Interesting Harwood Mandolin

[joshrieck]

Hello everyone. Long time reader, first time poster.

I have a Harwood mandolin in the shop that I'm trying to find info on, especially what it may be worth. After some searching online I've not been able to find one like it, mostly I see bowl backs and harp guitars.


Any help would be greatly appreciated!

[barney 59]

Never saw one like that. Some Regals had that basic body style and some that were attributed to Larson but the ones I have seen were flat, not arched. Is the back arched as well?( Or is this an illusion caused by the light?) Does it say Harwood NY anywhere? I don't know the significance of that but the William Jenkens Co was from Kansas and made or distributed Harwoods and then some say "Harwood NY". That is a really sweet looking mandolin that is going to excite some interest here. You should post more pictures! No idea what it's value is but I think it is really an uncommon mandolin and as such maybe worth getting it properly appraised. I've had some experiance with Harwood guitars and they were really well made.

[delsbrother]

Wow. That one is a head-scratcher.

[brunello97]

I've never seen one of these with a Harwood label. I was under the growing assumption that Harwood made all their own instruments, but maybe that wasn't necessarily true. (This is a "Harwood" thread here so it would be ideal of these conversations could somehow be merged.)

For comparison I've attached three versions of this body style I have in my files: two noted as Regal made, one for Montgomery Wards. The other is a Larson-made mandola with a Bruno label.

Jake Wildwood has had a couple of these Regal made versions, if I recall. Looking forward to the release of the Centerstream book on the Regal company. I hope it fills in a lot of blanks.

Mick

[MikeEdgerton]

THis design was patented by Regal and is referenced in the book Washburn Prewar instrument styles. In Gruhn's book Acoustic Guitars and Other Fretted Instruments there is an image of one of these that was built by the Larson Brothers. I assume that Regal may have had the Larson mandolins built as a high end offering. They were never labeled as far as I could see. Harwood was a builder that built some fine instruments. Frank Ford has likened their guitars to the quality of similar Martin's of the era. The musical instrument business has always been one where people farmed out building instruments and had them labled. This mandolin wasn't built by Harwood. It was most likely built by Regal, the same as the similar Bruno mandola listed above. I'm also wondering what the actual scale is as it looks just like the Bruno labeled/Regal built mandola above.

[Jim Garber]

I say Barney and others were right on the Regal attribution. Also, I may be wrong on this, but I think, initially, Harwood may have been a maker in his/its own right (situated in New York City) but later on was a brand name of the Jenkins Music Company of Kansas City.

FWIW Mike Holmes/Mugwumps has Harwood as a Jenkins brand name from 1885 on with no mention of a prior incarnation as an independent maker. Likely Harwoods were built by other makers for Jenkins even in the early days, including, possibly Martin (hence the quality comparison).

[barney 59]

It looks very similar to the Larson attributed "Bruno". How did those guys working in what has been said to be a two man shop build so many instruments with so many different (and really different, like the above mandolin) body styles and some with very intricate and complicated embellishments--It defies logic. I think some instruments are getting attributed to Larson because they were really well made but unlabeled --"so it must be Larson". If I were a builder in those days I think that it is very likely that I would be copying Larson's, at least to some degree.
Martin kept very thorough records, they would probably know if they produced "Harwood" labeled instruments. Someone should ask them. If Harwood was a person he would be portable,he could have moved to Kansas because of a job opportunity.

[Paul Hostetter]

Read this and this. It's a safe bet there was no maker called Harwood, but beyond that...

[delsbrother]

I don't know; there was some evidence (in the other Harwood thread) that they had a factory at one point.

[MikeEdgerton]

...Martin kept very thorough records, they would probably know if they produced "Harwood" labeled instruments. Someone should ask them....

From the harp guitar link Paul provided "Frank Ford, who has examined some of the parlor guitars, believes that they are nearly comparable to Martin quality (but not made by Martin)."

Gruhn doesn't list Harwood as an "other brand" manufactured by Martin but he does list ukes manufactured for Jenkins in Kansas City. Frank would probably recognize them as martins if they were. The Wurlitzer labeled Martins were recognizable as Martins.

[brunello97]

Here is the other thread going on about Harwood instruments which builds on Greg's Harp Guitar site and pushes deeper into the har-wood:

http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/sh...hlight=Harwood

(I see Jim's "Jenkins" thread already links to this..)

I have a Harwood bowlback that looks like none-other (as do some other examples.) It has a mahogany bowl, believe it or not, but has a top crack that needs repair before getting playable so I can't speak about its sound. It is curious enough in its appointments to make the usual suspects suspect as to attribution. I'll get some pictures together. It is nothing fancy but quite odd.

Paul, I did indeed misspeak. My earlier assumption was based on the relationship to Jenkins & co. and their possible manufacture of some of the instruments they may have sold under different labels, not on 'Harwood' producing for themselves. The NY Harwoods are a curious clue in the mystery.

