Eastman 504 or 604

[Yellowmandolin]

The Eastman site doesn't seem to give many details about the specific differences between the 504 and the 604. I've been looking at a few of these mandolins over the net, so don't really have a good idea about what seperates the two. I just called Steve Perry about this, but was wondering what the great mandolin community thinks about them!

[mangorockfish]

The two main differences is the "prettiness" of the wood. As the numbers go up 500, 600, 800, 900, the wood is supposed to get prettier, but you can find some very nice wood in the 500 series if you look long enough as with the other series. Also, the 600s have binding on the back as well as the front whereas the 500s have it only on the front. I bought a 615 that has exceptional wood in it and I also wanted the nickle tuners as opposed to the gold ones, and absolutely love it. I don't think you can go wrong with an Eastman no matter which one you buy.

[Yellowmandolin]

Thanks!

[Jim Broyles]

Gianna Violins site says:
Eastman Mandolin Overview
500 Series - Bare Bones Performance
- Lightly figured maple
- Bound front and fingerboard, veneered headstock
- Nickel tuners
- Shaped case

600 Series - The Standard Mandolin
- Flamed maple
- Fully bound body, fingerboard, & veneered headstock
- Nickel tuners
- Rectangular case

[cooper4205]

the 504 i just sold had one of the prettiest backs i have seen on a mandolin

[Roydw3]

My 504 has one of the most beautiful backs I have ever seen. This is one beautiful mandolin. It is amazing the quality it has for this value of an instrument.

[Uncle Choppy]

The Eastman site doesn't seem to give many details about the specific differences between the 504 and the 604.
What surprises me is the price difference between the two.

In the UK, there is something like a 50% increase in price between the 50x and 60x, which seems like quite a leap. I believe that he 6 series has Schaller tuners that will add to the cost, as will the extra binding and "better" wood (although in the few examples I've seen there seems to be little difference between the 5 and 6 series Eastmans in terms of the appearance of the wood).

I suppose it shows how cheap the 5 series are in the first place when a few upgrades make such a big difference to the price!

[Red Englemann]

I believe that he 6 series has Schaller tuners that will add to the cost,

My 504 came with Gotohs (spelling?). I thought the buttons looked cheap and replaced them inexpensivily with some ivoroid from Stew Mac so that the buttons match the binding.

I would save your money and get the 500 series. Who sees the back anyway? I have played some of the 900 series that do not sound as good as the 500 series which is the most popular series in the f style among players. I think Roscoe Morgan plays a 600 series.

Red

[LKN2MYIS]

All instruments are different. Particularly hand made instruments.

I've heard excellent 500 series mandos, and some horrible ones that I wouldn't use to stir chili. The same with the 900 series. And, not to be blasphemous, the same with the early Gibson A's, as well as others.

You can't really generalize. You need it in your hands - play it, feel it, hear it. If the 500 speaks to you, buy it. If the 600 speaks to you, buy it.

If we all liked the same thing, we'd only have one maker building them for us.

[Yellowmandolin]

Yeah, I assumed that there will be tonal differences throughout all the lines, but I am interested in learning if there is anything done intentionally to make the 6xx sound better than a 5xx, or not as good as a 9xx.

[LKN2MYIS]

Well, first define "good".

You can change the tone by doing a lot of things: set-up, different strings, different bridge, etc. The point is, what are you looking for?

Seems it might be better for you to play a bunch of different mandos, ignoring the name and model number, and see which one sounds and feels right to you. That's your mandolin.

There's LOTS of good ones out there, and the fun is indeed in the hunt.

[Yellowmandolin]

You are right, there are many different factors that make a good instrument, and the least of which is what is inlaid in the headstock. The only reason I am asking about the 504 and 604 Eastmans is that the 504 is in my price range and I have heard good things about Eastman's sound per dollar value; in general. Michael Kelly's do not seem to get the same respect. I live in east-central Ohio and there are not many music stores around, much less any that stock decent mandolins. The Mandolin Store in Washington Courthouse is the closest Eastman dealer to me, and they have 1 504 and no 604s.

I am looking for an introduction to the oval hole world. I have a Gibson F5-G now, and while it is great for blugrass, it just doesn't seem to work as well in an old time or Irish setting.

Good for me would be an A style oval holed mandolin that some of the bassy, resonant sound that I enjoy in the old Gibby F4s. I know that for $500 I'm not going to get something with that kind of tone, but I would like something in that direction.

[Red Englemann]

I know that for $500 I'm not going to get something with that kind of tone, but I would like something in that direction.


YOu might be in for a pleasent surprise

Red

[DryBones]

my thoughts too. I have a couple "issues" with my Eastmans but I still love the sound I get from either of them.

[Jim Broyles]

Hey Jason, what's going on with your Eastmans? (Looks wrong, doesn't it? http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif )

[LKN2MYIS]

Yellowmandolin -

A point I didn't sugget: buy within your price range. It'll help you feel comfortable with your decision.

