If it's not red spruce and varnish, it's cr.......?

[sgrexa]

Maybe this is obvious and has been for years but I am interested in hearing from my fellow MAS sufferers and builders. I enjoy red spruce / hard maple as much as anyone but I also have a lot of love and respect for the other tone woods. Anyone buying a new or used mandolin would be foolish not to factor in future resale value when considering what woods to choose. That said, I am hesitant to consider choosing anything other than red spruce as the market seems to discount any other topwoods as inferior. Same thing with varnish, anyone spending ~5K or more for an F5 is going to expect varnish, right? Case in point- Gibson varnished "Fern" in the classifieds. This is essentially a master model in every respect other than what I assume is a Sitka spruce top along with a nicer (IMO) fern inlay vs flowerpot. The MM also has a nicer case. Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't we talking about a roughly $5,000 or more price difference between the MM and Varnished Fern? So essentially that Sitka spruce top makes that mandolin worth ~5K less? Is this all in my head, or is there a definite prejudice against mandolins built with topwoods other than red spruce? I am of course referring to the common carved top F hole F5 / A5 variety.

Sean

[Michael Weaver]

Marty Jacobson made mine with redwood. I didn't consider the resale value because I honestly didn't care. It was sound I was seeking and not resale value. I see your point but if I am ordering a new instrument, I plan on keeping it. If someone hears a mandolin that sounds killer but doesn't want to buy it because it doesn't have a red spruce top then they are not smart enough to listen to. Like I said though, I see your point and have noticed it also.

[foldedpath]

I play a Lebeda F5 with a redwood top, and I didn't consider the resale value because I didn't care either.

It has a sound I like for the Irish/Scottish trad and pseudo-Blues/Jazz music I play. I don't think it would be totally inappropriate if I played Bluegrass instead. It also has an unusual finish, with a semi-transparent chocolate brown stain on the top. But then, I've always been drawn to musical instruments that are a little off the beaten path.

It has a hard lacquer finish too. Sometimes I wish it was varnish so it would show a bit more playing wear, but otherwise I have no qualms about the finish. My personal theory on finish effect on tone, is that there isn't any significant effect as long as the finish is thin enough to show grain line ripple. After that, it's all about the aesthetics and the underlying build quality.

I would only consider resale value when buying an instrument if I wasn't already pretty sure what I was looking for, and it's been a long time since I've felt that way about a purchase.

[fatt-dad]

I'm not selling my redwood and walnut Cohen. Could care less about resall. Used to think over that though. Just no longer important.

f-d

[JeffD]

Anyone buying a new or used mandolin would be foolish not to factor in future resale value when considering what woods to choose.

The device has not been invented sensitive enough to measure how little I care about the present or future resale value of my mandolin.

Chose what you are going to love the sound of, and love it.

[sgrexa]

Hmmm, 3 out of 4 responding have redwood topped mandolins and could care less about resale value? Obviously you guys are not MAS sufferers like myself ;) Hey, I confess that I have a redwood topped mandolin that I really like too, but I think saying you could "care less" about resale value is being less than honest. I have a couple different mandolins and MAS has caused me to trade mandolins up, down and sideways often times for no other reason than irrational curiosity and the thrill of trying something new and different. The market has significantly changed since the beginning of the "great recession" a few years back and satisfying that irrational curiosity has gotten expensive. I have to think purchases of new and used instruments through a lot more carefully, including resale value.

There is certainly a romanticism with the notion that red spruce "breaks in" offering the best of both worlds to both builder and player. If a mandolin doesn't sound great from the beginning you just have to "wait until it breaks in and opens up" whereas if it already sounds good, "wait and see how great it sounds when it opens up in a couple years". In that sense, the purchase becomes less "finite" as the sound has the potential to evolve and improve over time like a fine wine. To the best of my knowledge, all the other topwood choices offer less of a chance of experiencing this phenomenon. I am speaking in general terms, but you also get more headroom / volume, Monroe / historical connection, and the fact that the overwhelming majority of pro players use red spruce mandolins. I guess it is pretty easy to see why it is so popular and is the best choice for an A5 or F5 "bluegrass" style mandolin, especially if you were only going to own one instrument. Red spruce is popular for a reason, and popular sells. In short, I guess what I am saying and looking to confirm is this- "If you are buying a higher level mandolin and you choose anything other than red spruce for the top, expect it to be harder to sell and likely to depreciate more quickly than a red spruce topped example".

That said, and all else being equal, Gibson certainly puts a premium on a red spruce top. They seem to put a premium on a lot of seemingly less important features. Look at a Les Paul studio vs. '59 Historic reissue guitar. I am no expert, but it looks like a several thousand dollar price disconnect over essentially some plastic binding and curly maple.

Sean

[Jim Garber]

I suppose the true lovers of the iconic bluegrass mandolin will prefer even a particular species of topwood and identical finish to match that of WSM's mandolin but I have to agree with the folks above that I prefer the variety of tones available with different wood combinations and also even with different mandolin body shapes. Vive le difference!

OTOH if you are playing lots of catch and release with F5 mandolins then I suppose you do have to pay attention to the wood type. I do ask, tho, do many seekers of the bluegrass tone have the ability to distinguish the species of the woods in their mandolins? I know spruce and maple but I certainly do not know what kind of each are in my mandolins.

