Distressed Vs Regular

[Shawn Gambrel]

What do you like more.

[opie wan]

I don't want to pay more for a "distressed" instrument. I'll do that myself, thank you.

[Jim]

When I buy a New instrument I want it to look that way.

[Ken Olmstead]

When I buy a New instrument I want it to look that way.


Pretty much says it all for me! :)

[TomTyrrell]

Depends on what it is. There is a lot more to a Gibson DMM than just banging up the finish. But if a "distressed" mandolin is only different because it is banged up I won't pay extra for it.

I don't really have a preference between the distressed look and the perfect look. I can't see much of the mandolin when I'm playing anyway. You can have a lot more fun with a distressed model because you don't have to be all crazy worrying about that first scratch.

[allenhopkins]

I'm waiting for the "pre-totaled" Cadillac sedan to be on the market.

Or to walk into McDonald's and order the "pre-bitten" Big Mac.

To me, it's the ad absurdum development of the "ripped jeans" look that started a few decades ago. My poor instruments get nicked, lacquer-checked, fret-worn and pick-scratched soon enough, thank you.

[Ken Olmstead]

:)) :)) Allen that's a scream!!

I never much cared for "Pre-washed" jeans either!

[northfolk]

It is really more about the sound and playability of a mandolin that I look for; it just so happens that I own two distressed models. I would not part with either one?

[JEStanek]

I personally like them looking clean and perfect to start, agonize over the first nick, smudge, and then get over it. To me distressing is a real finishing art. I've seen some really convincing looking ones and others that look pretty bad. Since distressing is normally a premium add on to an already pricey instrument (especially if you're getting one distressed well) I rather doubt I will go that way. However, should I ever buy a vintage Gibson oval hole, I'll spend less to get a great sounding/playing one than a more pristine one.. but not because I want the more distressed one.

Jamie

[John Flynn]

I initially didn't like the distressing idea, especially paying more for what is essentially less. I also had the feeling that it was pandering to "posers" who just wanted to pretend they had a vintage instrument. I've softened on it, though. I really don't like the look of shiny-new, glossy instruments, that's just my personal preference, and I do agonize over that first couple of nicks and scratches, so it would be nice not to worry about it. So I guess I'm in between. If I did a custom order, I would want a low gloss finish and I would not sweat an appearance imperfection, but I would not pay extra to have some "distressed look," especially not the really radical ones that have Monroe-style pick scratches on them.

[Rob Powell]

Well, I have to say, I like the way my Yellowstone looks AND sounds. Both Gibson and Weber have said there's more than just finish that goes into the distressing and I can tell you my Yellowstone sounds way different than other Yellowstone's I played. It does in fact sound older. It's lacquer but I suspect it's a thinner finish than the norm and I know they used old wood.

Would you pay extra to have the neck on your mando made smaller? Would you pay extra to have your mando voiced for bluegrass? Would you pay extra for a tone gard?

I'm guessing that some of you said yes to one or more of those and paying extra for the distressing is no different. In the end, I simply bought a more expensive Yellowstone because I thought it was the best mando in the store at the time.

[woodwizard]

I think some of the distressed models look pretty cool but I personally prefer a new look on a new mandolin and like others have said ... I'll do my own distressing thank you.

[Payit Forward]

I think even if I bought a distressed model, I'd still agonize over the first ding.

[gregjones]

I think the distressed models are ones that have incurred some sort of damage at the factory. Somebody knocked it off the bench or a rack fell over on the way to the next station. Years ago, they would have been scrapped or sold as a blem.

Then someone came up with a great idea.........take the factory damaged instruments, beat them up some more and charge extra.

[Patrick Sylvest]

Somebody dropped one at the factory and thought, 'I've got an idea', let's get some sandpaper and say we did this on purpose! The rest is history.

(The above statement is a work of fiction for the purpose of satire. Please do not treat it as a serious opinion and have a meltdown:mad:.) ;)

[Big Joe]

I may be a bit biased having worked on the Gibson Distressed program. If it were merely appearance I would not be interested more than just curiosity. However, the tonal difference was enough to put massive MAS on those of us who were involved in the project. I have played a couple Weber distressed that had a marked tonal change also. I was blown away with what they have done and have not hesitated to tell them how impressed I am.

I can tell you they are not instruments that were banged around in the shop and then distressed to hide any flaws. Only the very best were made into distressed while I was at the big G. We would finish them completely and they were completed MM's before we decided which to put into the distressed program. We chose the best examples for several reasons, one of which was to ensure that the best mandolins entered the program to help justify the increased cost. There is a LOT of increased labor in the distressing process and it is not easy to do.

Whether the distressed thing is for you is a personal thing entirely. I have loved mine. Brutus and Firewood were two incredible mandolins that have evolved to other owners (boo-hoo, boo-hoo) but they too would tell you how wonderful they are. I have heard some distressed that are better than others in my opinion, but no bad ones in my opinion. My input will not change opinions, nor should it. Just a voice from inside the program :) .

[B. T. Walker]

Thanks for the inside peek at the difference, Big Joe. A DMM in my hands probably (meaning surely) wouldn't justify the increased price, so I'd get a bright, shiny one.

[Howard33]

It would be interesting if the distressing program actually entailed the instrument to be played by a technician daily over a specific amount of time to not only break in the instrument, but provide a natural distressing period. Of course, this would then mean the instrument would not actually be new, but hey, nothings perfect.....

