Why Does Gibson Favor Sitka? [Archive]

DataNick

Feb-01-2016, 1:17pm

Thanks. You all probably know more than me and I don't disagree but I bet Collings makes a lot more mandos than Gibson, and it seems they use mostly red and Engelmann. And Gibson mandos aren't cheap, so would think they could "afford" other tops.

There's an old saying:"Everything rises and falls on leadership"...if the leadership at Gibson(and I don't mean David Harvey) wanted to make it happen, they would! There's no reason that I know of that would limit their ability to make mandolins with sitka, adirondack, engelmann, european, cedar, or any other top. I mean if the pac-rim products (Kentucky, Eastman, Northfield, JBovier,etc.) can offer that kind of variety, then there's no reason that Gibson can't; other than their leadership chooses not to.
No idea why...

sgarrity

Feb-01-2016, 2:17pm

I always assumed they used sitka on everything to help drive interest in the Master Models. Also from a historical perspective Loars had red spruce tops and the Ferns switched to sitka sometime around 1925-ish as I recall. Maybe one of the Gibson history experts can confirm the actual date/timeframe of the switch.

LBob

Feb-01-2016, 2:43pm

Some of it is just the sound you are going for, though... it's not like a piece of Adirondack spruce is *that* much more expensive than a piece of Sitka... Adirondack is brighter, in my experience... not always what you want.

BradKlein

Feb-01-2016, 2:53pm

Ferns switched to sitka sometime around 1925-ish as I recall. Maybe one of the Gibson history experts can confirm the actual date/timeframe of the switch.

I've never heard that, and I'm skeptical, but willing to be corrected.

sgarrity

Feb-01-2016, 3:48pm

Just posted the question in the vintage section. Let's see what the real experts have to say! :mandosmiley:

DataNick

Feb-01-2016, 4:14pm

From the thread Gibson F-5 Fern vs Master-Model (http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/showthread.php?17579-Gibson-F-5-Fern-vs-Master-Model)

Fred...we can fix that http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif .

As for what woods are used in Loar era mandolins...it is generally considered that Red Spruce was what was used, however, the one thing we know about Loars is that nothing is set in stone. There may well have been a coupe that used Sitka. It is the same with the later 20's. They used Sitka primarily, but they also used what they had in the shop and we know there were woods used that did not seem to be from the later 20's in some of the mandolins. In other words, while it would be unusual to find a Loar without a red spruce top, I would never say impossible. I would also say it is highly possible to see a Fern with a red spruce top, though that would not be the norm. I hope that stirs the mud http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif .

Spruce

Feb-02-2016, 12:19pm

... it's not like a piece of Adirondack spruce is *that* much more expensive than a piece of Sitka...

What, 2-to-3 times more expensive??
That would get the attention of the folks calling the shots, especially at a company like Gibson.

There's no reason that I know of that would limit their ability to make mandolins with sitka, adirondack, engelmann, european, cedar, or any other top. I mean if the pac-rim products (Kentucky, Eastman, Northfield, JBovier,etc.) can offer that kind of variety, then there's no reason that Gibson can't; other than their leadership chooses not to.
No idea why...

I do know that the folks calling the shots in Bozeman don't want to have anything to do with Engelmann, despite the fact they reside right in the heart of Engelmann country...
(Or, at least this was the case 20 years ago--the last time I dealt with them)...

At that time, it was a matter of taste, not economics...

barney 59

Feb-02-2016, 2:09pm

For a large manufacturer availability and consistency become major factors and probably over price. Case in point. I have a nice stand of black walnut trees on my little chunk of woods in West Virginia. In the 70's lumber purchasers from Rocky Mount would ride the roads looking for trees. I would get offers averaging $5000 a tree for a walnut tree that they thought might produce a veneer quality log, I always resisted the temptation because I really didn't want to let them go and figuring also that it was like money in the bank! 15 years later the price was way down--and I mean less than half. The supply was way down to the point that manufacturers couldn't depend on a reliable source to maintain a line of furniture so they went on to other things. A builder or smaller manufacturer has much more flexibility because they need less.

