Trillium, Mid-Mo, Fylde

[steve V. johnson]

How's it go... 'The dogs bark and the caravan moves on...'

The wonderful Trillium went off to Otterly last week, and early word from here is that it's a real good fit. I thought it would be, and I hope that sweet instrument has finally found a home. Maybe she'll tell us more about how the two of them are getting along...

The Mid-Mo maple M-70 that Brother Bob Cook had lent me wasn't quite right for me, either, but I did really enjoy it. Four or five folks were sorely tempted by it, and I almost had it sold, but Br Bob has begun to re-think letting it go, so it went back to him just yesterday.
While it was here, we added a black strap button and strap to it, and put some of that clear pickguard material on it, in response to some deep intuition of the softness of the nice spruce top.

And, finally, I caved and bought a Fylde TouchStone OM (scale 20+15/16") with sapele b/s and spruce top from Paul Lawrence, from his ad in the classifieds here.

I'm excited about this one, and the Fylde Octavius zouk I had was a great playmate. It was mahogany with a cedar top, and had a great midrange richness and the cedar brought it a lovely warmth.
I wanted more bottom, and got that with my Crump (in SPADES, folks!!), so I hope that this Touchstone brings that sapele (walnut-ish) warmth along with it's smaller scale, too. It should be here around 8/13 or so.

So... Otterly? Howzit goin' with that Trillium, eh?

stv

[neal]

Yeah, Karen, fill us in! http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/blues.gif

[otterly2k]

Sorry it's taken me a while to report on the Trillium... I've been in the studio a lot and then yesterday morning threw my back out, and couldn't be upright enough to be at the computer (or play!) until the meds helped enough. Ouch!

Anyway, I really love this Trillium. The shape and style of it suit me well, the action is nice and low, the induced arch top gives it a depth and complexity of tone that I really like... today while I was playing, I was particularly aware of the range of overtones that were coming off of each string. just huge. I also like the narrow neck. It works for me.

My only reservation about it is the scale length. I'm finding 22.5 to still be a tough stretch. I can't quite tell whether I should seek an instrument with a shorter scale (btw, Bob Abrams says he's made Trillium OM's with a 20" scale and that they worked out great)--- or whether time and practice will make this scale do-able.

So I'm playing some every day... have dusted off a bunch of celtic albums and am merrily playing along, as a way of skill-building. Still deliberating on this one issue...

thanks for asking...

[Michael Wolf]

Otterly,
my experience with the longer scale (I play 58cm Tenorguitar) was, that at first some of my tunes seemed to be unplayable for the stretches. But then 1.)I found new fingerings and 2.)my fingers can do longer stretches now. That was a good practice. For some tunes I could return to Mandolinfingering for the increasing stretchability of my fingers. I found it worth the effort for the sound you get from the longer strings. By the way I found my Mandolinplaying improved from the practice on the bigger instrument.
One extra advantage of the 58cm-scale is, that if you master this, you have a big variety of classic instruments to choose from. Many of the old tenorbanjos and other octave-mandos use this scale length and I think they have their reasons (sound).

Cheers
Michael

[Dolamon]

That's partially true Michael, you do learn and develope a different set of muscle memories in playing any different length scale. However - if your hands can't accomodate the scale length due to size or injury - the short scales will work out really well (in fact - often better than a long scale instrument). There were a number of different scale lengths of Tenor banjo's and the 580's or above are NOT favored (and never were) for playing single note melody lines. I have one tenor banjo in the that range and it works for rhythm - period. It flat out hurts to play it for any amount of time and the precision suffers with it.

The shorter scale (tango banjo's) 16 or 17 fret neck banjo's, true tenor guitars (not plectrum) and even a lot of the early octophone types were more often in the 535 to 545mm scale length. There is a reason for this as the general four fret chord patterns can be made from the first to 17th or 18th fret, Melody work is much easier and the sound is as crisp as you'll want to make it.

