The price of a llyod loar f-5

[Bernie Daniel]

I am currently negociating on a vintage mastertone tenor tenor and I have been thinking about the value of vintage instruments.

If one were to assume that the price of a fine condition and playing Loar F-5 was $200K and a better sounding/playing recent Gibson DMM is $25K how much of that $175K difference is due to the rarity of the Loar and how much to its superior tonal qualities?

I know the answer would differ by individual. #

I am in awe of and respectful of the Llyod Loar F-5 and the place it holds in the mandolin world -- but I personally would not pay more than double the price for the vintage aspect -- thus assuming the two mandolins (Loar vs. DMM) were at least comparable with respect to playing/sounding-- I would fork over $50K for a Loar -- after that I say someone else can have it. #

But as noted everyone has their own views/value-system on this.

appologies for the"Z" in the title line!

[Joel Spaulding]

If one were to assume that the price of a fine condition and playing Loar F-5 was $200K and a better sounding/playing recent Gibson DMM is $25K how much of that $175K difference is due to the rarity of the Loar and how much to its superior tonal qualities?
Well, if the DMM is better sounding in one's opinion, I would suggest none of the difference would be due to the Loar's tonal quality. If both insruments were similar sounding, side by side, then my humble answer would be "most" of the $175k difference would be due to the Loar's rarity, collectibility and mojo factor. No one has made a real Loar since 1924 so that has to be worth something #http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif Quite a few discussions in the past regarding this very topic.

The real experts will give far better answers - I'm not even worthy of being a pretend expert (I couldn't play a Loar expert on TV)

[Darryl Wolfe]

Your comment makes alot of sense for ONE PERSON like yourself and a particular instrument new and then a vintage one. # However it falls apart when you factor in 300 people thinking the same as you and only 5 available a year on the market and 300 in existance.

In other words, yes it might make sense between a new A-model oval hole mandolin and an old vintage Gibson one.

[fredfrank]

I would say that all of the difference is due to the fact that they are in limited supply, they are the real deal, etc. While the MM of today are arguably very close in sound, they are still producing them, and will be available for a long time to come. I'm sure the numbers of MM's are also far greater than the total number Loars produced.

In the end, I'd have to say that anything is worth what people would pay for it. You won't pay 200K for a Loar, so it's not worth that much-to you.

If you are into golf at all, you might remember when Callaway came out with the Big Bertha drivers. People were flabbergasted that a single golf club could cost more than a $100. Now, people pay many times more than that without even thinking about it.

The value of money is an interesting thing.

[Bernie Daniel]

f5journl: Your comment makes alot of sense for ONE PERSON like yourself and a particular instrument new and then a vintage one. # However it falls apart when you factor in 300 people thinking the same as you and only 5 available a year on the market and 300 in existance.


Good point. #So for me this means the only way I'll ever have a Loar F-5 is if I stumble across a heretofore undiscovered one -- like maybe in the front window of a barbershop or something.

My barbershop only has magazines though.... http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Joel Spaulding]

I have always been of the belief that value truly is what one is willing to pay. So, for the factors I mentioned above (rarity and collectability being foremost) I would say a Loar would be worth the extra $175K for me - if I were in that market.

[kudzugypsy]

your beliefs on the LL vs MM values are based on reasoning - but the collectibles market does not conform to reasoning - has NOTHING to do with it, and never will - who in the world would pay $2 million for a baseball or $80 million for a painting one could get an exact reproduction of that 99.999% of the people couldnt tell the difference between? but people are lined up to pay at that and more. certain mandolins and guitars are no different.

the reason people pay $200K for a loar or any other collectible is the speculation that they will be able to sell it in the future for much more than that - even though they (LLs) may sound *better* - the price imo is 90% driven by condition, rarity, supply and demand at the given time - ie in the next 10+ years, when a lot of the present loar owners start to unload them (due to death, old age, illness, fixed incomes, etc) and if the market does not see the younger buyers step in, then the prices will reflect that - right now, there are probably a dozen LLs for sale at the same time, unheard of, and they arent moving for various reasons (even the ones priced *low*) - BUT if Eric Clapton comes out with a BG CD and is playing a LL, then you will suddenly have 6 million guitar players all wanting LL mandolins and the price will go through the roof. it could go either way.

[hoffmannia2k7]

my 03 ford taurus goes as far as your 67 corvette

[Joel Spaulding]

kudzu,

You would be one of the experts I referenced in an earlier post. Your points are right on and I agree with all your statements except that the ONLY (my word not yours)reason #people pay $200K is speculation of future increased value ----> profit. I believe (actually you are the first to accuse me of having reason) some Loar owners, rare car owners, etc simply want to own an example of the "best", The "Holy Grail" #a term often tossed around here. Some of these people just #want one and have the means to keep one - or more, with no intention of selling.

