ˇpapá gordo ain’t no madre flaca!
'20 A3, '30 L-1, '97 914, 2012 Cohen A5, 2012 Muth A5, '14 OM28A
This thread got me jogging the old memory banks as I recall owning (many moons ago) an original custom F-5 with an oval hole made in the early 1960s. As fate would have it, my wife Tracy showed up yesterday with an old photo album of instrument pictures and lo and behold I had photographic evidence that this instrument actually was more than a figment of my imagination. I was given to understand that Gibson made two of these, but I've only seen one. It didn't stay very long in the dawghouse though. Maybe I should have kept it to take better pictures than this. Stay safe and healthy you mandolin lovers!
Very KOOL David-love those pearl blocks man! There was a guy in Alabama who had one just like that but I suspect it was a teens F-4 with a early 60's refinish and neck!
Sonny Morris built exactly what you're describing for me in 2010. It took about 4 months and cost $1500. I believe it would cost more now but the time frame is likely still the same.
I played LOTS of Sonny's instruments. He consistently builds in great tone and playability.
Oh, really? Monroe recorded quite a few numbers on an F7 before purchasing his F5. He also did one session with a borrowed F4. Most people would agree that the F7 is closer in character to the F5 than the F4. I've owned a long neck oval hole and it certainly was much closer in character to a Gibson F2 or F4 (I've tried both) than any F5-type mando I've played. It was superior to the Gibsons but not suitable for rhythm work.
I built one to those specifications, using Siminoff components- I had the same thoughts as you. I ended up being extremely disappointed with it, even tore the back off twice to change bracing and graduations. Tried a Virzi then removed it. There are some other strings that discuss this (and some posts on your thread) and consensus is that oval hole plus elevated fingerboard doesn't capture the good attributes of either F5 or F4 as well, and adds nothing worthwhile.
"If you hit a wrong note, then make it right by what you play afterwards." - Joe Pass
So freaking cool when the top Dawg chimes in...
My Heater F4 is short scale and has no "tubbiness". Most of the Gibby F-2/4s I have played, do not have said"tubbiness". Where I have heard it is in the the short scale As from the 20s and 30s I have played. My Hester is sweet sounding, clean and pretty. It just sings.
Now, is has a weak bluegrass chop. While it can play grass, grass is not it's strength. That is just my experience.
deleted
It's a bit surprising that a builder working with Gibson designs should introduce a short scale ovalhole model contrary to the Gibson tradition. The standard seems to be 13 7/8 -- how much does your mandolin differ from that norm?
The reason you, unlike others, don't hear tubbiness in your Hester or most Gibson ovalholes is that people don't mean the same thing (if anything at all) with that word.
There are videos of Alan Biey playing Hester ovalholes, both A and F style, and while to my ears sounding like typical ovalholes, I wouldn't describe their sound as "tubby". And the same goes for just about every ovalhole I've tried.
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
Bookmarks