) you offer him a chance to play it for a tune and hold his instrument for a while. Then you tell him it's only a few months old. You accept the gracious compliments.

7) After being so worn out you can't play again for a while you go home and put it under your bed. Your wife accuses you of sleeping more with the mandolin than with her.

That's only the first week.

[mandoJeremy]

Dang Mike, that is a pretty acurate description except for one part. I use the Monel Bush strings and am awaiting the chance to try the JS74's! How is that varnish Fern working out for you? What strings did you end up going with on it? Have you posted a pic of it yet?

[mandoJeremy]

and you must have one excellent wife Mike! Actually, you too Dan!

[mikeyes]

I've got the J74s on right now but I picked up a set of JS74s from a guy at the festival. The Fern V is getting better each day as I learn to play it. I find that I can be very aggresive in picking it without reaching a point that it starts to fade away. On my F5L I can only go so far before it stops being loud and the tone starts to suffer. I have been experimenting with picks and find that the Wegen 150 works best for me although the Tortis mondo with the regular bevel is pretty good too.

I will try the JS74s in a week or so once I feel I have gotten as much as I can out of the J74s. So far my impressions are 1) this is a loud mandolin and loud without a lot of effort, 2) it has that bonecrunching sound you hear in the Mandolin Extravaganza album and in the True Life Blues tribute album to WSM, 3) the finish requires a totally different approach to caring for your mandolin, 4) my mandolin playing has improved with this instrument and that is not just my opinion.

No pics yet but once I learn how to use the camera and decrease the number of pixels so I can post it, I will. maybe a picture of the mandolin and my wife. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Charlie Derrington]

Mike...

That's about the funniest thing I've ever seen. Thanks for the laugh.

http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Charlie

[lindensensei]

Mike,
I did all that when I bought my F5G. #When I came home with my F9, my wife went and stayed with her sister for few days. #And the dogs were pretty put out that I spent more time petting that little wooden box than them. #If your pognastications concerining the fern are true than I guess I should be afraid... very afraid.

[Dave Cohen]

It is interesting that someone sarcastically suggests that maybe they should consult a scientist before their next instrument purchase, when the scientist in question is stating that at least he doesn't have an answer. As I see it, there are three possible answers. (1) Varnish finished instruments "sound better" or at least sound recognisably different, (2) One of the other finishes "sounds better", or at least sounds recognisably different, or (3) experimental results don't point to a clear-cut answer. My scepticism and my experience cause me to think that the third possibility is most likely, but results certainly could convince me otherwise.

For those who think that such things absolutely cannot be quantified, I offer the following references:

(1) M. Schleske, "On the Acoustical Properties of Violin Varnish", Catgut Acoustical Society Journal, Vol. 3, No. 6 (Series II), pp. 27-43, November, 1998.

(2) J.C. Schelleng, "Acoustical Effects of Violin Varnish", J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol 44, No. 5, pp. 1175-1183 (1968). Reprinted in Hutchins, C.M. (Editor): "Research Papers in Violin Acoustics [I]1975-1993" Vol. 2, p. 937-945 (1997).

(3) M. Schleske, "Empirical Tools in Contemporary Violin Making: Part I. Analysis of Design, Materials, Varnish, and Normal Modes", Catgut Acoustical Society Journal, Vol. 4, No. 5 (Series (II), May, 2002.

Finally, since this is a topic of such intense interest and even passion to the Gibson squad, I offer a proposal. I will design and conduct a blindfold experiment. You pay for the costs of the experiment. The results of the experiment will be published openly, preferably as a note in a peer-reviewed journal. Vest, er, uh, "Mr. Vest", I will even let you put on a blindfold and listen.

Full disclosure: Last December, Tom Rossing, acting on behalf of the Acoustical Society of America, invited me to give a paper on pre-1929 mandolins in a special musical acoustics session on "Research on pre-1929 Instruments" at the 75th Anniversary meeting of the ASA (founded in 1929). In January, I put an inquiry on this site and on CoMando about instruments for the study. Charlie Derrington e-mailed me privately and offered to let us study his '25 F5, provided that I share the results only with him, and not publish them. I politely replied that the presentation was for the ASA meeting in May. He then countered that it would be all right if I only presented the results at that "local" meeting. I then replied with the explanation that the May meeting was a national one, and that presentations and/or manuscripts submitted to a scientific society become the property of that society, to disseminate as it wishes. I further offered to do some experiments for Gibson which would be Gibson's property only, for a modest and fair price. I never got a reply.

[sunburst]

Dave,
If you get a chance to do a blindfold test and need "et al"s, (listeners or whatever) let me know. I'd be very interested in the results because I don't foresee building enough mandolins in my lifetime to get beyond anecdotes.

[lindensensei]

Forget it guys, I can't afford varnish.

Yall boys play nice now http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[onlyagibsonisgoodenuff]

Forget it guys, I can't afford varnish.
Hey, I can't afford the test!

[SternART]

But you know........putting a ribbon on a #### still ain't gonna make it pretty.
Just cause it has varnish doesn't make it sound like a Gilchrist. It is just one of
the many variables associated with how an instrument sounds.