[Michael Weaver]

I was not being dishonest in my response. I wouldn't have taken the time to respond if I was going to lie. I buy my stuff to keep. I have given away more instruments than I have sold or traded. I keep my instruments to enjoy and so one day I can hand them down to my children and family. I don't have the disposable funds to purchase instruments as an investment. We all have our different reasons for buying a particular instrument. For you to call me a fool because I don't follow your guidelines for purchase is a little ridiculous. Maybe I should stop dumping money into the stock market and start buying red spruce topped instruments. It might be a more wise investment. I do have three with red spruce but didn't buy them for investment reasons.

[fatt-dad]

I've owned 40 mandolins. In the last year, I've bought and sold 3. In some instances (i.e., the catch and releast scenario), I do care about resale. That said, when making a custom order, resale is not the item on the forefront of concern. Now that I've owned my Cohen for 2 years, I'm being fully honest. I don't care about resale. I'm not selling it.

Not sure how dishonesty entered this discussion. . .

f-d

[OldGus]

The one I regret selling the most was Sitka/Walnut. I did make a little in the sale but I would have preferred it didn't sell. Black Walnut tends to produce a sound richer, warmer and darker than Maple and I like Sitkas crisp response while generally being less bright sounding than Red Spruce. I also prefer lacquer in general for durability, to some people it will hurt the value to have distressed finish. If your worried about resale you might look for a hot shot 'up and comer' or 'underdog' builder instead of commissioning the most well recognized, well established builder of these things in the world.

[barney 59]

From the perspective of buying a new instrument I don't see how the differences in wood choice could change the price of that instrument more than a few hundred dollars,if that, particularly for something as small as a mandolin. Build quality,details and choice of finish would however be a big factor in production costs. If all other things are equal in the construction and a red spruce top can double the value then someone has done a dandy job in the propaganda department!

[foldedpath]

Hmmm, 3 out of 4 responding have redwood topped mandolins and could care less about resale value? Obviously you guys are not MAS sufferers like myself ;)

That surprised me a little too, but only because I thought the cedar-top owners would have chimed in first. And I'll bet they're on their way...


Hey, I confess that I have a redwood topped mandolin that I really like too, but I think saying you could "care less" about resale value is being less than honest.

Wait... we're being "less than honest" when we respond that way? Just because you don't think like this? C'mon... people are different. I'm very comfortable with the decisions I make about musical instruments, because I've been buying and playing them for 40-odd years. I think I know what I like by now, and whether I care about resale value or not.

As I stated earlier, I have always preferred instruments that are a little off the beaten path; a little different from what everyone else is playing. This inevitably requires making peace with the idea that it might take longer to sell something, or the resale value may be lower.

You should see my guitars... they're not exactly standard items. Even my small collection of mid 1930's roundneck Dobros is weird... fiddle edge, metal bodies... I'd have much better investment value collecting 1930's Nationals, but you know what? I like the sound of these better. And that's why I don't care about resale value for these, or any other instruments I own.


There is certainly a romanticism with the notion that red spruce "breaks in" offering the best of both worlds to both builder and player. If a mandolin doesn't sound great from the beginning you just have to "wait until it breaks in and opens up" whereas if it already sounds good, "wait and see how great it sounds when it opens up in a couple years". In that sense, the purchase becomes less "finite" as the sound has the potential to evolve and improve over time like a fine wine. To the best of my knowledge, all the other topwood choices offer less of a chance of experiencing this phenomenon.

Well, it's certainly a romantic idea, but I don't think it's ever been proven that spruce has this particular advantage over other tonewoods. The topic of "opening up" has spawned many threads here that never get beyond personal bias and into any hard data.


I am speaking in general terms, but you also get more headroom / volume, Monroe / historical connection, and the fact that the overwhelming majority of pro players use red spruce mandolins.

If you think you can't get equivalent "headroom" and volume out of a cedar or redwood topped instrument, then maybe you haven't played enough examples?

It's one thing to prefer the tone of a favorite red spruce-topped mandolin over another with a cedar or redwood top. It's also undeniable that many Bluegrass players may prefer a spruce top. Can't argue with taste. But making a blanket statement that spruce has more "headroom" and volume is something I'd dispute, because that goes beyond taste into an objective statement of fact. With every mandolin being different, and some better than others, I think that's an overly broad statement.

[stevedenver]

I dunno
I bought a gibby fern-Sitka and nitro
sounds great, and, imho, as far as durability, polishing and ease of care NOTHING beats nitro

I later bought a couple of red spruce and varnish booooteek F5s-both more expensive by far, and better mandos to my ear, maybe in part to red and varnish, maybe simply a better build.

I wouldn't sneer or pass on any instrument due to top wood or finish, per se. I love my poly rigel A.

I think, however, more sophisticated buyers , with specific needs, or musical applications MAY seek certain features, Italian spruce, Engelmann, red spruce, varnish, tone bar or x, etc.