[Links]

I never bought my DMM thinking I wanted a mandolin that looked old. Thirty seconds in my hands, and having no intention of buying a new mandolin, is what sole me. If the MM sitting in the showcase next to it had sounded better, I would have probably bought it. It just "spoke" to me. I doubt if very many DMM or Yellowstone buyer bought them strictly on looks alone. That would make about as much sense as buying a new "non-distressed" for looks alone.

[jimbob]

I don't care for the whole distressed gimmick. If the DMM's sound better, OK, but they ought to be able to do all the "sound good stuff" to a mandolin and still make it look new. I agree with the comment about the jeans, cars. etc....if I buy anything new, I want it to look that way....period.

[dhmando]

Distressing and or aging of the varnish finishes makes a difference in the sound of the instruments. To my ear they sound older, more "played in". The distressed look isn't for everyone we realize, some folks like chocalate, some folks like strawberry, some like both. We still offer the regular MM for those that want to do the distressing themselves.:mandosmiley:

[sgarrity]

I like it if it's done well. That's the key! and I think the DMM is done well. If I had taht much $$$ to spend on a single mando, it would definitely be a front runner.

[Emmitt Sanders]

My 17 year old son just distressed my NEW Collings MF gloss top this last weekend, with a scratch across the soundboard.
I just received the Collings about a week and now it's DISTRESSED.

[Sean Greer]

I like it if it's done well. That's the key! and I think the DMM is done well. If I had taht much $$$ to spend on a single mando, it would definitely be a front runner.

I agree with you 100%! That Gibson DMM is schaaaawwweeeeettt! :mandosmiley:

[Bill James]

Here's a question that I ponder when these threads pop up:

Let's say you buy two MM's today, one distressed and one un-distressed. In twenty years, how will the value of the "naturally" distressed instrument compare to the value of the instrument that was distressed at the factory?

[opie wan]

I don't care for the whole distressed gimmick. If the DMM's sound better, OK, but they ought to be able to do all the "sound good stuff" to a mandolin and still make it look new. I agree with the comment about the jeans, cars. etc....if I buy anything new, I want it to look that way....period.

Okay... here's the deal. If you can make a Master Model sound better feel free to go ahead. I know the distressing process is a closely guarded secret but I sense a rub here.

If you can make the instrument sound better that should be an option without scarring up the outside. Just a thought here. I really do like my 15 or 20K instrument to shine. I want to put carnuba wax on it to preserve the integrety of the finish.

Put it another way David. If you can make an instrument sound better... shouldn't you? Isn't that the whole idea of buying a Gibson MM? Getting the best tone out there? Do I have to pay extra to get the best tone Gibson can get?..... and why does the outside have to be scarred and sanded to hell to get that tone?

To put it another way, I'm hearing that I'm getting the "second best tone" when I buy a master model because you guys can do more... if I'm willing to pay. I figure if if I'm putting 15 or 20 K on the table the tone better be as good as it can get.

Seems like a something isn't quite right. Even a broken in car can still have shiny paint.

[Chuck Naill]

Let's say you buy two MM's today, one distressed and one un-distressed. In twenty years, how will the value of the "naturally" distressed instrument compare to the value of the instrument that was distressed at the factory?

I was thinking the same thing.

chuck naill

[JEStanek]

From what I've seen (not 20 years worth of data) the used DMMs are proportionally more expensive used than a MM.

Jamie

[Jeff Rose]

I recently acquired a DMM with an assist from Big Joe. For the past few years I have played my Wiens #12 which is a beautiful, artful, wonderful mando. Compared to the Wiens the DMM looks a little rough around the edges. However, what strikes me at this point in my life is that my interest lies more in the art that comes out of the instrument not the art of the instrument. And the DMM that I am caretaking right now has a type of tone, volume and synthesis of musicality that I have never heard in any other mandolin ever. I have a friend who once told me that there can be more than one "best", and I believe that applies to the mandolin world. We are truly blessed that people like Charlie Derrington, Big Joe, David Harvey, Danny Roberts, Mike Kemnitzer, Paul Newson, Steve Gilchrist, Hans Brentrup, Tom Ellis, Michael Heiden, John Monteleone, Jamie Wiens, Chris Stanley, Andy Poe, and so many other wonderful people, build beautiful instruments so we can play them and be amazed by the magic that they have created.

One of the cool side benefits of the DMM is that wherever my band plays invariably some kid will come up after the show and start looking at my mando. I can't help but remember what is was like when i was that kid and when I hand him the DMM I am not worried that it he is going to put a scratch in it...

[fiddledoc]

INteresting how in the fiddle world it's almost impossible to sell an instrument that's not "distressed". The violin world has been involved in the "gimmick" of antiquing instruments for at least 200 years now.

[dhmando]

Okay... here's the deal. If you can make a Master Model sound better feel free to go ahead. I know the distressing process is a closely guarded secret but I sense a rub here.

If you can make the instrument sound better that should be an option without scarring up the outside. Just a thought here. I really do like my 15 or 20K instrument to shine. I want to put carnuba wax on it to preserve the integrety of the finish.

Put it another way David. If you can make an instrument sound better... shouldn't you? Isn't that the whole idea of buying a Gibson MM? Getting the best tone out there? Do I have to pay extra to get the best tone Gibson can get?..... and why does the outside have to be scarred and sanded to hell to get that tone?

To put it another way, I'm hearing that I'm getting the "second best tone" when I buy a master model because you guys can do more... if I'm willing to pay. I figure if if I'm putting 15 or 20 K on the table the tone better be as good as it can get.