[Jim Roberts]

Ribbon on a ####? #Arthur, had I known this about you, I may not have asked you to pass the salt and pepper to me at the dinner table at the Mandolin Symposium! #

[Charlie Derrington]

Now, now, folks....

Dave has a point. I never said data wasn't important, I just think that one can't really quantify art. After all, most of what I have learned about Loars comes from years of study on these instruments. But in the end, I firmly believe the ear will trump scientific data every time.

And yes, Arthur, it takes a whole lot more to making an instrument sound good other than just varnish. But, all other things being equal, varnish can indeed be an important piece of the overall end-result.

And Dave, if Gibson is going to pay, I would expect any knowledge gained by the project would be owned by Gibson. That's how the free market works. If one pays for something, one owns it. You didn't get a final e-mail reply because you and I came to the same conclusion at IBMA, in a face to face discussion.

I really enjoy these debates and certainly don't mean to raise anyone's hackles.

I still stand by my opinion (OPINION) that varnish is a surperior sounding finish. However, I know plenty of great players that prefer the sound of lacquer.

Charlie

[mandroid]

how about a blind scientific test based on a Spectrum analysis from osilliscope printouts ? (sp?)
http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mandosmiley.gif
ask Dr Science!

[mandoJeremy]

The funny thing to me Charlie is the fact that most of the people that chime in on these discussions have never played a Loar but they want to voice their opinions on what makes them so great, or not so great!

[onlyagibsonisgoodenuff]

I've only played one Loar, and I think I prefer my varnished Fern. Sounds the same and cost a heck of a lot less money. Seriously, Gibson is making better mandolins now, than they have since the Loar period!

[Big Joe]

I think Dave (dr or mr or whatever) has missed my point entirely. I said I could tell the difference when I played a mandolin between varnish and lacquer. I did not say HE could tell the difference. No slam, just an observation. Ones ears are an integral portion of the mixture. All the spectrum analyzers on the planet cannot give the data that equals what my ear hears...or yours. In the whole mix of 'things' that create tone, the final and maybe most important is that thing which interprets all those other elements...the ear.

My ears may interpret different frequencies in a manner different from yours. Therefore, there is no scientific test that will accurately tell what each person will interpret as the 'best' tone. Couple this with the experience one may have by exposure to a large variety of tones and shades of tones. This can easily alter ones perception of the sound. Not everyone can or will tell the difference from lacquer and varnish. However, that does not negate the fact that some can. That does not make my dog meaner than yours, just different.

The real science, to me, is not what a spectrum analyzer interprets or a tone generator may simulate, but how a particular instrument with the right strings played by the right plectrum in my hands interprets. I believe I have enough experience and have been blessed to experience enough lacquer and varnish mandolins of a variety of types, makes, and styles to have a well formed opinon based on more than myth.

I am amazed that this flusters Dave so much. If, as he presupposes, this cannot be proven, why waste so much energy on the subject. In this case, it takes more than a doctorate in any subject to alter the years of study and experience of those I trust and know far better than him. That would include me, Charlie, and a handful of others. These are my opinons, and I am entitled to them just as Dave is to his. Now that this has been beaten to death, how about arguing whether the color could affect the tone. That would be a far more interesting argument...with just as useless premises on both sides http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif .

[Dave Cohen]

Charlie, free market or no, if you insist on the information being proprietary, you lose in the long run. After all, if you are really convinced that you are right, then you know that you have nothing to fear from the experimental results. And, if the experimental results do support your opinions about varnish, then you gain by having the results made public. Otoh, if it is known that you have the experiments done and keep the results proprietary, that only feeds the public's suspicion that you either have something unfavorable to hide or have nothing favorable to show.

I am not suggesting a chemical analysis of your varnish formulation, if that is what you are worried about; I am just not interested in it. Nothing that an acoustician would do would allow reverse engineering of your varnish formulation. Sheesh, if you would just read the references which I posted above, I wouldn't have to explain all of this to you.

[mandoJeremy]

First off Dave, I don't think you have the right or "expertise" to criticize Charlie Derrington in any way at all. If you did, then you would have repaired Monroe's Loar and made Gibson what it is today with your science. Science will never be able to grasp the sound of an instrument besides meausuring sine waves and all of that ####. The fact is that they sound great and nothing you can prove or disprove will alter that to certain human ears. Maybe you should do an experiment on human ears and the eardrum to discover why they hear what they do and why it affects them when it enters the brain. My true thought on this and everyone that posted on it is the question of how many Gibson F-5L's (Ferns) and how many F-5 varnish models have any of you played? Don't judge it unless you have touched it.

[lindensensei]

Gentlemen,
A few years ago I decided I wanted a new fiddle. #I took all the cash I had (about $6000.00) and took my boss (great musician) and we went to the finest business establishment we knew of to pick out a new violin. #Armed with a $1000.00 bow I proceeded to go through the stock untill I had chosen about 7-8 violins that I thought were pretty amazing.

Once I had them all in a private room I did the blindfold test. #My boss would hand me one and I would play and then say yes or no. #Sound was everything. #After the test was complete he handed me the violin I had chosen. #I first looked at the back. #It had the most amazing flamed maple I'd ever seen. #I groaned and asked the sales man "How much?"

