# General Mandolin Topics > General Mandolin Discussions >  Master model vs a really good luthier

## Narayan Kersak

So Master models are more than I paid for my car, and slightly less than what I have left to pay on my student loan. #There are some really spectacular builders out there who might only charge say 1/4 of a master model. #Do the folks who build the master models at gibson have some special fairy dust that is unavailable to these probably just as capable luthiers? #Or is it just the name and marketing...don't get me wrong, I'm sure the master models play like a dream, but I'm also sure there are some more cost effective builders who create mandolins that play like a dream too. #Thoughts?

----------


## sunburst

...

----------


## Narayan Kersak

is that a thought?

----------


## JimRichter

I think it's more a sign of deja vu

----------


## Bill Snyder

John just might be one of those other luthiers to which you refer.

----------


## sunburst

It's fairy dust, definitely.

Seriously, the same knowledge, the same techniques, the same materials are available to all the good mandolin builders. There are good instruments in all price ranges. Name recognition is one of the strongest influences on price. There's never been a better time to shop for a good mandolin than now.

----------


## Bradley

If I can remember Ricky Skaggs words...

"There are alot of nice Mandolins out there, but theres only one Gibson".

----------


## buddyellis

I think its actually PIXIE dust, a slightly different animal. 

There are great mandolins at many different price ranges. I've played some eastmans (one in a hundred or so) that were amazing. I've played at least one Gibson DMM that I thought sounded like ####. You do not need to pay the equivelant of a house downpayment to get a great mandolin. Just play alot of them and get past the name on the headstock. The name CAN mean something, but that doesn't mean it does in every case.

----------


## Bradley

I was just kidding in my previous post....before the flames start.

The point is this...no theres nothing equal to a MM from Gibson...if you are looking for the features that it offers then nothing will compare.The key word there is 
"That it offers". 

If you shop for a good one (which is a high percentage of the ones they make)and buy it right you will never regret the investment. There are some nice builders out there that are building great mandolins that offer great things too.Some are two times what a MM costs, and others are not far behind what a MM costs. You are not going to find anything that is 1/4th the cost that will compare to a MM,
unless it is stolen.

----------


## Big Joe

Bradley is right. You can buy many good mandolins, and some incredible mandolins. However, if you like what the MM has or is, nothing else is the same. There is nothing at 1/4 the price to equal it in any way. 

Still, one does not have to spend over 15K for a great mandolin if they don't want. There are many great mandolins for under 10K. These are creeping towards that 10k line quite fast though. Gibson has not raised its price in several years so the difference is narrowing quite fast. 

In MY opinion, if you want the most Loar like instrument without paying for a Loar, the MM or DMM have it hands down. I have played many wonderful mandolins, but still have my MM's. I would love to have some of the others, but not by ridding myself of what I have. Now, the question is what your ear hears and what you wish to invest. I spent less than the price of a good Bass Boat for my MM and it will certainly last longer, give more joy, and grow in value more than that bass boat. When you put it in perspective with other things you could spend your money on, a great mandolin is not that expensive. 

In the end, you will find what you like. With a bit of luck you will find the one that will last you for the rest of your days. For the rest, there is a big dose of MAS and dreams of the next one to try. For some, it is the search more than the acquistion. I'm glad I found mine when I did. My MAS has now moved to a mandola. My mandolin quest is over!

----------


## Flowerpot

"I'm sure the master models play like a dream, but I'm also sure there are some more cost effective builders who create mandolins that play like a dream too. ...."

You seem to sound like you haven't played any MM's or any independent luthiers' models which would compare in terms of quality. You really should get out and look them all over, and make your own judgements. The thing to remember, they're all make by people... there's no magic here. Just skills honed over time, and no one company has a monopoly on talent.

"The point is this...no theres nothing equal to a MM from Gibson...if you are looking for the features that it offers then nothing will compare.The key word there is
"That it offers"."

That's shoveling it quite deep right there. There are many individual builders who will make an F5 model with comparable features (Adirondac spruce, hide glue, varnish, the "right" graduations, impeccable fit and finish) for thousands less than a MM. Will it sound and play as good? Depends on the player's preferences. The only substantial difference is: it'll have a different name on the headstock -- so if the Gibson name is a "feature", then I guess nothing else compares.

Yep, now is a good time to be able to shop around for a mandolin, cause there are a lot of tremendous builders out there (one of whom has posted on this thread).

----------


## Mikey G

It all comes down to what you want. If you have a two thousand dollar mandolin that sounds as good to you as a fifteen thousand dollar Gibson, mission accomplished. I realize there's a lot in a name to a lot of players, and some people want "The Gibson" and the flower pot, and others could care less. I knew from the first time I played a Master Model that I wouldn't really be content until I had one. In the end, it really boils down to what makes you happy, and what you're willing to pay for that happiness. I bought it for the playability, tone, volume, chop...I bought it for the sound. Being a beautiful instrument on top of all of the other attributes is a bonus. Some guys buy boats, some buy cars, some buy guns....we all have our "man toys." The money I invested in my Master Model was money well spent, and I'm reminded of this every time I take it out of the case. It will be the last one I buy because I couldn't imagine any more I could get from any other mandolin out there. When I upgraded, I really never considered buying anything else except fot the MM, and am content with it in every way.

----------


## sunburst

> ...There is nothing at 1/4 the price to equal it in any way.


There are quite a few in that price range that can equal (or surpass?) the MM in tone, playability, and fit and finish. Add points and scrolls and it gets harder to find an equal at 1/4 the price.

----------


## Glassweb

I have no idea what the Gibson workshop does to recreate the "Loar" sound, but of all the new mandolins I've played the DMM really does seem to get it right. I don't care for the workmanship of the MM (doesn't anyone at Gibson know how to carve a scroll anymore?) and the DMM is kind of a screwy concept... not Loar-like at all. But if you really have to have the Loar sound for under $200K the DMM might be the way to go. However, MANY fantastic luthier-made mandos can be built to your specs for about half the price of a DMM. Not to mention those blonde Collings MFs which, for my money, are the biggest bang for your buck. Every one I've played has been fantastic!

----------


## Steven Stone

[ have left to pay on my student loan]

Pay off your loan son, then we'll talk....

----------


## dcoxmandolin

At IBMA last weekend I played a ton of good mandolins. I had the pleasure of playing a Gibson F5G that a young man had from Georgia. That mandolin was purchased for under $4000 and it was a hand cannon. So having said that you could buy 2 or possibly three really great mandolins for what you would pay for one distressed. Personally speaking I would take a good F5G and then finally I could get a good night sleep just knowing that I had "A Gibson". Would it make me a better player? Would it get me more recognition? Would people step aside when they saw me coming down the entrance to the stage? Or would they say "Oh, well he's Just got a F5G? No, in this world of bluegrass you Have to have a distressed Gibson or your nobody! Nothing else will do,so for anybody thinking of purchasing a new mandolin you must "PURCHASE A DISTRESSED GIBSON cause then you'll be more like Bill!  


Collings MF5 #131 rules. Pounds Gibsons distressed models!

----------


## Michael Lewis

Lots of good advice here, especially from FLOWERPOT, to play as many different good mandolins as you can get your hands on. You need to know what package of tone, volume, playability, feel, fit and finish, materials, coloring (or not), etc. that you are looking for. You will know when you are holding a mandolin that speaks to YOU, and that is the sort of instrument you should be looking for. 


My advice: Take whatever you want, and pay for it.

----------


## f5loar

There was an elderly gentleman from Rosine, KY that had this to say about his long association with a Gibson MM:
"It's got a sound that no other mandolin's got. You can separate the notes on it and every note will ring. It's got a quality that I don't hear in anything else. Listen to how it rings, and keeps on ringing. I've been offered $40,000 for this mandolin, but I don't think I would sell it for even if they went up to $500,000. It's meant so much to me and what I wanted to do. This mandolin's playing a big part in my music. It's aways been ready to go. It's had a lot of volume to it, and you could play the notes good and it rang. It's been a good mandolin down through the years."
No finer words could be said about the Gibson MM than this!

----------


## jim_n_virginia

I drove up to Floyd VA last weekend and jammed at the Jamboree they have every Friday night.

I pulled out my Gibson Fern and the old timer next to me was craning his neck to see the headstock. I had an Intelli 500 tuner on it and he couldn't see it. He says "what kinda mandolin you got." So I move the tuner and show him and he says "Hmmmm Gibson the best... top quality!" 

I wonder if he would have said the same thing if I had been playing anything else?

To answer your question of can you get just a good a mandolin from a small builder as a Master Model ... you betcha. But if you want to raise a few eyebrows at a jam pull out a Master Model.

----------


## Narayan Kersak

Yeah, I'm not sure I understand the "distressed" thing either. I play guitar and I got a few gibsons, and as I was browsing for new electrics I saw a "distressed" telecaster built to look exactly like Jeff Beck's old worn out guitar, and I said to myself, "Yeah I want to spend $12,000 more on a guitar that I could take out in my driveway and beat up to look like a piece of ****." I mean really, if it looks that bad now, in 25-50 when it really is vintage, how bad is it going to look. But then again I have a tendency to baby my instruments. If anyone out there has a new mandolin they'd like "distressed" I'll do it for $1000.00 bucks cheaper! PM me for details.   

(Just kidding of course.)

----------


## jim_n_virginia

oh yeah... here's another thing to think about.

Gibson has been around a long time. Hundred years or more I think. And there is a pretty good chance they will be around for a long time more.

How long will a small builder be around to work on your mandolin if it ever needs anything? 20? 30? 40 years max?

Even though at Gibson the person who might be repairing your mandolin isn't the one who made it he would most likely know how it was put together and what materials to use to get a good match should you ever need to have any work done.

I mean any good Luthier can open up someone else's mandolin but wouldn't it be best that the person (or company) that made it be the one working on it?

Only they would know exactly what was used to put the mandolin together and the formula and procedure for the finish.

jus some food for thought...

----------


## Narayan Kersak

That's true, but when I was a guitar player I often heard guitar techs and store reps say that trying to get Gibson to honor the warranty for repairs on an instrument was like pulling teeth. Besides, if a person spends thousands of dollars on a mandolin, they can probably afford to let a competent repair person do the work on it that is needed, right? I'm sure there are just as many good repair techs out there in the general population than there are in the magical golden city of Gibson fine instruments (tone*feel*appearance). 

(I know my posts sounds like I'm anti-gibson, which I'm not. I love my guitars, and have enjoyed the gibson mando's I've played. I just find the glorication of the company, funny. I'm much more interested in supporting individual builders now a days for some reason.)

----------


## AlanN

And not only that, I find it hard to quantify "Gibson tone" (talking new mandolins here). What is that? 

Mark said it best - check out as many as you can, there are many fine makes out there today.

----------


## JEStanek

If you're really considering a 7-12K mandolin I would recommend you travel to something like IBMA (you're in WV so it isn't too far) and try out some of these higher end mandos by production and independent builders. Even at these higher price points no two instruments will be the same. Get out there and test drive some and get to know the people. Forging a good relationship with your builder really impacts how you feel about the instrument.

I think the argument that an independent builder isn't going to be around to look after your instrument is a bit weak. If somethings going to go wrong I would imagine it would happen in the first few years rather than 40 down the road. At that point any competent builder can work on it.

How many of our rising star builders left production shops to make their own builds under their own name...  

Jamie

----------


## Chris Biorkman

Must.. bite... tongue...

----------


## Narayan Kersak

> Must.. bite... tongue... #


Don't bite your tongue, half the fun of these boards is wasting time reading everyone's $.02 instead working, which is what I should be doing!

----------


## Big Joe

While at Gibson we did repair a good number of mandolins over 40 years old...under warranty...and it was not hard to get the repair covered under warranty. All that is needed is the original sales reciept and the warranty is covered. The issues of getting warranty coverage are the dealers who don't or won't help the consumer properly, the inability to prove original ownership, or the repair is damage due to misuse or abuse and not a warranty item. You would be surprised how many people want free refrets because it has a lifetime warranty! Gibson has gone out of its way to help the consumer even if they had difficulty proving original ownership. We would do all we could to help them with that and would occassionally take statements from those who knew it was purchased by that party originally. Often times the seller would proved a statement. While Gibson did not have to take that as proof, they often did.

Gibson has been around for 113 years and has stood behind its product all that time. Like any company, you should know the warranty and what it covers and what it does NOT cover. There is peace of mind in knowing that your instrument will be covered by its warranty and, yes, many repairs are needed well down the road at five, ten, twenty, fourty, sixty years after it is purchased. It does not matter who makes it, sooner or later it will need some work. 

I always advise people to try as many mandolins as they can find before purchasing. Depending upon what level of player they are and what level of investment they wish to make, there are going to be good mandolins in nearly any price range above 800 bucks. Some will be noticeably better than others. As a beginner you may not be able to tell the difference from the cheapest and the most expensive. There is no point in spending big bucks on something you can't differentiate unless you just want the most expensive. As your exposure to the music and the instrument grows, you will be able to tell the difference. This may go on for many years as your tastes change. If you are like most mandolin players you will find your altered tastes will cause you to change instruments several times over the years. The real test is not the costs or the builder, but what makes you happy.

I could be very happy playing anything a good number of the builders on the cafe build. This past week I got to spend time with Hans and play some of his. Man, are they good! I spend some time with Will Kimble and he can knock it out of the park. Each of these men are incredible luthiers, as are several others including Michael Lewis, Fletcher Brock, Dale Ludwig, Chris Stanley, Steve Gilchrist, and several others. None of these men sell them for 1/4 the price of a Gibson MM, but they are all great mandolin builders and amongst the group you will find such a wonderful chorus of tones and colorations of music that it can be hard to decide which one to go for. The real issue is to find the right one for you. In many ways, just like finding the right mate for life. It does not always happen at first effort, but when you find the right one it is worth the time and the expense!

----------


## Narayan Kersak

I should probably clarify, I'm not in the market for a new mandolin. I've already got on Mr. Mowry's future "to do" list. I was just sitting around thinking, "You know, there's a lot of talk about these MM, how much do these puppies cost?" Then I saw the price tag and I got to thinking, "That's kind of insane." Of course keep in mind, that money I've already put into instruments many many people would say, "That's kind of insane." So I'm well aware that when my income is raised to a power of 6, that I will probably say, "Honey, I'd like one of those Gibson MM's for Xmas, what do you think? You know, I need a new campfire beater to take on my backpacking trips." and she'll say, "that's true sweetheart. why don't you just go get one now. We are going camping this weekend you know?"

----------


## Kevin Briggs

Joe,

It's a slippery slope when you compare MAS to finding the search for the right mate.

----------


## frig

My personal story is...probably a repeat from all these blogs..is I sold my Gibson F5L, Carlson signed as I came across a varnished CARVER that my set up man said it was the best mandolin he's played or heard...even better than the Gilchrist he's worked on...I thought so too and just wanted it confirmed..it doesn't say Gibson but I am completely satisfied, because the notes so clear and the chop is unbeatable and it's still opening up...the price, a fraction of the MM...guess I got Lucky...frig

----------


## ab4usa

Gibson MM MSRP $18,110. Dealer Cost about $9,000. I would venture to say there are a number of $9K mandolins out there from independant luthiers that are the equal.

----------


## AlanN

wow, the mark-up is huge!

----------


## testore

ralian, you can't go wrong with a Mowry, that guys work is great. Buy it and be happy and never look back. His stuff is a lot nicer than the new Gibson stuff I've seen. I think the one on one relationship between a single maker and a player is very important and lasts a lifetime. My $.02

----------


## ab4usa

AlanN,
50% is pretty standard in the musical instrument world. Figure a 10% off the top to a discount, 20% to keep up the bricks and mortor pay the bills and the people, and a 20% pre-tax profit.

----------


## AlanN

Makes sense. You can tell I'm in IT

----------


## mand0l1n

I am always amazed at peoples loyalty to Gibson even when the majority of their intruments that I have seen dont even compete with with other makers. #Then you hear these wannabe touching stories about someones grandpappy or some random old timer saying "I will die with my Gibson"
and "Gibson can save the world" BLAH BLA BLAH BS. Just because some stubborn old man thinks that Gibson is the best thing does not mean that he is right. #I dont care what Ricky Scaggs has said. # I dont care what Bill Monroe played. #I guarantee Bill wouldnt play one at the way they are priced today if he was just starting out today like he did in the old days when "yes" gibson was the best. I have played a few good Gibsons, but I have played well more good Collings that looked a whole lot better and sounded a whole lot better as well. The collings had more volume and played better. #Tone is subjective so I will not mention its comparison. #I have played a couple of loars that yes had great tone, but not $200,000 tone. There are good Gibson mandolins out there, but their name is their biggest asset. #I respect the fact that they were the first, but other luthiers have taken the concept and exceeded in many ways. Yes you can get a manodlin at less than half the price of the Master Model that will cosmetically and acoustically exceed it. #Try a Collings MF5, or MF5 Deluxe, or any of the Collings. #You will not be dissapointed. #And I am sorry, but if you work for Gibson, your opinion is biased.