DataNick

Feb-02-2016, 2:41pm

For a large manufacturer availability and consistency become major factors and probably over price....A builder or smaller manufacturer has much more flexibility because they need less.

I get that Barney, but how do you account for the fact that for example Collings and Weber make a lot more mandolins than Gibson and they both offer red spruce topped mandolins in more models and for much less in cost than Gibson does?

barney 59

Feb-02-2016, 3:10pm

But how many instruments does Gibson produce compared to Collings or Weber? and is that a fact ,across all models or just Master models? For a number of reasons Gibson can get what they get for their instruments over and above some others --their long standing name and long standing world wide distribution network are at least a couple of reasons that I can think of. Gibson's ability to get their shiny new instruments into the hands of high profile musicians that could easily be playing any instrument they want can't be overlooked either-- Their prices are high for no other reason than they can get it...or maybe it is a cost factor after all--they have a good source and a good deal maybe --maybe they own a forest!

sunburst

Feb-02-2016, 3:12pm

Gibson makes a lot of guitars. I imagine they buy a lot of spruce. Why would they source spruce for mandolins separately from spruce for guitars? Maybe they do... maybe they buy book matched, thickness sanded guitar tops and book matcked wedges for mandolins, or maybe they buy billets, who knows, maybe even logs, but Gibson is a big company into lots of things. They are not a mandolin company. Mandolins are almost a sideline for them. As an idea of what the Gibson corporation is like, according to Wikipedia, "Gibson also owns and makes instruments under brands such as Epiphone, Kramer, Maestro, Steinberger, and Tobias, —along with the ownership of historical brands such as Kalamazoo, Dobro, Slingerland, Valley Arts, and Baldwin[ (including: Chickering, Hamilton, Wurlitzer". Big company.
Weber, on the other hand, is a mandolin company that started making guitars and Collings is a guitar company that started making mandolins. Their collective market is acoustic musicians, and a relatively large part of that market (compared to Gibson) is mandolin buyers.
Other than some amount (I don't really know how much) of market pressure from a fraction of their overall market (mandolin buyers), what reason would Gibson have to not use sitka for tops? After all, as I said, sitka is an excellent top wood.
The whole thing about different top woods giving players different sounds is way overblown, and the biggest part of it results from marketing. I bet nobody can reliably pick out a sitka top over an engelmann top or red spruce top in a double blind listening test. So, what reason, other than a small amount of market pressure, would Gibson have to regularly use top wood other than sitka spruce in mandolin tops?
Sitka spruce trees are much larger than engelmann, red and European spruce trees and there are still quite a few of them (though they are still being over-harvested, as far as I know), so for instrument makers, it is no problem to get sitka spruce in any size, any quality, any amount that they want. Just the thing for a large, diversified company that makes a few mandolins along the way.

Luna Pick

Feb-02-2016, 3:15pm

DataNick

Feb-02-2016, 3:32pm

But how many instruments does Gibson produce compared to Collings or Weber?

Right now, I would guess that David Harvey & his small team might produce 30-40 a year? I'd bet that Collings produces at least 10-15 month or 120-150 at least per year; same for Weber. I'd bet they both produce anywhere's from 5-6 times the mandolins that Gibson does. Gibson is probably closer to Ellis mandolins as far as output these days. A Gibson rep told me as much at NAMM last year...

DataNick

Feb-02-2016, 3:46pm

Is there another reason they use Sitka besides supply/demand/cost, which is a reason that intuitively rings hollow for me? Many builders, in addition to Weber and Collings are using seemingly everything else BUT Sitka (maybe a slight exaggeration).

Is it sound, tradition, strength, workability? Seems the other woods are strong in those characteristics as well.

I think John Hamlett's post seems the most logical to me. Because they make a lot of acoustic guitars, they probably have a well sourced fairly cost-effective supply of sitka that doesn't "cost" them anything to outsource to building 30-40 mandolins a year with. The other 10 or so that are MMs are sourced from their small supply of red spruce that they pay for but more than makeup in costs with the $18k price tag on the MMs.

FLATROCK HILL

Feb-02-2016, 3:58pm

The whole thing about different top woods giving players different sounds is way overblown, and the biggest part of it results from marketing.

