Collings a's vs. gibson a's

[jk245]

I suppose a lot of old timers like to bash (in jest) Gibson because they are a venerable mando maker. BillM and his love for his instruments added to this stigma. While this is all likely tongue in cheek, Gibson rarely gets a bad review on this board. Sure, a few of their instruments might not be great but on the whole they are appreciated.

Collings, only making mando's since 1999, on the other hand seems to have a gained a fast reputation because they make beautiful instruments that play well for and by mature players.

Assume sound of each A's is acceptable for you, in the $2000-$4000 price range, are there pluses and minuses for each?
Here we are looking at sound and quality for a better value in price than a fancy carved and decorated F.

[Greg H.]

While both companies make excellent mandolins, they do sound different. A lot of what goes on here is more a matter of what sound you want than one being necessarily better than the other. In general the Collings have a better reputation for fit and finish, and they're probably a bit more consistent in the overall quality but, that being said, I personally prefer the sound of the Gibson. It may be that years of listening to bluegrass (which has, until recently, been most often played on Gibsons) Gibsons sound more like what I've grown to expect a mandolin to sound like.

This is, of course, just a long winded way of saying the most important difference between the two is entirely subjective so your best approach would be to get somewhere where you can try the two side by side and see which (if either) get to come home and play.

[Frank Russell]

I have owned a Collings A and F, and several Gibsons, both A's and F's. Here's a few observations. Tone and volume aside, playability and initial setup was definitely a factor. I've never owned a Gibson, new or used, that I didn't feel the need to "tweek" at least a little. The three Collings I've owned have been supremely playable from the get-go. As far as finish, I get it when some folks call them "too perfect," but once I played one, it was all over. Matte or gloss, the finish on these is perfectly applied, nice and thin, and the tonewoods are nearly always beautiful. Both the A and F I had showed figure in the spruce tops, I guess you call it "silking," and super flame on the backs. Nut height, radius and other factors gave my Collings a feel that many would describe as "loose," or easy to play. My Gibsons, while all exhibited super examples of the tradition, all needed some setup work to be done, especially the A9 and F9 I had. Corian nuts on a mandolin that costs over a grand is a bit lame, but easily fixed. The binding, as an old Cafe member used to complain, was also sharp as a knife on the 9's. Not being a baby, but it was actually uncomfortable to play for any length of time. A little sanding took care of that. My F5G wideneck deluxe needed a new nut cut for it, as the one that came on it was very poorly spaced. I also had it radiused, but that's personal preference. My point is, they are both great makers and mandolins, but I never had to do squat to my Collings to make them play easily. I am sure I will own one again. Then again, I miss that F5G. Frank

[pickinNgrinnin]

Nice assessment Frank. jk245 can take that review to the bank. I've yet to own a Collings Mandolin but I sure have played a bunch over the past 4-5 years at Mass Street Music. As Frank stated, their set ups from the factory are spot on. I've owned a Gibson F5G, A9 and now a Derrington signed A5-L. I also agree with the needed tweaking for these Gibsons. I'll be bringing my A5-L in for a new nut as I don't like the string spacing. Tone wise, I prefer the Gibson's over the Collings. My A5-L is the best sounding A I've played and the tonewoods are outstanding. Hard to go wrong with either choice.