Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 42 of 42

Thread: Varnish vs Lacquer

  1. #26
    Registered User foldedpath's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    5,293

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    FWIW, all my instruments are nitro, and the only varnish instruments in the house are my S.O.'s fiddles.

    To me, and as others have said above. the only thing that matters is that the finish is thin enough. If I tilt the soundboards of my mandolin, OM, and two remaining acoustic guitars against a background light source, I can see ridges of wood grain, not a smooth surface. That's a thin finish. The last thick finish instrument I owned was a 1970's Guild D25M (since sold), with a nitro finish so thick it looked like glass when tilted against the light. It still sounded okay for what it was, but that's not a characteristic you want to see in a more high-end acoustic instrument.

    Concerning wear, some of these nitro finishes are tough. I actually wish my Lebeda showed a little more personalized wear, after 10+ years of playing it almost every day. It's a thin finish but tough as nails. The only wear it shows (ignoring the neck I stripped) is a light haze from my pinky fingernail scratching the top below the strings. The rest of the instrument looks almost new, unless you look real close.
    Lebeda F-5 mandolin, redwood top
    Weber Yellowstone F-5 octave mandolin

  2. #27
    mandolin slinger Steve Ostrander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Capitol of MI
    Posts
    2,795

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    I've owned one mandolin that was varnish. I have no doubt that nitro is more durable. Which one sounds better is a whole 'nother debate that has been discussed many times here, and I have no desire to dredge up again.
    Living’ in the Mitten

  3. #28
    Registered User sblock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Redwood City, CA
    Posts
    2,335

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    Quote Originally Posted by Em Tee View Post
    sblock, so what are the characteristics/things to look for in a good finish, whether it's nitro lacqeur or a varnish? You mention soft finish, but what does that mean exactly in terms of look or feel to the hands? For reference, my only experience with mandolins has been eastmans, kentuckys, and big muddy
    You already have several pretty good answers from others. If I were to generalize (and that's always dangerous, because there can be notable exceptions), I would say the following:

    1) The most important characteristic of any finish on a great mandolin is that it needs to be thin, regardless of the type of finish. Thick finishes tend to affect tone adversely.

    2) For the equivalent thickness, nitro lacquer or poly finishes tend to protect better than spirit- or oil-based varnishes.

    3) Varnish finishes are certainly found on some of the better instruments, and many folks therefore associate them with better sound. But it is not clear whether these instruments sound so great because of their varnish finishes or because they are better built in the first place (i.e., better woods, carving, thicknesses, joinery, construction, etc.) The debate goes on...

    4) Nitro finishes are easier to repair (by drop fill) than almost any other. And poly finishes are among the hardest to repair.

    5) Varnish finishes (esp. oil ones) can sometimes take years or more to dry out.

    6) Nitro finishes can sometimes get pretty sticky under the hand. However, opting for a speed neck (with no varnish and no nitro: just bare wood, or perhaps treated with a bit of oil or a 'wiping varnish' like tung oil) does away with any such stickiness issues. Violins are almost all done this way. Why not mandolins?

    But what are the things YOU care about most in a finish? The level of protection against dings/sweat/other? Durability over time? Lack of yellowing? Lack of cracking? Glossy or matte finish? Ability to hold pigmentation? Lack of effect on the sound (or possible improvement in the sound)? Ability to make invisible repairs? Feel under the hand? Ease of application/method of application? Possible toxicity of ingredients (at the shop, or in the case)? How long it takes to dry during application? How long it takes to settle in after completion of the instrument?

    So much to consider. If all these things were well satisfied by a single type of finish, then that would probably be the only one in general use. But they are not, and different finishes have different things going for and against them. And some are better suited for mass manufacture, while some are better suited to hand/custom manufacture.

    But if you were to ask me what I care about most in a mandolin I would buy, it's #1, above. Unless I were buying it to take camping, or to the beach, or on a hard road trip, that is. Then, I would be inclined to trade some added durability against sound.

    The answer to every question posed on the MC always seems to be "it depends..."

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to sblock For This Useful Post:


  5. #29
    Registered User ellisppi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    338

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    I know a whole lot about this subject, but I'm too lazy to write much, and heck sblock already said all the true stuff. I would push shellac-based and Alkyd drying oil based varnishes into distinct categories, though. But even that can be blended. Remember, plastic is organic, and the better mandolins have better sound and sound better.

  6. The following members say thank you to ellisppi for this post:


  7. #30

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    sblock, you make the subject sound so interesting I'd read a book about it. Thank you so much for all the information!

