Lloyd Loar Mandolins

[Verne Andru]

All I know about Loar's and Greg Rich is what I've read here over the years. Some good, some bogus. As Shultz used to say on Hogan's Heroes, "I know nothing!"

Carry on.

[Billy Packard]

How 'bout...

These are the Holy Grail because they are the original.

Imagine, being there and putting all this together with L.L. It was the absolute beginning of the F5.

Never mind how great todays masters sound, if you want the original, there is no other.


Billy

[Ivan Kelsall]

From Bluegrasser78 - "I'd place a bet that anyone who possibly owned the "worst" real Loar out there WOULD be a happy camper ! " That maybe true,but i spoke with one well known bluegrass artist a few years back,who described one that he'd heard as a 'dog' & he wasn't being complementary. Having said that,it was 'his' opinion & sticking by what i said in my last post,i'd like to have heard it myself as opinions differ. I've also heard others speak of Loars they've heard as not being very good - but compared with what ?.

From Billy above - "..........if you want the original, there is no other.". That could very well depend on whether you attach more importance to the mandolin being played,or the skill of the player. For me,it's the latter. When i listen to Adam Steffey / Jeff Midkiff or Ron Pennington (a player i've only just discovered),i couldn't give a toot what they're playing - the music is all ,but then it has been for 53 + years,
Ivan

[William Smith]

From Bluegrasser78 - "I'd place a bet that anyone who possibly owned the "worst" real Loar out there WOULD be a happy camper ! " That maybe true,but i spoke with one well known bluegrass artist a few years back,who described one that he'd heard as a 'dog' & he wasn't being complementary. Having said that,it was 'his' opinion & sticking by what i said in my last post,i'd like to have heard it myself as opinions differ. I've also heard others speak of Loars they've heard as not being very good - but compared with what ?.

From Billy above - "..........if you want the original, there is no other.". That could very well depend on whether you attach more importance to the mandolin being played,or the skill of the player. For me,it's the latter. When i listen to Adam Steffey / Jeff Midkiff or Ron Pennington (a player i've only just discovered),i couldn't give a toot what they're playing - the music is all ,but then it has been for 53 + years,
Ivan

Hey man they still are the original 5. And if one wants one for say the playing that most of us do just around the house I'd still take a "Bad" Loar. For me a bad one isn't out there granted I've only played a few and they were great ones except one but it still had a pretty good tone, it was weak on volume "I'd still want that one if I couldn't have another, It had more to give with a different setup". Each one is different and I know some are better with volume and tone than others, I bet even the "so called dogs" have something, and you can really tweak a mandolin to get everything out of it. and yes like you said "music is all" I agree to that motto, just like I don't care what a mandolin looks like it should sound great above all, I don't go in for cosmetics. I'd still take a bad Loar for the playing I do. I know a few guys that seem to buy and sell Loars almost like we mortals without the $$$ change our pants! They keep looking for the ONE or just trying as many as possible. All just my opinion.

[Willie Poole]

As I have said before...a lot of mandolins sound bad because all they need is a professional set up...I had a friend that had a `23 Loar and my $295 Aria sounded better according to most folks that heard both and when he finally sold the Loar the new owner sent it to Gibson to have it checked out and when it came back it was one of the best sounding Loars that I have ever heard....But I have heard other makes that sound as good or better than the best Loar and it is all a matter of taste and what a person likes...

[Ivan Kelsall]

Bluegrasser78 - Your points are totally valid & 'maybe' i'd do the same. But - if i had the choice between a 'bad' Loar & a mandolin that i personally thought sounded more ''pleasing to me'',i'd take the latter - every time !. I'd also agree with my friend Willie,that often,a poor sounding mandolin might simply need a bit of TLC showered on it. A poor set up & choice of strings etc.can wreck the tone of almost any stringed instrument. For example - i once owned an Asian built Antoria banjo on which i used Bill Keith banjo strings, & it sounded as good as i could get it. When i bought my Stelling,as soon as i got it home,off came the strings & on went a set of BK strings. A week or so later,at a UK Bluegrass festival,a good friend of mine told me that the Stelling sounded lousy,worse than the Antoria. I was mortified. When i got home,i removed the BK strings & put a set of Stelling (re-branded GHS strings) on & the difference was like chalk & cheese. I'd never even given the original strings a chance.