I would submit that people falling into that category represent only a #very small number of Loar owners but they do exist.

[Bernie Daniel]

drmole: Some of these people just want one and have the means to keep one - or more, with no intention of selling. I would submit that people falling into that category represent only a very small number of Loar owners but they do exist.


That is an interesting side bar to the OP. What percentage of Loar oweners are just wanting to have a holy grail or to have a piece of history, or what precentage are speculators hoping to turn a profit someday, or still what precentage have a Loar because they think it is still the best sounding mandolin and their thrill is in playing it?

I guess one question that could be asked is, if there are as Darryl suggests, circa 300 Loars in the world what percentage of them are being played either professionally or by "home pickers" and what percentage are sitting in a collector's vault somewhere?

[chip]

yawn...

[Spruce]

Yawn all you want, Chip, but don't underestimate the role that this forum, and other forums discussing vintage instruments (the Les Paul forum readily comes to mind) has had in driving the price of Loars and other vintage instruments...

[Tom Morse]

While speculation can drive a market more forcefully than supply and demand (look what it's doing to crude oil), these prices could be a "whatever the market will bear" issue. When people with huge disposable incomes want things, they can pay any price and that drives the price goes up. It's what's driving the less well-heeled out of Flagstaff and other choice scenic places to live. On the other hand, if many of us had purchased LLs 25 years ago, that would have a speculative coup. Is an LL $175,000 better sounding than, say, a Monteleone? I can't even wrap my brain around that. What I can appreciate most is that LLs are truly great and historic works of American art and in that sense alone the high prices are probably justified.

[Joel Spaulding]

yawn...
Always have loved that horse emoticon BUT.... while this has been an often discussed topic there are new members daily, the market changes due to various world events, economic situations change frequently, and Loars are always of interest to many who play BG, an F5, a Gibson or all the above.
Message board participation is voluntary not compulsory - but Chip if you feel compelled - we'll try not to talk about this when we know you are watching. #http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Links]

I find all of these discussions interesting because I fall into a lot of these catagories. #I am a collector and player(debatable), but also a collector of many other "antique" items. #I buy many items because I want the best "example" that I can afford (and sometimes not afford) to own. #However, although I almost never sell any of my colletibles, I almost always buy with re-sale value in mind, as you never know when something unforeseen might affect your financial situation. #I should mention, that in my experience dealing with antiques, the "best", regardless of price, are always the easiest to sale.

I look at many of my items (ie. a Scagel sheath knife that I bought for $139 (now worth about 25K) and a 1930 Martin OM-18 (bought for $200, now worth approx. 15-20k)) as worth about what I paid for them. #I don't dwell on the fact that they have increased greatly in value. I bought them to enjoy, regardless of the price, so that's just the way I look at them. #When you depart this earth, what difference does it make anyway #- #except to you spouse or children!

[Bernie Daniel]

chip: yawn



drmole: Message board participation is voluntary not compulsory - but Chip if you feel compelled - we'll try not to talk about this when we know you are watching.

Yeah, gee whiz if I had known that really important people were on line I would have saved my post for a more appropriate time, and also I would have made sure that eveyone knew it was not mandatory to read what I post.
http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

My appologies.

[kudzugypsy]

about the well-heeled, big money buyers having a big influence on the market price of LLs - i dont think there are as many of those as some would believe - first off, the ones i know are so far out there that they only want the absolute best of the best, completely original down to the case key kind of buyers...and for that kind of find, price is of little issue. those are the kind that pay a 25%+ price premium for REALLY good pieces. there are very few of these left - most already in big money hands that wont surface again until estates are liquidated years from now (or divorce settlements).

the majority of LL owners are just regular folks, yeah, some are doctors, and lawyers and the like, but many are retired police officers, university faculty, everyday kind of joe's, etc. - of course most of these bought 15-30 years ago when you could get a bank loan for the full amount and have it paid off in 4 years - i just met a guy with a '24 Loar who did just that 15 years ago - of course, you cant do that anymore. like many things, its all about timing and getting in before the gold rush - the time to buy a LL was pre-1996, i passed on a '24 back around '95 for $24K...dumb now, but it didnt sound any better than the mandolin i was already playing (or so i thought then...i've played many more since and realize how ignorant i was about tone ) - that was my once in a lifetime chance and i passed on it, so i dont beat myself over the head anymore wanting one.

i wouldnt even call most LL owners *collectors*, they are more Loar obsessed.