  8. #31
    Mando-Afflicted lflngpicker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    2,239
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    Em Tee, I have an old Gibson A '09, which I assume is varnish, and my newest mandolin is an Eastman MD805/V Distressed Varnish Model. I can really tell the difference in the liveliness of the tone and the wood really sounds present in the maple and spruce combination. I like the look of it, but the tone is the key. It doesn't hurt that the action is very low, yet no fret buzz up and down the board. I would get another varnished mandolin now that I have experienced it. I wouldn't hesitate to get a nitro finish in a good mandolin, as Jamie indicated. They sound great when they are made well, and let's face it, it is the industry standard in guitars and a good portion of mandolins from what I can determine.
    2014 BRW F5 #114
    2022 Kentucky KM 950 Master Model

    YouTube Original Recording of My composition "Closer Walk"

  9. #32
    My Florida is scooped pheffernan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    3,859

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    Quote Originally Posted by sblock View Post
    1) The most important characteristic of any finish on a great mandolin is that it needs to be thin, regardless of the type of finish. Thick finishes tend to affect tone adversely.
    Does the method of application more readily lend itself to a thin finish with varnish as opposed to lacquer or poly?
    1924 Gibson A Snakehead
    2005 National RM-1
    2007 Hester A5
    2009 Passernig A5
    2015 Black A2-z
    2010 Black GBOM
    2017 Poe Scout
    2014 Smart F-Style Mandola
    2018 Vessel TM5
    2019 Hogan F5

  10. The following members say thank you to pheffernan for this post:

    Em Tee 

  11. #33

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    I believe that some of the most highly regarded builders, e.g., Steve Gilchrist and Mike Kemnitzer, at some point early on in their careers switched from lacquer to varnish because of the difference they could hear. My sense is this was hardly a convenience, more the opposite in that it required developing specific varnish recipes and learning new techniques, so they must have done it for a reason. Which isn’t to say that varnish sounds better than nitro or goes on thinner, though it might, but just that varnish was closer to the sound they were aiming for.

  12. #34
    Registered User sblock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Redwood City, CA
    Posts
    2,335

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Mott View Post
    I believe that some of the most highly regarded builders, e.g., Steve Gilchrist and Mike Kemnitzer, at some point early on in their careers switched from lacquer to varnish because of the difference they could hear. My sense is this was hardly a convenience, more the opposite in that it required developing specific varnish recipes and learning new techniques, so they must have done it for a reason. Which isn’t to say that varnish sounds better than nitro or goes on thinner, though it might, but just that varnish was closer to the sound they were aiming for.
    It is certainly true that Steve Gilchrist and Mike Kemnitzer (Nugget) switched from nitrocellulose lacquer to varnish at some point in their early careers. However, I would not be too quick to simply assume, as you seem to have ("they must have done it for that reason") that this was because of "some difference that they could hear." I, for one, am not aware of any evidence that this was actually the case. It would be nice if Steve or Mike could weigh in on this discussion, though! That said, there are plenty of excellent reasons that a luthier aspiring to make a very high-end mandolin would choose a varnish finish, and not necessarily for reasons of better sound. Here are some of them:

    1) Loars as inspiration: These luthiers were trying to re-create (or possibly surpass) the sound of 1922-1924 Gibson F5 Master Models signed by Lloyd Loar. All those instruments all carried a varnish finish. So if you're going to considerable lengths to copy a great many of their details, you would very likely opt for a varnish finish, too.

    2) Consumer demand: This was custom work. Many, if not most, of their customers were spending a lot of money and specifying individual preferences for tonewoods, figure, fingerboards, and many other characteristics -- including the finish! They may have picked varnish because most of their customers were asking for varnish.

    3) Small shop optimization : All their craft was being carried out painstakingly in a small shop -- not a factory floor -- with limited space and numbers of tools, and doing mostly handwork. A varnish finish can be applied by hand without any need for a special spray booth, spray-painting equipment (compressors; hoses; air brushes), HEPA filters, ventilation, and respirator masks. A nitro finish has to be sprayed and requires much more in the way of both space and equipment. Varnish may be more labor-intensive, but the labor savings associated with spray finishes becomes much more important when you're dealing with hundreds of instruments, not a mere handful per year.

    4) Environmental concerns: Because of the volatile, toxic solvents used and method of application, nitro lacquer poses a significantly greater health and environmental risk to the luthier and the immediate area, unless a number of protective measures are taken. These luthiers may have also been seeking to reduce their toxic exposure. Also, many formulations of nitro finishes cannot be legally shipped out of the U.S.A. due to their flammable and toxic solvents.