FWIW right now, im leaning toward certain features and specs in guitars, because I find I prefer them-NOT because its what I have read. I like cedar, red spruce and Sitka on guitars and mandos, but each has its own sound. (and im one who does think red breaks in and has a special character for hard comping or chopping)

I think, the way you put it , you are right about the 5K diff in top in fern v MM, but.....I just read a thread on the topic where I asked the very same question and was assured by MM and DMM owners that they were a step above in other regards as well. I could only know using my ears.

re-sale?
Always the best bet is mainstream, current popular trend; that blue giacommell etc will take a certain special someone to love it. Everyone else is going to want "whut Bill had"!LOL

[sgrexa]

Wow, do you guys really think I was out and out calling you liars and fools? I apologize if I offended anyone but we are all adults here and that is taking things a little too personally and literally IMO. I said "anyone not factoring in resale value would be foolish" IMO. I did not say that resale value should be a primary or even secondary consideration, but it should be a consideration. You might be in love with an instrument today but yearn for something different down the road. As to my other statement about "being less than honest" as to your concerns over resale value, it just meant I have a hard time believing that it seems to be such a trivial factor to you. It was not a personal attack on your character. Geez, I can't believe I am even writing this?

On to the "headroom" statement which I seem to be taken to task for even after putting in the "speaking in general terms" caveat. You might not believe that red spruce has more headroom than cedar or redwood, but you would be in the minority. My experience along with many, many others on this forum and elsewhere suggests that cedar, and redwood to a lesser extent, indeed does "break up" and "distort" when pushed hard, and hence therefore generally exhibits less headroom than red spruce. They might be as loud or louder, but again the overwhelming market perception is that red spruce offers the best volume to clean headroom ratio of all the topwood choices and I agree. This is a broad statement, but not overly so IMO. Same thing with the whole "opening up" debate, I never said it was true. What is true is that a lot of people believe it to be true.

Time to lighten up folks. My original point was to see if there was agreement that all other things being equal a "red spruce topped mandolin" will be easier to sell and depreciate less than another identical model with a different topwood. I provided the Gibson Fern as a very real example of this observation. It was not about which wood was better, or what motivates you or I to purchase a particular instrument, headroom, mandolins as an investment, and certainly not personal character attacks and I apologize again for things being misinterpreted.

Sean

[TonyP]

I'm also a cedar top convert, and was never that enamored of the whole scroll thing, or varnish. My first good handmade mandolin was a F5 admittedly(that I still have, with nitro finish) was what popped up after the non F5 mandolin I really wanted got sold before I could close the deal.

I've never had the cash to have MAS, and never been an investor. I buy a mandolin because it does it for me and for 25yrs I had only the one. Now I have two with the added A cedar top.

Guess I'm more a player than a play'a :)

[foldedpath]

Time to lighten up folks. My original point was to see if there was agreement that all other things being equal a "red spruce topped mandolin" will be easier to sell and depreciate less than another identical model with a different topwood.

A few observations here, and no I don't think we were overreacting. If you're going to imply or state directly that you think people are being dishonest with what they write here, you're naturally going to get a fairly strong response.
:)

It seems that you still have a hard time believing that some of us really don't care about resale value. We don't (or at least, I don't). That's just the reality. Not everyone cares about resale value when making a purchase decision. There is also a financial aspect to this, which we haven't touched on... i.e. how much does one need to care about resale value, based on their personal finances? That will be different for everyone.

Finally, I think your premise would be stronger if it was restricted to Bluegrass players only, because "all things being equal" doesn't apply when you cross genres.

[sgrexa]

It seems that you still have a hard time believing that some of us really don't care about resale value.


Finally, I think your premise would be stronger if it was restricted to Bluegrass players only, because "all things being equal" doesn't apply when you cross genres.

True, I do have a hard time believing this. While it is not my primary concern, it is in the top 5 for sure. This is based on the very real fact that I love mandolins of all shapes, sizes and colors and based on my past history, it is a very real possibility that any instrument could be used for barter down the road. I do understand that others may get very lucky and / or just have a very different mindset of purchasing one or two instruments and be quite happy and content for the rest of there lives. I am kind of that way with guitars, but mandolins are different for some reason and I have no idea why? I guess I find guitars less interesting for some reason? I did say in my first post I was "referring to the common carved top F hole F5 / A5 variety" which does kind of narrow things down a bit.

Sean

[Peoriamando]

I see your point, and yes, as with any high end luxury item re-sell is dictated by the whims of those with the money to enjoy them. As a chronic re-seller, I have taken re-sell value into most instruments that I have purchased in recent years. Certain instruments will sell at or near purchase price. A Collings MT for example is easy to sell, so if you get it for a good price then you will make money or at least break even. Purchase price is where you make re-sell dollars. With that said, my most recent mandolin purchase was purely emotional. I wanted an A-style mandolin that was hand made in America by an independent and I purchased it new. So even though the top is Red Spruce, I will still lose money if I ever sell it. But I knew that going into it. BTW...it was the cocobolo that made me purchase it. I am a sucker for that wood. But I will make money on my classical (cocobolo back and sides) when I sell it. Got that one for a song ;^). Oh...its all just disposable income in the end.

[DPrager]

"There is certainly a romanticism with the notion that red spruce "breaks in" offering the best of both worlds to both builder and player. If a mandolin doesn't sound great from the beginning you just have to "wait until it breaks in and opens up" whereas if it already sounds good, "wait and see how great it sounds when it opens up in a couple years".

