The modern mando that sounds most like a Loar is...

[holden]

...nothing I've played. Got to spend a lot of time with an original Loar ('23) for the first time. According to people I respect its a good example of a Loar. I've had several Gils, nuggets, derringtons, an altman and a henderson. None sounded like this. Doesn't mean the Loar is better. (Though it's my favorite sound I've heard) I just thought it was interesting that nobody has duplicated that particular sound. Maybe Heiden has? Or red diamond. I don't know. Haven't played those..

[vic-victor]

Give those other ones 80 years or so and check again :)

[Explorer]

Just to note, if that instrument is a good example of a Loar... that means there are Loars which don't sound that way.

In other words, there is a range of sounds produced by Loars, but only some are accepted as actually sounding like what they are.

I've heard some talk about Loars not sounding like how the players were led to expect.

Anyway, it's an interesting phenomenon, the ruling out and in of Loars.

[Londy]

All I am going to say is there are other brands like Collings that builds consistently good sounding instruments for years. There has also been arguments that age makes instruments sound better...or not. If I'm playing a new instrument I will expect it to sound great right now and not have to wait decades to sound better. The point is, a brand being built should aim for a specific sound and quality at a specified price point(s) to be a strong brand. The large range of variance you speak of sounds like a bigger production issue and questionable brand in my opinion. I have played a mando with the Loar name and was not impressed. Confusing.

[Tobin]

I think some people have claimed that Red Diamond mandolins are about as close to the real Loar sound as it gets with modern mandolins. I wouldn't know; just repeating what I've heard.

[mrmando]

The Shmergel Devastator will make you forget you ever heard a Loar.

[Ivan Kelsall]

As vic-victor so rightly implies,the time factor 'might' have a lot to do with it. In fact some of the mandolins being built today may very well come to outshine the Loars as they age. Nobody knows what an 80 year old Gilchrist,Dude.,Heiden ,Ellis etc. is going to sound like in 80 years. From what i've read on here,info.posted by folk with far more mando.info. than myself,there are Loars that don't quite make the grade. Also,it's not everybody that thinks that the 'Loar' sound is right for them. One famous instance is Ronnie McCoury, who,after buying a Loar played it for a while,then went back to his Gilchrist. He says that the Gilchrist has a more 'balanced' sound ''for him'' - other folk might think differently. Personally,i would never expect a 'modern' mandolin to sound like a Loar & despite a number of mandolins having been built to exact measurements taken from a Loar,they don't sound like 'that' Loar - why should they,the wood's totally different. That's the one thing that builders can't duplicate accurately 'yet',& even with wood dried in various controlled ways,the wood grain,density etc.are all factors that can't be reproduced with any accuracy.
Banjos have a similar aspect to their building. Pre-war Gibson banjos were always 'the' banjo for Bluegrass,if you could get hold of one. The post war Gibson banjos went through a few phases where they could be good,bad or indifferent,in the same way that late 1960's early 1970's mandolins aren't the best that Gibson ever made. However,with banjos,it's basically the bronze tone ring that's the deciding factor in the tone, & with analysis of the bronze being a fairly accurate process,the bronze can be pretty much duplicated. Several companies have done this,& there are a few post war banjo makes which sound even 'better' than the pre-war Gibsons. Until a similar process can be carried out for the woods that mandolins are built from,then ageing is the only way IMHO.
All i need is the cash to buy a Gilchrist & an age extension. When i'm 150 years old,i'll report back - slowly !!,:grin:
Ivan;)

[Darren Bailey]

Playing the instrument yourself and listening to recordings couldn't be more different. Take a listen to some of Bill's albums and despite his great playing they don't make me want to rush out and emulate that particular sound - not at all.

[William Smith]

Give those other ones 80 years or so and check again :)

Who has 80 years to wait my friend?

[William Smith]

Go for a conversion! take a 30's F-7 or such and change the tone bar position, regraduate add a F-5 neck and there ya go. You get vintage 80 year body. Most can give vintage 5's a run.

[Ivan Kelsall]

Quote - "Who has 80 years to wait my friend ? ". I'm working on it,but don't hold your breath for a report !.
Ivan;)

[Mandoplumb]

I've heard several Hutto's that came awful close, Dempsey's for one.

