2006 gibson f4 prototype

[simo26]

One of two built by Gibson last year. This one is X braced the other has Tone Bars. Never were to be sold to the public, I lucked out! According to Danny Roberts they were just trying to build different things last year. The label says F4 Prototype and is unsigned.

[Darren Kern]

Beautiful, I love the 'burst.

[mythicfish]

Nice barn.
Good luck.

Curt

[Bill Van Liere]

Beautiful instrument.

I wish gibson was making more of this type of thing.

How does it sound? What type of music do you like to play with this?

[simo26]

It sounds great, very loud and resonant. I mostly play old time stuff on it mostly Norman Blake type of tunes, hence it's name, Norman. But it sounds great on classical as well as bluegrass it just does not have a percussive chop like an F hole instrument. Here is a photo of the headstock.

[simo26]

Curt,
You are correct and that was what finally made me decide to buy the instrument, they included the barn with the sale. By the way, it is a "Loar Era Barn"
Alex

[B. T. Walker]

What a unique (well almost) instrument. Looks great. I wonder if Gibson ever came to a decision regarding production beyond the prototypes. Me like.

[simo26]

Unlike most vintage F5's you can still buy vintage F4's for less than what Gibson would retail this instrument for, so I guess time and the market will determine that. Gibson told me that they had no current plans to go into production.
Alex

[evanreilly]

A while back, I was getting the tour of OAI with Big Joe and Danny Roberts. I had just picked up my 1924 F-4 from Lynn Dudenbostel, who had done a bit of restoration on it.
I passed the vintage F-4 around to all interested parties, and asked about OAI producing an F-4. I was told that it would require a whole different tooling from the F-5 styles, and was not likely to happen.

[Wolfbane Stevens]

Nice Mandolin! I guess it's just the market but I still don't understand why it just so "difficult" for Gibson to start making f4's or even mandolas / mandocello's etc. It seems to me that if a small builder can make these instruments and still make a living then shouldn't a larger corporation be able to do the same? I mean Weber has done this for years and they are a considerably smaller company, yet still very much in business.

[PaulD]

I don't have any "inside track" on this, but I imagine it's just a matter of putting your resources to the most profitable use. As Alex says, if the price of vintage F4s is low enough they may not figure there's enough profit to justify the expense in tooling up for production runs (which is quite different that one-off or small batch building). They would also have to divert some of their staff from producing F5s.

So if they can sell all the F5s they can build for a decent profit it probably doesn't make good business sense to disrupt this and branch out into F4s. Of course the flipside is that if they figure there's a future market for F4s they might do well to ramp up that line. I would guess they've got some pretty smart marketing and operations folks looking at the numbers, and the fact that they've recently dabbled in the Flatiron and F4 prototypes has me thinking that the scales are near the tipping point.

pd

[sunburst]

...It seems to me that if a small builder can make these instruments and still make a living then shouldn't a larger corporation be able to do the same? I mean Weber has done this for years and they are a considerably smaller company, yet still very much in business.
Here on this forum, the Mandolin Cafe, people often seem to think of Gibson as a mandolin company. Over on the Banjo Hangout, they seem to think of Gibson as a banjo company.
From what I gather, Mandolins and banjos together don't come close to the amount of electric guitar business that Gibson does, and then there's Baldwin pianos, flat top guitars, archtop guitars, and probably other stuff.
Weber, on the other hand is mostly a mandolin company.

I think the competition from F2s and F4s (which are still pretty darned reasonably priced on the market, BTW) from previous "incarnations" of the Gibson company, along with fairly small demand, is enough to make the numbers just not work for new Gibson ovals.

[testore]

I agree with John. BUT that is the finest new Gibson I've ever seen. Everyone here knows my usual dislike for new Gibson mandolins but this one is simply stunning. I don't care what name is on the headstock, if it sucks it sucks, and that one is a great mandolin. There, now you can't label me a Gibson basher, I call them like I see them.

[PaulD]

John also makes a great point... OAI is a small part of Gibson, and mandolins are a subset of that. That probably takes the F5-F4 issue most of the way off the radar for the top management.

I also meant to say what a beauty that mando is. I would love an F4... old or new, and it would be great to have such a fine one-of-a-kind specimen.

pd

[markishandsome]

Different tooling? For what? The only difference I can see in the prototype is they cut the hole in a different place on the top. It still has the long neck and stock F5 everything else. Heck it's even got the same tone bars and I doubt it's graduated very differently. If they actually made real f4s with the 12 fret neck I can see where they'd have to do things differently, but they could whip up a truckload of these hybrids with almost no modification to their standard procedures. I'd personally rather see 15-fret a4s if they're too busy to do 12 fret f4s. Just slapping an oval hole on what is in all other respects an f5 just looks off. I'm sure it's an awesome instrument in its own right and I mean no disrespect to gibson or the instrument's owner.

