Gibson F9 with sunken top

[unclelee]

My F9 sn 60512010 top has settled down on the bass side to the point I cannot raise the bridge any further. It has had a carbon rod fitted on top on the inside to stop further collapse, but it is still settleing and I am wondering if I should just get a new top on it. What are my options? repair or just buy s taller bridge top? I was told the top was carved too thin. I cannot afford to spend a whole lot on it. zi hsf hoped this was my lifetime mando but??????? thanks for any suggestions, lee

[William Smith]

Well are you the original owner? Even if not contact David Harvey at Gibson and he'll find a way to make it right! He is the tops in my book and I didn't decipher your # so don't know what year but I'm sure he can help.

[rcc56]

If you are the original owner, try to get Gibson to fix it under warranty. A call or email to Dave Harvey couldn't hurt.

If they will not cover it, start saving your money for a re-top or another mandolin.

[Bernie Daniel]

Since it is a May 12, 2006 model I assume your are not the first owner. I concur with the previous two suggestions of contacting David Harvey -- he will do whatever he can for you and certainly he will have the best advice for you in any case.

Anyway my condolences what a bummer!!!

Couple of other questions. 1) How long have you had this mandolin and when you first got it was there any sign of sagging?

2) What kind and set of strings are on the mandolin?

3) When the string tension is released what happens? Does it rebound to the correct shape or stay down in somewhat in a "sagged" position.

4) When you look inside (through the f-holes) with a dentist mirror and flashlight are both tone bars glued down tight -- from end to end? Or when you tap or hammer sprightly on the top with the fleshy part of your finger (avoid hitting it with a fingernail!) do you hear any "rattling sound -- indicative of a something loose inside?

Perhaps with some luck it still will be your lifetime mandolin. Where do you live?

[multidon]

I have read too many stories about Gibson F9s with problems here on the Cafe’. Failing neck joints, sinking tops, sloppy “workmanship”. The most comprehensive analysis is a past thread by Adrian (Hogo) who was presented with an example with a failing neck joint and, upon opening it up, found so many problems he basically rebuilt the whole thing. If you can find that thread he identifies each problem in great detail and there is no doubt that each was a problem with original construction. When that thread was running some tried to dismiss it as an exception. But the fact that an instrument like that was allowed to leave and go to market speaks volumes about the attitude there. And I have seen several with failing neck joints. You see that telltail line between the neck heel and the back button, and you know there’s movement.

What I don’t understand is how some here continue to defend Gibson to the bitter end, talking about how great the modern era instruments are. In spite of evidence to the contrary. The problems are not restricted to the low price end either, if you can call a close to 4000 dollar instrument low priced with a straight face. There was a detailed thread about a Gold Rush with a top carved too thin and a sloppy patch put in place, obviously at time of construction, to cover it up.

This is not meant to be a rant, I’m just stating the evidence as I see it. And I’ve seen enough to cure me of any desire for a modern Gibson.

[multidon]

Forgot to say, I wish you best of luck. I can understand why you chose this as a lifetime instrument. The lure of the tradition behind the brand name on the headstock is strong indeed. I am curious about this carbon rod. Are you using it like a sound post on a mandolin?

If you are first owner, I would certainly try to get it covered under warranty. If you bought it used, you may have no choice but to have it re-topped at your expense. That would be an expensive repair indeed. Another plan of action would be to sell it as an as-is luthier’s special with all defects disclosed up front. Whatever you get for it, add that to what you would have paid for the re-top, and spend that sum on something else. Re-topping would be cheaper than a new instrument but for me, it would leave a bad taste in my mouth. You might be ultimately happier with something else.

[Br1ck]

I have not played another mandolin that sounded like the F 9s I played. The Gibson sound is the Gibson sound.