The salesman looked away, looked down, turned red and then walked away. #I turned to Ron (my boss) and asked "What's with him?" #He said "Look at the fiddle again. #It's yours."

I looked, and sure enough, I had chosen my own Chinese, factory made, $85.00 violin against all those handmade, beautiful european violins.

The point of the story is, if you are used to a Chinese, Factory made, violin (or Loar) then that is what your ear picks out as the best. #My opinion. #Charlie is used to the best of the best (Or at least varnish as is Big Joe) and in a blind test they will probably pick those. #I would probably pick an F9, because thats what I'm currently playing. #I'm moving up, but I think it is, like fine wine, an acquired taste. #I'm not sure I've ever heard a varnish, live in my living room, and the first time I do I might not like it, so I am choosing to save about $5000.00 and get a fern L. #Maybe once that becomes the level of my taste I will move up again. #Who knows? Someday I might try a cabernet sauvignon with a vintage date on it, too.

You're all great Americans!

[peterleyenaar]

I am the lucky owner of a 1917 Gibson F-2 and a
1921 Gibson F-4, both sound wonderfull, although different tonality, can someone tell me what the finish on these mandolins is ? I assumed it is varnish, I use violin polish to clean the instruments,is this appropriate ?
Thanks
Peter

[sunburst]

My true thought on this and everyone that posted on it is the question of how many Gibson F-5L's (Ferns) and how many F-5 varnish models have any of you played? Don't judge it unless you have touched it.
Since "everyone that posted" includes me, I'll say that I have played maybe 2 or 3 new varnished Gibsons and quite a few more lacquered. I have not posted an opinion of which sounds better, nor have I stated any of my opinions as fact. I cannot judge without a representative sample and don't claim to be able to.

A long time ago, my college sociology prof explained the definition of prejudice. It was something like: "a belief that is held despite evidence to the contrary". I think the definition should also include: "a belief held without evidence to support it".

I thought of responding to more of the points in your "rant", Jeremy, but I don't need to speak for or defend others. I'm only responding because I was indirectly refered to.

[Charlie Derrington]

Dave, while I appreciate your enthusiasm, you don't have to "explain" anything to me. Seems to me that you're not understanding what I'm explaining to you.

Nothing to hide at all. If I pay for it, it's mine. Otherwise, pay for it yourself and publish away.

Peter, it's shellac and Dave Harvey's polish will work fine as will any fine violin polish.

Good day, folks.

Charlie

[Dave Cohen]

Really interesting logic, MandoJeremy! I suppose that since no one has restored Bill Monroe's mandolin but Charlie, no one at all can criticise him! What is this, JeremyWorld? Btw, I have played a few handfuls of Loars by now, as well as a number of other vintage mandolins and guitars. Also, if you want to see some really stunning restorations, take a look at some of the classical guitar and flamenco guitar restorations by both Jeff Elliot and Richard Brune.

Of course, that is wholly aside from the fact that I have not criticised Charlie. What I did was recount an e-mail exchange between he and I exactly as it occurred. Admittedly, the exchange points out a dichotomy. He states that science can't quantify art, yet he privately offers to lend his mandolin for the science provided that I don't publish the results, and that I keep the results exclusively for myself and for Gibson. What on Earth would I do with the results if I didn't publish them? Still, he is nothing less than human for that. Kinda goes along with the saying that "There are no atheists in foxholes." I suppose that if I found myself in a foxhole, I would say a prayer or two.

It is also interesting that "Big Joe" referred to me as "flustered". Curious! I never really thought of it that way. I went to the trouble of reading his earlier posts in this thread. He was the first to refer to me personally I have stayed on topic, with the exception of a response to one of his digs. With regard to all of my spectrum analyzers and all that, my contention was and is that some blindfolds, mandolins, players, and listeners would shed some light on the "varnish vs lacquer vs french polish vs whatever" question. That was the gist of my post which MandoJeremy seemed to think was "critical", and Charlie has in essence stated that he doesn't want to share the results with anyone.

[Charlie Derrington]

No, Dave.... not in essence, but in fact.

If I pay for something, I expect rights to that something. It is up to you to accept, or decline. I'll say it again, there is nothing wrong with data, I just don't believe you can quantify art with it. And remember, the context of the potential agreement had to do with plate vibration and not nuances such as lacquer vs. varnish.

I still contend a well trained ear will trump scientific study.

By the way, the offer still stands.

Charlie

[mandoJeremy]

First off Sunburst, and I do quote, " I have not posted an opinion of which sounds better, nor have I stated any of my opinions as fact.", then my post did not apply to you either directly or indirectly. #I was only referring to the one's that had posted their opinions without firsthand knowledge which I have also done in the past and caught hell for. #Lesson learned very quickly. #I also think a lot of the posts are just from the typical Gibson bashing crowd that happens on this site and none of them have knowledge or experience with the new Gibson mandos. #That is my opinion. #Lastly Dave, JeremyWorld....naaah, I think it is CharlieWorld because he is the man in my view or maybe it's just SamWorld because he is the King of it!

