Non Loar sound

[red7flag]

There was a thread that started that mentioned that Will Kimble moved in the last couple of years to a "Loar" sound. I think what appealed to me about the 2004 model F5 was that it had a sound of its own. That, going along with great fit and finnish and great playability. I think that was one thing that drew me to the Ellis when I played it. It had its own sound. Had it sounded Loar like, I would not have bought it. In my case that is because I already have a Loar like instrument in the Stanley. I really enjoy ABing the two instruments and find that each draws to a different part of me. In the thread comparing Kimbles and Altmans, my buddy Jim Richter jumped me for being loose with my concept of Loar sound. I did not respond much at that time as, to me, that was not the focus of the thread. For me, I am not looking for that Loar sound. That has already been done and continues to be done.
Tony

[Chris Biorkman]

From what I've heard, Tom isn't trying to replicate a Loar, which is different from what I've heard Will is aiming for. I'm glad they're both doing what they are, because both of them do it very, very well. It's nice to have options out there.

[Jonathan Peck]

Ok, I'll bite. What is the 'non Loar' sound???

[sgarrity]

I think of the Loar sound to be a dry, fundamental, mid-rangy tone with lots of pop. The Gibby MMs and DMMs I've played have all been in this category as well as the Red Diamond Vintage models. I think the majority of the time you'll find this tone more associated with Red Spruce tops.

I think of the modern tone to be fuller, bassier, balanced sound with more overtones that still has "pop" to the notes. Heiden, Collings, Brentrup come to mind here.

Of course it comes down to the way that particular instrument was built. I don't think you can get any better bluegrass tone that Mike Compton gets from his Gil F5. But some people tend to think they are in the modern tone camp. So who knows?

[JimRichter]

Tony, et al: My point in that thread was that the qualifier "Loar" tone is so loaded that it can't be used without some thought as to how it'll impact a builder. We've all seen how someone's review (be it balanced, dogging, or sycophantic praise) lengthens or shortens a builders list. I think you did a great job qualifying Loar tone for you as it applies to the "Monroe" Loar sound.

To disclose for those who don't know, Will's my buddy and I want to make sure his work is accurately depicted.

No disrespect intended. Onwards and upwards.

Jim

[Chris Biorkman]

When you have professional players like Statman playing your instruments, I think you are somewhat immune to the Cafe talk. Player endorsements speak for themselves.

[Russ Jordan]

I don't think you can get any better bluegrass tone that Mike Compton gets from his Gil F5. But some people tend to think they are in the modern tone camp. So who knows?

I can't find reports from the cafe news archives, but I seem to remember that Mike Compton, at Loarfest West 06, told the audience that he did not particularly like Loars. Does anyone know if Mike elaborated, why he does not like Loars, or if he was just joking?

[red7flag]

Ok, I'll bite. What is the 'non Loar' sound???

My first response to that question was any mandolin that does not sound like a Loar, but that would not be correct in this context and a bit sarcastic. I think we are talking about high end mandolins that strive for a different sound than the Loar. I would agree that to me the sound I hear from Mike Compton with his Gil is not Loar like. Collings would be a sound that departs radically from the Loar sound. I would add the high end Webers to that list too. But, within that list I was referring mostly to older Kimbles and Ellises that just have a different sound all of their own. Better than Loar? No, different. Has a beautiful clean sound that just rings out at you. I probably am not hitting this right. The best way to get it is to play a DMM or MM and then play a Collings or Ellis. Your ears will immediately tell the difference.
Tony

[Darryl Wolfe]

I can't find reports from the cafe news archives, but I seem to remember that Mike Compton, at Loarfest West 06, told the audience that he did not particularly like Loars. Does anyone know if Mike elaborated, why he does not like Loars, or if he was just joking?

This may sound weird coming from me, but the "Monroe sound" is probably more easily achieved by a very good player playing a non-Loar inspired mandolin such as a Gilchrist. Monroes mandolin has sonics that are tough for many players to achieve given a dozen Loars to play. In short, Monroes mandolin is different enough from most Loars that only a portion of that sound is captured by "most Loars". That portion varies from Loar to Loar


EDIT Sgarrity quote: "I don't think you can get any better bluegrass tone that Mike Compton gets from his Gil F5. But some people tend to think they are in the modern tone camp. So who knows?"