I've ended up with about six instruments which were made of that length in the 1910's and 20's and they really simplify my playing. As far as the sound difference - a rule of thumb with shorter scale instruments ... go up at least one size (say .044 to .046 or .048 on a short octave) to get the proper tension on the strings. It really surprised me that there was a nominal tension difference and a quantum leap in volume and pick response. Several of my short scales have a bigger sound than large bouzouki's - it takes a while to figure out which one will work for you but it is worth the effort to find out.

[Michael Wolf]

Dolamon,
you're right. It's possible that one handsize simply don't fit a particular scale length. Then you should go for the shorter one. I observed in my case, that it took a few month to find out. My first impression was that I need a shorter scale, but then it began working.

I don't want to start a discussion about banjos here. But I want to mention, that the tenor banjo was
designed as a single note solo instrument and though there were several scale length in the golden age of banjo, my imprssion is, that the 58cm were the most common. There were several famous banjo soloists before the arise of the jazz brassbands, when the banjo changed its role in the bandcontext.
Well, that's only what I've read on several pages (for example Buddy Watcher) about the banjo age.
I have no reason to doubt it, but would appreciate any corrections.

The sound: I believe that there are many absolutely great sounding short scale instruments. But the relation between string length, thickness and tuning affects the sound very much. Let's say that we talk about very well built instruments. You never get the sound of a longer, thinner string out of a shorter, thick one. Both can be nice. My main problem with shorter scales is, that the base side becomes to thick to my ear. An alternative way would be to shorten the scale and change the tuning, for example to DAEA/H. I often find myself thinking about this and tried it with capo and always returned to mandotuning. But this is another story.

Cheers
Michael

[otterly2k]

I'm not sure there's a right or wrong answer here... I think it boils down to individual preference and capacity. I am finding that I'm better able to handle the 22.5" scale even after only a few days of practicing. Still, if I play the same tunes with a capo on the 2nd fret (effectively creating a 20" scale), I can play with more speed and precision. And yes, my hands are sore, but since I haven't played the fretted strings with this intensity for a long time, I can't tell if the soreness is just from the exercise, or if it's telling me I need a shorter scale. In my case, I think time will tell. And fortunately, the great sounding Trillium makes it worth the effort!

Also, it partly depends on how much I end up playing melody vs. accompaniment...I would like to be able to do both... a shorter scale could end up being a trade-off soundwise for those long open strings.

Mike's on vacation until Aug. 2... and at that point, I'll have to decide whether to keep the Trillium or not. I'm 90% sure I'll keep it. I'm very happy indeed with the quality of sound, how well it is built, how it feels in the hands, the design, etc. I've only been worried re: the scale length... and I'm encouraged by the quick progress I'm making as I practice. At the moment, I'm thinking that I should keep it and give myself some time to adjust to the scale... after a while, it will become apparent if I'm hitting the wall and need a shorter scale.

KE

[otterly2k]

Hey, folks, I've decided to take the plunge... just sent an email off to Mike saying "I'll take it".

happy. Now I get to play with string gauges and other minor adjustments, while I bask in the wonderful tones and overtones....:D

I know that this is an instrument I can learn from, learn with, and grow into for a good while. I may eventually seek a 20" scale, but for now it's me and Tri'!

KE

[steve V. johnson]

Congratulations!!!

Whew, finally... <GGG>

Ask Robert Abrams about that funny hole he puts thru the neck heel for a strap, too, wooodja? <GG>

One of these days I'll make it out that way and you can have a go at the little Fylde Touchstone, -and- the great big Crump.

I need to figure out when the Ceili Band Festival wknd is...

Congrats again, and long may you pick and grin!!

stv

[otterly2k]

Thanks Stv for the mando version of "live long and prosper"....!

re: the strap attachment, I'm assuming that it was Mike's request to not have that feature, since the instrument was custom made for him. I have attached a strap at the headstock for now, and it's working fine that way. I may put in a peg eventually, but I'm in no hurry.

FYI- The Ceili Festival is Sat. Sept 18th...you WILL let me know if you decide to attend...

KE