[Bernie Daniel]

I have read too many stories about Gibson F9s with problems here on the Cafe’. Failing neck joints, sinking tops, sloppy “workmanship”. The most comprehensive analysis is a past thread by Adrian (Hogo) who was presented with an example with a failing neck joint and, upon opening it up, found so many problems he basically rebuilt the whole thing. If you can find that thread he identifies each problem in great detail and there is no doubt that each was a problem with original construction. When that thread was running some tried to dismiss it as an exception. But the fact that an instrument like that was allowed to leave and go to market speaks volumes about the attitude there. And I have seen several with failing neck joints. You see that telltail line between the neck heel and the back button, and you know there’s movement.

What I don’t understand is how some here continue to defend Gibson to the bitter end, talking about how great the modern era instruments are. In spite of evidence to the contrary. The problems are not restricted to the low price end either, if you can call a close to 4000 dollar instrument low priced with a straight face. There was a detailed thread about a Gold Rush with a top carved too thin and a sloppy patch put in place, obviously at time of construction, to cover it up.

This is not meant to be a rant, I’m just stating the evidence as I see it. And I’ve seen enough to cure me of any desire for a modern Gibson.

Certainly opinions are fine. But how does that help the OP?

I'm thinking it might be a good idea to find out what is wrong with this mandolin before using it as an example of something that might not be true or at least is essentially unproven at this time?

I'm not defending Gibson just pointing out that we really don't know too much about the situation at this point? For some reason the OP has not responded since the first post?

Was this mandolin damaged by a previous owner for example? Does it simply have a loose tone bar? We have no idea!

It's been stated that the top is too thin. Is that really true or is that speculation? Who measured it?

If the top really is too thin (as per the specifications for an F-5 top) or if the wood is weak or faulty in some way I would agree that Gibson is probably at fault and should step up and deal with it.

I'd like to see a pic of this mandolin. I'm curious about the "sound post" too and why is the top continuing to sink even with it in place? That does not make sense to me??

[HoGo]

SInce the top is sinking on the bass side only I guess the tonebar on that side is loose. The F-9 I restored had poorly glued tonebars, they had pinholes in the ends of tonebars that looked like they used pins to hold tonebars in place while gluing, one or two of the ends were not tightly glued and showed thick layer of glue, one of the ends had even gap approx 1/4" long (not failing joint, just gap left there when the bar was glued in). The inside of top was not even sanded smooth to remove CNC toolmarks so the joints were compromised as well.
I'd suggest loking inside with mirror or through endpin hole to see what's going on. Loose tonebar can be glued back through f hole (though on these bars glued with Titebond and possibly not great gluing surfaces to start with it would be hard to predict how well it will hold). Removal of back would leave ugly scar in the thick colored finish but would be the best option to get the mandolin working again.

[multidon]

Bernie, you are certainly right that there is a great deal of missing information here. Point definitely taken. If you read my follow up I do ask for him to fill in the blanks, and I did offer a bit of advice I thought was helpful.

[Bernie Daniel]

Bernie, you are certainly right that there is a great deal of missing information here. Point definitely taken. If you read my follow up I do ask for him to fill in the blanks, and I did offer a bit of advice I thought was helpful.

I thought your advice was good Don. You might in the end be right and Gibson may have screwed up here?

My first thought was what Adrian posted i.e., that a tone bar is loose and I suggested trying to get a look at it with a mirror also or at least tap on it.

I agree with you that if that is the case Gibson should get a demerit and hopefully would be willing to reglue it without charge for the owner. They would probably have clamps that would allow them to re-glue it without taking the back off?

Thinking about what was the situation on the other F-9 that Adrian mentioned if someone at Gibson is not clamping the tone bars down for proper gluing that technician ought to be identified and canned. Just my opinion. Gluing down tone bars is not rocket science.

That said where is the OP? He popped a question and as received multiple suggestions and answers and has not acknowledged any of them? Hard to help someone who drops out of sight?

[Ivan Kelsall]

From Bernie Daniel - " Hard to help someone who drops out of sight ? '' . Bernie,it happens all too often. Somebody asks a question,gets answers / advice & we never hear from them again - however !. I think that very often,they simply have nothing to report - yet !. That's where the 'thanks' button comes in. At least we know that the OP has actually read the replies (?).

