# Instruments and Equipment > Videos, Pictures & Sound Files >  Distressed Master Models

## wantaloar

Lets see some photos of your Distressed Master Models
here is my May 27 2004, serial # D70289 signed by Charlie Derrington

----------


## Chris Biorkman

Nice mandolin. The more I see these, the more I think that having something already worn in would make me worry a lot less about keeping my instruments in pristine condition. Gibson distressed models actually look old to me, as opposed to some other makers. The varnish crackling is what I think does the trick.

----------


## f5loar

I've played on about a dozen DMM or RSDMM and they all are so different they each have their own unique characteriscis.  They all are worthy of their name and the quality and tone will remain long after the price is forgotten.

----------


## wantaloar

When I talked with Charlie at Loarfest 06 I asked him how he was able to make the varnish check in such a realistic way,  he told me egg whites!  Not a an oven, freezer, or,  microwave...... just egg whites

----------


## jimbob

the board will probably be clogged for quite a while waiting for everyone to post their pics of their DMM's...
They are pretty cool...how many around, do you think ?

----------


## danb

Wow, that one is just.. wow

----------


## jimbob

I didn't mean to be hateful in my post....who doesn't like to see pictures of these great mandolins ? I was only commenting that there probably won't be many posts due to the limited number of these mandos.  Sorry if I offended anyone.

----------


## wantaloar

Jim, you were right, no apologies needed.  I guess there are not too many out there.   I was hoping for at least 1 or 2 distressed  MM to show up.  I hope more show up....

----------


## K3NTUCKI8oy

All I see is a scratched up mandolin! I wonder why people won't buy a decent finished
mandolin and distress it by playing it....

----------


## Bill Snyder

Because their tastes are different than yours.

----------


## jim_n_virginia

Nice!!  Great looking mandolin!

It has taken me more than a few years to crawl up the mandolin food chain from the lowly Rover I first bought out of a Pawnshop to the Gibson Fern I am playing now.

One day I will own a DMM. When Big Joe sold Brutus I wanted that mandolin so bad I couldn't sleep. I hope whoever got it is playing the heck out of it.

I have played only few but they just have this tone that you won't forget if you play it.

one day ... hopefully soon...

----------


## goose 2

Wantaloar,

I too have a Charlie signed DMM that I have owned for several years.  The back of mine looks very similar to yours.  The greatest mandolin in every regard!!!  I would post pictures if I knew how.

----------


## Cullowheekid

Sam,that's a great looking mandolin.I've got a May 27,04 MM that looks alot like yours after 4 years of playing.Lightly distressed.Great sounding mandolins.E

----------


## Bernie Daniel

This seemed like a perfectly reasonable suggestion for topic on list server with the major section entitled *"Post a Picture of your mandolin"* 

How hard is that to understand?

I can hardly imagine what basis there was for the two negative posts that appeared!   What about a skunk in the middle of the road?

If someone does not like to see pics of a DMM or thinks the idea of a DMM is foolish then:
A) don't visit the post and/or 

B)don't buy one.

Why do we need to know about your negative opinions?   Isn't this site is FOR mandolins advocates?

If there was no market for a DMM then Gibson would still have every one of them that they made.  But guess what they don't.

Thanks for posting those pics.  And I would LOVE to see MORE pictures of DMM's and I would love to have one too.  Greeness comes over me now.

----------


## woodwizard

Nice looking DMM. Looks just like a real Loar. That buckle rash on the back, if that's not a reflection, looks like the real thing. To be honest...that's the only thing I don't like. I would freak out if I did that playing one of my mandolins. To me that's more mando abuse than playing wear but that's just me. I'm not trying to sound negative. That is a beautiful mandolin and I sure wish I had one. It looks FOR REAL. And I know it probably sounds awesome

----------


## wantaloar

Goose, What is the date of yours? mine is may 27, 2004

----------


## goose 2

Its dated July 9, 2003.  If you send me your email address I could send you a few pictures.  I really does look like a twin to yours.

----------


## gibson mandoman

Beautiful mandolin.  If I had the funds, I would buy one without thinking twice.

----------


## Glassweb

I'm not sure what their secret is, but of all the Gibson mandolins being produced these days the DMM's are, hands down, the best sounding (to my ear). Anyone have the inside scoop on Gibson's  
"secret" formula?

----------


## JEStanek

Those look pretty authentic!  Whatever it is they're doing, they're doing it right.

Jamie

----------


## f5gibson

Here's my March, 2007, RSDMM#5-30, Signed by Ricky Skaggs, Acoustic Engineer.  :Mandosmiley:  See more here: http://mandolincafe.com/forum/album.php?albumid=106

----------


## Bernie Daniel

Oh my gosh! Its absolutely priceless.  Its 8 years old and it looks like it has a tasteful 50 years of wear.  

I was always skeptical about the value of having a DMM as contrasted to a "plain" MM -- but I'm thinking different now.  The appearence of this mandolin is to die for.

Some time there should be a through discussion as to what is going on in the distressing process to give added the tonal characteristics. I hope others keep posting pics of these gems.

----------


## Chris Biorkman

Nice mandolin. That Skaggs doesn't look nearly as distressed as the other DMM in the first post of the thread.

----------


## Glassweb

[QUOTE=JEStanek;588320]Those look pretty authentic!  Whatever it is they're doing, they're doing it right.

I can't agree... the back of the headstock of F5Gibson's DMM looks anything but "naturally aged".

