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
I wish I was a better player, but I’ll see what I can do.
Even without seeing it in person, I’m quite sure that this mandolin is tremendous!
Gary, Gary, Gary, Oh yeah buddy! That baby is the epitome of GNARLY! I would love to wrap my paws around that little feller! Gorgeous wood choice and build! Does this have the same type deep neck set as my LL Tribute you built? I'm a firm believer in those deeper set necks. I have that done on all my mods! Many builders underset them and you just don't get the power and tonal bliss! I played a bunch of F-5's from the late 30's and they were hurting in that aspect. But all can be re-set deeper. John Duffey was one that swore by this and I know on his builds/mods he set them deeper. My Uncles Duffey F-7 convert that John did and played in the early 60s has a very deep neck set. I wonder if this thought process came from the violin world as those necks seem to be cocked back quite a bit?
Well done, ok somebody buy something from me so I can justify this A-5-LoL!!!!!!!!!! Is that the Pag case you got from me a long while back?
What did you use for tuners?
I'm sure mine is a minority opinion and I will affirm that I have the greatest respect (and no ill will at all) for the skills of the builder.
That said, I have to confess that I do not understand how is this mandolin is a "tribute"?
Putting "The Gibson" on the head stock and signing Lloyd Loar on the label would under most situations constitute what would be called a forgery?
And it kind of raises another question in my mind. Is it not true that ads copy=tribute=forgery mandolins are not allowed on the pages of the MC Classifieds? (at lest I think that is true?). But they are allowed on the forum discussion?
Like I noted before I'm sure many members might well disagree with my position on this and it is not intended to be personal just a frank expression of an alternate opinion on this rather unique interpretation of the concept of "tribute".
It is undeniably a beautiful mandolin though.
Bernie
____
Due to current budgetary restrictions the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off -- sorry about the inconvenience.
My wife once attended a girls’-night-out art class with a friend.
The event consisted of an instructor and a dozen girls sipping Chardonnay while attempting to paint Van Gogh’s Starry night with varying degrees of skill.
Considering there is only one original, I doubt any of the copies attempted that night would be considered forgeries.
An item only becomes a forgery when there is attempt to pass it off as the original.
for•ger•y fôr′jə-rē► n. The act of forging something, especially the unlawful act of counterfeiting a document or object for the purposes of fraud or deception.
n. Something that has been forged, especially a document that has been copied or remade to look like the original.
n. The act of forging or working metal into shape.
I think that the "attempt to sell" has nothing to do with the definition? The "The Gibson with the flowerpot" is a Gibson copyrighted feature so that is different then a V. van Gogh painting -- which I is suppose would be in the public domain?
And of course I did not imply there would be any attempt to sell this new A-5 in any nefarious way. But with luck the mandolin will live for centuries -- long after the Mandolin Cafe has faded from memory? Every sale of this and other "tribute" copies presents a chance for fraud. I just see nothing served by doing this?
Bernie
____
Due to current budgetary restrictions the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off -- sorry about the inconvenience.
Homage (/ˈhɒmɪdʒ/ or /ˈɒmɪdʒ/) is a show or demonstration of respect or dedication to someone or something, sometimes by simple declaration but often by some more oblique reference, artistic or poetic. The term is often used in the arts for where one author or artist shows respect to another by allusion or imitation; this is often pronounced like the French hommage (/oʊˈmɑːʒ/).[1]
....then I guess it would be ok for me to start building and putting Vessel on the headstock and a copy of his sticker on the inside?
Go ahead. But first you’d have to be willing to sell your F models for $485. That’s about the same ratio one pays for one of mine compared to a Loar. A $485 Vessel copy would likely increase my sales of genuine articles. Impersonation is a high form of flattery after all.
The intent here is quite obvious. If I really intended to be a fraud or a forger I’d never post photos of my work, which is really posted to show my reverence for the originals that I copy. Further, my willingness to have Darryl Wolfe dissect one of my F copies in public on this forum was also meant to elevate the greatness of the original article. My copies would never fool even a casually knowledgeable person. With each one I learn new things. Mostly, how impossible it is to make something that doesn’t look like a copy. But, my attention to these subtle details has made me a better builder.