A few years ago,another friend of mine visited me & brought with him a lovely pre-war Gibson F-4 that he'd bought years earlier from Mandolin Bros. It had very light strings on it,an action that a microbe couldn't have crawled under & a bridge that looked like a log. It didn't sound good at all. I was amazed really, because this friend, (who now lives in Ireland), had played mandolin for a long time & IMHO,should have set it up far better than it was. So yes,there's a lot of truth in the fact that even the finest instruments can sound bad if not set up right,in a similar way to a high performance racing car,you need to maintain the optimum performance & that requires checking every now & again - but we all know that !.

The bottom line 'for me' is that the good Loars will sound 'amazingly good',but to my ears,there are other mandolins that sound 'amazingly good' as well - simply 'different',
Ivan

[Billy Packard]

To continue my thoughts from above....

I have had the amazing good fortune to have played 8 Loar signed F5's over the years including Loyd Loar's personal instrument that Roger Siminoff got from Loar's widow. They were all lovely with some variation from one instrument to the next.

My point is they ARE the holy grail because they are the first and only. None other exist. It's not how they compare to others but rather what they ARE. Also how wonderful they are especially being the first. To this day many variations have come to be that are remarkable in their own way but the Loar is unique. Like a Stradivarius is unique.

I have several mandolins that I am totally stoked with and I don't covet a Loar, for what it's worth.

Short story...I was visiting with Stephen Gilchrist in the 'inner sanctums' of Gruhn's in 2010 sampling a couple of Loar's they had there. After playing the second one I said to Steve, "Honestly, I think my Gilchrist A3 sounds better." Steve winced and hurried me on, I guess one's not supposed to say such things!

Billy

billypackardmandolin.com

[William Smith]

I totally agree with ya Ivan and Billy, a proper set-up is everything, Like I said you can really squeeze out everything with a great setup, and some newish mandolins sound great, I've never owned a Loar just played em, I have owned some real high end mandolins and they just didn't cut it next to my F-7 conversions thats why i don't have em anymore, and still playing my old worn 7's. I had the chance to play mine side by side with a feb.18th 24 for a few weeks and my mandolin was my choice of the two. I don't covet owning a Loar but hey I wouldn't mind it at all

[Jeff Mando]

Steve winced and hurried me on, I guess one's not supposed to say such things!

I think that is a great point. There is an implied decorum. Same with Stradivari, Les Paul Bursts, diamonds, etc......

[Ken Waltham]

To continue my thoughts from above....

I have had the amazing good fortune to have played 8 Loar signed F5's over the years including Loyd Loar's personal instrument that Roger Siminoff got from Loar's widow. They were all lovely with some variation from one instrument to the next.

My point is they ARE the holy grail because they are the first and only. None other exist. It's not how they compare to others but rather what they ARE. Also how wonderful they are especially being the first. To this day many variations have come to be that are remarkable in their own way but the Loar is unique. Like a Stradivarius is unique.

I have several mandolins that I am totally stoked with and I don't covet a Loar, for what it's worth.

Short story...I was visiting with Stephen Gilchrist in the 'inner sanctums' of Gruhn's in 2010 sampling a couple of Loar's they had there. After playing the second one I said to Steve, "Honestly, I think my Gilchrist A3 sounds better." Steve winced and hurried me on, I guess one's not supposed to say such things!

Billy

billypackardmandolin.com

Well said. I have been trying to get this across for years. Folks don't always understand the difference between a good sounding mandolin and money. Never in a million years would I attest that there are not good modern F5's, there are many.
But... like a Rembrandt, or the "school of Rembrandt", one is worth a lot more than the other by the simple fact of what it is. "The Original".

