Why is it nearly impossible to copy Loar?

[Willie Poole]

Thanks Tim....I guess I have looked and handled about 12-15 Loars but never had two at the same time to compare but I do remember one early model did not have the tuner posts angled so that the top posts for the D and A strings were closer than the lower G and E strings which later models did have, I am not saying that that mandolin was in fact a "real" Loar, it could have been a fake one, I don`t know... also some I have seen the fit and finish wasn`t as good on some as it was on others...That has been discussed on here before...

Willie

[Darryl Wolfe]

Mostly because most builders are not fantastically proficient with every single aspect. And there is a certain "eye" required to perceive subtleties....and because of what HOGO referenced, the perfect imperfections that Loars all possess. Each builders forms are slightly different and each carves the scroll the way they do it, and they don't duplicate the consistent inconsistencies Loars have

Way back in the day, I wanted to commission a mandolin to be built have so and so do this, so and so do that etc etc. Obviously, you would never get all the luthiers to agree. Things have come a very long way since those mid 70's though

[Darryl Wolfe]

Hardly anyone duplicates all of these features:

- Neck is not installed in the center of the of the body. It's closer to the bass side of the instrument
- Neck is installed with a subtle right to left angle (the tip of the peghead is positioned to the left a bit)
- The neck is installed in a not square to the rim set fashion (the treble side of the fingerboard is lower than the bass side) Ever notice that no Loar bridge base is the same dimension left to right? They always have a thin side to square the bridge to the strings

That's just the tip of the iceberg

Most of the tops are slip matched

They used some sort of round bandsaw blade as both a cutting tool and a shaping tool

It is very much like trying to restore a '57 Chevy correctly. Size type and distance of spot welds, correct parts, correct paints with the right color and sheen, chalk marks, tags.......

[Jeff Mando]

Fascinating stuff, Darryl! Thanks for sharing your knowledge!

[Spruce]

Hardly anyone duplicates all of these features:

- Neck is not installed in the center of the of the body. It's closer to the bass side of the instrument
- Neck is installed with a subtle right to left angle (the tip of the peghead is positioned to the left a bit)
- The neck is installed in a not square to the rim set fashion (the treble side of the fingerboard is lower than the bass side) Ever notice that no Loar bridge base is the same dimension left to right? They always have a thin side to square the bridge to the strings

That's just the tip of the iceberg

Most of the tops are slip matched

...tip of the iceberg is right....

But the question i keep coming back to when I look at some of their procedures is: "Why"?
A lot of that stuff just makes no sense whatsoever...

[HoGo]

...tip of the iceberg is right....

But the question i keep coming back to when I look at some of their procedures is: "Why"?
A lot of that stuff just makes no sense whatsoever...

I do all of the above on my mandolins routinely (at least tha latest five or six where I started building in exact "Loar sized" mould)
It makes sense to me - in most cases it's aesthetics! The guy who designed the darned thing (F-4 and F-5) had very good sense of curve flow and balance of shapes. It's hard to see and I started getting it after my first two or three years spent drawing and re-drawing my own mandolin plans trying to capture that balance and vibe. I've been trying to get perfectly symmetrical body and headstock (if poits and scrolls were removed) but it clearly lacked the look I was after. Only by chance I forgot to check the symmetry for few rounds of curve adjusting and got shape that was much better - so I found the asymmetry is needed to keep the whole balanced. Same goes for the neck. If you put the fingerboard too far from scroll you lose the tightness of the design and scroll looks odd. So you move it closer to scroll. But without angling it the bridge would have to go as well. But the neck joint (dovetail) was prepared on rim before scroll was cut and thus is sitting on the apex of the curve where the heel button resides.
I found the tilt purely accidental as I've seen them with both right and left tilt. The one pictured above has no tilt (the CT's I posted in another threads are of this mandolin and shows no tilt).

[Spruce]

I do all of the above on my mandolins routinely (at least tha latest five or six where I started building in exact "Loar sized" mould)
It makes sense to me - in most cases it's aesthetics! The guy who designed the darned thing (F-4 and F-5) had very good sense of curve flow and balance of shapes. It's hard to see and I started getting it after my first two or three years spent drawing and re-drawing my own mandolin plans trying to capture that balance and vibe. I've been trying to get perfectly symmetrical body and headstock (if poits and scrolls were removed) but it clearly lacked the look I was after. Only by chance I forgot to check the symmetry for few rounds of curve adjusting and got shape that was much better - so I found the asymmetry is needed to keep the whole balanced. Same goes for the neck. If you put the fingerboard too far from scroll you lose the tightness of the design and scroll looks odd. So you move it closer to scroll. But without angling it the bridge would have to go as well. But the neck joint (dovetail) was prepared on rim before scroll was cut and thus is sitting on the apex of the curve where the heel button resides.
I found the tilt purely accidental as I've seen them with both right and left tilt. The one pictured above has no tilt (the CT's I posted in another threads are of this mandolin and shows no tilt).

Very interesting...thanks...!