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> Glassweb:I can't agree... the back of the headstock of F5Gibson's DMM looks anything but " naturally aged".


Kind of hard call to make though.  This is not a DMM --but here are two shots of the finish on a 56 year old Gibson F12.  

Of course it is nitro so maybe it is a bad comparison but it kind of looks like that seen on the DMM's

----------


## f5loar

Glassweb is right. I've seen over 100 Loars and never saw the back of a headstock look like that.  While they do different degrees of distressing some getting more , some less there are a few things they do that are not representive of an actual 85 year old Loar.  Loars also have different degrees of wear depending on the history of where it came from and how it had been stored all those years.  The type heat a house had effects the distressing patterns.  And IMO the DMM's are worth the extra money over the regular MMs.  Big difference in the way it feels and sounds.

----------


## woodwizard

Wonder what a regular MM and a DMM will look like in about 80 or 90 years "finish wise" ?
Will the MM look like the way a Loar looks now? Will the DMM look 200 years old? Any guesses?

----------


## SilverCity

Hmmmmmm - I read this and am intreagued by the posts that I find,...some for, some against - I'll throw my two cents at it regardless of my current inability to play the one I posted on another thread.

I'll relate this to my personal experience with a guitar I've owned for about 17 years - it's an American Standard Fender Stratocaster (strawberry red) - ok,ok,ok, I know it's not the same (I hear some of you screeeching right now) but it was my first real investment in a guitar when I was about 18 years old - I loved it,...I treated it better than any pet or girlfriend I'd ever had at the time - I wiped it down every play, changed strings at least once a month, etc.   About 10 years into owning the guitar - I noticed one day that the finish under the clear coat had started to crack and fisheye - there was definate discoloration that pissed me off to no end! - This was my baby!  I called Fender, no response, - i asked friends, no answer,....I finally took it to the store where I bought it and asked what the heck was up??? - The store owner and guitar tech. there laughed at me - told me it was "character" WTF? - I was seriously torqued!  So mad that I put the thing in it's case (thinking the thing was falling apart) and played my other guitars for about 6-8 months.

One day on a whim,..I thought "well,...it's not going to play itself in that old case,." so I pulled it out,...the thing had never sounded so good,...such a pure,....distinctive sound,,...make me think of some of the great Strat players of the 70's - It absolutely blew my mind!!!!!  I LOVE THAT GUITAR NOW - I will never sell it!!!! I will part with friends and family first!

All of that to say this,.....and i've done some research (none which really supports it) but I believe that an instrument,...because most good ones are made of real wood - needs time to mature and dry out, to give it the full sound of the body.  Almost all instruments (even hand made) are painted and/or "finished' before the wood has had time to cure - on that logic,...until the finish has had a chance to naturally or by outside agent crack and release the grain or "magic" (as i like to call it) below all the pretty paint and laquer the sound is mostly "manufactured" by the elements on top of the wood itself - either buy one distressed or play it yourself until it is to find your instruments "TRUE" sound.

----------


## wantaloar

Here are some more detailed shots of my Distressed MM..  Frank Wakefield was playing it this weekend at Big Sur CA. and really like it. He said the neck was just like his.  Although I cant say it sounded like his.  What a wonderful gentleman.  First time we met, but he treated me as if we were friends for 30 years.  I noticed he was so gracious with all of the folks there at the festival, can still pick even at 74 years young and a Triple Bypass. Nice Guy.

----------


## f5gibson

> Here are some more detailed shots of my Distressed MM..  Frank Wakefield was playing it this weekend at Big Sur CA. and really like it. He said the neck was just like his.  Although I cant say it sounded like his.  What a wonderful gentleman.  First time we met, but he treated me as if we were friends for 30 years.  I noticed he was so gracious with all of the folks there at the festival, can still pick even at 74 years young and a Triple Bypass. Nice Guy.


I met Frank last year in Ownesboro. He actully let me play his loar ( which caused almost immediate MAS ). He is a wonderful guy. If I could play 1/10 of what he knows I would be happy.  :Mandosmiley:

----------


## woodwizard

wantaloar, the more I see your pics the more I'm convinced that ... that has got to be the best looking DMM I've ever seen. Beautiful!  look out! MAS ATTACK!!!!!!!!

----------


## K3NTUCKI8oy

Man fellas my cousin brought me over a Gibson destressed f5 that he thought
he'd buy to LEARN on! I fell in love with it and showed him a few chords
then out the door it went leaving me sad and so blue. It had a bottom end
that was bouncing off the walls!!! He really needs to stop by some more from 
now on!

----------


## Hendrik Ahrend

Howdy, think I just bought a great DMM mandolin a few weeks ago. And I'm so happy with it! It has a great sound, bright and woody, yet balanced. Looks good, too, I believe, with old style flower pot, dark sunburst and triple binding on sides.
The craftsmanship seems a bit funny, though harmless:
There are some gaps visible in the kerfed lining-to-back glue seam. However, there seems to be no structural disadvantage. The back center glue seam is actually a bit off-center. The original pearl nut has a very uneven string spacing. Finally, the treble f-hole is a bit closer to the outer binding than the bass f-hole. Has any of you DMM owners observed little imperfections like these? After looking at some pictures of original Loars, it seems, even back then, these slight imperfections occured frequently and were normal.

