Weber v. Collings ?

[DWM]

Of the "large" builders, these two seem to be the most comparable in price, adornments, available wide neck, etc. I don't have the ability to A/B them, so would appreciate any comparisons of sound that you can offer.

Another way to look at this is "a Weber sounds most like a _______". Since I seem to be leaning that way.

Don

[9lbShellhamer]

Others are more versed than I am, so take this with a grain of salt.

The Webers I've played have a VERY distinct sound/tone. The tone is very "different" than a lot of other mandolins. Not good or bad, just different.

Collings are exceptionally crafted. The tone to me of my MT2 defines what people mean when they use the term, modern. The bass is deep and resonant and the trebles are super sweet, not dry.

Both have some OUTSTANDING reputations for customer service and quality. I enjoy both of their sounds.

[Dick Hutchings]

What he said. I'd add that Webers seem louder. At least the ones I've played. I don't know which I prefer.

[Rick Schmidlin]

Collings were my choice, the I fell for a Red Diamond.

Due to hearing problems not related I now only a guitar player

[John Soper]

Weber vs Collings? Easy answer: Both!

[NursingDaBlues]

For what it’s worth…and only of sound…

I have been a Weber fan from the first day I played one. I really enjoy and appreciate the voice. And as 9lbShellhamer stated, it truly is distinctive. The best that I can equate it is if you’ve ever heard a recording by the Three Tenors (Plácido Domingo, José Carreras, Luciano Pavarotti), that’s what you’ve got in a Weber – projection, range, aggressiveness, strength, but with control of tone; and the ability to cross a lot of styles.

Without question, Collings has beautiful sounding instruments as well. People who have one or more Collings in their stable have good reason to be proud and well-satisfied with them.

But it all comes down to personal preference.

Mine is Weber. I now have three (one that I just got but haven’t had the opportunity to play because of being out of town). I can hardly wait to get back home to do some picking on each of them.

[DataNick]

They really are all different; I've played examples from both that were all over the map tonality wise! Although they're supposed to be "modern" more Collings than not that I've played were decidely "Gibsonesque" in tonal qualities. The Webers have tended to be somewhat similar to Bozeman Flatirons, in a general sense. They really are all different! What are you looking for in a mandolin?
You could play any style with either. Collings is popular with the "modern" tonal sound desired by a lot of players today. Weber's artist lineup is diverse in genres and professional levels. They're both solid instrument makers who make fine mandolins. I will say that the "best" Collings that I have heard/played are a friend's MF5 and Austin Koerner's MF5V. I've played a Yellowstone and a Bighorn that I really liked from the Weber camp.

[darylcrisp]

we have both brands in our house, and had a couple models from each maker thru the years.

the big thing i would offer up beyond the sound difference, is the neck profile shape as well. like both, but a weber just fits me perfect. that might make some difference-the Collings i've played/owned have a more distinct soft V shape.
i find Collings to have a dryer tone, Weber more in your face.

here are two excellent places to hear the brands in use:
http://smile.amazon.com/Ardent-Spiri...=ardent+spirit (play the song list, Mark uses a Weber F on all these)

Collings:


i've personally owed the full gloss and the satin finish Webers, i tend to find the gloss finishes have a brighter tone, the satin finish like the BitterRoot seem to have a more woody tone and find my favor:

[George R. Lane]

Right up front I am a friend of Bruce Weber and I have owned three different mandolins, I now have my keeper a 2010 Yellowstone that Bruce customized for me. That said, I find the Collings to have a tone more suited for bluegrass. The Webers I have played (over 10 different ones) all seem to have a more fuller or even tone. My Yellowstone has an engleman top with quilted maple back and sides and it has a very full sound, not the deep woody or trebly tone. I don't play bluegrass and Bruce built mine with that in mind. I have played a few Collings and was very impressed with the tone and finish. If I did play a lot of bluegrass it would be a good choice. You need to decide what tone you are looking for and then play as many instruments as you can, till you find the one. Good luck with your search.

[verbs4us]

My experience echos George's. I play mostly Celtic music and have long admired Collins and am always disappointed when I play them. Action is superb but the sound (tone, harmonics, sustain) is not suited to Celtic. Too dry to my ear. I find it almost clinically perfect and I like some fluttering going on with an instrument. I could see how it would work with hard-driving bluegrass. One note worth considering: My Absaroka really blossomed when I traded the stock bridge for a Brekke bridge. Huge improvement in volume, clarity, sustain. It was like having wax removed from you ears. Others have commented on it as well. The only instrument that ever beat my lowly Absaroka for tone was a Nugget. That was an instrument from another planet.

[Gary Leonard]

I own both a Colling MT and a Weber Bitterroot F. I purchased the Weber only because it had such a different voice than the Collings (oh, and the scroll thing).

I would hesitate to recommend one over the other, they are both fine instruments. I would label the Bitterroot as more bluegrass sounding. One of the big differences is the neck profile, with the Collings more of a V shape. Swapping between them is not an issue, in fact I think the V neck makes me pay more attention to the hand position.