[Dave Cohen]

Too late, Charlie. Drew Carson in Aurora, IL lent us his '24 Loar while I was in DeKalb last February. I did the holographic modal analysis on that mandolin then, as well as on several pre-1929 Gibson ovals, an H1 mandola, a Lyon & Healy "A", and a Vega 205 cylinderback. I presented the results May 27th at the 75th anniv. ASA meeting in NYC. When the "hard" version of the paper is published, you can have the results for free just by visiting your nearest university library. Of course, everyone else can have them as well.

[mandoJeremy]

Let's see the results "Dr.", public as they may be!

[peterleyenaar]

Just an observation, I have never seen or heard of a lacquer finish on a ( quality) violin, they are all varnish, if a lacquer finish on a violin produced a better tone , someone would have done it.
A violin is a very different instrument then a mandolin, however, they both derive their tonal qualities from the interaction of the top and bottom plate (acoustic box) which in turn are influenced by the finish ( and a variety of other factors).
The Italian master violin builders,Stradivarius ,Amati,
Guarnerius and many others all jealously garded the make up of their varnishes , and the varnish is thought to be a major factor contributing to the soud quality of these exquisite instruments , so it seems that varnish finishes received a lot more attention than any other type of finish over the centuries.
My question is (probably somewhat ignorant)does a mandolin in the raw sound better or does a mandolin sound better with a finish applied and the finish adds to the sound quality of the instrument rather then being a series of protective layers ?

[Dave Cohen]

Jeremy, talk about bashing! By showing that much hostility in your posts, you discredit yourself more than anyone else.

Another lesson you would be well advised to learn is that you should not make assumptions about other people's motives. I have been doing the mandolin acoustics research at my own expense since 1999. I am not the only person capable of it, but I am the only person who has taken the initiative to do it. The paper I presented in May in NYC was the result of an invitation from the ASA, or did you miss that? I have no financial aspirations or expectations, as there is essentially no grant money available in musical acoustics. But "the free market" as Charlie described it works both ways. If you want something to be proprietary, you have to pay for it. You also have to be prepared for the possibility that someone else will "scoop" you and get there first. Also, you should recall that Charlie initiated the offer, tried to stipulate the the work not be published, and, btw, made no offer on behalf of either Gibson or himself to pay for the work.

As I stated earlier, the results have already been presented at a national meeting, and will be published later in a peer-reviewed journal. There is no "glory" associated with publishing scientific papers; only the author credit which goes along with a prodigious amount of work, which in turn requires a prodigious amount of training and study.

If you really do want to see holographic modal analysis on mandolins in the meantime, you can find very similar results in our two already published papers. I have referenced them in other threads. Frankly, I think that they will go right over your head.

The title Dr. is not supposed to be set in quotation marks, and as someone else in this thread already stated, I only request that people like salesman and you refer to me as Dr.

[peterleyenaar]

I wished I was a Dr.,I am just a mondolin playing schlemiel :-)

[lindensensei]

Dr Cohen,
Thank you for your remarks. #They have stated your case clearly and I look forward to reading your paper. #Could you please post up a notice when it becomes available? #Thank you all.

[mandoJeremy]

Yes Doc, thanks for the remarks and I would love to read that paper so where is the link to it?

[picksnbits]

Just to take this a bit further over the edge,...

Varnish smells different, so I guess any unbiased comparisons would have to be done with nose plugs as well as blindfolds http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[Charlie Derrington]

It's interesting, Dave, how folks remember things differently.

I was interested in the project. You mentioned publishing. I mentioned that if Gibson was involved (I assumed you understood financially), the info would have to be proprietary.

That's where we agreed to disagree.

Anyway, it's great that you were able to proceed without us, and since we didn't pay for it, publish away.

Charlie

[Dave Cohen]

Charlie, at my age I don't have a spectacular memory, but I don't have to remember anything differently; I still have the e-mails in my inbox.

The references, not links, to the previous papers follow:

(1) D. Cohen; T.D. Rossing, "Normal Modes of Vibration in Two Mandolins", Catgut Acoustical Society Journal, Vol. 4, No. 2 (Series II), pp 48-54 (November, 2000).

(2) D. Cohen; T.D. Rossing, "The Acoustics of Mandolins", Acoust. Sci. Tech. Vol. 24, pp 1-6 (Jan., 2003).

Acoustical Science and Technology is the journal of the Japanese Acoustical Society; it is printed in English.

[Charlie Derrington]

Yeah, me too. Too bad that e-mails can't show inferences and inflections.

Now, for your info to really be valuable, you'd need to do this work on about 100 Loars, do some statistical work in Minitab, and publish that data. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

BTW, I really enjoy the repartee.

Charlie

[fatt-dad]

Now that some of the dust has settled, I would like to offer one observation on the subject of "rights" or "ownership" of information. There is a big difference in product rights and intellectual rights. As a design consultant, if you hire us to do a project (design a building, perform a site evaluation, etc.) the drawings or reports are instruments of service, but the "ownership" remains ours, irrespective of who pays the bill. We have an obligation to maintain confidentiality, but there is no "product liability" related to our services. When you pay for a mandolin, the product ownership transfers from the seller to the buyer. However, the ownership of the design should remain with the seller (lord knows that this is difficult).

