# Instruments and Equipment > Builders and Repair >  Alternative Designs

## Jim Hilburn

I've reached a milestone where I can do about whatever I choose (no more list).
I've had some idea's for non-traditional mandolin designs and have thought about going back to the days when I did this as a hobby and would do any crazy thing that came to mind, although I never got too crazy.
But I still need to sell what I make. I'm wondering what others think about the market for something less than traditional. Obviously smaller but does it exist?

----------


## thistle3585

If Bill Bussman can sell an instrument shaped like a wedge of cheese or a slice of watermelon then I guess just about anything is possible.

Seriously though, I've found that there is always a buyer for something unique but it may take some time for the buyer to come along and find it. Brian Dean and James Condino seem to have gained fair recognition for building outside the norm.  Go for it.

----------


## sunburst

Good question!
I still have a list, but I have something "crazy" on the drawing board. I figure I'll eventually try to build it and just not necessarily expect to sell it.
Bill, Brian, James and those folks have developed somewhat of a reputation for "thinking outside the box" type designs, but I haven't, so I basically look at the project as a creative outlet and perhaps a rather poor business decision.
Perhaps you can let the rest of us know what the market for "crazy" stuff is like by wading in ahead of some of us! :Wink:

----------


## JEStanek

Hans Brentrupp was outside the box too and sold his Eclipse mandolins.  I'm always very excitied to see new ideas (as are most all of us) however, I'm not in the market (as are many of us).  The trick I think is to find that match of buyer and builder.  If you can sqeeze in the new build, it might find a buyer as you go.  Then you can see where that takes you.  I'm sure it will be beautiful and compelling based on your other work showcased here.

Jamie

----------


## j. condino

> ...a creative outlet and perhaps a rather poor business decision....


!!!!

The biggest headaches of my career have always been as a result of someone who went out of their way to track me down as a modern builder and then spent the entire rest of the process trying to dictate how I should build the instrument every step of the way. 

The most blissful and satisfying moments were when even I didn't try to interfere and I stepped back and let the internal forces that drive me create what they already knew was there...

Build it!

j.
www.condino.com

----------


## Skip Kelley

Jim, I think it is an excellent idea! Build what is on your mind and enjoy the journey. We would love to see your creativity at work and on display. Someone will more than likely love what you build and buy it.

----------


## Jim Garber

Obviously, builders like Monteleone, Brentrup and Giacomel and others have stretched the parameters of modern mandolin design. Personally I do enjoy the photos of the ultimate Loar copies but I am equally intrigued by some of the off shoots of that design as well as completely new designs as well. I say go for it.

The other offshoot to me that it interesting is those who have taken the lesser designs of the past such as Kaykraft, Knutsen and Regal reverse scrolls and modernized them to make some high quality instruments. I know a few luthiers who copy the lowend guitars of the past but make high end copies.

----------


## man dough nollij

I haven't built my first instrument yet, but I sure admire the work of Brian Dean. From faithful representations of Lyon & Healys, to one-off original designs, he has made some very cool stuff. I like a lot of the outside-the-box stuff that James Condino, Lawrence Smart, and Dr. Cohen have done, too. How about a ten-string fan-fretted bowlback?
 :Confused:

----------


## billhay4

There are two different aspects of this quest to get outside of the box. The first is design, which has been commented on here. The second, however, is technical. Many design changes are due to aesthetic preferences, but others are due to a desire to push the technical bounds of the instrument. Dave Cohen, Brian Dean, Lawrence Smart, James Condino, and some other are just as concerned with technical innovation and "experimentation" as with aesthetics.
I encourage you to go beyond your current work, and to do so in both of these areas.
Bill

----------


## fred d

So do a lot of others  National with their resonator someone here with a bedpan mandolin 4string 5,6,10 ect with pickup with out How about one with strings on both sides different tuning two songs at once????

----------


## Charlieshafer

I love the "avant-guarde" designs out there, and think the desire to pursue them is fantastic. There's no law that says all the great innovations in instruments have been already accomplished. I think the only cautionary note is that the principles of whatever it is you come up with have to be based on sound acoustic principles, and of course playability. There was a great article in the recent Fretboard Journal on Alan Beardsell's work and designs, and all his concepts are firmly rooted in a desire to make great instruments even better. I especially like his concept of a really stiff rim, in order to let the soundboard ring more, with less energy soaked up by the rims themselves. I've often toyed with the idea of making a rim out of machined aluminum, aside from the obvious attachment issues.

