Lloyd Loar Mandolins

[Mandosam]

I've heard so much about Loar mandolins but have never quite understood why they are so loved. Is it because they are so old or is it the way they are made? What is about them that makes them sound so good and makes them so special.

[fscotte]

[George R. Lane]

+1

[AlanN]

Mandosam -

You're new here. For us jaded vets, we've been up, down, roundabout and back again re: this very topic. Does that mean that it shouldn't be re-visited? Hardly. But, whilst we wait for the responses to pour in, I'll have some popcorn, too...

[JeffD]

http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/sh...quot-Loar-tone

[JeffD]

This is a good start:

[DataNick]

[MikeEdgerton]

Bill Monroe bought what turned out to be a Gibson F5 mandolin that was signed by Lloyd Loar in a barber shop in Florida. That mandolin became the gold standard for mandolins and the price for those mandolins sold by Gibson and signed by Loar have gained value over the years. It should be noted that Loar didn't build these mandolins, he inspected them at the end and had input into how they were built. To read more about Lloyd Loar check out this page on Roger Siminoff's site. I would characterize the Loar phenomena as Gibson getting it right and perhaps not even knowing what it was they got right. In the ensuing years many builders have gone to great pains to duplicate the Loar sound and mystique. Some get closer than others. The mandolins that are sold under the brand name "The Loar" have no connection with the Gibson built Lloyd Loar signed mandolins. That is strictly marketing.

[Doug Freeman]

I would characterize the Loar phenomena as Gibson getting it right and perhaps not even knowing what it was they got right.

Who would ever have known Gibson got anything right with the F-5 unless Monroe happened to find and play one? That's ground zero for the F-5 reputation (probably same with the L-5 and Lang). What if Monroe had played an F-4, or anything else? He still would have been the best in the land. Would followers not have sought out whatever instrument the master played? Isn't it because of the masters playing these instruments, and followers believing THAT'S what a good instrument sounds like, that they're revered? How can we say there is something objectively great about their sound outside that context? I have no idea, I'm just asking!

[MikeEdgerton]

...I have no idea, I'm just asking!

You probably know as much as anyone else.

[BradKlein]

Another point that may help the OP understand the lure of the Loar is this. In the few short years that Loar was overseeing production, Gibson built by far the 'finest' mandolins it ever made, before or since - as judged by countless musicians. They were terribly expensive and came well after the mandolin craze was over. Consequently there were not many made or sold, and there was no company or luthier making the American Mandolin to those standards for half a century or more. So as demand rose with the invention of bluegrass and the popularity of a number of musical styles, supply remained constant and extremely limited. If they'd been as popular as martin ukuleles... well, I'd probably be able to afford one!

[DataNick]

Who would ever have known Gibson got anything right with the F-5 unless Monroe happened to find and play one? That's ground zero for the F-5 reputation (probably same with the L-5 and Lang). What if Monroe had played an F-4, or anything else? He still would have been the best in the land. Would followers not have sought out whatever instrument the master played? Isn't it because of the masters playing these instruments, and followers believing THAT'S what a good instrument sounds like, that they're revered? How can we say there is something objectively great about their sound outside that context? I have no idea, I'm just asking!

One of the world's most premier mandolinists, Dave Apollon, played the Gibson F5, even keeping at least 2 on hand so he could switch after breaking strings. This was much before bluegrass came on the scene, and I'd bet that because of Apollon, the F5 had already started to garner a reputation as a stellar instrument...

[Mandoplumb]

Who would ever have known Gibson got anything right with the F-5 unless Monroe happened to find and play one? That's ground zero for the F-5 reputation (probably same with the L-5 and Lang). What if Monroe had played an F-4, or anything else? He still would have been the best in the land. Would followers not have sought out whatever instrument the master played? Isn't it because of the masters playing these instruments, and followers believing THAT'S what a good instrument sounds like, that they're revered? How can we say there is something objectively great about their sound outside that context? I have no idea, I'm just asking!

Maybe the masters believed THAT'S what a good instrument sounds like. Monroe owned and played other mandolins before and after he found that Loar in that barber shop but it was THE one for him and the one that seems to go best with the music he "invented".

[f5loar]

The founding fathers of Bluegrass music decided early on (or at least by late 1945 when many say was the birth of Bluegrass) that their style of music would be made on an early 20's Gibson F5; a pre-war Martin D28 guitar and a prewar Gibson Flat head Mastertone banjo along with a really old fiddle and bass fiddle of your choice as long as it's really old. Is that the reason the Loar F5 is so special? Probably. Why are they so expensive? They ain't makin' em no more!

