Why don't other quality mandolins sound like Gibsons?

**jman72** · Jun-06-2012, 3:41pm

As I'm in my search for the next mandolin and comparing Gibsons and Webers and other QUALITY mandolins (I'm not referring to lower end instruments) it seems that the major comment people make about non-Gibson mandolins is that they sound different from Gibsons. Not worse- just different. The implication I gather is that the holy grail of mandolin tone is the Gibson tone and that most mandolin players want that sound if they can get it (there are exceptions, of course). I know there are a many reasons why different mandolins have unique sounds (construction, materials, etc), but why don't builders who have the capability of reproducing that Gibson sound do it? I mean, at Gibson, many different people have built mandolins over the past 90 years, producing that "Gibson sound" up until today. So, its not as if the sound comes from the hands or workmanship of one particular person- it can be reproduced by lots of different people. And many fine builders today actually BUILT mandolins at Gibson, so they know exactly how to do it (Bruce Weber, for example). The dimensions, specs, etc. of the Gibson F5 are well studied. Do other builders do it on purpose to get a different sound or unique sound? To experiment? I'm just curious why it seems to be so hard to find that Gibson sound in a non-Gibson mandolin. If the Gibson sound is the one that most people want, why not give them that sound if you can? Just curious what you all think.

**George R. Lane** · Jun-06-2012, 3:47pm

Many builders can make you an instrument that sounds like a Gibson (Kimble or Stanley for example) while others (Collings and Weber) prefer to have their own tone. Gibson is the standard simply because they have been around the longest and they are what Mr. Bill played. I am sure others will chime in with their opinions.

**Justus True Waldron** · Jun-06-2012, 3:59pm

I think there are builders who can get a "gibson" sound out of an instrument. Also it's my personal opinion that "gibson" sound can mean a number of different things. To me the "true" gibson sound is the lloyd Loar F5, and even among those are different sounds. Lots of people associate a "gibson" sound with that tubby bass boom pop, but there are certainly loars out there that don't have that sound. In fact, Loars were designed to be chamber orchestra instruments, focused more on mid and highs than lows. Today everybody seems to want "the gibson" bass, so manufacturers are trying to make really bass heavy "woofy" mandolins, sometimes at the expense of the mid and high registers. I think there is a similarity to Gibsons, as there are with most manufacturers. I find Collings and webers have their own sound within their brand as well. However, I know a guy who is sponsored by weber and has the nicest weber I ever played... it sounds exactly like what people expect from a gibson. So I guess I don't really know, except to say gibsons themselves are more different than most people think IMHO. Crusher sounds different than Hoss which sounds different than my friend's Steve Carlson signed A, which sounds different than Sierra Hull's mando. I'm pretty sure even with the same player they would all sound different. Which means when a builder sets out to get "that gibson sound" he really could be replicating any number of different mando's sounds.

**JonZ** · Jun-06-2012, 4:17pm

If you consider Gibson as one group, and all other high-end brands as another group, aren't more people in the "other" camp? You would probably have to leave out famous players from your count, because many play what their sponsors give them.

Is there that much tonal consistency between F5G, Fern, Sam Bush, and Gold Rush? I played 3 different F5Gs at one sitting, and they were identical to my ear. But is a Gold Rush supposed to sound like a Fern?

**foldedpath** · Jun-06-2012, 5:03pm

If the vast majority of mandolin players wanted a mandolin that sounded "just like a Gibson," then luthiers would try to serve that market. Although, it would be somewhat self-defeating since it's easy enough to just buy a Gibson, eh?

So that's one reason, and I imagine another is simply pride in creating something that sounds great in a different way. The fact that so many other tonal varieties can sell well, from various luthiers, should tell you something about the marketplace. Not everyone wants a Gibson.

Mandolins have been slowly gaining popularity over the years in genres outside Bluegrass too. This might also have something to do with it. In the Irish and Scottish sessions where I play mandolin, there isn't any particular cachet in having the name Gibson on the headstock.

**Adam Sweet** · Jun-07-2012, 6:54am

Originally Posted by foldedpath

Mandolins have been slowly gaining popularity over the years in genres outside Bluegrass too. This might also have something to do with it. In the Irish and Scottish sessions where I play mandolin, there isn't any particular cachet in having the name Gibson on the headstock.

Agreed...also oval / A-style mandolins are more accepted in these settings. Those big brassy-barky bluegrass mandolins are too much in a Celtic setting

**Randi Gormley** · Jun-07-2012, 7:44am

Isn't that like asking why anybody paints differently from Picasso? Or Thomas Kincaid? I can admire something without wanting to own it, myself. I've played a couple of old Gibson A ovals and they're fine and if I had one, I'd gladly drag it to whatever session I'm able to attend, but I have just as much fun playing my rescue bandolim or my strad. I don't "need" a particular sound except one that I can hear over the whistles, concertina and fiddles. Maybe the market is too full of people like me, who play what they have and can afford?