Mike, right now I am dreaming that the upcoming Regal book is going to answer all our questions. But I felt that way in advance of Bob Hartmann's book on the Larsons…

Mick

[joshrieck]

Thanks for all the reply's, this Harwood thing is quite the mystery. I live very near the National Music Museum in South Dakota, this may require a little research trip on my part.

I did some more poking around on the instrument, thanks to my handy goose neck webcam I was able to see a date handwritten on behind the sole top brace (which is right under where the bridge is supposed to be, never seen that before) which reads Aug 11, 1915. In addition to that there are two identical stamps reading "Nicola Turturro's Music Store 105 S 4th Ave Mt. Vernon, NY. There is also one little bit of text that isn't legible on either stamp but it looks to me like it may be "mfg." I can't be sure though. I see Turturro was a maker in his own right, I wonder what the connection is there. Mugwumps has an interesting article about the Turturro Turnover.

There are patent dates on the tailpiece and I just searched Google patents for it but didn't find it, go search for mandolin patents though, there is some amazing stuff including a mandolin attachment for a guitar, wow.

Anyway, to answer some questions. The back is flat and the top is arched, back and sides are rosewood. The top is bookmatched but the seam is about an inch off center. The scale length is 13 1/16 or 332 mm. And as to Frank Ford's point, the construction of this instrument is beautiful, not a spot of glue, the blocks are nicely shaped and the way the mahogany linings are beveled at the spruce blocks look is quite nice.

This instrument is in beautiful condition except for some small rib cracks by the tailblock and two back cracks, one on either side of the tailblock running about 2/3 the way up the back.

And here are a couple more pics for the curious.

Cheers!

[Jim Garber]

Nicola Turturro was a maker who may or may not have some connection to the Calace family in Naples. There was some rumor going around that he was Raffaele's brother and they had some fight and he came to American and changed his last name. I am not so sure of that, tho he did make some oddball instruments, like that turnover uke/mandolin. I actually owned one -- not much of either instrument but certainly a conversation piece. He also made a mandolira which might connect him directly to the Calaces.

Oops! I did see that Mugwumps tells more of this story. BTW I did not know that Turturro had a store up in Mt Vernon which is in the same county I currently live in. I have a feeling that it was a music store and he ordered the OP's instrument wholesale in order to sell in the store.

[joshrieck]

Pardon my ignorance, the OP's?

[BradKlein]

Original Poster. You!

[joshrieck]

Ahh... right, as I said pardon my ignorance.

[brunello97]

In addition to that there are two identical stamps reading "Nicola Turturro's Music Store 105 S 4th Ave Mt. Vernon, NY. …..

Wait a minute. Where are the 'Turturro' stamps located? Inside or outside the instrument? I can't quite tell from the photos.

Thanks,

Mick

[MikeEdgerton]

I can pretty much guarantee that puppy was built in Chicago. The only question is if it was built by Regal or built by the Larsons. It was a patented design. It appears that this one might mate up well with the matching though not branded the same mandola listed above. The mandola is said to have been built by the Larsons. If that's true then this would have been built by the same builder. Too many features are the same. To this point nobody has talked value. If it's Larson built it's worth more hundreds than if it was built by Regal but we are still talking hundreds, not thousands of dollars.

[Paul Hostetter]

Very tidy construction for Regal.

[joshrieck]

The stamps are on the inside of the top behind the brace which lies under the bridge.

Thanks for all your help here, I am leaning toward the Larson attribution because of the mandola and quality of workmanship. Thank you Mike for the mention of value, I don't think my customer wants to sell it (it was his Grandfathers) but I wanted to have a good idea of what I was working on before proceeding with the repairs.

[Jake Wildwood]

I doubt this is a Regal... this looks like a Larson-made instrument. The interior does NOT comply with the numerous Regal makes I've worked on and for that matter, all the Regal-made arched-top instruments of this design I've seen in person (3 now so far) all had arched backs as well. Note some other inconsistencies -- the fact that the lower body is wider in comparison to the upper bout area than the Regals and the scroll is lighter, taller, and has more curve than the Regals (which were all apparently made in the same molds as they're quite consistent).

Anyhow, my $0.02 is that this is not a Regal make. Having owned 2 of the 3 arched-top reverse-scroll Regals I've had and worked on them inside and out, I can say that with some certainty.

[joshrieck]

The verdict is in... its been positively ID'd as a Larson for anyone who was curious.

Thanks for all the replies.

[Jim Garber]

Just curious... who made the definitive designation?

[barney 59]

I'd like to know that as well. As far as guitars go there is a very short list of individuals that are qualified to make that determination. I know of three/five tops,there are probably a few more but not very many. The list is probably shorter for mandolins.
What I tend to find is someone has something that they can't identify it's nicely made so,well it MUST be a Larson!

[Jim Garber]

Yes, the Larson's were a mystery. Relatively egoless luthiers who found no need to put their names on their instruments. At least they gave us something to talk about on these forums. As Barney notes: I think even the experts can only make educated guesses as to whether it is Larson made.