New Collings, Old Collings

[Bob Stolkin]

I have a couple of used MT2s that I'm considering. They are long distance, so I won't be able to play before I decide on which. One is a 2002, the other a 2006. Have you folks that are familiar with these noticed any general improvement over the years, or were they always as good. In other words, although you can't know about two specific instruments, is there a general assumption that they'd gotten even better by 2006, or not?

[sgarrity]

An '02 would be a fairly early example. I prefer their stuff made in the last 4 years or so. They just seem to be stronger, more consistent instruments to me. I'm not sure of any changes Collings made during that time other than just getting more under their belt. YMMV

[GTG]

I don't know if it matters to you, but Bill Collings used to sign each label individually (through 2005, maybe? My 2004 MF is signed). I believe he's stopped doing that on most models. I don't know if this will ever affect value or if means anything different in terms of construction, but may be a minor point to consider.

[Nick Triesch]

Well I guess if it means that a newer unsigned Collings is even cleaner made and has even richer, cooler sound, I can't seem to think it would matter to me. But to be honest, the early Collings MF-5's for example were super clean and top of the line in sound and construction from the get go! Nick

[lovethemf5s]

I just A/B'd my '03 MF5 with a new one a couple of weeks ago and mine had a stronger voice and had more volume. The fit and finish was incredible on both. When the new one has some playing time it should be excellent too.

[R. Kane]

I know that you said long distance, and that you cannot play before deciding. Still, if it were me I'd ask the sellers for 48 hour approval period, and you pay the freight to ship both ways if you return. Most sellers will do that. And if I had the funds in my bank account I'd try to organize it so that you have them both in your hands at the same time.

I have and have had a bunch of early and late model Collings mandolins, and they are pretty consistent. Older/more played usually equals louder. Beyond that, its a matter of wood preference, appearance, and price. You probably can't go wrong.

[Dan Margolis]

You said it in your initial post: you can't know about specific instruments. The newer one may be only average, and the older one exceptional--or vice versa.

[Rick Schmidlin]

My 2004 MF5 sounds as good as they get and was signed by Bill. 70 years from now somebody may say it as good as a Loar. Of course with a different sound.

[Bill Auld]

Yep, my '03 MF5, signed by Bill, is unbelievably well made. It sounds it too ...

[Mandobar]

the only problem with the early collings mandolins was the fact that some of the necks were very thin and pointed. they have since refined the shape and offer a more rounded profile on request.

[Dan Margolis]

Speaking theoretically, since I own an MT-1 dated 1-00 and have played few other Collings mandolins, I would expect newer Collings to be generally better. It's a very smart company run by a very smart guy, and experience is the best teacher. Despite that (if it is true), an older one could still be better than a newer one. There is the factor of the wood used--one piece can sound better than another. Also, any good instrument might just be "the one."

[MWM]

I've played a bunch of these since they very first came out. I believe the tailpieces have changed but I doubt you'll hear a difference in sound based upon year. You will definitely notice differences in sound depending on how much and how hard they were played. MT2's in general have plenty of crisp mid-high end cutting volume and clarity. The low end opens from a lot of heavy play over time - like most red spruce. These are consistently outstanding instruments in both sound and finish.

FWIW: I bought a barely played 2004 earlier this year. I've probably put more play on it the last 4 months than it had in the last 4 years. It sounded great when I bought it and sounds even better already. My only regret is that I didn't buy one years ago.

[mandocaster]

As I have mentioned, ad nauseum, I love my new MF-5V. FWIW, it has a signed label. Maybe some models are still signed

[tango_grass]

Well, I've got an '03 MF-5, Which I think is signed by Bill, hard to read though...so I just assume.

I love it, and have had the chance the play it in the same day as a brand new MF-5, of course they are both killer, but there were tonal differences. But what can I say! They are both killer in their own unique ways. Its the joy of the hunt I suppose...

[T Little]

I have an MT2 from 9 99 and to me it's as good as any other I've tried through the years. They are certainly consistent but some just got an extra dose of mojo or something.

[Dave Harbst]

I have two MT's, both built in 2007. I've owned a lot of mandolins(still have too many) and I can't say about old vs new Collings, but both of my MT's sound fabulous. I consider the MT's among the best mandolins for the money these days.