So, it is not always clear to say that just because you "buy" a service (i.e., sponsor research) that the ownership of the results immediatly are transferred to the buyer. That is a matter of contract, obviously one that Gibson tried to negotiate to no avail. In my practice (the company where I work), we (normally) retain the ownership of documents. That way if someone pays for us to design a building and we can leverage features of one project to the benefit of another project, it our legimate right to do that.

I find it interesting that there is a conflict between the good work of "science" and the good work of subjectivity. We are fortunate to have so many choices in this world. I congratulate Dave (or is it Dr. Dave) for his dedication to the science and also for making great mandolins. Heck, I bet even a non-scientist could easily see (or is it hear) that Dr. Dave's mandolins are great.

You all have a great day.

fatt-dad

[fatt-dad]

Jumping in again: It would be a bigger question to a scientist to ask whether they are an advocate for something in the absence of data. My read is that Dave is in the process of collecting data.

Regarding the topic of how big a factor one paramater is over another, it is better to be careful in persuing excellence than careless. I am hearing genuine desire amoungst the masses to know what is better, whether it is a matter of degrees or not. You can bake a cake with honey or sugar, but one comes out better - ha.

fatt-dad

[Moose]

Being the academic librarian that I am - or.., rather what it states in my personnel file - I'm gonna' dig out(oops!, I mean "research") all them there "references" that have been put forword.. I believe we subscribe to most - if not all - of them "technical journals" mentioned above by the respected "academicians" and the other assorted science-minded folks contributing to this laborious "thread" - I'll send copies of same for money "reimbursement" - of course after I get the proper "authorization"!!##?.. - I will start this project as soon as I have a few "libations" (not on-the-job mind 'ya!) - To Charlie and Joe :... ; don't develop ulcers over this. Please continue making great musical instruments..., and keep pickin' yer'music as you get the opportunity. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mandosmiley.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif - EL MOOSO.

[Tom C]

Charlie is %100 correct in that if he pays for it, he owns it. But I did not read anything money related, only the offer to study his '25. So if Charlie pays Dave for a
service, Charlie owns the results. If the issue was
studying Charlie's mando for comparison ...etc, for Dave's
research paper then Dave would own it and owe Charlie a
nice dinner and a couple of drinks. (which now, I would love to see a picture of)

[addcourt]

This thread is like a good book--can't wait to keep tuning in. Leaning in Charlie's direction since I play one of his masterpieces. Dave makes a very strong case. Where will it end? What round is it, anyway?

[Don Grieser]

I wonder if any of the "experts" got the Mando Tasting CD and would actually confess what they picked as their top mandos before they read what mando was what. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif And would we believe them. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mandosmiley.gif

[Spruce]

"And Dave, even if you had all of the scientific data to suggest the exact opposite, you'd have a heck-of-an uphill battle to convince the market that yours was the definitive answer.

Just like you'd never be able to convince a believer in creationism that evolution was fact."

The perfect analogy... # http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Me, I just love the way varnish wears over time, with "that" wonderful crackle and the cloudy blur that comes with years of usage...

But you'd be hard-pressed to find a mandolin that sounds as good as many Monteleones I've played and one I owned...

[fatt-dad]

(Anybody here could forward Dr. Cohen's citations to their respective state libraries and within a week or so have them in hand for likely no charge.)

[Moose]

my dear fatt-dad: Your "suggestion" is appreciated - and correct! - However MY work will cost! - I'm faster.., I'm high-maintainance ... AND, I don't make mistakes ; "oversights" sometimes.., yes. Regards, DR. MOOSE http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[mandoJeremy]

You are too funny there Moose...I mean Dr. Moose!http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[tiltman]

All of this "DR" stuff is pretty funny... my friends keep me from getting a big head by reminding me that I'm a "dog mechanic".
Kirk, Doctor of Veterinary Medicine
F5-V player whose wife won't let him have a loar http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[mikeyes]

Is that mando tasting CD still around?

[lindensensei]

Which brand of mandolins does Dr Cohen make? #Or am I just being stupid?

[mandoJeremy]

These (http://users.erols.com/judcohen/)

[Moose]

Thanks Jeremy. Impressive site/info. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/coffee.gif

[neal]

This has been one of the most tedious, long, tedious, redundant, tedious etc. threads that I have read every word of. # #http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[Flowerpot]

The mando tasting CD's are still around, but you ain't gonna get a good answer from them. My own top 10 from the 2003 CD included a whole lot of varnish models, but that doesn't mean squat, as nobody goes to the trouble of putting varnish on a piece of junk. Nor does it say what those tasty mandos would have sounded like with a different finish.

If you took 100 different models of cars and rated them all for performance like acceleration and cornering, and then had somebody else rate their paint jobs, you would probably find a lot of the same vehicles in the to 10 list. But it ain't the paint job that makes the car go fast.

I'm not saying there are not real tonal differences, but I wonder how much reputation for good tone comes from the fact that it's too expensive to put on the average instrument, and those really great hand-crafted instruments would have sounded excellent with a thin coat of laquer as well.