Seems like a something isn't quite right. Even a broken in car can still have shiny paint.


Walt,
Our distressed finish is subtle and achieves a believable aged look. I never implied that that the tone of a MM is a "second best tone". I stated it is a different flavor. When reading your post, I am not able to determine if you have had the opportunity to play both a MM and a DMM. If you are ever in the Nashville area, I would be happy to help you compare the two.

[John Flynn]

Here's a question that I ponder when these threads pop up:

Let's say you buy two MM's today, one distressed and one un-distressed. In twenty years, how will the value of the "naturally" distressed instrument compare to the value of the instrument that was distressed at the factory?
Ha! In my hands, you couldn't tell them apart in 20 years! :))

[Andrew B. Carlson]

I haven't played either, so I can't comment on tone. I will say that I prefer the appearance of the DMM as opposed to the MM. It's not that I want to "pose" as it were, but having my instrument glint into someones eye or having it look shiny like a diamond just doesn't do it for me. I guess I just like non flashy things. That's just personal preference. This being said, I do a fine job of distressing the instruments I have without trying. Playing comes first, and although I don't smash them like Kurt Cobain, I don't baby them while I'm playing.

I'm wondering though, when it comes to a DMM sounding better than a MM, did Gibson's distressing process start by trying to make a mandolin sound as though it were really old (some would say better) or was it purely a cosmetic goal. I've heard than Gibson does a UV process that changes the wood a bit. Maybe they were trying the "de-damping" thing and the side affect was crackle in the finish. So they just went with it. I'm just speculating. Maybe Joe or DH can speak to this.

[Ivan Kelsall]

I like both - but i must admit to the fact that the appeal of distressed models has grown on me to the point where,if i had a choice of buying a new Mandolin & could have either an un-distressed one or a distressed one,i'd most likely go for the distressed one.
I've just bought a Lebeda F-5 "Special" (used & 8 years old) which has a Varnish finish. It looks superb - not distressed but 'worn in'. It doesn't have the high gloss finish of my Weber Fern & i find it very appealing indeed,
Saska :mandosmiley:

[Rob Powell]

I was "distressed" by this thread :grin: since I own a Weber Yellowstone that's been distressed. So yesterday, I went to one of my favorite places to go...Melodee Music in Leesburg to play a few different mandos. I wanted to see how much of a poser I was. I am happy to report that while I may be a poser, it has nothin' to do with my mando ;)

I favor the Leesburg store over Sterling because Rick has more mandos. I also found out that one of my old band members is working there but I digress. Rick also had another distressed Yellowstone as well as a Fern, a Big Sky, a regular Yellowstone and a gaggle of Bitterroots, all with various upgrades. He also has a Collings MF, all flavors of Eastmans and some Breedloves. Lotsa good karma in the acoustic room:cool:

The mission was to determine if any of them sounded better than my Yellowstone because I find myself in the market for an upgrade or possibly a second mando.

What I found was that there wasn't a single instrument in there, including the other distressed Yellowstone that floated my boat in the tone department. It made me remember why I bought the Yellowstone in the first place. From a visual perspective, the Fern and the Big Sky were much more pleasing to the eye. However, my Yellowstone cleaned their clocks from an aural perspective. You know what they say, sometimes, you just get a good'un.

So the view from my house is that the distressing on my particular mandolin has combined with the wood choice, tuning and construction to produce an unusually good Weber in a long line of good Webers.

Listen to Sierra's distressed Weber Fern on this youtube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_NFtgY4Rvk) or the Skaggs DMM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGAhcVubibo) or this MM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwGpdH0Fu8Q). I was hoping to find one of those tones, all of which I will admit are better than my Yellowstone but my Yellowstone comes closer to those than any other I have played.

Sierra's Weber sounds kinda like the love child of my Yellowstone and Kevin Briggs' Weber Fern.:)) The Skaggs DMM and Rob Haines' MM sound somewhat different but are ear candy as well. I happen to think that the Skaggs DMM sounds better than Rob Haines' MM, more complex, but they both sound great.

The point being, in a blind test you might discover that some distressed mandolins benefit from the process the builder uses and in other cases, it's purely cosmetic.

For me, I've discovered that it's going to be difficult to beat the tone on mine but as evidenced by the fine mandos I mentioned, it's out there.

[Big Joe]

The original project was for the appearance just to see what we could do. It was originally a test or prototype if you will to see what it might do. We discovered to our surprise the added tonal enhancements.

The issue was not about having the DMM for improved tone over the MM, that was just the byproduct. It is similar to this. When I was younger...much younger....I bought a car that was very nice and decided I wanted it to be "different" and wanted it to be a real drag racing street car. I changed a LOT of things on that car, including hood scoop, wheels and tires, suspension items, engine was the same but heavily modified. It could really run! for 1/4 mile it was almost scary. It was much faster than it was new from the factory and therefore better for what I wanted. The headers when uncapped even improved the tone for that era in my life :) .

The point is that anything can be "improved" with enough money and labor. I prefer to think "different" rather than "improved" but use whatever term best fits your mood. The Distressing does affect the instrument on so many levels and each part of the alterations affect the final outcome just as each portion of a build affects the outcome. It is not any one thing. UV was used on all the MM and DMM. The only difference may be the amount of time they would spend in the UV booth, and that is more dependent upon temperature and humidity than just distressed vs regular. In other words, it is the whole not the parts that bring the instrument to what it is. It takes all the parts, but it is the combination that makes it what it is.