[Glassweb]

What precentage have a Loar because they think it is still the best sounding mandolin and their thrill is in playing it?
I'm in this camp. The Loar F5 I'm playing now is the most perfect mandolin I have ever had the pleasure of playing. When I purchased it I wasn't thinking about how it might appreciate over the years. In fact, I sold a minty July 9th sidebound Loar in order to acquire this one - the July 9th being a much better "investment". So yes, I am absolutely amazed and thrilled every time I pick up this instrument. The tone, the balance, the response, the volume, the complexity, the neck, the beauty... no other Loar I've played (more than fifty of 'em) can beat it. That said, I could easily live with the Kimble mandolin and mandola I played in the midwest a couple of weeks ago!

[Paul Kotapish]

Don't let 'em grind you down, Bernie. It's a fair and evergreen point of discussion, and just because the issue has been discussed here before . . . a lot . . . doesn't mean that it isn't fun to kick it around some more.

The attraction of the very high-end vintage instrument market continues to elude me. While I absolutely understand the desire to have a Loar or a 1937 D-28 and will readily acknowledge the intrinsic merit of many of those instruments as producers of wonderful tone, volume, etc., I have always been more intrigued by the prospect of supporting new builders than tracking down the vintage holy grail. I'm much more excited by the news that there is a great young luthier showing a lot of promise than I am by news that someone found a previously undocumented Loar in grandpa's closet.

And I reckon that I wasn't blessed with the ears to appreciate the micro-level sonic subtleties that drive so much of the discussion about Loars. When I hear a great player--Grisman, Reischman, Thile, Compton, McCoury, Rozum, et al--I always think they sound wonderful and just like themselves regardless of which particular instrument they are playing at a given moment. Maybe I'm just too easily distracted by the music itself, but I have never noticed that Grisman, for one example, sounds dramatically different or any better on a Loar than on a Giacomel or a Gilchrist or pretty much anything he picks up, for that matter.

[chip]

Just woke up..yawn...ok, lets see...Why is something priced so high when others sound as good....hmmm...supply and demand? Has withstood the test of time? Why is a Ferrari worth more than a chevette, etc. etc. I don't know but it just seems crystal clear to me as to why one of the premier luthiers who set the bar for others would have made an instrument that only so many were made and as to why it's worth what it is...Stradavarius comes to mind also...Quality, Rarity,etc. $150,000 isn't that much for something iconic as a LLoyd Loar...You can bank on it continuing upwards in value through the years as they sure aren't being made any longer and never will. So having said that the $175,000 difference is simply put, the rarity...I wouldn't be driving a Dusenburg arouond the freeway either.

[Spruce]

"On the other hand, if many of us had purchased LLs 25 years ago, that would have a speculative coup"

Hell, scoring one ten years ago would have done the trick....

[Glassweb]

I have never noticed that Grisman, for one example, sounds dramatically different or any better on a Loar than on a Giacomel or a Gilchrist or pretty much anything he picks up, for that matter.
I can definitely hear the difference between Grisman's Loar and the other mandolins he plays! In addition, I would say that most styles of music played on the mandolin today only utilize a fraction of the instrument's tonal possibilities.

[sgarrity]

Most of them sound good. #Not a lot were made. #Lots of people want one cuz that's what The Mon and lots of their other mando pickin' heros played. #Price go up!

Are they worth it? #That's up to you. #I've owned some really nice guitars and mandolins, all by modern luthiers. #One particular guitar I owned I was convinced was the best thing ever built with 6 strings. #And lots of people agreed. #Then, THEN....I got to play a friend's '39 D-18. #What a guitar!! #It was so light, responsive and loud all while maintaining the kind of tone you dream about. #I swear it almost came alive when you played it. That guitar was worth about 10x what mine was worth at the time. #Was it worth 10x more to me? #Not really. #But you pay a LOT of $$$ to get that little bit extra that makes an instrument "special."

And this next statement may be unpopular but....It takes some time and experience playing LOTS of high end, very good instruments to understand what that little bit "extra" is.

[Darryl Wolfe]

And this next statement may be unpopular but....It takes some time and experience playing LOTS of high end, very good instruments to understand what that little bit "extra" is.
BINGO

I know several accomplished mandolin players that used to rebuff Loars..."they don't sound that much better" ect ect.....and now they own one

(it would be totally unfair to name names)

[45ACP-GDLF5]

I've got my eye on a couple of Loars, but my wallet's eyes are still closed. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

I would love to own one. I've played a couple, but that's as close as I've come so far.

