F4 style neck length?

[b.pat]

Ok here's the deal. I'm having an F4 style built to match an F5 that I have. I understand that my options on neck length are: traditional [neck joins the body at the 12th fret], F5 length [neck joins boby at 15th fret], or a compromise where the joint is at the 14th.

My question is two fold.

#How #will the Tone and volume be affected by the different lengths?

#How will resale be affected ? [is one length more desirable than the others ?]

#Any and all opinions will be appreciated.
# # # # # # # #
# # # # # # # #B.Pat

[John Flynn]

I have asked similar questions on the board and got some food for thought, but never a really satisfying answer. One thing I am interested in is that the shorter neck length (12 frets to the crosspiece), given a similar scale length, puts the bridge back farther toward the tailpiece on the top. I suspect that is one major factor in giving the vintage Gibson ovals thier signature sound. Other factors may be the neck angle and the non-raised fingerboard, which are also different than an F-5. I like the vintage F-4 sound so much, I will either get a real one or have any custom build I commission be as close the original as possible. I will be very interested to see what others say.

[ourgang]

It's been my impression that the longer, F-5 scale is the more desirable, especially since you are having a new mandolin built. If you were restoring a vintage Gibson F-4 it would be a different story. You would need to stay with the short scale.

[Bob A]

The scale is the same. The only differences are where the neck joins the body (which might have some impact on reaching higher frets) and exactly where the bridge would go. Since the F5 top has an uninterrupted piece of timber running the length of the body, and the F4 has an oval hole in the middle of the instrument, I suspect that bridge placement would have a more significant effect on the oval-hole instrument, sound. But I'm not sure just how much of an effect it would be.

[Bob DeVellis]

It seems to me that the longer neck was intended for the f-hole configuration while the shorter neck was intended for the oval hole. If it's an F-4 you're after, I'd imagine the short neck would be best. It's certainly possible that builders have re-engineered an oval hole design specifically for a longer, more steeply angled neck, but why? Wouldn't that move the sound more in the direction of an F-5? Ultimately, I'd let your ears and hands judge if listening to and playing both styles is an option. But short if that, I'd be inclined to assume that they got it right with the original F-4.

Also, how many frets do you need to access? If you're playing that much up the neck, is an F-4 really the style you want? For the way I use my F-4, I have plenty of fret access, but everybody's situation is different, of course. Just something to think about.

[Keith Newell]

I believe the shorter neck that puts the bridge more towards center of the body also gives it a more hollow boxy kind of sound. Just my opinian though.
Keith

[mandroid]

12 fret neck (joins body at 10th) with the fretboard attached to the top directly,
F4/A4,etc. has a bit bigger sound chamber,apparently, as the top is shaped to arch up to meet the fretboard.
with an elevated fingerboard, neck angle,& bridge height, being the same, the body is thinner in thickness (by the amount of that elevation) lower frequencys somewhat changed as a result.
Hollow [J.Garrity] scroll has appeal , in this mix. #http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Oval holes traditionally cross braced top too , F hole top braced usually with the grain generally.
though X braced tops come up in both designs.
http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mandosmiley.gif

[Mike Blohm]

I was wondering what the difference in length does to the sweet spot on the strings. Does it move down the body with the shorter neck?

[Jim Garber]

I wouldn't worry much about resale at the moment. Are you a dealer or a player? If this is a good make then the instrumen will sell...er... resell itself.

I would just consult with the maker to see what he/she thinks about the pros and cons and what you want out of this instrument, given your playing style. Perhaps there is a compromise or some change in the body size, depth or the position or type of bridge to change the ultimate sound you will get.

Jim

[Bob A]

The place you pluck will alter the vibration of the strings, emphasising some harmonics and de-emphasising others. That is a function of string design and length.

The mandolin itself is an amplifying device, making the vibration of the strings louder. The design of the mandolin also has an effect on the tone produced, emphasising some and minimising other vibrations.

Keeping the scale length and make and size of string the same, the sweet spot will be in the same place. The nature of the sound produced will vary because of the differences in the mandolin body. (Remember the scale length is the same for all the Gibsons. The neck/body ratio is different between the F4 and F5, as is the design of the top).

[SternART]

I have owned two long neck oval holes, a Doug Woodley and I still have a Lawrence Smart. I prefer the long neck for up the neck playing, jazz chords etc. The bridge does end up in a different place, and to me the sound is somewhere between an oval hole and an F5. The Woodley had a single cross brace like ol' Gibson's and the Smart is X braced. I'd say not as ol' timey sounding as an A model Gibson or old F2-4, but possibly a more modern sound. If you're really looking for that old sound, maybe a short neck is better, but for playability I prefer the long neck versions. IMO both can have a beautiful voice, but I love all the voices of the mandolin. Long necks are rarer, probably easier to sell, lots of old Gibsons available to compete with on the short necks. There is a nice 13 1/2 fret neck 3 point by Brentrup on the Cafe classifieds right now, kinda a compromise in length.