That must be the same marketing technique that allowed Ricardo Montalban to sell me a Cordoba. Rich Corinthian Leather my butt.

pheffernan

Feb-02-2016, 5:46pm

Right now, I would guess that David Harvey & his small team might produce 30-40 a year . . . . Gibson is probably closer to Ellis mandolins as far as output these days.

Not if you include the Pava line!

almeriastrings

Feb-02-2016, 11:55pm

Sitka is a pretty darned good top wood. There are some seriously nice guitars and mandolins built with it.

One area where it has an advantage, is that is easier to source cosmetically excellent sitka than cosmetically excellent Red spruce, certainly on wider boards, such as for guitar. To marketing departments (and many customers) cosmetics count, so that can be part of the equation.

That as certainly one of the key reasons C F Martin switched to Sitka circa 1945/6. Getting decent looking Red spruce tops was proving very difficult. Customers wanted tight, even grain, with 'silking'.. and finding wide boards of Red with that was just getting impossible at the time. That is what Mr C F Martin himself told me when I asked, anyway...and he was there....

I don't much care what they're made of as long as I like how they sound :)

Ivan Kelsall

Feb-03-2016, 1:31am

From DataNick - "...but how do you account for the fact that for example Collings and Weber make a lot more mandolins than Gibson and they both offer red spruce topped mandolins in more models and for much less in cost than Gibson does ?" . Firstly - the decision to use 'which' type of wood is maybe based on Gibson's experience on the tonal qualities of the wood ie. if Sitka was widely used in the 'Fern' models,maybe that's good enough for them for their regular mandolin production,the 'Master Models' coming outside of that line. Regarding the price - IMHO,that goes with the name,
Ivan

Seattle

Feb-03-2016, 2:42am

Companies use that is available locally the world over. If the wood isn't too soft or ugly it works.

T.D.Nydn

Feb-03-2016, 9:14am

if Gibson is producing 30-40 mandolins in a year, let's say 36, that is only 3 mandolins a month! ( plus or minus)

DataNick

Feb-03-2016, 12:19pm

if Gibson is producing 30-40 mandolins in a year, let's say 36, that is only 3 mandolins a month! ( plus or minus)

The 30-40 number covers F9s, F5Gs, Ferns, Goldrushs.

Then add in the 4-5 MMs, 5 or so Sam Bush models, and maybe 10 or so special orders; all per year.

It's really not hard to figure out if you pay attention to stocking inventory announcements from TMS and Janet Davis, David Harvey's Facebook postings of new mandolins, account for what could be "ordered" thru Guitar Center, etc. and add it all up over the course of a year; then confirm that general number with a Gibson rep at NAMM.

Spruce

Feb-03-2016, 12:21pm

That is what Mr C F Martin himself told me when I asked, anyway...and he was there....

Which "C. F. Martin" are you referring to?
'Chris' Martin IV, his dad, or his dad?...
Obviously, it wasn't Chris' great-great-great-grandfather...

Just curious...

almeriastrings

Feb-03-2016, 12:49pm

Which "C. F. Martin" are you referring to?
'Chris' Martin IV, his dad, or his dad?...
Obviously, it wasn't Chris' great-great-great-grandfather...

Just curious...

:))

No, I may be getting in a bit, but quite that old :))

C. F. Martin III

DataNick

Feb-03-2016, 1:54pm

Not if you include the Pava line!

Actually pretty close: I doubt that Tom Ellis is carving more than 25 mandolins a year these days; that's about 2/month which seems pretty close to me. If Pava produces 40/year, then their combined total would be 65, which is pretty close to what Gibson is doing these days...of course this is all speculation, but I bet I'm not too far off...

Spruce

Feb-03-2016, 1:55pm

:))

No, I may be getting in a bit, but quite that old :))

C. F. Martin III

Got it...
Do you remember anything else from that conversation regarding wood??
Curious as to whether they were bringing in logs (like they did with rosewood), or buying already milled sets...
I ran into a mill in Dolgeville, NY, that said they supplied red spruce to Martin (and Steinway), but never got an answer as to whether they were shipping logs, billets, or sets...