It may not be for everyone, and that is a good thing. If everyone tried to get one there would be a LOT of disappointed people. There are very few in existence and it is unlikely there will be a great number of them in production ever due to the difficulty to build, the time it takes, and the cost involved. It is fun to speculate and talk about them but the reality is that only a small percentage of the mandolin community will ever have one. For those who can and do, they are likely to be amazed at the instrument and find it is always a joy to play and hear. Many would not care one way or another, and many just like the shine. Just like many cannot tell the difference from a low to mid level pac rim from a high quality hand made American mandolin, many will never see the advantage of the distressing. It is not thier thing and that is good. For those whose thing it is, they will appreciate what they find.

[opie wan]

Distressing and or aging of the varnish finishes makes a difference in the sound of the instruments. To my ear they sound older, more "played in". The distressed look isn't for everyone we realize, some folks like chocalate, some folks like strawberry, some like both. We still offer the regular MM for those that want to do the distressing themselves.:mandosmiley:

David, I've played the victorian and compared it to a Skaggs MM. To my ears, the victorian blew that particular Skaggs MM away. What's funny here is that I haven't actually played a non distressed MM except for the Gibson Loar F5 I got to play a while back and time had sort of taken care of that instrument. So.... I can't compare tones.

Here's the deal... if you can "age" the wood without aging the finish I personally would find that more appealing. I suppose the treatment of the wood prior to finishing the wood would certainly do something for the tone... and if you're sitting on a way to improve tone and not doing it you're not producing your best instrument to my mind. I'm sure the varnish on the wood affects tone also.... Are you getting my point?

By the way, we've met... I'm sure you meet hundreds of people a month.. and I appreciated the time you gave me and the mandolin education you provided. I know you're a great guy and an equally fine craftsman. To me, tone is king.....

[Cheryl Watson]

The old Loar style mandolins look especially good with wear to me. I'd theoretically play all the DMMs and MMs they had and choose the best sounding/playing one.

But for looks only, I'd choose a distressed model. I love the look of old instruments; worn in all the right places with that aged look; they just have that cool:cool: factor going for them. I also love old guitars and fiddles and bass fiddles too and it's kind of a bluegrass/earthy thing. And, you don't have to worry, like someone else said on here, about dinging and scratching them too much.

At one time I looked for a while in vain to find an aged and worn Collings guitar from the 90's and Collings has even had very well done ads featuring older Collings guitars owned by well-known players.

And from the mouth of babes...I have a 10yr. old student, a girl, who definitely has talent on the guitar (and singing) <she wants to learn mandolin also BTW> and she said to me right out of the blue yesterday during her lesson, "I have a poster on my wall of Taylor Swift holding an old looking guitar, maybe a Gibson, that looks like termites got at it; I think old guitars they are like well-worn jeans, really cool!" That is about verbatim. She then went over to my well-worn Williamson mandolin and said, "Your mandolin looks old too, and I like that better than shiny new."

Cheryl:mandosmiley:

[Tim Peter]

And from the mouth of babes...I have a 10yr. old student, a girl, who definitely has talent on the guitar (and singing) <she wants to learn mandolin also BTW> and she said to me right out of the blue yesterday during her lesson, "I have a poster on my wall of Taylor Swift holding an old looking guitar, maybe a Gibson, that looks like termites got at it; I think old guitars they are like well-worn jeans, really cool!" That is about verbatim. She then went over to my well-worn Williamson mandolin and said, "Your mandolin looks old too, and I like that better than shiny new."

Cheryl:mandosmiley:


Cheryl, my 12 year old who has the same poster on her wall started asking me to show her how to play an old Kay guitar that I have had hanging around for a couple of months. Now that is a truly distressed instrument! Thank you Taylor Swift for making vintage distressed instruments cool... and for inspiring a bunch of young girls to start pickin' and singing.

sorry for the off topic post... Now back on topic...

[JeffD]

When I started working in the electrical industry, I was issued a brand new hard hat, so shiney the sun glinted off it.

On my way to my first assignment in the field I skuffed that hard hat in the gravel and dirt to remove the shine and give a respectable amount of "distressed".

I knew I could not entirely hide my newbie status, but I wasn't going to advertise it.

[allenhopkins]

To expand a bit on my earlier somewhat flippant post:

1) If the "distressing" process actually produces a different/"better" sounding instrument, more power to it. This seems to be what Dave H and Big Joe are saying. Since by their admission, "distressing" started out as more of a cosmetic aging process, the sound change might have been an unexpected byproduct, but hey, nothing wrong with that.

2) On the other hand, I assume that the Master Models get the best of materials and craftspersonship, and the DMM's the best of the best, so you're presumably going to get a quality instrument at the highest price levels, regardless of whether it looks shiny or scuffed-up.

3) To the extent that "distressing" is merely to camouflage the fact that the instrument is new, and deceive (can't think of a nicer word) the casual observer into thinking its owner has a '30's Fern when it's really six months old, then IMHO it's an accomplice to posing. You may like the "antique" look -- but then, why not buy an old instrument? They're around, and for prices competitive with the new "distressed" models.

Pick up a Musicians' Friend catalog and check out the variety of faux old Les Paul's and Stratocasters now available, with pre-corroded tuning pegs and looks-like-sweat-stained fingerboards. I guess it's harmless enough -- except that you pay a premium for something that does nothing to improve the instrument, merely to show people that you're playing "vintage" when you're not.

