Last time I checked $30K was a lot of money!
Agreed, as an academic exercise, making a tribute to "see how close" you can get is a valid thing to do. That's how art students have been trained for centuries -- to go to a museum and sit in front of a classic work and try to copy it.
The "grey area" is that once the object exists, what do you do with it? Technically, not legal to sell, even if declared a copy, tribute, etc., as such -- once it reaches a certain level of mastery, it becomes a counterfeit, IMHO, even if that was not the maker's intention to do so. Once the mandolin changes hands, the question would be, will the new owner be responsible and do the right thing or will greed become a factor?
With are lucky here with Gary's tribute to have every detail documented with photos, description, etc. to the Mandolin Cafe worldwide audience. For argument sake, let's say another mandolin exists without this documentation?
I know in the guitar world, there have been 1959 Les Paul counterfeits sold as originals. And believe me, they have their own "experts" on the subject and those experts were fooled. Next to a Stradivarius, probably no instrument has been studied as much as a 1959 Les Paul Standard. Used to be that a guitar could be blacklighted to show to show if it was original or repaired or composed from other instruments. Now, builders have found finishing techniques that will "fool" a blacklight. Just saying, for what its worth.
And not to compare guitar dealers with mandolin dealers, either. I think the fact that we can have such an open discussion, says a lot about the character of mandolin people.
Jeff, I believe we're on the same page here. The problem of counterfeit is not only well known among people who copy art or instruments, but also in restoration. I once bought a D28 in "mint" condition. Ten years later, it turned out to be refinished. (The seller agreed to take the guitar back for the price I originally paid. However, in the meantime the price for mint condition guitars had almost doubled...)
Part of my daily work is restoration of pipe organs, some of which are older than 350 years. And very often, many parts are missing and have to be reconstructed. We try to make sure a new part looks original from afar (or else the instrument would lose its artistic message and appearance), but from closer inspection, you can always tell that the part is new (by means of a stamp, by leaving power tool marks or the like). Author John Watson calls this approach the "6 feet - 6 inches rule". Anyhow, if you want to "re"gain a certain historic vibe - I believe humans tend to - the grey area of counterfeit and fooling is not far.
I would believe it's only counterfeit if one sells it with the intent of defrauding. Otherwise it's a tribute.
I think situation is partly different in violin world where most of the copied makers are long dead. They don't mind if you try to fool anyone, it's all between the seller and buyer and their ability to know fake from original. But Gibson's lawyers can be PIYA once they find out... and they won't care if it was just tribute sold for $3k.
Adrian
Orcas Island Tonewoods
Free downloads of my mandolin CDs:
"Mandolin Graffiti"
"Mangler Of Bluegrass"
"Overhead At Darrington"
"Electric Mandolin Graffiti"
There is a builder in Pa with the name of "Gibson" so when he builds a banjo or an mandolin he puts "his" name on the headstock...I don`t know what the labels inside say...But is he breaking the law? I don`t think so....And we still see new Givens mandolin popping up now and then so what gives with that? I believe his family members are still building to Bobs specs but I can`t be sure about that...
Willie
And then there was the infamous true story of Canadian high school student Mike Rowe who filed the domain name MikeRoweSoft.com in 2003 and was promptly sued by Microsoft and was settled with Microsoft taking control of the domain. You can read about it on Wikipedia. So, it seems, what we think is our own name really isn't..........
Last edited by Jeff Mando; Sep-21-2017 at 12:52pm.
Orcas Island Tonewoods
Free downloads of my mandolin CDs:
"Mandolin Graffiti"
"Mangler Of Bluegrass"
"Overhead At Darrington"
"Electric Mandolin Graffiti"
Strictly speaking Bruce, that advertisement is incorrect, a buddy of mine had a Roper stove with the soup kettle "droppable" burner.
Something sounds like design infringement!
Timothy F. Lewis
"If brains was lard, that boy couldn't grease a very big skillet" J.D. Clampett
Could we keep the "copyright infringement/fraud/counterfeit"-topic out of this thread please.
Not only professionally am I interested in the legal part of this topic. But I donīt think that this thread deserves to derail due to a legal question. If possible, get another thread started in which foremost the legal experts should state their opinion. There is so much misinformation and heresay that muddies the water. There are also legal distinctions to be made when you look at the laws in different countries. So please...