[barry]

Good morning Holden,

This question is asked often. Since I've been chasing the same dragon for over a decade, I'll throw my opinion into the mix.
The short answer is, "There really isn't."
Even though Loar F5's (of which I've played a dozen) vary a bit in tone, volume, and response, they all have a consistent character. They possess a sound that has the "old dryness" that we crave, as well as a "dense, balanced, brilliance".
Those characteristics seem to be mutually exclusive in new builds. Age may be the determining factor. Who knows? Speculation abounds.
My guess is that, with age, a new build that has the "dense brilliance" will develop the "old dryness", but not the inverse.
I eventually settled on two instruments. One with each characteristic. In theory, I wish I could crossbreed them. In practice, the tariff for such would be tenfold. ��

[sgarrity]

I think some of the Gibson MM and DMM mandolins come the closest. But then there's the question of, What exactly does a Loar sound like? Monroe's Loar is obviously the most widely heard and it had an edge to the tone that many Loars don't have IMHO. People say Reischman's Loar is the best one and he gets a big, lush tone out of it. Heiden had some sound samples of one of his F5s and a Loar being played and you got to guess which was which. Damned if I could tell! There are so many great mandolins being built today. I have learned to enjoy them for their own unique tone and character.

[Jim Hilburn]

I was at the Loarfest in Bakersfield, but it was Dempsey's mandolin that I still remember the most.

[choctaw61]

Lol They been trying to imitate That Harley sound for a long time!! 112 years now and strong as ever.Yet when U hear a Harley Come thru Ur town U know it before U see it!It's that Unique sound baby!! Just watch everyone's head. Nothing else turns heads like a harley,u just gotta stop look and listen. That's vintage gibson Loar mandolin.It can't be imitated.Sure folks will keep trying though.Maybe one day....... NAH!!!!

[David Lewis]

It becomes an interesting debate. Does age improve things? A friend of mine pointed out that the vintage amp craze had an inconsistency: when the classic records, featuring, say, a fender twin were made, it was a new amp. So did it sound better 50 years down the track?

Same with bills Loar: he bought it second hand, ok, but did it sound different in 1970 to what it did in 1945? Or 1990?

I'm not being provocative here (well I'm provoking thought). I'm not trying to be combative.

[barry]

It becomes an interesting debate. Does age improve things? A friend of mine pointed out that the vintage amp craze had an inconsistency: when the classic records, featuring, say, a fender twin were made, it was a new amp. So did it sound better 50 years down the track?

Same with bills Loar: he bought it second hand, ok, but did it sound different in 1970 to what it did in 1945? Or 1990?

I'm not being provocative here (well I'm provoking thought). I'm not trying to be combative.


Lynn Dudenbostel once told me that he thinks mandolins take about 15 years to develop a mature tone. After that, changes occur, albeit at a slower pace. Did Bill's sound different? I don't know. But I'd think that, likely, the "feel" and responsiveness changed over time.

[mrmando]

Lol They been trying to imitate That Harley sound for a long time!! 112 years now and strong as ever.
I had a violin once that sounded like a Harley...

[David Lewis]

Lynn Dudenbostel once told me that he thinks mandolins take about 15 years to develop a mature tone. After that, changes occur, albeit at a slower pace. Did Bill's sound different? I don't know. But I'd think that, likely, the "feel" and responsiveness changed over time.

I think a lot of us mistake the 'feel' of an instrument or the 'responsiveness' of an instrument for the sound of an insturment.

This is not to say I'm in the class of those who don't believe instruments 'open up': I do believe that - 15 years? Maybe... I don't know.

But I do think that as we get to know the sweet spots of instruments, they sound 'better' to us...

[Timbofood]

I have wondered about what a "Virgin" Loar sounded like the day it left home too, the question has been brought up here before. We can really only speculate about that and thank the builders who have so carefully tried to replicate as much as they can! The mathematics have been very carefully reproduced, time is the the part which modern man cannot change, an hour will always be an hour. As time marches on, that which man has built may improve or, crumble. We cannot speak to the future of some of these amazing pieces of the luthiers art.
The part which gets lost, is that builders are trying to make new instruments which sound eighty years old, I would love to be around long enough to see the outcome!

[barry]

I have wondered about what a "Virgin" Loar sounded like the day it left home too, the question has been brought up here before. We can really only speculate about that and thank the builders who have so carefully tried to replicate as much as they can! The mathematics have been very carefully reproduced, time is the the part which modern man cannot change, an hour will always be an hour. As time marches on, that which man has built may improve or, crumble. We cannot speak to the future of some of these amazing pieces of the luthiers art.
The part which gets lost, is that builders are trying to make new instruments which sound eighty years old, I would love to be around long enough to see the outcome!