----------


## mando1man

Here's D70315, Aug 4 2005. I bought it from Danny Roberts right after IBMA. Danny didn't want to sell it but he needed to as part of the deal that got him Charlie Derrington's Loar. Danny had been playing this on all of the Grascals recordings and live performances. I probably need to sell it at some point. I can't afford to keep it.

----------


## Mike Bromley

That's a mighty gorgeous mando.

----------


## Scotti Adams

> Here's D70315, Aug 4 2005. I bought it from Danny Roberts right after IBMA. Danny didn't want to sell it but he needed to as part of the deal that got him Charlie Derrington's Loar. Danny had been playing this on all of the Grascals recordings and live performances. I probably need to sell it at some point. I can't afford to keep it.


Dannys DMM has to be one of the best sounding mandos on the planet..at least to my ears. On his solo Cd...that thing just oozed the tone.

----------


## Steevarino

Very nice instrument.  A fine example of Gibson at the top of their Post Loar Game, no doubt.  I have seen Danny play this mandolin several times with them Grascal boys, and it is also a great sounding mandolin.

Nice looking pickguard too(!)  I remember making that one for Danny.  He brought me a piece of Macassar Ebony to make it from.  Macassar Ebony is a very nice wood to use on mandolins.  Isn't that right, Gail...?

Steve Smith
http://www.CumberlandAcoustic.com
http://www.RedLineReso.com

----------


## Elliot Luber

I'm just much more impressed with how Gibson makes new mandolins, not at all in how they can make a new one look old. I can do that by loaning it to my son, or by not taking care of it. The best way is to play it for 50 years.

----------


## mando1man

<<Nice looking pickguard too(!) I remember making that one for Danny. He brought me a piece of Macassar Ebony to make it from.>>

Oh yeah Steevarino......Hhmm, maybe I should take that Macassar Ebony pickguard off before I sell it  :-)

How about them ebony tuner buttons?

----------


## wantaloar

> I'm just much more impressed with how Gibson makes new mandolins, not at all in how they can make a new one look old. I can do that by loaning it to my son, or by not taking care of it. The best way is to play it for 50 years.


Actually you don't have to play it for 50 years, you just have to send it to Roger Siminoff for a de-dampening session.  The best $125 I have ever spent, just sent him 2 more guitars and my other Derrington MM for a work over.  I sent my Distressed MM about a month ago and was very, very, happy with the improvement in overall tone, evenness in string volume and openness of the instrument.  Roger is a really fair and honest guy, not to mention THE authority on the Lloyd Loar instruments.  I would highly recommend his methods,  you will hear a difference, No B.S. it works.

----------


## red7flag

I heard from Big Joe that part of the distressing affects the tone of the DMMs.  From what some of the more knowledgable folks here say, there is a difference in tone between DMMs and MMs.  If they are made of the same quality materials, would one expect a MM with hard playing to come to sound like the DMM or is the process that distresses them unique?

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> red7flag: I heard from Big Joe that part of the distressing affects the tone of the DMMs.


Very interesting comment.  Do you recall any details of that converstation as regards exactly what is done to turn an MM  into a DMM and which parts of that process are the ones that influence the sound?  Thanks.

And please keep those DMM picutres coming each on is better than the next -- I never thought I was going to go after anything else as I really like all the mandolins I have now but these DMM pics are too much.  

Like the last two by wantaloar and mando1man are just amazing -- they all are really.

I really rather have a DMM than a Loar because with the latter I would almost be afraid to leave the house with it or to put a ding in it -- because it is as much a piece of history as a mandolin!  :Smile:

----------


## red7flag

Bernie,  Sorry but Big Joe was not more specific in our conversation.  Trusting Joe as I do, I do not doubt it.  I am just curious if regular or heavy playing will duplicate that change in tone.

----------


## ronlane3

Bernie,

There are other threads on here with "guesses" about what Gibson does during their distressing.  As Big Joe is a former employee, I'm sure that he cannot discuss the specifics.  However, the other threads that talk about the distressing, was originally done to make it look like an 80 year old Loar, and that the change in tone was a bi-product of that.

----------


## Big Joe

The distressing achieves the tonal changes much quicker than just playing it.  You would have to give it about 30 years of pretty constant playing to get a similar tonal change.  It has to do with the process and how it changes the wood and the finish to accomplish the tonal changes.  At best we know the results can be duplicated regularly but it is the combination of things that are done that give the results seen and observed.  If one just makes it look old, it may not achieve the desired results.  If one were to only replicate a portion of the process it may not accomplish the desired results.  It is the combination of things done that give the tonal alterations.

Needless to say, I am not going to give their secrets to anyone.  That would not be right for me to do.  It is not brain surgery nor highly secretive, but of the guesses many on the cafe have given, they are so far from the process that was done at Gibson that I often found it highly amusing.  I am amused with how many have tried to replicate the results and some will do well while others have neither accomplished the look or the tone.  

From purely as structural standpoint, all the MM's and DMM's are the same mandolin.  Each is hand built and are made from different pieces of wood so each will have its own personality.  Still, the consistency with which the MM and DMM produce the similar tonal properties is quite amazing!

----------


## mandopete

> ...but of the guesses many on the cafe have given, they are so far from the process that was done at Gibson that I often found it highly amusing.


You mean they don't really drive over the mandolin with a Hummer?

----------


## Gail Hester

[QUOTE=  Macassar Ebony is a very nice wood to use on mandolins.  Isn't that right, Gail...?

