# Octaves, Zouks, Citterns, Tenors and Electrics > CBOM >  Octave mandola and octave mandolin

## halfling356

I have been reading and some sights have said that an octave mandola and octave mandolin are the same instrument, just labled differantly. Is this true?

----------


## Unseen122

For the most part yes. Octave Mandolin is the American way to say it. Octave Mandola is the European way. Some times it will just be called a Mandola. A Tenor Mandola is what we Americans call a Mandola. A dead give away is the Scale Length, an Octave will be 20+", a Mandola will be about 17" plus or minus one or two.

----------


## catmandu2

How about neck widths? My mandola has a very narrow, mandolin-like width. I know a lot of OMs and zouks are wider.

----------


## Unseen122

The neck gets wider as the scale gets longer. Thanks for pointing that out.

----------


## Gerry Cassidy

An octave mandola is more commonly called a Mandocello and is usually larger, and tuned a fifth below an Octave Mandolin.

----------


## Bob DeVellis

I'm not sure that "more commonly" is universally true but certainly people do refer to a mandocello (tuned an octave below mandola) as an octave mandola. I think the take-home message is that it's really important to specify scale length and customary tuning when talking about these big-boys in order to avoid confusion. Now, I think I'll go play my baritone mandolinetto.

----------


## jmcgann

One way to avoid confusion

What's all this about whatd'ya call that thing?

Great debate continues to rage over what to call each instrument. Perhaps "the fighting is so fierce because the stakes are so small"  In the UK and Europe, the octave mandolin is often called an octave mandola, which I find quite confusing and musically incorrect. I look at it like this:

Mandolin- GDAE is standard, it can be tuned a number of other ways including GDAD, GDGD, AEAE etc.

Mandola- CGDA

Octave Mandolin- same as mandolin GDAE an octave lower. Again, many variants on the tuning.

Mandocello- same as Mandola an octave lower, long scale.

Bouzouki- longer scaled version of octave mandolin, but less frequently tuned like one- usually a "modal tuning" like ADAD. Not be be confused with Greek Bouzouki, which is DAD (older tuning) or CFAD, whole step below the top 4 strings of the guitar (contemporary tuning).

Cittern- as above (though may be short scaled) with 5 courses (sets) of strings. I recently played one tuned GDAEB with the extra high string, but most seem to be tuned with an extra low string pitched at D or C. Again, the tuning can vary wildly depending on the player's preference. Stefan Sobell appropriated this name from an olde English stringed instrument also called the cittern.

To me, "Octave Mandola" is wrong and defies logic, because it is not a mandola tuning, it is not an octave below the mandola tuning, and has nothing to do with a modern mandola. The instrument tuned an octave below the mandolin is, logically, an octave mandolin. The fact that hundreds (or thousands) follow a belief doesn't necessarily make it right.

I know it sounds like "American arrogance" and it is not my intention to offend our European brothers and sisters- but it has nothing to do with nationality. To me, "mandola" means it is tuned like a mandola with a C in the bass. "Octave mandola" would simply be a mandocello.

"Octave mandolin" pretty much tells you what the instrument IS.

----------


## Bob DeVellis

What John says, of course, makes complete sense. But I think the alternative system makes an odd kind of sense, too (although I prefer John's nomenclature). Think of a mandola as a low-pitched member of the mandolin family, generically. Then, think of there being two primary types of mandola. The tenor mandola is a tenor-pitched "big mandolin" and the octave mandola is an octave-pitched "big mandolin." In other words, "mandola" refers to its status as a "big mandolin" while "octave" denotes its pitch relative to the point of reference for the whole mandolin family, namely, the mandolin, and differntiates it from other mandolas (i.e., other big mandolins). Confusing, absolutely. This sytem also leaves out other "big mandolins" in the use of "mandola." But there is a certain imperfect internal logic to it, although it's not the usage I prefer. I guess, we really don't need the term "mandola" at all because we could call the two instruments "tenor mandolin" and "octave mandolin." But if I'm not mistaken, there were actually mandolas before there were mandolins. Mandola is Italian (in a certain dialect, in others it's "mandorla") for almond. When our beloved little brother came along it was a little almond, mandolino. So, I guess we should really be calling the mandolin a soprano mandola.

I hope I haven't done too much injustice to musical history here. Others, please correct me as needed.