I for one have never bought a pair of uncomfortable shoes with an expectation that they'll break in.

That said, I do have a red spruce topped mandolin that I and most of my picking friends really like. I've played many other mandolins and not coveted my neighbors er, instrument or succumbed to MAS. But, earlier this year I played another mandolin and I was smitten. After weeks of self torment I pulled the trigger and next fall (maybe winter) a new toy should show up on my doorstep.

I'm going from bigleaf/red to hard rock/englemann. Am I to be branded a heretic?

[peter.coombe]

I'm going from bigleaf/red to hard rock/englemann. Am I to be branded a heretic?

No, absolutely not. Engelmann/Hard Rock Maple is an excellent combination of woods, I really like the sound I have get from that combination. However, my personal mandolin is a 5yo Red Spruce/European Maple A5. Why? It gets used in a band situation where it gets played hard and in my experience nothing excels in that environment better than Red Spruce. I have made A5's with Carpathian tops that I thought sounded better, but in the band situation they just did not cut it. I usually end up playing the Carpathian mando at home and the old dependable Red Spruce A5 for gigs. It really depends on the individual circumstances. If you play hard and often in a noisy environment then Red Spruce is hard to beat. If not then Engelmann or European Spruce may be more satisfying. Red does take a long time and a lot of play to sound at it's best, and if not played for a while will tend to go to sleep. However, IMHO if a mandolin does not sound good in it's first few weeks of age it will never develop into a great instrument. Red Spruce will not go from bad to wonderful after "opening up" or "breaking in", so I would ignore the "wait until it opens up comments" but it certainly can go from good to wonderful, and the more it is played and the more it is thrashed the better it will sound. I would not recommend a Red Spruce top to some one who is a very light picker who mostly plays at home. Horses for courses. This Easter I had the opportunity to listen to various players play my personal (Red Spruce) mandolin against a newer Capathian topped A5 I made near to identical as mine. Some people could get a better sound from the newer instrument, others got a better sound from mine.

Resale value, not something I think much about as a maker. I just try to make the instrument fit the player as best I can. What is "best" varies a fair bit.

[Mandoplumb]

I own a Dearstone redwood top A-5, and resell valve is no concern to me. My wife or kids can worry about that when I'm gone, cause I'll own it till then. Do I still have MAS, you bet, I just bought a flatiron and my MAS is not even in recession. My wife or kids will probably have to sell it too. I go by Raymond Fairchild's philosophy, you don't sell them you just keep buying them. I do sell the culls, but try not to buy them.

[JeffD]

but I think saying you could "care less" about resale value is being less than honest.

Naah. I really mean it. I don't plan on selling. I have sold one bouzouki and a mandola, because I found I wasn't playing them and I met someone who really liked them. But I never recalled what I paid for them I owned them for so long, so I have no idea if I made or lost money. I sold them for the market value at the time.

I am not a trader or a seller or a collector or an investor. I catch and release only when fly fishing. I am a player.

I know folks that are afraid of customizing their instrument, scraping the finish off the neck to make a speed neck, or changing the bridge, installing microphone or a strap button, or whatever, compromising their present fun for some theoretical future selling price. Not me. Everything I buy is for keeps, without the slightest consideration for future value.

That said, I do have a healthy dose of MAS from time to time. I just won't let any of mine go, so I have to be able to afford it from discretionary money, or its not going to happen.

[allenhopkins]

...I think saying you could "care less" about resale value is being less than honest...

Only true if you're planning to buy, keep for awhile, then sell/trade up to a "better" instrument. I almost never get rid of anything, and honestly, resale value means little to me. I just dropped a modest bundle on a custom-made, five-course, fan-fretted mandolin/dola that quite possibly no one not as crazy as me, will ever want. Don't care -- really, I don't.

If you buy quality, resale value will sorta take care of itself. Fads come and go, and the style and construction that's in fashion today may be less marketable in five years. I do sometimes speculate what the '54 F-5 that I paid $1500 for in 1980 is worth now, but since it'll be up to my heirs to sell it, it's pretty irrelevant to me.

I would not buy a mandolin I wasn't "into," just because it was in demand in the marketplace. I'm not a dealer, so current market price isn't one of my most important variables. If it were, I wouldn't beat the bejasus out of all my instruments, since with every pick scratch, the market value drops another few buxx.

[JeffD]

"If you are buying a higher level mandolin and you choose anything other than red spruce for the top, expect it to be harder to sell and likely to depreciate more quickly than a red spruce topped example".

Never heard that. But there's lots I am not clued into. And it wouldn't matter to me anyway.

[Jack Roberts]

The device has not been invented sensitive enough to measure how little I care about the present or future resale value of my mandolin.。。。.

I hear you, brother! When my mandolin is resold, I'll be dead, cremated, and my ashes scattered in Monterey Bay. I'm sure whatever harp St. Peter assigns me will be "good enough."

[almeriastrings]

Does it matter?

