I Bought "The Loar" Once!

[Soupy1957]

The novelty of the name, I guess. A Chinese knock-off, as I recall. The neck didn't waste any time separating from the body............

"You get what you pay for" applies here.

Ah well.........live and learn.

[Bill Findley]

Not sure , but your post is a little odd, coming out of left field. I have a well-made and well-finished ”The Loar” LM 400, bought new several years ago from Folkmusician. Nice chunky neck, good for a beginner with big hands, loud as can be. Holds its own, great first mando. “Chinese”? — I thank those carvers every day.

[MikeEdgerton]

This might be the first I recall seeing of any complaint like this on these mandolins.

[Ivan Kelsall]

As Mike mentions above & it's the first time for me as well. ''The Loar'' mandolins have been bought by the dozens by Cafe members over the years since they've been on the market,with very few complaints,& certainly not ones like yours. If that has indeed happened,you should refer back to where you bought it from & maybe contact the manufacturer.

It's one thing to buy a mandolin maybe not perfectly set up,but to have one come apart,is quite another. Maybe a bit of history on yours might be in order = how long / where from etc. ?. Bad news anyway,
Ivan

[Soupy1957]

Well I’m sorry to say that what I experienced was indeed what I experienced. It was probably around the time that they first came out, to be sure, and maybe their quality has improved, but that wasn’t what I found to be true at the time. I probably ordered it through one of the online sources, but I don’t happen to recall at the moment.

The novelty about it of course, was the fact that the name “Loar” was used, which at the time I thought, might have been a copyright infringement or something like that. It’s certainly raised a few eyebrows in the Gibson community. For those of us who could only dream about owning a Gibson “Lloyd loar,” it was about as close as we could get to any thoughts of that.

My memory at the time was that the lacquer was extremely thick, the sound was “OK,” and then of course there was that flaw between the neck and the body. I suppose I could’ve pursued a replacement from the manufacture or from the place where I ordered it but I never did. My bad. I think it was pretty much a low, to mid range, price point too.

[Mandoplumb]

Remember mass production is going to have a few “lemons” - should not condem all of anything on one bad apple. You didn’t even give manufactor a chance to correct his mistake. I owned one, they are not in the same league as a Gibson,or any high end mandolin but it was a great back-up/beater mandolin well worth what it cost IMHO

[Dave Greenspoon]

I bought a lower-end F5 Style instrument from them.While it is not the loudest mandolin I've ever heard, it is certainly more than functional and worth the money I spent for it. If anything I felt it was pretty well put together, especially given the price point. The satin finish on it is fine. This is the perfect mandolin for me to travel with without worrying about damage or loss the way I would with my Rigel.

[Soupy1957]

Well I’m certainly not trying to offend anybody in here who has bought one and had great success with it. My experience is just “different,” is all. Not trying to condemn the whole line.

What, if anything, came of the use of the name “Loar” in connection with that particular mandolin? There were some folks in here at the time, who were none too happy about the use of that name in an instrument not connected to Lloyd. I got the impression that to them, it felt like a slap in Lloyd Loar’s face. I know “I” felt that way!

[Folkmusician.com]

Soupy,

What year was The Loar?

Out of the many thousands I have sold, I don't recall a single instance of the neck joint giving way. I am wondering if this was one of the very first made at the third party factory. I don't recall an issue with those either, but I did have a few random occurrences from other brands made at that same third party factory. I believe the last of these were produced in 2009.

The new shop started production of the hand-carved mandolins in 2008.

[Jesse Kinman]

My second Kentucky did that too, there appeared a crack in the finish between the neck and body about a month after I bought it, and it got bigger over the next several months, started affecting the playability, and I shipped it back as it was still on warranty. The one I got in replacement was the Kentucky I just now upgraded from 14 years later. Obviously with these mandolins that are slapped together in a factory there will be issues here and there, some major some minor, but it sounds like you got a lemon like Mandoplumb said. I’ve played a few “The Loar”s and I was quite impressed with the tone.

[allenhopkins]

Underscores the issue of universalizing a single experience, good or bad, into an evaluation of a broad genre of products. I bought a Chevy that was a "lemon," so all Chevrolets are badly made, "and I'll never buy another one."

This is also the flaw that exists in the countless threads asking Cafe members for their evaluations of a particular make and model of instrument. We generalize from our individual experiences -- can't help it -- and our experience with the HotFrets 990 mandolin may be truly an outlier. We got the only bad one -- or the only good one -- of the hundreds or thousands made, so we vehemently pan it, or give it unqualified praise.

Loar mandolins are often recommended here as entry-to-mid-range instruments, so we have a significant number of "data points" to use in evaluating them. This isn't to discount Soupy's experience, which I'm sure was very disappointing.

As to the "Loar" trademark, I'm sure Gibson never thought to claim it, an omission they may regret, but probably don't care about. My only quarrel with it is that these mandolins (and guitars) have no discernible connection to Lloyd Loar, other than adopting his general F-5 (and L-5? don't know) silhouette and basic construction. It's merely an attempt to invoke the name of a generally respected designer -- "Loar means quality," I guess.

