Difference between Loar LM-170 and LM-175

[whistlearrow]

Anybody knows the difference between Loar LM-170 and 175? There's a $50 price difference between them, and from the description, all I could tell is that, instead of "back and side: maple" in 170, the 175 has "back and side: flamed maple". Does that really make $50 price difference? and what is it good about? or they have some other differences? Thanks.

[Eric F.]

"Flamed maple" just means it's probably prettier than "maple." Is it worth $50? That's your call. I've never even see any model of The Loar, so I can't help you with other differences.

[Perry Babasin]

They both have solid carved tops but the back and sides are laminated. The 175 just has a prettier flamed maple laminate "back".

[Perry Babasin]

I'm surprised that no one has stepped in and suggested the Kentucky 150. Similar instrument, similar price point, similar quality - but all solid hand carved woods.

[mandobassman]

I'm surprised that no one has stepped in and suggested the Kentucky 150. Similar instrument, similar price point, similar quality - but all solid hand carved woods.

Kentucky KM150. Solid woods yes, hand carved, certainly not. It has a good reputation for a entry level mandolin, but lets not over state its' quality. Nothing at that price point is hand carved.

[mandobassman]

Actually, I stand corrected. While the Kentucky KM150 does not have a hand carved top The Loar LM 170 actually does, according to the description on the Folkmusician site. Not sure that in itself makes either one better than the other though.

[Perry Babasin]

Sorry about the "Hand" part, I doubt that anything in this price point is actually hand carved. More often than not the language is just - carved solid woods. The Kentucky is described as having solid carved spruce top and solid carved maple back, where "The Loars" are described as having solid carved spruce top with maple (or flamed maple) back and sides (leaving out the carved). Both of these Loars are the budget-minded bottom-of-the-line instruments. Sorting through all the marketing speak The Kentucky might be technically a better instrument, but I think all three of these would be reasonable beginner mandolins. Get out and play any that you can, that is way better than specs, every instrument is somewhat different.

[mandobassman]

I was actually surprised to see Folkmusician's description of the LM 170 said "hand carved". I also thought there was nothing in that price range that was truly hand carved. I can't get to The Loar's web site to see what it says.

This is copied from the Folkmusician web site.

Top: Solid Hand-Carved Spruce

Back & Sides: Maple
Neck: Maple
Fretboard: Rosewood

[Zach Wilson]

From their (the Loar) website on the grassroots series (including the LM170)

"Players will immediately respond to the classic “chop” only a quality mandolin can deliver. We've hand-carved the spruce tops to optimize each instrument's individual character, and the thin “V” profile of the maple neck fits comfortably in the player's hand. Our removal of the fretboard extension beyond the 20th fret allows for easy strumming without the classic problem of getting hung up on the extended upper frets."

I have a LM170 and really enjoy playing it. It is very much a budget or beginner's (a good one) model. It sounds good and plays well. I recommend having it set up though. It really made mine sing.

[mandroid]

You can see visual differences , sound differences , because its Wood , and made by People in a factory, Is a variable

and really only assessed at the live audition playing It sitting in your own Lap. Good Luck ..

(its like picking a Puppy from the litter, find the one that responds to you)

[Zach Wilson]

^well said. Try 'um both (all) and get the one that sings to you no matter what the name on the head stock says.