Re. the apparent problems with some Gibson F9s,hearing of them isn't 'good'. How they manage to sneak through Gibson's inspection we'll maybe never know - but do Gibson inspect their mandolins at every stage of construction ?. Hearing of a problem with a Gibson 'Goldrush',one on my favourite Gibson models, & as far as i know only in production in recent years under the guidance of Dave Harvey,is pretty sad !. Nevertheless,the best advice as given by the guys above,would be to contact Dave Harvey,to see what he can do,
Ivan

[multidon]

Ivan, if you or anyone else is interested in the Goldrush story, search for threads with the titles “My Mandolin Story” and “Update to My Mandolin Story”. In short, this is another case where a Gibson top was carved too thin, Gibson acknowledged that it was a factory defect, but refused to help because the OP was not the original purchaser, and he ended up getting it professionally re-topped. The story really closely parallels this OP’s situation, and points towards possibly the best solution for him, too.

[Bernie Daniel]

Ivan, if you or anyone else is interested in the Goldrush story, search for threads with the titles “My Mandolin Story” and “Update to My Mandolin Story”. In short, this is another case where a Gibson top was carved too thin, Gibson acknowledged that it was a factory defect, but refused to help because the OP was not the original purchaser, and he ended up getting it professionally re-topped. The story really closely parallels this OP’s situation, and points towards possibly the best solution for him, too.

Here is the link to the Goldrush saga "Update to My Mandolin Story" which was a follow up discussion.

The first thread on the Goldrush (I guess titled: "My Mandolin Story") got hot and was closed down. Don't think I ever saw that one.

Anyway the implication is that Gibson put a patch on a Goldrush top and then sent it out the door and some dealer sold it as a new mandolin. Then the top collapsed in the hands of the second owner? On these threads it seemed to be the opinion of many that the patch was done at on the Gibson factory build line -- but it seems to me also that no one knows for sure how that patch got there? I did not bother to look up the original closed thread.

[multidon]

Yes Bernie you have it right. Nobody knows for sure how the patch got there. But there is little doubt someone at Gibson carved the plate too thin. In the follow up it is very plain that the owner of that Goldrush is vey happy with the re-top. This may be the best answer for the F9 in question. Expensive but cheaper than a new mandolin. I’d probably bite the bullet and do it. Or sell it as a luthier special. Financially it would be 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.

[Bernie Daniel]

Yes Bernie you have it right. Nobody knows for sure how the patch got there. But there is little doubt someone at Gibson carved the plate too thin. In the follow up it is very plain that the owner of that Goldrush is vey happy with the re-top. This may be the best answer for the F9 in question. Expensive but cheaper than a new mandolin. I’d probably bite the bullet and do it. Or sell it as a luthier special. Financially it would be 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.

I guess now I'll have to track down the original string and read all the posts to try and make sense of that story. I'm thinking if the factory originally carved the top on the Goldrush too thin that it most likely first deformed for the original buyer? That original buyer would have (logically) sent the mandolin back to Nashville? So perhaps the implication is that Gibson glued a patch on instead of making a new top? If so that would be pretty disappointing! Anyway it has me curious.

Too bad the OP for this string has not came back. If he (unclelee) is the second owner what was the condition of the mandolin when he first got it? If the top was too thin it must have sagged for the first owner too? That being the case the second owner might also have a claim against the seller (original owner) for deception?

If he is actually the first owner then clearly Gibson is obligated to fix it for him. Since the instrument is a 2006 model is seems likely that he is not the original buyer though?

[Bernie Daniel]

So I tracked down the original string "My Mandolin Story" and I really wish that I had not done so. Even worse I spent some time to read it. Almost nothing claimed in that story about the Goldrush mandolin in that string of over 60 posts can be confirmed -- including the OP. It is good that the thread was locked down as it was going nowhere and frankly seems to have served little purpose.