[Greg H.]

That is an interesting side bar to the OP. #What percentage of Loar oweners are just wanting to have a holy grail or to have a piece of history, or what precentage are speculators hoping to turn a profit someday, or still what precentage have a Loar because they think it is still the best sounding mandolin and their thrill is in playing it?

I guess one question that could be asked is, if there are as Darryl suggests, circa 300 Loars in the world what percentage of them are being played either professionally or by "home pickers" and what percentage are sitting in a collector's vault somewhere?
I know of multiple professional or semi-professional mandolinists who own multiple loars. The idea being you have them to play and you have the retirement fund simultaneously. On that score Herschal Sizemore comes to mind as does Tony Williamson (and there are another 1 or 2 less famous players like that as well).

[opie wan]

What I know about LL's would fit in a thimble..... a small one at that. I will add this though. There are certain things in the world that cannot be reproduced with authenticity. Great works of art. Original instruments that raise the bar and expand tonal possibilities. The list goes on. I view fine instruments sort of like real estate. There are people in the world that make a lot of money flipping real estate... and so be it. They take advantage of other peoples greed and desires. The real fact of it all is this. We are only here for a given time period. We can't do a damned thing about it. We're going to die. Money doesn't mean so much in the grand scheme of things... nor does what you "own." Essentially, whether it's real estate, works of art, fine instruments, or football teams, you only hold it for the next generation.

If I had a loar I would not play it unless it was to demonstrate the finer aspects of the instrument. I would view it, show it, and preserve it for the next generation. At this point instruments like the Loar are simply on this earth to inspire players and luthiers to expand their craft and break new ground. They are not for players to use at this point. Instruments are made to be played but..... great musicians can make great music on wash tubs. It's my belief, based on what I've read (never played a Loar) that the Loar has crossed over the threshold from instrument to art. They should be preserved. Just some thoughts.

[allenhopkins]

If I had a loar I would not play it unless it was to demonstrate the finer aspects of the instrument. #I would view it, show it, and preserve it for the next generation. #At this point instruments like the Loar are simply on this earth to inspire players and luthiers to expand their craft and break new ground. #They are not for players to use at this point. #Instruments are made to be played but..... great musicians can make great music on wash tubs. #It's my belief, based on what I've read (never played a Loar) that the Loar has crossed over the threshold from instrument to art. #They should be preserved. #Just some thoughts.
Well, Opie, I disagree. #Instruments are made to be played, and one of the reasons Loar mandolins are in such demand that the price has all those zeroes in it, is because many of them sound uniquely wonderful.

I agree they should be preserved, but not in glass cases; they should be treated with care and respect, but played, IMHO. #Look at the Stradivarius violins that have been bought by syndicates etc., then loaned or leased to orchestras and soloists so that audiences can still hear the tones of what are considered the best of all instruments.

As to why Loar mandolins are priced so high: a lot has to do with the connection to Bill Monroe, for sure. #Had he played an Epiphone or a Lyon & Healy, Loars would still be prestigious (Dave Appollon [sp.?] and other respected mandolin players played 'em), but not a quantum level higher than any others, as they are now.

Limited supply (Loar can't build any more instruments, just as Van Gogh, Rembrandt and Picasso can't paint any more pictures) is obviously a factor. #And another is, honestly, speculation -- buying an object in the hope that it will appreciate in value. #Today's $175K Loar may be salable at $400K in 15 years. #Or maybe not.

The price of any "product," in contemporary capitalist society, is set by the market. #Limited supply, increasing demand, fueled by reputation, actual quality, and speculative prediction, adds up to a "bull market," in either Enron stock, mortgage-backed securities, or Lloyd Loar Gibson F-5's. #Some of them go in one direction, some in another...time will tell.

[Spruce]

"They are not for players to use at this point."

Man, you need to hang out with some Strad owners...

You could sell one and buy 20 of nicest Loars on the market at $250K a pop, and yet they are played and played, and passed around for all to see...

[Jim Broyles]

What I know about LL's would fit in a thimble..... a small one at that. #I will add this though. #There are certain things in the world that cannot be reproduced with authenticity. #Great works of art. #Original instruments that raise the bar and expand tonal possibilities. #The list goes on. #I view fine instruments sort of like real estate. #There are people in the world that make a lot of money flipping real estate... and so be it. #They take advantage of other peoples greed and desires. #The real fact of it all is this. #We are only here for a given time period. #We can't do a damned thing about it. #We're going to die. #Money doesn't mean so much in the grand scheme of things... nor does what you "own." #Essentially, whether it's real estate, works of art, fine instruments, or football teams, you only hold it for the next generation.