From a marketing standpoint, keep in mind that all the greats previously listed came up with their designs, perfected them, and stuck with them, so they've become iconic in their own way. You can't keep trying different things and expect anyone to jump in with a check in hand. It's got to be a signature design, it's got to be really good, then I don't think there will be a marketing issue.

----------


## Graham McDonald

Jim,

Why not do both. Build what you can be pretty certain of selling, and build some prototypes of the different ones. I have been slowly refining an F5ish design for a few years, but I have a day job at the moment, so I am not dependant of instrument building to pay the bills and can afford to experiment and do some R&D. You certainly sound as if heading off in another direction is want you want to do...

cheers

graham

----------


## Jim Rowland

I think you have a good chance of finding the right person today,mainly due to the Cafe. Years ago,I ventured a tiny step away with a two point "A" style copied from a picture of Jethro's Gibson. It was built with good materials and looked good. It sounded and played well,but didn't have a real Bluegrass sound. I put it on eBay at a ridiculouly low price just to cover my investment and got NO action of any kind..no inquirys,no bids,no nuthin'. I think the fact that I am a no-name luthier and mentioned in the copy that I didn't consider it a good iinstrument for Bluegrass killed any chances from the get go,but I also think that today it would draw some interest.
Jim

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

The builders of arch-top Jazz Guitars have never been afraid to 'think outside the box' when it comes to building. I'm thinking of the wonderful collection of_ Blue Guitars_ from the Chinery collection when i say this. Of primary importance of course,is the playability & the 'sound' of the instrument.The most wonderful designs will go nowhere if they sound & play poorly,but within limits,& provided that an instrument doesn't look too 'freakish', then if it sounds really good,i think that many folk would love to own a 'different' looking instrument,i most certainly would.
    There was a thread on here (i think ?) quite a while ago, that showed several instruments built by student luthiers,many of them with quite radical styling & well away from the 'norm'. I thought that they looked great,although one or two didn't appeal to me personally,
              Ivan

----------


## Rolfe

Since my "list" has been gone for a while, I've been concentrating on going "outside the box," but instead of radically changing the body design (which would need new molds, etc.), I have gone the Laskin route of trying to create "art" mandolins on my established design.  Primarily, this involves creative inlay work, as inspired by Grit Laskin.  Several examples are on my website.  I use the finger rest from Moose (one) as my signature logo.  Right now I am working on Moose Fore (involving mooses and a golfer) and Moose Fifth (can you imagine drunken mooses?).  A Phoenix version of an A-5 was another effort.  These go to dealers on consignment and sell slowly, but they do sell.

----------


## martinedwards

I've had far more satisfaction making things for myself (and maybe selling them later) rather than making commissions.

I've made and sold about 30 guitar shaped mandolins, and my one of my last builds was a Gibson Explorer shaped acoustic bouzouki.  I LOVED designing and making it, it got a real following on a couple of fora where I did a step by step as I built it, then I sold it with no difficulty at all.

I've also made double neck acoustic guitars which sold with no difficulties.

go for it, just expect to get less for them until you make a real name for yourself as an avante guard builder

----------


## sunburst

Jim, personally, I think you should proceed with whatever design you want to build, but I can't help noticing that there are lots of responses here saying things like: "if it's sounds and plays well, someone will buy it", and very few saying things like: "if it sounds and plays well _I'll_ buy it". 
To me, the most prominent mandolin builder to make "alternative" designs in recent memory was Rigel, and it was a long hard road to success followed by... well, we all know what Rigel's success was followed by. I think people as individuals like the idea of different and various designs, but I think that people as a collective (the market) are less able to pull the trigger on deciding to buy something unusual with their hard-earned dollars. There sure are a lot of guitar builders still making dreadnoughts, mostly rosewood and mahogany, because that's where the market is. One might think that electric guitar buyers would be more open to alternative designs, but the Parker Fly guitar had a similar trajectory to that of Rigel, buried by Les Paul and Stratocastor look-alikes.