You can make fantastic mandolins from Red Spruce, Sitka Spruce, Cedar, Englemann... and so on. Sound wise, I have never been able to tell a really good, thin nitro from varnish. I have not noticed recent Harvey-signed Ferns and Goldrush models (sitka) being given away with packets of cornflakes, nor seen late 20's Ferns (lacquer) going too cheap either. Really fine instruments tend to be assessed on a range of characters, not just materials used.

Just my opinion here, but I do believe that a lot of the "cedar lacks headroom" stuff is based on its use (cut very thin) in guitar tops, where I do feel that has some substance. However, carved tops are not the same thing, and the lower stiffness can be compensated for by varied graduations. I've played a couple of truly stellar Cedar-topped Silverangels (no lack of headroom or volume at all I could detect) and also a very fine Weber some time back. There are many variables in instruments... and if everything is right, you can end up with a very good, highly desirable one regardless of rigid, formulaic stipulations.

[Ivan Kelsall]

Sean - My Weber "Fern" has the old 'bog standard' Sitka Spruce top with a lacquer finish (i believe that all the new ones are Redwood),but it sound incredible,especially with the addition of the DR MD11 medium strigs on it. It sounds far better than i ever thought it could. I haven't had any opportunity to play a Redwood topped one without taking a 460 mile round trip to TAMCO in Brighton UK,so i can't comment on those. However,i can't imagine a different top wood having as much impact on the overall sound, as the change of string brand had on mine. No 'subtle' difference,just a full on kick in the butt !.
I'm really not sure of the top wood on my Lebeda. It has a 'Bearclaw' grain in one part of it & i suspect that it's 'Adirondak' Spruce or whatever species passes for Adirondak in the Czech.Republic. It also has a varnish finish. Again,DR strings have had a huge impact on the sound of that mandolin as well,& again,probably more so than a different top wood might have had,
Ivan;)
120353

[Petrus]

I can't speak on the future investment situation, but I would never want to limit my choices based on wood. The spruce top / maple back and sides standard comes from the violin, where there is much less room for variation in that regard. If 99% of mandolins available were limited to one or two types of wood, a lot of the enjoyment in collecting them (and most of my MAS) would be gone. A mahogany mando is one of my favorites currently, and I've read praise here for cedar, walnut, carbon fiber, and so forth. Maybe it's all just to enable our MAS. :cool:

[Petrus]

BTW, how come I can never find a mando made out of oak? :confused:

[Neoclinus]

That surprised me a little too, but only because I thought the cedar-top owners would have chimed in first. And I'll bet they're on their way...

Here! Yes, I will also join the chorus of not caring in the least about resale value. I largely solved the MAS problem by playing every instrument I could get my hands on for years before jumping in to the deeper end of the pool. By that time I knew more or less exactly what I was looking for; tone, woods, aesthetics, finish, etc. I too have always preferred objects and instruments that were a bit different and unique, and I'd much rather own something that appealed to my tastes than give a fig what a theoretical buyer down the road thinks. The only factor at all in buying something for me is how it appeals to me. There was a brief, and I do mean brief, thought that, hmm, this might be hard to move, but as I don't intend to sell it anytime soon I quickly forgot about it and got on with enjoying my mandolin. If I do ever choose to sell it for some reason I suppose I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

Almeriastrings beat me too it, but I think that's also an important point to bring up. While obviously different species of woods have very different qualities, there's so much variation within species, and so much variation within mandolins of the same woods, that I think in more cases than not the build style and setup have a far more apparent affect on sound. The arching and graduation, neck angle, setup, hardware used, thickness (more than material) of the finish, etc, etc...
That being said, yes, I largely went with cedar and cocobolo for warmth of tone, and my instrument is not the loudest, but I attribute the volume more to various aspects of the build and setup than the use of cedar, and while I may try a bit of tweaking to bump up the volume at some point, it suits my style of playing just fine and I couldn't be happier.

Apologies for the length, but to wrap up my rambling, if you want to talk about "foolishness", while perhaps the market is indeed biased against non-standard woods, I think the bigger fool than one who doesn't prioritize resale value is the potential buyer who disregards an instrument based purely on it's use of a less common wood without considering the myriad other aspects of what makes an instrument "good".

[Jim Adwell]

BTW, how come I can never find a mando made out of oak? :confused:

Here ya go:
120365
120364

The bridge is walnut, though. ;)

[Jim Garber]

It is very interesting to me that it seems like all the responders here on this thread are non-bluegrass players which might explain some of the reactions to your original post, Sean. I don't know where the F5 enthusiasts are but maybe they agree with you spo they have moved on to other threads. Strange!

[almeriastrings]

It is very interesting to me that it seems like all the responders here on this thread are non-bluegrass players which might explain some of the reactions to your original post, Sean. I don't know where the F5 enthusiasts are

Monroe style to the core here, Jim....

I still found myself liking some Cedar topped examples, and Englemann...and Sitka. I also like Red Spruce too, of course. Each and every one has their own characters and voices, and if they are built right, can all sound wonderful, from a 'smoky' sounding Sitka to a hard-driven, cutting Red...or warm, ancient sounding Cedar...

All good. We are fortunate that there are so many great builders around these days and that we have such choices available to us. Years ago, that was not the case.

[JeffD]

There are many variables in instruments... and if everything is right, you can end up with a very good, highly desirable one regardless of rigid, formulaic stipulations.