    That said, none of this rules out the possibility that only varnish ALSO gave these luthiers a sound they were looking for. But I tend to doubt that this was the main/only reason, myself. The other drivers are simply too important to ignore. But perhaps Mike or Steve will have something of their own to say on this topic?!

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to sblock For This Useful Post:


  14. #35

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    I was in touch with Mike K. when he first did varnish and got to play his first ever varnish mandolin. Ironically it has since been re-finished in lacquer due to some of the same problems many have with varnish. Still know where that one is too. Still sounds great and has been the owners primary instrument for nearly 40 years.
    I just remember seeing it and noticing a lot of sanding scratches in it and wondering why Mike did it when he could have lacquered it. However I don't know if it was spirit or oil. I had never heard of a varnished instrument back then.
    Not sure that Steve G. ever did lacquer.

  15. #36
    Mandolin & Mandola maker
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bega NSW, Australia
    Posts
    1,425

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    Not sure that Steve G. ever did lacquer.
    He most certainly did use nitro lacquer in his early instruments. I have not asked him why he changed so can't enlighten you on that.
    Peter Coombe - mandolins, mandolas and guitars
    http://www.petercoombe.com

  16. The following members say thank you to peter.coombe for this post:


  17. #37

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    Dear SBlock, I actually didn’t just assume that they moved from lacquer to varnish because of a difference they could hear. Mike has said this in interviews (e.g., “Cracking the Nugget” and Steve has as well, his website says “When I first started using spirit varnish in 1980 (mandolin #81) l noticed an immediate change ... in the quality of the sound of the mandolin ...”.

  18. #38
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    342

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    Must... resist... lol

  19. The following members say thank you to Will Kimble for this post:


  20. #39
    Registered User sblock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Redwood City, CA
    Posts
    2,335

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Mott View Post
    Dear SBlock, I actually didn’t just assume that they moved from lacquer to varnish because of a difference they could hear. Mike has said this in interviews (e.g., “Cracking the Nugget” and Steve has as well, his website says “When I first started using spirit varnish in 1980 (mandolin #81) l noticed an immediate change ... in the quality of the sound of the mandolin ...”.
    Aaagh. You are misquoting Steve Gilchrist by selectively omitting words from his entire sentence, which was this: "When I first started using spirit varnish in 1980 (mandolin #81), I noticed an immediate change in the appearance and the quality of the sound of the mandolin compared to the instruments that were previously finished in thicker nitro-cellulose lacquer." (underline mine)

    In essence, Steve G. is commenting that a thin varnish sounds better than a thick nitrocellulose. No argument there, and that's exactly what we've all been pointing out all along: a thinner finish sounds better. Steve is not saying that a lacquer finish of equivalent thickness to a varnish finish is in some way inferior in sound.

  21. #40

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    Point, though I guess this begs the question why he switched to varnish if it was simply a matter of putting on a thinner nitro finish. Perhaps there are obstacles to putting nitro on at an equivalent level of thinness? I know that Bruce Sexauer, one of the most highly regarded California luthiers says he can get varnish thinner than nitro.

  22. #41

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer


    So I've made mandolins with nitro, violin oil, Rockhard oil, boat varnish, water based varnish, french polish on oil and straight french polish. I learned much of what I know about applying nitro from Nugget and took a course with Steve Gilchrist on his French polish method.
    So I'm presenting some totally non-scientific evidence of a comparison of french polish mandolin and a lacquer mandolin. When I built my #56 A style I used Don Musser Colorado Englemann paired with a slab sawn one piece sugar maple back and did a FP finish. If you take a minute to go to my website and find it in the gallery there are 2 recordings made at Boulder's Coup Studio of Rich Zimmerman playing it when it was so new it ended up with a tee-shirt imprint from not curing completely.
    When I made #62 I used Don Musser Englemann, possibly from the same tree but probably not, but still very much like on 56. The back was another slab from the same board as was used on 56. It's lacquer. Are the instruments identical? Every one I make is different but I strive for consistency so quite similar. The link above is one of Don Grieser playing it when it's quite new.

  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jim Hilburn For This Useful Post:


  24. #42

    Default Re: Varnish vs Lacquer

    There is no doubt you can get french polished spirit varnish or something like Tru-oil will be thinner than lacquer and will have the least possible effect on the tone. My position is that lacquer can be applied without greatly effecting the sound of the instrument also. But it takes some extra effort.

  25. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jim Hilburn For This Useful Post:


Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •