Printable View
Hi, I am looking for a mandolin with a fairly bright yet quite warm tone and good projection. I play celtic / Scottish folk on an A-shape with oval hole model. I'm based in Scotland.
I have a Sitka top and walnut back and sides mando but is verging on being too warm. Someone suggested European spruce top and walnut back & sides. I wondered if a maple back and sides with euro spruce top would do? Rosewood is seemingly the brightest, so may avoid that.
Any advice would be welcome!
Cheers,
Scott
There are so many variables involved that it is difficult or impossible to make generalisations. Best thing is to talk to your luthier and he will give you advice based on his experience with his mandolins.
I have an a-model mandolin (f-holes) that's redwood and walnut. I love it!
Attachment 143450
f-d
Can you make any guesses as to how these instruments are constructed? (Ideally without looking at pictures or specs?
https://soundcloud.com/martyjacobson...olin-34-sample
http://martinjacobson.com/27.mp3
One is an instrument with a very soft maple back, and fairly lightweight Sitka spruce top. The other has a very, very dense wenge back ("like rosewood, only more so") and a fairly stiff redwood top.
I'd say the first is the very very dense wedge back. Am I right?
Fat-dad, what does that beauty sound like?
Thanks Peter. My luthier recommended Wallnut back & sides with Euro Spruce top. Not sure if it would be bright enough as my Wallnut and Sitka Spruce is a bit too warm...
I can't describe sound, but I love it. I use flat-wound strings (Thomastik Heavy), which does affect the sound. I don't play bluegrass either. It's a great instrument for sure though, built by my buddy Dave Cohen.
f-d
Good advice already given above. Want to observe that I normally expect Sitka to sound bright and crisp - more so than any other soundboard wood except maple. I expect walnut back and sides to sound hard, crisp and dark - not warm. Your current mandolin doesn't fit what I would expect, demonstrating the reality that these things really aren't so predictable. Given your descriptions, I would suggest considering a sitka top with mahogany back and sides. If it is a new build, realize that it may not sound at all the way you predicted.
There is such a wide variation in wood properties, even within a single species, that you just can't expect the choice of a wood species alone to produce the tonal results you want. I have had pieces of walnut with a density of ~0.42 g/cm3, and other pieces with densities around 0.65 g/cm3. Expect similar variations in stiffness (aka Young's modulus or elastic modulus), and possibly even greater variations in internal damping. The damping is largely responsible for the "ringy" aspect of the "tap tone" of a piece of wood, but I am not sure how or even how much it affects the tonal outcome for an instrument. Maple samples have displayed similar variation in properties. Same thing applies for top woods. I have had pieces of redwood with densities below 0.3 g/cm3, and I have some in my shop with densities as high as 0.56-0.58 g/cm3. I have seen similar variations in samples of Engelmann spruce, European spruce, sitka, adirondack,.....
With all that variation in mind, I would suggest that you choose the woods you want on the basis of cosmetics, and trust your luthier to try for the tonal outcome you want. If you are considering purchasing from a store or dealer, I would still suggest choosing the woods based on cosmetics, and trying different instruments within your parameters until you find the tone that pleases you.
+1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommando
Nope. It's got an extraordinarily soft/floppy maple back. But thanks for playing. :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottymando
Great advice! I have tried out a few different wood combinations in the shops and keep returning to Sitka top with Maple back and sides. A bright, full sound but still with a little warmth and certainly enough volume. I do also like the look of these woods together with a dark rosewood sound board and binding...hmmm