I have no issues whatsoever with my Eastman, and I doubt you will either. Comes with a lifetime warranty.

Buy it, pick it, enjoy it, and write to tell us what a great decision you made!!!

[allenhopkins]

Buying an Eastman mandola recently, I had my choice of three, two 615's and an 815. Bought one of the 615's because it sounded more like what I wanted, and because spending $300 more for gold hardware and (slightly) more flamed maple on the back didn't seem to make sense.

On the other hand, someone else on the "mandola waiting list" passed on the 815 because it "didn't have enough flame" on the back -- didn't match his 800-series mandolin. Different things are important to different people, I guess...

[acousticphd]

I would definitely buy the 504, and if one comes along at the right time/price, I will do just that, if only to give one of these Eastmans a try. #I just played last night with a fellow picker who had just picked up a used 604. #It does not have the same sound as my old A-oval, but pretty good all the same. #I personally do like the wide vintage necks, and unbound fingerboards. I wish Eastman would make at least one of their models with a "bare bones performance" plain, unbound FB.

[wayfaringstranger]

In my experience, Eastman's model numbers are not necessarily a good indicator of tone, and tone is not necessarily consistent across model numbers (the same rule seems to apply to any instrument maker to some degree, especially the ones, like Eastman, that crank out a lot of instruments). I'd heard 500-series mandolins that positively blew away their more expensive brothers, and vice versa. If you have a price range, try to play as many within that price range as you can, and then buy the one that really grabs you :-)

[Stephen Perry]

The differences among the various models seem somewhat consistent after equivalent setup and play. I suspect that's much of the difference - simply getting the bridge fitted better makes a difference. The tonal desire of the player also figures into things. Rather than good or bad, just different. Eastman mandolins tend to (when set up nicely) have a nice crisp response regardless of level. The ones with the wood bindings often have a bit of a subtle shimmering sound and are very clear, especially with just the varnish finish. I can hear this when Roscoe Morgan demos them. I don't know that it matters in real life, but makes them fun to play in person!

However. Some of the best I've heard and played were the MD505 A with F holes. A couple of those were really big sounding, warm, open, crisp, etc. Didn't last long, of course.

I've been sent a few "duds" to work on. These generally were quite stiff and also had at least one other setup problem. Usually inadequate bridge fit. Loosening them up a bit really helped them move into the average performance domain. The duds weren't just Eastmans, but included a range of interesting famous names. I can't think of one that remained a dud.

Any of the Eastman mandolins seem to really like a better bridge, although the latest shipments have come with improved bridges. I'm currently using Cumberland Acoustics and the Husky walrus. A surprising number of people want a Husky.

My experience with perhaps 200 Eastman mandoliins is that going through the setup and a few other basics levels out the performance a great deal, moving the apparently weak ones up in performance. Also brings out a few reasonably consistent characteristics of the various models. My personal favorites have been the expensive F models. Some of them have been really nice. Not necessarily a "bluegrass" sound, but with some of the things I like to listen for in violins. Very fast response, for one thing.

[wayfaringstranger]

Stephen's played more Eastmans then I have.

But I'm not sure I buy the idea that there can be significant sonic consistencies deliniated among model lines (esp. for a maker with a lot of output). I don't know this for certain, but I'd bet that they're all carved to the same blueprints, with the same dimensions and internal specs, regardless of model number. Which suggests that the differences between the models has more to do with cosmetics, hardware, and wood choice (which is in itself often cosmetic; an ugly piece of wood can sound terriffic and vice-versa, yet you don't often see ugly wood on high-dollar mandos).

Gold hardware, bound F-holes, and highly-flamed backs aren't going to make a mandolin sound inherently better than a plain-jane cousin carved to the same specs. It's entirely possible that they put more time into the final carving of the more expensive mandolins. There's nothing wrong with any of those things; looks do matter. But I still think that if sound is what you're looking for, you should shop by the sound of individual mandolins, not by model number.

I've played a number of individual ow-end gibsons, collings, webers, etc. that, sonically speaking, whipped the pants off of other individual high-dollar instruments made by the same builder.

In the end, it all comes down to the individual instruments, which are a bit like snowflakes.

[wayfaringstranger]

(Hit "submit" too fast, sorry):

Stephen's absolutely right that a good setup can make a world of difference. So your first sonic impressions may not always be 100% accurate. I'm not so sure about the bridge, though: I replaced a cheap bridge on my mando with a much more expensive version of the same thing, and while it was definitely more stable, it didn't really make any difference in sound. YMMV.

Best Eastman I've ever played was a 500 series F5 with a big ugly ding in the top. Outstanding instrument.