[Hans]

[QUOTE=sgarrity;580378]
I think of the modern tone to be fuller, bassier, balanced sound with more overtones that still has "pop" to the notes. Heiden, Collings, Brentrup come to mind here.

Shaun, I build them both ways. The F5C sounds like a Loar.

[Hans]

[QUOTE=sgarrity;580378]

I think of the modern tone to be fuller, bassier, balanced sound with more overtones that still has "pop" to the notes. Heiden, Collings, Brentrup come to mind here.

Shaun, I build them both ways. The F5C sounds like a Loar.

Well, here's why I don't like being able to delete a post.

[danb]

I can't find reports from the cafe news archives, but I seem to remember that Mike Compton, at Loarfest West 06, told the audience that he did not particularly like Loars. Does anyone know if Mike elaborated, why he does not like Loars, or if he was just joking?

I recall he was playing a '22 Loar as part of the proceedings. He said "I don't usually like Loar mandolins. I like *this* Loar"

There are several Loar sounds too, btw. I thought that the one I tried from Will's "Statman" batch sounded very much like a friend's Jan 12 Loar. That is to say, midrange, punch, commanding powerful tone.

My Wiens F5 sounds more like the March 22 batch with virzis, which is to say midrange and clear with more complexity than punch. This is my favorite batch, but not often brought up for tone in bluegrass settings.

The Feb 23 batch seems to be the favorite of many pro players.. John Reischman, Chris Thile, Mike Marshall.

The "Fern" sound is what more builders seem to go for. That's a bit more of a bluegrass sound. Bill Monroe's July 9 actually sounds more like a fern than most other Loars. The ferns (roughly 1925-1929 are usually called ferns) seem to have more punchiness and brashness, and are what are more archetypically associated with bluegrass tone.

[sgarrity]

[QUOTE=Hans;580525
Shaun, I build them both ways. The F5C sounds like a Loar. [/QUOTE]

I don't doubt that one bit!

[Will Kimble]

A few years back I came to a crossroads in my building. I quit thinking so much and built a mandolin using all of the information I had gathered studying and playing old Gibson mandolins. The result was something that I thought sounded a lot like a Loar, but didn't sound as distinctive as what I had been building previously. At first I was concerned that I would be building mandolins that didn't sound like "Kimbles" - whatever that means. But after some reflection I decided that as a player I would prefer to play a Loar, and that since I can't afford one I would prefer to play one of my own that sounded as much like a Loar as possible.

As time has passed, I have realized that they all sound like "Kimbles" no matter what I do. But some sound more like Loars to my ears than others. And I think that is a good thing.

As far as establishing what a "Loar" sound is... I agree that it is difficult to describe and that the term seems to be thrown around loosely. I also agree that there is a lot of variation, but I think that idea is overplayed as well. If you have played enough Loars, you start to recognize some common characteristics. And that is what I mean when I talk about Loar tone.

Will Kimble
www.kimblemandolins.com

[Gary Hedrick]

When one discuss the "Loar tone" I find it very hard to really quantify something that is really situational and qualitative. The picker is a lot of it. Bill could make a lot of lesser instruments sound Loar like. How you play it....the gauge of the strings...the height of the action....the type of pick used and the angle of pick attack all factor into the "sound" that comes out. I have owned a Loar.....played a bunch of them...and more importantly let a bunch of folks play the Loar I used to own. Amazing variety of sounds these folks would get out of the same instrument.......Hit it with a light pick with a light hand and it doesn't sound anything "Loar" like yet it was a very good sound that came out. When all of us talk about the Loar sound and comparing a modern luthier's product to that magical will o whisp that is the "Loar" sound frankly it's all of bunch of conjecture.
Pick the darn instrument and see if you like the sound that comes out if you do then you like the instrument.

When I pick Will's 116 that I now own, it sounds like Gary Hedrick playing his old January 12th, 1923 but give it to someone else....hmmm all bets are off.