If I had a loar I would not play it unless it was to demonstrate the finer aspects of the instrument. #I would view it, show it, and preserve it for the next generation. #At this point instruments like the Loar are simply on this earth to inspire players and luthiers to expand their craft and break new ground. #They are not for players to use at this point. #Instruments are made to be played but..... great musicians can make great music on wash tubs. #It's my belief, based on what I've read (never played a Loar) that the Loar has crossed over the threshold from instrument to art. #They should be preserved. #Just some thoughts.
No wonder. You break your stuff! http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

Seriously, I don't understand this. If I had one I'd play it, and I might even alter it to suit my personal preferences. Makes no sense to own a musical instrument and not play it, especially knowing that it produces the most desired sound of an instrument of its type.

[kudzugypsy]

And this next statement may be unpopular but....It takes some time and experience playing LOTS of high end, very good instruments to understand what that little bit "extra" is.
that is so true - i know it took many years for me to understand the "lore", because many amature pickers think in terms of volume and chop and are especially drawn to massive low end (i'm speaking tonal frequency, not cheap) - Loars are mid-rangy with a dry honk and are very balanced across the tonal spectrum, something foreign to most ears if you dont know what you are listening for.

- its also interesting to note that a very famous mandolin dealer once told me that most players cant pull that *extra* out of a LL to begin with - it is a different animal - i've even noticed quite a change in Ronnie McCoury's playing style since the Loar purchase, as if he is adjusting to its potential. another think i have noticed is that long-time loar players actually play differently that non-loar pickers - sure, its minimal, but noticeable. i'm referring to the way they approach the instrument, not saying they are better players. they let the instrument *breath* and sound...get this word - more "mandony" http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[opie wan]

I sort of view it as respect for humanity and the builder. Once something is altered or destroyed it deprives future musicians and artisans of the experience. To play a Loar at this point is a..... okay... I'm stopping that line because I don't want to step on any toes. To put it simply, to use something up and deprive others of it's use is selfish. The most important aspect of making an instrument sing is the player.

Imagine telling your kids.... I had the last Loar and I chopped it so it would fit my playing preferences... geez... I could launch here.

[Jim Broyles]

Go ahead, we've had this discussion here before. If you wanted a current builder to build you a Loar replica, but make some design changes so you like playing it, you'd do it. Well, the same thing applies to the real deal, as far as I'm concerned. You do own it, despite lofty pronouncements to the contrary, such as we are only stewards of our possessions, etc., - nope, we own them. I would especially do it if I were making my living from playing the mandolin, but I'd do it as who I already am, IF I got one, and there was something about it I would prefer to be different, such as the fretboard extension.

[Jim Broyles]

Another thought - if I decided that I could live with it the way it is, I would DEFINITELY play it. There would be no way I could rationalize owning such an instrument if it were not to play it and enjoy it. I would drive a classic car full time too, if I had one, and it was legal - it isn't in PA.

[opie wan]

If I were looking for an instrument to play... which I usually am... I try to get the one that fits the needs of what I'm doing at the time. I don't chop instruments. Hey, that's just me. I'm sure, if you wanted a convertable automobile, you'd go out and by a Ferrari and get a chain saw and cut the roof off. That just makes sense to me!!

[Jim Broyles]

Why would I do that if I could find the convertible I wanted on the market? That last statement was an utterly strange thing to say, given that that you do not know me, and that it is absurd.

[sgarrity]

By "chopping" instruments, I assume you mean modifying them in some physical way??

Would it surprise you to know then that all Strads have had their necks replaced?
Why? To suit the playing style of the time. And they're still worth a coupla bucks! http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[opie wan]

There are a few truths in life.
1. Follow the money.
2. It's all about ego.
3. See #1.

[sgarrity]

So anyway, back to some intelligent discussion about Loars......

[Jim Broyles]

I sure have to follow it, because I don't have any of my own.

[opie wan]

With all my noble sentiment... I've never had a 250K instrument... I couldn't have one because.... I have to follow the money too... I don't know if I'd play it because I'm not in that situation.

