Rigel

[Verne Andru]

Gold Tone has a couple of pretty sweet Rigel-looking acoustic/electrics on their site. Anybody see these in the wild?



https://goldtonemusicgroup.com/goldt...at=rigel-style

[dwc]

I played the CT 110 lookalike in a local music store and was underwhelmed in every way. It is a shame; I wanted to like it.
I think that the 110 has been around for years.

[MikeEdgerton]

They have both been around for years.

[mrmando]

I've had one or two of the GM110s; they are OK but nothing like a real Rigel.

In 2006 Rigel's expanded operations went belly up, and what had become a six-person shop went back to being a one-man shop. Around that time Pete decided to license the G110 and A Plus Deluxe designs to GoldTone to make these inexpensive copies. They've been around ever since.

Heard tell of a fortunate eBayer who snagged a real Rigel from a pawnshop that thought it had a GoldTone copy and had priced it accordingly...

[Ted Eschliman]

A very poor copy. Gold Tone does not do these instruments justice.

[Verne Andru]

Kinda a shame...

How is the acoustic tone from a real Regal?

I ask because they have always struck me as being more on the electric than acoustic side.

The body design looks great but doesn't inspire confidence that it will come close to being a Loar-killer acoustically, but I could be wrong.

If we're talking electric, the fact that Gold Tone ships with cheap electronics isn't a big surprise.

Electronics are usually always the first thing I upgrade on my instruments, so I would be more concerned with play-ability and upgrade-ability if I was looking to buy.

Would I be correct assuming a real Rigel would be significantly more expensive than an upgraded Gold Tone? If you want the look on the cheap, this may be the way.

[stevedenver]

Kinda a shame...

How is the acoustic tone from a real Regal?

I ask because they have always struck me as being more on the electric than acoustic side.

The body design looks great but doesn't inspire confidence that it will come close to being a Loar-killer acoustically, but I could be wrong.

If we're talking electric, the fact that Gold Tone ships with cheap electronics isn't a big surprise.

Electronics are usually always the first thing I upgrade on my instruments, so I would be more concerned with play-ability and upgrade-ability if I was looking to buy.

Would I be correct assuming a real Rigel would be significantly more expensive than an upgraded Gold Tone? If you want the look on the cheap, this may be the way.

I think because Rigels are curvy, the electric guitar/mando assumption is applied.

Loar killer????

I dont even think this way. Its not a Gil, you realize.
More to the point, i have never played a Loar.

Great f holed A style, indeed.
Simply, for what they cost, imho, the sound is commensurate, playability superb.

Rigels are first an acoustic mandolin. They happen to have a piezo like, under the bridge , pick up. Just like any acoustic mando that has had a pick up added later.

I havent played a gold tone. I too have not heard good reviews, though.

I have a Rigel A plus. I love it. I bought it originally as a "combat" mando, ie bars, mountains, dicey areas in town places where i might be concerned.


It has an interesting sound, and to my ear it has the woodiness of an F4, but the cut of an F5, weber-like, to my ear, ie slightly brighter than some. It has great sustain, and sounds like an x braced mando, more balanced among bass, mid and treble. I think its body is slightly deeper than my Fs.

The play really beautifully, and are comfy. Neck is the mando equivalent of a boatneck tele, ie a D , a little thicker, as it has no truss rod as i understand.fret work is great, and they are contemporary, not vintage, mando frets, ie slightly larger than those on my gibson.

The stock pick up benefits hugely from a DI, changes from tinny microphonic to almost a top end mic sound, imho.

While i dont know how the f style Rigels are built, the As are very clever. The back, neck joing area are a hollowed piece of solid maple, ie a one piece bowl. The top is then tuned, braced, and fitted. I belive mine is addy.

The neck is a bolt on, with the screws under the 12th fret marker dots!

Headstock is straight pull on the strings. Not sure this actually makes a difference in fact, but many modern makers think so. I love the looks too. Unique. And the quality is, imho, superb, and the tech well applied. Value? I love mine, but ive recently heard some great eastmans which I assume are closely priced.

Fwiw, i also have a gibson fern, brentrup f, and ellis f, and i love the Rigel.
Hope this helps

[mrmando]

Rigel necks are reinforced with a graphite rod. As Peter Mix explained to me, one advantage of the bolt-on construction is that if something ever did go wrong with a neck, it could easily be replaced without pulling the whole mandolin apart. But they rarely if ever had to replace a neck.