----------


## Gerry Cassidy

Bob,

I must admit I don't have much of the actual histories of these families of instruments in my lil' ol' noggin, so I can't comment in that regard, but the way I keep it all organized, once again, in my lil' ol' noggin is pretty simple and has worked for me:

Violin - Mandolin

Viola - Mandola

Cello - Mandocello

Bass - Mandobass

Note: The Octave Mandolin doesn't fit into this architecture, and somewhere along the road I had read it was because of this our British Isle Brethren, out of simplicity, called it a Mandola for lack of better term. 

This may make no sense to some, but has worked for me over the years.

----------


## Tennessee Jed

You do have to be careful if you are on a site that doesn't specialize in mandolins and other instruments in the mandolin family. The may call an instrument one thing but when I read more about the item I become suspicious. I've seen items on e-bay call "octave mandolin / bouzouki / mandola". I've seen the exact same brand and model instrument called different things on different websites.

----------


## otterly2k

always good to ask the scale, just so you know what you're dealing with...

----------


## Steph

Check out the thread on the Sobell on "the auction site". Dan posted - and my experience is the same, is that Sobell seems to refer to the &lt;20" scale versions he makes as "octave mandolas" with an lengthed mandola scale. The longer scales as octave mandolins and of course on from there to zouks.

----------


## WildWest

> An octave mandola is more commonly called a Mandocello and is usually larger, and tuned a fifth below an Octave Mandolin.


There are so many differences of opinion as to the Mandolin Family, however one way that might help is the following.

Mandolin- GDAE is standard, it can be tuned a number of other ways including GDAD, GDGD, AEAE etc. Corresponds to the violin. Tuned like a violin.

Mandola- CGDA Corresponds to the viola. Tuned like a viola.

Octave Mandolin- same as mandolin GDAE an octave lower. Again, many variants on the tuning. No modern bowed counterpart.

Mandocello- same as Mandola an octave lower, long scale. Corresponds to the 'cello. Tuned like a 'cello.

Bouzouki- longer scaled version of octave mandolin, but less frequently tuned like one, due to the long scale length making GDAE tuning unwieldy (without a capo)- usually a "modal tuning" like ADAD. Not be be confused with Greek Bouzouki, which is DAD (older tuning) or CFAD, whole step below the top 4 strings of the guitar (contemporary tuning).

Cittern- as above (though may be short scaled) with 5 courses (sets) of strings. I recently played one tuned GDAEB with the extra high string, but most seem to be tuned with an extra low string pitched at D or C. Again, the tuning can vary wildly depending on the player's preference. Stefan Sobell appropriated this name from an olde English stringed instrument also called the cittern.

To me, just my opinion: the name "Octave Mandola" defies logic, because it is not a mandola (viola) tuning, nor is it an octave below the mandola tuning (which would be mandocello), and has nothing to do with a mandola-as-tuned-like-a-viola as you'll find in the US marketplace.

The instrument tuned an octave below the mandolin is, to me, most logically an octave mandolin. 

"Alto mandola" and "Tenor mandola" mean different things to different people in various countries.

A viola isn't an octave below a violin. In the USA, mandolas are tuned like violas- CGDA.

I believe the naming conventions could be simplified, but the horse is out of the barn.

----------


## mrmando

Trouble is, the mandola was developed first. The mandolin is a variant of the mandola, not the other way around. 

When the Europeans say "mandola" they mean the GDAE instrument. The term "octave mandola," is redundant and exists mostly to distinguish the GDAE instrument from the CGDA instrument.

----------


## zoukboy

> Bouzouki- longer scaled version of octave mandolin, but less frequently tuned like one, due to the long scale length making GDAE tuning unwieldy (without a capo)- usually a "modal tuning" like ADAD.


If you are talking about the Irish bouzouki it actually has nothing to do with the octave mandolin, being a development of the Greek bouzouki after it was introduced to Irish folk and traditional music in the late 1960s. By far the most common tuning is GDAD (ADAD is fairly rare).

----------


## Bertram Henze

:Sleepy: 
If anybody asks what instrument I play, my answer depends on where I am:
In the US: octave mandolin
In the UK: octave mandola
In Germany: Mandola
In a fit of boredom: Quare Bungle Rye

If I had a mandola in the US, I would call it a tenor mandola in the UK and an alto mandolin (Altmandoline) in Germany.
If I had a mandocello, I'd call it a mandocello everywhere.

Then there's those long-neck contraptions whose name, tuning and number of strings are completely arbitrary: Bouzouki, Cittern, Blarge, 8string, 10string, GDAE, CGDAE, CGDAD, GDAEB, GDAD, GDGD, ADAD, DDDD ....
The only way out of this would be a length/tuning code, like "CGDAE25", but you know how it is with good ideas...