[f5loar]

There is out there from 2006 a recording of about 35 Loars that got sampled by two well known artists. It was from the 2006 Loarfest in Bakersfield, CA. I'm sure some of you remember this. I was there and the difference was so minimal, at least to my ears. Those 2 guys knew how to keep the tone right. They were very different in their styles too, but they knew how to do it. They were all tuned to pitch and handed the Loar and they played the same song on them so as not to be different in their notes up and down the board. The only thing not controlled was the type strings on them. As far as Ronnie saying that about his Loar, that would be how he feels when he is playing it. To me seeing him live, the Loar had a better Monroe sound to it then his Gil. Same can be said about the recordings he has done with the Loar. Bobby Osborne has a Loar and a Fern. Without getting into details, when he got that Loar he loved it. Recorded his solo mandolin album with it. He did a couple of shows with Sonny and Sonny kept telling him man I can't hear that thing. Sonny had stood beside him for some 30 years with his Fern and when he switched he knew it so Bobby went back to the Fern. And Bobby knew there was a difference, so took out the Virzi in the Loar to see if it would make a difference to Sonny. He ended up putting the Virzi back in. So yeah, a lot of it is the picker and a lot of is your ears, not someone else. Harry West told me one time (a dealer of dozens of Loars over 50 years) when I told him this one Loar that was so well balanced with the tone across all the strings didn't really cut the volume like another Loar he had. Harry told me "that's why they make good microphones". And you know, he is right. You can have the finest Loar on earth, and the man behind your mic can kill it in an instant. I've got lots of "other" F5s but 9 times out 10, if you see me doing a show, it will be with a Loar (or a Fern).

[Billy Packard]

f5loar, when you mention, "Fern", to what are you referring to specifically? A Loar Fern?

Billy

[re simmers]

About 25 years ago I met Benny Cain. He had 5 Loars in the trunk of his car. He played all 5. One was spectacular. The other 4 were not. He said the spectacular one (in sound AND appearance) was insured for $25,000.....no insurance on the other 4. His 'playing' mandolin at that time was a recently purchased Flatiron F5, which is what I was playing.
HOWEVER, I do not know the condition of the strings on each Loar, and I don't know if he regularly played all 5 Loars. Maybe the 4 needed played!
I played 4 Loars at Herschel Sizemore's house about 8 years ago. All were fantastic, but 2 (consecutive serial numbers) were way better than anything.
Having said that, Tom hearing 35 of them at one setting is probably the best gauge here.

[paul dirac]

This is for Sam, the original poster, as well as for the rest of us:
Though the four pages of responses to this post indicate that we, as a community, jump at the chance to discuss this topic, I feel it's healthy etiquette to encourage new members to use the forum search functions and read up on the wealth of existing knowledge on this topic. I've been around here a bit, and always search first before posting any content, if only to connect new info with old threads, and overall for future efficiency and completeness. Our "database" of past posts becomes less usable as these links deteriorate. I've noticed Mike E. and others typically respond with search results, and think it's good moderator intervention.
However, as these 4 pages of responses indicate, new interest and discussions do emerge, I just worry that it's cheating both Sam and future forum queries out of a fuller experience. What say ye?

[f5loar]

f5loar, when you mention, "Fern", to what are you referring to specifically? A Loar Fern?

Billy

You consider a Loar as from June 1, 1922 until Dec. 1, 1924 and all are signed by Loar. There is a dozen or so of the Fern Loar which all seem to have a virzi in them. Then you have those half dozen or so called "unsigned" Loars. Loar was there when they were beginning near completing but did not get the signature stamp. In most all respects some do have virzi and some have Fern pattern. Then you would have the Ferns , made after these unsigned Loars when Loar was gone from 1925 to 1935. These were really close to the Loar, as many of the same guys were making them. A few had retired out or switched over to other lines like banjos.

[MikeEdgerton]

Then you would have the Ferns , made after these unsigned Loars when Loar was gone from 1925 to 1935.

After that unfortunate episode at the company Christmas party?

[JFDilmando]

July 9, 23' Fern never had a virzi

[Billy Packard]

f5loar...

I understand.

I visited Darryl Wolf once and checked out an F5 he had. It had block fingerboard inlay but the numbers said the body it was earlier. He suspected the body was around the shop a while, maybe even from when Loar was there, then mated with the later block inlay neck and a lacquer finish, maybe around 1930? It was wonderful but not as nice sounding as his signed Loar. He also had a guitar he made that was among the best sounding I've heard.