[Verne Andru]

Okay - so far we know an Asian factory-made knock-off of a "boutique" built Rigel isn't the same.

No surprise there.

But like many of these knock-offs, there is usually a way for them to be brought up to a respectable level. Not perfect, but respectable.

Has anybody taken the time to polish one of these GTs, or are we clearly in turd territory?

NFI - I'm just very aware that:

A] factory made instruments (including Fenders, Gibsons, etc.) are "assembled" at the factory with the expectation the resellers will do the setup, which they seldom do, and

B] many players will take an instrument off the wall and pass judgement without taking into consideration A above.

Not sure what a real Rigel and the Gold Tone cost, but I would think the difference is significant allowing more than enough elbow-room for spit and polish,

unless we're polishing turds, which is what I'm asking about.

[Verne Andru]

Rigel necks are reinforced with a graphite rod. As Peter Mix explained to me, one advantage of the bolt-on construction is that if something ever did go wrong with a neck, it could easily be replaced without pulling the whole mandolin apart. But they rarely if ever had to replace a neck.

That's sorta the same argument Leo made for doing bolt-on necks - i.e. easier to service after the fact.

[stevedenver]

as to gold tones, and , hoping to tune em up , as i said, i don't know.
what i do know, from similar wishes, is that there has to be good bones, one can fall in love with the look of an instrument, but, to really change its sound is something far bigger.

the whole instrument build thing is a summation of many aspects, wood, thickness, joints, necks angle of neck, bridges etc.

i would assume, someone, somewhere, must have bought a gold tone, put his heart into a proper set up and "fix", and, speaking for myself, i have yet to hear they are secretly sleepers which can be tweaked into.......wait for it........wait..........Loar killers. LOL


assuming you can evaluate and set up, change strings, check intonation , yada yada
i suggest that the answer might be to locate a dealer that will allow you a 3-4 day exam period, and full return sans shipping. Buy one, set it up, play it, make a decision.

a real Rigel 110 is about 5500 new from peter, about 2800 used, a new GT is about 600-700.
the issue, for me, is will that 600+ be enjoyed, or, thrown away.

my perspective is that the Rigel shape, which i love and have since i saw my first one at 1999 NAMM, isn't popular, and might be a hard thing to resell, given the many nice traditional, higher quality PAC RIm Fs, like eastmans etc

let face it, most mando players are pretty traditional in their tastes, as are most guitarists, imho.

[CES]

I've only played one of the Gold Tones, at Harry and Jeannie West's store probably 8 or 9 years ago. I owned a Fender FM 62-SE at the time (before they had to make them all lumpy shaped). I recall thinking that the GT was better acoustically than the Fender, and better than I anticipated, but plugged in there wasn't a ton of difference. The GT didn't come close unplugged to the Rigel G110 and CT 110s I've heard, though I'll admit I've never played one.

I suspect the GT could be made into a serviceable plug and play instrument, as was the Fender. But, as Ted E pointed out when I bought that Fender from him, they're not in the same realm as the Rigels, of which he'd owned/played several, iirc. Think Epiphone F-5 Copy vs an actual Gibson F-5. There are lots of people who gig with Epiphones, but they're not in the same league, especially acoustically.

FWIW, I have a lot of respect for GT's banjos, and think they're some of the better made affordable instruments out there, so don't mean to bash them at all. If an inexpensive plug and play, cool looking mando is what you're after, the GT could work well for you. If you're hoping it will be as good as a real Rigel, you'll be disappointed.

[Walt]

Okay - so far we know an Asian factory-made knock-off of a "boutique" built Rigel isn't the same.

No surprise there.

But like many of these knock-offs, there is usually a way for them to be brought up to a respectable level. Not perfect, but respectable.

Has anybody taken the time to polish one of these GTs, or are we clearly in turd territory?

NFI - I'm just very aware that:

A] factory made instruments (including Fenders, Gibsons, etc.) are "assembled" at the factory with the expectation the resellers will do the setup, which they seldom do, and

B] many players will take an instrument off the wall and pass judgement without taking into consideration A above.

Not sure what a real Rigel and the Gold Tone cost, but I would think the difference is significant allowing more than enough elbow-room for spit and polish,

unless we're polishing turds, which is what I'm asking about.