I'd think that scratching a Loar... or a Strad (or burning it with a cigar for that matter).... would be a lot like scratching the Mona Lisa. There are instruments... and then there are "instruments." I'd add that I wouldn't alter a Loar to suit me just like I wouldn't paint teeth onto the Mona Lisa because I happen to like women with all their teeth..... LMAO.
Anyway, peace..... when you die I hope you donate your Loar to a museum so we can all appreciate it.
http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Marc Berman]

Anyway, peace..... when you die I hope you donate your Loar to a museum so we can all appreciate it.
http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
I feel a Loar is a musical instrument made to be played not just to be looked at. If it was put in a museum what would there be to appreciate? There are luthiers today putting out mandolins with workmanship equaling or bettering a Loar.
To me not playing it would be like telling a young Mikhail Baryshnikov not to dance because he might injure himself. He should just stand there in his tights so we can appreciate him as the dancer he could be.

[Spruce]

"There are luthiers today putting out mandolins with workmanship equaling or bettering a Loar."

Way, way better.... http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Jim Broyles]

Scratching a Loar?? You're only talking about putting a scratch on it?? Hails bails, I thought you just didn't want to cut on it! Besides that, I heard that the most famous Loar in the world has a few scratches on it. But it ain't the same thing. The painting is to be looked at in order to be appreciated, the mandolin is to be played in order to be appreciated. If it were only to look at and enjoyed as a piece of artwork we'd only need pictures of them. I will never own a Loar unless I find one in an attic somewhere. I doubt I'll ever be able to buy one, and even if I had the money, I wouldn't use it on a mandolin. But if I did, I would not donate it to a museum. Nobody can appreciate it in a museum anyway, unless the museum has someone playing it. I would leave it to my heirs and they can donate it if they want to.

[Bernie Daniel]

opie wan, while I admire you desire to protect fine things and preserve them for the next generation etc -- your concept in its logical extension makes no sense to me. #

Yes you could lock up all the Loars. #That being the case the Loar mandolin would become a piece of art like a statue or a painting in a museum.

Once that happen why would anyone want to save it? #It would never be played so the sound of a Loar would never be heard and it would become legend and something of mythology.

The next generation would never develop an appreciation for something they never heard. Would they? Recordings don't count -- we appreciate instruments in live performances I think.

Besides if our generation has to lock them up for the next generation -- then what generation down the line is the "privilaged generation" that gets to break them out for a jam? I'm being silly but you get the point.

And I think jbmando has it right -- why worry about small unintended scratches -- they do not affect the sound or playability of the mandolin do they?

That is how a mandolin over time becomes "distressed"! #

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

[opie wan]

hmmm.... I just lost my best post in history. In general, I agree that instruments are to be played. However, something as rare and precious as a Loar should be preserved. I'd think that if a museum had one they'd invite GREAT players to come in and play it for fund raising and to allow those who appreciate such things to enjoy the experience. I'd line up to be the guy that took care of it <GRIN>. Of course, I wouldn't smoke or drink around the instrument...... and to quote another poster.... before I handled it I'd shower, get in pajamas, and wrap the room in bubble wrap. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Jim Broyles]

Rare and precious? Certain gemstones are rare and precious. Only because a certain acoustical engineer who was only around long enough to sign a couple hundred mandolins, one of which ended up hanging in a Florida barbershop, are Loar signed mandolins considered rare and precious. If Bill Monroe had continued to play his F7 we might not even be having this conversation. As has been noted in this thread, there are favorably comparable mandolins available in today's market at a fraction of the cost of a Loar. When it gets right down to it, it is just some wood, some plastic and some metal.

[Glassweb]

When it gets right down to it, it is just some wood, some plastic and some metal.
Sure, and The Starry Night was just some paint slopped on a piece of stretched canvas!

[Jim Broyles]

GW, I would not use the word slopped. I think that it is hyperbolic to try to characterize what I said about mandolins using that kind of term. If we take emotion out of the equation, and just look at intrinsic values, yeah, Starry Night is a canvas with some paint on it. But I didn't demean the Loar by using a emotionally charged word like "slopped." The only thing I am trying to say is that we are talking about a thing which was made to play music, not to sit in an atmospherically controlled chamber for people to look at, because it, beautiful to look at as it is, is not a work of art in the visual sense, except to some mandolin aficionados, like us, and if I ever owned one, I would play it and not merely look at it.

[MikeEdgerton]

Sure, and The Starry Night was just some paint slopped on a piece of stretched canvas!
Yup, but when it all boils down to basics it was paint slapped on on a piece of stretched canvas but... It was done by a person that was very talented. In the case of the Loar mandolins it was wood and plastic put together by some very talented people. When it all comes down to it when Lloyd Loar signed the instruments for Gibson he was no different than the person that marks a pair of blue jeans "Inspected by No. 4" with the exception that he really knew what he wanted to see in a musical instrument and we are assuming he was very picky about the sound quality. I suppose Number 4 could really care about the jeans they are inspecting but I digress.

