How does the Gibson F-9 compare to the Gibson F-5G?

[Charles E.]

I have been looking at getting another mandolin this summer and will be buying used.
In the classifieds I have noticed the two models go in and out and wondered if the F-5G is worth the extra 1K. I am most interested in tone and volume not appointments. Will the F-9 give me the same tone and volume as the F-5G?

[mandobassman]

I have played both, although it has been several years. They were both outstanding mandolins. There are always going to good and not-so-good examples of every model, but I think overall the differences are going to be minor. If I was deciding between those two, I would go for the F-9. I seldom read anything negative about them. All of the comments I have read have been that they all have that Gibson sound.

[Josh Levine]

I've owned a 03 f9 and a 01 flatiron festival f which is for all intensive purposes a Nashville f5g. I sold the f9 when I got the flat. I've played some other 9 models and seen similar trends. They have a fabulous low end great thumps bass and strong mids. The high end can be muddier. The flat excelled in the mids and highs with a decent low end. But really great blue grassy mids and highs, more of the traditional gibson sound I would day. If you don't care about the name a flatiron could be a good option. I still own a 2000 flat a5 and think it's great and Classic.

[Charles E.]

Is it true that F-9's have a flat fingerboard, while the F5G is radiused?

[Astro]

Is it true that F-9's have a flat fingerboard, while the F5G is radiused?

Both the F9 and 5FG have flat fingerboards. The noticeable difference is the top binding on the 5FG.

The only reason I didnt get an F9 when I got my 5FG was that at the time the F9 did not have fingerboard markers and I need those. But now they do come with fingerboard markers.

The 5FG can come with more custom features as they vary the features a bit more on these from time to time (options may include gold hardware, jumbo frets, more burst, ivroid as opposed to white binding, occasional back binding). Also, I think more 5FG's are signed than are F9's, but Harvey has signed some of both models. The significance of the signature is still a bit of a mystery, but it can't hurt.

Individual mandolins vary, but in general these are great mandolins and despite the high profile name either model can still be a great value.

[RichM]

A few years ago, I went to the Gibson Showcase in Nashville. They had about 20 mandolins available, mostly the higher-end stuff. The F-9 they had there was the best sounding of the bunch. Really amazed how good that mandolin sounded.

[jclover]

I have an F-9, but have not been able to compare it directly to an F5G. One of the differences that has not been mentioned is that the current F-9 uses rosewood for the bridge and fretboard instead of ebony, but it sure seems to work. Mine sounds like a Gibson should, at least to my ear. It is very loud with deep lows, cutting mids, and bell-like highs. Mine is also signed, and smells great too!

[MikeEdgerton]

I'd go for the F5G (I'm biased, I own one). When I was buying mine I just liked the more finished feel of the mandolin.

[Josh Levine]

I'd love to play a new f9 as I have only played Derrington era models. I hear the Harveys are great and there have been a few good deals in the classifieds. I played a Harvey f5g and it was solid but not totally different from the Derringtons I've played.

[Astro]

I have an F-9, but have not been able to compare it directly to an F5G. One of the differences that has not been mentioned is that the current F-9 uses rosewood for the bridge and fretboard instead of ebony, but it sure seems to work...

That was true in years past but actually, as of sometime in 2014 or 2015, I believe the 5FG's now are also using rosewood instead of ebony. I doubt many of us could tell a sonic difference though.

[jclover]

That was true in years past but actually, as of sometime in 2014 or 2015, I believe the 5FG's now are also using rosewood instead of ebony. I doubt many of us could tell a sonic difference though.

Thanks Astro, I was not aware of the change. Seems the modern F-9/F-5G are even more similar than I thought. That would make the differences finish and inlays. BTW, my 2014 F-9 does have top binding.

[itstooloudMike]

I prefer the F-9, because it doesn't have the fretboard extension. The F-9s I have played sounded and played very much like any F-5G that I have played. I don't need the bling or the Florida extension. F-9 is a great value for my needs.

[allenhopkins]

I heard a rumor, from a reliable source not willing to be attributed, that the bodies of Gibson mandolins are pretty much interchangeable for all the models up to the most expensive, and that the differences in price are mainly due to binding, ornamentation, bridge/fingerboard woods, and finish.

If this were true, then you could find F-9's with better sound than F-5G's, just based on the individual variations of different pieces of spruce and maple. The F-5G is a nicer-looking instrument, in terms of finish and ornamentation, but I'd say -- based on my "reliable sources" -- that whether you wanted to spend $1K more on finish and "flash" would have to be a decision based on individual taste.