[DryBones]

Hey Jason, what's going on with your Eastmans? #(Looks wrong, doesn't it? http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif )
Both had the bridge stuck to the finish and when I removed the bridges during a string change they left a black smudgey area where the bridge was as well as a tiny ridge in the finish. Worse on the 505, hardly noticable on the 604. The bridge pins on both of them seem to be bending towards the fretboard as well. Here the 604 seems worse than the 505. When I received it the action was pretty high so I lowered it down but the pins still appear bent slightly. I am sure both of these could use a good bridge replacement and a really good setup. I bought them both from different dealers and to tell the truth I don't think there was much "setup" done considering both had the intonation off about the width of the bridge and the bridges were stuck in/to the finish. I have thought about contacting Eastman CS just to see what they say but I will probably just have to pay someone to change the bridges and try to buff out the smudges.
Even with these small complaints I still can't find any reason to sell either of them and order a custom built. They sound great as is and I am sure would sound even better with a new bridge and setup. Besides,lefty mandolins are hard to come by and these might become collectables someday! http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Sorry for the long rant/post.

[LKN2MYIS]

A thought occured to me while reading through these posts.

Flame, gold tuners, etc., certainly shouldn't make the mando sound better. BUT - if it makes the player feel great to have an exceptional looking instrument, shouldn't that positively effect his playing?

If you pick up your instrument and think that it sounds and looks incredible, I would think you would play it more with more attention, and that's got to help the whole package.

There seems to be an underlying feeling that it isn't a good idea to spend money on looks as well as tone. Tone is indeed the most important, but it's also a delight to look, hold and play something you think is beautiful. (Ex-prom dates excluded!)

Anyhow, JMHO.

[Yellowmandolin]

That is an interesting thought. #I think that a person would pay more attention to good playing if they were holding a fine looking instrument, at first, but I think after some time, the look would cease to have any effect on the perceived tone. #It may be something like the placedo effect, too. #If you think it should sound good, it might!

[Red Englemann]

It may be something like the placedo effect, too. If you think it should sound good, it might!

This is just an observation, it appears that beauty is more important to collectors and amatures than professional musicians.

There are more and more Chinese instruments making their way into the American orchestra pits. I heard a $10,000 Chinese cello this week. The whole room reverberated as it was being played, wow!

I am not bashing, but I played the most famous brand of mandolins least expensive offering this week, most any Eastman would have been far superior. My advise is to go with tone and let the brand and bling alone.

Red

[wayfaringstranger]

LKN2MYIS has a good point, though: if mando-bling makes you happy (and makes you feel good about playing), then there's absolutely nothing wrong with springing for it.

It's not really my thing, but I wouldn't turn down an exceptional sounding instrument just because it was gussied up.
http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[JEStanek]

I think the placebo effect on an owner can be pretty powerful on beginning players, espescially as we move up the mando-food chain. Many of the less expensive a style mandos have the look (sunburst, maybe some flame) and the more expensive imports (MK, Morgan Monroe, Eastman to a degree too) offer us prettier woods and more inlay. I had a Morgan Monroe with a tree of life inlay in the neck. I got so lost on it.

Now that I've been through some mandos and am more interested in how it sounds and plays vs how it looks, that'll be the deciding factor in future purchases, for me. Red is correct, leave the bling be and buy the best tone you can afford regardless of headstock appointments.

Jamie

[LKN2MYIS]

I don't know if I'd call it a placebo effect.

If someone purchases an instrument that sounds just like what they want, and it's also stunning, it just seems that they'll be drawn to play it more often. Three senses involved: hearing, seeing, feeling. IMHO, sound and playability are primary, looks secondary. That being said, I take looks into consideration in third place where it's appropriate.

I would NEVER buy a mandolin that sounded great, but that would always be a bear to play. Similarly, I wouldn't buy one that played smoothly but sounded (to my ears) horrible. It's the proper balance that draws me. If that balance is struck, I'd pay attention to appearance but it wouldn't be a deciding factor unless the instrument was in close competition (in my mind and opinion) to another.

If I were to walk into a room where there were 5 mandos all with the sound I was looking for in the price range I had in mind, I think I'd buy the one that was visually more appealing (all things being equal).

I'd imagine that the more that you like about your instrument (or wife, for that matter!) draws you to be near it more and play it more.

I don't necesarily think this is a bad thing. I would think that an incredibly sounding mandolin that played beautifully and appealed to me visually would be a find - again providing it was in my price range.

I wouldn't get rid of an instrument because of looks if it played and sounded great - UNLESS it was too horrible to look at (painted pink with a skull and crossbones below the sound hole, for example). I would get rid of an instrument that sounded poorly or could not be made to play smoothly enough for my taste.

Just my opinion. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[JEStanek]

What I mean by placebo effect is a fancier looking mandolin that costs a bit more (given equal tonal properties) may inspire someone to play more into a more "worthy" instrument. A belief that the fancier instrument is somehow better and will help you become a better player...

Jamie

[LKN2MYIS]

Yep, that makes sense.