Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Comparing a The Loar to a 1987 Flatiron

  1. #1

    Default Comparing a The Loar to a 1987 Flatiron

    So I'll give you the long story, before I get to the point.

    In 1979, my parents got me a Gibson A-1 (small crack in the back) for 375. I loved it then and I love it now. And I'm surprised they aren't snatched up when the price drops below 1500, but that's another thing. Nice WIDE fretboard. The sound is very full and rich, great for slow to medium songs....although the sustain gets in the way on fast songs. No surprise here -- that's one of the few things folks at the Cafe seem to agree on!

    To balance it with an F-hole, I bought a used THE LOAR (yes I hate that name also) 400. Action seemed low, so I sent it off to Cumberland and they fitted a new bridge. It sounds fine (no bracing at all) and is pretty loud -- a fuller sound, maybe halfway between the typical midrangey ("dry") bluegrass sound and the Oval Hole Gibson A 1. Fingerboard seems a little narrower (1 2/16) and it takes a little getting used to.

    Wanting to step up to the top tier --- okay, the very, very bottom of the top tier!--- I bought a used 1987 Flatiron, f hole, tone bars, integrated fingerboard and neck. It was nicely set up when I bought it. Strings okay. The fretboard on this is 1 1/16 and that's hard to get used to, but that's also another story. The sound is quite nice --- rich enough...not like a real cheapo mandolin -- but with good separation and not too much sustain.

    Now, to the point -- when I play it against my THE Loar 400 (currently going for about 350-400 used) it is not as loud as The Loar. I tried playing it slow, trying to fret in exactly the right place, etc. and the sound is fine. But it doesn't seem as loud as the The Loar??

    So, 1) am I nuts? 2) Could it be quieter than the cheaper The Loar because the The Loar doesn't have bracing and/or the neck/fretboard "appears" to be elevated somewhat?

    Just curious.......any thoughts?

  2. #2
    harvester of clams Bill McCall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Forest Grove, Oregon
    Posts
    2,771

    Default Re: Comparing a The Loar to a 1987 Flatiron

    It could be quieter, but it also could be perception from being behind the instrument when playing. Hard to tell. You can also manipulate the sound with strings, picks and a different setup (higher action is often louder). While volume is important, it ranks lower than 'tone' to me. If there's sufficient volume to hear yourself when playing alone perhaps that's enough. In a room full of banjos all bets are off. And you can buy boxes with volume knobs for more difficult situations

    I don't think the best of the Gibson Loars are ranked by volume.
    Not all the clams are at the beach

    Arrow Manouche
    Arrow Jazzbo
    Arrow G
    Clark 2 point
    Gibson F5L
    Gibson A-4
    Ratliff CountryBoy A

  3. #3
    Registered User Caberguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2021
    Location
    Syracuse NY
    Posts
    282

    Default Re: Comparing a The Loar to a 1987 Flatiron

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill McCall View Post
    While volume is important, it ranks lower than 'tone' to me.
    [...]
    I don't think the best of the Gibson Loars are ranked by volume.
    Important context. Volume and quality of tone are not synonymous.

    Having read through most of the Flatiron threads on the board, I've noticed that a few folks that have suggested that the models with integrated fretboards are typically not as loud as others. There are, of course, others that disagree.

    But, also, as Bill said, it's worth experimenting with strings and setups... and maybe have somebody else play them both for you and sit out in front and listen, things can sound quite different from out there.
    '91 Flatiron Signature A5 / Silverangel Econo A / Eastman MD-315

  4. #4
    Worlds ok-ist mando playr Zach Wilson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Auburn, Washington
    Posts
    1,551

    Default Re: Comparing a The Loar to a 1987 Flatiron

    Very interesting as I had a the same experience with my The Loar LM170 (solid top, ply b/s) that I had a few years ago that. To me, Tho Loar seemed louder then my Weber. The Weber is definitely sweeter in tone and a wayyy better Mandolin in every other way however.

    I've also noticed that my Weber is quieter than some other Mandolins.

  5. #5
    Registered User JiminRussia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    509

    Default Re: Comparing a The Loar to a 1987 Flatiron

    IMHO if you want LOUD you have the right make, just the wrong model. The Flatiron 1N is the loudmouth. I honestly believe that it is the Loyd Loar of the flattop oval holes. I don’t know about The Loars . They have a good reputation, but they do not suit my genre of music. My main mandolin is a flattop pancake style that suits the fiddle tunes that I love.
    There are 10 kinds of people in the world, those that understand binary and those that don't.

    Ibanez M-522
    Gold Tone GM 10 Frypan

  6. #6

    Default Re: Comparing a The Loar to a 1987 Flatiron

    I am often surprised how much louder my mandolins get when I put new strings on - I'd start there.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Comparing a The Loar to a 1987 Flatiron

    FWIW, I started out on a Loar 600 and that thing was stupidly loud. Ive owned 4 higher end mandolins since then and none of them compare to the sheer volume that the Loar produced. I couldnt even play that thing quietly after my family went to bed. It was impossible to sound mellow with it. Tone and quality of the sound is a totally different story though.

  8. #8
    Registered User Dave Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Hoosierlandia
    Posts
    705

    Default Re: Comparing a The Loar to a 1987 Flatiron

    I have an 85 Flatiron A5 Jr. It's not all that loud, but it is probably my favorite tone, compared to Gibson A0 and Big Muddy M1X. Also, it cuts through other instruments better than the ovals.

    But I like them all, and they all get used. (We're off to a picking party this afternoon - which to bring? )

    D.H.

  9. #9
    Worlds ok-ist mando playr Zach Wilson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Auburn, Washington
    Posts
    1,551

    Default Re: Comparing a The Loar to a 1987 Flatiron

    Quote Originally Posted by JiminRussia View Post
    The Flatiron 1N is the loudmouth. I honestly believe that it is the Loyd Loar of the flattop oval holes.
    I have an '82 1N. It's not the "Lloyd Loar" of anything. Loudness is only one attribute of an instrument and I wouldn't say that my 1N, or any others I've seen, are any louder than most every other Flattop mandolin.

    I'd like to add that comparing Flat tops to Arch tops isn't fair to the original question also since the two project and sustain very differently.

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


  11. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    4,966

    Default Re: Comparing a The Loar to a 1987 Flatiron

    The Flatiron made several models in that time period. Each was different in several ways and everything affects tone. You did not mention which Flatiron A model you have. They are good mandolins, but not all the same. The Loar LM 400 is a very nice mandolin as well. They have the same specs as the highest price F model, but this is an A. I have seen and setup a fair number of those over the years, and I did not see or hear any that were not really good. The tops and backs are good wood and hand carved. I even tried to buy one for me, but every time I did, someone else needed it more than I did. I wish they still made it. I’d like to order one. My opinion is they set the price so low that the market thought they could not be that good at that price. I have not seen one yet that I did not like. Now let me say loud does not mean good or bad. It’s the tone and playability that makes it a good, great, or bad mandolin. If the Loar plays and sounds makes you happy, don’t be concerned about the price or name on the headstock. The Loar is the same company that makes Recording King guitars, and they have some killer models. They also make great banjos. The point is a great instrument can be had for a reasonable price IF you are more concerned about the tone and playability and the price is comfortable, then you can be quite surprised by what you can buy and serve your playing needs very well.
    Have a Great Day!
    Joe Vest

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Big Joe For This Useful Post:


Tags for this Thread

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
  •