[DataNick]

That was true in years past but actually, as of sometime in 2014 or 2015, I believe the 5FG's now are also using rosewood instead of ebony. I doubt many of us could tell a sonic difference though.

All true with the following exception: you can order the F5-G Custom thru the Mandolin store for $500 more and get the ebony bridge & fretboard back along with the binding scheme of the F5-L.

[jclover]

Good point Mike, I forgot about the florida or lack thereof.

[John Kinn]

Is it true that F-9's have a flat fingerboard, while the F5G is radiused?

The Jam Master is the same as an F-9, but with a radiused board and slightly wider nut.

[Bernie Daniel]

I have been looking at getting another mandolin this summer and will be buying used.
In the classifieds I have noticed the two models go in and out and wondered if the F-5G is worth the extra 1K. I am most interested in tone and volume not appointments. Will the F-9 give me the same tone and volume as the F-5G?

You won't go wrong with either and there should be little to no consistent difference in the sound/performance of either mandolin if you compare them from the same era. A Derrington F-9 = Derrington F-5G = Derrington F-5L only the hardware, binding and inlay schemes are different.

Similar arguments for Harvey era F-mandolins.

But as noted Harvey era instruments are a little different from the Derrington era mandolins. Also the scrolls are definitely a bit different shape in the two eras -- on the Harvey mandolins the scrolls appear to be more "open".

[Charles E.]

Thanks for all the responses,
I play in a large stringband (four fiddles, two banjos most times) and would like an instrument that can, perhaps, cut through a bit more to what I have been playing lately.

To add another mandolin to the mix, I am also attracted to the Weber Bitterroot F-5's. They are in the same price range as the Gibsons, how would they compare?

[DataNick]

Thanks Bernie, do you happen to know what years would be the Derrington era?

1998 (though the F9 started production in 2002) - 2006, though I don't know how involved he was in 2005-06 with direct supervision. I think Danny Roberts was more involved during that time frame.

Someone else can clarify...

[Josh Levine]

There is a noticeable difference in my opinion. Like I said before, the 9s have been very dominant on the bass side. That goes for the F9 that I owned, the A9 I briefly owned and another A9 I plated recently, all right around 2003. The F5Gs have been more mid range dominant. Those were a 01 Festival F, 00 Artist A5, and a 2013 F5G. So people can say that there is no noticeable difference in tone, but I noticed a big difference. Not sure if that is because some were under the Flatiron label (shouldn't make a difference) or whether it was the finish or the fact that they were a few years older than the 9s, but there was a big difference to my ear.

[Josh Levine]

And they have all been great mandolins, so not a knock against the 9s by any means.

[KGreene]

The F5G's are basically the F5L's without the frills, e.g., additional bindings and inlays. The F9 also has a bone nut, where the F5G has a pearl nut. This in accordance with the Gibson website and their specs.

I got the F5G and have had nothing but compliments on the sound.... From very seasoned players. I did get an opportunity to play an F9 and it sounded great too me.

DataNick....I see you added the F5G to your stable.... How are you liking it?

[DataNick]

...DataNick....I see you added the F5G to your stable.... How are you liking it?

Hey KGreene!

I got it as a backup to my F5L as the "gigging season" is upon me...it's got the classic Gibson tone, feel, and playability emblematic of a Derrington era Gibson F5...I'm very happy with it...btw: +1 on Josh's earlier observations re: the Flatiron Festival F from the same period (1999-2001)...same mandolin as the F5G...

[Charles E.]

Thanks again everyone.
Like I mentioned, I will not be able to get another mandolin before summer (a shame because there a a couple of mandolins in the classifieds at the moment that are very tempting) and will have to sell a couple of things off.
Hopefully I will have a chance to play a couple of Gibson's and Weber's at a festival or two later in the spring. I'll keep my eye on the Mando Mutt site as well since he seems to have good looking used instruments at any given time and is an easy drive from Raleigh.