[Chris Biorkman]

Well, whatever sound Will is going for, I think he's doing something right. Mine is as good as anything I've ever played to my ears. Oh, and I look really cool holding it too. :)

[red7flag]

I know I tred on very difficult ground disagreeing with Darryl, our esteemed Gibson expert. I have been told by people very knowledgable that my Stanley has that Loar sound: very strong mids, one register, bass while not booming fit with the rest of the instrument sound. Loar sound or not, that instrument just hums when anyone, especially somebody extremely proficient, takes it through the Monroe licks. I have heard my other instruments play Monroe, and they do an admirable job, but simply pale next to the Stanley. When you run it through Big Mon, its like the instrument just comes alive. Rawhide makes it smile. You get the analogy. Accomplished players after a few notes playing the Stanley will start playing Monroe. Is this by chance? You decide. Well, to revert to Darryl's comment, is it because it has or hasn't got the Loar sound? Well, I will leave that up to experts like Darryl, who I have great respect for and have learned a great deal from. But when I play Monroe, the Ellis, Collings, Weber, Lebeda stay in their cases. Does that make the Stanley a better instrument than those wonderful instruments? Only when playing Monroe. Just my take.
Tony

[Jonathan Peck]

There are several Loar sounds too, btw. I thought that the one I tried from Will's "Statman" batch sounded very much like a friend's Jan 12 Loar. That is to say, midrange, punch, commanding powerful tone.


Hey Dan,

Was that mandolin a blond by any chance? I only ask because I was told that you had played my #110 before I bought it from it's owner in Chicago and it fits your description. Coincidentally, my #72 is very dry and is more reminiscent of a Fern....maybe that's why I keep both:)

[JeffD]

My ear is not as developed. I can tell that "Gibson" sound, and I can hear it in other's mandolins striving for a Gibson sound. I am not sure I can really tell a Loar or not, and I certainly can't tell if a modern makers instrument is striving for the Loar sound or not.

I have been playing Butch Baldassari's CD Old Town, and I believe he is playing a Loar on that. From the sound all I can tell is that it is the greatest, tastiest , toniest sounding mandolin I have heard.

[Rick Schmidlin]

Playing John Reishmans Loars and he playing my Collings they could not be further apart, but both had purty sounds for the tin drum ear.

[lenf12]

I have been playing Butch Baldassari's CD Old Town, and I believe he is playing a Loar on that. From the sound all I can tell is that it is the greatest, tastiest , toniest sounding mandolin I have heard.[/QUOTE]

I don't know if Butch played a Loar on Old Town but he does/did own a '25 Fern F-5, one of the "unsigned Loars" and a magnificent sounding mandolin it is, especially in his hands. One of my all time favorite old Gibson F-5s is Tony Williamson's '27 Fern. In fact, I am drawn more to the sound of the Ferns than the Loars if I was shopping around.

Len B.
Clearwater, FL

[Will Kimble]

I think some of us are confusing the sound of Monroe with the sound of a Loar. A player can sound like Monroe, but a mandolin cannot. A mandolin can sound like a Loar, but a player cannot. I think this is an important point because the genius of these mandolins is how well they work for all kinds of music.

Will Kimble
www.kimblemandolins.com

[red7flag]

Again on rough terrain, but some mandos work best playing Celtic, I think of my Vintage A, or my Stanley playing Monroe, Ellis, almost anything, Lebeda, classical/Celtic. I think instruments carry the spririt of the builder that made them. I played your 2004 last week, Will. It talked to me. Was that from you, not directly, but your spirit was in that baby. It was a wonderful. While most high grade instruments can play different music, they seem to relish being played certain ways. I can play bluegrass with my Vintage A and the result is passable, but campared to me playing the same tune with either the Stanley or the Ellis, it just pales in comparison. There is a reason Mike
Compton plays his F5 Gil with NBB and his F4 with David Long. Could he play the F4 with NBB or the F5 with David Long? Certainly, but the end result would not be as satisfying. Again, just my take and provided with great respect to you Will.
Tony

[Chris Biorkman]

Compared to my Ellis, I would say that my Kimble is slightly more mid-rangy and punchier, while the Ellis has more of an emphasis on bass and has more overtones. Does that make one more suitable for bluegrass over the other? I don't think so. Both mandolins are top-notch and make their presence known when playing with others. I don't really get caught up in trying to achieve the Loar tone. All of the blind tests I have seen on the Cafe have shown me that even the most experienced among us have a hard time nailing down exactly what that is. All I can say is that my mandolin acquisition has come to an end for the time being. I have more than I need in what I already have, and am convinced that no matter how much money I was to spend, that I couldn't do any better.