That.

[Daniel Nestlerode]

I have enjoyed the tone of my Englemann and English maple Vessel F5 from the moment I got my hands on it.
Did I think about resale when I ordered my very first ever custom built mandolin? Heck no. I'll play it to bits or I'll die tryin'

My other mandolin is a Mix F5 made entirely (ok except for the bridge and fretboard) of carbon fibre. I don't expect it to lose resale value. But I bet that's an entirely different kettle of fish.

;)
Daniel

[Spruce]

I suppose the true lovers of the iconic bluegrass mandolin will prefer even a particular species of topwood and identical finish to match that of WSM's mandolin....

Just to throw this into this polluted pot...

There is no proof whatsoever that #73987 sports a top made from Picea rubens...
Opinions, yes.
Proof, nada... ;)

It could very well be a set of Picea abies that Charlie pieced back together all those years ago...

http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee22/e_stamp/MonroesLoar2_zps5b47bbc9.jpg (http://s231.photobucket.com/user/e_stamp/media/MonroesLoar2_zps5b47bbc9.jpg.html)

http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee22/e_stamp/73987_frank_ray_1_zps4798c3dc.jpg (http://s231.photobucket.com/user/e_stamp/media/73987_frank_ray_1_zps4798c3dc.jpg.html)

[sgrexa]

Interesting that another Gibson example turns up in the classifieds today:

2002 F5L - $5.8K
2000 F5MM- $14K

These price anomalies seem to be more extreme with Gibson. That $8K difference is basically varnish and red spruce. I don't see nearly identical Englemann / Red Spruce Gilchrist F5s or A5s being offered at $8,000 price differences. I don't believe Gilchrist or anyone was even using red spruce at least consistently until the mid 90's. I have only a very basic understanding of this process but do violin "experts" place a great deal of importance on tone when determining value? If true, it would be interesting, although doubtful that it will ever happen if mandolin values were determined similarly.

Sean

[Spruce]

Interesting that another Gibson example turns up in the classifieds today:

2002 F5L - $5.8K
2000 F5MM- $14K

These price anomalies seem to be more extreme with Gibson. That $8K difference is basically varnish and red spruce. I don't see nearly identical Englemann / Red Spruce Gilchrist F5s or A5s being offered at $8,000 price differences. I don't believe Gilchrist or anyone was even using red spruce at least consistently until the mid 90's. I have only a very basic understanding of this process but do violin "experts" place a great deal of importance on tone when determining value? If true, it would be interesting, although doubtful that it will ever happen if mandolin values were determined similarly.


It ain't the market that values Red Spruce so highly...
It's Gibson...
Ironic, as they had to be dragged by the collar into offering the species as an option in the first place... ;)

The best mandolin I ever owned was a Monteleone Grand Artist with a bearclaw Sitka top, and there's no way that mandolin is worth less than one of John's Red Spruce GAs...
The same would apply to the other high-end makers...

[Marc Berman]

That $8K difference is basically varnish and red spruce.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the MM/DMM the only one made with hot hide glue?

From a Big Joe post:
It was a team effort but the MM and DMM models were handled a bit different from the other models. These differences included the wood selection, glue, the tuning and oversight was by a different person and the finish was done by a different team. The final inspection and tweaking was given substantially more attention and it had to go through a tedious approval process. The MM and DMM models were certainly a step above the others.

[Marc Berman]

To answer the Op's original question -
When I commissioned my Lawrence Smart F5 the resale value never once crossed my mind. As for Red Spruce/wood selection - I told Lawrence what I was looking for and left it up to him. I did know that he likes to work with Englemann (which is what was used) but if he had wanted to use something different that would be fine with me. In fact I didn't even know which maple he was using until after it was started. As for the finish - Spirit Varnish. Oh and I almost forgot - X braced :grin:

[Jim Garber]

Monroe style to the core here, Jim....

I think you posted after the others I was referring to. Up until then that was the truth.

[Michael Weaver]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the MM/DMM the only one made with hot hide glue?

Are they charging $8k for hot hide glue/snake oil now?

[Mandoplumb]

I play bluegrass and only bluegrass but I own 2 a-5s and one F. The F is oriental and not the " bluegrass" mandolin of the other 2. It don't have to be a F to be a great bluegrass mandolin.

[sgrexa]

From a Big Joe post:
It was a team effort but the MM and DMM models were handled a bit different from the other models. These differences included the wood selection, glue, the tuning and oversight was by a different person and the finish was done by a different team. The final inspection and tweaking was given substantially more attention and it had to go through a tedious approval process. The MM and DMM models were certainly a step above the others.

Well, now that certainly would explain some of the difference. I would have to believe that the Gibson mandolin team working under Dave Harvey realize that most folks willing to plunk down that much money for an F5 are going to scrutinize these kinds of differences. I'm sure they do not decide pricing though, that is up to the marketing / sales dept. Hot hide glue seems to be very important to some folks but that is a feature that I personally cannot see, touch, feel and dare I say hear any difference at all. At least oil varnish offers a very real difference that most can see and feel but I am not sure about hear. Any other builder would be seriously taken to task for such blatant price discrepancies but Gibson does not seem to have a problem selling mandolins. Except maybe those pelham blue F5Gs ;) http://bernunzio.com/product/gibson-f-5g-18201/


Marc- Lawrence Smart's spirit varnish is beautiful stuff indeed!