[TomTyrrell]

I guess I'm just not impressed by people who are impressed by a well-worn instrument. Hey, even great mandolin players get new mandolins once in a while. Does that make them beginners again?

My wife asks my why people care what the back of the mandolin looks like. I haven't found an answer for her.

[Rob Powell]

Let me say that I doubt anyone can hear whether a mandolin has been distressed, although there are some people I know of that could probably hear whether it's finished in lacquer or varnish.

[opie wan]

I guess I'm just not impressed by people who are impressed by a well-worn instrument. Hey, even great mandolin players get new mandolins once in a while. Does that make them beginners again?

My wife asks my why people care what the back of the mandolin looks like. I haven't found an answer for her.

I read this to my wife. She had a really good laugh. This is the same woman that told me "I don't here 10,000 dollars worth of difference between those two instruments." I figured she had a point. I love down to earth women. They keep us grounded.... and interfere with our MAS.:))

[frankenstein]

I must admit i do have a chuckle when i see this. FOR SALE Distressed mandolin in mint condition.

[Jack Roberts]

My 17 year old son just distressed my NEW Collings MF gloss top this last weekend, with a scratch across the soundboard.
I just received the Collings about a week and now it's DISTRESSED.

My 17 year old son distressed my OM-28V last year. Maybe Gibson could hire 17 year olds for cheap to do the distressing. I'd be happy to sell them mine for a low price, as he's 18 now and even more distressing now than ever.

[Links]

[QUOTE=opie wan;618656].

Here's the deal... if you can "age" the wood without aging the finish I personally would find that more appealing. I suppose the treatment of the wood prior to finishing the wood would certainly do something for the tone... and if you're sitting on a way to improve tone and not doing it you're not producing your best instrument to my mind. I'm sure the varnish on the wood affects tone also.... Are you getting my point?QUOTE]

Opie -- maybe you did not understand what Big Joe and Dave said or meant. The additional UV exposure time and probably some of the other things done to the DMM are time consuming and apparently add quite a bit of cost to the DMM. If they did those same things to a MM, then it would be a DMM. If they were able to do them to a MM without making it looked distressed, then you could have a MM that cost the same as a DMM.

[opie wan]

to which I'd say "Bingo."

If they can treat the wood and get the same effect on tone as they do by treating a finished instrument.... I think you get it.

They would have to switch the last two steps. (assuming that finish and distressing are the last two steps.

I'd add this though... and I know I'm being redundant but... if you know a process that improves tone, and you don't do it, then you're selling your "second best" instrument. Tone is king to me. Distressing is BS to me. I don't have a 59 reissue strat. Those things are marketing gimmicks. We've arrived at the point where pretty much ever guitar gibson markets is a "limited run" that is a "collectors item." You don't intentionally build rare guitars. They become rare because they're popular, people play the hell out of them and wear them out... because they're great instruments... and then a few are still around and become desirable. The Loar, a 58 Les Paul, a 50's strat, a strad.....

I wonder if Mr. Loar built any "distressed F5's?" I'm betting no. To build a distressed instrument is, in my opinion, a marketing ploy. It allows you to say "there's a limited amount built" and to charge more. If something in the process actually enhances tone (and I'm doubting UV light on varnish enhances the tone... but I don't know that for sure) then it should be applied to all instruments. This is my opinion. It is what it is. Take it to be worth what you paid for it.

[TomTyrrell]

I guess Gibson should only sell one price-range of mandolins. Everybody who wants a Gibson mandolin and can't afford $23,000 is out of luck...

[opie wan]

If you're selling your "top of the line" instrument and you're holding back.... it ain't your top of the line instrument.

[JEStanek]

Interestingly, Gibson's (http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Acoustic-Instruments/Mandolin.aspx) page doesn't even list the DMM (as of today). There is a listing for the Ricky Skaggs Limited Edition Distressed Master Model and a listing for the Master Model. I don't know who (currently with Gibson) is saying the DMM is superior to the MM. The website isn't. Dave Harvey certainly isn't in post 31 above. He is the closest thing to a spokesperson Gibson has in this thread. I would describe the DMM as a modified top of the line. It's up to you to decide if the modifications are your cup of tea.

Has this just become an argument of semantics? Or to the OPs question do you like more regular or distressed. He didn't even mention the Big G! I'm just trying to understand where we started and where we are now.

Jamie

[Martyweir]

I guess it depends on the level of "distressing". I like instruments that are clean, but look old. There is something classic, and earthy looking about what some builders achieve & call a distressed model. To me, that does NOT include sanding the finish off so it looks like it's been played for 50 years , or strap wear on the scroll. Don't mess with the finish - except, I kinda dig the checked finish look some guys can achieve as long as it's light & takes close inspection.

Personally, I do not care for a super high gloss varnished dark (black) sunburst F5 mandolin. It's been done by everyone. I like blondes & dark tobacco stain & and I like to see wood grain.

[jeff_75]

What do you like more.

This is always an interesting topic, and my personal feelings on it seem to always be in flux. So for today, my answer to the original question in what I think is the original context, is that my personal preference if I'm buying a mandolin is regular.

That said, I love the look of an old (genuinely) distressed mandolin. But on an aesthetic level, I appreciate that look in part by knowing that I'm looking at a mandolin that's 25 or 50 or 100 years old and has a history. I still think a newly made distressed mandolin looks cool, but the fact that it just came out of the shop last year seriously reduces the impact, or coolness factor, for lack of a better term, in my mind. I'm not personally going to pay that much more for the look. To me, the look without the mojo is hollow. It's pretty, but there's no soul.