[multidon]

Hey Bernie, I’m sorry that you felt that way about reading the original Goldrush post. I agree that it is a really tangled web, but it was not shut down because of that. The reason is that names were named and private communications shared to gain an advantage in a dispute. Clear violation of guidelines. I’m actually surprised he was allowed to post a follow up. That is usually shut down also. But to me the whole episode has some valuable takeaways. For me, they are as follows:

1. If you buy used, you takes your chances. Do you feel lucky? A new purchase at least gives you warranty protection.
2. All makers can, no matter how much “quality control” there allegedly is, can let a stinker hit the market place. After sorting through all the posts,I still come to the conclusion that the top was carved too thin in the first place. It’s the only logical explanation for everything else.
3. Ultimately,the OP with the faulty Goldrush made, in my opinion, the correct decision to get it re-topped by a top notch luthier. He seems very happy with the results. Judging from the pictures, Randy Wood did a great job cosmetically. I wish he had said what it cost. He must have thought it was worth it, though. Wild guess on my part: at least 1000?

I always start out giving OPs the benefit of the doubt. I believe the Goldrush guy had a top that was originally carved too thin. And I believe unclelee has one too. Unless I see clear evidence of deception. The fact is, no matter how skilled the maker, it’s easy enough to do. There is a parallel thread going on right now about a makerwith a top that turned out too thin because he go a little overly enthusiastic with a new tool. He asked for advice on how to “fix” it. James Condino posted some hilarious suggestions. Burn it. Use it for target practice, or a frisbee. And so forth.

One last point. Do you remember why all the experts on this forum advise folks to steer clear of ‘70s Gibson’s? It’s because they started carving their tops much thicker than previously. And why did they do that? Because they were sick and tired of honoring warranty claims related to the thinner tops. Which just goes to show that carving a proper mandolin top is a true art. It has to be done just so and the maker walks a fine line between structural strength and sound quality.

[unclelee]

Here is some more information about my F9. I bought it used and the top was just a little down on the bass side, it kept getting worse so I sent it to BIG JOE. he called me and told me it was one that had slipped through inspection,top was too thin. He put the carbon rod in the mando and it did help, and even gave it a little more bass sound. it still is playable but is now starting to buzz on the G and D strings, and getting worse.

[unclelee]

sorry about not being clear about the carbon rod, it is not a sound post, it is glued or attached along the top. I can just feel it using my little finger in the f hole. it is about 6 inches long.

[multidon]

Thank you for the clarification. If Big Joe says the top is too thin, you can take that to the bank. He would know. And thank you for naming him. That will stop anyone from saying that Gibson would never, ever in a million years ever sell an instrument like that. Obviously it can and does happen.

I still think a re-top is the only permanent solution. I understand what he was trying to accomplish with the carbon fiber rod, and it would have been nice if it had worked over the long haul, but it was a crap shoot and he probably knew it.

[sliebers]

In both cases, the F9 and Goldrush, I'd love to know what the actual top thicknesses were. People can speculate or blame all they want, but those specs would be something lots of us could benefit from.

[Bernie Daniel]

Hey Bernie, I’m sorry that you felt that way about reading the original Goldrush post. I agree that it is a really tangled web, but it was not shut down because of that. The reason is that names were named and private communications shared to gain an advantage in a dispute. Clear violation of guidelines. I’m actually surprised he was allowed to post a follow up. That is usually shut down also. But to me the whole episode has some valuable takeaways. For me, they are as follows:

1. If you buy used, you takes your chances. Do you feel lucky? A new purchase at least gives you warranty protection.
2. All makers can, no matter how much “quality control” there allegedly is, can let a stinker hit the market place. After sorting through all the posts,I still come to the conclusion that the top was carved too thin in the first place. It’s the only logical explanation for everything else.
3. Ultimately,the OP with the faulty Goldrush made, in my opinion, the correct decision to get it re-topped by a top notch luthier. He seems very happy with the results. Judging from the pictures, Randy Wood did a great job cosmetically. I wish he had said what it cost. He must have thought it was worth it, though. Wild guess on my part: at least 1000?

