Gibson f-4

[Jonathan Peck]

I'm looking for opinions on Gibson F-4's made between the years 1916-1924. Other than the addition of a truss rod and adjustable bridge, are they pretty much the same in workmanship, materials, tone and playability?

[Dave Reiner]

Hi Jonathan-

Here's my subjective response, based on owning a few F4s and having played many more:

For F4 mandolins in the 1916-24 time period, the actual year is not a very strong predictor of workmanship, materials, tone and playability. #I'm mostly familiar those in VG+ to EXC condition. #Individual variations abound, but they seem to be fairly independent of the the year, and much more a function of how much the mandolins were played, how carefully they were treated and maintained, and what wood and other parts were on hand at the time.

That being said, the later ones, from 1921 on, seem to be a little bit harder-edged in tone, and the earlier ones a tiny bit tubbier -- but there are plenty of exceptions so it's a rather weak generalization.

For the earlier F4s, lack of a truss rod doesn't often seem to be an issue (although it is occasionally). #Lack of an adjustable bridge is ok some of the time, but may require some professional shimming or trimming, or replacement.

Of course, prices vary, with Loar era instruments being higher, and with all-original, EXC- examples commanding a premium from collector-players. #

Finally, tone and volume are (sometimes!) inversely related to condition; mandolins that have been played a lot (and look it) often sound better. #

I'm sure others will post as well, but that's my 2 cents... #

Dave http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[sunburst]

As a generalization, the earlier ones show a little more "style", or attention to the interaction of the curves and shapes of the design. There are exceptions that I've seen, and I guess it came down to who among the Gibson work force was doing the carving and binding. That "style" transcends condition and in my way of thinking constitutes better workmanship on those that have it whether newer or older. The ones I've seen with the most "style" to their workmanship have been early to mid 'teens.
Playability has much more to do with the set up than the build, other than the different neck widths and sizes. Most of the truss rod ones have smaller, narrower necks than the older ones, so playability is subjective.

[Bob A]

Every Gibson of the period is its own thing. Some are great, some are dogs, most are in between. My personal pref is for non-trussrodded instruments. My personal F4 is from 1921, has been played, has been repaired (back shrink, reglue interior support, crack from upper point to edge of soundhole trim) and has a later, screwed-on pickguard. While it's far from the loudest mandolion I've played, it does have a rich tonality, and records very well, I'm told.

I have an H4 mandola from 1915. I prefer the look and tone of the later instrument, though we're comparing apples and oranges in a sense.

Generalisation is pretty much useless, although amusing. You just have to try a bunch, see what you like and dislike, then find the one that best approaches your ideal. Consider it a quest, and figure that the journey is its own reward.

[sgarrity]

And aren't the Loar era F4s gonna have adi tops and varnish finishes?

[Ken Waltham]

All the F4's should have an adirondak top and a varnish finish. That was the wood most commonly available at the time. For me, I agree with Dave Reiner. He has several of my F4's, and is an astute buyer of them. They are independant, but, as a wide generalization, Loar period ones are more stacato, and earlier ones are "sweeter". My personal faves, probably by coincidence, have all been 1921's. Go figure.

[f5loar]

I remember when I meet the late great classical artist Herman Von Berniwitz that he felt his 1921 F4 was his loudest and sweetest mandolin he had ever owned and this man over 90 some years had owned hundreds of Gibson mandolins.

[theBlood]

I will have to confess to having acquired F-4 #68472 on ebay a couple of weeks ago, in a moment of some weakness. That number puts it in late '21, I believe. It was missing some original hardware but the finish is in good shape for what appeared to be a player's instrument. It came with a Calton. I think the color was a factor in my weakness as it is quite lovely. Add the 87 yrs of yellowing to the original reddish tobacco stain along with the look and feel of varnish...I can't stop looking at it.

I figured I'd check it out and if it didn't play or sound great then I could probably find another buyer. But now having played it for a few days, I'm thinking its pretty special. I have an exceptional 1918 A-1 as a reference, which has a huge bass and creamy trebles. The F-4 though, is a smidge louder in the bass, and the trebles seem more richly defined. The highs are the area where I hear the most difference from the A-1 with more clarity and depth. Its so pretty, though, that I know my subjectivity is not very reliable.

I play swing, blues, eclectic styles in gigs in a trio (and jam a fair amount in bluegrass circles), so I need the softer tones and strong bass of an oval hole, I've learned.

[Jonathan Peck]

Thanks for the descriptions in the differences between the pre and post truss rodded F-4's. I wound up trading on a 23' in clean condition. I can't wait to meet it in person!

[danb]

Nice Jonathan, looking forward to seeing more of it.

The comments on workmanship resonate with me. I think that in smaller production years you see more detail in the carving and generally nicer finishes, but they can all be good or bad. My favorites that I have played were a '22 truss rod model, and my 1909 3pt.

[Jonathan Peck]

Thanks Dan, I'm looking forward to seeing more of it too...It should be here tomorrow.

[sgarrity]

Between that and the Schneider, you're gonna have some nice ovals!!

[Bob DeVellis]

I agree with pretty much everything that's been said. Aesthetically, for me, the double-flowerpot and Handel tuners are a plus on the earlier models, but everybody's taste is different.

[Jim Garber]

One of the nicest F4s I have ever played is a friend's 1921 which has a Cremona finish, more brown than red.

Themn again take a look at this one (http://cgi.ebay.com/GIBSON-1921-F4-MANDOLIN-SERIAL-NUMBER-64375_W0QQitemZ160232354084) with a rather optimistic starting price.