So anyway, I really don't want to be discouraging, as I said, I'd really like to see you build something "unusual", but I think it is best to consider an alternative design to be a therapeutic exercise for the luthier, a creative outlet and show piece for creative thinking, a fun project, but not necessarily a way to make money. You might have it sold before it's even finished, but I just think it is healthier for the luthier to know that his/her alternative design must make it's own market rather than just fall into place within the existing market.

----------


## JeffD

I am particularly interested in the false back ideas, so that the sound doesn't get dampened when the back is pressed against me. Incorporating the tone guard concept in the permenant design of the instrument.

Another idea I have seen that could be expanded upon: side ports. A small sound hole on the side of the instrument, on the bass side. Let the sound out towards the player as well as towars the audience. 


I played an old harp mandolin several weeks ago. What a hoot. Got my MAS into gear.

So yea, there's lots of room for innovation.

----------


## first string

> Jim, personally, I think you should proceed with whatever design you want to build, but I can't help noticing that there are lots of responses here saying things like: "if it's sounds and plays well, someone will buy it", and very few saying things like: "if it sounds and plays well _I'll_ buy it". 
> To me, the most prominent mandolin builder to make "alternative" designs in recent memory was Rigel, and it was a long hard road to success followed by... well, we all know what Rigel's success was followed by. I think people as individuals like the idea of different and various designs, but I think that people as a collective (the market) are less able to pull the trigger on deciding to buy something unusual with their hard-earned dollars. There sure are a lot of guitar builders still making dreadnoughts, mostly rosewood and mahogany, because that's where the market is. One might think that electric guitar buyers would be more open to alternative designs, but the Parker Fly guitar had a similar trajectory to that of Rigel, buried by Les Paul and Stratocastor look-alikes.
> 
> So anyway, I really don't want to be discouraging, as I said, I'd really like to see you build something "unusual", but I think it is best to consider an alternative design to be a therapeutic exercise for the luthier, a creative outlet and show piece for creative thinking, a fun project, but not necessarily a way to make money. You might have it sold before it's even finished, but I just think it is healthier for the luthier to know that his/her alternative design must make it's own market rather than just fall into place within the existing market.


Those are all fair points to be sure, but I do think it is important to point out that Rigel and Parker were both production shops. When it comes to the former, I would say that it is probably pretty difficult to keep a production shop going selling nothing but mandolins. Weber is the closest thing I can think of, and even they have branched off into other instruments. Gibson definitely makes a lot more money selling guitars, and I'm betting Collings and Breedlove do too. I think the mandolin market was probably just too small for Rigel. And as to Parker...it might never have exactly taken off, but the fly is still in production. And Ken Parker seems to be doing alright for himself as a one-off archtop maker, given the prices his guitars go for. 

Of course, my assessment may be colored somewhat by the fact that I am someone who would like to see more innovation in luthiery. The Stradivarius may be the pinnacle of violin design, but I am willing to bet that the D45 is not the peak of guitar design, and that the F5 similarly leaves room for improvement. Given the limitations inherent to plectrum instruments, I think they stand to benefit more from the efficiencies that are theoretically possible with modern materials and construction techniques, than their bowed counterparts. 

Which is not to say that a new design will necessarily be embraced. Bluegrass musicians, who I would venture to guess make up most of the mandolin market, do tend to be fairly conservative when it comes to instrument selection. But I definitely think there is room for other designs, especially if they are focused on achieving a different sound, rather than just a different aesthetic. I think Ken Parker and Greg Smallman are on the right track, and I expect to see more instruments along those lines as time goes by.

----------


## Rush Burkhardt

Hey, Jim!
I agree with the tone of John Hamlett's response. I am a mandolin player and vintage musical instrument acquisition victim of about 50 years. My livelihood, however, comes from business consulting. Here would be my opinion, based on what I heard you say...forgive me if this is not an encouraging message. It's all about money! If you depend on selling your creations to eat, build what people will buy first! One of the downsides facing almost all artistic-type, entrepreneurs is their desire to be creative. That's a downside because an artist's off-spring's beauty has to be based on the eye of the beholder! The beholder has your money in his pocket! A wise man once told me to protect my personal production, in all things related to generating revenue! I would say to you, if you depend on selling your creations for you and your family to eat, build what they (the beholder) will buy! After you've got a monetary cushion, then you can exercise your creative juices! Too late to make a long story short, one of the best mandolins I own is a custom-made Rigel G-5. Pete Langdell builds a wonderful, very creative mandolin...and I never saw one that didn't sound and play great, right off the workbench! Although I'm sure he sells everyone he builds, I'll bet he has orders and deposits, first! That's free advice, and it may be worth exactly what you've paid for it! All my best! Rush