[mandoJeremy]

Let's see....Gilchrist, Dude, and Gibson use varnish. #The only other really "major" builder that doesn't is Monteleone and I agree that his mandos rip it regardless of what is protecting their wood! #Ahhhhh, maybe it is just all of the hype but it is funny to watch the trend that most mando builders are going with...varnish.

[mandoJeremy]

and I think everyone is forgetting one major thing on my "opinions".....I played the same freaking mandolin that started out as a lacquer instrument four years ago and ended up a varnished one in January. #There WAS a MAJOR difference and I think that is the most perfect comparison you can make....the same instrument, different finish, different sound...HHHMMMMMMM! #Maybe my un-scientific approach to this is naive but it is different, maybe not better to some ears but much better to mine. I still think my ears need to be analyzed!...and maybe my brain while we are at it. Shock therapy just may be helpful!

[SternART]

<< Ahhhhh, maybe it is just all of the hype?!!! >>

From my personal experience. Monty's can indeed <<rip it>>

[mandoJeremy]

Yes they do, I rank a certain Monty among the top few mandos I have ever had in hand, which is quite a lot! Rip it up John!

[fatt-dad]

In the immortal words of MOOSE, "I'm outta here" (taken from the Where's Joni Mitchell's mandolin thread). What remains is whether I pull a Lazarus. . . . .

f-d

[mandoJeremy]

Yeah, I am done with this one also. Why keep beating it to death?

[peterleyenaar]

So does a mandolin in the white sounds better then a mandolin with a finish, varnish or lacquar, in other words does a finish
contributes to the sound of a mandolin in a positive way or is a finish merely a series of protective layers, not improving the sound of the mandolin ?

[lindensensei]

Why not start this as another thread? I'd kind of like to know the answer to that.

[Flowerpot]

New thread! New thread! Go ahead, peterleyenaar.

[Bob Sayers]

One last comment before this thread ends: In the last year I went crazy and purchased two new Gibson mandolins. (Apparently just in time, as those folks seem to have abruptly disappeared into the ether! Are they still in business?) One is a lacquer Wayne Benson model and the other is a varnish Fern. As I've said elsewhere, the difference in sound is quite dramatic. The Benson has a dry, focused sound while the varnish Fern not only has a more complex tone, but it also sounds like a larger instrument. I presume it's the lacquer v. varnish thing. They're both nice, just very different. Go figure...

Bob

[elenbrandt]

The only "Dr." I have to my name deals with "Juris" -- and my knowledge doesn't even attempt to approach the scientific -- but this much I know with every fiber in my being -- I never heard a mandolin nuance and sing and express incredible depth until I played one with varnish. Yes, I'm sure the luthier had a lot to do with it, but that aside, the fact that he no longer makes them with a lacquer finish should serve as a hint. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[Big Joe]

If one takes large samples of an item and tests them in many ways, does that equal research? If one takes hundreds of mandolins that have been varnished and thousands of lacuered and insprects, plays, and studies them would that be part of research? If one devotes their life to the study of the instrument and its development would that be a part of research? Would a machine with no ability to understand timbre or emotion with a single sampling be equivalent to the years some have had in studying the instrument? I think clearly the evidence falls on the side of Charlie and a very few others whose experience are so far above the snake oil presentation of a single instrument to represent the entire genre. This argument has gone from interesting to droll. This I do know. I will trust Charlie's word and my ears long before I trust a psuedo-scientific paper purporting to answer all the questions of mandolin sound. This is just my opinion and I am both highly entitled to it and highly qualified to state it. Whatever initials one might put in front of my name are less important than the end results anyway.

[Scott Tichenor]

Is that mando tasting CD still around?
Yes, indeed, and you should all own a copy, if for nothing else than to have a picture of my kitchen table and mandolin + a glass of vino that I consumed shortly after the photo was snapped. Seriously, it's an interesting work.

Plus, MandoTasting is now a part of Mandofest 2005 and wait until you hear the lineup of events/fun for this three-day mandolovefest as Ken Sager calls it.

Whilst you were all discussing the merits of this I was at Winfield playing round the clock until my fingers bled.

Sleep. It's overrated http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mandosmiley.gif

Buy the CD online (http://www.mandolincafe.com/archives/mandotasting.html).

Although I do possess a B.S., I figure this weekend I earned a Doctor of Picking Endlessly. Let's see..... DOPE. Hmmm, need to earn another degree with a better sounding title.

[mandolooter]

It sounds like a worthy weekend and I've been called worse for pickin all night, of course a DOPE degree might not look very good on a resume.
Sleep is very over-rated!

[fatt-dad]

I'm somewhat bothered by BigJoe's post and figure I should air my thoughts right here in this forum.

An ability to make observations leads all of us to frame up our opinions. To the skilled luthier, the quality of tone in an instrument would then lead to any number of improvements. To the blind person, an ability to know when danger approaches or the scent of a woman. Many of these observations cannot be properly substantiated using science, but they are real none-the-less.

I am not here to defend Dave Cohen. I have not studied his work. I do know that it is unlikely that a scientist would state that qualitative observations are invalid. The purpose of science is to take a hypothesis, develop a therem and conduct experiments. Whether the theory is found correct depends on peer review. So, in my world, if a scientist were to claim they could not discern any quantitative differences between a laquer or varnish finish (I don't even know whether Dr. Cohen has made this claim), it would never invalidate the skilled observations of a luthier. It would just be a scientific finding.