When I come across a mando that's 80 years old and distressed, I wonder about all the things that mandolin has seen, and I feel some sense of awe and mystery at this wooden creation that outdates me. Who's played it, what festivals and gigs and honky-tonks has it visited, which highways and dirt roads has it been down, where did that scar come from, where did it weather that depression/hurricane/flood/fire, what's it's story? That sound is not coming from any science or the latest trend in woodworking or finishing technique; it's coming from decades of life and making music. What could this mandolin tell me if it could talk? You can't ever measure, quantify and reproduce that in a shop.

If I had the money to spare, I'd prefer to spend it on a new instrument and distress it myself. When my mandolins that I bought new are 50 years old and distressed (and I'm hopefully still around), I think I will take pride in them then as aged instruments. And I'll be able to tell you all the places they've been played and where some of those dings and wear spots came from. To me, that's cool, and it's a cool that can't be bought.

[Fliss]

I don't mind an old instrument having the "character" that comes with age. If I was buying an old Gibson I'd be happy to accept one that has some cosmetic issues if it saved me money and sounded great. But when I buy a new instrument I like it to look and feel new, and although I'll happily take it out to the pub to play, and let others play it, I will try to keep it looking like that.

Fliss

[Ken Waltham]

Just one interesting comment...
Those of us in the vintage Gibson market want them to look as clean, or "new" as they can. It raises the value substantially. But, the new ones are more valuble if they look old.....:confused:

[allenhopkins]

Just one interesting comment...
Those of us in the vintage Gibson market want them to look as clean, or "new" as they can. It raises the value substantially. But, the new ones are more valuble if they look old.....:confused:

So a new condition category, "Distressed -- near mint"?

[frankenstein]

How many more scratches determine the decline in originality? Distressed instruments do take the STRESS out of worrying about the first one though. I don't think distressed mandolins are worth so much more , that is just marketing.. Let us decide which instruments are desirable not the manufacturer...Would you buy a mandolin with factory cracks in it ?? i doubt it.. i wore out my blue jeans, no designer holes here..

[Links]

Please excuse me for beating my head against the wall - I need some relief!

This has been a good discussion and there is certainly no "right" or "wrong" answer. I guess that is why it is an interesting topic. However, IMHO, I think you may be comparing apples and orange regarding the Gibson DMM (which was not even part of the original question) and other distressed instruments. My general answer to the question would be "NO". I have no interest in mandolins or guitars that were made as the regular production model, taken in another part of the shop for a day, and made to look like it was abused for fifty years. Some of the Fender guitars were done that way (SRV comes to mind). I neither want nor would pay a dime extra for those guitars.

Nor would I normally buy "limited edition" models unless I thought the price justified the instrument as strictly an instrument and not a "collectors item".

However, I don't think the Fender guitar scenario is remotely close to the treatment given to the DMM's. As Big Joe indicated, it is a lot more than simply trashing a production MM. I don't know about the Webers or other distressed models. They may receive a similar treatment as the DMM's and maybe not.

[jeff_75]

it is a lot more than simply trashing a production MM.

So short of anyone disclosing the thirteen secret herbs and spices, what are the manufacturers (Gibson and others) doing in the "distressing" process? And what part of that process could potentially be impacting the tone of the instrument?

[frankenstein]

Do you think Orville Gibson was interested in making old looking instruments ? No.. Mr Loar ? i doubt it. I personally would want the best rarest woods to be treated with great care..and care for my instrument.. that's it i'm going to scratch my car..

[JEStanek]

So short of anyone disclosing the thirteen secret herbs and spices, what are the manufacturers (Gibson and others) doing in the "distressing" process? And what part of that process could potentially be impacting the tone of the instrument?

I would hope it is proprietary if they are claiming it has marked tonal impacts.

If you're speaking of cosmetic distressing to give the appearance of age the instrument needs to be finished like normal and then more time put in to affect or remove some of that finish in a convincing looking manner. Thus the premium price. Just think of it in terms of building on an hourly rate.

Jamie

[Rob Powell]

For those interested, check this (http://www.dalemfg.com/acousticaladjustment_017.htm) out.

And this (http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=18021988).

I have my own opnions about how the articles work together but I'll let others draw their own conclusions first.

[frankenstein]

Claiming that UV exposure improves the process is all very well, I can't say that it doesn't work. but i can't see how hanging up wood in the sun for X amount if time justifies labour costs.. OK here is my recipe.. leave your mandolin out side for 3 weeks then cover it in egg white, microwave it for 7 minutes then scratch the livin' #### out of it with course sandpaper. then strum it vigorously with a fork !!

[woodwizard]

Claiming that UV exposure improves the process is all very well, I can't say that it doesn't work. but i can't see how hanging up wood in the sun for X amount if time justifies labour costs.. OK here is my recipe.. leave your mandolin out side for 3 weeks then cover it in egg white, microwave it for 7 minutes then scratch the livin' #### out of it with course sandpaper. then strum it vigorously with a fork !!

:)):)):grin: That's the ticket! :popcorn:

[opie wan]

Claiming that UV exposure improves the process is all very well, I can't say that it doesn't work. but i can't see how hanging up wood in the sun for X amount if time justifies labour costs.. OK here is my recipe.. leave your mandolin out side for 3 weeks then cover it in egg white, microwave it for 7 minutes then scratch the livin' #### out of it with course sandpaper. then strum it vigorously with a fork !!