It certainly is Steve. :Cool:

----------


## mando1man

I used to think that distressing an instrument was simply cosmetic. A lot of pickers still think this way. Im sure that some builders cosmetically make the instrument look old (antiqued?) and call it a distressed model. I cant speak about these but I do have a little experience with Gibsons distressing results.

I bought a lacquer 2004 new Fern from Gibson. It sounded good, looked great. A while after I bought it I was offered a great deal to have Gibson distress it. To make a long story short, when it was done I thought cool, but it looks a little strange with the white binding. I put the mando up for about 6 months. After a while I wanted to play it again. I took it out, put new strings on it and WOW. I could not believe how awesome it sounded, like magic, it simply blew me away and everyone that plays it agree. I talked to some of the folks at Gibson about the process and other builders and heres what I was told and believe to be true. Part of the process is putting the mando in a UV booth. This dries the wood, thins the finish, makes the mandolin sound better, like it has aged 50 years. Its an amazing process.

Here it is, signed by Charlie Derrington (rare) and set up by Dave Harvey.

----------


## woodwizard

Wow ! keep em coming! The pics keep getting better & better. You can almost hear the tone coming out of some those pics. Beautiful.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> mando1man: Here it is, signed by Charlie Derrington (rare) and set up by Dave Harvey.


Just to clarify.  So you own a DMM as well as an F-5 Fern that has been put through the Gibson distressing protocol?

Any general comments about how the two mandolins compare in sound? 

It would be great to listen to a bunch of MM's and DMM's in the same setting to get a feeling for the differences in the tone.  

You mentioned the UV aspect of the process -- I will take a guess that the impact is more on the finish than the wood.  

I doubt any (or much) UV energy would get through to the wood -- the finish would adsorb about 99% of the irradiated energy -- however the depending on the intensity of the beam I expect that maybe some heat would be generated also as the short wavelength UV light would be exciting electrons in the molecular structure of the varnish driving them to higher levels and they would subsequently irradiate that energy as heat (i.e., much longer wavelengths) as they drop back down.  

So I expect that could cause drying of the finish as well as the wood -- of course this is all theoretical speculation based on chemical principles.

I wonder if a person could get Gibson to "distress" your mandolin (it would probably have to be one of their own models) for a fee? 

If that were true I wonder how much they would charge?  

Thinking out loud on this a person could arrange a UV irradiation of their mandolin pretty easily -- I used to run a micobiological unit that use UV lamps for sterilization -- there are many other sources.

----------


## mando1man

Hey Mandolin1944, I would just say that the difference between a great sounding DMM and this Fern would be the difference between lacquer and varnish. Kinda like between a great sounding Loar and a late 20's fern, they just sound different. (I'm not very good at describing tone with words).

I can't speak for Gibson but I have heard them say that they would distress a mandolin for a fee, you would need to contact them for the price.

As far as trying to put a mandolin in a UV booth, it's like this:
"Don't try this at home, leave this to a professional" :-)
I would not want to take responsibility for messing up a $8,000 or $15,000 mandolin.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> mando1man:I would just say that the difference between a great sounding DMM and this Fern would be the difference between lacquer and varnish. Kinda like between a great sounding Loar and a late 20's fern, they just sound different. (I'm not very good at describing tone with words).


Thanks for the information.  

Yeah the finish is certainly one of the big factors and I guess the other two main differences between your two mandos are the red vesrus sitka spruce and the hide versus white glue.  

But the fact that both mandolins have been through the "distressing protocol" is interesting.  

I had never thought about getting my Fern distresssed.  Yours is the only Gibson except for the DMM's that I have ever heard about getting that treatment.  

Also there seems to be no doubt in your mind that the distressing process helped its performance.

If the price were not too high it might be worth a try if it would improve the performance -- heaven knows a lot of other things like voodoo etc. have been tried in the past by others to improve a mandolin's performance.

----------


## jasona

> I had never thought about getting my Fern distresssed.  Yours is the only Gibson except for the DMM's that I have ever heard about getting that treatment.


There was a fellow who was a prominent poster here a year or two ago who got his Sam Bush model distressed. Let me hunt around for a link to that thread for his reactions to the tonal changes.

Here it is.

----------


## jasona

Reading it, it is red spruce not sitka. Big Joe said on another thread they did one other distressed Bush, and it too has a red spruce top. It belongs to Sammy who is no doubt distressing it further.

----------


## Mike Bromley

> Reading it, it is red spruce not sitka. Big Joe said on another thread they did one other distressed Bush, and it too has a red spruce top. It belongs to Sammy who is no doubt distressing it further.


Now there's a new application for the study of taphonomy, n'est ce pas?

 :Wink: 
 :Mandosmiley: 
 :Popcorn:

----------


## f5loar

The "fee" Gibson charges for doing the D to your "?" is a mere $6000 or so I was told by someone who had it done to his MM.  And what a difference it made. From a super great MM to an unbeliveable DMM.  Since he got it back he has been able to double his notes output.  His trebles are more trebley and his pull offs are faster than ever.  Even his tremlos are more tremely. 
I know for $6000 you can get another pretty decent F style mandolin.  Imagine if Gibson took a '23 Loar and did the big D to it.

----------


## MandoNicity

"The "fee" Gibson charges for doing the D to your "?" is a mere $6000 or so I was told by someone who had it done to his MM."