Canoedad

Feb-03-2016, 1:57pm

Tom posted here recently that their schedule is one mandolin per week. And I think that is Pava/Ellis combined.

DataNick

Feb-03-2016, 2:01pm

Tom posted here recently that their schedule is one mandolin per week. And I think that is Pava/Ellis combined.

52/year would be pretty close in number to my estimation of Gibson's 60 or so per year. What folks don't realize, as that Gibson rep confirmed to me, is that Gibson mandolins is really a small shop environment these days, and they don't crank out a whole lot of mandolins.

Think about one mandolin per week as compared to Gibson-Montana cranking out five F5Ls/week. The production of the Bozeman years and to an extent the Derrington/Pre-Flood Harvey eras has changed dramatically post-flood.

Drew Egerton

Feb-03-2016, 3:06pm

Is Sitka really that undesirable to so many people? I have a killer Larrivee D60 guitar with a Sitka top. I've seen a couple of people defend it here, but the majority of the thread sounds like it is a significantly inferior option.

I don't know enough about the different species to say either way. My Flatbush has a "European spruce" top so I don't really have much first hand with Sitka v. the others discussed.

Luna Pick

Feb-03-2016, 3:35pm

In starting the thread I didn't mean to imply inferiority or superiority. My 2 dreadnoughts, former Sam Bush F5 and probably my Givens are all Sitka.

It just seems curious to me why, generally speaking, the nameplate mandolin builder favors Sitka, and all the others, including many absolutely incredible builders, don't. Just sayin'. . .

George R. Lane

Feb-03-2016, 3:41pm

I believe that Givens used Englemann on his mandolins.

FLATROCK HILL

Feb-03-2016, 3:45pm

Is Sitka really that undesirable to so many people? I have a killer Larrivee D60 guitar with a Sitka top. I've seen a couple of people defend it here, but the majority of the thread sounds like it is a significantly inferior option.

I think Almeriastrings answered your question pretty well in an earlier post (quoted below).

Sitka is a pretty darned good top wood. There are some seriously nice guitars and mandolins built with it.

One area where it has an advantage, is that is easier to source cosmetically excellent sitka than cosmetically excellent Red spruce, certainly on wider boards, such as for guitar. To marketing departments (and many customers) cosmetics count, so that can be part of the equation.

That as certainly one of the key reasons C F Martin switched to Sitka circa 1945/6. Getting decent looking Red spruce tops was proving very difficult. Customers wanted tight, even grain, with 'silking'.. and finding wide boards of Red with that was just getting impossible at the time. That is what Mr C F Martin himself told me when I asked, anyway...and he was there....

The question/title of this thread is "Why Does Gibson Favor Sitka?" So far, to me at least, the answer seems to be 'cost and availability'.

Martin and Gibson may (do) charge a premium for Adirondack Spruce Tops. That doesn't necessarily prove Sitka inferior.

Spruce

Feb-03-2016, 3:47pm

I believe that Givens used Englemann on his mandolins.

He used what he had...
...and when he lived over in Idaho, he had an Engelmann source.
I sold him Sitka, and I know he used it...

Same with the maple he chose to use--a lot of it is unfigured lumber from the hardware store.
The most mundane wood I've ever seen in any builder's work.

Flame Maple

Feb-03-2016, 3:49pm

It seems strange that this topic has appeared today as only yesterday I was seeking advice as to which top would be best for my new Mandolin .

sunburst

Feb-03-2016, 4:00pm

Is Sitka really that undesirable to so many people?