----------


## Steven Stone

[ am always amazed at peoples loyalty to Gibson]

You REALLY should have stopped there...

Some folks, like this poster, don't get it, and obviously NEVER will.

That's OK, but to be SO PROUD of not getting it is what I find annoying...

----------


## chip

Sounds to me like you can't afford a Gibson, MandOln

----------


## JEStanek

Big Joe no longer works for Gibson. Certainly, and understandably, he has a pro Gibson slant. Read also the great things he said about other builders in his last post.

I don't think any one brand of mandolin can save the world. Chocolate pudding... maybe.

Jamie

----------


## Wesley

That poor,poor horse.

----------


## f5loar

Is Gibson still giving a 50% dealer cut? I thought they changed that a few years ago on the OMI instruments. What say you Big Joe?

----------


## sgarrity

I hear ya AlanN. I'm working on a proposal (or I gues should be working on a proposal) for some Juniper equipment for a client and my markup is a whole 10%! I need to start selling manalins!

----------


## jimbob

I'll add my $0.02 to this discussion....
I only started playing the mandolin about 4 years ago. Man, how time flies when you get to be my age ! Anyhow, I bought a cheap mandolin to learn on and was amazed at the prices of top line instruments. I then bought a Yellowstone and thought " how could a Gibson or any other mandolin be worth several times the price of my Weber ?" Since then I have acquired two mandolins from a very good independent luthier and two Gibsons. One Gibson is an A5 signed by Mr. Derrington and the other is a Alan Bibey. the prices have ranged from about $ 2.5K to about $ 6K. I have also had the opportunity to hold and pick a little on one MM. 
My conclusion is that it is very difficult to absolutley define quality and value in a mandolin. All 4 of mine have qualities that I appreciate. They all sound very good, play very nicely and represent quality craftsmanship. I would find it difficult to get rid of any of the set. I realize, however, that I will never be a accomplished picker, but as more of a collector, I still enjoy it as a hobby and continue to appreciate the talents that go into the creation of all of these instruments. That said, I find myself lately trying to figure out how to acquire a MM to meet the continuing MAS. I think that would be the epitome of mandolin ownership, short of having a Loar. I don't know if I'll manage the purchase of an MM since I would find it difficult to part with any of my stable to do so, but it is hard to dismiss the desirable quality of an MM.

----------


## JeffD

I think that even if Gibson had no legacy reputation, the quality of most of their mandolins (and other instruments too, lets face it) would still compete with independant luthiers, at their present prices.

I think where the Gibson name has the most impact is in the vintage mandolin market - where folks are willing to pay extra bucks for the name, even if the particular instrument purchased is not a great example, or has suffered some re-muddling.

Paying five figures for a mandolin is a absolutely a stretch for most people, but that doesn't mean by itself the instrument isn't worth it. I would love to get to the point where a discretionary five figure expenditure is possible. And deciding betweeen spending it on a world cruize, golf lessons, a bass boat, a mustang convertable, a house addition, living room furniture, or a mandolin - well the choice would be obvious to me.

I really really wish Gibson would take up the challenge and make a fine quality bowl back mandolin. I, for one, would buy one.

----------


## AlanN

jimbob,

Spoken honestly, with conviction, passion and humility.

We need mo' o' dat round heah

----------


## Spruce

_"There are good Gibson mandolins out there, but their name is their biggest asset."_

Bingo....

And that name--and the bragging rights that came with it--only cost Henry $5 million in '86...

Now _there's_ the ultimate garage sale mandolin story....

----------


## jhbaylor

All this Master Model talk made me want to go back and re-read the CoMando session with Charlie.

Here it is:

http://www.mandozine.com/resources/CGOW/derrington.php

----------


## mand0l1n

Chip, I actually can afford a Gibson, but would not buy one. I shopped some Gibson mandolins. #Some were good but most were #$%!. #I played a brand new F5-G and I was astonished that it was not stopped by quality control. #I played about 5 master models of which only one was really good, especially at the price. And Steven, I am glad that you get it. #Could you explain "getting it" to the rest of us mando lovers out here. #Does "getting it" mean trying to justify your pain for that Gibson you purchased? #Hehe! I would really like to read your explanation of getting it.

----------


## Jonathan Peck

> I shopped some Gibson mandolins. #Some were good but most were #$%!. #


Can you explain what made them (insert expletive) in your opinion?

----------


## mand0l1n

As far as the Gibsons that I have tried, cosmetically there were issues with the finish, scroll, and binding on many of them. #Acoustically some were good and a couple were very good. #But considering price with all aspects weighed together, they were not as good other choices for the same amnount of money. #Consistency is something that I did not see in many of the Gibsons that I shopped and I shopped many of them. #I know that they have gotten better, and that they, OBVIOUSLY, have built some great mandolins for a long time. The mandolin world has changed alot and I dont think that they are the TOP DOG as some make them out ot be. But from other topics around this issue, it is obvious that some people get really heated if you dont like Gibson or dont join in on the Gibosn Group Think and give them praise that is a little too much.

----------


## Steven Stone

[Could you explain "getting it" to the rest of us mando lovers out here.]

Short answer - NO

If I could put it into words it wouldn't be the same - like dancing to architecture. When you play a great Gibson you get it - no words are needed.

Not every Gibson is great, but the ones that are, regardless of whether it's an F-2, A-50, F-9, F-5G. F-5 Fern, or MM, or Loar - They are worth every penny.

Sure, there are fine individual builders making superb instruments, but they are different from Gibsons. Some have better fit and finish, some don't. But none are exactly the equivelant.

 Just the facts, son....

----------


## mand0l1n

Yes many Gibsons are not the equivalent of other builders. And many builders are not the equivalent of some Gibsons. 

There is no fact in opinion and you mispelled equivalent

Thanks Sis

----------


## mythicfish

"I am always amazed at peoples loyalty to Gibson"

Brand loyalty goes far beyond Gibsons in particular and mandolins in general. It is often a short-cut for critical thinking and also provides the owner with a set of shared values which enable
him/her to relate to others with similar loyalties. It provides consumers with "benefits" which have existed in tribal cultures for millenia. Pardon my deconstructionism.

Curt

----------


## Jonathan Peck

> Acoustically some were good and a couple were very good. #


Could you elaborate on this? what was good, what was not so good, and what was very good abou the MM's that you tried?

----------


## Bradley

I have never had manufacturer loyalty on the name basis only...some do but most buyers buy from their heart.

Its amazing that all non Gibson owners always compare their
mandolin to a Gibson...I have heard many that buy a mando and say play this, it sounds like a gibson doesnt...If they are so bad why are they always the benchmark for everyone elses Mandolins.

There are some great builders, some who do it by hand (the way it should be) and others who do the majority of work on a CNC, glue it together and send it out.I personally dont want a mandolin that looks like it was made by a machine...I want to see that it was hand made, with graduated tops, with a dovetail joint, etc. If the MM is $15K and the competitors carbon copy of the last 400 mandolins is $12K you can bet that I would spend the extra cash on one that has some blood sweat and tears into it, versus something treated like its a Big Mac at the drive thru.

----------


## Narayan Kersak

wow! How do I turn off my email notification for this topic? Did I misspelll anithang?

----------


## mand0l1n

Jonathan,
The master models that I tried did not have any cosmetic flaws that stood out to me. #They were very nice. They had good volume, tone, playability, etc. #But only one of those stood out, to me, as far as all three qualities working very well together. And in comparison to other mandolins that I have tried, in that price range, they were good, but not as good. I have seen many flaws in other Gibson models though like bad fretwork, binding issues, and they did not hold their tuning well.

Bradley,
I dont compare anything to Gibson because I dont dont know many people that keep them when they buy them. #I have heard the Loar comparison, but those are very old instruments made by Loar himself and its kind of unfair to make a comparison of a newer instrument to one that has had so long to age. Yes Gibson still makes some good and even great mandolins, but I believe that there are just as good if not better instruments out there at half the price. #Basically I think that their name leaves them overrated in some cases. #And no I dont mind strictly hand made, but I draw the line with some of the afforementioned quality issues. #I also dont believe that Gibsons are completely hand made. #

Back to the original post: Master Model vs Luthier. #
I believe that you can definately match or possibly exceed the master model at half the price with some of the fine luthiers in the business today.

----------


## Jonathan Peck

Thanks, you know I think that MM's can take some getting used to because of the string spacing and neck widths. Once you get into that price range though, I think that you're getting a mando built to some pretty high standards. The differences between makers are going to be just that...differences. Some may be deeper, dryer, more bass, darker etc....some play looser/tighter. There are so many good available choices that there's going to be one that's right for everyone. 

I also had trouble justifying the cost of a MM new, but I think if your patient and a motivated seller comes along, they can be affordable and a good bang for the buck. One other thing to consider is that Gibson's are infinitely easier to re-sell that custom builds. When you re-sell a custom instrument, you're pretty much limited to the classified section of this board and a few other options. You can re-sell a Gibson pretty much anywhere.

----------


## mand0l1n

Ralian,

Go to command prompt and type "format c:"

That will turn off email notification.

----------


## Mikey G

Jonathan, If you're ever seriously considering a MM I would definitely talk with Dennis Vance at The Mandolin Store. I bought a new MM from him a few weeks ago that's an absolute beast. Dennis is A GREAT guy and the deal he gave me on my MM was just too good to pass up. I too find it interesting that most everyone I know, or their posts on forums such as this, always seem to compare their mandolin to a Gibson MM. I believe Gibson is the standard by which mandolins are judged and the Master Models and DMM are the finest they put out. As I've said before, if a two two-five thousand dollar mandolin sounded the same, most people would have two-five thousand dollar mandolins. I can't imagine many people who would invest the money that the Master Models cost to have a mandolin that sounds like almost anything you could pick off of a rack almost anywhere. I had a new Flatiron and a really nice 2001 F-5L that were both fine mandolins, but neither of them compared to the MM I traded them in on. I told my wife that the sound, tone, and playability was night vs. day when I compared them. Sometimes you get what you pay for, and I was looking for the LAST mandolin I was going to buy: the one I was going to grow old with. Was it worth what I paid for it? Absolutely. Could I have found a mandolin from a builder that would have sounded close to the MM? Probably, but that's not what I really wanted and sometimes it's important to not settle for less than you want, especially when you're stroking that check.

----------


## stevem

The only thing this thread is missing is J. Mark Lane.

----------


## Bradley

Now is definitely the time to get a good used mandolin at a great price...I have seen MF5's going for $4K and Master Models going for $11-$12K.....So if you want to get a good deal now is the time.

----------


## Mikey G

There's a June 13, 1923 Loar at Laurence Wexer that has been rebound and refinished by Stephen Gilchrist for $90k. It's a real beauty and seems like a bargain for someone that wanted a Loar for a player. If I had the cash, I seriously would have considered it, but a man has to know his limitations.

----------


## Narayan Kersak

Real men play MM's.

----------


## woodwizard

mand0l1n,
You are entitled to your opinion. But just remember it is only your opinion. Others have different opinions on this subject. I'm one.

----------


## Rick Schmidlin

I A/B ed John Reismans Distresed MMM aganst my Collings MF5 and the for straight Bluegrass the MM is the winner but far. AS for other styles I play;Classical,Cetic,Old Time ,Gypsy,Russian and Brazzilian I think my MF5 is equal.There are others out there also that are better suited for varied styles as well.

----------


## JEStanek

I'm guessing to offend even more people than those who may have already been offended in this thread...

----------


## MikeEdgerton

> was there a reason for this?


In my mind no and I would think that one as well as the "format c:" message should both be gone.

----------


## Kevin Briggs

I'll concur about the Collings mandolins. I have a newfound respect for them after playing a few at IBMA. I like the diverse sound, and would probably choose one over a DMM, and I played a saweet DMM at IBMA. I just like how they do something more than "that" vintage sound. The DMM is no joke though, at least the one I played that Elderly has right now, if you don't mind paying $20,000 for a beat up new mandolin.

Regarding brand loyalty, I'm guilty as heck. I love my Weber Fern, and I loved my custom Bitteroot. I will add that I wouldn't love them if they didn't sound superb to me. My Fern sounds so good I can't remember how good it is, so when I play it I am reminded and like, "Ohhhhh.... I almost forgot." However, if it was a clunker, I'd go on to something else. The Kimble at IBMA spoke to me something fierce. It didn't surpass my Fern, to my hands and ear, but it was on the same level. I explained to Rick that once mandolins get that good, they are all right up there, it's just what a player prefers. The complexity of the red spruce top on that Fern shakes my bones.

----------


## mand0l1n

WoodWizard,
I appreciate your comments and I realize that others have their own opinions which I respect. I am just truly amazed at the Gibson is the end all be all of manodlins attitude when ,in my opinion, there are so many others that are as good if not better. But again we are dealing with the subjective on this board and not fact. It is interesting though to see the heat rise when I share my experiences with everyone about Gibson mandolins. Ironically most of my mandolin heroes play Gibsons. But their main Gibson axes are at least over 60 years old.

----------


## bgmando

I'm a proud small shop mando player.

  Made me walk into a noted store ready to dislike the Gibson MM I asked if I could play. Instead, I really thought it was a fine instrument.

  No fairy dust, just a really good sounding mandolin, especially considering it was new. 
  So many temptations in this world.

----------


## Narayan Kersak

Yes, my wife often tells me, that when I think I'm being funny, I'm really not. I guess it spills over into cyber space too.

----------


## Brady Smith

> I am just truly amazed at the Gibson is the end all be all of manodlins attitude when ,in my opinion, there are so many others that are as good if not better.


Don't feel too bad...If I had a Gibson I'd have a roll of tape handy for sure.

----------


## Narayan Kersak

Ok. So from all of this debate I have learned these things.

Buying a MM or going with a luthier depends on these things:

Income and budget
Name recognition
Opinions, beliefs, perception
a whole lot of subjectity. 

Sounds like life to me!

Thanks for helping me get clear on that.

----------


## foldedpath

Another $.02 opinion... I might eventually spend MM (if not DMM) money on a mandolin, if I get to the point where my playing justifies it. But I don't think I'd be looking at a Gibson, or a Collings, or any other factory-made instrument that's built to a consistent standard, however good it is. 

I've bought a few custom-ordered guitars from independent luthiers, and I've enjoyed that process very much. I get a little input on the materials, the target tone, the neck shape, plus all the little cosmetics like binding, stain color and inlay. The result is a unique instrument. So without getting into the inherent build quality of a MM and whether it's worth the money... I'm just not that interested in a factory-made instrument. I'd prefer to drop that kind of cash on an independent luthier and a custom instrument. I'm done with buying new instruments off the rack, at least until conditions change and I can't afford that option.

Another part of this is a bit of an iconoclast streak. I like not playing what everyone else is playing. The fact that I don't plan to focus on bluegrass makes it even easier to avoid the Gibson brand, at least for a new instrument (I'd still like to own a 20's A model someday). Besides, why should we all sound alike? Imagine how boring the music world would be if everyone played the same model Martin dreadnought guitars and Gibson mandolins, and were all aiming for exactly the same tone. Yuck.

----------


## Rick Schmidlin

Red Diamonds by Don have the Loar tone, as people like Ronnie McCoury would say when I spoke to him. But of course Ginson mando's are like Martin guitars,they have the tone that that some will only crave.

----------


## f5loar

If we could go back in time 30 years and someone had asked this question in 1977 you would get entirely different answers. New Gibson MM F5s were $1200 and a signed Loar was a mere $4,000 to 6.000 but you could get Randy Wood, Paganoni, Montelone,MKKirk,CEWard,etc to build you a copy F5 for under $1000.
Now if you had bought that new Gibson MM 30 years ago today you be hard pressed to get $3000 for it. The Loar would sell for $225,000 and the Hand-made famous Luthier copy would bring in $3000 to $10,000 if it was a really good one(most were not near the quality copy they are today back then). Some people still don't get it!