----------


## Dave Cohen

John, I beg to differ re the Parker Fly.  Anyone who has ever met and spent any time w/ Ken Parker knows that he is a genius - a wacky genius, but a genius nevetheless.  The Fly is highly regarded by a number of jazz guitarists of my aquaintance.  Ken (like Charles Fox before him) made the mistake of partnering w/ an offshore company, and that company eventually stole Ken's interest in the operation.  What killed the Fly commercially was that Ken Parker is Ken Parker, but that offshore company was _not_ Ken Parker.

http://www.Cohenmando.com

----------


## Rick Turner

A few observations...

Bluegrass...love it, but the genre has some of the most conservative, up-tight, and locked-down musicians on the planet, and they want F-5s, Mastertones, and D-28s.  And they're willing to pay for what they want.

That D'Angelico "Shark Fin Guitar" is one of the ugliest archtops I've ever seen.  There is simply no balance in the design.  It's hideous.

Thank you, David Grisman, for using Giacomel's mandos on stage.  That's what it takes for a builder of original instruments to be noticed and accepted.  

Ken Parker's major mistake was in doing the Fly as a guitar.  He'd have found much more acceptance in the electric bass market.  I do agree with Dave re. Ken's genius; I used to have a regular pre-NAMM single malt at the Marriott bar in Anaheim with Ken every year.  He's up there with Ned Steinberger.

I've been making "original design" instruments for 40 years now, and it's really hard to get a new design off the ground.  Then it's equally hard to go off and do something entirely different from what you have become known for.  People want so much to lock you into a box once you've defined it.  Try thinking outside of your own original box; that's really fun, and that's what I'm up to these days.  Some of it involves collaboration with old designers (who are dead!)...my Buddy Holly guitar project; and some of it is taking what I've learned about production and helping a very original electric guitar designer, Graham Henman, achieve his vision while injecting little tweaks of my own into it.  All this while keeping my own stuff going and thinking about new designs.

www.buddyhollyguitarfoundation.org

www.henmanguitars.com

----------


## Willie Poole

A different shape mandolin might not sell to bluegrassers but what about jazz or other forms of music?  I once bought a mandolin that didn`t look anything like a mandolin and my bluegrass friends laughed at the thing but I took it to work one day and a jazz player begged me to sell it to him...SO, I say go for it and test the market, if it is really off the wall some "kook" will buy it just to be different, I see a lot of things now days that people buy just to be different.....Good luck with the project.....Willie

----------


## RJinRI

> So yea, there's lots of room for innovation.


I'm a hobbyist builder and my last "planned" F style ended up as an A-1pointer, due to fact I kept breaking the side maple wood & was running out of it. Ended up with a nice sounding & easy playable insrument. The local jam reviews have been encouraging, to boot.

----------


## Andy Miller

Yes, the market exists, and is even smaller than the market for A's and F's (and maybe even GBOMs!).  But I think you've got a pretty good rep and a pretty good forum for advertising your work right here on the Cafe.  I bet you'd have to get pretty far out there before you ended up with an instrument sitting around with no interest.  Besides, we know you don't build them in big batches anyway, so you're not risking the family farm by trying it.  Go for it!

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

Rick - The D'Angelico Guitar is refered to as the 'Teardrop' Guitar & was custom built for Jazz Guitarist Peter Girardi. I don't care for it's looks myself,but PG did & that's all that matters - he bought it !. It's so awful that it inspired John Monteleone to build one of his own design,which to my eyes,is far nicer than the original.
  To address John Hamlett's remark  -_ "if it sounds and plays well I'll buy it"._ . I'm sure you know John that if we ALL had the cash we'd like, we'd ALL buy it,but i do understand the spirit of your comment. If for one would be beating a path to your own workshop to buy one (or both !) of your_ 'firewood'_ Mandolins if i had the cash. There are also many other makers who'd be on my list,but unfortunately,most of us have big dreams & small bank balances, :Frown: 
                                                                                                     Ivan

----------


## foldedpath

I just wanted to reinforce what billhay4 said earlier in the thread, that "alternative" can be a technical solution, and not just a different visual aesthetic. Ideally, this would be a technical solution to a problem that an actual paying customer already has, and that you as a builder can satisfy.

One of my three mandolin-family instruments is an alternative design: a Breedlove 4-string Radim Zenkl signature model mandola. It has the unusual Breedlove body shape but that's beside the point. The main difference is a change to 4 single course strings, slightly wider spacing, and an integrated humbucker. It's a technical solution to the niche problem of how to play fingerstyle on this type of instrument. Not many people will buy an instrument like this, but _some_ people might. 

In fact there are several builders making "jazz" mandolins and mandolas that are circling around ideas like this, and breaking away from the Bluegrass mold. Check out all the alternative designs on Ted's jazzmando.com site. They look great (most of them), but they're also trying to solve the technical requirements for sound quality and playability that a jazz or blues player might want in a mandolin.

If I ever commission another custom order (which isn't likely in the near future, but 'ya never know)... it might just be a fan-fret 10 string mandola/mandolin hybrid. That's another case of solving a technical problem: how to reconcile the low C of a mandola with the high E of a mandolin on the same instrument. 

With the overall mandolin market as conservative as it is, there may be more room for technical innovations like this, than designs that simply wrap the usual mandolin concept in an exotic body shape.

----------


## j. condino

One thing that I'd offer up that nobody has mentioned is that, for some builders, what you see as their "work" is simply an outward manifestation of all the things that make up their personality. No matter how hard they try to fit into someone else's box of what the world should look like and sound like, their experiences have shaped and molded them and they've developed the skills to express that in the form that you know as a mandolin; often one that doesn't look or sound like your grandfather's mandolin.

I've started out probably 100 times to build a nice traditional July 9 F5 just for myself to have around the shop. Over the course of the 200+ hours I'll spend building that mandolin, my mind wanders around to the curve of the hip of a beautiful woman I knew when I lived in Japan for several years and it comes out in the shape of the arch I'm carving, and the next day I'll be working on the design of the neck and I'll be thinking of taking a nap on a summer day under a gigantic old growth redwood tree and the headstock will take on a subtle cant, and then later when I'm finishing  the color of the wood and the combination of dyes will get me lost in the deep colors down inside a glacier when I was working as a mountaineering guide, and a thousand other uniquely individual things will combine such that my instrument morphed into it's own with greens and soundholes coming from all over the place and the counterpoint of heart and sapwood mixed with the contrasts of Bill Monroe and John Coletrane  and always Django flowing in the shop during the whole process. Alas, where did my F5 go? It went to place that values and respects that model and has room for something else.

For all the time I've spent around mandolin folk, I'll never be able to figure out why some of the most conservative players I've ever met are so enamored by an instrument made famous by the raging party guy at the old Kalamazoo factory who by a lot of accounts got canned for overdoing it at the office holiday party- not exactly a role model for tradition, and quite outspoken as a designer....If Lloyd was around today, I'd wager that he'd be laughing at all of us and building exactly what he wanted to....

j.
www.condino.com

----------


## LateBloomer

A couple of years ago there was a long thread about college students who were going to build, then did build mandolins that were not traditionally shaped.... I'm sure someone can find the thread.  I'd love to hear from the Prof. or students to see if they sold their mandolins, or kept them.  It might give us an idea if creative mandolins would sell.

----------


## Dale Ludewig

James, I think you're onto something there.  As my father-in-law used to say, "I just can't hep it".

----------


## Don Grieser

James, that was a great post. Lloyd's instruments after he left Gibson weren't exactly traditional looking.

----------


## JonZ

There is no way of telling how much the general public will want to pay for your personal vision of what a mandolin should be. Pushing boundries is generally a risky business model. A lot of new concepts just don't pan out.

However, as Edison said: "If I find 10,000 ways something won't work, I haven't failed. I am not discouraged, because every wrong attempt discarded is another step forward".

----------


## jdchapman

I'd like to see that college student thread as well, if anyone knows where it is.