I guess the one thing on Darryl's list that has always bugged me in the F5s (and the only thing I'm even qualified to comment on... ) is the spruce selection...
...why all the slip and mis-matches, off-quarter wood, during a period when even the lowly A model got a decent set of quartered wood for the top?

The only answer I can come up with is that they really wanted Picea rubens in those F5s, and were willing to use stuff that wasn't all that great...
...and therefore, we must be looking at other species in the rest of the line, right?

[HoGo]

Very interesting...thanks...!

I guess the one thing on Darryl's list that has always bugged me in the F5s (and the only thing I'm even qualified to comment on... ) is the spruce selection...
...why all the slip and mis-matches, off-quarter wood, during a period when even the lowly A model got a decent set of quartered wood for the top?

The only answer I can come up with is that they really wanted Picea rubens in those F5s, and were willing to use stuff that wasn't all that great...
...and therefore, we must be looking at other species in the rest of the line, right?

My thought on this is that initially they used European spruce and maple imported from violin suppliers for the highest models (F-5, perhaps tops of F-4s as well) as it was considered superior (the brochures/ads of the era name Norway spruce) but found out it is indistinguishable from red spruce lumber that they could get locally and for much better price so they switched to red in mid. '23 (and since sales of F-5 were not too hot that may be the main reason).
They had the wood in boards and just took two pieces from one board and joined them (often with wrong side/s in the joint). The last piece of the board got it's other half from the next board on the pile etc. You can see that they didn't like to waste any piece of wood. They didn't use ebony where it was not necesary (headstock) and often used up other species for fingerboards that they had at hand (I've seen some really dark BRW on boards of 20's Gibsons). And they used up all the ugly (wide wiggly grain, off-quarter, not wide enough - with wings added, etc.) stuff on cheaper models.

[Timbofood]

Adrian, your mention of using the material on hand speaks to the frugality of "factory production". Form and shape ( with all the subtleties you and other high caliber builders see and incorporate) is exactly what the guy at the drawing board had envisioned from the first drop of ink.
People wonder about "why the Florida is the shape and length it is, why the neck is a touch "off"" all the little things made for the full effect of grace and visual pleasure. The Florida design compliments the optical weight of the fullness of the scroll (somewhat) there is visual balance and artistry, design elegance which is lacking in some modern designs across current looks of many items. Face it, we do not use the fine penmanship which was much more impressed on children and adults either, now it's all done with a screen and keyboard. That's over simplified but, I think you get the drift.

[Spruce]

My thought on this is that initially they used European spruce and maple imported from violin suppliers for the highest models (F-5, perhaps tops of F-4s as well) as it was considered superior (the brochures/ads of the era name Norway spruce) but found out it is indistinguishable from red spruce lumber that they could get locally and for much better price so they switched to red in mid. '23 (and since sales of F-5 were not too hot that may be the main reason).
They had the wood in boards and just took two pieces from one board and joined them (often with wrong side/s in the joint). The last piece of the board got it's other half from the next board on the pile etc. You can see that they didn't like to waste any piece of wood. They didn't use ebony where it was not necesary (headstock) and often used up other species for fingerboards that they had at hand (I've seen some really dark BRW on boards of 20's Gibsons). And they used up all the ugly (wide wiggly grain, off-quarter, not wide enough - with wings added, etc.) stuff on cheaper models.

[Paul Hostetter]

All I can see with a quick look is: -Grain in the ivoroid is the currently available, larger pattern and not the smaller pattern of the older stuff (that we can't get anymore).

I agree—that's modern yellowish wavy Chinese ivoroid. I like it, but it can't be original binding.

[HoGo]

I agree—that's modern yellowish wavy Chinese ivoroid. I like it, but it can't be original binding.

I'm pretty certain it's original or someone did totally fabulous-miraculous job of binding replacement???
Even CT scan doesn't indicate any structural work. The only thing that is visible is the white line in top binding shines (probably lead white used as pigment or something like that) and the back is softer white.

BTW, the back has IBI and top IBW binding...
I found pic of another one with such ivoroid... 72052, also early '23...
(source, most likely frets.com, I saved the pic years ago)
Notice how similar is the heel, I'd bet the same person did the binding on both mandolins...

Or do you mean the top or neck is not original? As I said no trace of any work on this one... The top binding has that typical sunken-in white line. And other side of board has grain straight along the board....

[HoGo]

Bruce I have all of the specs sheets (notice no F-5 there), but the ads and the F-5 brochure also says Norway spruce, perhaps Loar wanted European woods as that was considered best material in classical world?

[Spruce]

...but the ads and the F-5 brochure also says Norway spruce...

Isn't there an infamous brochure (or plan) from that period that specifies red spruce??
(I'm losing it...)

