c.1895 Vega Bowlback Mando

[Jake Wildwood]

Here's a rarer old Vega in stunningly great shape. Mid-grade model but it plays perfectly and sounds "ace." I'm probably going to keep this one. They don't come much cleaner than this! More pics/writeup over at my blog (click here).

[Martucci]

Jake,

CLEAN indeed. Wish I could find one of my GGF's in that condition.

Really enjoyed your blog and am curious about the Thomastiks you strung it up with, could you tell me what guage. Also, you mentioned that later Vega's had the paper lining - any thoughts on why it was added? My newly aquired Martucci lacks the lining and I think that may help to determine which of my two mandolins is older. My suspicion is the one lacking the lining is the older.

Thanks, Fred

[Jake Wildwood]

It's the medium set (mittel).

It seems like on both Vegas and Washburns and some other makes from the time that the paper/canvas interior was added around 1900 or so. Someone with more detailed knowledge will probably chime in, though. I think the Italians had been building that way for a while but the 'merican makes seemed to want to try it without. In the end it seems to matter little tonewise.

Washburns even had some curious bracing/strapping inside to support the ribs when they had no canvas which looks kinda neat.

[brunello97]

Jake, that is the earliest Vega I can recall seeing. Really nice quality workmanship (by you too, hombre). What kind of label were they using back then? Any available shots of that?

Also, one shibboleth around here is the Vega design location of bridge south of the top cant. Yours is located well north. I never been completely comfortable with that as an absolute 'truism' as some Lelands and Ditsons I have (presumably Vega made) are right around the cant (N or S) viz proper intonation.

What's your take on this? I can imagine Vega must have went through a minor catharsis around the turn of the century when they were merging/acquiring other companies, designers and builders. But yours is 5 or so years earlier than that. An interesting example.

Mick

[Jake Wildwood]

"An interesting example." -- for sure! And for the reasons you pointed out.



Here's the label.

I'm also familiar with more modern examples with "above/below" cant contradictions. Do you honestly want to know my opinion??

...I think that they didn't care too much when they were building these in the factory setting and the cants and fingerboard placements changed slightly randomly on every build... ...or it could be as simple as one got built that way, sounded better, so they started doing that on more of them... or they elongated/shortened a scale length and didn't change anything other than the fretboard.

I mean: look at Gibson's erratic output in every era -- even a more attention-to-details builder like Vega must have had the same sort of problems.

[brunello97]

Thanks, Jake. Honestly, your opinion and mine on this sync up quite nicely. Having worked on various bowlbacks (and retopped a few) and I've realized that nailing that geometry between bowl profile and top cant takes some fine skill, even if you are working with molds, patterns, etc. "Got built that way" as you say, probably covers a lot of territory and explains a lot of things.

This one of yours is super clean and almost Martin-esque in its simple elegance (though I prefer the Vega "Pringles" scratchplate.) I wish our EuroBowlHead friends would get more hip to these mandolins. Your work just might help that happen.

Mick

[Schlegel]

I think the bridge position wasn't random. Most Vega bowlbacks have the bridge below the cant, and most of those have a rounded volute on the headstock. But those with the bridge above the cant seem not to have the volute. Looking at some at Bernunzio's, for example, he has two Vegas that demonstrate this:

the first one has no volute

and the next has a volute

All 3 of the Vegas I have, have both a volute and the bridge below the cant. I don't think the geometry is random, because Vega is one the most consistent makers in quality- I think they just had 2 different bowl designs and two headstock designs. Two different time periods or two different shops/departments? Possibly.

[Schlegel]

Regardless, I like Vegas. They are just as good as the Martin I had, and very consistent in sound. The plain jane student models sound just great, just as good as the fancier models. Though I should mention I've been told the Pettine Special really is a cut above.

[Jim Garber]

I used to own this style 208 which is prob similar in grade to yours. Once again, bridge below the cant and another difference is the end of the fretboard which seems more common at least in my library of jpegs.

[Jake Wildwood]

Regardless, I like Vegas. They are just as good as the Martin I had, and very consistent in sound. The plain jane student models sound just great, just as good as the fancier models. Though I should mention I've been told the Pettine Special really is a cut above.

Vegas are my all-time fave bowlback. Every one I've worked on I've liked, which is something I can't say about most bowlback makes.

Jim: Your ex-mando (208) is essentially what I was "in the market" for -- but I saw this Vega pop up on the 'bay and snagged it because it looked so clean. I was sort of taken with the simple "sawed off" extension and slightly plainer looks but was extra-surprised when I got a look inside and a look at the serial. Most of the Vegas I encounter are c.1905-20 or so.

[brunello97]

Vegas are my all-time fave bowlback…. but was extra-surprised when I got a look inside and a look at the serial. Most of the Vegas I encounter are c.1905-20 or so.

Wait a minute. I'm used to the Vega SN being on the end of the headstock. Whereabouts "inside" is the SN on this? Jim has been trying to convince me that two Ditson mandos I have are Vega made. Both have SNs on the brace N of the soundhole (as does my Leland). I'm hoping for a match here.

Mick

[Jake Wildwood]

Mick: nope, this one's at the headstock. I wrote that confusingly -- "I got a look inside AND a look at the serial." -- different places.

[brunello97]

Mick: nope, this one's at the headstock. I wrote that confusingly -- "I got a look inside AND a look at the serial." -- different places.

Rats.

Thanks, Jake. You've had a few of these Lelands, what's your take on their provenance? (I don't think L+H made the Lelands themselves, though I have no evidence but the merely circumstantial to back that up.) Meanwhile, a Ditson labeled bowl that I have (which looks very Vega-oid) also has the same SN system and 'font' on that brace. Might Vega have SNed their own work on the headstock and the work they did for others on the brace? Not the strangest thing to imagine. Though I have read here of (100% guaranteed!) Larsons having the same SNing on that same brace.

They are all very nice instruments and ultimately it doesn't matter so much who made them, but it is an itch that I just can't scratch. Just when I am convinced I have them pinned down as Vega, something slips.

Mick

[Jake Wildwood]

Now we're into dangerous territory... :D

I think the Lelands are Larson-built. The circumstantial evidence that points to this for me is a very different "heft" to them vs. Vegas and also the detailed material use -- bindings and purflings on the ones I've seen have all been very "Chicago" in that one finds them on Regals, Harmonys, Kays, L&H, and other Chicago brands but not on anything Eastern.