Earlier in this thread someone referenced the parallel to evolution and creation. I look at the opinion of BigJoe in that light. His conviction is real, he and his trusted colleague share that conviction and whether science agrees with them or not is no matter. I have no problem aplauding that conviction. However, for a scientist to rest a theory at that point would result in the failing of science (some may not care, however).

Fatt (I said I was out of here) Dad

[Moose]

Some things are hard to walk away from.., ain't they.. - just ask OJ... (ops!... here comes "counselor elen" - again.) http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

[Big Joe]

I have no fear of peer review or scientific study. I believe we have enough evidence based upon many years of careful observation to form an opinion that is as scientific and as factual as any machine could give...maybe better. Whether one agrees with the findings or not is up to them and really not relevant to the issue. I think we have had 80 years of peer review to help establish the validity of our point of view. The 'evolution' comment was not mine and really is not applicable to my comments. My point is that there are already those who have spent many years in the field of science of mandolin sound and have the credentials needed to speak their points. Those points are as valid as any and have plenty of subjective and objective evidence to back them up.

My doctor tells me what I should do to keep healthy. He has the credentials to give credence to his point of view. I trust him. Not because of his initials, but because of the years he has proven the initials are deserved. If he could do the same without the initials I would still listen to him. On this board there are plenty of us with initials enough to fill an alphabet but without the proven track record to back up that list, the argument cannot stand.

My point is some have the credentials to state an opinion and it can hold as much or more weight than a wordy testament based upon a small sampling of the work and that be the basis of the finding. Thank you.

Would of been a decent post without the Dr. analogy......So Joe, you don't trust young Doctors?

[Tom C]

"you don't trust young Doctors? " - Not ones younger than me!
Don't you remember that day when you found yourself older than the baseball player you used to idolize? I no longer look up to those money hording game players. And I would still rather take advise from Hank Aaron as from Bonds.

[Moose]

Ah!!! - Now the thread takes another "turn" - a distrust of "....young doctors." - What was the original question.., senator??!!http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

LOL!!

[Don Grieser]

I've never seen a picture of Big Joe, but Charlie looks remarkable for being over 80 years old. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

Would Joe allow himself to be examined by a "young foreign lady Dr."??

Would he need to be laquered prior to the exam?

I vote for varnish BTW......

[Dave Cohen]

I was outta here a couple of pages ago, but I see that "Big Joe" has gotten personal again. After his last couple of posts, I am torn between wanting to leave it alone and feeling the need to defend myself.

Vest, you have been careful enough in your last two posts to not mention me by name. However, your implications were pretty clear. Implying that I am not qualified, either as a scientist or as a luthier, to state opinions about the behavior and characteristics of instruments is not only incorrect, but also uninformed and libelous (yes, I just looked up the definition of libel). You don't know me, and I daresay that you have not bothered to look up my credentials or my CV. You also have not bothered to check on the collaborative nature of my work. I have done all of this work in collaboration with Thomas D. Rossing. Tom is near the top among a very select few distinguished senior musical acousticians both in the U.S. and worldwide. He is one of only seven silver medalists in musical acoustics, he was the chair of the ASA technical committee on musical acoustics from 1984 to 1990, and is a Fellow of the Acoustical Society of America. He has also been an officer of the International Society for Musical Acoustics. He would not put his name as co-author on any papers containing shoddy work, let alone "snake oil" or "psuedo science". By insinuating what you have about me, you are implicating Tom Rossing as well. Without having asked him, I am pretty sure that he would be offended by your insinuations. I am as offended by what you tacitly and unknowingly implied about my good friend and collaborator and mentor as by what you implied about me. Our work has passed the test of peer review; that means that people far more qualified than "Big Joe" have explicitly stated that it is neither "snake oil" nor Psuedo science".

What is even sadder than the fallacious nature of Mr. Vest's assertations is the very personal nature of them. Throughout both of these threads on varnish/lacquer as well as other threads, I have tried to remain on topic. Otoh, Joe Vest has taken numerous opportunities to make personal attacks on my ability, credentials, and character. The credentials part of it is especially ironic, since he obviously does not have the scientific credentials himself to publicly judge the qualifications of scientists.

Joe, since I have not posted since page four, the allegations in your last two posts are certainly completely unprovoked. I would ask for an apology, but no one can make anyone else apologize. You have stated some strong and really nutty opinions in some past threads, and been gently corrected by others. I did not pile on you then, but instead chose to simply leave it alone. You can say whatever you like about mandolins and finishes and neck/body joints, but it is long past time for you to stop the personal attacks. They are damaging to me, but they discredit you far more.

George Booth had a wonderful cartoon several years ago in The New Yorker. Two cavemen were circling each other menacingly, clubs poised in readiness. A circle of cavemen onlookers watched intently. One of the onlookers remarked wryly to another standing next to him; "The age of assertion and counter assertion is upon us". Assertions and counter assertions often lead to clubbings. Homo Sapiens Sapiens alone has the intelligence and capacity for reason to avoid the clubbings, though he doesn't often use that intelligence and reason. This is a moment which certainly does call for intelligence and reason.