 I'd buy a weird mando in a minute.  I'm bored tonally and visually with Gibsons and Gibson clones.  BUT, I have little extra money, and I'm not a very talented player, so it's hard to justify spending too much.  I wonder if that isn't a common problem.  The guy who likes freaky Teisco guitars, etc. can afford to buy them off ebay every couple of months, even if he makes his living as an adjunct art professor or landscaper or whatever.  But the guys who can afford high end luthier stuff tend to be in fairly conservative professions, and have tastes to match.  

I don't mean to overstate this, or stereotype people unduly, but you guys know what I mean.  Lawyers on their lunchbreaks checking out the expensive Taylor guitars.  That guy wants what he thinks he's supposed to have.  Even on this board, you see a lot of derision aimed at anything that looks raw or bold.  

So maybe the answer is to try and build interesting, brave stuff in a way that the keeps the price point low.  Or find the guys locally that are into this idea, and work with them to make their own instruments.  I'd pay and put in sweat equity if I could find someone who was interested in helping me make something really cool.

----------


## Tavy

Loyd Loar's designs were quite tame compared to what Orville came up with:



While we're at here is the thread with the student built mandolins.

----------


## j. condino

I believe the student designs that folks are talking about came from the University of Texas at Austin Architecture program. They had a very bold professor who had all the students build a unique mandolin for one semester. ( the "progressive" architecture department thought it was an awful idea and a waste of time; he's no longer employed by them....)

There was a nice long thread here on the subject and I also profiled them and their instructor, as well as luthier Steve Marchione who mentored them all in an article for Mandolin Magazine- their first full color article with a lot if imagery. I've had a lot of conversations with all them and the staff about the process and their instruments. They were never intended to be sold.

j.

----------


## Charles E.

There is very little new under the Sun, the bell shaped mandolin that I am currently building was taken directly from a Lyon and Healy tiple. The same shape can be found in citterens dating to the 16th century. Just take a look at the shapes of instruments from the Baroque era, some pretty wild stuff.
As far as Jim's question, I think there is a market for original instruments. One of the best looking variants of the F style, for my taste, is a mandolin by Steve Anderson. It's beautiful.

----------


## Rick Turner

James, if you want weird Loar, all you have to do is hang out with my ViviTone Spanish/Hawiaan/Acoustic/Electric guitar for a while.  It's a 1933, maybe the third (the pickup assembly has a hand written in pencil "3" on it) of the ViviTone guitars.  I got it from a Carl Christiansen to whom it was given by the estimable Mr. Loar in 1933.  Carl put an RCA jack in it, and Seth Lover, inventor of the Gibson humbucking pickup, gave me a couple of early 1930s 1/4" jacks as probably appropriate restoration bits and pieces.  

It is one weird guitar.  And arguably one of the earlier attempts an an electric, but five years too late to be the first which was evidently a Stromberg-Voisinet in 1928!   http://www.vintageguitar.com/feature...s.asp?AID=3337 

But Lloyd came out in '33 with electric (plus a solid body!) guitar, bass, mandolin, viola, and keyboard.  No moss growing in that rolling stone...  Roger Siminoff has most of the story on his website.  Amazing...  But Leon Termen designed the Theremin in 1919!

And forget about Les Paul...he was Johnny-Come-Lately...

----------


## Mark Seale

> I believe the student designs that folks are talking about came from the University of Texas at Austin Architecture program. They had a very bold professor who had all the students build a unique mandolin for one semester. ( the "progressive" architecture department thought it was an awful idea and a waste of time; he's no longer employed by them....)
> 
> There was a nice long thread here on the subject and I also profiled them and their instructor, as well as luthier Steve Marchione who mentored them all in an article for Mandolin Magazine- their first full color article with a lot if imagery. I've had a lot of conversations with all them and the staff about the process and their instruments. They were never intended to be sold.
> 
> j.


It was Rice University here in Houston.  The original thread can be found here

----------


## Onesound

IMO, one of the most visually pleasing non-traditional designs was the rounded two point A style that Stelling came out with in the '80s.  Never heard why, but I understand they had top stability problems and a number of them cracked.  I'm sure a skilled builder could overcome that design flaw with proper bracings or other top reinforcement.