That seems to me to be an extremly exorbitant cost for this process.  What could they possibly do that would require that kind of money?  Maybe it comes with some dancing girls?  :D

----------


## Bernie Daniel

I must say $6K does sound like a lot of money -- Maybe Gibson is still paying off all the R&D required to come up with the process  :Smile: 

But the whole thing is kind of astonishing really -- this forum has talked on and on about the secret to getting "the sound" out of a mandolin -- and long arguments have ensued about the importance of:
the wood, 
the graduations, 
the finish, 
the glue, 
the luthier....

Now it starts becoming evident that a huge improvements can be made by merely sticking the finished mandolin under a UV radiation source or whatever is done to "distress" it.  

It seems almost counterintuitive -- heck it IS counterintuitive -- isn't it?

Its just a whole new dimension to the "puzzle" for me.




> mandoNicity: Maybe it comes with some dancing girls? :D


Oh  I am tempted to comment on that one!

----------


## Big Joe

While Gibson does use UV in the varnish drying process, it is far more than just that.  For one thing, only certain UV spectrums are helpful in the process.  I should also say that using UV light waves can be very dangerous.  Gibson uses a sealed booth for the UV.  It is a portion of the formula, but only a portion.  The price could easily be close to 6K.  It was about 5 when I was there.  It is a fairly lengthy and labor intensive process.  That makes it expensive for them to do.  

We do some distressing in our shop also.  We do not have the overhead, so it is quite a bit less for us, but it is still labor intensive.  If all one did was put it in a UV booth it would be oh so easy.  Sorry to say, it is far more complicated.

----------


## JEStanek

Maybe it's the secret mold treatment, eh Joe?  :Grin: 

I think folks trying to sort out the secret to the DMM is alot like trying to sort out the 11 Herbs and Spices in the Colonel's Chicken (my second KFC reference in a few days!).  I doubt they'll crack the code.  I kinda hope nobody does.  The distressing effect is real enough for the line to be successful and folks are willing to pay the premium.  I've seen many different distressed models shown here.  While I rather doubt I'll ever buy one, the Gibsons sure look pretty darn authentic.  I'll take Joe at his word about the process.

Jamie

----------


## Gary Hedrick

It seems to me that the distressing is getting a little more realistic with the newer ones. Dave Harvey had a Ricky model that I had to really look at it to make sure it wasn't the 23 Loar that I used to own (which was at our picking session)....it was scary to me.....I really had to look at it and I owned that mandolin for over 20  years and put a few of the marks on it but from 15 feet I had to get closer to really tell.....and the sound wasn't a give away either.....hmmm maybe the boys at Gibson are on to something?

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> Big Joe: We do some distressing in our shop also. We do not have the overhead, so it is quite a bit less for us, but it is still labor intensive. If all one did was put it in a UV booth it would be oh so easy. Sorry to say, it is far more complicated


Interesting comments!  

Sorry, Joe I did not mean to imply that distressing is only UV irradiation --in fact I really have no idea what Gibson does  :Smile: 

But I do know that many industries (marine, aircraft, floor covering etc.) use UV light to cure varnish.  I am a chemist but my focus has been along the biological side over the past 30 years.  

But from the reading I have done I do know that many of the details on the chemistry of the UV-induced curing process are not all totally sorted out -- or at least it is not widely known as to exactly what is going on (or maybe better to say while some industrial coating scientists might know a lot about it they are not exactly talking).

Nevertheless, from my reading I know that the certain wavelengths of UV irradiation are very effective at inducing chemical cross linkages -- that is covalent bonds -- wherein molecular oxygen is incorporated into the link.  Thus it is really a catalysed oxidative process to form links between polymers of the varnish matrix.

Further it is a true a catalytic event so the same bonds occur without UV but they take much longer.  In fact I wonder if some of the luthiers on this Cafe can state with any certainty that heat is of any benefit whatsoever at curing varnish.  

Heat will speed the curing of lacquer as that is simply an evaporative process --- but curing varnish is chemistry -- maybe there is the usual thermodynamic Q10 effect (double reaction rate for each 10 degree raise in temperature)?  Don't know.

This leads me to speculate that indeed the a big part of mandolin "distressing" might be due to effects on the advance aging of the varnish finish?  Just thinking out loud Joe.  :Smile: 

This does leave me scratching my head as to how distressing would aid a lacquer finished mandolin -- so maybe some effects are on the wood as  well as the finish afterall!

Oh well let's see some more DMM's..............

----------


## f5loar

The difference in retail price of the MM and DMM is $7444.00.  So charging around $6000 (probablly more now) to D an MM model makes market sense.  Otherwise you would simply buy an MM and then send it back to have the D done to it thereby saving money over just buying a DMM.  It's way more then just UV lights doing the D. The DMM is a different feeling mandolin. 
I don't blame Big Joe in not saying here what all they do to make the DMM but I'll say it again, it's worth it whatever they do to it. I've played enough of these to know there is at least that much difference.  Just as there is a difference between say a brand new Red Diamond,Stiver,Rattlesnake,Duff and a Gilchrist,Dudenbostel,Nugget or Montelone.  Aren't they more than $6000 apart in price?  Why would you pay that much more if they were the same.  
So no need to say here that paying that extra $6000 makes no sense. 
It's what you want in your mandolin that makes sense.

----------


## goose 2

I owned a MM for 4 years and sold it and the Gilchrist when I got my DMM.  I agree with F5Loar that they feel different and definitely sound older than the standard MM.  I also think they are worth the money.  I will also say that the MM I owned for those 4 years was a GREAT sounding mandolin when I sold it--definitely getting stronger and stronger with age and playing, however, the DMM still had an extra gear that the MM did not.  