You left out the rock salt soak and the salt and pepper on the egg whites... and hitting it gently with a rubber hammer will creat stellate cracks.... this is really good for the distressed look!! Plus, the cracks let more tone out!!!

But seriously, if UV light exposure enhances the tone of the wood..... then it should be done to the wood prior to the finishing. I don't know if the varnish would soak in further or not... but... if it hasn't been tried I'd think it should be tried....

[frankenstein]

further to this we may assume that one could possibly receive custom distressing uprades like the smoked salmon wrap with a hint of mint, cholesterol free egg white and sandpaper sundried of course, and my personal favorite the tradesman special, the sunkissed tomato and cheese tung oil bath..

[Patrick Sylvest]

I'm a fan of buying factory seconds and 'blem' instruments that are structurally sound but have small cosmetic flaws that keep them from being sold as new at retail outlets. There are some good deals and you get a new instrument where playability is concerned. I like to think of it as 'pre-dinged'.

[Rob Powell]

You left out the rock salt soak and the salt and pepper on the egg whites... and hitting it gently with a rubber hammer will creat stellate cracks.... this is really good for the distressed look!! Plus, the cracks let more tone out!!!

But seriously, if UV light exposure enhances the tone of the wood..... then it should be done to the wood prior to the finishing. I don't know if the varnish would soak in further or not... but... if it hasn't been tried I'd think it should be tried....

IMHO, you're missing the point. Neither David Harvey nor Big Joe said it enhanced the tone. They said it produced a different tone. Unsaid, that tone may be more pleasing to some but not all.

So according to the article I linked to, UV on the plates with varying levels of ground coats (one of which sometimes consists of egg whites on a violin, good call frankenstein) changed the frequency response of the plates in accordance with the number of coats.

What we do know is that UV will "cure" or polymerize some varnishes and lacquers to varying degrees. We also know that UV on the plates make the cell structure more elastic (hence the change in frequencies.) My guess is that the right formulas would in fact soak in a bit more and as they cure in the UV, create more stiffness with less finish. Stiffer plates could be carved thinner.

Again, just guessing here but the plates probably have to be checked more frequently to make sure they don't crack and they probably have to be tuned more frequently or at least checked for where they are in the process.

It might also be a multi-step process where the plates get exposed to various amounts of UV at different steps in the finishing as well as then being exposed to the rumored "sound chambers" multiple times.

So think about it...you're not just simulating aging the wood and the finish, you actually ARE aging the wood and the finish in a controlled environment.

I'm enjoying the debate even if we are all speculating ;)

In the end, this thread was really about the looks. We're all willing to pay more for an instrument that looks nicer to us. I don't see the difference between paying more for a distressed finish and paying more for a scroll or a special color sunburst or herringbone binding or special inlay or ....well, you get the picture.

I'll say it again....I bought my Yellowstone because of the way it sounded and THAT was the reason I was willing to pay more. I was willing to buy the Weber Fern or Big Sky but this Yellowstone spoke to me and they didn't so, in effect, I won.:cool: If there had been a cheaper mandolin that sounded better, I would have bought that as long as the finish wasn't just plain nasty.

Honestly, sometimes when I play it, I feel like I almost stole it. Especially after playing another distressed Yellowstone. Of course as I've said many times, my ears are pretty fried from too much rock n roll many moons ago so it might actually sound like doo-doo to someone else.

I do agree with you though regarding the possibility of getting a DMM without the finish distressing. They could call it the Aged Master Model.:grin:

[Big Joe]

Opie...It is not holding back when you take your very best and then enhance them with many man hours of additional work to get it to its final point. The DMM is a project for the few who like the concept and it does alter the tone. Part of that may be the UV exposure, but that is only a part of the whole. All MM, DMM, and Skaggs DMM models have UV light to help cure the finish. This is not exlusive to Gibson either. It is a method used by many to help cure varnish finishes...particularly oil varnish. However, that is only a part of the process and I don't think putting too much emphasis on that aspect alone will give the total results accomplished from the distressing process.

The DMM process is not for everyone any more than the MM is for everyone. It is a niche market that appeals to those looking for that particular tonal properties. If it does not float your boat, then don't worry about it. There are posts on this forum that state the 200 dollar mandolin sounds better than a loar the owner of the inexpensive mandolin states. For him that may well be true and he deserves to stay with his 200 dollar mandolin until it does not sound better. For some the DMM does have a better tone and appeal than any other mandolin they have heard or can obtain. For them the DMM hits the mark. For others the MM may be a better choice.

Here is what I find humorous. With the tens of thousands of mandolins available in the world today....and the few thousand good ones made each year.....here is a lengthy thread about an instrument that is extremely rare in its total output with all manufacturers combined and with less than 100 from the builder this column has spent most time discussing. It is fun to speculate, but this is such a limited availability that it really seems odd for so much time to be spent on this particular model. Of course, here I am speaking to the issue. I guess it achieves as much passion in me as it does in so many others.

The distressing process is likely different for each builder. We have discussed parts of it from time to time when we are in person but each still retains their particular secrets. Part of this is because it is a secret, but mostly because we cannot always describe how we do what we do, we just do it. If you were to do the very same thing it would likely have a different outcome. That is the part that makes the difference from one builder to another or from one mandolinist to another playing the same song but sounding different from each other.

[Links]

So short of anyone disclosing the thirteen secret herbs and spices, what are the manufacturers (Gibson and others) doing in the "distressing" process? And what part of that process could potentially be impacting the tone of the instrument?