[Jonathan Peck]

Considering that everyone contributing has played alot of F-4's over the years, what are the little things that would contribute to considering a particular F-4 as one of the nicest that you've played? Understanding that this is considered subjective, what are the qualities that you like in certain F-4's over others?

P.S. aesthetics also being a consideration

[danb]

Tonally speaking, I look for balance (each string same volume with same relative picking velocity), clean playing setup (nice fret height, flat board, action just right), mechanically sound (tuners work well), and usually a nice clear note that isn't too muddy. Some of them just grab you and make you want to play more.

For aesthetics, I personally love a really subtle sunburst or solid color, nice figure in the maple, and sharp precise carving. Orange ones are my favorites, followed closely by the subtle reburst ones of the early teens.

Older ones seem to have more mojo in my mind- the Orville Lyre label and the Torch & Wire inlay make my heart go pitter patter. Single piece backs, a nice case, all plusses in the aesthetic department.

[Bob A]

While a clean instrument is appealing visually, I have to say that my response to a mandolin is visceral rather than aesthetic. I can tell in a few minutes of playing whether it's a keeper or not. There's a certain feeling I get, that tells me that if I pass this one up I'll regret it.

Then too, an instrument that's been played will usually carry the signs of age and use, which are off-putting to the true maniac collector, but I don't find it objectionable, unless the thing looks terribly abused, or has been physically compromised. Even then, sometimes, if the sound is there and it's cheap enough, I'll bite.

I don't think my comments will be very helpful, for which I apologise. I hope you find a great mandolin, and I'm pleased that you want an F4. I value them above all other Gibson mandolins, personally. Others' mileage may differ.

[Jonathan Peck]

It finally arrived. It is in very clean condition with the usual dings and scratches typical of an instrument that's been played, but cared for. There isn't really any finish checking at all and the finish is in excellent condition only showing wear on the neck from being played.

The tuners are in good shape and the neck looks good except for a hump up around the 14th fret or so on the bass side. The threaded rods on the bridge look bent with the bridge leaning, but the saddle is a tight fit with the top.

I took her for a spin last night and she started to come back to life. This one is very clear and 'shimmery' on the top with nice even balance across the board. She's plenty loud and an easy player but I think it will definitely benefit from some nut and saddle work. The frets are so tiny that my fingers are a little sore. The neck has a deep 'V' which is also taking some getting used to, but it is not as narrow as I thought it would be. It definitely has 'the sound' I was expecting, just needs more playing.

Thanks again for your input.

[Jim Garber]

...as a wide generalization, Loar period ones are more stacato, and earlier ones are "sweeter".
I like your characterization of tone. I never liked the term "tubby" when applied to oval holes. It sounds derisive of the tone as opposed to the "superior" tone of the Loar F5 to which all mandolins are supposed to be compared to. They are IMHO just different, none better, necessarily, than the other.

[Jonathan Peck]

Sorry, one more question. Do you use medium or light gauge strings on your F-4's?

[Bob A]

I've been pleased to use PF250s on mine. As these instruments age, they don't seem to require high tension for good tom=ne production.

Your mileage may differ.

[Jonathan Peck]

Thanks Bob, I think my mileage is about the same. I took off the J-74's and put on a set of J-62's that I had in the drawer and finally starting enjoying this mandolin as much as I thought I would. Man, there's something about the midrange that I just haven't heard in modern instruments that combined with the clarity and sparkling trebles just grabs your shorts and pulls them through your nose. The F-4 has a unique voice that is very special and hard to put down.

I just ordered a set of the PF-250 and A-260's to try out next.

[Jonathan Peck]

Between that and the Schneider, you're gonna have some nice ovals!!
Hey Sean,

if you're ever up north, drop me line and we'll hook up.

[Fliss]

Congratulations on your new acquisition, Jonathan, sounds like you've got a beautiful mandolin there!

Fliss

[Jonathan Peck]

Hey Fliss, that's funny, I just finished writing you an e-mail. I'm definitely enjoying it. It's hard to put into words some of the qualities that make this mandolin such a joy to play. Don't tell my wife, but after I dropped the kids at school, I went back home and played for a few hours before going to work. Ah, I'm probably busted anyway since I ran into some of our neighbors on my way out the door. They asked me what I was doing home, I told them I was having a 'mental health day' http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Bob A]

Glad you found the mediums to your liking. I myself was surprised that I preferred bright bronze to phosphor bronze, but there it is. I don't know if that sort of thing is as instrument-specific as it seems to be with violins, for example, or if it's just personal preference. Let us know your thoughts in this regard, when you've had a chance to experiment a bit.

[Michael Cameron]

I'll chime in late(as usual). I bought a truss-rodded, 1924 F4(beautiful red sunburst) from Dexter at Carmel Music about 15 years ago. I already had a 1913 F4(black/red back&sides) I got from Elderly. I really preferred the older mando in looks and tone;so ended up selling the Loar-era beauty to a man who plays in a mandolin orchestra in Atlanta. The 1913 black F4 is VERY clean and all-original. #I truly dislike the tiny frets and the huge, sharp V-neck;but I probably won't be the one to have it refretted. It has been a conundrum for me to own this great sounding mandolin and yet not enjoy playing it because of the neck being so big and uncomfortable for me even after Randy Wood did a nice set-up.

[Bob A]

Due perhaps to the fact that it was my first decent and for several decades my only mandolin, I confess to liking the pre-trussrod neck profile. I suspect it's a matter of getting used to it. As to fret size, I have a teens Gib mandola that had been refreeted with large frets; looks odd to me, though it plays well. I do find the tiny frets a bit offputting, but again, they're what I got used to. I admit a few extra thousandths here and there might be an improvement.