----------


## Bill Snyder

> ...#I have heard the Loar comparison, but those are very old instruments made by Loar himself ...


They were not built by Mr. Loar. He was management. The current signers of the Gibson MM's or DMM's don't build them either, do they. I am under the impression that they are skilled luthiers who give final approval on those instruments.
I don't have any problems with Gibsons selling for big bucks. I even understand it. People want them and will pay it, but to say that only Gibsons can achieve the level of quality/sound/finish that they do does not make sense to me.
What about Sim Daley or Jim Triggs? They worked for Gibson and now they are independent luthiers. Since they left Gibson has their skill set deminished?
I don't know if they build exactly the same way they did at Gibson, but if they don't it probably is not because they can't. Point being that short of the varnish recipe they use there is nothing about the construction of a Gibson that the right luthier could not replicate.
It still won't be a Gibson but it can be as good - just maybe not as valuable.

----------


## Jonathan Peck

you know, this kind of reminds me of a discussion I once had with another picker about Waverly tuners. He thought it was a 'status' thing and that they were overpriced. Then he got himself a mandolin with Waverly tuners and he had one of those 'oh, now I get it' moments. 

Point is, he was happy when he didn't have Waverly's, and he was happy when he did. You can be plenty happy w/o a Gibson MM, and you can be plenty happy if you have one too. Soooooo.....be happy  There's no point in trying to make the many folks who have one feel like jerks cause..we're happy

----------


## Orrin Star

Interesting thread.

As perhaps has been implied (but never actually stated) there is a third path to getting Loar-like sound aside from the GMM vs great current small builders options: finding an older reproduction. 

Some great vintage-sounding mandolins that I've heard: 
Red Henry's Randy Wood #1 & #3; Bob Green's Luke Thompson; Danny Knicely's Fraley. I own two Vern Bryant mandolins (made in '75' and '80) that I think also qualify.  

(But I don't begrudge the Master Modelers their mirth.)

Orrin
www.orrinstar.com
Alabama Mandolin Week Nov 4-9

----------


## testore

When someone says "There's only one Gibson" they couldn't be more wrong. There's one Gil,Monte,Ellis,Lewis,and COUNTLESS other great builders. I'm sick of Gibson only wanting to claim their very short period of time when they made good instruments.If they want to claim that ONE company made Loars and is STILL making fine mandolins, then they HAVE to also claim the ABSOLTUTE JUNK they made for YEARS. Between 1925 and 1985 they made some unbelieveably BAD mandolins. Now is that the same company that made Loars?,of course not. It is also not the same company making things today. How many owners of the Gibson Company have there been? I'd say there's been A LOT of Gibsons and truthfully not very many of those years where they making good stuff. The finest stuff was the teens F4's. None of the Gibson lovers ever want to really discuss in depth the very poorly made mandolins,just the winners. I know for myself, I've seen more dogs than winners.Have you all seen the Wiens mandolin on the other thread? Now that mandolin out Loars anything Gibson is making today by miles.

----------


## sgarrity

Cain't we all just get along? There are Gibson lovers and there are Gibson critics. And it's been my experience taht you will NOT change a Gibson lovers mind. So lets just pick some instead of doin' this:

----------


## Chris Biorkman

what fun would that be?

----------


## MASadict

You could always spend your retirement fund on a Dude... #

----------


## Ken_P

I'll never have the money for this discussion to be relevant to me, but it's still interesting. I seem to be in the odd position that the name on the headstock doesn't sway me one way or the other. The proof is all in the playing. If I had the money, I'd play every mandolin I could get my hands on, Gibson or no. If I liked the MM best, I'd buy it. If I liked something else more, I'd get that. 

I'm just glad that I'm more of a guitar player than a mandolin player. You can almost get a mid 30's D18 (my personal holy grail) for the cost of a NEW DMM. There's a lot of the same name issues with guitars too. If I had any kind of money, I'd probably get a Collings, but most would chose a Martin just for the name.

I really like the point about getting a custom made instrument, too. I think if I were that serious about it, I'd find a brave luthier willing to make me a 2-point 10 stringer.

----------


## Mikey G

Out of curiosity, what would a custom Built Wiens sell for new?

----------


## Chris Biorkman

12K, according to his website.

----------


## pager

"Now, the Star-Belly Sneetches had bellies with stars.
The Plain-Belly Sneetches had none upon thars.
Those stars weren't so big. They were really so small,
you might think such a thing wouldn't matter at all.

But because they had stars, all the Star-Belly Sneetches
Would brag, 'We're the best kind of Sneetch on the beaches.'
With their snoots in the air, they would sniff and they'd snort
'We'll have nothing to do with the Plain-Belly sort!'

When the Star-Belly children went out to play ball,
Could a Plain Belly get in the game ...? Not at all.
You only could play if your bellies had stars
And the Plain-Belly children had none upon thars."

----------


## chip

Darn silly discussion. There's nothing better than a Gibson so just give it up.:p

----------


## good_ol_al_61

Well, this thread forces me to say the same thing again about my mandolin experience. Even though I have been playing only a short time quality can be readily heard in the human ear and felt by the human touch. I have owned many junk model mandolins, quite a few pac-rims of different quality levels. I have in my current stable what I consider to be the best of the best. My '81 Gibson has a Master Model label on the inside because at that period of time the Fern (F5L) was the top of the line model. I sent it to Gibson last winter to have a complete overhaul (tuners bridge, frets, setup and other stuff) and it came back a monster. I recieved only few weeks ago my Arches mandolin. That mandolin was put to the test (in the builder's section of the cafe) and many here chose the sound of it over a Gil and a Loar. Some didn't. Lastly I have a fine Eastman that had Steve Perry's Mandovoodoo ® process and it is one of the best sounding Pac Rims around. Several retired bluegrass professionals in this area told me not to get rid of "that Eastman because it does everything you need it to do".

With that having been said, none of these instruments sound like each other. Each one is a different tool for a different purpose. When I need a different sound or I am in a harsh environment, I get to choose the tool for the job.

So to state that any luthier's product is as good (or better, or cheaper or whatever) as another person's or company's product is to miss the point entirely. It is also unfair to the builders that put thier sweat into building it to compare it to another. Apples against oranges syndrome. I am sure the builder as he was hand carving the top, tapping on it to hear the desired sound, did not say, "it doesn't sound like brand-X yet". No, he/she was working to produce the best sound that piece of wood had to offer and doing so with pride. 

Advice: Choose the mandolin for the sound you want regardless of what is carved into the headstock...then you will never be disappointed.

I wonder how long Scott will continue to have the patience and fortitude to let these type of "conversations" take place.

BTW: I just sent off the payment for the carved top Mandocello that Steve Perry had at IBMA...excited!

----------


## Nuages

> "Now, the Star-Belly Sneetches had bellies with stars.
> The Plain-Belly Sneetches had none upon thars..."


That's perfect, as Dr. Seuss so often is! The funniest part of this discussion to me is that if you think about the instruments used in bluegrass music - mandolin, banjo, guitar, fiddle, dobro, bass - the only ones that people get so worked up over the brand name are the ones with pegheads on which to plaster that name. Fiddles and basses? Who knows and who cares, just find one that sounds good. Dobro? Well, they have a peghead, but it's usually sideways, so you can't see the name, and, for the most part, there is no brand snobbery. But mandolins and guitars? Completely irrational. It keeps the Gibson and Martin companies in business, so I suppose it's not all bad...

----------


## chip

Gibson must love this thread. Wonder how many times the name "Gibson" has been used. The marketing department has done a good job! There's only one "Gibson"! 
Both my Gibsons, F5VMM and 1922 F4 are just yummo...

----------


## JEStanek

So I did some Google searches to see if Gibson should be worried... Here are the results of the search criteria and number of pages returned.

GIBSON AND GUITAR      2,570,000
Gibson and Banjo       976,000
GIBSON AND MANDOLIN      607,000 
Epiphone And Mandolin     198,000

Flatiron and Mandolin     29,000
Weber and Mandolin      203,000

COLLINGS and MANDOLIN     59,000
Eastman and Mandolin      84,000
Epiphone And Mandolin     198,000
Michael and Kelley And Mandolin 382,000
Johnson and Mandolin      831,000

Brentrup and Mandolin       556
Wiens and Mandolin         519
Stanek and Mandolin        564 (A couple of reviews by me and that's it!)

Looks like Gibson's marketing is fine considering the mandolin is 1/5 the guitar pages... They better watch out for those guys making the Johnson mandolins though.

Jamie

PS- This is worthless marketing research but it was a fun way to kill 10 minutes.. or did 10 minutes work on killing me?

----------


## homeslice

If there is only one Gibson.....that baby gets around!

----------


## f5loar

Why heck, Gibson's cases are worth more than most people's mandolins. (See ebay item no. 150169354720)

----------


## Links

Maybe my experience in purchasing a DMM is typical # - # maybe not # - # but I promise you it has nothing to do with the name Gibson on the peghead. #I stopped in a music store primarily to look at banjos. #Although I owned several mandolins, I had also been searching for one of the "new" builders (about $5000 range) whose instruments would be worth about that of a Gilchrist or Dude in a short period of time (yeah #- #good luck). #Therefore, I had played a bunch of very good, somewhat alike, well built, mandolins. #I had also played a number of Collings, which I liked a lot. #I liked all of them, but none of them said "this is the one" # - # that is until I pulled a DMM from the glass case. #Until I put that mandolin in my hands, I had no earthly intention of paying that kind of money for any mandolin. #Driving home from the shop (2 1/2 hours) I could not stop think about that mandolin. #To make a long story short, I called the shop the next week and made arrangements to pick up the instrument the following week. #I have absolutely no regrets!

Maybe you have to experience what I did to "get it", but once you get it, you get it! #I can't explain it either, but I know what Steven is talking about.

PS: I also have since bought several other great small builder mandolins which I love also, but it's not the same #- #great but not the same!

----------


## Big Joe

testore...your history of Gibson mandolins is a bit flawed. There are many, many wonderful mandolins built in the years from 1925-1987. The ferns from the last half of the twenties into the early thirties are some incredible instruments and they command from 75K-150K in todays market. The mandolins before Loar were considered pretty good. Many from the fourties through the eighties were wonderful. After WWII there were a few more duds than one might desire, but still, some of those mandolins were incredible, and there were not many building mandolins any better during those years. A few, but even those builders were somewhat hit and miss. Not much during those eras to compare with the products available today.

We are lucky to be in the Golden Age of Luthiery. Never before in history have so many built such wonderful mandolins...and guitars. Today we have choices that nearly boggle the mind. Still, you get what you pay for. If the mandolin you bought sold for 25K then it was worth that amount. There is a reason those mandolins are the price they are and a reason people buy them. It is not just the name on the headstock. Many of these sales are made to people who are not independently wealthy but most are for people who have to sacrifice a LOT of other things to have the mandolin they like.

Once again, let's look at the MM. Many like to use it for a point of reference, just as in this post. First, you could not all have one even if you wanted. There are not that many on the planet. The Gibson MM is quite rare. The total combined with Charlie's signature and Danny's signature would total under 75. That makes it a pretty limited club. Steve Gilchrist has made over 600. There are many great mandolins. I got to spend time with Lynn Dudenbostal and Will Kimble and Hans Brentrup at IBMA. They each build INCREDIBLE mandolins. If you purchased a mandolin from any of these guys you would not be sorry. Of course, you would not get one for 1/4 the price of an MM, or even 1/2. One of them is substantially above the price of an MM. While each of these mandolins are equal in quality to an MM, they each have thier own features and tones. You have to decide which one you want or like.

I will repeat AGAIN. You may not understand the desire for the upper echelon mandolins. That is fine. You are often a newer player with an ear that is developing. I hear many say the (put your favorite cheap mandolin in here) sounds better than any MM. Yeah, right. It shows your inexperience and the lack of development of your ear. Even when developed you may not like the MM. Fine. You may find a mandolin for much less money than any listed in this response. Fine. Just don't assume everyone has the same taste as you. Many put down expensive mandolins from a lack of development, lack of ability to own one, and often to justify their egos with the mandolins they have rather than getting a better mandolin.

I have said many, many times on this forum that you should buy the mandolin that you buy, and you should love the mandolin you love. Don't settle for less just because it is nearly as good as brand "X" and it was a lot less money. You will find the shortcomes in your bargain instrument soon enough. Your MAS will rage again. 

Some have made a hobby of chosing instruments just because they are inexpensive. They may have a dozen or more inexpensive mandolin when the same money spent on all those may have provided one mandolin that would have rocked their world. The issue is not whether there are other mandolins as good as Gibson MM's. The issue is whether it accomplishes what you really want. Again, buy the mandolin YOU love and love the mandolin YOU buy. Your choice is not a competition with what others buy or love. There is a reason why you don't find the expensive mandolins hanging in every store out there like you do others.

Finally, when you talk about Gibson, why is it that everyone wants to compare whatever they have with the MM? It is not apples for apples. If you want to compare with instruments costing much less, you often can find a Gibson in a similar price range that is comparable. The Eastman, while good mandolin for the money, is not a Gibson MM and does not even have the capability to be. Rather than compare that to an MM, get real and compare the the '9' series. Closer price range and both will have a great tone. If you wish to compare a private builders lacquer finished instrument, it is not apples to apples with the Gibson MM. There are many lacquer Gibsons to compare with. Those Gibsons are readily available on the new and used market. It certainly is a better comparison.

I have no interest in what Gibson does, or any other builder. I am just a private citizen in the mandolin world. Still, I have been around a long time, and have been very blessed to play the best...and worst of what is available. The Gibson MM certainly is up there in thin air with the best of what anyone else is making. It is not the ONLY in that thin air, but it certainly breathes the same air as the others that belong in that category.

----------


## bjewell

Man, I gotta pay off the Hayabusa and start saving... This is getting ridiculous! -L-

----------


## foldedpath

> Finally, when you talk about Gibson, why is it that everyone wants to compare whatever they have with the MM?


Can we at least put a bullet in that particular horse's head, with discussions like this? I don't play bluegrass. I don't care if my mandolin sounds like a Gibson. I really don't. Seriously.

----------


## Chris Biorkman

This Kool Aid is delicious.

----------


## Stephanie Reiser

> I mean any good Luthier can open up someone else's mandolin but wouldn't it be best that the person (or company) that made it be the one working on it?


Not neccessarily.

----------


## Stephanie Reiser

> #I have played a couple of loars that yes had great tone, but not $200,000 tone.


You're right; great as it is,not all of that $200,000 is from the instrument's tone.

----------


## Rick Cadger

> When someone says "There's only one Gibson" they couldn't be more wrong. There's one Gil,Monte,Ellis,Lewis,and COUNTLESS other great builders. I'm sick of Gibson only wanting to claim their very short period of time when they made good instruments.If they want to claim that ONE company made Loars and is STILL making fine mandolins, then they HAVE to also claim the ABSOLTUTE JUNK they made for YEARS. Between 1925 and 1985 they made some unbelieveably BAD mandolins. Now is that the same company that made Loars?,of course not. It is also not the same company making things today. How many owners of the Gibson Company have there been? I'd say there's been A LOT of Gibsons and truthfully not very many of those years where they making good stuff. The finest stuff was the teens F4's. None of the Gibson lovers ever want to really discuss in depth the very poorly made mandolins,just the winners. I know for myself, I've seen more dogs than winners.Have you all seen the Wiens mandolin on the other thread? Now that mandolin out Loars anything Gibson is making today by miles.


I think Big Joe's long and reasoned post a page ago was great. Very convincing, and it smacked of experience and sincerity. I believe that Joe knows what he is talking about, and that he is talking honestly. As I understand it, Joe no longer works for Gibson, so doesn't have to wave the company flag.

That said, leaving out the references to BAD, JUNK and other purely subjective stuff, there is an interesting point in testore's rant.

With sole luthier builders there is continuity, and hopefully evolution, in the product. With a company of the size and lifespan of Gibson, the sheer number of people who have been involved in making their mandolins will have meant that the same continuity and direct linear evolution is not possible.

I think testore has a fair point in so far as one cannot talk about "Gibson" as if it were one coherent entity in the same way as someone can talk about a top-notch sole-builder. Therefore I find it conceivable that a good, experienced luthier could build a mandolin with A "Gibson sound" (as I doubt there is such a thing as THE "Gibson sound" - surely there must be many "Gibson sounds"). Using the same materials, specs and techniques, why should the end result not be as close to a given Gibson as another Gibson built by different hands during a different year?

----------


## AlanN

'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
and the mome raths outgrabe. 

Now, where did I stash that hookah? oh, here it is, right next to my MM.

----------


## Narayan Kersak

Wow...one post made 24 hours ago...and now we have 5 pages of stuff.

----------


## Rick Cadger

But a lot of it is noise without any contributing value. Some people just love the sound of their own voices - even when they have nothing relevant or helpful to say.

The substantial, reasoned posts here have been interesting.

----------


## AlanN

This is clearly directed at my latest, and perhaps a few others' posts.

If you search my contributions across this WIDE forum, you'll see mostly relevant contributions. You may agree with some, disagree with some, love some, hate some. But c'mon, this topic has been debated to death. And there is even a reference buried in here to a mandolin of mine out there for sale, which I very much appreciate. A little levity/lightness is sometimes needed, doncha think? I mean, it's only mandolin.

----------


## sinebar

> So Master models are more than I paid for my car, and slightly less than what I have left to pay on my student loan. #There are some really spectacular builders out there who might only charge say 1/4 of a master model. #Do the folks who build the master models at gibson have some special fairy dust that is unavailable to these probably just as capable luthiers? #Or is it just the name and marketing...don't get me wrong, I'm sure the master models play like a dream, but I'm also sure there are some more cost effective builders who create mandolins that play like a dream too. #Thoughts?


Is Gibson an independent company or is it owned by a larger corparation that owns a bunch of smaller companies? If it's owned by a larger corparation then most likely the parent company, like most now days, is driven mostly by profit and don't care about quality at all. These large corparations push sales and profit and as I said they could care less about quality. They will often squeeze all the profit they can from a big name like Gibson until they have ruined it and then sell it. I hope Gibson is not in this situation.

----------


## Jonathan Peck

"Is Gibson an independent company or is it owned by a larger corparation that owns a bunch of smaller companies?"

I believe that Gibson is the parent company. They have other brands that they have aquired that service other musical needs - ie. Baldwin/pianos.

Gibson Brands

"If it's owned by a larger corparation then most likely the parent company, like most now days, is driven mostly by profit and don't care about quality at all."

Every sucessful company cares deeply about quality. They also care about developing products with different price points to service a large consumer base. And what's wrong with rendering a service for a fee or proffit? When you recieve your paycheck, it's an exchange of services - your time and experience for the companies money. If you do a quality job, you will be valued by your employer no matter how large or small he may be.

----------


## sinebar

> "Is Gibson an independent company or is it owned by a larger corparation that owns a bunch of smaller companies?"
> 
> I believe that Gibson is the parent company. They have other brands that they have aquired that service other musical needs - ie. Baldwin/pianos.
> 
> Gibson Brands
> 
> "If it's owned by a larger corparation then most likely the parent company, like most now days, is driven mostly by profit and don't care about quality at all."
> 
> Every sucessful company cares deeply about quality. They also care about developing products with different price points to service a large consumer base. And what's wrong with rendering a service for a fee or proffit? When you recieve your paycheck, it's an exchange of services - your time and experience for the companies money. If you do a quality job, you will be valued by your employer no matter how large or small he may be.


Well unfortunately I was speeking from experience. The manufacturer I work for is owned by a larger company and they have ruined the product to squeeze all the profit out they can. Nothing wrong with profit. I'm all for it. But some companies such as the one that owns the manufacturer I work for, simply don't care about anything but profit. I'm glad to hear Gibson is the parent company.

----------


## Jonathan Peck

> The manufacturer I work for is owned by a larger company and they have ruined the product to squeeze all the profit out they can. #


Well the converse would be to improve the product, something that I think that the modern day Gibson has done with their Master Model line under the tenure of Charlie Derrington and those that have followed him. I think that this should hold true while Gibson remains a privately owned company, but I can't predict the future. I can say from experience though that the MM I own and play was worth every penny that I paid for it and is in no way a ruined product.

----------


## Jonathan Peck

> There are some really spectacular builders out there who might only charge say 1/4 of a master model. #


Sorry, I forgot to ask: Who are these builders who can build an equal to the MM for say 4K+- I've owned several mandolins in this price range and can honestly say that they were not the equal of a MM. Now if you're talking 10K+, then that's a horse of a completely different color.

----------


## Mikey G

I'd have to agree with Jonathan about the quality of the MM. I just bought a new one, and the fit and finish as well as the playability, tone and volume could not be viewed as a "ruined" product. It's a first class mandolin. I do believe that "There is only one Gibson." It is what it is. There are many other fine mandolins out there, each with unique qualities. But to each its own. Buy what speaks to you.

----------


## Links

It is very difficult to discuss (argue) with someone who does not understand the "value" in these higher priced instruments, whether they be a Gibson MM, Gilchrist, or a Dudenbostel. If you think it is all in sound, you are mistaken. If you think it all craftsmanship, you are mistaken. If you think it is all ego driven, you are mistaken. If you think it is all "emotion", you are mistaken. It is probably a combination of all of those, with a large dose of "intangibles", which are much harder to explain.

Quite frankly, after I have heard so much about a product, and expectations are sky high, I am much more difficult to impress. The first time I played Pebble Beach Golf Links, I was not impressed at all  -  probably because of my expectations. Subsequently, I have learned to love the golf course, mainly because of the subtlties that are hard to put into words. There is so much more than just beautiful views of the Pacific, although they are terrific!

The reason some mandolins are "great" is not necessarily because you are blown away the first time you pick it up (although that can happen too  -  like love at first sight), but because they grow have many of these "intangibles" and "subtlties" that are just too hard to express in words.

----------


## sunburst

> Who are these builders who can build an equal to the MM for say 4K+-


I'm not getting into the naming names thing, but if you spend 4K+- on an A-style mandolin you can get the choicest of woods, the nicest of finish, the best of playability, and the best of tone from any number of builders.

If this discussion is supposed to be limited to mandolins with points and scrolls, then that's a little different, but there are still some mighty fine ones out there in that price range.

----------


## Jonathan Peck

Thanks, and good point. I should add that the mandolins that I owned in the 4k+/- price range were all 'F' style mandolins constructed after the second millenia. I also agree that these mandolins were mighty fine indeed and the new owners are very happy....and still are.

On a much finer point, some of these exceptional up and coming builders will charge more when they can and I _have_ noticed their prices gradually increasing and desevedly so.

----------


## Rick Cadger

> This is clearly directed at my latest, and perhaps a few others' posts.
> 
> If you search my contributions across this WIDE forum, you'll see mostly relevant contributions. You may agree with some, disagree with some, love some, hate some. But c'mon, this topic has been debated to death. And there is even a reference buried in here to a mandolin of mine out there for sale, which I very much appreciate. A little levity/lightness is sometimes needed, doncha think? I mean, it's only mandolin.


Actually, no, Alan. It wasn't aimed at your post. I am a big Lewis Carroll fan, and would never consider a quote from him as lacking in value!

It was an observation triggered by the OP's expression of surprise at the number of posts. Personally, I see some value in revisiting the subject. Even though I'm familiar with earlier threads and the defensive ranks that people have historically fallen into.

It'd be good to be able to discuss what makes a Gibson a Gibson, and thus supposedly unique, without the loyaties and biases interfering as they usually do, and have here to an extent. Also, I think passing snipes about biting tongues, flogging dead horses, drinking poison are a bit discouraging to the the OP who seems to have asked a serious question.

Much of the thread has been good, which is why I'm still coming back to read it.

----------


## testore

these pics are only meant to support my stance that they are not one and the same. Gibson has been a lot of things over the years.These are from the 30's,40's , 50's,60's and 70's. I LOVE old Gibson mandolins, this is not a Gibson bashing post. When Gibson was the finest there wasn't anyone making anything to compare,why ? because they where at the top of the heap. Today it is a different story. Again, these pics are only to show that there isn't only one Gibson but many Gibsons.

----------


## testore

...

----------


## testore

...

----------


## testore

...

----------


## testore

...

----------


## testore

...

----------


## Chris Biorkman

Gary,

That is the most beautiful sunburst I have ever seen. Thank you for sharing.

----------


## testore

...

----------


## mandobando

nobody's perfect i guess

----------


## Hans

So, what's the matter with those Gary? #

----------


## testore

Nothing Hans,they're just not made by the same company that made those great teens and early 20's mandolins, that's all I'm saying. Having Gibson on the headstock isn't the last word on quality, other things matter too.

----------


## Hans

If ya squint they don't look so bad! #

----------


## f5loar

Other than the 70's back photo I thought that looked really good. A 20's Ford A model is not the same car as a 70's Ford Victoria but they were made by the same company.
Gibson made changes to all their product line throughout their history. Many changes were improvements. Even they didn't know the '20's F5s were that great until a young gentleman went into a studio in Feb. of 1945. By 1945 the F5 was not being made. Now that Gibson knows the 20's F5 was a success they have gone back to square one and there is no denying the new MM's and DMM's are pretty darn close.
IMO Lloyd Loar if he were alive today would be more than happy to sign these new ones.

----------


## buddyellis

Gary I suppose the nappy inlay, binding that looks like my second mandolin (bad), and obviously thick lacquer are lost on some, but...

----------


## Big Joe

Gibson may not be the same from its inception to modern day, but there are no other luthiers who have been building a consistent product since 1894 either  . As a matter of fact, none of them have been building for the last 85 years. Had they done so you may have seen some equally odd things from any of them. While you may not have thought about it, most luthiers are quite young in their craft compared to 113 years of Gibson production.

Will Kimble was commenting on how much his mandolins have changed since he began building. He feels they are much better today. I have no doubt that he knows what he is talking about. All builders grow and change with time. That is part of the process. 

Of course, the name of this thread is "Master model vs a really good luthier". I hate these kind of comparisons. I say again, it is not a competition. Will Kimble builds the best Kimble mandolin on the planet. Hans Brentrup builds the best Brentrup mandolin on the planet. Michael Lewis builds the best Lewis mandolin on the planet. Lynn Dudenbostal builds the best Dudenbostal on the planet. Gibson builds the best Gibson on the planet. Each may have many points of similarity, but they are not all the same. You can't just throw them all in a bag and pull out any one and expect them to be the same. Any of these mandolins would rock your world, but they are not the same as each other. Thank God we have these choices.

Still, I have yet to see one for 1/4 the price that was the equal of any of these. If you remove the scroll it is still not the same. While there are many good builders, and some are not as expensive as the list of rare air I listed a minute ago, but when they reach that level in their craft, they will be in the same price. There is a reason people will line up to pay what these guys are asking or Gibson for that matter and others cannot command such a price. In time some will move into that echelon, but not many. The market will determine what will sell for what price. So far, none have been 1/4 the price and been comparable that I've seen, and I've seen LOTS of mandolins. 

Just compare apples to apples, which most of these kind of threads do not. Lots of good fruit, but an apple and orange cannot be compared reasonably.

----------


## Glassweb

Has anyone noticed that not only is Big Joe a very thoughtful, generous and patient presence here on the Cafe, but he is a hell of a good writer as well! As usual Joe... great insights and very well said. Ever think of writing a book on well... er... ah, you know what I mean!

----------


## mythicfish

"While you may not have thought about it, most luthiers are quite young in their craft compared to 113 years of Gibson production."

So now we're comparing a corporate structure to an individual.

              "Just compare apples to apples, which most of these kind of threads do not. Lots of good fruit, but an apple and orange cannot be compared reasonably."

I don't even want to imaging your rationalization as to why this constitutes an intelligent arguement. 

Curt

----------


## Mandolution

I have made 3 separate trips to the Gibson Showcase in Nashville to look at their mandos. I looked at 15 mandos from an F5G up to various signature series. Based on this experience, I wouldn't own a Gibson. Fit and finish were pathetic. I could see daylight between the top and side on one of them. Two of them had runs in the finish on the neck; and this is a showcase? I believe their quality has gone downhill since Charlie passed away. Want to raise eyebrows at a jam? Practice more often. Believe I'll stay with Weber.

----------


## Links

Joe - that was very well said! As a matter of fact, one of your points about no builder building as long as Gibson, and if so we would have seen some funny things strikes an interesting point. I mentioned in an earlier thread that I am still buying mandolins made by individual luthiers -  however  -  I almost always look for their most recent mandolins (within reason). I have turned down some very fine instruments from well known builders that were made in the 80's and early 90's, because their newer stuff (in my opinion) is better. If they are not learning as they continue to build, and perfecting their craft, I think they are missing a great opportunity. If their work is not getting better, it is probably getting worse - it is very difficult to stay the same!

----------


## Chris Biorkman

Have the same individual builders been building for the entire 113 years? The same knowledge that goes into building mandolins is available to anyone willing to put in the time and effort to properly learn their craft. It seems logical to me that the most talented and skilled builders would be in business for themselves rather than working for gibson, and based on what I have seen, I'm pretty sure that I'm not off base.

----------


## Rick Cadger

> "While you may not have thought about it, most luthiers are quite young in their craft compared to 113 years of Gibson production."
> 
> So now we're comparing a corporate structure to an individual.
> 
>               "Just compare apples to apples, which most of these kind of threads do not. Lots of good fruit, but an apple and orange cannot be compared reasonably."
> 
> I don't even want to imaging your rationalization as to why this constitutes an intelligent arguement. 
> 
> Curt





> "While you may not have thought about it, most luthiers are quite young in their craft compared to 113 years of Gibson production."
> 
> So now we're comparing a corporate structure to an individual.
> 
>               "Just compare apples to apples, which most of these kind of threads do not. Lots of good fruit, but an apple and orange cannot be compared reasonably."
> 
> I don't even want to imaging your rationalization as to why this constitutes an intelligent arguement. 
> 
> Curt


Curt's first point here is the thing that I keep stumbling over. I do take Joe's point about Gibson having a long history, but I don't think that adequately negates the crucial difference between a company and an individual.

None of the Gibson luthiers has, empirically, 113 years of experience. What they do have is what the sole-builders have: the empirical experience of their individual journeys as craftsmen, and the legacy knowledge of those who went before them.

Logically, I see no basis for assuming any real difference. In order for Gibson instruments to be beyond emulation or equal one or more of the following conditions would surely have to prevail:

* Gibson to have some secret technique/knowledge that cannot be guessed or reverse-engineered by close study of their instruments
* Gibson to employ ALL the best luthiers, leaving none of equal or superior skill to labour freelance in the mando-building world
* Gibson to have exclusive access to a non-substitutable material (magic pixie spruce or fairy maple, perhaps)

So far the arguments that only Gibson can provide instruments like a MM fail to convince me, logically. Bear in mind that no two MMs are identical. Why would the difference between a MM and another luthier's emulation be any greater than that between two MMs?

----------


## Big Joe

The answer to Flattops questions are pretty simple. First of all, there is no single individual at Gibson that has been there that long. That is true, however, there are the plans, templates, and jigs that have been used for various periods of time to make the process much simpler for individuals in the mandolin department. Fairy dust? Not likely. I never saw any when I was there....in any of their plants. Still, the mandolins do have a general tone that is very close to each other in the MM and DMM line. The same is true for each of the Gibson lines. A Gibson mandolin may differ slightly from another Gibson, but it still souonds like a Gibson. The same is true for each of the other luthiers. Their mandolins sound like thier mandolins. While they can emulate any other mandolin they want (if they are good enough, and the ones I mentioned are) but there are a couple points that will differ. First, they do not have the same varnish/ french polish formula. Second, they usually don't want to build Gibsons. The ones I have spent time with don't. They want to build what they build and they build with some slight differences to achieve thier look. 

What Gibson has by its 113 year history is the combined influence of each generation to help the current generation to be what it is. Had it not been for the preceeding 100 years, Charlie Derrington would never have been who he was or able to do what he did. The OAI mandolin department is completely different now from when Charlie was there. The mandolins will be good mandolins, but they will likely not be exactly the same. Time moves on and the influences and tastes of the people making the mandolins will change with time. 

My point is not that MM is the best mandolin ever, but that it is equal to the best on the market today. If you want the MM tone, appearance, and the name on the headstock, you have to go with the MM. Everything else will be different. That is not a bad thing in any way. Let's not put another luthier down by always insisting they must build to the Gibson standard. Some of them really would rather not be labeled in that way. Still, the analogy of comparing apples to apples applies. Lacquer mandolins cannot be compared to the MM in any honest way. Different finishes, woods, glues, etc. If you want to compare Gibson MM you must compare it to other similar products. None are in the market that I have ever seen for 1/4 the price. There are mandolins for 1/4 the price, but not in any way similar. Attempting to decrease the value of one mandolin becuase you may have something against the name on the headstock does not give more value to anothers product. When you want to compare Gibson to the mandolin that sells for 1/4 the price, compare a Gibson with the similar features and finishes. Someone mentiones an A model being 1/4 the price. That is not a reasonable comparison to the MM. Use the A9 or the A5 to make a comparison. If you want to compare a lacquer mandolin, Gibson makes many lacquer mandolins in various price ranges. Use those for a basis of comaparison. Using the MM is not a reasonable comparison. I think I'll go eat my apple  .

----------


## Jim Hilburn

The only reason Gibson makes mandolins today is because individual luthiers such as Mike Kemnitzer and Steve Gilchrist and small companies such as Flatiron showed there was a market for them. 
Gibson is a brand name that has been kept alive through at least 5 corporate sales and has dodged bankrupcy on more than one occasion. Everyone involved in the creation of the original F-5 is dead. The majority of the current mandolin market is individuals and corporations making replica's of mandolins that were created by the original company at a time when the mandolin market was crashing and in that context it is apples to apples. 
The difference is only one company has the legal right to inlay the Gibson name. 
If Gibson had been a stable company in the 60's or early 70's and had the foresight to see the burgeoning market for mandolins and done the retro R&D to make them like the old days they could have stemmed the tide of individual craftsmen who saw that market and responded. But that's not how it went.

----------


## Links

Joe - more excellent points. Another difference that you did not mention (or I missed it) is just the sheer volume of mandolins that Gibson has produced, even in recent years. Not so much the MM, as they are actually quite rare, but the other F models. I would think that one of their luthiers whom has carved 100 tops (+) would really have a "feel" for what makes a Gibson a Gibson and could cull out those tops that don't meet the "standards". I may be wrong, as I don't know how many tops that individual luthiers go through (probably differs greatly), but my guess is that a lot more wood goes through the Gibson shop than most individual builders.

All luthiers now have access to fine wood, but I would also reason that Gibson, just through sheer volume has a little more leverage when buying from suppliers. This may not be a valid point, as I know that some builders look at a lot of wood before they select, but there is probably some advantage here (maybe not so much in quality as in consistency).

I should reiterate here I look forward to obtaining instruments from many of the builders that post on the Cafe. I may even buy one that I like better than my DMM, but it will still not be a MM, which I think is Joe's point all along.

PS: Earlier I said that "luthiers mandolins are either getting better or they are getting worse, but never staying the same." That was stupid (and thank you all for not pointing that out). While that is true for some things, I think luthiers can keep their instrumenst basically the same -  although I would hope that they are continuously trying to get better!

----------


## buddyellis

No doubt Jim. I think that's many are trying to say: its up to the luthier to get the job done, and there was a long, long period of time where Gibson simply did not 'get the job done' and often are not getting the job done, even today. That's not meant as a dig on the fine luthiers they have in shop. It's just meant to say that I've seen a lot of trash over the last few years, even on the MM and DMM level in some cases that an accomplished single luthier shop would NEVER have allowed to see the light of day. The last DMM I saw had literally horrid scroll binding. If I'm paying that sort of money for a mandolin, THIS is what I expect to see in fit/finish. I've never seen a MM that looked like that, period. Maybe there are some out there. Maybe the binding 'flaws' are intentional, trying to 'emulate' some of the slop on the loars. I tend to think its due to the time pressed pace of the construction environment, however. 

Look, I'm a newbie builder. I dont even have the gall to call myself a luthier, although oddly enough, I have a wait list already (boggles the mind I know) I've built a wad of kits, one 'real' instrument and have really, really gotten profoundly addicted to this habit. I drive all over creation to find mandolins to look at, touch, feel, examine, etc. Over the last several months I've went looking at the MM's for inspiration, thinking to myself, 'man, those things cost alot, I bet they must be AWESOME to behold, PLUS its a REAL GIBSON' and after holding a few of them in my own hands, I walked away sorely disappointed. Maybe I expected too much? Heck I *WANTED* to believe in the mystique. I just don't feel the MM/DMM lives up to its own hype, at least in the instances I've seen. Gibson isn't the one to emulate these days. The Jamie-Lynn-John-Jim-Andrews-etc-etc-etc of the world are.

Fact of the matter is, you CAN find some builders out there for at least half the price point of a MM that build at that level, and builders on the same price point that build, objectively, WAY beyond what anything Gibson is producing today. 

But anyway, Ill shaddup now.

----------


## Kevin Briggs

In reference to gaining experience over time, and something being a result of what has come before, I think T.S. Elliot's "Tradition and the Individual Talent" is the last word. The bottom line, according to Elliot, is that there is no escaping tradition, even if escaping tradition is our goal. As far as Elliot's credibility... he's sort of like the Loyd Loar of American Literature, along with Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Take a gander:
http://www.bartleby.com/200/sw4.html

It talks about "writing," but you can read that analogously. It is applicable to all art, including mandolin luthiery.

----------


## testore

I don't like comparisons either. When October baseball gets here all the talking heads go over and over the past as if the 23 Yankees are still suited up. This is the same. The 20's Yankees are not the same team as the 07 Yankees, dumb to make long range estimates on the newer team based on the older teams success. This is the same thing. And Joe is wrong, Gibson hasn't made a consistant product for all those years, those pics proove that. It's not the same team playing and therefore the results vary. I don't mind the variation, just don't try to make me believe that having Gibson on the headstock makes it worth owning. Stradivari made violins for about 80 years, I've seen probably 60 - 80 of them. There wasn't one of those that I wouldn't want to own. Now that's consistancy.

----------


## Rick Cadger

Thanks for the substantial and reasoned response, Joe.

Valid points all, and if anything at least some of them seem to bear out what I was thinking. Especially when you say:

"While they can emulate any other mandolin they want (if they are good enough, and the ones I mentioned are) but there are a couple points that will differ. First, they do not have the same varnish/ french polish formula. Second, they usually don't want to build Gibsons. The ones I have spent time with don't. They want to build what they build and they build with some slight differences to achieve thier look."

And: 

"The OAI mandolin department is completely different now from when Charlie was there. The mandolins will be good mandolins, but they will likely not be exactly the same." 

I believe that if one of the great luthiers often mentioned here wanted to emulate a MM, there is little (in practical, not legal terms) that would stop them from building something so close that the variation would be no more than that between individual MMs. I don't think that they should do so, and I agree that they probably don't want to.

I just shudder at superstition which elevates anything, irrationally, to supernatural levels of untouchability.

Gibson mandolins are great. The ones I've played I like very much. An entry- to intermediate-level Gibson is one of the candidates on my next-step MAS list. 

I've got a couple of fairly expensive (£1500+ is expensive to me) mandolins as well as the Asian cheapies, but the ones I have are both very disappointing, and only my budget instruments have delivered the value that makes me want to list them in my sig (that's what came of having more money than experience a couple of years ago). Maybe it is that feeling that previous high-price purchases haven't delivered that makes me think that MMs, good though they may be, are priced a tad beyond what I personally consider to be sane - for any mandolin.

----------


## Kevin Briggs

Again, try reading the article. It addresses all of that. It even addresses the mistake of trying to recreate what came before, and of trying to completely avoid what came before.

Basically, it explains what mandolin luthiers do today. They are doing somethign that has a history, and they somehow use that history to inform what they are doing. For example, the F style, A style, and two-point dominate the business. That's tradition.

----------


## sunburst

> Someone mentiones an A model being 1/4 the price. That is not a reasonable comparison to the MM.


That would have been me. Twice, so far, in this thread. The first time in response to this quote from Big Joe:

"There is nothing at 1/4 the price to equal it in any way."

Notice that it says "_in any way_"! My response was:

"There are quite a few in that price range that can equal (or surpass?) the MM in tone, playability, and fit and finish. Add points and scrolls and it gets harder to find an equal at 1/4 the price."

That's three ways they can be compared; 1.tone 2.playability 3.fit and finish. That is simply a statement of fact. An A can have tone equal to an F, playability equal to an F, and fit and finish, frankly, _better_ than an F because the builder doesn't have the inside of that scroll to deal with.


The second time I mentioned it was in response to Jonathan Peck who asked:

"Who are these builders who can build an equal to the MM for say 4K+- "

I said:

"I'm not getting into the naming names thing, but if you spend 4K+- on an A-style mandolin you can get the choicest of woods, the nicest of finish, the best of playability, and the best of tone from any number of builders."

That, again, is a simple statement of fact. When it comes to quality of materials, quality of finish, and quality of playability, an A can give you _the best_. I leave it up to the individual to decide if a MM can compare with "the best", I made no such claim. 
And, did I mention lacquer? Where did lacquer come into this? For one thing, I think a lacquer finish can be a top quality finish, but for another thing, you can get a varnished A for 4K+-.

Finally, in his last post Big Joe said:

"If you want the MM tone, appearance, and the name on the headstock, you have to go with the MM. Everything else will be different."

That's quite true, but he also said this of other luthiers:

"While they can emulate any other mandolin they want (if they are good enough, and the ones I mentioned are) but there are a couple points that will differ. First, they do not have the same varnish/ french polish formula. Second, they usually don't want to build Gibsons. The ones I have spent time with don't. They want to build what they build and they build with some slight differences to achieve thier look."

So, if other luthiers can emulate anything they want (if they are good enough and want to), the only real differences left are the exact varnish formulation and procedure (fairy dust?) and "the name on the headstock".

Lastly, I thought I had summed all that up back on page one when I said:
"...the same knowledge, the same techniques, the same materials are available to all the good mandolin builders. There are good instruments in all price ranges. Name recognition is one of the strongest influences on price."

----------


## Kevin Briggs

Men!

Read that Elliot article. Everything you are writing is covered. NFI.

----------


## Cheryl Watson

I'd love to own a Gibson someday and if I had my choice, I'd cherry pick a really great MM. That said, there are great mandolins out there for less made by independent luthiers. The problem is mostly getting on the list and then waiting for them.

Used would be a very good choice--all broken in. If you can find a used Kimble from about 2003 or newer then you would be doing great. They have that traditional look and they have great tone/volume/playability. I own a Kimble and have played several and you can get one with a full, sweet, fat tone or an extremely even-toned, midrange heavy, kick-a#* bluegrass monster. I have played both examples.

Cheryl

----------


## Rick Cadger

> Again, try reading the article. It addresses all of that. It even addresses the mistake of trying to recreate what came before, and of trying to completely avoid what came before.
> 
> Basically, it explains what mandolin luthiers do today. They are doing somethign that has a history, and they somehow use that history to inform what they are doing. For example, the F style, A style, and two-point dominate the business. That's tradition.


Thanks, had read the article shortly before my making my post. 

The general analogy is fine, but it does not directly address my specific concerns, which are not with how tradition informs subsequent endeavour, but rather about examining the unquestioning assumption that because something is terrific it is somehow mystical and beyond the grasp of mortal man to replicate.

Somehow analogy and parallel don't always satisfy. Thanks for the reference, but we'll decide for ourselves when our points are adequately made or addressed.

So far Joe is doing a fine job. I think we perceive things a little differently, but his experience tells me that I need to mull over what he says before setting my own position in stone.

----------


## Jonathan Peck

Hmmm......

----------


## sgarrity

My favorite Norman Blake quote, "It's a Gibson but it'll have to do!"

----------


## Kevin Briggs

Dang, flattop. Cold as ice. I meant no offense, just good jovial discussion.

The article answers your concern well. it somewhat cynically states that nothing is beyond the grasp, that there is no mystical realm, that even the most innovative endeavors are a result of something that came before, in some even miniscuile way.

How can we justify ignoring a great statement that applies to what we're discussing? It's not that you're not deciding for yourself. It's that it's a discussion that's been had before.

Sheesh.

----------


## sunburst

Interesting story about the "banner" on the headstock. They only did that for a short time (in the 40s). I'm told that they discontinued the "banner" when some competitor started an ad campaign saying something like "when good enough isn't enough" or "when you don't want to settle for good enough" or something like that. 
Anybody know if that's true? Any more details about that?

----------


## Jonathan Peck

I read that on the internet...so it must be true  #I thought it was Epiphone, their largest competitor at the time


"Just after WW2, Gibson stopped using the "banner" script logo ("only a Gibson is good enough") because of an advertising campaign used by Epiphone (their largest competitor). Epi advertised their guitars as "when 'good enough' isn't good enough"."

I belive that Gibson eventually aquired Epiphone 

Epiphone history

taken from the article:
"The stock market crash of 1929 drew a line under the age of prosperity. Combined with the sudden slump in the banjo's popularity, it sounded the death knell for many instrument manufacturers. Once again, Epi was ready for the change. At the height of the banjo boom in 1928, he had introduced the Recording series of guitars, each one identified only by a letter ('A' through 'E') and notable for their unusual body shape. The Recording guitars were a combination of spruce and laminated maple, with either an arched or flat top, depending on the price. 

The market was certainly ripe, but the Recording guitars were not a success. One problem was a lack of celebrity endorsement. The other was a lack of volume. The Recording guitars were too small and arguably too ornate, particularly in comparison to the mighty size and volume of the Gibson L-5. At least Epi was taking notes. It wasn't hard to see the L-5's influence on the new Epiphone archtops that followed in 1931, with the Masterbilt Series sharing similar f-holes, pegheads, and even a similar name to the Gibson Master Model range (though the individual model names would be more interesting than Gibson's serial number system, including the DeLuxe, Broadway, Windsor and Tudor). Despite taking inspiration from Gibson, however, the Masterbilts had their own identities. Their intention was not to emulate the Master Model range, but to destroy it."

----------


## mandopete

> Hmmm......


Is that for real?

----------


## Jonathan Peck

> Originally Posted by  (Jonathan Peck @ Oct. 11 2007, 08:58)
> 
> Hmmm......
> 
> 
> Is that for real?


Well, as long as we are going to discuss the decline of the Gibson mandolin as was brought up by Testore, I thought it might help to bring things into historical perspective. The so called 'decline' years seem to parallel a decline in the economic fortunes of most everyone living in the United States at the time and culminated in a World War. Also, the biggest advances in musical instruments at the time were in the new market of 'electrified' guitars, basses and amps. Eventually, the Gibson company wound wind up in the hands of Norlin industies who pretty much abandoned a sinking ship. 

Not to mention that Gibson by no means had a monopoly on the market and faced some pretty fierce competition at a time when people weren't necessarily interested in acoustic instruments. 

Just trying to add a broader perspective to some very narrow viewpoints. It would seem that many other acoustic instrument companies followed this trend of decline all at the same time. It would also seem that the resurection of the acoustic instrument would start with the emergence of folk music starting in motion some unique conditions that would eventually lead to the 'Golden Age of Lutherie' that we are experiencing today. 

Perhaps those more knowledgeable will chime in to clarify/correct some of these points.

----------


## Rick Cadger

> Dang, flattop. Cold as ice. I meant no offense, just good jovial discussion.
> 
> The article answers your concern well. it somewhat cynically states that nothing is beyond the grasp, that there is no mystical realm, that even the most innovative endeavors are a result of something that came before, in some even miniscuile way.
> 
> How can we justify ignoring a great statement that applies to what we're discussing? It's not that you're not deciding for yourself. It's that it's a discussion that's been had before.
> 
> Sheesh.


Don't mean to be cold, but you keep pointing us to that article (which has been read and appreciated) when, frankly, it may support the point, but it doesn't tell me what, specifically, it is that convinces some people that no one could reproduce a MM (commonly paraphased as "If you want the 'Gibson sound' you have to buy a Gibson").

In practical terms that may be true, as no one I am aware of is trying to produce an exact copy. But (and not just in this thread), people seem to have this near-religious reverence for Gibson (and other manufacturers in many fields of craftsmanship) which goes far beyond "Wow, their stuff is great".

I don't want to win an argument that proves there is no mystical unattainability. I want to understand what makes people think there may be. What is this elusive thing that they think no one could copy?

----------


## Jim Hilburn

It's not at all unusual that Gibson to a large degree abandoned the mandolin when they did. We're all very lucky they didn't see the writing on the wall and bail before giving Loar the chance try to prove the vanishing market was still there. Where would we be now if that had happened?
It's also easy to see why they didn't address the mandolin demand that bluegrass started. It was a tiny demographic to begin with at the same time rock and roll, jazz and folk were taking off like wildfire. It made perfect sense for individuals who really cared about mandolins to take up building them.

----------


## Jim Hilburn

I'm glad a close-up picture of that banner inlay was posted.
I always thought it said "only a Gibson is glued enough".

----------


## Snakebeard Jackson

time tells us all. I believe with all my heart that we now are living in a golden age of mandolin building. Never were there so many great makers. Even gibson's I would only buy one for the statis symbol of it. I ear perfers the sound of another luther who I won't drag into this.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> Mandolution: I have made 3 separate trips to the Gibson Showcase in Nashville to look at their mandos. I looked at 15 mandos from an F5G up to various signature series. Based on this experience, I wouldn't own a Gibson. Fit and finish were pathetic. I could see daylight between the top and side on one of them. Two of them had runs in the finish on the neck; and this is a showcase? I believe their quality has gone downhill since Charlie passed away. Want to raise eyebrows at a jam? Practice more often. Believe I'll stay with Weber.


Not too believeable. Anyone else ever went to the Gibson factory in the last year and saw this kind of thing? 

Not likely! I sure didn't. All the new Gibsons I have seen there were immaculate. 

Sounds like sour grapes or some kind of axe to grind? So maybe you saw what you came to see? 

I'd advise you to stay with Weber.

----------


## sgarrity

Gibson can make some good mandolins. Every MM and DMM I've played has been spectacular. A friend of mine has a Bibey model that is killer and another friend has a Steffey that is just as good. BUT....Gibson turns out some pretty mediocre stuff too with barely average fit and finish. If they'd just work on their quality control and consistency a little more it would help their image A LOT in the general mandolin playin' world.

----------


## JHo

I have no particular interest one way or the other, but I would be very curious to hear something like Hans Brentrup's "poor man's Loar" compared to a Gibson MM. I know the DMMs are something else, as that "distressing" would seem to me to involve another process altogether.

----------


## JeffD

> I believe with all my heart that we now are living in a golden age of mandolin building. #Never were there so many great makers.


I have said this myself. Its really amazing.

----------


## cooper4205

> Originally Posted by  
> 
> Mandolution: I have made 3 separate trips to the Gibson Showcase in Nashville to look at their mandos. I looked at 15 mandos from an F5G up to various signature series. Based on this experience, I wouldn't own a Gibson. Fit and finish were pathetic. I could see daylight between the top and side on one of them. Two of them had runs in the finish on the neck; and this is a showcase? I believe their quality has gone downhill since Charlie passed away. Want to raise eyebrows at a jam? Practice more often. Believe I'll stay with Weber.
> 
> 
> Not too believeable. Anyone else ever went to the Gibson factory in the last year and saw this kind of thing? 
> 
> Not likely! I sure didn't. All the new Gibsons I have seen there were immaculate.


I did when I was there about 6 months ago, chipped scroll binding on a Fern, fingerboard side dots that were sloppily done (not inline, and some running of the edge of the binding) on the same Fern, two or three had pickguards that were not rose over the fretboard itself and other fit and finish things like that. 

Sound is a subjective matter, but there were quite a few mandolins at that time that sounded rather tight, with little volume - definitely not what you would expect for the $ . 

But on the flip side, there were also a few that I still wish I would've had the money to buy. They were great mandolins in every regard. I'd definitely buy a Gibson, but I'd want to play it first or at least get a trail period due to the (in)consistency of them.

----------


## woodwizard

MM vs. a good luthier... Hmmmm
MM's are good (no doubt about it) and there are good luthiers that build good mandolins. Yes. But to me those F5's by them cost as much or more. Dudes, Monte's, Gil's etc. Seems I remember C.D. saying once that there are other really good mandolins being built out there other than Gibson. Look who they are copying.

----------


## Jim Hilburn

Once again, they're copying a mandolin designed 85 years ago, not anything Charlie Derrington or anyone else currently involved with Gibson ever did. I don't understand why that is so hard to understand.
I'm outta here on my way to New Mexico!

----------


## woodwizard

Designed by Gibson and still being made by Gibson at very close to the same standards of the golden age of Gibson.
Why is that had to see? Charlie and others helped to keep it to those standards.

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

----------


## Chris Biorkman

The same standards? I bought a goldrush sight unseen over the Internet and was appalled at the workmanship, so i returned it and got a collings MF5 that was light years ahead in the fit and finish department. I saw a Danny Roberts signed A-5 the other day that was even worse. I could go to work for a contractor and have access to all the plans in the world, but unless my skills are up to snuff, my work isn't going to be that impressive, so I don't really take much stock in the argument that a corporation being around for 85 years translates into improved product quality and superior building skill.

----------


## Paul Weber

The price of a good luthier's bluegrass mandolin goes up proportionately with the closer he or she gets to the look and sound of a Loar mandolin. Just my observation.

----------


## Chris Biorkman

Yes, but there are lots of Loars out there for builders to study and try to replicate. They aren't all locked in a vault in Gibson's basement.

----------


## Cullowheekid

Hello,The Gibson MM is a factory made,assembly line type instrument.L. Loar was the inspiration for some of the greatest f-hole mandolins ever built in a factory environment or otherwise.The people building those mandolins were doing something right because of the leadership,good ideas and probably luck.It's hard to keep people motivated to build a instrument that good without someones vision and quality control.Plus a pride in there own workmanship.The mandolins were'nt cosmetically perfect,but the plans and ideas they were working from were sound.Those factory made instruments are standing the test of time.I think Charlie Derrington was able to do something very similar at Gibson.He had obviously studied the great mandolins made by Gibson and was able to motivate a large number of people to follow his vision of making great mandolins once again.I believe he succeded.
 # # We are in a Golden era of individual modern luthiery.Maybe not all,but alot of modern builders have studied the Loar era instruments and what make them produce the sound they do.Many of these builders are making fabulous sounding mandolins ,through years of trial and error.I think like a artist, they study the masters and then take what they've learned and go in their own direction.
 # # I don't know how Gibson will continue to develope.Hopefully they can continue to build great mandolins.Some independent builders have and will continue building great mandolins because they love what they do in their small shops.
 # # It's up to the consumer to decide what they like from their own listening and playing experience.Thanks.E

----------


## Bradley

[QUOTE]Not too believeable. Anyone else ever went to the Gibson factory in the last year and saw this kind of thing?


I went there a few months back with my 13 and 11 year old Son. I was amazed at how cordial that Dave Harvey and the Gang were to us while we were there.Many people talk about the late Charlie Derrington but I will go way out on the limb and say that the Mandolin Dept is in VERY good hands under the direction of Dave Harvey. He is very rich in his knowledge of Gibson History, very deep in his knowledge of Mandolin building, and has a deep desire to keep Charlies vision alive with the help of the same people that worked under Charlie.Dave spent over an hours with us showing us the shop and meeting the Luthiers. He himself was distressing a Skaggs Master Model by hand at his Bench which was neat too.

I played every mandolin in the place and didnt see any that were as bad a mentioned earlier.There were some that I liked better, but none that had issues. I also went to several stores in Nashville where there were many mandolins to look at. At Gruhns they had 6-7 Collings Mandolins, they looked EXACTLY the same, however some were just OK, while one Blonde A Model was superb. While there I looked at another High dollar mandolin that was $13K, and yes it was in the MM arena as far as looks and Sound.
Ironically the folks at Gruhn said 'Yes, thats the 3rd one we have had in and we finally got one to keep." As they had sent the first two back to the Builder.

----------


## simo26

Well folks I have been reading this thread since it's inception and am torn between both sides of this argument. I believe the main reason to own any particular model of mandolin is it's sound, period! That said I am a true fan of great workmanship I have taken meticulous care of my Flatiron A5 as well as my Breedlove Olympic and both are in mint condition, yet they have been constantly played. You see I respect the workmanship as well as the sound and though an instrument is a tool to produce music, I also admire the woodwork.

I have played Reischman's Loar, best mando I have ever played as well as Heidens, Nuggets, Collings and a few other great builders. Without a doubt all had better detail work than the modern Gibsons I have played. Some were well worn with the varnish gone in certain spot. I have coveted a F Model for years, yes there is no cure for scroll fever it just lingers. But for 12 years I did not seek the cure till a month ago.

I stumbled on (I hope this photo loaded.) On a F4 Prototype built by Gibson last year. They built two one X braced (mine) the other tone bars. The dealer that sold it to me told me that the sound was great the color was great , but the detail work had a lot of issues. The dealer was Dexter at Carmel Music who is also the Dawgs buddy and booking agent.

He said that David wanted it and loved the sound while recognizing the less than perfect workmanship on the exterior. Yet he raved about the sound and isn't that the bottom line?

Well I bought it, it has a F5 neck and is one of the best sounding mandos I have ever played! It has the volume of an F hole model and the sound of an F4. Yes I would love Collings like detail work on it but most people never get that close anyway. 

When I look at most mandos that are sold all except Nuggets ,Dudes and Gilchrists lose value because there are a lot of them around. This does not demean them in any way, it is just what the market dictates. But I bought this beacause it is a one of a kind Gibson that just sounds great and if it did not I would have returned it.

Just my 2 cents.

Regards to all,
Alex

Flatiron A5
Breedlove Olympic (currently for sale.)
Gibson F4 Prototype

----------


## Tony Sz

Hello,The Gibson MM is a factory made,assembly line type instrument.[/QUOTE]
And so was a Yugo, as well as a Mercedes. There's a lot that can be said about the concept of assembly line. Better or worse than just one individual? I don't know...I think given all the variables, an argument can be made for both sides. As for myself, if it came out of a multi luthier shop or a single luthier shop, I still just want to play the thing and then make up my mind as to weather I like the instrument or not. I think the MMs are fantastic mandos. My problem is that I seem to run into a lot of fantastic mandos these days, and not all of them were made by just one luthier.

----------


## good_ol_al_61

I am not generally a negative person, but isn't it time for this thread to go away?

The horse stinketh!

----------


## jim_n_virginia

> That's true, but when I was a guitar player I often heard guitar techs and store reps say that trying to get Gibson to honor the warranty for repairs on an instrument was like pulling teeth. #


The guitar techs and reps told you wrong. The experiences I've had with Gibson is they bend over backwards to help and I just had a friend send in a new Benson sig model and it was repaired and returned in record time.

----------


## jim_n_virginia

> I am not generally a negative person, but isn't it time for this thread to go away?
> 
> The horse stinketh!


I'm not generally a negative person either but if you think this thread is a dead horse why read and post in it?

----------


## testore

Simo, When I saw that mando on Dexters web site I was stunned. That is a GREAT looking mandolin. I'm so happy to hear from the owner to say congrats. That is a keeper for sure. That is a throw back to a time long gone and they did as great a job as can be done.

----------


## Kevin Briggs

> I don't want to win an argument that proves there is no mystical unattainability. I want to understand what makes people think there may be. What is this elusive thing that they think no one could copy?


There I go again, getting off track. It's just a bunch of questionable training in literature that never quite explains things. There's always an angle, but never an answer. That's academia for you. 

To try and get back on track with your point, I'll say that our memory seems to start with Gibson. It's as if 1922 was the first year anyone made a mandolin. I don't know what that means, but it seems to apply somehow.

I think Gibson has going for it what so many other revolutionary companies have goign for it. It did it first. To my limited knowledge, Loar made the first F style with f holes and tone bars. While he didn't invent the mandolin, his evolution of the instrument changed everything, particularly when a few fantastic musicians took to the sound. 

I think using Sam Bush's words from his Grey Fox mandomasters workshop sometime in the 1990s says it all. I'm paraphrasing, but he said something like he owns a Gibson because Bill Monroe did, but nowadays you don't have to own a Gibson to have a great instrument.

What Joe and some others seem to state is a good point I think. Joe in particular stays pretty rational, despite his subjective prefernce for Gibsons. An MM is made to have the classic, even standard Gibson sound. It is something they seem to go for, and it is something that pervades through decades of bluegrass music. That said, there is a whole different discussion about whether or not that same bluegrass music is still making headway. 

I'm not the most cerebral bluegrass fan in the world, but I can say that I don't know of many straight bluegrass bands consisting of kids who are in their 20s. King Wilkie comes to mind, but I'd argue against them being straight grass. The Stringdusters aren't straight grass. There are lots of examples. Of course, I know I'll get ripped for that statement for the bluegrass police. I just don't see them on the big festival lineups. I see Abigail Washburn, Thile, Chatham County Line, King Wilkie, etc. Will we need the classic Gibson sound after all of the second and third generation patriarchs are gone?

So, if a band doesn't play straight grass, why would it need the classic bluegrass sound, the Gibson sound? Personally, that's one reason I dont' lust after a Gibson. I truly don't. The other reason is price. I don't think I'm enough of a bluegrass enthusiast to feel the need for the logo on my mandolin. I'm a tone enthusiast, and I do love bluegrass. I'm just into all kinds of stuff, so its not "my music," so to speak. I'll say that as a genre it is probably my favorite, unless we count what Yonder Mountain String Band does as being a genre (jam grass?). That said, I own and love a mandolin with a fairly well-known logo in its own right. But, the tone is so amazingly, wonderfully different that it does what I want. It's diverse, complex, and on and on.

----------


## f5loar

Am I missing something here..... isn't a Weber Fern just another copy of a Gibson Loar Fern? Sure looks like it to me with minor changes to it like the name at the top, the truss rod cover and the tailpiece. Sounds to me you are just a Gibson wanna-be! Now if you told me you had a Montelone Radio Flyer or a John Duffy "Duck" model then I would say you go for the non-traditional. While your Weber Fern may not sound like a Gibson Loar I can say I've not found two Loars with the same sound. Hard to define that sound especially when 2 different players can get 2 different tones out of the same mandolin.

----------


## Mikey G

I think there will always be traditional bluegrass out there, or at least as long as players like me are inspired by the masters from the past. You don't have to have a Gibson to play bluegrass, but for me, it's a heck of a lot more fun having one. Worth every penny? YEP!

----------


## Rick Cadger

> Originally Posted by  (good_ol_al_61 @ Oct. 11 2007, 21:50)
> 
> I am not generally a negative person, but isn't it time for this thread to go away?
> 
> The horse stinketh!
> 
> 
> I'm not generally a negative person either but if you think this thread is a dead horse why read and post in it?


What Jim said.

This thread may be a rehash, but it is interesting and a lot of people are contributing some fine food for thought.




> ...Joe in particular stays pretty rational, despite his subjective prefernce for Gibsons...


Absolutely.




> ...So, if a band doesn't play straight grass, why would it need the classic bluegrass sound, the Gibson sound?...


I have to say, I find the sound of F and A mandolins to be excellent for Irish and Scottish trad tunes as well as for bluegrass - in fact, despite my nick, I have moved away from flat top instruments for sessions in favour of F models.

I don't play solely (or even mostly) bluegrass, but I certainly wouldn't shy away from a decent Gibson at a reasonable price.

The Gibson designs and their copiers are very versatile, which is more than one can say of other designs. You can jig or reel on an F5, but just try chopping on a Stefan Sobell or Jimmy Moon mandolin (fine though they are)!

----------


## Kevin Briggs

> Am I missing something here..... isn't a Weber Fern just another copy of a Gibson Loar Fern? Sure looks like it to me with minor changes to it like the name at the top, the truss rod cover and the tailpiece. Sounds to me you are just a Gibson wanna-be! Now if you told me you had a Montelone Radio Flyer or a John Duffy "Duck" model then I would say you go for the non-traditional. While your Weber Fern may not sound like a Gibson Loar I can say I've not found two Loars with the same sound. Hard to define that sound especially when 2 different players can get 2 different tones out of the same mandolin.


The Weber Fern absolutely follow sthe F5 body design popularized by Gibson and Loyd Loar. That's a no brainer. All F5s follow that design. I'm just talking tone. I find the tone of my Weber Fern much more complex than any Gibson I've ever played. That's my personal observation. I guess you'd have to hear it to know, but the chop on my Fern is ridiculous. I have to not hit it as hard so it won't be too much. I've just had a great experience with Webers, starting with my custom Bitteroot, and continuing with my Weber Fern. It is so full and rich. It's complex and unique. The finish is unquestionably flawless. I have no complaints, and no MAS of significance. I love it.

----------


## mandoman4807

> Originally Posted by  (f5loar @ Oct. 12 2007, 01:17)
> 
> Am I missing something here..... isn't a Weber Fern just another copy of a Gibson Loar Fern? Sure looks like it to me with minor changes to it like the name at the top, the truss rod cover and the tailpiece. Sounds to me you are just a Gibson wanna-be! Now if you told me you had a Montelone Radio Flyer or a John Duffy "Duck" model then I would say you go for the non-traditional. While your Weber Fern may not sound like a Gibson Loar I can say I've not found two Loars with the same sound. Hard to define that sound especially when 2 different players can get 2 different tones out of the same mandolin.
> 
> 
> The Weber Fern absolutely follow sthe F5 body design popularized by Gibson and Loyd Loar. That's a no brainer. All F5s follow that design. I'm just talking tone. I find the tone of my Weber Fern much more complex than any Gibson I've ever played. That's my personal observation. I guess you'd have to hear it to know, but the chop on my Fern is ridiculous. I have to not hit it as hard so it won't be too much. I've just had a great experience with Webers, starting with my custom Bitteroot, and continuing with my Weber Fern. It is so full and rich. It's complex and unique. The finish is unquestionably flawless. I have no complaints, and no MAS of significance. I love it.




I owned the Weber Fern prototype. It was a very nice mandolin..that was until I played a Charlie D signed MM.

It has cured my quest for a better mandolin for life  




Darrell

----------


## Kevin Briggs

> I owned the Weber Fern prototype. It was a very nice mandolin..that was until I played a Charlie D signed MM.
> 
> It has cured my quest for a better mandolin for life  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Darrell


That's good news! It's a fortunate thing to be satisfied with a mandolin.

----------


## Hans

Gawd, I hate these "versus" threads. Who exactly is the judge?
 Here are some pretty valid points:
 No two mandolins sound the same.
 No new instrument sounds the same as a 5 year old one.
 No modern, freshly made, new mandolin sounds like a Loar.
 No two Loars sound the same.
 There is a range of tone into which Loars and instruments built to Loar specs fall that can be generally classified as the "Loar tone".
You cannot build 90 years into a new mandolin.

Whew! Feel better now... #

----------


## Rick Cadger

> ...
> I owned the Weber Fern prototype. It was a very nice mandolin..that was until I played a Charlie D signed MM.
> ...


And it was probably still a very nice mando afterwards, too.

----------


## Kevin Briggs

> Gawd, I hate these "versus" threads. Who exactly is the judge?
>  Here are some pretty valid points:
>  No two mandolins sound the same.
>  No new instrument sounds the same as a 5 year old one.
>  No modern, freshly made, new mandolin sounds like a Loar.
>  No two Loars sound the same.
>  There is a range of tone into which Loars and instruments built to Loar specs fall that can be generally classified as the "Loar tone".
> You cannot build 90 years into a new mandolin.
> 
> Whew! Feel better now... #


you said it, Hans. Individuals can only decide for themselves when it comes to what they like and silike, mandolins or no. 

I see the "verses" thing pop up all the time in the Cafe. I'm probably as guilty as anyone about it. However, a lot of times I know that people simply express how much they like their manodlin, and how much they like it compared to another, and the response it some sort of debate. 

I try really hard not to knock any mandolin or builder. If I do it, I do it unconsciously, because I understand that my brain is the only one in the world. Being married for a number of years teaches a person that! Sometimes I like to discuss how satisfied I am with my mandolin, and I do it to break up the polarized views that constantly bubble up. I am always checking my opinions, to make sure they are not over zealous, so I guess I tend to check others opinions too. 

My opinion - and it's only my opinion - is that nobody can tell someone else what to like. We can only talk about what we like. If people take offense to it or something, they must not be completely secure with what they like or something. I can't say how many threads I've joined simply because people are trashing a mandolin they don't have, have never played, or something similar. It doesn't make sense. It's like me saying I like Pho, a Vietnamese soup (it's soooo good) and someone saying, well, I've never eaten it, but I've heard it's just like Chinese food, and that's not good fo someone. A counter argument can be, "well every restaurant makes a different kind." That's true, but it's still the basil, cilantro, veggies, beef broth. Who can say if it tastes good ro not? My wife hates it, but only because she hates other asian food she's eaten. She's never tasted Pho. 

I don't know if this all makes sense. I hope so.... #

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> ratehrbpickn: My opinion - and it's only my opinion ....My wife hates it[Pho], but only because she hates other asian food she's eaten. She's never tasted Pho. I don't know if this all makes sense. I hope so....



In the context of this discussion you make PERFECT sense!

Well said (in my opinion).

----------


## Bill Van Liere

The versus can be a bad deal as it attempts to establish one as the winner and another as second place or less than that. It's all to easy to forget that the people creating mandolins, independent and production, have thier heart and soul into and doing the very best they can. Many times this is thier life work and livelihood so that a negative comment or a second place can be damaging to them and possibly thier household.

Me, being the judge of where to spend my money decided to go the Brentrup route, it suits my playing style. I also enjoyed a playing sample of David Harvey's MM, I suspect it suits his playing style. Both are great mandos.

Times are good, even if the dead horse continues to run, but I am not the moderator here.

Thanks for your patience Scott

----------


## Daniel Wheeler

like martins with guitar players everybody wants a gibson in the mando world...this is kinda of ridiculous..collings makes both guitars and mandos better than martin and gibsons new ones...of course we are excluding the the 40-s and 50's martins those are beasts..but i digress...you can find plaenty i mean plenty of private luthiers who make better mandolins than gibson...daley collings weber and the brw i played at winfield was a cannon etc...I may start an uprising but its time...YOU CAN FIND BETTER MANDOS THAN GIBSON!!   :Cool:

----------


## Chris Baird

For one, the folks building Gibsons are good luthiers. For two, it is alright to compare different instruments, but, trying to see who has the "best" subjective opinion has no end. 

Comparing virtual instruments on the internet is not a useful endeavor. The only way to compare two or more mandolins is to get a hold of them, play them, compare, etc. And, if they are for sale, maybe one can even win (you over).

----------


## Larry Simonson

Now that I have read this thread from beginning to end it reminds me of a big corporate/government meeting to decide where to award a monsterous contract to aquire thousands of mandolins, MM's or elsewhere. Lots of testimony, much of it self-serving, was heard for each side and maybe now is the time to call the question. Ooops, I just woke up and recognized we each can do as we darn well please.

----------


## Rick Cadger

> like martins with guitar players everybody wants a gibson in the mando world...this is kinda of ridiculous..collings makes both guitars and mandos better than martin and gibsons new ones...of course we are excluding the the 40-s and 50's martins those are beasts..but i digress...you can find plaenty i mean plenty of private luthiers who make better mandolins than gibson...daley collings weber and the brw i played at winfield was a cannon etc...I may start an uprising but its time...YOU CAN FIND BETTER MANDOS THAN GIBSON!!


Although I have enjoyed the sensible bits of the thread, I'd guess it's nonsense like this that makes people talk about "versus" threads.

This post seems designed to annoy. Thank heavens I started using caps in the conventional manner. Someone might have thought that was me... **shudder**

I don't think the OP intended a "versus" or bashing thread, but there are always some people waiting to hijack, ruin or whine about a thread they either don't like or don't understand.

----------


## Jonathan Peck

I think if someone did a blind taste test of differnt makers, everyone could pick a personal favorite - when played by capable hands...they'd ALL sound pretty darn good though. We tend to turn molehills into mountains around here, and slight differences become major points of contention. 

There are some points of comparison here that I find very pertinent. For one, in that price range, it seems that ALOT of people expect that fit and finish should be as close to perfect as humanly possible. Some makers achieve this and some don't. This seems to be the most common dissapointment voiced here with Gibson mandolins.

If I were to do a direct comaprison between Collings, Weber and Gibson using fit and finsh as the sole criteria, it is more than likely that these mandolins wouldn't finish in the same order as they are priced - ie. the most expensive one having the best finish and the least expensive one having a lesser degree of attention to detail in the finish and appointments.

If I then did a comparison between these three makers with tone and playability as the sole criteria, then I suppose some would prefer the collings tone, others would prefer Weber and another group would like the Gibson.

If you factor in the cost of each, well that's where I think the division starts as you just don't hear many (if any) tales of a signed Collings, Weber or indepent getting into public unless they are up to snuff. OTOH, you do hear complaints about signed Gibson's. I've read enough accounts here about Gibson mandolins being sent back due to quality concerns that is reasonable to believe that some do get signed and released into circulation with problems that a new owner would consider a flaw. I have not read anything that would lead me to believe that Gibson is not willing to make things right.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is that when it comes to brand loyalty, we all have different criteria -price, fit & finish, playability, tone etc... I have a hard time reading the 'gibson is $%#@' posts as I've played enough to know that this is too broad of a statement to be believeable. Gibson has built thousands of mandolins, then someone plays three or four and comes on here and states emphatically that they're all $%#@....all I have to do is unlatch my case to know that this is not 100% accurate

----------


## woodwizard

Quote: I bought a goldrush sight unseen over the internet and was appalled at the workmanship.

biorkman,
Too bad you didn't get my goldrush instead because you would have kept it for sure. Absolutely flawless, beautiful wood and awesome tone. Even Sam Bush when he played it mentioned that it was a very good one. Hope you're happy with what you got. I am.
Have a nice day.

----------


## Daniel Wheeler

_&lt;Comment removed for violating board posting guidelines.&gt;_

----------


## Daniel Wheeler

haha I guess they didt like my last post

----------


## ipmala888

The trick is when you buy 'Gibson', you just have to keep on searching until you find that one-in-a-million instrument that falls in the 2% category of being called a 'freak'. I think their production of the MM's has been much more consistent-- as compared, let's say, to their acoustic guitars. In 2005, the Gibson Showcase in Nashville notified me when a really 'freaky' new MM (2% category) came off-the-line. It had been handpicked by Charlie, Danny, Big Joe, Dave H., and Jackie M. So I grabbed it before someone like Ricky Skaggs could get his grubby little hands on it--(he visits Gibson on a regular basis to try out all the new MM's and DMM's before they leave the factory). All the MM's and DMM's are considered exceptional, but the fact is that some are better than others. Just like the 'Loars'.

----------


## mand0l1n

<a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/GIBSON-MANDOLIN-F5_W0QQitemZ190165139365QQihZ009QQcategoryZ10179QQ  ssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQc



&lt;br&gt;mdZViewItem" target="_blank">Gibson</a>


"Only a Gibson is Good Enough"

Hmmmm....

----------


## JeffD

> <a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/GIBSON-MANDOLIN-F5_W0QQitemZ190165139365QQihZ009QQcategoryZ10179QQ  ssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> &lt;br&gt;mdZViewItem" target="_blank">Gibson</a>
> 
> 
> "Only a Gibson is Good Enough"
> ...


I'm sorry. I am not convinced that was ever a Gibson. That bug ugly peg head scroll?

And that neck repair - if it ever was a Gibson, it sure ain't now.

Trout line sinker more likely.

----------


## Justin E.

There's nothing special about the master models. There are a lot of very fine instruments by other luthiers. In all reality, I've played more than a couple of Gibsons, including their master model, and I absolutely hate them. They were hard to fret and had a fairly hollow and weak sound.  I know there are some good sounding Gibsons out there, I haven't played one yet. My advice is to look for a good luthier who can build one that sounds to your liking. Then, play to your heart's content!

----------


## Bradley

Wow....I guess no horse is too dead to beat

----------


## Narayan Kersak

Kick it again! Kick it again!

----------


## Kevin Briggs

Please, no...!

----------


## good_ol_al_61

C'mon Scott...save us.

----------


## Jonathan Peck

"The trick is when you buy 'Gibson', you just have to keep on searching until you find that one-in-a-million instrument that falls in the 2% category of being called a 'freak'"

I think the 'trick' is to buy used. You not only get a much more affordable instrument, but you get one that's been played some to.

----------


## Big Joe

Jonathon...Gibson has not built a million mandolins in its entire history. I have seen more than a few "freak instruments". I have owned (and still do) some of these. Still, 2% of a million is 200,000. I would hate to claim there are that many great mandolins on the planet let alone built by Gibson. I doubt Gibson has built anywhere near that number in its history either.  .

Have I dived into the lake yet?

----------


## Keith Erickson

Let me go put on another pot of coffee

----------


## f5loar

My guess is since 1922 when the first F5 was introduced that Gibson,Inc. has put out less then 7,500 F5s in 84 years.
(Note: this total would include the F5L and any other F5 style like the signature models).

----------


## mandolirius

&lt;The trick is when you buy 'Gibson', you just have to keep on searching until you find that one-in-a-million instrument that falls in the 2% category of being called a 'freak'. In 2005, the Gibson Showcase in Nashville notified me when a really 'freaky' new MM (2% category) came off-the-line. #It had been handpicked by Charlie, Danny, Big Joe, Dave H., and Jackie M.&gt;

It took a while, but this thread finally unlodged that niggling little half-formed thought that was lodged in the back of my head. I hear versions of the quote above all the time. Essentially, the message I get is that you can't just order a Gibson, that's taking way too much of a chance. No, you've got to select from among them, in order to get a "good un". 

Great if you happen to live in Nashville or even near a major dealer. I live on an island off the west coast of Canada. Seattle or Vancouver would be the closet major cities. I lived in Vancouver for 20 years and rarely saw a Gibson mandolin in any music stores. Seattle probably offers a bit more choice, but still, according to this "lottery" concept of getting a good Gibson, I'm not liking my chances. 

On the other hand, you don't really hear that about builders. You can be as involved in the process as you like, select the woods, whatever. In the end theoretically get what you were hoping for, or even better. This is according to the type of anecdotal evidence you often see right here on this very message board.

I'm just a working stiff, definitely not MM material. I aspire to maybe a Fern, Bush or Goldrush, or there are lots of luthiers out there who are still in the under-10K market. I'm not quite ready to make a purchase yet, another six months to a year, maybe. The message I'm getting is that maybe I'd be better off with a luthier because of this idea that only *some* Gibsons are good enough.

----------


## Jonathan Peck

> Jonathon...Gibson has not built a million mandolins in its entire history. I have seen more than a few "freak instruments". I have owned (and still do) some of these. Still, 2% of a million is 200,000. I would hate to claim there are that many great mandolins on the planet let alone built by Gibson. I doubt Gibson has built anywhere near that number in its history either.  .
> 
> Have I dived into the lake yet?


I had to go back and check because I thought that I had said thousands, and that I was refering to the period of time from when Gibson first started building mandolins. While I wasn't clear on the second point, I did find the quote that you are refering to

"Gibson has built thousands of mandolins, then someone plays three or four and comes on here and states emphatically that they're all $%#@....all I have to do is unlatch my case to know that this is not 100% accurate"

Millions? Dat's alot of mandoze!

----------


## mythicfish

No matter whose name is on the headstock, I won't buy an instrument that I can't play. I'm sure that reputation means something to some folks, but for me it only extends to a vague assurance
that the instrument will not manifest any structural anomalies for a period of 5-10 years.

----------


## Jonathan Peck

Oooops, Big Joe, I think that your refering to the comment by ipmala888 that I Quoted. Sorry, never mind...


BTW - I give, what's a freak mandolin? Inquiring minds want to know

----------


## jhbaylor

Speaking of Gibson...

What are the big name luthiers that once worked for Gibson such as Bruce Weber, Sim Daley, etc. that now build on their own or who have built on their own in years past?

----------


## Keith Erickson

Have you thought about purchasing a Givson? #Beware of imitation #

I'm sure that Gibson never built a mandolin that looked like a sitar

----------


## Lefty&French

> Still, 2% of a million is 200,000.


 I thought 2% of a million was 20,000.

----------


## Bill Snyder

> Originally Posted by  (Big Joe @ Oct. 23 2007, 18:52)
> 
> Still, 2% of a million is 200,000.
> 
> 
>  I thought 2% of a million was 20,000.


So Joe is a luthier and not a mathmetician.

----------


## Lefty&French

> Originally Posted by  (Lefty&French @ Oct. 23 2007, 15:27)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Originally Posted by  (Big Joe @ Oct. 23 2007, 18:52)
> 
> ...


I guess I know why Gibson mandolins are so pricy!!!

----------


## mandolirius

I actually would like to hear other's views on this idea that to get a good Gibson you've got to be able to select from many, or have a friend at the factory or be Ricky Skaggs' brother-in-law or whatever. What about a guy who just has to order one and take his chances? I assume no Gibson at that level is going to outright stink, so how do you even know if you've got one of *the* ones. As an about-to-be purchaser, all this stuff about "getting a good one" is a bit troubling.

----------


## Jim Hilburn

I thought Joe was a salesman, not a luthier or a mathmatician.