Sean

[JeffD]

importance on tone when determining value? If true, it would be interesting, although doubtful that it will ever happen if mandolin values were determined similarly.

I think many are willing to pay more for a mandolin with better tone. Tastes in tone vary though, especially across genres. The tone that a bluegrasser would want might not be as prized in old time, blues, or country, or jazz, traditional Irish, or in a classical mandolin setting. So I don't think it would be easy to correlate prices with tone.

Perhaps if you focused narrowly on one genre, bluegrass say, and only included mandolins likely to be highly coveted by bluegrassers, F5s perhaps, but again that would be kind of hard to do.

[Capt. E]

My understanding is the biggest value in Hide Glue is in the ease of disassembly for repair. That can be quite significant if it is ever needed. I do suppose hide glue has added acoustic properties. I'll let others explain that.

[peter.coombe]

My understanding is the biggest value in Hide Glue is in the ease of disassembly for repair.

That is believed by many, but is not true. Titebond is actually easier to disassemble. Just heat it up and it will come apart easily. The most difficult join I have ever had to disassemble was glued with hide glue, also the easiest joint was hide glue so you never can tell. Hide glue is brittle, so sometimes if you get lucky just a little persuasion and it pops apart. That property can also cause a joint to pop if the object is dropped, and that is usually not what you want to happen. The main advantage of hide glue for repair work is that old glue can be reactivated, you don't need to clean up old glue. Titebond and other synthetic glues will not bond to itself and cannot be reactivated, so you need to clean up all the old glue before re-joining. So hide glue is great for repair work, but it does not always come apart easily, it sometimes can be a right ####### to disassenble.

[Michael Weaver]

I do suppose hide glue has added acoustic properties. I'll let others explain that.

I have good friends that have been luthiers for a very long time. One of them down the road from me has over 60 years doing repair and he learned from his father. Anyone telling me that glue holds acoustic properties will need a lot of evidence to back those claims up. They have told me that it's snake oil and I believe them. He has people come in and request hide glue because they believe the hype. People can believe what they want I'm just not going to bite. Peter obviously wipes out the claim of easy disassembly also.

[allenhopkins]

BTW, how come I can never find a mando made out of oak? :confused:

Fylde Touchstone Single Malt. (http://www.fyldeguitars.com/touchstone_sm_mandolin.html)

[OldGus]

The best mandolin I ever owned was a Monteleone Grand Artist with a bearclaw Sitka top,

There's no real strong promising leads that it was a Sitka top on that one as far as I'm concerned... no one could ever tell but I'd like to point to another random claim that it may WELL be picea obovata reclaimed by John in the middle 70's...

[JeffD]

Fylde Touchstone Single Malt. (http://www.fyldeguitars.com/touchstone_sm_mandolin.html)

:)) I was just about to mention that.

[JeffD]

Any other builder would be seriously taken to task for such blatant price discrepancies but Gibson does not seem to have a problem selling mandolins.

Now I am confused. :)

[sgarrity]

Price a Collings MF-5 and then look at an MF-5 Deluxe Varnish. Same ballpark. The Master Models are on the same level as Gil's, Nuggets, etc. there are some nice Ferns out there but you have to hunt for them.

[Petrus]

Fylde Touchstone Single Malt. (http://www.fyldeguitars.com/touchstone_sm_mandolin.html)

That is teh awesome. :disbelief: I've seen Fyldes before but that may be the coolest.

[Spruce]

There's no real strong promising leads that it was a Sitka top on that one as far as I'm concerned... no one could ever tell but I'd like to point to another random claim that it may WELL be picea obovata reclaimed by John in the middle 70's...

Uhhhh, I cut up the tree that went into that mandolin...
I only wish Gibson would have kept such records...

[OldGus]

Uhhhh, I cut up the tree that went into that mandolin...

...Busted! But how do they know that Holly wood was used as a underlay and Pear wood used as an overlay on the Loar head stocks if wood is supposedly unidentifiable after they were cut? Or are you saying that with Spruce only? I just feel like saying there is no 'proof' is the same as saying there are no 'facts'. Have you ever held Bills Loar in your hands?

[Capt. E]

I have good friends that have been luthiers for a very long time. One of them down the road from me has over 60 years doing repair and he learned from his father. Anyone telling me that glue holds acoustic properties will need a lot of evidence to back those claims up. They have told me that it's snake oil and I believe them. He has people come in and request hide glue because they believe the hype. People can believe what they want I'm just not going to bite. Peter obviously wipes out the claim of easy disassembly also.

Great summary of glue advantages. The fact the hide glue can be re-activated seems to be the biggest advantage.
Acoustic properties would seem to be different with hide-glue because it is hard and brittle, but whether it adds anything to the sound, I have no idea. I am sure a Strad violin would never be repaired using anything but hide glue.

[Spruce]

Have you ever held Bills Loar in your hands?