[sunburst]

Just slapping an oval hole on what is in all other respects an f5 just looks off.
That's certainly a different perspective than mine.
I've always thought an F5 looked like somebody slapped f-holes and a long neck on what was otherwise an F4, which, when you think about it, is pretty much what they did.
To me, the F2s and F4s always looked like a more balanced, coherent design than the F5. I think the longer neck looks better with some re-design of the body and peghead.

[evanreilly]

Mark:
If you have an opportunity to hold a vintage F-4 and an F-5 in hand and compare them, take an inspection mirror and look inside them. And take a good look at the thickness of the two tops. Very different tops. Not the same graduations at all, nor the same bracing.

[markishandsome]

Well that was exactly my point. This new non-vintage gibson "f4" does have the same bracing as an f5. I can't really tell from the pictures if the arching or graduations are similar, but would be interested to find out.

[Big Joe]

Hey Guys...the actual designation for this mandolin was the "F6". Danny Roberts was responsible for this and prototyped these into production. It takes quite a bit of work to make what seem to think is minor alterations. The tops are quite different from the F5.

Only two of these were made. We showed them at 05 IBMA and there was quite a bit of excitement. This was in a time of flux for OAI. Charlie was gone and a new GM was there but on his way out. If consistent leadership had been in place several cool instruments may have made it through the system....and possible a couple uncool (like the flame maple topped F5 with a spruce back).

The F6 was an incredible instrument with a tone about halfway between the F4 and the F5 with all the playability of the F5. It looks GREAT, sounds GREAT, and should have been a hit.

Remember though, the market for this product is quite small. Many talk about wanting Gibson to build one, but when it came time to putting the cash on the line it is often a different story. Many of us think it would be cool to have one available if we ever decided to buy one, but without orders in hand the market appears too small for the new jigs and training to make it worth it. They sell all the mandolins they build now, so why take some people from those lines to build something that may or may not sell. From a business perspective it is not feasable.

One off builders can do many things a place like Gibson cannot for a million reasons. A smaller builder can build one just because he wants to and he does the work himself so he is only out whatever he puts into it. In a larger shop there are many more things to consider. It was pretty amazing we got two of them built and even more amazing one of them ever got out of Gibson.

[simo26]

Joe,
Thanks for your insight on this instrument. The label does say F4 Prototype on it with no signature. I love the sound and feel of playing it but must admit the detail work has a lot to be desired. The rosette is very inconsistent and some of the lacquer work could be better. Believe me I am happy to have it but I do also like nice woodwork. Do you remember who built it and what was the criteria for how the tops should be made. I called Danny Roberts about it and he said one was X Braced (this one) and the other had tone bars. I do love the color though, beautiful burst.
Thanks,
Alex

[Steve Davis]

I think it is beautiful. Let me know if you decide to sell it please. If that time ever comes I hope I have the money.

[Big Joe]

Alex...that instrument was never designed to leave the shop and I'm sure the company would be a bit unhappy having that mandolin in circulation considering it was a never approved project by senior management in corporate.

It was built under Danny's supervision. It was certainly a test run to see what came out. Yours, I believe was the first one made and is the rougher of the two, though both are pretty nice. It was just an attempt to see what we could do with the stuff we had and to see how it would perform. We were incredibly blown away by its tone and playability and the overall look. I have wanted one of these ever since I saw the first one. Needless to say, I am envious...even if it is not perfect. You have a one of a kind in circulation. I hope you enjoy it.

[B. T. Walker]

...that instrument was never designed to leave the shop and I'm sure the company would be a bit unhappy having that mandolin in circulation considering it was a never approved project by senior management in corporate.

It was built under Danny's supervision. #It was certainly a test run to see what came out. #Yours, I believe was the first one made and is the rougher of the two, though both are pretty nice. #You have a one of a kind in circulation.
These sage words from Big Joe mean you should never, ever sell it unless it means starvation...without contacting me first. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Wolfbane Stevens]

This has been an interesting thread - I am the fourth owner of the Flatiron Oval F that came up on line here a few years ago. It's been a great mandolin, but there has been nothing to really compare it to (I really would like to hear it against one of the new Weber Vintage F's). I go from really liking the sound to really liking the sound of my A-9 better - subjective, I know. I thought it might be of interest to share the following correspondence I have had with a Gibson employee about this instrument:

---------------------------------------------------------
Question: While I've got your ear, I just bought the Flatiron oval-f off of someone on the mandolin cafe. I really like the mandolin. I understand that Gibson will not be bringing these into production. If you did play this mandolin, what was your impression of it, I.e., the f4/f5 hybrid. It seems like you guys used some really good wood for it's construction, but it also seems like the previous 3 owners really did not play it at all. - It still smells brand new and it just seems really solid, almost still tight.