----------


## Bradley

Mandolirius,

 I just bought a Gibson unsight and unplayed....Believe you me there is no second thoughts that I got one of "them". Gibson is about making you happy. Order one and get it in, and if its not right blast the heck out of them until they make it right...I am sure that you wont be disappointed.

----------


## Jonathan Peck

When I got my MM, it was already 4+1/2 years old. It still sounded new/green (to me). I've been playing it regularly for about 8 months and it has changed somewhat to my ears. 

Most notably, it sounds drier, thicker, deeper and is louder and more responsive. Tonally, it also sounds more developed while maintaining a focused clear midrangey tone with good bass and trebles and is nicely percussive while maintaining individual string clarity. 

It has also always had a great chop, and I love the feel of the neck. It made me want to play it every day from day one. That's how I knew. I like an adirondack top with five years of playing in it and I'm looking forward to how it's going to sound with ten years playing.

There are days when I play it very hard, and days when I play it softly. It responds nicely to both types of pick attack. I also like the aesthetic of it. It has a sort of vintage vibe to it. It's also one of a finite number of mandolins that are signed by Charlie Derrington.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> Justin E. :There's nothing special about the master models. #There are a lot of very fine instruments by other luthiers. #In all reality, I've played more than a couple of Gibsons, including their master model, and I absolutely hate them. #They were hard to fret and had a fairly hollow and weak sound. #I know there are some good sounding Gibsons out there, I haven't played one yet.


Have you ACTUALLY played a newer Gibson mandolin? I wonder. 

I think your statement is complete nonsense and not remotely possible. #Why don't you just say what your REAL issue with Gibson is?

I would guess that between mandolin camps and jams and lounging in stores I have played more than 50 new (say post 1995) Gibson F-model mandolins and I have yet to encounter a dog. #Some are obviously better than others -- but if you have not played a good sounding Gibson mandolin then I will guess that MIGHT not have played ANY Gibsons. 

What is more they are CERTAINLY not "hard to fret" - -that is total nonsense.

I do not think your post passes the "SMILE TEST".

----------


## Nolan

What difference does it make if you order a mandolin sight unseen from a small builder vs Gibson? #In both cases you're taking a chance... at least Gibson has replacements ready to go if you don't like that one. # 
And the whole 2% thing is misleading in my opinion anyways. #At that level... they could all be "freaks" depending on what you want to hear in an instrument. #Even Danny Roberts "freak" Master Model was one he built for a customer who returned it because he thought it was a dud.

----------


## pager

This post is making me crazy ... I'm switching to banjo now.

----------


## Nolan

> This post is making me crazy ... I'm switching to banjo now.


I've always wondered where banjo players came from....

----------


## Chris Biorkman

> Have you ACTUALLY played a newer Gibson mandolin? I wonder. 
> 
> I think your statement is complete nonsense and not remotely possible. #Why don't you just say what your REAL issue with Gibson is?
> 
> I would guess that between mandolin camps and jams and lounging in stores I have played more than 50 new (say post 1995) Gibson F-model mandolins and I have yet to encounter a dog. #Some are obviously better than others -- but if you have not played a good sounding Gibson mandolin then I will guess that MIGHT not have played ANY Gibsons. 
> 
> What is more they are CERTAINLY not "hard to fret" - -that is total nonsense.
> 
> I do not think your post passes the "SMILE TEST".


That's the second time in this thread that you have implied that someone is lying. First about someone'e experience at the Gibson showcase, and now this. Why would he lie about his experience? I have a hard time believing that all the negativity you hear about Gibson is just coming from liars or people who are jealous because they don't have enough money to buy one of their instruments.

I don't think that anyone can argue that Gibson has pretty abysmal quality control. If they didn't, these threads wouldn't pop up from time to time. It doesn't happen with other major builders. I have owned three Gibson instruments, all new and from the last five years, and two of the three had major issues with fit and finish.

Give the accusations a rest. If you like your Gibson, who cares what anyone else thinks.

----------


## mandolirius

&lt;What difference does it make if you order a mandolin sight unseen from a small builder vs Gibson? &gt; 

I'm feeling the weight of disapproval here, as I'm getting the sense a lot of folks want this thread to end. 

But to answer your question, the difference is this:

you hear this about Gibsons from time to time, again sometimes right here on this very forum, but not about individual luthiers. I guess the implication is that they don't have quality-control issues and Gibson does (or can, or has at some points in the past, I really don't know). As I said, I'm way up here in a remote corner of Canada and see very few newer Gibson mandolins. A guy's got a MM, which is out of my league and another friend has an '80 F5L, which is an excellent mandolin. Played my first A9 last week and thought it was a great mando for the money, couldn't think of anything better in that price range.

----------


## mand0l1n

Gibson and Dead Horse. I see the connection.

I think I get it now!

----------


## foldedpath

> What difference does it make if you order a mandolin sight unseen from a small builder vs Gibson? In both cases you're taking a chance... at least Gibson has replacements ready to go if you don't like that one.


A reputable independent luthier will work with the customer to iron out any problems on delivery, whether it's a question of a small tweak or (in an extreme case) building another instrument or refunding payment. Unless what the luthier delivered is just way off the mark, it's an opportunity to drill down to what you want as an ideal instrument, vs. taking another stab at a random instrument off the rack. 

An independent luthier's livelihood is on the line with every sale, because word-of-mouth reports can do much more benefit or damage to a small one-man operation, than a large corporation like Gibson. 

The one big difference when you work with an independent luthier, is that you need a lot of patience with the process. Things don't move that fast in the alternate reality of "luthier time," and there won't be a wall full of finished instruments for you try, if you don't like what's delivered. But then you should know that going into the relationship anyway. The results can be worth it, for some of us.

FWIW, I've bought several custom guitars from small shop luthiers, sight-unseen and "sight-unheard", and I never had to return a single one.

----------


## Kevin Briggs

> A guy's got a MM, which is out of my league and another friend has an '80 F5L, which is an excellent mandolin. Played my first A9 last week and thought it was a great mando for the money, couldn't think of anything better in that price range.


This is the second time you referred to a MM as being out of your league. I think that's the wrong attitude. You are a mandolin player, and your presence on this forum attests to how much you like playing the instrument. I don't think any instrument is too good for you. As a matter of fact, a very nice instrument will help you do two things:

1. Play more
2. Get better tone more easily

I played the guitar for eight years before I got a good one, and I'll readily admit that I wasted a lot of time with a poor instrument before getting my Martin HD-28. When I got that thing, it begged me to play it all the time, and I did. Plus, it made sounds that I couldn't make with my hands, so a great relationship was forged. I never really knew how to play until I got that great guitar.

Mandolin is the same way. Whenever you play 10 or 20 in a row, you'll notice that you pull some different things out of each, for the most part. For example, I never have played another mandolin the way I played the Breedlove Spirit I used to own. I didn't mean to play it a certain way, it just happened, even on songs I already knew.

Get the best mandolin you can afford, and know that it is not "out of your league." You deserve it.

----------


## Nolan

> &lt;What difference does it make if you order a mandolin sight unseen from a small builder vs Gibson? &gt; 
> 
> I'm feeling the weight of disapproval here, as I'm getting the sense a lot of folks want this thread to end. 
> 
> But to answer your question, the difference is this:
> 
> you hear this about Gibsons from time to time, again sometimes right here on this very forum, but not about individual luthiers. I guess the implication is that they don't have quality-control issues and Gibson does (or can, or has at some points in the past, I really don't know). As I said, I'm way up here in a remote corner of Canada and #see very few newer Gibson mandolins. A guy's got a MM, which is out of my league and another friend has an '80 F5L, which is an excellent mandolin. Played my first A9 last week and thought it was a great mando for the money, couldn't think of anything better in that price range.


If you are worried about ordering something sight unseen but want to go with a small luthier you might check out Gail Hesters mandolins down here in Washington state. It's not far from where you live.

----------


## Big Joe

I don't work for Gibson any more. I have no reason to speak anything but what I believe to be the truth. My jobs covered everything from one of the senior managers at OAI to GM or the retail and repair and restoration division. Yes, I do know how to build and how to repair. I've got many, many years experience with these things. 

While at Gibson the last number of years my office was at the same place as OAI. I saw nearly every mandolin coming through there. The quality control was very high. Charlie and Danny were in charge of quality control and any of us managers that saw something we felt was an issue had the right to have it redone or scrapped. The guys who worked there (it is a very small shop) have an incredible amount of pride in what they do. They checked themselves constantly to see that no problems were encountered.

In those years I was very involved in many of the things that went on in OAI under Charlie Derrington. We looked at, inspected, and played those mandolins to ensure they were right. We are mandolin addicts. We coule not wait for another mandolin to come through so we could check it out. It was a mandolin player's heaven.

I saw a couple of mandolins in that time that I felt were duds. Amazingly, someone else bought them becuase they felt they were the best they ever played. One of the members on the cafe who will remain nameless purchased a mandolin that I thought was pretty mediocre. He brags about it all the time here on the cafe and everywhere he goes. This just shows that different strokes for different folks. Danny and I have very close tastes in mandolins. Charlie had a bit different taste tonally. Still there were very very few we were not in love with. Of all the MM's and DMM's we built (and yes, we did play them all...every one!) not a one was a dog. There are a few I think are better than others, but that is to me. Just because one does not meet my criteria tonally does not mean it won't send someone else into mando heaven.

I say all that to say this. There were a period of years when Gibson did not build mandolins to the same quality standard of tone and structure as they did during Charlie's and Danny's reign at Gibson. Even now they are still good mandolins, but not exactly the same as under Charlie. Much like the years post loar, there are little subtle differences that will make them different. Time will tell how they measure up. Still, during the time I was there you could order a Gibson and be sure you were going to get a wonderful mandolin. In addition, if you had a problem all you had to do was to contact me or Charlie and it would be taken care of. PERIOD! We worked very hard and often went beyond the call of duty and beyond the warranty to ensure a person would love the mandolin they have. We have exchanged mandolins for a couple of people, set them up, made different adjustments, repaired issues that were not warranty issues when a consumer did something stupid. We went beyond what we were required. The difference is this. During that era, and it may not have changed, but I have no idea now, Danny, Charlie, and myself were completely sold on what we were doing and felt our job was to build the very best mandolin we could within the structure we set for ourselves. We were always available. No other major manufacturer put the name, e-mail address, and cell phone number of one of its senior managers on the internet so people with issues could reach someone who would know what the instruments were and how they work. It also gave approachability to anyone who had a question, need, or question about Gibson bluegrass products. A good share of time was spent answering these questions and dealing with any questions a Gibson owner had....new or old.

The less than stellar issues of the 60's and 70's and even the 80's gave us a bad reputation. I believe the team of myself, Danny Roberts, and Charlie Derrington did a GREAT job of overcoming that reputation to deliver what many consider to be the finest mandolin since Lloyd Loar himself. Many of the top players have BOUGHT an MM or DMM for their own use. Even some of the luthiers on the cafe have or may still own an MM or DMM. 

Let me say again, there are many fine luthiers from every sized shop. Whether it is a one man shop or a shop with six guys doing the work, there are some fine builders. Some of them make a mandolin of comparable quality to an MM. They are not cheap either. When they get that good, they can and do demand a lot of money for their product. In addition, whether it is the MM or an upper end mandolin from a small builder, they cannot build enough of this quality mandolin to provide everyone a mandolin of this quality. Just not enough days in the year. There are less than 75 MM and DMM from the inception of the program to now. Not many mandolins. Still each one is stellar and well worth the money they sell for. If you want to compare a small builder who can build at that level, I'm happy to refer you to them and I have often done so. You don't have to have a Gibson, but it is still the standard by which everyone else measures theirs. This entire thread is evidence of that. Even the name of this thread is evidence of that. 

I think I will walk away from this thread at this point. You can find a dog in any pound, no matter who runs it. Still, when you look at all the negative posts about Gibson, it is usually the same few who post thier negative remarks but because they do so often, it seems like many more.

Remember, I have no stake in what Gibson does now. I have only spoken about the time I was there. It was an incredible experience and a dream job for any mando nut! The many years I worked with and for Charlie Derrington were the most incredible of my life.

----------


## mandolirius

&lt;This is the second time you referred to a MM as being out of your league. I think that's the wrong attitude. You are a mandolin player, and your presence on this forum attests to how much you like playing the instrument. I don't think any instrument is too good for you. As a matter of fact, a very nice instrument will help you do two things:

1. Play more
2. Get better tone more easily&gt;

My mistake for not being more clear. I meant, financially. Ability-wise, I'm absolutely certain I deserve a MM, no doubt whatsoever  

A guy can always win the lotto or whatever, but I just work a regular job for regular wages. I could give up every conceivable pleasure in life for a few years but I don't want to make that kind of sacrifice. It's also a bit of personal statement. I don't have any problem with mandolins in the 10-15 range, but above that and I really can't justify the cost.

----------


## f5loar

_&lt;Comment removed. Violates board posting guidelines&gt;._

----------


## Keith Erickson

_&lt;Comment removed. Violates board posting guidelines&gt;._

----------


## Scott Tichenor

No one is going to win this argument. If you're here to have some fun tossing flames, you might want to review the posting guidelines. I'm through tolerating some of what's transpired here.

----------


## sunburst

> You don't have to have a Gibson, but it is still the standard by which everyone else measures theirs. This entire thread is evidence of that. Even the name of this thread is evidence of that.


As much as I would like to be out of this thread myself, I feel like I can speak for some other builders when I say I prefer not to measure my mandolins by the Gibson standard, but instead like to measure them against the standards of Steve Gilchrist, Mike Kemnitzer, Fletcher Brock, Jim Hilburn, and others who consistently present excellent workmanship and attention to detail from a small shop.

----------


## bjewell

I'm so glad Big Joe is here. And those people here who just want to learn and talk about mandolins probably feel the same way.

----------


## mandolirius

&lt;No one is going to win this argument. If you're here to have some fun tossing flames, you might want to review the posting guidelines. I'm through tolerating some of what's transpired here.&gt;

I had the impression the thread was close to dying before I piped up. So, to whatever extent I've been responsible for prolonging it, let me offer an apology. 

To close, I'll say this: there's two kinds of mandolin pickers - those that get to play a lot of different stuff and those that don't. Sometimes, out here in the weeds, one feels the need to check in with the rest of the world onece in a while. Thanks to some responses here and some pm's I've received, my feeling is that the idea you somehow need to get the "pick of the litter" to get a good Gibson is overblown. Being toured through the factory, offered a selection of the best wood, treated like royalty etc is an experience few will have. I got a blow-by-blow of what that was like from Emory Lester in a leisurely conversation at a bluegrass camp. That's about as close as I'll ever get, but I think this kind of thing often works its way into the accepted wisdom. In other words, that's what everyone has to do to get a good Gibson. It really doesn't make any sense, and I've concluded the chances of getting a dud are pretty slim and that any problems could be dealt with easily.

----------


## Scott Tichenor

> "As much as I would like to be out of this thread myself, I feel like I can speak for some other builders..."
> 
> "I had the impression the thread was close to dying before I piped up."


Memo to self: reduce medical dosage administered to board members through cookie so they are able to unplug from such conversations in future.

----------


## Chris Biorkman

> No one is going to win this argument. If you're here to have some fun tossing flames, you might want to review the posting guidelines. I'm through tolerating some of what's transpired here.


That's a shame, Scott. I really think we were just a few posts away from reaching some sort of consensus and settling this matter once and for all. #

----------


## G. Fisher

_&lt;Comment removed. Violates board posting guidelines&gt;._

----------


## f5loar

_&lt;Comment removed. Violates board posting guidelines&gt;._

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> Big Joe: I believe the team of myself, Danny Roberts, and Charlie Derrington did a GREAT job of overcoming that reputation to deliver what many consider to be the finest mandolin since Lloyd Loar himself. #Many of the top players have BOUGHT an MM or DMM for their own use. #Even some of the luthiers on the cafe have or may still own an MM or DMM. #


I agree and I thank you and the rest of the Gibson team for it.

I will put the two 2002 Gibson mandolins that I own up against any mandolin made by any luthier or company. #

Yes, there probably are some very expensive mandolins that are a little superior overall in one catagory or another - case by case -- than my F5L (Danny Roberts) -- but the differences are not worth the extra money to me. 

And volume and tone of the modest little A9 I use on travel has totally blown away more than on owner of a fine "other brand" F-style. #

And by the way neither one of them is "hard to fret"! 

I agree with others I am out of this string no matter what is said next.

----------