[Br1ck]

Many of the finer violins are on loan to the performer. Rich patrons like to call up a concert soloist and ask them if they would mind giving a private recital for a few of their friends.You do like playing that Guanari don't you? Many of the top concertmasters in big city orchestras play instruments that come with the position. I had dinner with David KIm, concertmaster with the Philadelphia Symphony. They were on a west coast tour. A string quartet was going to Palm Springs to give a recital in the home of a patron who donates $2 million a year to the orchestra. I don't remember if he played a Strad, but it was never farther than an arm's reach away. It was under the table at dinner. Violin came with the concertmaster chair.

[HoGo]

Isn't there an infamous brochure (or plan) from that period that specifies red spruce??
(I'm losing it...)

Here is the brochure that specifies Norway and spec sheet that calls for Adirondack...

[Paul Hostetter]

Norway spruce is a common name for Picea abies, the primary European spruce that was introduced to N. America early on, and was thoroughly naturalized by the 1920s. Even if Gibson had used it, it would probably have been harvested in Michigan or nearby. But using native American Picea rubra makes more sense.

An interesting article about Norway spruce here.

Another one here.

[Jeff Mando]

Sorry, I seem to have missed the fine points about the wood discussion. Are you saying that the top wood for an original Loar is not as good as what we would expect it to be, by today's standards?

[Spruce]

Sorry, I seem to have missed the fine points about the wood discussion. Are you saying that the top wood for an original Loar is not as good as what we would expect it to be, by today's standards?

In many cases, yes.

Take JR's--a famously good-sounding example made from two different trees, one half being about 20 degrees off quarter...
////////////

You couldn't give that wood away today....
Hard to see:

[HoGo]

Norway spruce is a common name for Picea abies, the primary European spruce that was introduced to N. America early on, and was thoroughly naturalized by the 1920s. Even if Gibson had used it, it would probably have been harvested in Michigan or nearby. But using native American Picea rubra makes more sense.

The European spruce was introduced as ornamental tree and I doubt there were any serious attempts to plant it out in forests of US back in late 18th or very early 19th century (so the trees could grow old enough by 1920's) when US spruces were still plentiful on east coast.
I live in country with one of the oldest re-forestation history and oldest stands of planted trees date to the early 19th century and the trees are over 200 years old now.
Th etops on the earliest Loar betches are noticeably different quality from the later. Typically fine even straight grain without excessive runout. Later, mismatched, off-quarter, tops became common feature. Even selection of maple changed from quartersawn book-matched to slipmatched pairs etc about the same time.

[HoGo]

You couldn't give that wood away today....

OK, I'll take it. We can split the shipping cost so you finally get rid of it. LOL.

[Spruce]

The tops on the earliest Loar batches are noticeably different quality from the later. Typically fine even straight grain without excessive runout. Later, mismatched, off-quarter, tops became common feature.

You do know you're blowing a hole in the whole "Adi is Better in an F5" theory...?

OK, I'll take it. We can split the shipping cost so you finally get rid of it. LOL.

Hey, you apparently have THE stuff that was used in the early Loars over there...
It would just be really hard to find someone who knows how to cut it that far off-quarter...

[HoGo]

You do know you're blowing a hole in the whole "Adi is Better in an F5" theory...?

Hey, you apparently have THE stuff that was used in the early Loars over there...
It would just be really hard to find someone who knows how to cut it that far off-quarter...

I don't know which is beter, but apparently the possibility of use of European spruce is there at least for some of them. And "Crusher" has also that fine straight-grained spruce and it is early Loar....
It's easy to find local spruce with density and stiffness of typical red spruce over here. I've been thinking about calling one old man who cuts violin spruce (and he grades them according to density) if he has something too dense and stiff that he could sell for less. I bet wood like that ends in his firewood pile... Few weeks ago I was buying some dried spruce beams and noticed thick spruce boards at the company, air-dried for several years and mostly not far from center of tree i.e. either quartersawn or just slightly off-quarter. 4EUR or so per board-meter (2 1/2" thick and mostly 2-2.5' wide bark-to-bark) I think I'll have a closer look at the grain when I'm there next time...
Too bad that the proper "Loar" Michigan maples (red or sugar) don't grow here and the wild irregular curl is extremely rare in EU maple.

[HoGo]

Th etops on the earliest Loar betches are noticeably different quality from the later. Typically fine even straight grain without excessive runout. Later, mismatched, off-quarter, tops became common feature. Even selection of maple changed from quartersawn book-matched to slipmatched pairs etc about the same time.

I must correct myself here. Not all early Loars had these tops and backs, I had a closer look and I'm not sure why but it seems like it's mostly the light tobacco burst mandolins that show the well-quartered, fine-grained spruce but after mid 23 most tops are typically unmatched and/or off quarter. The bookmatched backs are rare in the early Loars, but almost non-existent in later (I don't know of any, but I haven't seen them all).

[fscotte]

I have yet to see any evidence that indicates a Loar sounds better than modern mandos. So I'm not quite certain the drive or goal to recreate an average crafted instrument. Modern tools and methods are vastly superior.

I think the Loar craze is slowly going the dodo bird. Like modern pianos, vastly superior to their early and mid 20th century counterparts.