----------


## Larry Simonson

Jim, instead of looking to change the looks of the F5 why not see if you might make one that has a better sound.  Here's an idea that you could pursue.  I'd do it myself but have gotten into boat building lately.  

I'm not sure how the mandolin bridge's position evolved but it becomes fixed once the fingerboard is glued on.  That is, the fingerboard's location dictates the bridge location.   Can you imagine reversing this order?  Suppose you were to optimize the bridge position then attach the fingerboard where it needs to be.

----------


## Geoff B

> I'm not sure how the mandolin bridge's position evolved but it becomes fixed once the fingerboard is glued on.  That is, the fingerboard's location dictates the bridge location.   Can you imagine reversing this order?  Suppose you were to optimize the bridge position then attach the fingerboard where it needs to be.


I believe this was the reasoning behind the "long neck" F5, to move the scale toward the headstock, to bring the bridge right in the center of the soundboard and on top of the arch.  

And, for the first comment, Jim builds a hell of a mandolin already, I'm not sure how much better he could do with the current paradigm.  Go for it Jim!

----------


## Larry Simonson

Having played and heard played one of Jim's mandolins, I fully agree with Geoff that "Jim builds a hell of a mandolin".  I am very sorry that my comment above may have been interpreted to mean something else.

----------


## pops1

Before he quit building Doug Woodley built a couple of a models that have a unique sound hole (so the hand didn't block the sound) and parallel tone bars. Sound was designed to be somewhere between an A and an F model and it is. The e and a strings sound like an f and the g and d strings like an a, deep but not tubby at all. Very clean and balanced. It is a wonderful mandolin for all music except of course bluegrass. I nearly sold it in a financial crisis, but am glad i didn't. I say built it and they will come. (I stole that of course)

----------


## jdchapman

That is an interesting instrument right there.  I wonder how many are out in the world?

Why don't more folks play with the design of the instrument back?  Given the continuing enthusiasm for Vegas, isn't there something to be gained in experimenting in that direction?

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

*Mark* - That's the thread i was thinking about. There are several really different & very striking designs on there,most of which i wouldn't mind sharing my home with - thanks for digging it out,
                                                                                   Ivan

----------


## Bill Snyder

> ... Sound was designed to be somewhere between an A and an F model and it is...


Many (most?) builders say that there is NO sound difference between there A and F models.

----------


## Rick Turner

Bill, you're going to have to qualify that remark, I think...

Some (many?) builders might tell you that there's little difference in sound between an F-5 and an A-5.   

Calling it A's and F's throws too many variables into the mix.   F-5 vs. A-4, for instance...

----------


## Will Kimble

Hi Jim,

Sometimes it helps me to think about the music first, and let the music drive the instrument.  You will know what to do, just get out there and start building more of those fabulous mandolins!  

Best wishes,
Will Kimble
www.kimblemandolins.com

----------


## Jim Nollman

I was attracted to my own mandolin (BRW 3 point oval hole, seen here in my avatar) because both the odd shape and the bracing suggested great sound. It has proven to be correct. 

If I'd found one at the time, i probably would have bought a Beardsell which takes unique design a few steps further. Check out the sound holes along the rim. There are a few more sound holes cut into the side. The design borrows something essential from the old Kay two point design, but clearly takes that older design to new heights. Made in Toronto, Beardsell doesn't build many mandolins, and is mainly a guitar maker. His acoustic guitar design is emphatically radical, and has made quite a splash in the professional music world. Here's a Beardsell mandolin plus 1930's Kay I use as my beater:

----------


## trevor

I have long had a love of alternative designs. I took delivery of Al Beardsell's A6 today and am expecting an black-face Eclipse from Hans Brentrup tomorrow, I have a used Eclipse in stock. There are photos of Al's mandolin in the used section on my website (and a link on the Cafe home-page).

I have also had an A6 from James Condino (photos in my previously sold section). I still have a Rigel I-110 and a few more past and present.

----------


## Dale Ludewig

into the mix comes also the Mix.!

----------


## Jim Nollman

> just wanted to reinforce what billhay4 said earlier in the thread, that "alternative" can be a technical solution, and not just a different visual aesthetic. Ideally, this would be a technical solution to a problem that an actual paying customer already has, and that you as a builder can satisfy.