The guy I bought it from said that the bridge pickup had been installed at the factory. The wire from the bridge runs under the tailpiece thru a hole in the top! (under the tailpiece). Is this the common way to do this? Or is it just that this was a prototype and you guys were just experimenting late at night in the sound lab?

I'd love to hear your insight on my new (used) mandolin, but if you don't have the time to respond I'd completely understand.

----------------------------------------------------------

Response: I played all of them I was over mandolins at the time we were doing these proto types. What type bracing does yours have and what color is it?
I always tried to use good wood on any prototype we built.
I can't say for sure but I don't think we installed that pickup here, but that is a common way that pickups are installed.

-----Original --------------------------------------
Question:
Here are some pictures of the Flatiron. It has the X-bracing. The wood on the treble side of the soundboard has some really interesting figure in it (sort-of a "silking" to it, but different) - I don't think that the pictures capture this. This mandolin has some good weight to it - much heavier than my A-9. - the rim is also thicker by about 1/8th. - Isn't that the same as the Steffy model? Is that what this mandolin started out as, or is it unique to itself? As I understand it, you folks made a few of these - on the cafe some people have been speaking about another f4/f5 with "the Gibson" inlayed on the headstock (seen at NAMM I believe), sort of an F-5g but with an oval hole. So...I guess you tried both tone bars and X-bracing, perhaps a transverse brace? Too bad that the world is more interested in f-holes than oval holes. These little guys are really neat. Thanks for making such a creation.

Thanks!
----------------------------------------------------------
Response:
That is a good sounding one, probably the best looking one we did, there also was the Chet orange and the rusty red. The best sounding ones were the x brace, they just sounded more open that the others.
We did a few of each, Gibson and Flatiron, in different colors and different bracing. If they will ever put them in production? I don't know, I am not involved with production anymore so I don't know what they have planned these days.
The rim differences are just due to them being hand built, the rims are sanded down on on a big belly sander, by hand and it is really easy for them to vary just a bit in width.
-----------------------------------------------------------


So I guess the question is, did Gibson ever sell off the Chet orange and the rusty red models, or is that for the months to come...inquiring minds...

[Big Joe]

I'm not sure who you spoke to, but the only F with oval holes was the one you got. There were a couple A models with oval holes, but they were not orange. There were 2 Gibson oval F style and that was it. The pickup was installed by Gibson at the request of the first owner. The Flatiron was quite a mandolin. It does not sound like an F holed instrument, but then it should not. It also has the longer neck like the Gibson F6 in a post in the photo section.

The bracing was X braced. This product never made it past the prototype stage (yours), but there was one that was somewhat orange colored made in China. Yours was made at OAI in the USA. Hope this helps.

[Wolfbane Stevens]

Thanks Big Joe, It was Danny Roberts that I was corresponding with. Tell me, does my Flation and this X-braced oval hole gibson (F6?) that this thread is about have the same X-bracing as Blondie? Do both these mandolins have the same bracing pattern? Thanks in advance.

[BBarton]

Interesting thread, and a lovely looking instrument. #While perhaps a prototype for Gibson, the idea for an F-4 with longer neck is not new. #My recent acquisition (see New Kid on My Block - Sawchyn 02-C thread) is similar -- a traditional F-4 body, including internal bracing and non-"floating" fingerboard, but with 15th-fret neck join instead of 12th -- a design the builder has used for a few years now. #Weber also came out with a similar prototype a short while back. #The similarities are obvious, but I wonder what the differences in construction are (and of course how they sound).

[Big Joe]

The Flatiron and Gibson F6 should have the same bracing. Blondie has a different x bracing.

[johnnymando]

I played one of the 2 F6's built at the Roanoke Weekend fall of 2005. David Harvey brought it with him from Gibson.
It sounded great, had more volume than any F2 or F4 I'd ever played. And played like butter with the long scale neck. Who owns these today?
Thanks,
John Denniston

[labraid]

What's an f6 look like? (I thought I made mine up! Gonna pick a letter like sixffth next time)

I've got an f4 with some new arching coming up soon.

And flatties with tone bars tae! the deja-voo thread... man, I'm scared.!.!.[shift-1 in excess]