Ah well; "Strad-O-Lin" instruments apparently tried to invoke Antonio Stradivari, 18th-century ace violin maker. Doubt anyone was fooled. Now Stradivarius is a women's clothing line -- who knew?

[Soupy1957]

Skaggs describes what I went through, except I didn’t send mine back.

[MikeEdgerton]

Skaggs describes what I went through, except I didn’t send mine back.

Why not?

[Michael Neverisky]

The novelty about it of course, was the fact that the name “Loar” was used, which at the time I thought, might have been a copyright infringement or something like that.

While I have seen some competently manufacturered instruments come out of China, it is also true that the same manufacturers have no concern about copyright and trademark infringement.

No opinion, btw, about "Loar" since I've never played one. Neither the Gibson nor the Beijing editions.

[Soupy1957]

Just to be clear, I am not ditzing the entire squadron of Chinese made “The Loar” mandolins. I realize I probably just got a lemon when I bought one. I also realize, that by not returning it and having it repaired, I was making a choice that some of you might not make. Lessons learned, all.

My personal opinion about whether not the use of the name “Loar,” Could’ve potentially been a heart ache for Gibson, and a potential lawsuit, is just a personal opinion.

I’m glad to hear that many of you that had chosen to buy that particular mandolin, and found it to be wonderful for your purposes as a travel mandolin or whatever; had no issues with it. that’s great! (YMMV)

[JEStanek]

The novelty of the name, I guess. A Chinese knock-off, as I recall. The neck didn't waste any time separating from the body............

"You get what you pay for" applies here.

Ah well.........live and learn.

Soupey... Brother... dissing the whole line is a very reasonable way to interpret this initial post in this thread. It's like there's a room full of folks with mandolins sitting around having a chat. All different skill levels and all different brands of mandolins owned by those folks and you say this short statement and then sit down with a look on your face...

That's kinda what you did and this is kinda the reaction that kind of statement gets.

From some more recent threads, the brand is not focusing on build quality as much lately and some stores are dropping the brand in favor of another for starter packages. That's an interesting thread.

Jamie

[colorado_al]

The novelty of the name, I guess. A Chinese knock-off, as I recall. The neck didn't waste any time separating from the body............

"You get what you pay for" applies here.

Ah well.........live and learn.

Should be covered under warranty if you are the original owner

[Ivan Kelsall]

Soupy has said that he's not calling into question the whole ''The Loar'' mandolin quality,simply the one that he bought - we all understand that. As Robert Fear suggests,it might have been an early mandolin made in a factory that hadn't yet got the build quality right. However,he did slip up in not sending it back,but i think that maybe all of us have done similar things in the past,accepted an item that's not 'quite' as good as we'd hoped & then regretted it.

As colorado al suggests - is it covered by any warranty ?. The manufacturer might still honour it,so IMHO it's worth a try,
Ivan

[Willie Poole]

Soupy says that he can`t recall where he bought it so how can he return it or seek compensation under a warranty? He should have kept better records of his purchase so he could get some help from the dealer that sold it to start with...He also states that it had a decent sound so if that is the case he should have it repaired at his own expense and he will have a mandolin that he can fall back on when needed, that beats the hell out of throwing it in the trash can...(YMMV)...He can always send it to me and I`ll dispose of it...

Willie

[Russ Donahue]

Throw a hand grenade and you get a bang...

[Soupy1957]

I didn’t throw it away; I gave it to my step son.

[Jim_G]

Lets keep is civil.

[Timbofood]

The interesting thing about the OP is he simply didn’t return it. If it was “no time” before the neck failure began what was the delay? I can usually recall where, when, and how much on instrument purchases. If Soupy didn’t do follow up at the time, no reason to beat him up now. Launching the initial volley seems a little strange when not trying to remedy the problem when first discovered at least, to me. Now it seems like sour grapes.

[Mike Scott]

I think I may be confused. I don’t believe the thrust of the OPs thread was so much about the disintegration of the mando as much as the name on it (then again I could be wrong). The discussion has since gone downhill toward whether or not he should have exercised his rights under the warranty. I for one have never seen a The Loar mandolin although I do have one of their arch top guitars which is fine by all accounts. Remember he’s been away from here for a while too. I guess my rambling deals with what the point of the original post was in the first place. Maybe Soupy could weigh in and enlighten us.

[Soupy1957]

[QUOTE=Mike Scott;1619442]I think I may be confused. I don’t believe the thrust of the OPs thread was so much about the disintegration of the mando as much as the name on it ................QUOTE]

You are correct, sir. My "thrust" was to simply offer my questions concerning the litigation that I thought would have likely ensued, after the use of a name that has such an important value in the mandolin world. The side note (if you will) that I had issues with mine) was only that..........a side note.