Wide vs Tight Grain Tops?

[Al Trujillo]

If I walked in to a shop to buy a new mandolin and there were two that were pretty much identical (apples to apples)...the only difference being that one had a wide grain top and the other had a tight grain top. Based on experience building them which one would you prefer? And why?

[Inklings]

I'm tempted to say, "Put on a blindfold, ask the shop rep to hand you each in random order, and let your ears decide."

Guidelines for choosing top woods will normally articulate above 10 grains per inch. I've read some convincing statements here by knowledgeable people who disagree with that.

[fscotte]

I think tight grain has a more complex appearance.

[sblock]

There is a longstanding myth among some luthiers and many musicians, which apparently refuses to die, that a narrower grain pattern produces a superior tonewood, and therefore that one should seek the narrowest possible grain patterns. This is complete nonsense. It has been disproven wrong time and again. There are other physical properties of the wood that have a much greater affect on its sonic characteristics, specifically, the density (and uniformity of that density), the stiffness (compliance under stress), and the damping (ring-down characteristic). None of these things is readily assessed by a simple visual examination of the wood. And none of these things is closely correlated with the tightness of the grain. Therefore, you cannot use a quick look at the top's grain pattern as a surrogate for assessing the density, stiffness, or damping. Great tops have been made from comparatively wide grains, and also from narrow grains. That's not what matters most.

[sunburst]

...Based on experience building them which one would you prefer? And why?

The one that sounds best to me, because I would like that one better.

Bottom line, sound is subjective, that's why I said "the one that sounds best to me", and grain count has nothing particular to do with top quality other than appearance. Tradition says we use relatively tight grain if we want that look.

[HoGo]

If I walked in to a shop to buy a new mandolin and there were two that were pretty much identical (apples to apples)...the only difference being that one had a wide grain top and the other had a tight grain top. Based on experience building them which one would you prefer? And why?

Please define "pretty much identical". Were the other woods (necks, backs, ribs) all from the same tree, preferably even cut from one billet one next to the other? And were they carved exactly same? If not then the whole question about the tops is moot.
In my experience the only difference why I would prefer tight grained top is that soundhole carving and carving binding notch is easier when grain is tight...

[fscotte]

I think he meant everything was exactly the same, including sound. I just like the look of tight grain better.

[j. condino]

medium grain

[peter.coombe]

As John says, the one that sounds better to me.

[Timbofood]

I had a friend that had a D-28 that was so wide grained it was like looking at a piece of flooring, like five or six lines per inch! That was an amazingly good sounding guitar! Aesthetically, I tend to lean toward finer grain but, if the sound is there, I'm with John.

[sblock]

There is nothing wrong at all with selecting a piece of topwood for its visual appeal (e.g., tight grain), as long as the mandolin achieves the tone you desire. But never confuse looks with sound!

[buckhorn]

the last A style I built had a fir top that was 6 to 7 lines per inch.. it was the one everyone picked up AGAIN after trying the other F styles.. don't slam the Fs , but that A made most pickers smile.. Yes, all in the ear....

[Ivan Kelsall]

I feel pretty sure that Al was resurrecting the old myth (?) of one grain maybe being 'better' than another tonally. It was one of the things i read about on here almost as soon as i became a member. Somebody had asked the question - 'which one's better' = logical answer,the one that 'sounds better' (more pleasing to you),
Ivan

[Al Trujillo]

Thanks all for your comments. Many times when viewing an instrument on either in the Classifieds, or other websites, a description of the instrument may include a statement such as - "Beautiful wide-grained (or tight-grained) top", which of course made me question whether that was something important that I'd been missing. Who better to ask than those who build them. Thanks again and play on!

[Austin Bob]

Do as Goldilocks does when she goes shopping for a mandolin, and pick the grain that's "just right."

[Jim Garber]

Back in 1983 when they first came out with the Flatiron carved series I decided to buy one, my first new mandolin. This was at Mandolin Brothers and they had what they then called A5-1 and A5-2. The A5-1 was plainer and the A5-2 had flamed maple back and sides and more binding. They were IIRC identical in sound but I opted for the A5-2 deciding to pay for a little of those cosmetics. Altho I definitely agree that it is sensible to go for sound, given identical tone and playability, there is nothing wrong with paying for some bling if it makes you feel good. I still look at that mandolin and love both its tone and the look of the wood.

[Marty Jacobson]

There's also the psychological aspect. If I tell you that this mandolin sounds amazing because of the incredible tight-grained wood, and you believe I am a credible source, you might well perceive that instrument as sounding better.
My point here is to never believe anything I say.

[David Houchens]

I lean toward medium to wide grain. This is aesthetics only.

[Jeff Hildreth]

Who decided that "fine" grain had a more appealing aesthetic than wide grain?

Keep in mind many famous mandolin/guitar makers used mismatched tops and wonky grain and varying lines per inch, rather than straight grain and homogenous appearance and fine grained. Example Hauser, Martin pre CFM IV.

Martin guitar grades tops from 1 - 8 low to high quality. This is a cosmetic judgement only. Zip all to do with any acoustic testing or criteria.

Unfortunately..the majority of instrument makers, to include mandolin, follow this in top selection.

The worst custom made mandolin I ever owned ( current expensive American revered maker) had a top with 22 lines per inch. The top was flabby, the workmanship was Jr High School woodshop quality ..played and sounded bad(ly).. offed it in short order.

Cosmetics, while desireable, are not indicative of playability and superior tone.

[fscotte]

I decided!

Seriously though, the tighter grain gives me the impression of "more going on" in the aesthetic department - all those grain lines, beautiful. Especially attractive when the spruce is perfectly quartered.

[Al Trujillo]

Who decided that "fine" grain had a more appealing aesthetic than wide grain?

Cosmetics, while desireable, are not indicative of playability and superior tone.

To your first point....I'm not aware that 'fine' is more appealing but both 'tight' and 'wide' are used in some descriptions. Your second point is well taken and I remind myself of this everytime I pick my A-style (also that I'm too poor to own an F).

[Ivan Kelsall]

From Marty Jacobson - "My point here is to never believe anything I say.". I don't even believe that statement ?,
Ivan

[Br1ck]

I have a 1970 Guild D 35 with quite a bit of bear claw. Now I know the top went into the inferior pile to make the cheaper guitars. The tight perfect looking tops went to the D 55 pile. Flash forward 45 years and I've seen bear claw touted as an upgrade. I think the same thing happened with wide grain as I've seen a fair amount of 18 series Martin's with wide grain, and also A and A Jr mandolins. I think along the way this aesthetic sensibility morphed into a false view that it was for sonic reasons.

I know a guy with Pava#1. He took it back to the Ellis workshop and was told simply that they had some issues with coloring and rather than redo the top it was easier to just paint it black. LOL. Simple as that. No conspiracy to cover up flawed wood, but flawed execution.