I find it easier to "drive" the Collings than the Weber, but I tend to have a light hand (a habit I need to break, from playing late at night and not wanting to disturb the family). The Collings is well balanced, with a nice low end, and mellow mid and high range. The Weber I would have to call more dry and aggressive. Both currently have coated phosphor bronze EXP74CM sets on them.

[Charlieshafer]

George did put it pretty well. Having played a bunch of both, if I had to generalize (a dangerous thing, I know) I'd say on balance, Collings are brighter, Webers are deeper-toned and fuller. I prefer the neck shape and tone of the Weber, and there easily as many folks who feel just the opposite. If it's only bluegrass, I'd agree with those who say the Collings is more suited for that tonally. Otherwise, it's just personal preference, but either way, you get a great instrument.

[DWM]

Thanks everyone. I've listened to sound clips on some of the sponsor sites and still, it's difficult to sort things out. For me, sound is like color -- if it's not right in front of you it's hard to remember well enough to make a good comparison. The consensus seems to be that Collings is more bluegrass and cutting while Webber is a bit more complex and even toned.

[George R. Lane]

Thanks everyone. I've listened to sound clips on some of the sponsor sites and still, it's difficult to sort things out. For me, sound is like color -- if it's not right in front of you it's hard to remember well enough to make a good comparison. The consensus seems to be that Collings is more bluegrass and cutting while Webber is a bit more complex and even toned.

You hit it on the head.

[darylcrisp]

TheMandolinStore used to have some good soundclips of different models from each maker, thats a good place to hear also.

also look at Gregboyds-they have very good video sound and visual on both brands-check the new for sale and the archive(they keep the video of the sold instruments)

http://gregboyd.com/instruments.html...&in_stock=sold

d

[DWM]

I should add that I'm also a guitar player and strongly favor Taylors for their clear articulate sound.

The Mandolin Store has been a good source of comparison sound clips. I've listened to them over and over. But there's no substitute for the hands-on experience of the members here. I so much appreciate it.

[bassthumper]

I have one of each...one collings mf from the early days of their production that is a pure aggressive beast... Everything any bluegrass picker would want..
.
And a bruce weber signed se cedartop.. Can be leaned on and get loud but has more of a woof than a chop... Great across the board swiss army mandolin... There won't be any more logan se's & i don't know the present situation on webers cedar but i wish i'ld ordered a custum cedartop, short scale, oval x-brace before the bend deal.....

That said ... With weber you have a broad range of choices and they've proven able to build not only genre spanning mandolins but bluegrass specific mandos too....collings also has a proven record of consistant top quality mandos...all that i've played were great, some greater than others but loud with great tone...i have'nt had my ears on a collings oval but the guy i bought my mf from tells me it falls in between my two in tone & sound projection .... If you're looking for something to stand up and out for bluegrass but can change the pick attack and fit in other genres for my two cents check out collings mf oval

either way call weber,collings & definitely the good folks at the mandolin store for their knowledgable input....my interest is as a highly satisfied customer of both...i won't argue with the folks who gave that advice
.

[Bob Clark]

Hi Don,

You can't go wrong with either, since they both make great instruments. My personal preference, however, is Weber. I own two (Vintage A mandolin and highly customized Absaroka OM) and love them both. Can you reach stores that stock these instruments from where you live? If so, it would be worth your while to go play them and see which you like best, even if you have to travel a bit to get to them. After all, it's not our opinions that matter; it's yours. Besides, it's a lot of fun to shop for mandolins!

Best wishes,

Bob

[trevor]

I have both in stock and think this is a good summary "Collings are brighter, Webers are deeper-toned and fuller".

[Ivan Kelsall]

From charlieshafer - " ...Webers are deeper-toned and fuller..". Mine ain't !!!. I wish it was. My 7 year old Weber "Fern" is pretty 'bright' sounding,very open,loud & pretty powerful,but 'woody' it's not. Webers do have a very distinct tone of their own,& you either like it or you don't depending which genre of music you play.It will suit some more than others. I've tried many brands of strings on my Weber to try to calm the brightness down. DR MD11 strings supercharged it to a huge degree,but eventually,the Weber's own brightness coupled with that of the DR strings (DR themselves say that their strings are brighter than most other brands) simly got too much. Yesterday i fitted a set of GHS A270 strings to it. I've used those on my Ellis "A" style & they're beautifully toned strings. They have calmed the brightness down slightly & using a 1.3mm thick Dunlop Primetone pick,seems to have got me to where i want to be with the Weber - to an extent. I'm begining to have my suspicions regarding how much the Weber tailpiece is involved in making it sound 'bright'. As any banjo player knows,the more downward pressure from the tailpiece on the strings will make it sound brighter. Less downwards pressure & it will sound more mellow. A couple of days ago,i measured the gap at the front of the tailpieces on my 3 mandolins. My Lebeda & Ellis had a 3/8" gap at the front,the Weber,barely 1/8". Both the Ellis & especially the Lebeda have a far 'woodier' tone that the Weber. Having said all that,the Weber is still a good mandolin - simply not 'woody',
Ivan
https://youtu.be/J4JGTTi8h60 - Jordan Ramsey demo.ing a Weber Fern - Now i call that tone 'bright'.