The most radical mandolin I've played lately is this one, the Godin A8. No sound holes, but it's hollow. The bridge is full of wires, but it is also adjustable. Some parts of the instrument are hardly perfect direct from the factory (the fret edges need dressing, the neck angle needs adjusting, and and EQ pots are noisy), but if you are willing to take it, new, to skillful electric luthier, you'll end up with one of the most original designs in modern mandolin construction. I just had the built in electronics worked on by a guy who really knows his stuff, and transformed what had been a blunt and crackly object into a very refined onboard EQ system. It cost $75 to do. Attach it to an acoustic amp with a built in mute, an effects loop, and a PA output, and you have something with great acoustic potential. Route the effects loop through a macbook loaded with software effects, and you have something no one could have dreamed of 20 years ago.

----------


## joebrent

> I am particularly interested in the false back ideas, so that the sound doesn't get dampened when the back is pressed against me. Incorporating the tone guard concept in the permenant design of the instrument.
> 
> Another idea I have seen that could be expanded upon: side ports. A small sound hole on the side of the instrument, on the bass side. Let the sound out towards the player as well as towars the audience.


Pähkinä has both a false back and side ports. And now that I've played her for a while, I'll never buy another mandolin that doesn't.

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

I love the Beardsell Mandolin,it's a stunner !. I've always liked the Breedlove range of acoustics as well,different but 'the same',at least they look like Mandolins. I've never been able to get my head around Guitar shaped 'octaves',they look just like a Guitar & i think i'm being cheated somehow,that just me though,
                                                            Ivan

----------


## Michael Lewis

Jim, I think you have what it takes to come up with good designs but whether they will sell well is yet to be known, so do it as an inspired project and see where it goes.   James Condino put it so well, to get out of the way of the design and let it happen.  That has worked for me several times.  Let us see where your imagination takes this.

----------


## french guy

I have a very short experience in mando-building , I'm hobbyist ans speak like an hobbyist .
The work of conception for your own design is great to do , however it's a sum of ideas already visited .
the last I made was lot of fun for me , I think people who tried the mando say virtually the same things .
Good sound , good projection , big sustain , good balance , nice design , easy to play ...........;
but unsaleable because too far from the standard design .

However acoustic mandolin world is more open than acoustic guitar world IMHO,
difficult to find a guitar player,  playing bluegrass on a funny guitar .
You are a serious guitar player only if you play on a dreadnough model , right ?
imagine a dreadnough with a big sound on  virtuoso hands , but the guitar is stained in .... blue , inconceivable .

Here is what gave me great satisfaction during the building process 
and give me great pleasure to play on , now .

----------


## pops1

> Many (most?) builders say that there is NO sound difference between there A and F models.


You are right Bill, what i should have said is it is between an oval and an f model.

JP   I believe there are only two that i know of in the world.

----------


## Rodney Riley

Love my Godin too Jim. Did reset the neck. Think I will need a refret soon so won't bother with the fret ends now. Thanks for the info on the electronics. Maybe have that looked into in the future. Even though it has a solid top it can be heard unplugged. 

By taking a solid piece of wood, cut out in the design that's in your head. Route the inside and put a flat or a carved top on it. Oval, round, f slots or any design sound ports could be added. Maybe a little easier than bending sides if the outline in you head is really radical. Oh the possibilties. :Smile:

----------


## JonZ

I have always thought that the F style mandolin is one of the most physically beautiful instruments of any type--just something about it. Right up there with the French horn.

Not much discussion here about few professionals using alternative designs. Is this due to audience expectations, corporate sponsors or their own conservatism?

----------


## JeffD

> Pähkinä has both a false back and side ports. And now that I've played her for a while, I'll never buy another mandolin that doesn't.


I was thinking of yours Joe. I remember the descriptions of the sound. WOo hoo.  These idea are really worth exploring.

----------


## JeffD

Though subtle by many standards, I love the innovative look of Webers Aspen and Bridger mandolins. An increment of evolution by comparison to some of the flights of fancy being contemplated, but evolution nonetheless, and they sell.

----------


## Geoff B

Jim I've had some ideas for the last year or so and, when time arrives, will be pursuing the first prototype or two.  I'd be interested to see what you've got in mind, and the thinking behind it!

----------