(Side story...When we were hanging out on the back porch visiting and playing mandolins this HUGE iridescent dragon-fly goes cruzing by. I pointed at this wonderful creature and said, "Wow look at him!" And just like that the dragon-fly zipped over and landed on MY FINGER!! I could feel the weight of him, he was so big. I froze with wonder, what a treat! Darryl's going, 'What the Heck!')

Billy Packard

billypackardmandolin.com

[Billy Packard]

After that unfortunate episode at the company Christmas party?

Mike, tell me about the unfortunate episode.

[paul dirac]

This is for Sam, the original poster, as well as for the rest of us:
Though the four pages of responses to this post indicate that we, as a community, jump at the chance to discuss this topic, I feel it's healthy etiquette to encourage new members to use the forum search functions and read up on the wealth of existing knowledge on this topic. I've been around here a bit, and always search first before posting any content, if only to connect new info with old threads, and overall for future efficiency and completeness. Our "database" of past posts becomes less usable as these links deteriorate. I've noticed Mike E. and others typically respond with search results, and think it's good moderator intervention.
However, as these 4 pages of responses indicate, new interest and discussions do emerge, I just worry that it's cheating both Sam and future forum queries out of a fuller experience. What say ye?

"Love me, hate me, but don't ignore me!"

[Ivan Kelsall]

From f5loar re. Ronnie McCoury's Loar - "...To me seeing him live, the Loar had a better Monroe sound to it then his Gil." I'd possibly agree with you if i'd heard it live,but maybe R.Mc isn't after a ''Monroe'' tone ?. I don't think that his Gil.has a 'Monroe tone',at least on the recordings that i have.

I must say that ''for me'',the tone of Bill Monroes's mandolin is ''the'' tone, & only one mandolin that i've heard to date comes close,& that isn't a Loar or even a Gibson - it's Chris Henry's Randy Wood,which was (became) the subject of a previous thread.
What gives such a ''relatively'' recent mandolin such a tone,is something we can only speculate on. Most of us have to settle for purely 'good' sounding instruments of whatever make to begin with. Maybe the ''Monroe mandolin tone'' might creep up on them over time,but i'm not holding my breath regarding my own,
Ivan

[f5joe]

Folks ......... go back to the player as an equal component to tone. Many folks cannot pull tone, period.

Chris gets it done right.

[MikeEdgerton]

Mike, tell me about the unfortunate episode.

Tom tells it so much better than I can.

I just cracked up doing the search for this. This story now has a life of its own.

[JamieJ]

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.

There are many luthiers that make mandolins to the same specifications as the Lloyd Loar era Gibson F5. The specs are not a secret, and are well known. For the most part, owning a Lloyd Loar signed mandolin is a prestige issue, in my opinion. When you own one, you are playing the same mandolin Bill Monroe played and that's a great feeling! You are a member of a very elite group of musicians that own one.

However, there is one caveat; a Lloyd Loar Gibson F5 mandolin will be nearly a century old, which means the Adirondack spruce will have fully cured and be at its peak potential, acoustically. That gives them an edge over other custom mandolins made to the same specifications, but are not as old.

These are great mandolins, arguably, and are the "gold standard" for bluegrass musicians, but are very expensive and relatively rare. There are only about 300 in existence.

The bottom line is that you can get a great mandolin for a fraction of the price of a Lloyd Loar signed Gibson F5.

[red7flag]

My selection of Loars that I have played is small, just 4. Two were owned by luthiers. In both those cases, I thought their own work was better than their Loars. I don't think either was played much or had been set up any time recently. One Loar I played at a Local dealer was very underwelming to say the least, and not nearly as spectacular as many of the 10+K instruments he had for sale. I am pretty sure that one one was well set up. I just did not care for the feel or the tone. One Loar I played was simply amazing. I just did not want to move after playing it. I did not want to play more because I was afraid to drop it. That was truly a stellar instrument in all departments, playability. tone. It just had IT.