I agree. Even though there are old F5 copies out there, it's only within the last 10-15 years that builders have really been diligently attempting to copy all of details of the originals.

[vic-victor]

I had a chat to a very good luthier in Russia who repairs classical instruments - mostly top tier ones - violins, violas, cellos and occasional mandolin or a guitar. He reckons the new instrument matures for 15-20 years and then it has it's "golden era" of another 20-30 years and then it starts slowly going down. Still can be very good after many more years, but not quite as good as it was in it's golden era.

[pops1]

It becomes an interesting debate. Does age improve things? A friend of mine pointed out that the vintage amp craze had an inconsistency: when the classic records, featuring, say, a fender twin were made, it was a new amp. So did it sound better 50 years down the track.

I have a different opinion on the amp. When it was new the electricity from the wall outlet was 110 volts, now it is 125 volts which changes everything about an old amp, much higher voltages on tubes. I had a '56 fender tweed deluxe and AB'd it to a new one I built using a transformer to compensate for the higher wall voltage and it sounded much better than the original. Now if i would have run the original on a variac to lower the voltage (not good for the amp) it might have been a different story. The mandolin on the other hand doesn't have things like that to consider only the aging of the wood, the vibration from playing and possibly changing the wood, hence the sound change, and of course that hasn't been discussed much here:) So older closer growth trees???? Who knows. I just saw Chris Theile last week and his mandolin sound was wonderful. A sound I hear in my head but haven't found the mandolin that sounds like it. I love my mandolin and it is a great sounding mandolin, but different. I have also played a Loar signed F5 and wasn't impressed with it, i'll keep mine thanks. So maybe Chris, the setup, the room (wonderful venue) or the mandolin itself.

[Ron McMillan]

Next up we'll solve the 'how long is a piece of string' question, then maybe we'll work on the definitive answer to the burning debate over what's better - ketchup or Tabasco.

[Jeff Mando]

I have wondered about what a "Virgin" Loar sounded like the day it left home too, the question has been brought up here before.

Don't know about "Virgin" Loars, but there are recordings and video (film) of Bill Monroe and Dave Apollon playing 15-20 year old Loars. Again, the sound quality might not be up to today's standards for comparison....

[barry]

Don't know about "Virgin" Loars, but there are recordings and video (film) of Bill Monroe and Dave Apollon playing 15-20 year old Loars. Again, the sound quality might not be up to today's standards for comparison....

Yes. I've listened to those. In my opinion, the '37 film of Apollon sounds like a newer mandolin. There are a couple of variables aside from sound quality. He may be using a thin, pointy pick. But, most importantly, there are no later videos that assure he is playing the same instrument.
Monroe, on the other hand, always played the same instrument. I can hear a fundamental difference in maturity of tone between the '41 recordings and the recordings from the mid 50's onward.

[colorado_al]

+1 for Tabasco

[OldGus]

Grismans personal Red Diamond Crusher replica.

[Drew Egerton]

Next up we'll solve the 'how long is a piece of string' question, then maybe we'll work on the definitive answer to the burning debate over what's better - ketchup or Tabasco.

If it's a burning debate, then obviously Tabasco wins every time. I prefer Frank's Red Hot myself. ;-)

[holden]

We are all susceptible to the placebo effect I suppose. But I do feel the '23 I played is the best sounding mandolin I've ever played.
I got to spend a lot of time with it, alone, A/Bing against Gil, Nugget, etc. I know a lot of people post that they've played Loars and not been impressed. I once got to play a few 30's D-28's and wasn't impressed. But I was in a strange room, in a hurry, and being watched..might have something to do with it.