To my mind this thread was started to exemplify the differences and similarities of the original 20ies F-5 as opposed to a bench copy/tribute mandolin.
I have to say that I am extremely grateful for this thread. I read trough the "Charlie Derrington Loar threads" and I have learned quite a bit through those. Yet I donīt half understand the tiny bits and pieces that make a Lloyd Loar F-5 unique. It is this thread that tries to enlighten the uneducated and entrhall the knowlegable.
We are speaking of extremely small differences that to the eye of the layman would not make any difference. Yet the sum of the facts paint a picture that will not fool the conoisseur.
I am far from knowlegable, even with a little experience.
If I may ask:
Is there a possibility to "enhance" the thread?
What I would like to see is sort of a list:
- Name the topic where the copy/tribute strays from the original
- post a picture of both mandolins with the specific part that shows the difference in built.
I know that this is a call mainly for Darryl. Yet there are others that have a bench copy/tribute mandolin. I am thinking of the Wiens Loar bench copy as well as others.
Let me finally thank Gary Vessel for building such interesting mandolins. The fact that his mandolin is the topic of discussion is a high praise for his work. I think it goes without saying that the "criticism" is rather an in depth analasys of an instrument and the way it was historically built.
Olaf
Your point is well taken, legalities take too much time out of all our days and have no business here. The thread was indeed all about the intricacies which separate the original from the new, apologies for my trip on the crazy train.
Timothy F. Lewis
"If brains was lard, that boy couldn't grease a very big skillet" J.D. Clampett
How does the mandolin in question sound? I imagine quite good. I think there's a similar discussion about this in the Red Diamond thread in General Topics right now, but I've always wondered if you got every measurement right, every material right etc., your mandolin should sound exactly like a real Loar, when that Loar was new. I suppose we don't have high enough quality recordings of brand new Loars (although there's some early Apollon recordings right?), so we will never "Really" know the answer. Still, copyrights aside, any tribute/copy, if close enough, should sound great right? I suppose you could calculate the total mass of the Gibson name inlay and write something else that puts the mass in the proper places to maintain the balance of those inlays, but who's that crazy (Gary? hehe).
I for one highly value the craftsmanship, obsession and value of tradition that some replica makers are able to achieve (you ever read Gil Yaron's Les Paul or Telecaster build threads on TDPRI?). It's my favorite form of art since it so easily can be shared and makes many millions of people happy wherever they are.
Mandolin, Guitar, & Bass for Doug Rawling & The Caraganas
www.dougrawling.com
2008 Kentucky KM-1000
2014 Martin D-28 Authentic 1937
1964 Gibson LG-0
2022 Sigma SDR-45VS
I've played it...
There's a mid-range thing happening in good Loars under the ear, and I know it when i hear it...
That "thing" defines a Loar for me, but it doesn't necessarily mean that I want my mandolin to sound like that...
(...and my Sullivan doesn't)...
You don't hear that "thang" in most modern mandolins--GAs, Gils, most Nuggets, Gibsons, etc.--and I've only run into it a handful of times...an encounter with a Red Diamond comes to mind...
To me, it's an interesting mandolin tone trait that good Loars seem to have, but not the be-all end-all of mandolin tone...
Anyway, Gary's mandolin (I think we both agreed on this) didn't have that midrange thing happening...
But what it did have was a tone and projection i could live with for the rest of my days...
I don't know if you've checked out our joke recording of the Virziectomy on this instrument (you can hear it here), but if you fast-forward to 8:20 you can hear what it sounds like...
Lousy recording, but you get the idea...
Oh, and don't judge it by what it sounds like after the Virziectomy...
Orcas Island Tonewoods
Free downloads of my mandolin CDs:
"Mandolin Graffiti"
"Mangler Of Bluegrass"
"Overhead At Darrington"
"Electric Mandolin Graffiti"
Great thread. Enjoyed reading it all!
Is there a previous thread that goes into detail about the differences of the Derrington MM's compared to original Loars. Or would a new thread be in order?
Orcas Island Tonewoods
Free downloads of my mandolin CDs:
"Mandolin Graffiti"
"Mangler Of Bluegrass"
"Overhead At Darrington"
"Electric Mandolin Graffiti"
Adrian
Bookmarks