**Steve L** · Jun-07-2012, 8:00am

Gibson represents a standard, not the standard. My own ideal mando sound would be a Sobell, which is in many ways the opposite of a Gibson. I don't play Bluegrass so there's a whole value system attached to that music that doesn't affect me at all.

**red7flag** · Jun-07-2012, 8:13am

I had a conversation with Tom Ellis where he talked about developing the sound he was looking for. He was clear that he was looking for a non Loar, more contemporary versatile sound. I love the sound be developed. I had a similar discussion with Steve Gilchtist where he talked about how hit tone evolved by trial and error, with an ideal in his mind. Will Kimble talked about how he moved from his own sound to more of a Loar sound. I love the distinctive sound of builders like Weber and Collins. How wonderful to have such fabulous choices.

**yankees1** · Jun-07-2012, 8:49am

Originally Posted by red7flag

I had a conversation with Tom Ellis where he talked about developing the sound he was looking for. He was clear that he was looking for a non Loar, more contemporary versatile sound. I love the sound be developed. I had a similar discussion with Steve Gilchtist where he talked about how hit tone evolved by trial and error, with an ideal in his mind. Will Kimble talked about how he moved from his own sound to more of a Loar sound. I love the distinctive sound of builders like Weber and Collins. How wonderful to have such fabulous choices.

I listened to a 1920's Loar and an Ellis in Tom' shop and I definitely preferred the sound/tone form Tom's instrument. Of course, these are only two examples.

**almeriastrings** · Jun-07-2012, 8:52am

For the same reason all high quality guitars do not sound like Martins. Or Taylors. Or Gibsons.

**jman72** · Jun-07-2012, 10:11am

I think it's great to have variety. I'm a guitar player whose only been playing mandolin for about 7 years, so I can relate to the guitar analogy. With guitars, there is a huge range of music types that people play, which dictates the need for a wide variety of guitar sounds. I have a Strat, a Tele, an Ibanez Satriani model, an ES-335- they all have different personalities and sounds and I like them all. I play a Taylor Grand Auditorium acoustic- it sounds very different from my buddy's D-28. I bought it when I was in a more jazz/fusion phase and it has the perfect tone for that. While I love it dearly, it is not very good for bluegrass. It has a beautiful balanced tone, but not the volume or bass for bluegrass jamming, and I'd love to complement it with a D-28 of my own! I guess I just need to get several mandolins as well to cover all my possible bases! It's just that mandolins are MUCH more expensive than guitars (you can pick up a used USA Strat or Tele for $500), so it's tough to do that with mandolins. I've got one shot right now, and I love the sound of the Gibsons, but can't afford a nice F5 (only an F9), but Webers of comparable price (say a used Bitterroot or Yellowstone) are much more polished and adorned and equally well-built (but lack the sound I want). While there are many builders that can give me that Gibson sound, they're WAY out of my price range (say a Kimble). I guess I just wished that I could get a reasonably-priced mandolin that had the Gibson tone without the super high price tag of the Gibson or custom builder. Oh well, that's life I guess.

**almeriastrings** · Jun-07-2012, 10:55am

As someone has already mentioned... look at those circa 2001 Nashville-built Flatirons. Same design. Same factory. Same pretty much everything apart from the logo... I have a 'Performer A' from that time, and it sounds exactly like any Gibson of the same design and period. The Montana ones were somewhat different, but those Nashville examples were like peas in a pod... it even has a "Gibson Master Model" label. Excellent value if you can find them.. both the 'A' and 'F' models are truly fine mandolins.

**sunburst** · Jun-07-2012, 11:11am

Originally Posted by jman72

...It's just that mandolins are MUCH more expensive than guitars...

Not true.
Flat top mandolins are generally no more expensive than flat top guitars, electric mandolins are generally no more expensive than electric guitars, carved, arched mandolins are generally no more expensive than archtop guitars.