[Ivan Kelsall]

From Barry - " I can hear a fundamental difference in maturity of tone between the '41 recordings and the recordings from the mid 50's onward". A few days ago,i spent some hours listening to several Bill Monroe recordings spanning a period of around 15 years or so. The biggest 'difference' was in the recordings themselves. The mics.'might' have been different,& i found some recordings to have more 'reverb' on them than others.Some sounded 'distant' & some sounded 'close mic'd'.I really couldn't hear any difference in the tone of Bill's mandolin that i could attribute to 'ageing',
Ivan;)

[Timbofood]

Barry, I hate to burst the balloon but, Monroe did not always record with the same mandolin.
The famous recording of "Monroe's Hornpipe" was recorded on an F-4 as were several other from that time frame.
F-5Loar will back that up, we have had several discussions on that subject. I kind of hope he weighs in on this, he's played quite a few, owned at least one and played a boat load of newer highs quality instruments. Come on Tom get in on this one!
Truthfully, it's all going to be which one has "it" for YOU, we all want it, some find it, some don't. Very interesting quest though!

[barry]

Barry, I hate to burst the balloon but, Monroe did not always record with the same mandolin.
The famous recording of "Monroe's Hornpipe" was recorded on an F-4 as were several other from that time frame.
F-5Loar will back that up, we have had several discussions on that subject. I kind of hope he weighs in on this, he's played quite a few, owned at least one and played a boat load of newer highs quality instruments. Come on Tom get in on this one!
Truthfully, it's all going to be which one has "it" for YOU, we all want it, some find it, some don't. Very interesting quest though!


No balloon bursting. I'm aware of that. I should have worded it as, "Monroe extensively used one instrument the majority of his career."

[GTison]

Makes me want to go listen to the Mandolin Tasting CD that Mandomedic put out several years ago. Listening to that CD proved my listening as to the "Loar" sound. That was back when I was mandolin shopping. Get a copy. It is a challenge to pick out different instruments blindfolded or just without the liner notes.

We need a new one of these CDs. (Did Ken Cartwright pass away or just not post anymore?)

[danb]

They're out there. "Sounds like a Loar" is deceptive.. think "looks like a celebrity" as a metaphor.. the obvious question is "which one" ?!?

The most common definition is the mid-range and piano notes on the high part of the fretboard. You often get one or the other of these.. both is kind of rare.. but you might get it from a Gil, Nugget, Dude, Monteleone, Red Diamond, J Wiens.. and many others sound great with different quantities of all the right stuff. By this point, you already have a specific mandolin sound in mind I bet.. some combination of the above has a lot of that instrument you are imagining in it.

Most people think of Bill Monroe's Loar. Crusher (Dawg's apparent favorite Loar) isn't far off. Maybe BIll's Loar sounds like what most of them would after an incredible amount of hard playing?

I can't think of a recent one that I've played that sounded like a Feb 18 (Thile's, Reischman's).. But I can think of a few that sound like a favorite March '31/24.

There are some that really sound a lot like a particularly bassy March 31 I tried. There are others that sound a lot like good Ferns.

Strangely, Mike Compton's F4 makes me think of Loars more than anything else. SO do the particularly good snakeheads. They (the oval holes) lose it on the bass and crispness of attack, mostly. Strangely I have an F2 that has *more* bass than most F5s.. but not quite the overall Loar tone.

[NoNickel]

At Monroe Mandolin Camp I played a ton of instruments this year: Gils, Kimbles, Webers, and a lot of Duffs. There must have been 7 or 8 there, not including mine. It was really spooky how much the Duffs sounded like each other. I also got my first chance ever to play a Loar. In fact I played two Loars. They were slightly different, but in the same ballpark. And of all the mandolins that I played, the Duff sound was closest to the sound of the Loars. Of course I may be biased, as I own one, but I was really expecting the Loar to be something extremely different. I have to say, playing those 2 Loars reminded me most, of all the mandolins I played, of the Duffs, in feel and tone.

[Big Joe]

I've been fortunate to have had the opportunity to see and play some of the finest mandolins by the finest builders over the last century. I've also played many, many real Loars and a bunch of fakes (replicas if that fits your sensibilities better ). There is no "Loar" sound. They all have their own sound. It is true they have a range within most fit, but I don't recall any two that sounded alike. The same with other good builders. No two are identical, but they seem to fit in a range to ally that may be similar. I've played a number of builders whose product would fit within that range of Loars. Still, each is remarkably its own. My favorite mandolin is a Loar that belongs to a dear friend, but they are not within my means so I don't even dream about them anymore. I've been blessed to have owned a number of great mandolins, and none of them sounded like the others. I guess that's what I love about mandolins. The same is true of guitars. I guess that's why we get MAS!