[djweiss]

Just to add more fuel to the fire, but mandolins sound very different from the player's perspective and the audience...

I've recorded myself on a few different mandolins with my computer ...Prior to the test, I would have sworn each was *completely* different sounding (and therefore I needed all of them!) than the other, but listening back to the recordings, each of the mandolins sounded more similar than not. Without a doubt, the overriding variable was me! The similarities were astounding for such different "specs". At the end of the day, my conclusion was that a good mandolin is a good mandolin, regardless of musical style (and the player can make or break it).

The three mandolins "tested" were my 2007 Kimble A5 (Englemann Spruce), 2006 Vessel F5 (Red Spruce) and a 2004 Brentrup 21L (Italian Spruce). I wished I kept the sound files, but man it's tough listening to your own playing :)

-DJW

[danb]

Jonathan, that could well be the one :)

Hi Will, nice to see you here. I think your new stuff is great!

[Jonathan Peck]

Well, either way, it's the one I always reach for. Something about the power in this one...it's like hitting a golf ball on the screws

[Gary Hedrick]

Sayeth Dr Kimble "I think some of us are confusing the sound of Monroe with the sound of a Loar. A player can sound like Monroe, but a mandolin cannot. A mandolin can sound like a Loar, but a player cannot. I think this is an important point because the genius of these mandolins is how well they work for all kinds of music."

I think there is indeed some confusion on the issue because folks that are true experts in instruments like a Will or Lynn Dudenbostel or Gilchrist or insert a name....all can take an instrument and listen and look at it from a viewpoint that discounts the form in which it is played. They see it as specific work of art that produces certain sounds ...most of us put it into a context of what it being played on it.

So many of the mandolin tastings that are conducted blindfold produce results and are really mixed . From what I've seen most folks cannot really pick out what is a Loar from a a Dudenbosted etc. They know what sounds really good and what doesn't sound as good but picking out what is a Loar .....is difficult for most of us less trained observers.

So much seems to depend upon how it's played....ala the Tone Poems CD's.

All that said....trying to produce a "Loar" sound on a consistent basis seems to make sense to me.....afterall they were to be the amazing solo voice played by the concert master in an orchester.(sp)........

[Red Henry]

To my ears, while most of the Loar F-5s are excellent instruments, with a bell-like tone, they (at least the 15 or 20 I have played) often have distinct sounds. Also, many of them have quite good volume, while a few are disappointing in that regard. And to my ears, Monroe's old F-5 was not a typical Loar. It had a drier sound, and it also did not have a lot of volume. (David McLaughlin, who played Bill's mandolin a lot, agrees with this assessment.)

While none of us can sound like Monroe, it is not impossible to build a mandolin that sounds much like Bill's. The proof of that is that in 1968, he tried to buy one that he liked for that reason. The mandolin was brand-new, but it had a sound reminiscent of his old F-5. However, the builder, Randy Wood, had already promised to sell the instrument to Bernie Michelle. (It was the very first mandolin Randy made. I've heard this story both from Randy and from Bernie.)

Red

[Gary Hedrick]

Dan Beimborn says "here are several Loar sounds too, btw. I thought that the one I tried from Will's "Statman" batch sounded very much like a friend's Jan 12 Loar. That is to say, midrange, punch, commanding powerful tone." Might that friend live in Chicago? If so that is the Loar that I used to own and you are spot on about it. The 22's and early 23's had a different tone than many of the later ones. More bass the G and D strings have more body to them than many of the later Loars.