It is to some, and the reason is... once again... marketing.
All through the 1940s, '50s, '60s, '70s and into the '80s sitka was the top wood. European spruce was mostly used by violin makers and a few classical guitar makers, engelmann as a tonewood came along later (when was that, Bruce?) and red spruce didn't make a resurgence until around 1990. When I started building instruments, "everybody" was using sitka spruce for "everything".
Lloyd Loar specified red spruce for the F5 model mandolin, Martin bought locally produced spruce, and so used a lot of red spruce in the "golden era", and those two things, along with marketing claims by recent builders and wood sellers have convinced many people that there are easily distinguishable sound differences between species, and that sitka is not up to the level of red or even engellman spruce.
Here's a baseless claim, well, lets say it's more speculation than claim, and it is based on my observance of human nature:
If sitka spruce was rare and hard to get, and thus more expensive than other spruces; if other spruce had been the standard for years and sitka was a late-comer to lutherie, people would clamor to get it, pay extra for it, and claim sound superior to all others. If the '60s Martin guitars were the "golden age" standard instead of the '30s Martins, people would be sure that part of the reason was the sitka spruce used.

Spruce

Feb-03-2016, 4:36pm

...engelmann as a tonewood came along later (when was that, Bruce?)...

The late 70's-early 80's or so?...
The Sante Fe Spruce Co. (http://www.classicalguitarbuilder.com/newpages/santafespruce2.html) was the first outfit I know of that marketed "Engelmann"...
I went after it the week I read that GAL article... ;)

Here's a baseless claim, well, lets say it's more speculation than claim, and it is based on my observance of human nature:
If sitka spruce was rare and hard to get, and thus more expensive than other spruces; if other spruce had been the standard for years and sitka was a late-comer to lutherie, people would clamor to get it, pay extra for it, and claim sound superior to all others.

Can you say "Lutz"? ;)

DataNick

Feb-03-2016, 4:42pm

...Lloyd Loar specified red spruce for the F5 model mandolin, Martin bought locally produced spruce, and so used a lot of red spruce in the "golden era", and those two things, along with marketing claims by recent builders and wood sellers have convinced many people that there are easily distinguishable sound differences between species, and that sitka is not up to the level of red or even engellman spruce...

You know the Gibson catalog from 1923 describes "Norway Spruce" as what is used for the top of the F5 Master Mandolin. From this description I culled off a website, I wonder if Norway(European) Spruce is for all intensive purposes "Red Spruce"?

"...Norways are the dominant evergreen in Europe, and although it is not native to the US, it is very commonly planted throughout the NorthEast and as far south as Tennessee. "

Is this "Norway" that Loar/Gibson was calling in the catalog, later designated as "Red" spruce?

DataNick

Feb-03-2016, 5:10pm

More on Norway Spruce from Wikipedia: "In North America, Norway spruce is widely planted, specifically in the northeastern, Pacific Coast, and Rocky Mountain states, as well as in southeastern Canada. It is naturalised in some parts of North America. There are naturalised populations occurring from Connecticut to Michigan, and it is probable that they occur elsewhere.[9] Norway spruces are more tolerant of hot, humid weather than many conifers which do not thrive except in cool-summer areas and they will grow up to USDA Growing Zone 8."

Picea abies Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picea_abies)

sunburst

Feb-03-2016, 5:29pm

Norway spruce (Picea abies) is not the same species as red spruce (Picea rubens), and the Norway spruce that has grown in the US is generally very fast-grown wood in open stands, and thus has wide growth rings and abundant knots and is not suitable for tops. The wood of European spruce (Picea abies) can be indistinguishable from red spruce wood, however.
There is a well known spec sheet that was supposedly found behind a file cabinet at Gibson or some such, on which Adirondack or West Virginia red spruce is specified for the F5 model, but Bruce (among others) thinks there might have been some Euro spruce in some of them.

Spruce

Feb-03-2016, 5:39pm

There is a well known spec sheet that was supposedly found behind a file cabinet at Gibson or some such, on which Adirondack or West Virginia red spruce is specified for the F5 model, but Bruce (among others) thinks there might have been some Euro spruce in some of them.

Geez, who knows?? ;)

http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee22/e_stamp/p11.%20Spruce%20Quality%2083kb_zpsvzd8lbyn.jpg (http://s231.photobucket.com/user/e_stamp/media/p11.%20Spruce%20Quality%2083kb_zpsvzd8lbyn.jpg.htm l)

http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee22/e_stamp/p01-1.%20F-5%20Info%201%20of%202%20116kb_zpswly7dcsn.jpg (http://s231.photobucket.com/user/e_stamp/media/p01-1.%20F-5%20Info%201%20of%202%20116kb_zpswly7dcsn.jpg.html )

Jeff Hildreth

Feb-03-2016, 6:02pm

Anyone else remember in the '80s and '90s when Englemann (sp) was being shipped to European wood hustlers and returned as "German Silver Spruce" ?