[Timbofood]

Nicely put Joe! Not the individual but the "class" of instruments. Makes a lot more sense to see the "group", every piece of wood involved in each mandolin has its own characteristics and every one is going to be different.
I have had to give up on a "dream" mandolin too. I have reached a time where some dreams will just die, sad but, true.

[Don Grieser]

Find a good one that speaks to you and play it. The search for the Holy Grail never ends, and every one has something that bugs you IME. Commit to one or two (or three) with different voices and play the heck out of them. The fun is in finding out how to get the tone you want out of the one you're playing.

[Andy B]

I believe that Monroe's 1941 recordings, like the Monroe Brothers sides and the 1940 Blue Grass Boys sides, were made with the F7, which sounds very different from the Loar. He had the Loar by the time he recorded again in 1945. His 1945 versions of Rocky Road Blues and Blue Grass Special sound like nothing he had recorded before.

[Ivan Kelsall]

From Don Grieser - " Commit to one or two (or three) with different voices and play the heck out of them. The fun is in finding out how to get the tone you want out of the one you're playing.". Well,Don,for me there have never been any truer words spoken (typed) on here. I always wanted 2 mandolins an ''F'' & an "A" style,which in a round about way,i came to own,plus,i picked up another ''F'' style along the way. If i was many years younger,i'd trade 'em in & 'commit' to one - but i ain't !!. So currently,my Weber "Fern" / Ellis "A" style & my Lebeda "Special" ,all very different sounding mandolins,& instruments that i realise that i'm very fortunate indeed to own,give me a buzz every single day. You're correct again - it does take some time to find out how to get the best out of any mandolin (instrument ?),but isn't that one of the best bits in owning a good instrument ?,
Ivan;)

[pheffernan]

every one has something that bugs you IME.

What bugs you about the Heiden, Don? :disbelief:

[Winfield]

I've never played a real deal Loar but I do have a Red Diamond voiced July 9, 1923 and I'm very happy with it. Here's an article about Don MacRostie, the builder and how he voices his mandolins to get the Loar sound.

141000

[Winfield]

Sorry about the small image I posted above. I'm not sure how to get it to read better.

[Willie Poole]

I`ll add that we all hear a Loar being played on recordings through a good sound system and that is what we think that all of them sound like and we hope to find a mandolin with that sound, well a good sound tech can most likely duplicate that sound when recording using the equipment that is available these days so we don`t really hear what they sound like being played straight out in the open, I have played a few Loars and never heard two that sounded exactly the same, some didn`t even impress me...The older Monoe recordings were made using sound equipment that wasn`t nearly as good as what is out there today so maybe the older recordings of Bill really show what his Loar really sounded like, I heard one of his early recording just yesterday and his mandolin didn`t ring out at all, sounded quite dead to be honest but it had a sound that made me know it was Monroe...I know when I play a show I tweak my sound system some times for 15 minutes to try and get the "Loar sound" as you call it, come close sometimes but that's about it...

Big Joe has a great response to this question...

Willie

[Timbofood]

Sound guys can make or break what we hear, I have heard sound men try goat pee into gasoline and the converse is equally true.
Yes, Joe has brought an excellent point to the mix, as usual.

[fatt-dad]

You'll know it when you play it, if that's what you are looking for. . .

Texas Pete!

f-d

[WW52]

Another question might be "How many Loars don't sound like Loars?" I have a tone of what I think a Loar sounds like burned into my memory based on a few examples I've heard, and lots recordings and videos. But I've heard many other mandolins that redirect my attention in more realistic directions. (One in particular that I just can't shake --the tone of an Ellis.)

[Don Grieser]

What bugs you about the Heiden, Don? :disbelief:

Well, now that I think about it, I can't really say anything bugs me. The Heiden suits me better than any mandolin I've owned, and I've owned more than I care to name.