We can take things back to the materials they are made of but we can't lose sight of the fact that it's the talented human beings that make these things what they are. The talent is what separates the great from the not so great mandolins.

[SternART]

Best part of this thread on llyod loar and Ztone
is the topic title.......zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Glassweb]

We can take things back to the materials they are made of but we can't lose sight of the fact that it's the talented human beings that make these things what they are.
Exactly the point I was trying to make...

[Five]

I don't think Bill would give 200 grand for a mando. Most of the icon players who own Loars gave nothing like that for them. I know that one person mentioned in this thread gave 6 for his when a new Gibson was around 3600. Give me the better sounding mandolin for a reasonable price.

[Links]

[QUOTE] "As to why Loar mandolins are priced so high: a lot has to do with the connection to Bill Monroe, for sure. #Had he played an Epiphone or a Lyon & Healy, Loars would still be prestigious (Dave Appollon [sp.?] and other respected mandolin players played 'em), but not a quantum level higher than any others, as they are now."

Allen #- #we hear this all the time and I guess we have always accepted it to be true. #Same with Earl Scruggs and the Gibson flathead Mastertone banjo. #If Earl had played a Bacon and Day we would all be hunting for them. #However, I think I have to disagree to some extent (and maybe a lot). #Certainly Monroe and Scruggs had an influence, but I don't think we are giving the instruments enough credit. #I think they can stand on their own even if Monroe and Scruggs never played or recorded with them. #If it hadn't been Bill or Earl, it sure would have been someone else. #I guess what we can say is that maybe Earl and Bill were a couple of the first to recognize the potential of these fine instruments.

[Jim Broyles]

Well, history being what it is, we would only be guessing if we were to say what we think would have happened, but I think links is probably right about this. The instruments do stand on their own merits. My belief is that they aren't enough better than an instrument I can afford to purchase to make me crave one.

[Five]

As for Earl's banjo. There are only 5 RBs like Earl's.

[allenhopkins]

Certainly Monroe and Scruggs had an influence, but I don't think we are giving the instruments enough credit. #I think they can stand on their own even if Monroe and Scruggs never played or recorded with them. #If it hadn't been Bill or Earl, it sure would have been someone else. #I guess what we can say is that maybe Earl and Bill were a couple of the first to recognize the potential of these fine instruments.
Links, I don't disagree with a single thing you're saying. #They are exceptional instruments, and would be on the top of anyone's list of great vintage mandolins (and banjos), had Monroe and Scruggs never existed, or if they had played other brands of instrument.

What I do believe, however, is that these instruments wouldn't be selling for five to ten times what other top-line instruments of the same vintage are selling for, were they not seen as somehow "iconic," due to their connection with these icons of bluegrass -- and, by extension, of the American music tradition.

Since this thread is about why Loar mandolins are so high-priced, I do think that the Monroe/bluegrass connection has a lot to do with it.

[Fretbear]

There are at least three simultaneous things going on with the three factory Grails (Loar mandolins, Mastertone banjos and pre-war Martin D-28's)
It must always be remembered that these are and always will be factory produced instruments built by salaried workers. In this they will always differ from something like a Stradivarius.
One is that they filled a niche created for them by musical geniuses and mavericks in a musical style that was not fully conceived of or in some cases even thought of at all when they were first produced, so they could be thought of adopted orphans. These are Bill Monroe, Earl Scruggs and Lester Flatt (along with any number of other bluegrass guitarists such as Jimmy Martin, Carter Stanley & George Shuffler). Their legacy is indistinguishable from the history of bluegrass music.
The second is that they were in their time (and some would say remain to this day) the very best available and became indistinguishable from the music and styles of the living legends that played them.
The third is that there will be no more of them and that their age, unlike most things in our modern throw-away culture, actually enhances their value, not only as the coolest of collectibles, but most amazingly for us as sound junkies, in their incredible tone.
The discussion of their current monetary value will always go on, but their place in musical history and their influence on modern luthiery, is secure.

[CES]

That guitar was worth about 10x what mine was worth at the time. #Was it worth 10x more to me? #Not really. #But you pay a LOT of $$$ to get that little bit extra that makes an instrument "special."

And this next statement may be unpopular but....It takes some time and experience playing LOTS of high end, very good instruments to understand what that little bit "extra" is.
I would totally agree. #I'm only beginning to discover how different (and usually better) quality instruments sound and play (with equivalent setups) than, say, my Kentucky. #My Kentucky sounds pretty good for its price-point, and to friends who don't know any better I only get complements about how beautiful it is and how great it sounds. #And it sounds like a mandolin. #BUT, definitely not like a great, or even very good mandolin.