Red spruce was used when it was local, cheap and easily available. Sitka is used because it is local (relatively because of improved transportation) cheap and available.

Anyone remember when bear claw was considered inferior until someone ( who shall remain unnamed) suggested to CFM IV that is should be used on the CEO V and therefore started to become desirable ?

The German Classical builder Hauser used bear claw frequently.

I owned two original Givens an A-3 and an A6.. one was a plain Jane and was killer.. the other was high graded maple and spruce and very fine inlays and was just ok.

FLATROCK HILL

Feb-03-2016, 6:07pm

Norway spruce (Picea abies) is not the same species as red spruce (Picea rubens), and the Norway spruce that has grown in the US is generally very fast-grown wood in open stands, and thus has wide growth rings and abundant knots and is not suitable for tops. The wood of European spruce (Picea abies) can be indistinguishable from red spruce wood, however.

So...Norway Spruce is Picea abies. And European Spruce is Picea abies. Same species of wood, but because of the location where they grow, they have entirely different characteristics?

sunburst

Feb-03-2016, 6:18pm

So...Norway Spruce is Picea abies. And European Spruce is Picea abies. Same species of wood, but because of the location where they grow, they have entirely different characteristics?

Happens all the time. Any tree that grows in an open area will be very different from a tree of the same species in a dense forest. Big differences in altitude, weather, soil, aspect of slope, etc. where the tree grew can cause wood to be different. In the case of Euro spruce, it is mostly used as an ornamental in the US, and few, if any have grown in dense forests for centuries like the trees in Europe that produce desired wood for instrument tops.

Ivan Kelsall

Feb-04-2016, 1:49am

Weber's top line "F" style is their 'Fern' model. Mine's Sitka Spruce & it sounds as good as any 'modern' mandolin that i've heard to date. Weber will custom build one with a Red Spruce top if asked,obviously at an increased cost. I know that because one Cafe member who's recently ''returned to the fold'',Kevin Briggs,used to own one. Obviously,without being able to play one against the other side by side,i've no idea what the tonal differences would be,but Kevin was far more than pleased with his,
Ivan

almeriastrings

Feb-04-2016, 2:51am

Got it...
Do you remember anything else from that conversation regarding wood??
Curious as to whether they were bringing in logs (like they did with rosewood), or buying already milled sets...
I ran into a mill in Dolgeville, NY, that said they supplied red spruce to Martin (and Steinway), but never got an answer as to whether they were shipping logs, billets, or sets...

I remember some of it. I was specifically interested in asking a few particular things at the time... as this was mid 70's and I was working for a tonewood supplier in Europe back then. Martin were, at that time, installing a new mill in the Sycamore street factory, but this was going to be for cutting rosewood and other hardwoods, not top wood. I asked why not top wood, and he said they can buy that easily from many sources "these days"... but they wanted to be able to cut their own rosewood, etc. In fact, that did not last long as India and Brazil banned the export of whole logs shortly after they got the mill going. Going back in time, I asked if he could tell me anything about the top woods used in previous eras. His recollection was they did buy in well quartered, nice-grained sawn lumber boards and billets wherever they were available, direct from various mills and then re-sawed for tops at the factory. It was 'cheaper' than buying in pre-cut tops and you "could get a lot of nice tops" from these lumber boards. He said they were doing this in pre-war days, and well into the 1950's. They sourced boards as 8 X4" or 10 X 3" (etc) after "picking" them (I am not sure from who exactly). Some of it was "construction lumber"..... also "government surplus building supplies".... apparently when the aviation industry turned to metal aircraft, a lot of fine grade lumber was left behind... this was re-sawn to guitar tops. Red-spruce was the preferred material up to the mid-40's, when it became difficult to source in adequate quality. He told me that he would have liked to change to Englemann instead, as he liked it "better" than Sitka (!) but could not find reliable sources in the quantity they needed. I believe he said the same thing in a 1980's interview with Dana Bourgeois.... he liked the grain, the colour and he thought it "sounded good". They did manage to obtain it "occasionally", and if they could, they used it. They got a relatively "large" amount in 1953, but also some supplies earlier than that, but not in quantity (I have a 1950 D28 myself that has a very unusual top... very pale yellow... hard to be be 100%, but I think it very probably Englemann). He also told me he did not feel there was any significant tonal difference between EIR and Brazilian rosewood... and when they made that switch, no-one considered it important... as far as they were concerned, it was just "rosewood".