I have owned only those from the Derrington era and played a few DMMs from the Roberts era which were great.  Anyone out there compared any of those to the Harvey era DMMs?  I have heard good things but never played one.

----------


## Chris Biorkman

Maybe if someone gets Big Joe liquored up, he will spill his guts about the distressing process. I'm very curious and demand answers.  :Smile:

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> f5loar: So no need to say here that paying that extra $6000 makes no sense.  It's what you want in your mandolin that makes sense.


I agree with that -- if its worth $6K to someone its worth $6K so spend it if you got it.  

Is any other company or luthier into distressing like Gibson?  

I mean more than just creating a distressed appearance but a distressed mandolin?

I'm also curious as to whether Gibson does this process to their guitars too if you want it.  I'm kind of wondering what would happen to a re-issued Advanced Jumbo would sound like if it went through this process?

----------


## carleshicks

> I owned a MM for 4 years and sold it and the Gilchrist when I got my DMM.  I agree with F5Loar that they feel different and definitely sound older than the standard MM.  I also think they are worth the money.  I will also say that the MM I owned for those 4 years was a GREAT sounding mandolin when I sold it--definitely getting stronger and stronger with age and playing, however, the DMM still had an extra gear that the MM did not.  
> 
> I have owned only those from the Derrington era and played a few DMMs from the Roberts era which were great.  Anyone out there compared any of those to the Harvey era DMMs?  I have heard good things but never played one.



i own the above stated MM and have to say that it looks lightly distressed from goose2's 4 years of playing. It is 6 years old and has opened up in a way that you would only think an 80 year old mando could. I have yet to play a mando that I would trade it in on, well there was a Loar but that is diffent. So instead of paying $6000 send your MM to Goose2 for 4 years and them to me for 2 and you can have the same effect for only the cost of shipping. HA Ha.

----------


## Hans

Bernie, I have been known to build a distressed F5C or two...
I believe you are very close to the crux of the "secret". I have done several instruments with the UV treatment and I think that it actually inhibits the varnish from shrinking down to a very thin finish. Your comments about curing are accurate in my experience as the finish gets much harder immediately. Much of the "secret" to the distressing process is the fact that the finish can be a lot thinner as it doesn't have to be all smooth and shiny. After a year or two that thin finish gets even thinner, and that "old sound" starts to come in. I think that UV curing stops the shrinking to an extent. That is why I stopped using it. 
Even a smooth and shiny instrument will start to sound old in a few years, and if you compared the varnish to a new one you would find it has shrunk down quite a bit. IMHO that is a large contributing factor to the "old sound". Some day I will stick one in an oven for a couple of hours when I can muster up the courage. 
I also believe that a brand new instrument pounded on from day one will sound better than an instrument that has sat around for a while before being bought. The finish that is "shaken and stirred" while curing seems to make a better instrument.
Nothing can compete with an instrument that is played for 5 years. Distressing (thin finish) just gives you a jump start on that 5 years.

----------


## Big Joe

All Gibson MM's were finished in varnish and the UV process is part of the process.  It does allow a much faster drying time depending upon temperature and mostly humidity.  Humidity seems to affect the drying process more than anything else.  Again, the UV process is used on all varnish mandolins so that is not the only key to the DMM.  The entire process affects more than just the finish and each mandolin has its own changes from pre distressing to post distressing.  The process has evolved over the years.  Goose has one of the prototype DMM's and was one of the first 3 to be distressed.  It went from a good MM to an incredible DMM that has been mistaken for a Loar on many occasions.  The first bunch were more realistic in my opinion to the real loars, but that had to do with the presence of Charlie and his demanding eye involved.  After Charlie was gone the tone continued, but as the staff was changed over time, some of the details were not as exact in my opinion.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> carleshicks: So instead of paying $6000 send your MM to Goose2 for 4 years and them to me for 2 and you can have the same effect for only the cost of shipping. HA Ha.


"...........I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse."




> Hans: I have been known to build a distressed F5C or two...


That model 23V on your home page looks pretty "authentic" to me.

One thing this entire conversation has done is made it clear to me that I will have to get my own distressed mandolin -- before this string started I had been free of any syndromes.  :Crying:

----------


## mando1man

> Maybe if someone gets Big Joe liquored up, he will spill his guts about the distressing process. I'm very curious and demand answers.


Hey Joe you wanna get lunch today? I know the perfect place.......... :Smile:

----------


## Big Joe

Sure...I can eat my four bites then  :Smile:

----------


## Hans

Thanks Bernie, but the 23V is a ways away from a Loar copy. Here are some pix of a disctressed F5C...

----------


## JEStanek

Hans's work is exquisite also.  Another "distressed" instrument that looks the part is Gary Vessels' copy of WSMs Loar with broken headstock and gouged out name plate.  I think it's fair to say there is a good bit of extra work that goes into the look of distressing an instrument to have it look authentically aged right off the bench.  That work comes in varying degrees and if you want it be ready to pay more for it.

Jamie

----------


## goose 2

Here is my 2003 DMM that was one of the first prototypes under Charlie.  It is pictured next to a 2003 Fern.  I have seen several DMMs but this is the only one from Charlie's era that I have played/seen.  To me this one looks completely legit for being a well played Loar.  It even fooled a well known dealer when I had it with me in his shop.  The sound is all there as well.  There is a difference in the distressing appearance on the later DMMs that to me do not look as authentic.  However, and as Big Joe has said, the later ones sure nailed the sound.

