2.5mm-3mm pick

[shins]

Experimenting proves this too, a pick with some elasticity sounds louder than a rigid pick if picking techniques are kept equal. Try it!

[Ivan Kelsall]

Shins - I understand what you're trying to say,but in my own experiments with picks varying from .09mm thick to 3.0mm thick,i've found that the stiffer the pick,the more energy it directly imparts to the string. The .09mm pick i have is so flexible that it bends when i hit the string & then springs back to hit it again,so i get a double note. It's quite an effect,but an impractical one !.
If the pick bends when it hits the strings,part of the energy is taken up by the force needed to bend it,it's not then imparted to the strings. It's a bit like trying to hammer in a nail with a rubber hammer,you can do it, but a harder,more rigid one does the job better & imparts more energy into the nail,because with the rubber hammer,part of the energy is taken up by compressing the rubber. The more flexible pick only 'un-bends' after it's struck the strings,so it can't impart that energy to the strings. I used to use Wegen Bluegrass picks 1.4mm thick,that was until i tried the far more rigid Dunlop Primetone picks. I tried 1.3mm ones at first which were much louder & more clear than the Wegens. I then bought some 1.5mm ones & they're louder still.The much more flexible Wegens now sound very dull by comparison - however,the materials are quite different,which accounts for some of the difference in tone,
Ivan

[Lord of the Badgers]

I actually walked away from a mandolin teacher who told me I shouldn't use a pick thicker than the orange dunlop tortexes I'd used when I first started out.
Even in my embryonic playing, I had realised that a thick pick produces a much stronger & more strident tone - I believe there's a video lesson from Thile where he talks about playing "through" the strings, which is much easier to achieve with a thicker pick. I also realised that thin picks kill my wrist if I'm doing fast chord work.
But for a bouzouki, or a tenor, I'd use only thinner picks as that's the sound you want for those IMO.

Not sure I'd want to go much over 2.0 though. I might view that as overkill (purely my opinion)

[shins]

"Part of the energy is taken up by the force needed to bend it"

that's what I'm saying; elastic picks store potential energy, that energy which is "taken up" is later released as it passes the string.

the motion trajectory and dynamics of a rubber mallet are different, you're comparing apples to oranges. A pick more resembles the limbs of a bow and arrow, or a diving board. using a rigid diving board is not as efficient as a springy one.

this is because rigid objects are inefficient at storing kinetic induced potential energy.

We really need to see some hard science In order to settle this debate. I wonder if this has been experimented on.

my own personal anectode is that I hear optimal tone and volume from about a .7 or .8 pick. Anything above that gets dark, muddy, and "clicky" and much below that gets too floppy.

lets see if I can find and good studies or articles.about this.

[shins]

"Generally, a heavier pick produces a darker sound than a lighter pick, but the shape of the tip has the most influence on the sound. A pointed tip produces a brighter, more focused sound, while a rounded tip produces a rounder, less defined sound."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guitar_pick

according to this, a thick, rounded pick will produce a darker, muddier sound, while a thinner pick will create, a brighter, more focused sound.

it seems to me that for a mandolin, a brighter, more focused sound would be more favorable since mandolins are designed to sound bright and focused, especially for bluegrass.


in theory the only advantage to a thick pick is not in tone or volume, but potential speed.

if you're playing so fast that the delay from an elastic pick flexing before it releases the string is limiting your upper range of speed, then a thicker pick will allow you to "shred" faster.

[pheffernan]

according to this, a thick, rounded pick will produce a darker, muddier sound,

No, according to this, a heavier (not necessarily thicker) pick will produce a darker sound:
"Generally, a heavier pick produces a darker sound than a lighter pick." Also, nowhere does the entry introduce the word "muddier," a pejorative term that you have been using throughout the discussion.

while a thinner pick will create, a brighter, more focused sound.

No, according to this, the shape of the tip is more influential than the pick's weight and it is the pointed tip with delivers the qualities you ascribe to a pick's thinness: "A pointed tip produces a brighter, more focused sound."

it seems to me that for a mandolin, a brighter, more focused sound would be more favorable since mandolins are designed to sound bright and focused, especially for bluegrass.

It seems to me then that you should be using a pick with a pointed tip.

in theory the only advantage to a thick pick is not in tone or volume, but potential speed.

In theory, there are lots of advantages to a thick pick. If the only one that you experience in practice is potential speed, then by all means choose according to your preferences. But you might find that in larger mandolin world, other players have preferences of their own.