[Ivan Kelsall]

From Winfield - "...and how he voices his mandolins to get the Loar sound.". Which Loar ?.This is the whole point,there isn't a 'generic' Loar sound,they all sound 'different' to one degree or another. The Red Diamond mandolins do indeed have a great reputation,but realistically,they're no more like any individual 'Loar' than mandolins being built by many other makers who make similar claims. I think that all of us would agree that the mandolins built by Don & other top builders,are terrific instruments in their own right,but they won't sound like a ''genetic' Loar,because there aren't any. That's because of the huge number of 'variables' in their build - no two are identical,& if they were,put different string sets on them & use different picks & there you go - they're different !. So again - 'which' Loar is Don building to sound like ?.
The Red Diamond mandolins have a great reputation because they're ''good in their own right''.That happens because Don's a great builder,& along with others,they're building instruments,which,maybe in the future ie.80+ years,might indeed be better than what they're trying to achieve right now. That's one thing that Lloyd Loar did for the instrument world,pushed the boundaries in his own day,which has resulted in superlative sounding instruments,the tone of which our current builders are using as a 'starting point',& just how good are some of these going to be in the future ?,:disbelief:
I sometimes feel that we're doing our current builders a disservice in expecting them to replicate
a 'sound' that's only come to be by the passage of time. Why don't we simply enjoy these fantastic instruments for themselves ?. I don't think that even Lynn Dudenbostel or Steve Gilchrist,to name just 2 awesome builders,expect to reproduce the 'Loar' tone - ''whichever'',& Steve Gilchrist knows as much about Loars as anybody. His mandolins are valued 'for themselves' & even now,there are some players who think that they're at least as good as the Loars,if not 'better'
(more pleasing to them). If i owned a Gil.would i care if it didn't sound like John Reischman's renowned Loar ?. First off,i'd me crazy to expect it to, & secondly,i'd be far too busy playing the bejeezus out of it to care one bit !!!,
Ivan;)

[vates]

Sorry about the small image I posted above. I'm not sure how to get it to read better.

Try this link (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0Qtss-X46h5N1JwTEFhM1A4Wm8/view?usp=sharing). The whole article in pdf.

[Bob Bass]

At the present time, it appears from his web site that Don Macrostie is building "replicas" of 3 different Loar signed mandolins- Dawg's "Crusher", Bobby Osborne's Loar, and John Reischman's Loar- each w/apparently different tonal qualities. At some point in the past few years, he was also building a "replica" Loar mandolin that he described as having "more" of certain identifiable Loar tonal characteristics- it was referenced to a specific instrument, but I cannot recall which one. It is possible that this version was planned, but that maybe only a few were built, and they aren't referenced in the current HP.

If you think a bit about what sort of craft, artistry, and precision it might take to replicate the tone and other characteristics of a single Loar signed mandolin's widely recognized sound, what it takes to build 3 different very specific "replicas" is sort of mind-boggling.

http://www.reddiamondmandolins.com/

Many other very capable and accomplished luthiers have produced very high quality mandolins "based" on different individual Loar signed instruments.

[barry]

I believe that Monroe's 1941 recordings, like the Monroe Brothers sides and the 1940 Blue Grass Boys sides, were made with the F7, which sounds very different from the Loar. He had the Loar by the time he recorded again in 1945. His 1945 versions of Rocky Road Blues and Blue Grass Special sound like nothing he had recorded before.

Great point! Even Bill sounds different on a Loar vs. a (not a) Loar. It's the archer AND the arrow.

[Ivan Kelsall]

From Bob Bass - "...certain identifiable Loar tonal characteristics..". Again the question - which Loar ?. If no 2 Loars sound absolutely identical,then........ ?. Also - which ''certain identifiable' tonal characteristics ?. All of them,some of them ?.
I'm not being 'anti' here at all. I'm simply trying to understand how any luthier can built into a new mandolin the tonal characteristics of a mandolin 80+ years old. Unless,if 'a' mandolin has a deep woody bass (my Lebeda has that) it's characteristic of a Loar. Or,if it has clear, open trebles (all 3 of my mandolins have that) they too are ''Loar characteristics''. We could pick out any single tonal characteristic in any Loar & find a mandolin built by 'somebody' that has that/those characteristics as well. Other mandolins might not exhibit all the characteristics of a Loar,but neither do all Loars exhibit the same characteristics. IMHO - it's a search for the end of the rainbow,however,it has resulted in some incredible mandolins - which,as i said in my last post,should be appreciated for their own qualities,
Ivan;)

[Willie Poole]

Not always but most of the time when I hear a mandolin on the radio I can tell the Loars from some others, a sound that I cannot describe but I know it when I hear it, and true, all Loars are not the same but most of them have that "something" that sets them apart...There are some great sounding mandolins now being made but that "something" is still missing on just about all of them, I do like the sound of most Gibson new mandolins but they also lack that "perfect something"...But 80 years from now who knows????

Just my opinion and others may hear things that I don`t

Willie