Yes... :sleepy:

[wsugai]

It seems like every time the question of installing a strap pin in the heel comes up in this forum, there is a slew of responses about how it will negatively impact the resale value of the instrument from some of the very same people in this thread who are saying that they don't take resale value into account when buying an instrument.

[OldGus]

Yes...

And you got no implication it was Red Spruce?

[foldedpath]

It seems like every time the question of installing a strap pin in the heel comes up in this forum, there is a slew of responses about how it will negatively impact the resale value of the instrument from some of the very same people in this thread who are saying that they don't take resale value into account when buying an instrument.

That doesn't imply inconsistency or dishonesty. A person can understand that certain modifications or tonewood choices might affect resale value negatively, and point that out to others considering it, and at the same time not care about it with their own instrument.

When I had owned my one-and-only Lebeda mandolin for about a year, I made the decision to strip off the neck finish. I liked the way it looked and felt, and I understood that it might affect the resale value. I'm not sure, but I may have pointed that potential problem out in threads that discussed neck-stripping here. It's just something to consider. And if you really don't care about resale value at all, you do it anyway. Like I did.

I can't think of a more definite statement of "I don't care" than stripping the neck finish. Well, maybe installing a side 1/4" jack and volume knobs in the top might beat that.
:)

[Spruce]

And you got no implication it was Red Spruce?

Oh, I do think it's RS...
But IMHO (and R. Bruce Hoadley's (http://www.tauntonstore.com/identifying-wood-r-bruce-hoadley-070088.html)), it can't be proven...

[Barry Wilson]

I gave away the OM I built to a buddy for his birthday (wish I would have kept it, that walnut had a great sound) and have sold the 2 low end mandos I got when I started (for super cheap to get friends playing).. every other instrument I have bought I still have. I gave away a couple lower end guitars to a friend that had to sell his stuff to make the mortgage... I too give away more instruments than I sell.

if it sounds good I keep it or strip it to make it sound better hehe. I play all my instruments other than the fiddle and ghuzeng (I still plan on figuring the fiddle out though...) my ukelele is made from paduk and Kala discontinued it. it is a soft toned, quiet instrument and I love it. my cheapo plywood uke has way more volume and much brighter...

[trevor]

From Almeria.

"You can make fantastic mandolins from Red Spruce, Sitka Spruce, Cedar, Englemann... and so on." Agreed, no question on that. Ervin Somogyi (obviously referring to guitars) once said that he thought red/Adirondack spruce is a 'celebrity' wood...

[f5loar]

I can't figure it out either. 1924 Gibson F5 varnish finish-$185,000. 1927 Gibson F5 lacquer finish-$85,000. Both made by the same luthier at Gibson only a few years apart from the same woods and glues. One has a signed and dated label, the other does not. Is the difference in finish and that signed label really worth $100,000 difference? Many sure think so!

[Michael Weaver]

I can't figure it out either.

If you can't figure it out, it's obviously a 1924 Schmergel Devastator. That's the price difference.

[fatt-dad]

'25 snakeheads cost less than '23s or '24s.

Not even a signature involved.

f-d

[almeriastrings]

Indeed... though I think you are primarily dealing with 'collector' value here rather than value based on more mundane factors. You see the same thing in everything from vintage cars to guitars to beanie babies. You see it is stamp collecting, where stamps with printer's mistakes can be worth tens of thousands more than a perfect equivalent... a collector's postage stamp is a good example, because they don't really have any intrinsic value at all. They are a tiny square of paper, and you can't even use them to mail a letter any more, yet many are 'worth' more than a typical house, car, '38 D-28 and '23 Loar combined.

[trevor]

I noticed an advert here recently where an unsigned Loar was going for $90 000 less than had it been signed!

[pheffernan]

'25 snakeheads cost less than '23s or '24s. Not even a signature involved.

Probably no varnish involved either.

[Mandobart]

I'll chime in on Redwood (and other less-standard tonewoods) too. This 10 string 'dola is redwood:

120603

This 21" OM is Western Redcedar:

120604

And this soon to be finished 26" 10 string mandocello is Redwood:

120605

I love the sound of these instruments. It's like building/remodeling your house; do it for yourself, not the future owner. If Red Spruce is what YOU love, then certainly go for it. But if you insist on Red Spruce mainly so the next owner will want to buy it, then you 're thinking more of the next's guys wants then your own.

[mandogoshen]

This combination may or may not have been mentioned yet.

The sweetest, cleanest, sonically pleasant sound I've ever heard form a mandolin I've actually held in my hands and heard from across a coffe table was an F model built by Will Parsons of Rock, WV. The tone woods were red cedar carved top, black walnut sides and back, mahogany neck, ebony fingerboard and bridge, w/a rosewood pickguard. The headstock was rosewood and simply said 'Parsons' in MOP script inlay. Very simple. I believe the binding was maple. Satin finish. Had a solid, throaty chop and was punchy enough, but when one would play arppeggios, decending/acending cross-picking lines ala Jesse McReynolds was where it really shined. Perfect intonation as high up the neck as one wanted to go. And the low notes up the neck on the G and D strings didn't disappear either. It was just a pleasure to play and listen to from any angle. Excellent projection, too. Really understated appearance and tone. Phenomenal instrument. He's very reasonable with his prices, too.