Back to the original question, when you say "...the holy grail of mandolin tone is the Gibson tone and that most mandolin players want that sound if they can get it (there are exceptions, of course)", I think that may be true for a segment of mandolin players, but I think the segment making up the "exceptions" is larger than you seem to think.
Speaking for myself as a builder, I'm going for a balanced, versatile sound from my mandolins. I want the chop chords, the Bluegrass sound, but I want less of the mid range "boost" characteristic of the F5 sound. Also, I like as much clarity in the trebles as I can get, and a G-string that competes well with the D-string in loudness. It's a tall order to get good, clear notes up around the 12 fret and above while having a strong open and first position G-string, but that's what I'm striving for in each build, and I don't really think about whether or not it is the "Gibson sound". Also, if someone likes a different sound, there are plenty of other choices on the market. I can push the sound this way or that way a little to suit the preference of a player in a custom build, but the player must like the basic sound of my mandolins and know what variation he/she wants well enough to communicate it to me. If he/she wants a sound that is very different from my characteristic sound, he/she needs to look elsewhere.

**terzinator** · Jun-07-2012, 2:03pm

We talk about "bluegrass" and say "this is the definitive bluegrass mandolin" (often meaning Gibson, and specifically a Loar or whatever...)... Now, I play bluegrass, but I don't play it fast and I don't play straight-ahead stuff that would ever be mistaken for Monroe's style. I just goof around, basically. (Think Garcia/Grisman but before they got to be any good.) I play a Collings MT. I don't think if I played a Gibson I could get anything out of it that would be worth a dime more than my MT. But yes, it was what Bill played, and that's what folks expect a "bluegrass" mandolin to be.

But I hear Thile play his Loar, and Reischman, and maybe Grisman (although I don't know that I know what mandolin he plays at any given time, he doesn't really seem to focus on any one instrument) and some of the other ones out there who might have Loars but aren't playing "straight-ahead" bluegrass, and they make it sound the way they want it to sound. It's not like someone said, wait, Chris, you can't play Bach on that Loar! That's a bluegrass mandolin! When he plays Bach, he doesn't sound like he's playing bluegrass -- or a Gibson, specifically. But when Sierra Hull plays bluegrass on her Weber, dangnabbit, it sounds like bluegrass. But I can't say it doesn't sound like a Gibson, or that it DOES sound like a Weber.

Was at a fest last weekend, and we had a couple of great jams going on, and one guy had a LaPlant (made in Grand Rapids, Minnesota by Lloyd LaPlant), and it was a very traditional sounding mandolin, played in a traditional way, and that to my ear could have been a Gibson. And was in another jam with a young guy who had a pac-rim thing; I think it was a Michael Kelly. And he got great tone out of it and I looked at the headstock, and wow, I was impressed. He was playing very Monroe-ish stuff, and it sounded more Gibson-like than my MT ever could. I should have handed him my MT and said "play that stuff on this" and just hear what it sounded like.

So, um, could it be that a player plays in a style that accentuates those things that Gibson mandolins have been known for? And many players might usually pick a Gibson for that. But someone else might not have access to a Gibson, but plays like a Gibson sounds.

I don't have any idea what all this means, but it's the internet, and my stomach is grumbling and my burrito isn't ready yet.

**mnosretep** · Jun-07-2012, 4:00pm

Not all Gibson's sound identical. Mine possess a similar tonal quality, but each varies subtly from the other. I am certain the same could be said for any other maker.

**F-2 Dave** · Jun-07-2012, 5:26pm

Originally Posted by almeriastrings

As someone has already mentioned... look at those circa 2001 Nashville-built Flatirons. Same design. Same factory. Same pretty much everything apart from the logo... I have a 'Performer A' from that time, and it sounds exactly like any Gibson of the same design and period. The Montana ones were somewhat different, but those Nashville examples were like peas in a pod... it even has a "Gibson Master Model" label. Excellent value if you can find them.. both the 'A' and 'F' models are truly fine mandolins.

I'll second this. I have a 2001 Gibson made Flatiron Festival that I really like. I've never had the opportunity to compare it with a Loar, but it has held it's own against other F-5's. Plus, I kind of like the fact that it doesn't have Gibson on the headstock. (although it does have the Gibson Master Model label on the inside) Compared to their more expensive cousins, they're real gems for the money.

**terzinator** · Jun-07-2012, 5:27pm

Originally Posted by mnosretep

Not all Gibson's sound identical. Mine possess a similar tonal quality, but each varies subtly from the other. I am certain the same could be said for any other maker.

And this! ^

Hey, I'm from minny, too, and we called one of our pals Nosretep back in the day!

Doog Semit.

**trevor** · Jun-08-2012, 4:34am

"The implication I gather is that the holy grail of mandolin tone is the Gibson tone and that most mandolin players want that sound if they can get it"

I don't sell Gibsons and wouldn't because I find their business attitude to dealers and customers unacceptable. I also like to deal with small companies and individual luthiers not corporations (they own Wurlitzer and piano makers etc) with little connection with the their history. (Lets leave it a that).

I have found NO evidence of the above in the last ten years during which time I have sold thousands of mandolins.