[Ivan Kelsall]

I think that Gary has it spot on re.the sound of a Loar & the sound of Bill Monroe. Many folk on here will have 'seen' as well as heard Bill Monroe in person,many times - i only got to see/hear him once,back in '66. Maybe it's just my opinion,but i haven't heard another Loar sound like his. John Reischman has a wonderful Loar & as i have most of his Bluegrass recordings,i've heard that instrument so many times i can 'hear' it's tone in my head as i 'hear' the tunes & it's totally unlike the sound of Bill Monroe's Loar,as is the 'sound' of the other Loar's that i have on record.
I'm trying to get round to the question - what did Bill Monroe's Mandolin sound like in the early days compared to the way it sounded in the '80's say ?. His Mandolin has such a unique tone,that i find it hard to imagine that tone 'evolving',i think that his Mandolin possibly sounded very similar when he bought it,maybe purely the result of the particular woods used in it's construction.
Whatever,when i think of the 'Loar sound' only his Mandolin comes to mind, & that is not to denigrate the other wonderful Loar instruments - it's just that tone,that tone,that tone....... !,
Saska

[Red Henry]

I think that the recorded examples of Bill's playing reflect the sound of his mandolin through the years, well enough. In the period in which I heard him live and on recordings (1968- on) I believed that the sound of his mandolin came through on the radio and on recordings quite well.

Bill's sound did change as time went along, and I had the impression that the sound he wanted (or preferred, or pursued, was best able to produce) evolved with age. His mandolin tone on "Bluegrass Instrumentals", after all, sounds to me considerably different from on "Master of Bluegrass", while both projects were recorded using the best mikes and tape recorders available at the time-- and tape-recording technology did not change that much between the 1950s and the late 1970s. (This was the era of Ampex's Model 350 recorders to the era of their Model AG-440 recorders, and many folks say the earlier Ampexes sounded better.)

Exactly right, many quality instruments, even when brand-new, have a sound which is distinctive and reflects what they will sound like many years later. Most good instruments improve with age, but some of the best ones already sound great (each in their own way) when newly made.

Red

[red7flag]

Probably the closest I have heard to Bill today is Mike Compton. I remember a memorable concert where Chris Henry (Red's very accomplished son (get his album, you will not be disappointed)) played a very strong version of I think it was Rawhide, up next was Mike Compton. He walked up to the mike with an arrogance mimicking Bill, saying in effect, here is how it is done. Then he ripped into it with a fury that was awe inspiring. Then turned abound when he was done as if to say, "See?" The whole audience cracked up. He not only could play "like" Bill, he had all the mannerisms when he wanted to show them. A very cool moment. I think Bill would sound like Bill playing an Italian bowlback, if it could survive the treatment. Probably couldn't. I will never kid myself that I ever sound like Bill playing, a mandolin I play may get that sound for a moment when I am "there".
Tony

[Red Henry]

There are so many eras in Bill's music. To my ears, Mike has completely captured the style Bill was playing in the 1970s onwards-- a bit different (smoother and possibly less angry) from what he was doing earlier. On the other hand, David McLaughlin specialized his study to Bill in the 1960s, because he was fascinated by Bill playing many experimental and revolutionary things.

My own greatest excitement with Bill's sound focuses on what he played from the late '30s to the early '50s. Christopher, in contrast, seems to soak up Bill's playing from all periods with equal facility (and recorded some examples of several Monroe styles on his CD). Others will have their own most fascinating period. To each his (and her) own--

Red

[red7flag]

Another Bill related story. I went to see Bill not long before his death at the Bell Cove in Hendersonville, TN. When it was his time to play, he was escorted to the stage by two women, one on each arm. He looked as though he would not make it to the stage, looking so infirmed. Once the women left him and he had the mando in hand, he started to play. Before long he was dancing, then on one foot. Was just jaw dropping. The whole time he was focused on different women in the crowd. Bill always played to the women. Once music was in place, he overcame his physical problems.
Tony

[Red Henry]

That's a good eyewitness story. And--



When it was his time to play, he was escorted to the stage by two women, one on each arm.
Tony


As they say, it's good work if you can get it!