Jeff - I did not say that I knew what they were doing - only repeating what the folks that know (Big Joe) have said - that there is much more to it than hitting with sand paper and a torch, etc. I have no reason to doubt what those in the know have said. And if Gibson has "thirteen secret herbs and spices", I assume that they plan on keeping it that way - secret! Big Joe has probably told us as much as he is comfortable with.

The information and understanding that Rob Powell has brought forth has also been quite helpful. My purpose of posting is not try and get anyone who does not like distressing to like it. If you don't like you don't have to have any reason or justify why you don't like it. You probably just don't like it. But I think it should at least be clear (and it isn't to some, or they just are not buying it) that there is more to it than the sandpaper "thing".

[opie wan]

I've got to head to Austin and wont' be able to get to a computer I don't think. Anyway, I've enjoyed the discussion too. I will have to agreeably disagree about the tonal qualities of the DMM. What's funny is that the only two gibson mm's I've played were both distressed (except for the Loar). If a luthier tells me that a process alters the tone I have to assume he means enhancing it. No self-respecting luthier would do something to the wood, cosmetics, etc... that would deaden/kill the tone. Tone is king. Thus, my interpretation of what David said. I'd agree that it's a niche market and tone is individual to each instrument. I love my Sumi. I think it blew the Skaggs MM away that I compared it to. However, the Victorian blew them both up. A good discussion. I enjoy this sort of back and forth and repect the opinions I've read.

[frankenstein]

there is also the Jimi Hendrix type of distressing, no tone improvment but hey it looks cool.and it's worth heaps.. don't try this at home..

[shadco]

I don't really care if you like my mandolin or not, I do.

If it makes you feel better knocking someone else's choice in an instrument so be it.

[Chris Biorkman]

That's ultimately what it gets down to, Shad. Play what you like and don't worry about what other people think. Distressing isn't everybody's cup of tea, but if you like it, by all means buy one.

[frankenstein]

I don't really care if you like my mandolin or not, I do.

If it makes you feel better knocking someone else's choice in an instrument so be it.

Shad, i don't know your mandolin so i can't knock it..and no it doesn't make me feel better... it's your decision what works for you, all power to you. I feel that the whole distressing , ageing , thing is hype. if that's what you like, do it yourself , save yourself some money. there is no magic here.. Time can't be manufactured..only simulated.

[TomTyrrell]

Shad, i don't know your mandolin so i can't knock it..and no it doesn't make me feel better... it's your decision what works for you, all power to you. I feel that the whole distressing , ageing , thing is hype. if that's what you like, do it yourself , save yourself some money. there is no magic here.. Time can't be manufactured..only simulated.

Maybe you mean "if that's what I like I will do it myself and same myself some money"?

[frankenstein]

Spin it any way you can, it's still hype.. or maybe i meant Time can't be simulated.. only manufactured.. or..???

[TomTyrrell]

Do you remember the serial numbers of the MM and DMM you compared in order to come to your conclusion that it is all hype?

[frankenstein]

No, but you could post a video to prove me wrong..

[Cheryl Watson]

Ricky Scaggs said in the FQMS video I found on You Tube that the distressing of the DMM reflects the oldness of the music. That makes sense to me. It's a matter of what an individual player prefers.

Cheryl:mandosmiley:

[allenhopkins]

And the "oldness" of the musicians? I've seen Ralph Stanley get fairly "distressed" as the years go by; ditto Curly Seckler, Earl Scruggs, and the many others who've "crossed the river.""

[Chris Biorkman]

Ricky Scaggs said in the FQMS video I found on You Tube that the distressing of the DMM reflects the oldness of the music. That makes sense to me. It's a matter of what an individual player prefers.

Cheryl:mandosmiley:

He also says, "The frets is rounded."

It makes me cringe every time I watch that video. :)

[Rob Powell]

He also says, "The frets is rounded."

It makes me cringe every time I watch that video. :)

And "they're all good, some is great."

You can take the boy outta Virginia, but you cain't take the Virginia outta the boy. I should know:grin:

Is this horse flogged into submission yet?

I think, we're just gunna have to agree to disagree. I think that UV exposure does a fair job of what natural aging does and Frankenstein does not. I think that physics and chemistry are on my side and he thinks its bs.

Whatcha gunner do?:confused:

[Chris Biorkman]

Shucks.

[opie wan]

I used to throw keys across the room and tell my niece..... "that's physics." If you want to get into the science of it then you need to analyze what this "distressing" process does to tone (which looks pretty good from a skimming the papers), what it does to the overall life span of the wood, what it does to increase crack potential, and a plethora of other things. Anytime you alter a material you affect the life span and strength. I remember the stress and strain lecture from freshman physics. Stress is what you do to the material. Strain is the effect of the stress. You can't have one without the other.

I'm going to start a new process called mandolin face lifts. What we're going to do is make sure the bracing is perfect, then we're going to sand the instrument until all the scratches and varnish are gone, then we're going to put new varnish on it. I'd think this might enhance the high ends of the tone (say above 4000) due to increasing the thinness of the wood. I'm going to start with the California players and I'm only going to charge 10K to do each mandolin. I can't reveal all my secrets because then I'd have to call in my cousin Guido..... and you know how he is.

One other thing. If an instrument tickles your fancy... play it. Don't give a flip what anyone else says or thinks. Tone is king, brand name is ####, and if the instrument makes you happy, enjoy it.

[frankenstein]

Is this horse flogged into submission yet?

Whatcha gunner do?:confused:[/QUOTE]

Agree to Disagree . ~o)