one piece back for a F-style

[mbtatum]

I am going to build a F-style mando. I am looking at using a one piece back. I just want to know the pros and cons. I know most have two piece backs. Thanks for any info!!

[sunburst]

I've built 2 that I can think of with one piece backs. I have wood for more one piece backs, and plan to use it.
As for pros and cons, there's really not much difference, other than you don't have to do a back joint.
I prefer and use quartered wood for my backs, and it isn't easy to find quartered wood wide enough for one piece backs, but it can be done.
If you don't mind using slab cut wood, there's no problem finding it, and it's no different than a 2 piece slab cut back, except for the joint.

[mbtatum]

Thams for the input. I sure would like to hear from some more builders please!!!
http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[mbtatum]

Thanks for the input. I sure would like to hear from some more builders please!!!
http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Spruce]

One-piece backs in slab-cut wood, as John pointed out, are indeed common and readily available...

One-piece Eastern maple backs are fairly common in Loar-period instruments, and make a fine-looking instrument when the wood is well-figured...

It's Mother Nature, and not the size of the tree, that determines whether or not quartered one-piece backs can be milled from a log.

Eastern Maple and Western Bigleaf Maple usually display red-heart, making it very difficult to find the 11" of white wood needed to mill an F5 mandolin back on quarter.

Even if a log did have that 11" of wood, it wouldn't matter at 99% of the sawmills East of the Mississippi. #They would mill the log entirely on the slab regardless, thus making one-piece quartered backs in Eastern maple one of the rarest cuts of wood going....

This process of rotating the log to mill on-slab also makes one-piece slab-cut backs very common...

European Maple, by the way, does not display red-heart very often, making it an easier proposition to obtain one-piece F5 backs from even a relatively small tree...

[webers]

I have a very nice 1983 Taggart A5 with a one piece back. I bought it
over a two piece back because it looked really nice (lots of figure).
It sounds great and no signs of cracking or wear after 20 years.
My next F5 that I build will have a one piece back, mostly to
use up some nice wood that is too thin to bookmatch, but wide
enough for one back. I also flitch matched maple for the back of my
first mandolin, mostly to save money, and it sounds great. Sometimes
you can flitch match a back and have it look almost bookmatched.
This helps if you like browsing through your local lumberyard
and find a pretty piece of wood that is not thick enough to bookmatch
but has relatively unifore figure over much of the board's length.
I think it would be really hard to hear a difference in tone if
the carving is done well, the difference is mostly aesthetic.

[Yonkle]

Iv'e got both and can,t tell any tone differences, and if I could, it may not be because of the back. I have heard that 1 piece backs are a bit stiffer and may not flex as much if carved the same as a two piece, but it probably depends on the piece of wood and if it is low figure, high figure flame or quilt ect. As far as pros and cons, I don't think there are any. One piece backs tend to cost more if you are comparing high figure to high figure. I guess you should pick what you like or pick what is traditional. Like on old F4 Gibsons you don't see many with high figure flame, so you may want to go with a low figure or 1 piece in this case. Personaly I like high figure flame or quilt, if they have good "mojo" they look great 1 or 2 piece IMHO. JD