Loar's Mando/Viola 70321

[Ken Waltham]

I am curious about this instrument, and have a couple of questions for discussion.
First, I see this as very possibly having what later became the Tenor Lute body. I've had three TL's, and it looks spot on to me. However, none of those have, to my knowledge, a maple back and sides. They are birch. Could this be true, and they later became TL's for the simple reason F holed mandolas, or 10 strings wouldn't have caught on?
Secondly, has anyone ever played this instrument? How would a 10 string sound?? I have toyed with idea of converting a TL to these specs, but, is that a bad idea?
Third; looking at the archive, the tuning Lloyd used was ADGCF. I am not sure I could make sense out of that. Why that tuning, and not a mandolin/mandola tuning?

I have entered some photos of a TL for discussion, but, cannot seem to figure out how to get the real thing from the archives. Can someone help with that?
Thanks!

[Eddie Sheehy]

F being the 5th BELOW the C - Mandola tuning? You could probably push it up a string to CGDAE... or if going high to low EADGC... and that means adding a peg - so for a 10-string you would double the strings and add 6 pegs?
I'm missing the whole point of this, am I not?

[BradKlein]

From the Archive.

[Timbofood]

I really like the inclusion of the saw! He must have "kerf" tuned that, no?

Dobbs, "Say mister, can you stake a fellow American to a meal?"
Sorry Jaycat, can't top the beans line! Too funny!!

[Ken Waltham]

F being the 5th BELOW the C - Mandola tuning? You could probably push it up a string to CGDAE... or if going high to low EADGC... and that means adding a peg - so for a 10-string you would double the strings and add 6 pegs?
I'm missing the whole point of this, am I not?

So are you thinking the F is the low string? Hadn't looked at it like that...

[mrmando]

According to Siminoff the tuning was (high to low) Eb, C, F, Bb, and Eb. So, a major third below mandolin tuning, but with the high string tuned to the same note as the bass string.

There were two mando-violas; the other had an oval hole and AFAIK is lost.

[Darryl Wolfe]

I played it. It was tuned down. I tried my best to tune it up as-is to something that felt right and arrived at mandola tuning plus a fret or two in timbre

I believe it would be good to note, that the instument does not seem to be completely a June '22 experimentation. If so, then we have some of our other thinking a bit out of kilter.

[pfox14]

I really don't know what Gibson was thinking with the TL. Seems like a bad idea from the get go, and sales certainly proved that there wasn't much interest in such an odd instrument.

[BradKlein]

Has anyone taken exact measurements of the Loar 10 string and compared them to the Tenor Lutes out there? And did the TL body share dimensions exactly with the oval hole H mandolas? We should be able to figure this out on this thread.

[Darryl Wolfe]

Has anyone taken exact measurements of the Loar 10 string and compared them to the Tenor Lutes out there? And did the TL body share dimensions exactly with the oval hole H mandolas? We should be able to figure this out on this thread.

Yes, yes and yes.

And additionally, the FON's on the TL's pre-date their completion and support my theory on the 1925 A suffixed instruments

| 77282 | 3247 | TL | NULL | 0 | 1924 |
| 77598 | 11180a | TL | NULL | 0 | 1924 |
| 77260 | 11177A | TL | NULL | 0 | NULL |
| 77636 | 11177 | TL | NULL | 0 | NULL |
| 77637 | 11177 | TL | NULL | 0 | NULL |
| 77259 | 11177A | TL | NULL | 0 | 1924 |
| 77290 | 11177A | TL | NULL | 0 | NULL |
+--------+--------+-------+------+-------+------+


We can also see that the Mando-viola FON 70321/11729 roughly fits with the serial number. This supports that it was a one-off instrument constructed mainly in the experimental stages of the F5 time.


70308 11669 L3
70321 11729 (no model)
70336 11692 A
70383 11696 F4
70409 11693 A2
70556 11480 H1
70603 11169 A
70610 11699 A
70625 11668 L1
70660 11634 Ajr
70669 11667 F2
70795 11720 A
70909 11707 H4
70946 11703 F4
70982 11698 Ljr
71069 11609 F5
71074 11721 F4
71080 11548 F4
71234 11711 A4
71239 11711 A4
71249 11753 A
71261 11753 A
71303 11750 A2
71458 11755 A
71462 11755 A

But look at the FON's and serial numbers in the time frame of the TL FON's (11177)

46848 11121 F4
46856 11131 F4
46977 11090 F2
47269 11132 H1
47300 11095 O
47601 11128 L3
47641 11144 A
47897 11164 A3
48010 11145 A
48043 11145 A
48401 11032 F4
48851 1170 H2
49171 11200 O
49190 11163 A3
49230 11193 A3
49534 11186 F4

[Hendrik Ahrend]

Thanks a lot, Darryl. It all makes sense.