I always start out giving OPs the benefit of the doubt. I believe the Goldrush guy had a top that was originally carved too thin. And I believe unclelee has one too. Unless I see clear evidence of deception. The fact is, no matter how skilled the maker, it’s easy enough to do. There is a parallel thread going on right now about a makerwith a top that turned out too thin because he go a little overly enthusiastic with a new tool. He asked for advice on how to “fix” it. James Condino posted some hilarious suggestions. Burn it. Use it for target practice, or a frisbee. And so forth.

One last point. Do you remember why all the experts on this forum advise folks to steer clear of ‘70s Gibson’s? It’s because they started carving their tops much thicker than previously. And why did they do that? Because they were sick and tired of honoring warranty claims related to the thinner tops. Which just goes to show that carving a proper mandolin top is a true art. It has to be done just so and the maker walks a fine line between structural strength and sound quality.

You're right I must have been in a cranky mood when I read it today! But I certainly suffered no ills while reading it so perhaps I might have just kept my impatience to myself LOL! On both of the Gibson I am willing to believe anything that is clearly demonstrated. If someone says a top it too carved to thin then my first question is what is the thickness? If the person says I don't know then my next question is: "then how do you know it is carved too thin"? We don't have that info here. So I agree. Open mind but also we need facts.

On the Goldrush story I felt there were just too many things that sounded to me implausible in the story from the OP? Just my opinion.

[Bernie Daniel]

Thank you for the clarification. If Big Joe says the top is too thin, you can take that to the bank. He would know. And thank you for naming him. That will stop anyone from saying that Gibson would never, ever in a million years ever sell an instrument like that. Obviously it can and does happen.

I still think a re-top is the only permanent solution. I understand what he was trying to accomplish with the carbon fiber rod, and it would have been nice if it had worked over the long haul, but it was a crap shoot and he probably knew it.

Wow! Well I stand corrected! If Big Joe says it was carved too thin then that is an air tight story -- I have no more doubt -- he knows mandolin repair and he knows Gibson.

I'm saddened to hear this. I can believe that the mandolin slipped through final inspection. Clearly final inspection cannot include using a Hacklinger gauge on the top board. But there is no way that the person who carved that top did not know it was too thin and that person should be ask to account for this debacle IMO.

I think that would still contact David Harvey about this to see what he says. Even it the company is not technically responsible under original warranty for this mandolin being as you are not the original owner I think that they might want do something to correct the problem?

OP, Big Joe knows David Harvey and most of the other people building mandolins at Gibson as well. Did you ask him if he might be willing to bring this matter to their attention? Even if not he would still be a very credible "witness" for you.

This whole matter is still hard for me to believe. There is clear difference between an acceptable thickness and too thin I can't see how this could happen and someone not know it?

Looks like Big Joe tried to add an additional CF tone bar to prevent the sagging. Let me ask you this. What happens when you release all string pressure? Does the top rebound to proper contours?

[Bernie Daniel]

....I still think a re-top is the only permanent solution. I understand what he was trying to accomplish with the carbon fiber rod, and it would have been nice if it had worked over the long haul, but it was a crap shoot and he probably knew it.

You might be correct about that Don? But I would like to propose perhaps an easier and hopefully less expensive attempt to fix it. I am thinking about taking the back off instead of the top -- much easier to do.

Then remove the tone bars and the CF bar that Big Joe put in. Then carefully map the graduations on the entire top board. Once that is done it will be easy to see where more spruce thickness is needed to give the top sufficient strength.

Then I would glue down strips of spruce veneer (~0.05 inches thickness) over the thin (weak) areas pressing them done with enough force that they morph to the exact contour of the top. (I think I would run the grain of the veneer the same direction as the top board?) Once this operation completed one could go back with either planes and gouges or with sand paper and bring the entire top in to proper graduation. Then clean up the edges of the patch and blend it in. Finally re-glue the tone bars and the back plate.

In both cases, the F9 and Goldrush, I'd love to know what the actual top thicknesses were. People can speculate or blame all they want, but those specs would be something lots of us could benefit from.

Yes for sure it would be good to know this!