I used to own the prototype to Rigel's A-model (15-ish years ago). They were very good mandolins. They had a reputation for being good plugged-in instruments; but I used mine acoustically touring with a bluegrass group, and it held its own.
I don't know how often the Rigel A-models come up for sale, but I bet you could find one for ~$1000. The Gold Tones look like they are going for $600-$800. If the price difference is that small, going for the real Rigel is a no-brainer.
I haven't played a Gold Tone, but an uncle had the Rigel copy that Fender was making. That mando was one of the worst I've ever played. It was made of super-cheap materials, and was way, way, way overbuilt. A good setup could not have saved it.
I don't know where the Gold Tone falls on that spectrum between the real-deal and the bad Fender-copy.

[Verne Andru]

Based on what I'm reading, nobody really knows what a properly tuned GT sounds or plays like.

Most factory setups are just assembly of the parts with no fine tuning. Things as simple as fitting the bridge properly to the top can make a huge difference on tone and volume. Same as tweaking bracings, etc.

I've seen too many instances of peeps jumping to conclusions about an instrument before all the preliminary work was done. Would be an interesting experiment to put a GT in the hands of an expert setup person and see what comes out the other end.

Could still be a bit of a turkey, but I'm thinking...

[Verne Andru]

let face it, most mando players are pretty traditional in their tastes, as are most guitarists, imho.

So true...

[stevedenver]

Based on what I'm reading, nobody really knows what a properly tuned GT sounds or plays like.

Most factory setups are just assembly of the parts with no fine tuning. Things as simple as fitting the bridge properly to the top can make a huge difference on tone and volume. Same as tweaking bracings, etc.

I've seen too many instances of peeps jumping to conclusions about an instrument before all the preliminary work was done. Would be an interesting experiment to put a GT in the hands of an expert setup person and see what comes out the other end.

Could still be a bit of a turkey, but I'm thinking...

Be brave
It's called "tone tuition." At least that what i call it. Like string, picks, etc.

I own seven odd/rare les Pauls and teles, because i was curious to learn and hear and feel their unique configurations and electronics, finish, neck shapes, etc. I dont regret any, and love them

and, i know first hand about these models. Not the typical forum speculation on these items.......

. I often think of this type of purchase as an experiment...............

If you bite the bullet, you will be able to be the authority.

But i think if you were determined, you'd have simply gone ahead.

[Verne Andru]

But i think if you were determined, you'd have simply gone ahead.

More curious than determined. I have enough instruments ATM, but never hurts to look.

I've been tinkering with instruments since I was a kid and one of the first things I learned was peeps tend to want to pick something up and have it be perfect (for them) first time out. I've also worked in the MI biz and know what goes into the supply chain from tree to consumer and know most of what ends up on store shelves has not been given the necessary setup that's expected by customers.

In short, a poorly playing and sounding acoustic instrument - assuming the fundamental elements are in place - can often be brought up to a high-quality of tone and playability with the proper setup and attention.

FWIK the original Rigel's probably came from the maker who sweats the details on each one because his/her name is on it. When you play one, it probably plays and sounds just about as good as it can because the builder has a vested interest in each piece he puts out. And he charges accordingly.

Mass-manufactured off-shore instruments are made on an assembly-line by workers who don't have much of a clue what they're doing and have no vested interest in the instrument beyond doing their little piece. Once all pieces have been put in place, instruments are packed and shipped to stores waiting for customers with no attention paid to the details of tone and playability.

Assuming all the fundamental pieces are in place on the GT version, I'm curious whether or not these can be made into a nice playing and sounding piece with the proper attention to detail, or are they just a nice looking turd?

[dang]

...Assuming all the fundamental pieces are in place on the GT version, I'm curious whether or not these can be made into a nice playing and sounding piece with the proper attention to detail, or are they just a nice looking turd?

I had one the Gold Tones in my hands at some point, but I don't recall the specifics...
The fundamentals were NOT in place, and the one I played could never have been made into a highly functional instrument.

And it wasn't even in the same universe as the Rigel A+ deluxe I used to own

[tmsweeney]

Don't have the gold tone but I have the Rigel G 110, it has a very bell like tone and a sweet sustain, while it holds its own for Monroe Style BG, I prefer mine for gypsy, ethnic, and classical, the chop does not have the F5 bark. - although I saw Jimmy Gudreau play one with the Tony Rice unit and he was as BG as could be. Mine is Vermont Maple on the back, I would not assume Gold Tone uses high quality wood.

[mrmando]

I don't know where the Gold Tone falls on that spectrum between the real-deal and the bad Fender-copy.

Pretty close to the Fender; maybe marginally better but not much.