The "1925 A suffixes" just like the 1924 A suffixes support the idea of a company desperately needing to save money.
Unlike 1922 and 1923, when Gibson got into financial trouble, 1924 was hardly a year for overproduction. Apparently, lots of hitherto incomplete instruments were completed that year, including at least two H5s. The same year, many F4s were sold, complete F4s with 1923 FONs that is, no need for producing new F4s. Hence, I wouldn't expect many F4 FONs in 1924. In fact, Joe Spann lists only one. Possibly a bad year for producing new models from scratch, especially expensive F mandos... (Sorry Ken, I couldn't resist.)

[goaty76]

We know the Mando-Viola is a Loar instrument because of the photo of Loar with it in the "experimental laboratory". One thing I've always wondered about the Mando-Viola is if we found it today without any pictures of it from the past would it be considered a "Loar" instrument or would it simply be an interesting one off piece from that period. I say that currently owning another one of these experimental instruments from this period also not having a label directly tying it to Loar. Sure would be nice if I had a pic of him holding it though.


(Details on it in Fretboard Journal #25)


Phil

[mrmando]

Well, you could try PhotoShop but I doubt you'd fool anyone.

[BradKlein]

Thanks a lot, Darryl. It all makes sense.

I can't quite say the same for me, but I'm happy to thank Darryl even if the nuances of Loar FON and serial numbers elude me!

So IF I understand correctly, the Tenor Lutes all have an FON that suggest that they were begun as early as the late teens, but serial numbers that place them in the 'Loar years' of 1923 and 1924? And the lone mando-viola also basically conforms to that.

So does the FON 11177 suggest that there was an idea to create an A-5 style mandolas as early as 1918 (around the time of 48000 serial numbers)? Or would Gibson have roughed out H sized mandola bodies without a sound hole, and then in 1923? after they'd been lying around for a while, decided to cut ff-holes for the tenor lutes?

Please forgive me if I've completely misunderstood the posts above!

[Ken Waltham]

Brad; I think that is what we are seeing. I believe..( and I'm not exactly sure I'm getting this data either) is that these were all H1 style mandola bodies that at this point were without tops. Then, during Loar's tenure, and the whole violin to mandolin thing, they put F hole style tops on these incomplete bodies. My guess would be the mando/viola comes first, then, when wondering what on earth to do with the rest of these, and, in the start of the banjo/tango craze, they stick tenor banjo necks on the rest.
Just my guess.
Ken

[Ken Waltham]

So, I want to go back to my original question for a moment. How does the 10 string version, when tuned properly, sound for today's player? Is it a bad idea to convert a TL to Loar's idea of a 10 string??

[mrmando]

When was the Lyon & Healy pear-shaped tenor guitar first available?

AFAIK the first commercially available tenor guitars were either the Gibson tenor lutes or the L&Hs. It's possible that one was conceived to compete with the other.

[bratsche]

According to Siminoff the tuning was (high to low) Eb, C, F, Bb, and Eb. So, a major third below mandolin tuning, but with the high string tuned to the same note as the bass string.

There were two mando-violas; the other had an oval hole and AFAIK is lost.

I don't even get why "viola" is in the name anywhere, if it's not tuned anything like one.

bratsche

[William Smith]

So, I want to go back to my original question for a moment. How does the 10 string version, when tuned properly, sound for today's player? Is it a bad idea to convert a TL to Loar's idea of a 10 string??

Convert it Ken, Ya may have something fun to mess around with? Hell I like my F-7 conversions! If ya have one or so that needs work anyway go for it. I've thaught about converting one, I believe ya can also convert the wide bell shaped bodied A models from the 30's to a mandola? Billy Smith

[mrmando]

I don't even get why "viola" is in the name anywhere, if it's not tuned anything like one.

And there's nothing English about the English horn. And French fries originated in Belgium.

[Dawg]

Greetings fellow lovers of Loar lore. I borrowed this unique instrument from it's very knowledgeable custodian (at the time) to see how it would sound on a recording. I tuned the instrument (as I thought it was intended) to CGDAE (low to high) and recall that due to the scale length I had to use the very thinnest of E strings (.009 I believe) and still broke a few during the process. The results were issued on the Warner's LP Dawg Grass/Dawg Jazz (currently out of print) and more recently on Dawg Plays Big Mon. Here are the results of this experience!

[bluesmandolinman]

now THAT is a 1. Post !

Thanks !

[Ivyguitar]

I was the first person to say thanks to the DAWG!!!!

Scott, Please record me in the footnotes of Mandolin Cafe History!


Edit- Well, I was the second person. Maybe I will get to be a footnote in the unabridged second addtion.

Hey Dawg- you are the best.

[Jim Garber]

Thanks, Dawg, for that wonderful mp3! Do you remember what the scale length was?

I was wondering if any luthier has attempted to make an accurate copy of that mandolin.

[Larry S Sherman]

I have a similar style 10-string, although oval and not a copy of Loar's instrument. Like the Dawg I use a very light E string, but they don't break anymore than normal strings.

I love it for the extended range and ability to move 4-string chords up and down.

Larry