[Dick Hutchings]

From charlieshafer - [I]"
https://youtu.be/J4JGTTi8h60 - Jordan Ramsey demo.ing a Weber Fern - Now i call that tone 'bright'.

Thanks for posting that link. I could listen to Jordan play that tune all day. What kind of mandolin was it? Who cares

[trevor]

"Jordan Ramsey demo.ing a Weber Fern"

[dang]

Of the "large" builders, these two seem to be the most comparable in price, adornments, available wide neck, etc. I don't have the ability to A/B them, so would appreciate any comparisons of sound that you can offer.

Another way to look at this is "a Weber sounds most like a _______". Since I seem to be leaning that way.

I put in custom orders with both of these major builders and was very happy with the results. I grabbed both my wide neck 2004 Weber Bighorn and my wide neck 2015 Collings MT2 and played them before posting this.

To my ears there is a piano like quality to the sound of my Collings. The tone almost pops out and it has a very clear voice that rings after.

My Weber, to my ears, is more martin guitar than piano. The tone snaps and rings in a little more resonant way (woody?), it has a little more "character" to the voice. Not piano clean but perhaps dirty in a good way, gives the chop a little woof. It could be 10 years of aging and playing in, but I have always felt it was a great bluegrass oriented instrument.

I can't tell you one sounds better overall. They perform differently in different situations, respond to changes in temperature and humidity differently, and they each sound different at different points in the life of a set of strings.

My Weber is 11 years older and feels like a well worn glove, but took some modifications (new bridge) and playing time before it really came into it's own. My Collings feels fresh and new and great right out of the box.

My hands and ears seem to appreciate the subtle differences in switching back and forth between the two, keeps everything fresh. Or so I tell myself to justify having such a great collection...

[George R. Lane]

From charlieshafer - " ...Webers are deeper-toned and fuller..". Mine ain't !!!. I wish it was. My 7 year old Weber "Fern" is pretty 'bright' sounding,very open,loud & pretty powerful,but 'woody' it's not. Webers do have a very distinct tone of their own,& you either like it or you don't depending which genre of music you play.It will suit some more than others. I've tried many brands of strings on my Weber to try to calm the brightness down. DR MD11 strings supercharged it to a huge degree,but eventually,the Weber's own brightness coupled with that of the DR strings (DR themselves say that their strings are brighter than most other brands) simly got too much. Yesterday i fitted a set of GHS A270 strings to it. I've used those on my Ellis "A" style & they're beautifully toned strings. They have calmed the brightness down slightly & using a 1.3mm thick Dunlop Primetone pick,seems to have got me to where i want to be with the Weber - to an extent. I'm begining to have my suspicions regarding how much the Weber tailpiece is involved in making it sound 'bright'. As any banjo player knows,the more downward pressure from the tailpiece on the strings will make it sound brighter. Less downwards pressure & it will sound more mellow. A couple of days ago,i measured the gap at the front of the tailpieces on my 3 mandolins. My Lebeda & Ellis had a 3/8" gap at the front,the Weber,barely 1/8". Both the Ellis & especially the Lebeda have a far 'woodier' tone that the Weber. Having said all that,the Weber is still a good mandolin - simply not 'woody',
Ivan
https://youtu.be/J4JGTTi8h60 - Jordan Ramsey demo.ing a Weber Fern - Now i call that tone 'bright'.

Ivan,
I recently replaced my Weber tailpiece for a James and I noticed a tonal difference right away, it was much, dare I say 'Woodier'. I now just measured the distance from the top and the bottom of the g string, it measure 5/16 of an inch. Perhaps the difference in height did make a tonal change. I do like the tone now, the E strings isn't quite as trebly as before. This Weber is now 5 years old and is quite 'broken in'. Maybe it is time for a new tailpiece.

[FLATROCK HILL]

Ivan,
I recently replaced my Weber tailpiece for a James and I noticed a tonal difference right away, it was much, dare I say 'Woodier'. I now just measured the distance from the top and the bottom of the g string, it measure 5/16 of an inch. Perhaps the difference in height did make a tonal change. I do like the tone now, the E strings isn't quite as trebly as before. This Weber is now 5 years old and is quite 'broken in'. Maybe it is time for a new tailpiece.

I've often wondered what, if any difference a James tailpiece might make on my Weber (Fern). I've heard that the Weber cast tailpieces are the optimum for those instruments. I've also been under the impression that the existing mounting holes don't line up with the standard, Gibson-style James tailpiece. Filling and re-drilling holes is out of the question for me.
Did you have to 'special-order' your James to fit the Weber holes?