You kind of miss the point. But carry on.....
Not at all. Make a Vessel copy for us to see your work.
I'll also point out that I have no personal axe to grind in the discussion and what you build in your shop is clearly your business. My point was that regardless of your intent was it seems that building that mandolin obviously violates a legal Gibson patent/copyright?
Am I wrong about that and can everyone just start building Gibson tributes?
If I rob a bank because I want to give a million dollars to St. Jude's Children's Hospital is it OK? Laws are laws.
But again what you do is your call -- I just don't see the logic or the reason for these tributes -- to use your term. I don't think it is the right thing to do. But as the previous poster said "carry on". I've had my say.
PS You made one statement that really caught my attention. "My copies would never fool even a casually knowledgeable person." Seriously? Come on that can't be true??
Bernie
____
Due to current budgetary restrictions the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off -- sorry about the inconvenience.
Ummm...there was only one Loar A5...so yep.
Violin makers have been copying Strads and Guarneri's for hundreds of years...it's a tribute......you get it or you don't....unless a builder passes it off as an original then who cares....lots of 70's F5 makers, when Gibson quality was the pits, made F5's with "The Gibson" on the headstock with reproduction Loar labels...if you know what you're looking at, they're obviously not the real deal, but they're an "homage" to the REAL Loar signed F5's.
This is getting a bit silly.....IMO.
Last edited by oliverkollar; Jun-29-2020 at 8:13pm.
Is anyone bothered by this?
Very nice mandolin but it's not like you are trying to be one of the Voller brothers of the mandolin world. I assume that you include your stamp or mark in the instrument to make that clear?
Charley
A bunch of stuff with four strings
There are interior signs that it is not an original item, aside from freely posting my work on the internet.
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
Trying to stay out of this, but if you continue to put The Gibson name on the headstock and/or label you are likely to get a cease and desist letter from Gibson lawyers. Others I know have, and it can get very stressful.
Peter Coombe - mandolins, mandolas and guitars
http://www.petercoombe.com
Stradivari's lawyers are long dead but Gibson's not so much.
I think mking such mandolin is probably not illegal, but once you sell it with the logo they can go after you (if they have evidence). You're kicking hornets' nest...
Adrian
I think Bernie asks a couple of perfectly legitimate questions. And asks them in a polite and respectful tone. No accusations... just questions.
I'm on record here as being an admirer of Vessel's work. I don't have even the slightest suspicion that these 'Tributes' were meant to be anything other than that... tributes. Regardless of the intentions of the builder, putting 'Gibson' on the headstock is risky business IMO. Recent announcements by Gibson (heavy-handed, clumsy and desperate sounding though they may be) make it clear that they're not amused by any form of imitation.
That makes me less than "casually knowledgeable". But it puts me in good company.
https://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/t...ht=april+fools
"I play BG so that's what I can talk intelligently about." A line I loved and pirated from Mandoplumb
Very cool work. I was happy reading the F-5 tribute analysis thread, and thought it was an amazing way to put yourself out there for that detailed of a level of analysis. But this is out of this world for an A-5 lover like myself... thanks for doing your part to preserve the history of the Gibson A-5 Loar.
Well done Gary!
I kind of understand the tribute side of this, but I would want one with your name on the headstock. You deserve it. If only humans could see the value of objects instead of the branding on the objects - tributes like this wouldn’t be necessary.
But where would we be in the mandolin world without the exercise of making tributes/bench copies? IIRC from what I have read here, several (many?) well known luthiers have such instruments in their histories?
It’s not like the legal side of this can be worked out here anyway, point made, please keep up with the discussion of this mandolin! I appreciate the insights shared and wish I had some to contribute, but will have to content myself with following this thread.
I should be pickin' rather than postin'
Bookmarks