----------


## carleshicks

> Thanks Bernie, but the 23V is a ways away from a Loar copy. Here are some pix of a disctressed F5C...


Han your work is beautiful

----------


## Mark Seale

> All Gibson MM's were finished in varnish and the UV process is part of the process.  It does allow a much faster drying time depending upon temperature and mostly humidity.  Humidity seems to affect the drying process more than anything else.  Again, the UV process is used on all varnish mandolins so that is not the only key to the DMM.  The entire process affects more than just the finish and each mandolin has its own changes from pre distressing to post distressing.  The process has evolved over the years.  Goose has one of the prototype DMM's and was one of the first 3 to be distressed.  It went from a good MM to an incredible DMM that has been mistaken for a Loar on many occasions.  The first bunch were more realistic in my opinion to the real loars, but that had to do with the presence of Charlie and his demanding eye involved.  After Charlie was gone the tone continued, but as the staff was changed over time, some of the details were not as exact in my opinion.


Understanding that the UV is only a part of the process, could you (they, whomever) create the tonal changes without making the instrument LOOK distressed?  Or is the "wearing in" responsible for part of the tonal change?

----------


## f5loar

I recall a few years ago Gibson made a special DMM that was "lightly" distressed for John Reiseman.  When I saw it that first day it looked very lightly distressed.  So I guess your answer would be yes.

----------


## evanreilly

"And good morning Mr. Monroe. How would you like your mandolin today?"
"Why, I think I'll have it over easy, with just a touch of distress."
Okay, enough distress is enough!
Get the smell right!

----------


## Mike Bromley

Eau de Mandoline scratch'n'sniff brochures might be next, Evan...

...no denying it, there are some great mandolins in this collection....

----------


## Fretbear

Bill Monroe's first meeting with breakfast bagels:

"Stay away from those doughnuts, they're as hard as anything and they ain't a bit sweet...."

----------


## f5loar

The last time I saw CD at Gibson he said he had prefected the smell and it would be included in the new DMM models.  The only thing I can see they can't duplicate exactly is the Loar signed label.  Mr. Loar ain't signing them no more.

----------


## evanreilly

Bill Monroe encountered the infamous rock-hard donuts at the Pines Hotel festival in maybe 1990. He was really unhappy that he couldn't get some ham for breakfast also.
Now, forget what Bill had for breakfast; he had Diana Christian along for that trip!  Talk about stressed models!

----------


## wantaloar

Nice DMM Goose.  Can you take some more detailed shots of yours.  I noticed you have a real looking Loar MM tailpiece.  They put a genuine 1920's F4 style on mine.  Does yours say PROTOTYPE on the label.  I recall Elderly had one for sale and the label said prototype, just before I got mine in Aug 2004.

----------


## goose 2

Mine does not say prototype.  I will work on some better pictures.

----------


## wantaloar

You must have the one that was built earlier but not released until later.

----------


## grassrootphilosopher

Evan, you crack me up.

I think the whole concept of distressing at the Gibson shop is the late night tuesday jam in the back office where a bunch of bluegrass nuts drink a lot of white lightning, eat greasy food and try to play Rawhide and such the way Mr. Bill did. I guess they might even tollerate the average Martin employe working on the distressing of the new Martin D-28 Authentic distressed model. Where can i sign up for that jam?

----------


## goose 2

That sounds like my kinda jam.  I do own a D-18 Authentic and while we are talking about superb recreations of the old masterpieces, the D-18 Authentic completely nails it as well.  Compares VERY well to the 1939, 1940, and 1942 D-18s that I often play.  I like the necks on the Authentic (more like a '36) better.  Back to mandolins. . .Yes my DMM was either the first or second one done (Big Joe ?).

----------


## Big Joe

It was the second completed.  It was an incredibly fun project.  You kind of had to be there on the early ones to get a picture of the whole process.  We worked very hard on every item to ensure it was as close to the real thing as we could.  Needless to say, once the project got going and changes were made at OAI some things went by the wayside and it was just a project...not as much a project of love and personal interest.  Once Charlie, Danny and I were gone, it was not the same for the project.  The mandolins continued to be good, but it was just different.  Even the mandolins look a bit different if you compare Goose2's mandolin to any of those built after 04.  The farther from the time Charlie left OAI the less they were alike in appearance.  Much of that was because we were not personally involved in the project any more.  Much of the distressing work was done by or under the supervision of Charlie and his team.  Once Charlie was gone, his supervision was gone as was his team.

There were some that were lightly distressed.  The more the distressing the more the mandolin sounded old.  Goose has one of the most distressed we did and it is an incredible mandolin to say the least!  Not only does it look old, it sounds old.

One last thought....at least for now  :Smile:  , Charlie did have a special scent made for the DMM project.  It was put in the mandolins during his era.  I don't know if that continued after that or not.  The scent was VERY expensive to have made and it was certainly similar to the old mandolin smell.  It was applied inside the F holes onto the wood of the interior.  I know it lasted over a year on my first DMM.  I don't know if it is still there or not.  Goose2 will have to answer that question.  

I do know when I showed the mandolin to a Loar expert and he looked it over carefully, played on it, and then smelled it before giving his recognition of authenticity.  When he realized it was not a real Loar he was a bit miffed.  Oh well, just shows how good the job of distressing was at least on that one.