I saw a 1927 small bodied Gibson guitar in a shop yesterday that immediately caught my eye on the wall with new Blueridges and Ovations...its condition didn't justify in my opinion the price they were asking, but, man, it had that sound that only 80 year old wood can get. #Just a year or two ago I probably wouldn't have picked it up just because of how beat-up it was, but my education continues...

That said, I'm no where close to hearing what I want to be able to hear. #I read an article a while back about a thirty-something violin virtuoso who was "renting to own" a Strad owned by numerous investors. #To my ear there wasn't a lot of difference between the Strad and the 20,000 dollar newer one he had played previously. #Part of that was just how good the guy was, but there certainly wasn't 2.6 million in difference to my ear...but there sure was to his, and I'm sure the difference is quite real.

As for the OP (sorry for the ramble), I'd say the price of Loars is what it is based on both factors you mentioned, but it varies from owner to owner...

[Glassweb]

Certainly Monroe and Scruggs had an influence, but I don't think we are giving the instruments enough credit. #I think they can stand on their own even if Monroe and Scruggs never played or recorded with them.
Thank you.

[chip]

"When it all comes down to it when Lloyd Loar signed the instruments for Gibson he was no different than the person that marks a pair of blue jeans "Inspected by No. 4" with the exception that he really knew what he wanted to see in a musical instrument and we are assuming he was very picky about the sound quality." Quote...

You are kidding, right?

[Glassweb]

There's a reason that most of the greatest mandolin luthiers of today use the F5 mandolin as their model. Sure, nobody "needs" to play a Loar to make great music, but I don't think a clean example of a Loar F5 is overpriced one bit.

[Jeff Chu]

strads have been around for over 300 years, and modified, becuase they are such high quality craftsmenship that they can last. built to last. This goes along with the loars. they are buildt to last so you dont have to worry that your kids wont be able to play it.... that is why they are always modeled after.

[Links]

Allen:

I agree. #You certainly can't discount the influence on price that "stars" of all ilks have on various instruments that they are connected with!

[MikeEdgerton]

Exactly the point I was trying to make...
I know.

[Five]

For those of you who need a Loar. Mandolin Central (Tony Williamson) is having a sale. Ad reads "The price on this mandolin has been reduced to well below market value!"

[Jim Broyles]

Well, what people often fail to recognize, is that if something doesn't sell at the so-called market value, then the reduced priced becomes the market value, and the market value continues to decline until the item sells, at which point the market value is established.

[kudzugypsy]

i've often wondered the same thing about "market value" - ex: if 12 Loars are listed for sale at $150K-250K and no buyers step in, that to ME, looks like there is no established "market value" figure. the price that they will all move at is more rational (of course, we have established rationality doesnt work in the collectibles market)
of course, Tony is one of the highest Loar authorities you will ever find, so he has a greater feel for the market than the rest of us.

its just my humbled opinion based purely on observation (ie-not any facts), but it seems the dealers have been trying to push the vintage market up way past "market value" over the last 5 years - this is starting to catch up with them now in some niche instruments, like Loars (30's Martin D's continue to climb up and up!)

[f5loar]

The Loar Tony has does have a Virzi. Monroe's didn't have one. Nuff said!
That's the reason the one at Gruhn's has not moved at $150,000. It has a Virzi. Now if it were a Fern with a Virzi different animal. They bring the bucks.

[TEE]

When it all comes down to it when Lloyd Loar signed the instruments for Gibson he was no different than the person that marks a pair of blue jeans "Inspected by No. 4"[/QUOTE]

Quite possibly the worst qoute I have ever read on this board. Loar designed the F5 and has been emulated by hundreds since. To compare him to "inspector no 4" in a blue jeans factory is ridiculous at best. However one feels about loars prices today is fine but I would not down play Mr. Loars contributions or his importance to designing the greatest F5 design to date.

Mike, I feel you are very knowledgable about mandolins but I had to look twice to make sure you were the one that posted that.

[f5loar]

I personally have never owned a pair of jeans that had the top,back,tone-bars and air-chambers tested and tuned by an acoustic engineer. I truly believe the tester at a jeans factory will not do that nor do I believe they have an engineer's college degree to do the testing. While Loar may have had a "plush" high paying job at Gibson one must wonder had they replaced him with another engineer of like abilities would the mandolins have maintained their quality of excellence verses slowly going down hill without that additional inspection.