[itstooloudMike]

Regarding the questions about the Weber Bitteroot, I've owned the F-version with mahogany back, and now own the A-version with maple back. I love the way Webers play. The neck shape, radius fretboard, and large frets all make for a comfortable playing experience IMHO. I am primarily a guitar player, and have hand cramping problems with most traditional Gibson style mandolin necks (narrow nut, flat fretboard, small frets, deep V-shape neck). I love the sound of the Gibson F-9, but I struggle to play one smoothly. I have no problems playing my Weber. But I didn't care for the sound of the Bitteroot-F I had with the mahogany back. It just didn't have the bluegrass bark I wanted to hear. I let that one go, and now have a Bitteroot-A that I love. This one has a highly figured maple back and sides, but with a satin finish. It's a very understated and natural appearance, that I really like. It plays great (as all Webers do), and sounds awesome. It's got that throaty bark that I want to hear, and is a wonderful bluegrass mandolin. I can highly recommend a Bitteroot, but make sure it has a maple back. The workmanship of Weber mandolins is top notch.

[sgrexa]

Hey KGreene!

+1 on Josh's earlier observations re: the Flatiron Festival F from the same period (1999-2001)...same mandolin as the F5G...

My memory is a little foggy, but I thought the Flatiron Festivals were X braced?

Sean

[Bernie Daniel]

My memory is a little foggy, but I thought the Flatiron Festivals were X braced?

Sean

Yes, as a matter of fact, I think some were.

[DataNick]

My memory is a little foggy, but I thought the Flatiron Festivals were X braced?

Sean

Not after Gibson re-tooled for the move from Bozeman to Nashville. There were some "transition" mandolins that were started in Bozeman with the previous specs and finished in Nashville in 97'-98', but by 99' just about everything being produced was to Derrington's "Loar" specs (dovetail neck joint, parallel braced, loar carving graduations, neck profile, etc.)

The Flatirons from 1999-2001 are equivalent F5Gs and A5Gs; tremendous deals and the reason btw that Gibson stopped producing them, ie: self-competition.

[mandobsessed]

Even an earlier Flatiron is a great mandolin. I once had the opportunity to compare a 90;s flatiron A5 against my A9 and it stood up pretty well. Didn't have the volume or depth but had a nice warmth and good tone. Once you get to a certain point in quality it becomes a matter of personal preference anyway.

On the matter of sound chambers when I bought my A9 (one of the early ones) I emailed Gibson and asked whether the A's had the same internal size as the F's and whether the 9's were different than the 5's and was told that the A9 and 5 had the same body size but they were not simply an f5 without the scroll. I was told that they had slightly greater body cavity size but in my experience Gibson A and F models sound pretty darn similar.

I was also told that indeed the only difference between the 5 and 9 is/was in ornamentation. This could all have been marketing spin though I have no ideal I do know that the 9s and flatirons are incredible instruments for the price, especially used.

[Bernie Daniel]

Even an earlier Flatiron is a great mandolin. I once had the opportunity to compare a 90;s flatiron A5 against my A9 and it stood up pretty well. Didn't have the volume or depth but had a nice warmth and good tone. Once you get to a certain point in quality it becomes a matter of personal preference anyway.

On the matter of sound chambers when I bought my A9 (one of the early ones) I emailed Gibson and asked whether the A's had the same internal size as the F's and whether the 9's were different than the 5's and was told that the A9 and 5 had the same body size but they were not simply an f5 without the scroll. I was told that they had slightly greater body cavity size but in my experience Gibson A and F models sound pretty darn similar.

I was also told that indeed the only difference between the 5 and 9 is/was in ornamentation. This could all have been marketing spin though I have no ideal I do know that the 9s and flatirons are incredible instruments for the price, especially used.

Some years ago I owned a 2002 A-9 that was in every way sound-wise equal to my 2002 F-5 Fern. They were both absolutely excellent mandolins and were built within a month of each other during that magic time at Gibson. They sounded essentially identical and if anything the A-9 had a little more volume. Strangely enough I don't have either one anymore! :)

[mandobsessed]

The only problem with my A9 is the binding is #$% sharp...I end up with lines on my arm when standing up. I've always meant to get an armrest for it.

Every so often I get scroll envy. (Right now I am drooling over a Tolley F5 in Dusty Strings) but I find that my A9 gives me all I need, and its the color of a good stout beer!!

[DataNick]

Some years ago I owned a 2002 A-9 that was in every way sound-wise equal to my 2002 F-5 Fern. They were both absolutely excellent mandolins and were built within a month of each other during that magic time at Gibson. They sounded essentially identical and if anything the A-9 had a little more volume. Strangely enough I don't have either one anymore! :)

Yeah Bernie, you don't see those 2002 Gibsons up for sale very often. I think I read here on the Cafe where Big Joe said 2002 they had the full-on mojo goin with mando production; killer rep for mandos from that year!

[Bernie Daniel]

Yeah Bernie, you don't see those 2002 Gibsons up for sale very often. I think I read here on the Cafe where Big Joe said 2002 they had the full-on mojo goin with mando production; killer rep for mandos from that year!

I fixed that A-9 up a bit while I owned it --MOP fret board dots, MOP Fleur on the head stock, MOP truss cover, and an ebony pick guard. It was just a great great mandolin for $1000.

[mandobsessed]

I fixed that A-9 up a bit while I owned it --MOP fret board dots, MOP Fleur on the head stock, MOP truss cover, and an ebony pick guard. It was just a great great mandolin for $1000.

Wow, that really spruced it up!! Did you make the pickguard yourself?

[bassthumper]

although i own 2 fantastic mandos..collings MF & Weber SE Cedar I'm curious about the F9 or Jam master specifically an oval

are they? available? radiused? how they sound? what fret is the neck joined to the body? is the neck v or c? because of disability i cannot get about to research

[Bernie Daniel]

Not after Gibson re-tooled for the move from Bozeman to Nashville. There were some "transition" mandolins that were started in Bozeman with the previous specs and finished in Nashville in 97'-98', but by 99' just about everything being produced was to Derrington's "Loar" specs (dovetail neck joint, parallel braced, loar carving graduations, neck profile, etc.)

The Flatirons from 1999-2001 are equivalent F5Gs and A5Gs; tremendous deals and the reason btw that Gibson stopped producing them, ie: self-competition.

Nick, what you say may well be true. But here is another little bit of "data" to ponder.

I have an October 1995 F-5G with a Bozeman label signed by Bruce Weber it has a bolt-on neck but definitely also tone bars! :)

So it came off a Bozeman bench approximately one year before mandolin production was moved to Nashville (which was late 1996?). Of course at that point construction was under Charlie Derrington's eye - and he called for the dove-tail joint and his version of "Loar-specs" for graduation (all of which you have noted in your comment).

But if indeed some partiality completed mandolins (and/or mandolins-in-white) made the trip to Nashville and some of these ended up with "Gibson" on the headstock in 1997 (even 1998?) I wonder if they would have had X-bracing because here is a Montana Gibson from late 1995 already with tone bars? Maybe Charlie had already mandated tone bars in the last years of Montana Gibson production even if they still had the bolt-on necks? How does this fit in with what we already have learned?

[DataNick]

Hey Bernie,

Just confirmed this with Bruce Weber himself personally at NAMM back in January.

In Bozeman, Flatirons were built to Flatiron spec(as established and handed down by Steve Carlson).
Gibsons were built to Gibson spec as established by Jim Triggs who went up to Bozeman to "inservice" the luthiers there.

So Flatirons had X-bracing and parallel bracing depending on the models but Gibsons (like your F5-G) were parallel braced. Gibsons however were built with the mortise-tenon joint with bolt and the carving graduations, neck profile, etc. were a combination or evolvement of what Roger Siminoff had begun in 1978 and what Triggs/Derrington had adjusted by 1988.

Bruce Weber said that actually he was glad that both product lines were built to their respective specs.

As far as X-braced Gibsons I think a few were made in Bozeman but not as regular practice. I know definitely that Derrington made the "Blondie" MM which is X-braced. I've played it and it is a beauty!

btw Bernie: my 94' F5L is just like your F5-G; parallel braced with the mortise-tenon joint. Great mandolin and still my number #1

[Bernie Daniel]

So it all fits then! Yes, those Montana Gibsons are killers! This Bozeman F-5G is in no way a lesser mando than my 2001 Sam Bush. If anything the F-5G is a little bassier then the Sam.

I agree it is pretty cool that they kept the Flatiron and Gibson specs separate.

[DataNick]

although i own 2 fantastic mandos..collings MF & Weber SE Cedar I'm curious about the F9 or Jam master specifically an oval

are they? available? radiused? how they sound? what fret is the neck joined to the body? is the neck v or c? because of disability i cannot get about to research

Hey bassthumper,

I don't think I've ever seen an oval hole F9 or Jam Master.

I believe the Jam Master has a slight radius on the fingerboard, they both sound like good typical Gibsons, neck join at the 15th fret, and the profile is a "V", some slight variation from Derrington to Harvey eras.

Hope this helps!