To the best of my recollection, that is what was said.. he was a very polite and helpful gentleman, as was Mike Longworth.

This is my D-28 that I suspect has an early example of an Englemann top.

143335

Teak

Feb-04-2016, 11:15am

I believe that Givens used Englemann on his mandolins.

Bob used both Englemann and Sitka. When I phoned him in 1978 to order an A model, he told me it would have a Sitka spruce top. It was probably later on when he began to use Englemann spruce.

Tony Sz

Feb-04-2016, 12:19pm

Another point that might be worth considering is that Red Spruce takes a lot longer to "break in' compared to Sitka. I think right out of the box, if you had 2 identical instruments, except that one had a Sitka top and the other had Red Spruce, you might be surprised at which one you liked more. Fast forward 5 years, and now that the instruments had matured somewhat, your opinion might change. The same goes for a lacquer vs. varnish finish, but that's a whole 'nuther topic....

Teak

Feb-04-2016, 2:03pm

Duplicate post deleted.

Teak

Feb-04-2016, 2:05pm

He used what he had...
...and when he lived over in Idaho, he had an Engelmann source.
I sold him Sitka, and I know he used it...

Same with the maple he chose to use--a lot of it is unfigured lumber from the hardware store.
The most mundane wood I've ever seen in any builder's work.

Cool. That means that he might have bought the Sitka spruce from you that went into my mandolin. I know what you mean by some mundane-looking maple; there are a bunch of Givens mandolins out there with pretty plain backs, but mine has a very nice Bird's eye maple back. I should post a photo some time.

If you look at Greg Boyd's site, there is an archive of Givens mandolins that have gone through his shop. If a particular mandolin had an Englemann spruce top, that is stated whereas I suspect the mandolins with no mention as top wood type had Sitka spruce. It looks like Bob began using Englemann in the mid-1980s based upon the Greg Boyd site info.

Spruce

Feb-04-2016, 2:49pm

Any tree that grows in an open area will be very different from a tree of the same species in a dense forest. Big differences in altitude, weather, soil, aspect of slope, etc. where the tree grew can cause wood to be different.

Heck, go look at a clearcut sometime...
The trees growing right next to one another are entirely different from one another...
Some with wide grain, some tight, some with bearclaw, most without, and a vast difference in weights and splits...

Again, you can't generalize about this stuff, but we do it all the time...

I asked if he could tell me anything about the top woods used in previous eras. His recollection was they did buy in well quartered, nice-grained sawn lumber boards and billets wherever they were available, direct from various mills and then re-sawed for tops at the factory. It was 'cheaper' than buying in pre-cut tops and you "could get a lot of nice tops" from these lumber boards. He said they were doing this in pre-war days, and well into the 1950's. They sourced boards as 8 X4" or 10 X 3" (etc) after "picking" them (I am not sure from who exactly). Some of it was "construction lumber"..... also "government surplus building supplies"....

Thanks for this!

The guitars from that era kinda speak for themselves, with all the runout and off-quarter wood...
You can just tell that they were liberated from lumber...

Despite what you hear all the time ("The tonewood today just isn't as good as it was back in the day"), the guitars and mandolins being built today are made from the finest tonewood that has ever been available--just wonderfully milled and selected material...
It's not even a contest...