[almeriastrings]

Yes... well... they only had two options, didn't they? War-time or pre-war

Those pre-war D-28's were only 6 years old at the time, too.

[Ivan Kelsall]

From Brad Klein - "..Gibson built by far the 'finest' mandolins it ever made, before or since...". With due respect,that's purely a matter of personal opinion,& as we've read,not ALL Lloyd Loar signed mandolins come up to scratch. But - i will grant that most of them do sound very good,as do many other makes of mandolin,but with a ''different'' sound of their own.

If i'm perfectly honest,& despite my love of several makes of mandolin (notably Ellis mandolins),the one mandolin that i'd love to own (if it still sounds the same),is Chris Thile's 'Dude.'. It was far more pleasing & seemingly ''well balanced'' to my ears than his current Loar. It's no wonder that after letting it go at one point,he then sought to get it back,
Ivan

[JKA]

I've heard so much about Loar mandolins but have never quite understood why they are so loved. Is it because they are so old or is it the way they are made? What is about them that makes them sound so good and makes them so special.

Mandosam...or Sam for short, it's because these mandolins are the 'Holy Grail' for a large section of mandolin players, and collectors.

There are so many opinions as to why they sound so good, a lot of opinions are quite subjective but there is no definitive answer...it's just so.

That doesn't mean to say the're aren't instruments available to us mere mortals capable of holding their own when it comes to offering everything one would want in a mandolin at a price many of us can aspire to.

Loar is history, myth, intrigue, and food for discussion for all time to come...as it should be.

Enjoy the forum...it's quite addictive

Keith

[UlsterMando]

Thank you BradKlein, I love "The lure of the Loar"
- another mando-compulsive disorder finds a name !

Move over MAS

[Mandosam]

I am beginning to see all the different opinions. I don't think anybody has a definitive answer as many of you have pointed out. I think I knew that there wouldn't be a definitive answer, I just thought I would ask and see all the different opinions. Thanks for the responses everyone, and by the way, as a new guy, the forum is very addictive.

[JAK]

Mass hypnosis (IMHO)!!!

[Bill Kammerzell]

One of the world's most premier mandolinists, Dave Apollon, played the Gibson F5, even keeping at least 2 on hand so he could switch after breaking strings. This was much before bluegrass came on the scene, and I'd bet that because of Apollon, the F5 had already started to garner a reputation as a stellar instrument...

I don't know if Dave's F5 would bring 1.125 million dollars?

[Denny Gies]

Mike and F5Loar continue to add so much to our understanding. Thanks to both of you.

[f5loar]

Yes... well... they only had two options, didn't they? War-time or pre-war

Those pre-war D-28's were only 6 years old at the time, too.

Yes, but they had lots to choose from too! Bill could have stuck with his F7 that seemed to suit him since 1934. What if that barber shop had a killer F4 like Jimmy Martin found? Earl could have stuck with his RB11 with no tone ring at all! Or one of those fancy new Epiphone or Vega banjos. And Lester could have found just as good a sound on a prewar Gibson J30 or even a war time SJ. But they didn't.

[Ivan Kelsall]

It's not too hard to imagine,that after Lloyd Loar departed from Gibson,that the luthiers who'd been building mandolins to the ''Loar spec.'' carried on in like manner & that the mandolins produced for quite a while afterwards, were of exactly the same quality,but of course 'not signed' = had a label stuck inside 'em !. I really can't imagine a bunch of luthiers simply abandoning the way they built just because LL left Gibson. That is very probably why some Gibson mandolins built well after LL left also sound so good. The one owned by Butch Baldassari for one,the superb Gibson once played by Ralph Rinzler for another,neither of them Loars,but to my ears every bit as fine sounding.

I can't imagine that the first mandolin NOT to have a 'Loar signed label' inside it,sounded worse 'all of a sudden' than the last signed Loar - so what price the little piece of paper & all the hype (so to speak) that goes with it ?.

I can imagine a situation where the last 'signed Loar' & the next one off the line, built by the same guys,to the same specifications,but of course not signed ,being scrutinised. I'd bet a shed load of cash,that 'whoever', would find a reason to prefer the signed mandolin above the other,despite them 'maybe' sounding as identical as 2 mandolins can. As we've all been told so many times,the label makes quite a difference to the tone.

I'm sorry to sound so sceptical,but i am. Yes - 'some' Loar signed mandolins are terrific mandolins & i'd never dream of saying otherwise -but,to imagine that the ones that came after were 'inferior', is pretty hard going for me,as i've read,not ALL Loar signed mandolins sound good withing their own group,
Ivan

[Atlanta Mando Mike]

Provenance, rarity, fingerprints, legend, mystery, and magic... in no particular order