Red

[Gary Hedrick]

Red, you and I think alike about our favorite era of Bill. I am most captivated by the Bill of the earlier years and into the 50's. But also imprinted on me is the Bill of the early 60's when he came to Bean Blossom with a band that was less than great....played to a "crowd" of 20 people and stood there mandolin in hand and by force of will made music. He pushed and poked and bullied folks with that instrument. In those days the action was a mile high on this mandolin and he was a force of nature. Making it happen the way he heard it in his mind.

But in those times the mandolin was more than just what you hear on the recordings. He would sometimes just get "pi**ed off" and play out of time to show the guitar player who was boss. Other times he would use it with all the volume it had to make his point about a tune.
As a teenager sitting in the control room watching, it was facinating...When I had a chance to play in the house band every week, I would wait for the time that Bill was coming. Just to see "how it was done"......

[pjlama]

Just to add more fuel to the fire, but mandolins sound very different from the player's perspective and the audience...

I've recorded myself on a few different mandolins with my computer ...Prior to the test, I would have sworn each was *completely* different sounding (and therefore I needed all of them!) than the other, but listening back to the recordings, each of the mandolins sounded more similar than not. Without a doubt, the overriding variable was me! The similarities were astounding for such different "specs". At the end of the day, my conclusion was that a good mandolin is a good mandolin, regardless of musical style (and the player can make or break it).

The three mandolins "tested" were my 2007 Kimble A5 (Englemann Spruce), 2006 Vessel F5 (Red Spruce) and a 2004 Brentrup 21L (Italian Spruce). I wished I kept the sound files, but man it's tough listening to your own playing :)

-DJW

"a good mandolin is a good mandolin" -DJW

This is about the smartest thing stated here on the Cafe. I've talked to Greg Boyd about mandolins and if it's good he says "It's one of those mandolins." Same with all the guys that sell high end mandos, nobody ever says it's the "ONE" a fine instrument is a fine instrument so you'll hear "it's a goodun". Now in regards to Loars and the Loar sound I know absolutely nothing and will not waste anybodies time with conjecture and speculation.

[Red Henry]

Right-- Mandolins (and other instruments) sound more alike than is generally recognized. There was a famous sound-tasting with violins, where fine virtuosos played famous violins behind a screen to a listening panel of judges. The violins all had their particular well-known sound characteristics, but the lists the judges made of the violins they heard had no correlation with which one was being played.

Recorded differences in mandolins will show when one is really striking-- and that has, I think, as much to do with the player as with the instrument.

Red

[Fretbear]

I've always enjoyed listening to Bill's playing even before he got his Loar. The smooth driving tone he got from his F-7 with Charlie was amazing and definitely state of the art.

[Ivan Kelsall]

Tony - I really wish i'd been there to see Mike Compton pull that one out of his hat- a great story,i'd have been grinnin' for a month after that.:grin:
Red - I've got the LP recording of 'Bluegrass Instrumentals' but not the "Masters Of Bluegrass" one,i do however have several more LP's by Bill Monroe (inc. 'Bluegrass Ramble' which he & his Banjo player Lamar Grier autographed for me in 1966,when Bill & the Boys came over to the UK). I'll have a good listen to a few of them when i get the chance,maybe i can answer my own query re.the evolution of his Mandolin sound & his varying style/s,
Saska

[Red Henry]

Red - I've got the LP recording of 'Bluegrass Instrumentals' but not the "Masters Of Bluegrass" one,i do however have several more LP's by Bill Monroe (inc. 'Bluegrass Ramble' which he & his Banjo player Lamar Grier autographed for me in 1966,when Bill & the Boys came over to the UK). ...
Saska

For the later Monroe, I believe that "Masters of Bluegrass" is, fortunately, available on CD. Also from that era is "Kenny Baker plays Bill Monroe," which features a wealth of Bill's playing, including some hard-to-find tunes.

Red

[cooper4205]

For the later Monroe, I believe that "Masters of Bluegrass" is, fortunately, available on CD. Also from that era is "Kenny Baker plays Bill Monroe," which features a wealth of Bill's playing, including some hard-to-find tunes.

Red

I think 'MoB' is only on 'Last Days on Earth' box set from Bear Family. You can, however, find "Kenny Baker plays Bill Monroe" on iTunes.