[Charlie Derrington]

I'm going to step in and stop this before it goes any further.

Dave, Joe's not attacking you personally. He's just saying that your opinion is no more valid than his. Joe, Dave can assert whatever he likes and neither you nor I can change his opinion.

Enough is enough. I think we are all adult enough to stop this nonsense. This is getting way too personal.

Charlie

[Jim Roberts]

"Down goes Frazier, Down goes Frazier, Down goes Frazier". Howard Cosell circa 1970.

[Moose]

elen..., oh counselor. ; someone here can use your "services" - for a fee of course - who'll pay to have a good defense ; I know you're lurking.. hee.. hee.. This is really getin down 'n dirty ; libel.., slander.. go for it .. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[peterleyenaar]

I thought you guys were done,
funny how a simple question can cause a near feud

[Moose]

Actually, this thread has been very "informative" - personally. Lot's of "techy" stuff to increase my knowledge...- impress my peers.. (the one's I have left)hee.. hee.. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mandosmiley.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[lindensensei]

Yeah, too bad the guy that starts the string can't decide when to pull it. #This one should die here and now. #I already decided which mandolin to buy. #Done. #Over. #Goodbye.

How the heck do you turn off the auto responder?

[Moose]

"...turn of the auto responder.... turn off the auto responder...turn off the auto responder... http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mandosmiley.gif

[mikeyes]

Dan Said: "I already decided which mandolin to buy. Done. Over. Goodbye."

Ah, but does the devil ever stop tempting? You will come over ... to the dark side. (maniacal laughter follows)

[onlyagibsonisgoodenuff]

Scott, we need a lock put on this one!http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[GTison]

not so fast scott. this is the best thing in a while. assertions and all!
I respect you guys who use your real name on here. Cause I'm not gonna subject myself to all this. I just think it's the nature of posting. I'm glad Joe and Charlie and the Doc all post w/ names but If you don't like your opinions slammed don't EVER put them out for someone to trample on because like the old saying goes 'opinions are like.............. everybody's got one. (scientificly based or not)

[onlyagibsonisgoodenuff]

I don't want to fan the flames here, but after re-reading the first page, I found everything the original post asked was answered in the first few replies. It seemed to me this got off-topic when the discussion went from "what is the difference" to debating "whether anyone can tell the difference". Most everything after that just went down hill for the most part.

Just my opinion, of course!

[addcourt]

I'm with Moose on this thread. Although I'm a firm believer in current Gibson quality, I've found the Cohen website through this thread and am toying with the idea of contacting Dave regarding the fine looking 2-point he builds. Thanks for the info and regards.

[fatt-dad]

I think that the Cohen Mandolin will sound good too!

(no doubt that this is off topic. . . .)

f-d

[MEP]

I played one of Dr. Dave's mandolins at IBMA last year. It was an A-model and it sounded great and played well. The sound reminded me of a Collings MT2. I personally like a more traditional looking instrument, but he makes killer mandos. In addition, Dave and his wife are very nice people. I enjoyed getting to know them a little bit. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Scott Tichenor]

Sorry to intrude on the discussion. Trying out a new emoticon just inserted into the board software. Just plucked a conversation out of the list to test this.

Really.

Testing: http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sleepy.gif

[Flatpick]

I like it Scott.... http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sleepy.gif

[danb]

http://engr.smu.edu/~kaytaz/76.gif

[lindensensei]

C'mon let it die or tell me how to turn off the topic tracker. My e-mail is getting rediculous.

[Jacob]

Go to Your Control Panel - then to Topic Tracker.

[Tom C]

That is so funny Dan.
Scott, good thing I can see those ZZZz otherwise I'd be offended.
http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sleepy.gif

[lindensensei]

THANKS JACOB, GOODBY ALL.

[addcourt]

Not so fast Dan--if you sat in on some jams in the Winter Park/Orlando area 15 or so years ago, send me an email so I can get caught up on that group. Thanks, Mike

[Rroyd]

Talk about being disappointed!!! # I saw the new emoticon, and I thought,"Wow, this is great. A little emoticon that turns its head and sticks its tongue out at whoever is bugging it. #What a great way to deal with these controversial discussions." # I called my daughter over to look, and then she cleaned the monitor screen. . .

[GVD]

While at Winfield this year I did extensive research on the tonal properties of Varnish and Lacquer mandolins. I've just finsihed crunching the numbers and Varnish came out the clear winner. The 3 best sounding mandolins were in order:

1. John Rieschman's Loar
2. Scott Tichenor's Nugget
3. Some guy I didn't get the name of's Master Model

So there you have it, it must be the varnish http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Of course the results might have been skewed from the fact that I got almost no sleep for a week and I drinks you know. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

GVD

[ericwall]

Just curious. Does anyone make a varnish finished oval hole? I think Peter Coombe's mandolins are all varnish finished. Don't know about Old Wave.
I may wish to trade my Lebeda F5 for an oval hole that has some volume to it.
Eric

[peter.coombe]

They certainly are varnish finished.