----------


## mando1man

I bought the first prototype DMM, Oct 12, 2003, from Charlie in 2004. It was his personal mandolin, although he did have a lot of personal mandolins over the years. I remember that we were playing a gig together and I said to him (half joking) "If you wanna sell me that mandolin, you better not scratch it up!" He laughed with that Charlie cackle, He said "It doens't matter if I do."

----------


## Michael Cameron

Many thanks to all the contributors to this thread.
It's great to see pics of these magnificent mandolins. I've studied them over and over.

Even more pics(same mandos/different angles/lighting,MP3s,stories...whatever. I can't get enough. I bet others would like more of any kind of comment,info.,conjecture,etc. on DMMs,past,present,and future.

I do feel lucky to have a MM signed by Charlie. It's not a distressed model;but,I have 4+ years of playing on it. Hoping to have many more.

----------


## John Malayter

OK, so if the UV light treatment works on thinning the finish and curing varnished instruments faster, what would it do to an older varnished instrument that has been cured for several years?

Just a thought.............. :Popcorn:

----------


## goose 2

A few more pictures of my axe.  

I am so proud of myself.  After 10 years of being on the cafe I can now upload photos!!!!  I guess I kinda have always been a fast learner.

----------


## carleshicks

wow, that is beautiful goose2, I thought my mm was the prettiest mando around but yours just made my heart throb. Give me a call sometime, I just got to do a side by side comparison with your old MM and a 1924 Loar. it was a good day.

----------


## goose 2

That sounds like a good day.  I'll be calling

----------


## carleshicks

does anyone have any pics of John riechmans DMM or Mike Marshal's DMM?

----------


## Michael Cameron

Hate to see a good thread vanish. I don't have a DMM;but,I have played my August,18,2004,Derrington MM for about 5 years. It's sorta "stressed" maybe not dis-stressed? It came with fat,radiused, frets.

Yup,my photos sucketh.

----------


## carleshicks

very nice. is that side bound

----------


## f5loar

Looks like ole Charlie got the dip right on that stain for this one.  Very '24 like finish.  Looks great all over

----------


## Michael Cameron

> very nice. is that side bound


Yup,side-bound. It's more "stressed"/nicked scuffed, than those pics show. 
Sometime I'll try outdoor pics for more detail. 

Just put some fresh strings on.

Time to pick one.
 :Mandosmiley:

----------


## Michael Cameron

Different light/fresh strings.

----------


## Michael Cameron

Light!

----------


## gibson mandoman

Michael, your Gibson DMM is absolutely beautiful.  You are one lucky guy!

----------


## Michael Cameron

This is not a Gibson DMM that was "distressed" by the makers. It is a Master Model that is signed by Charlie Derrington(Aug.18,2004). 

I've just played it and rubbed on it some.

I do feel very fortunate to be it's Master(custodian) for a time.

----------


## carleshicks

here is my 02 mm. Same thing it looks just liked a distressed but it comes from playing. i wouldn't have it any other way. If it was all clean and shinny i doubt i would love this much.

----------


## Skip Kelley

There are some great looking mandolins on this thread! I did a fret dressing/set-up on one of the Cafe members Gibson MM and the mandolin was aging like the ones on here. It looked very nice and the owner was pleased with how the "aging" was occuring without having to buy a distressed model.

----------


## Gary S

Cam,
Beautiful mandolin. I hope to give it a try someday. Did you put your armrest in that location to prevent your forearm from rubbing on the corner of the tailpiece cover?

Gary

----------


## Michael Cameron

Thanks,Gary. 

You're welcome to play it anytime!

Had to raise the armrest(more cork) and thin the underside that goes over the tp. It's just where my R forearm makes contact. I found I like the armrest a tad higher anyway.

----------


## carleshicks

Cam I love the Color of you MM. with the side binding that defenitly has the Loar look about it.

----------


## diptanshu

hey guys 6k for distressing! :Disbelief:  can anyone send me a gibson MM i will play it hard for 5 years and send it back to you. free of charge no cost at all! 
thanks...
that will be like a dream come true!
 :Mandosmiley:

----------


## pjlama

It's nice to see this thread back up. I gotta say of all the mandolins I've owned the only ones I regret selling were the two MM's I owned. I'll own another, it'll just take time.

----------


## Demetrius

Here is mine.....

----------


## grassrootphilosopher

Let me just say: 112 posts and five pages of a thread and still no soundclips.  :Disbelief: 

You ought to be ashamed of yourselves.  :Wink: 

Is your picking as good as your instruments... I dare you... :Smile:

----------


## Demetrius

This is an audio of the DMM aka (Mandy)  at it's pre-scooped fretboard state.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

Pretty awesome!  The playing and the mandolin!!!  Very high tone quality all across the range IMO.

----------


## grassrootphilosopher

> This is an audio of the DMM aka (Mandy)  at it's pre-scooped fretboard state.


Nice! Is that all you and your instrument (in overdub) or are there others participating in the mix. And what´s the recording setup by the way (an mp3-recorder of some kind I suppose?)

----------


## Demetrius

Hey there thanks, It was not an over dub, it was a spur of the moment jam with a friend while traveling in a van. It was recorded with my band mates I-Phone. The strings on the lead mandolin were D'Addario Fat Tops.

----------


## Jason Kindall

> This is an audio of the DMM aka (Mandy)  at it's pre-scooped fretboard state.


Man that's some nice jammin' there!   :Mandosmiley: 

Do you have a band website or the like?  I'd love to hear more.   :Cool:

----------