(..and, no, I'm not talking about me...) ;)

Bill McCall

Feb-04-2016, 6:11pm

I would think Sitka wasn't widely available as a tonewood in 1922, so I don't read a lot into the material choices makers made in that time. After the wartime demand (spruce division), Sitka would have been available relatively cheaply and would have been quite plentiful. With large makers having relatively big supplies of lumber on hand, I would think you wouldn't see an immediate shift to different woods until existing, seasoned supplies would have been depleted.

But business decisions are made for a variety reasons by a variety of people, with perceived quality and historic use as just two of the elements.

ollaimh

Feb-08-2016, 9:24pm

i think they are cheap--cheap like a bird. it's easier and cheaper. i knew some guys up on the northwest coast of canada who did instrument quality logging for a while. gibson bought a bunch of spruce from them, all sitka, but well chosen from wind facing trees that grow slower with a lot tighter grain and often nice bear claw, but gibson just would not pay in a timely manner so they quit the work. they could have looked for lutz or engleman up there but sitka was easier to find and that's what gibson wanted. i am also not impressed with their scandal over faked cites documentation of rare woods.

i like sitka for many instruments, but on a finger style guitar nothing beats the tone of nice engleman, and on a dreadnaught red spruce is great. i have a nice local made hand made guitar by don fitzsimmons, with locla red spruce from the mirimichi river valley in new brunswick. the tone is fantastic on a dread. he's retiring so i just bought a european spruce topped guitar and a red spruce topped mandolin. both have great tone. i am not a sitka fan unless the maker uses it well. jean larrivee made a lot of sitka topped guitars and his system makes it sing. martin and gibson, do not use the sitka as well, in my not nearly humble engough opinion. and all the gibson mandolins i love are the old carved top ones with red spruce(adirondak--our northern red spruce is the same species but it's colder here, so the growing seasn is shorter and hence the red spruce here is tighter grain on average and harder to find big pieces--so it has to be accomodated for the difference), however red spruce has such a great woody tone for mandolins.

i am amazed that gibson only produces 30-40 mandolins a year. but then there are so many great makers out there, i have never heard a collings mando that wasn't ace, across the model range, and many other makers big and small, without spending over five grand. heck without spending over 2500. the choices are fantastic now compared to the seventies.

almeriastrings

Feb-09-2016, 12:44am

martin and gibson, do not use the sitka as well, in my not nearly humble engough opinion

Makers do have their "ups and down", with Gibson having more than many... however, I'd have to say that their more recent output with Dave Harvey at the helm is a major "up" - certainly in the consistency of tone they are getting. One can argue over finer points such as how they cut the scrolls or what glue they use... but the ones I have heard all sounded really, really good. In fact my own 2011 Fern runs my Ellis a close second in the tone/volume departments. It's really very impressive. It also beat (to my ears) an earlier MM hands down, so I do feel there is much more to it than "just" wood choices. It's how they are worked that really counts.

Spruce

Feb-09-2016, 12:58am

...but gibson just would not pay in a timely manner...

...don't get me (or dozens of other woodcutters) started... :sleepy:

HoGo

Feb-09-2016, 6:17am

Happens all the time. Any tree that grows in an open area will be very different from a tree of the same species in a dense forest. Big differences in altitude, weather, soil, aspect of slope, etc. where the tree grew can cause wood to be different. In the case of Euro spruce, it is mostly used as an ornamental in the US, and few, if any have grown in dense forests for centuries like the trees in Europe that produce desired wood for instrument tops.

I think this is incorrect. European spruce is known for its fast growth during first 20 or so years. WHen part of forest gets (clear) cut weeds like birch and willow will grow immediately and underneath small spruces will sprout in hundreds and within 3-5 years they are christmas tree sized competing with the birch. Tehn tehy can grow up to 1 meter per year for the first 20 years or so. So after those 20 years you have VERY dense (one tree every few meters) forest of telegraph pole sized trees (some 20 meter high and 15-20cm diameter). The lower branches are already dead and falling down so there won't be much knots. From there the trees grow just like they would in dense old growth forest. Difference is only that in old growth old fallen tree is replaced by few new ones of which only one or two will survive and fill the place of the old one. I've seen lots of beautiful spruce logs from managed forests, commonly 10+ grain pe inch. I wish they would let them grow older than current 80-100 year cycles..