----------


## magic-marmelade

what a crazy debate on how to call these instruments...

Somehow i like the fact that the names are not really fixed and depend on the place,
i like this slight mystery around the mandolin family
i actually would be sad of someone would come and be so clever to set the perfect names to all of them that everybody agree with...
but even in that case, sooner or later,  there would for sure be a guy building a new kind of cross-gender that wouldn't fit in the system... for exemple the norvegian "5 chorus Låtmandola" with a screw system of individual capos

To people i meet that i know barely recognize that what i play has a funny shape for a guitar i tend to say it is the big sister of mandolin... usually they get happy on with that answer! 
So i could propose this, Mandolin, and all bigger is *big sister*... 
but well i see the end of my beautiful theory that people would sooner or later have to say the *big 5 courses sister in C* of the mandolin...

----------


## Dr H

[Removed duplicate post]

----------


## Dr H

> TOctave Mandolin- same as mandolin GDAE an octave lower. Again, many variants on the tuning. No modern bowed counterpart.


Actually there is a modern bowed counterpart, but it hasn't caught on in any big way.  It's called the "tenor violin," and it's tuned like the violin, one octave lower.

Among the reasons it hasn't caught on is that it's an awkward size, and neither its makers nor its players can seem to agree on whether it should be played on the shoulder (like violin and viola), on the knees (like viol da gamba), or pegged to the floor (like a cello).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_violin_family


The core mandolin family parallels the core violin family:

Violin --------------- Mandolin --------------- G3 D4 A4 E5
Viola --------------- Mandola ---------------- C3 G3 D4 A4
(Tenor Violin) ------- (Octave Mandolin) ------ G2 D3 A3 E4
Cello --------------- Mandocello ------------- C2 G2 D3 A3
Bass --------------- Mandobass ------------- E1 A1 D2 G2

So by my reckoning the "octave mandolin" really ought to be called the "tenor mandolin," since that's the pitch range it functions in, relative to other members of the instrument's family.

Of course the fussy (like members of the Catgut Acoustical Society) would insist that viola and mandola be called "alto violin" and "alto mandolin", etc.  But we don't need to be that fussy, do we?  :Wink:

----------


## mrmando

> Actually there is a modern bowed counterpart, but it hasn't caught on in any big way.  It's called the "tenor violin," and it's tuned like the violin, one octave lower.
> 
> Among the reasons it hasn't caught on is that it's an awkward size, and neither its makers nor its players can seem to agree on whether it should be played on the shoulder (like violin and viola), on the knees (like viol da gamba), or pegged to the floor (like a cello).


One can also take a standard violin and put really heavy strings on it for octave tuning. Reportedly works best when the violin is somewhat overbuilt, which a lot of student models are. Darol Anger is among the players who've done this successfully. 



> The core mandolin family parallels the core violin family:
> 
> Violin --------------- Mandolin --------------- G3 D4 A4 E5
> Viola --------------- Mandola ---------------- C3 G3 D4 A4
> (Tenor Violin) ------- (Octave Mandolin) ------ G2 D3 A3 E4
> Cello --------------- Mandocello ------------- C2 G2 D3 A3
> Bass --------------- Mandobass ------------- E1 A1 D2 G2


The problem with this is that the tenor violin, as you admit, isn't part of the "core violin family." It's a Hutchins octet instrument that hasn't caught on in the mainstream violin world, so your argument here is mostly self-defeating.



> So by my reckoning the "octave mandolin" really ought to be called the "tenor mandolin," since that's the pitch range it functions in, relative to other members of the instrument's family.


"Octave" is just as descriptive of its pitch range as "tenor," methinks. And the octave mandolin is actually the oldest instrument in the mandolin family, not some 20th-century concoction by a nutty professor. So there is no valid point of comparison to the tenor violin other than that they happen to have the same tuning. 



> Of course the fussy (like members of the Catgut Acoustical Society) would insist that viola and mandola be called "alto violin" and "alto mandolin", etc.  But we don't need to be that fussy, do we?


Well, I'm not interested in perpetuating, any further than necessary, the myth that the mandolin family of instruments are derived from the violin family. They're not. They have some things in common, but each family of instruments has its own line of development. 

We owe the confusion over the term "mandola" in large part to the Gibson Company, which decided somewhat arbitrarily that a mandolin orchestra should have instruments with the same tunings as a string orchestra. This led to the promotion of the CGDA mandola as the "proper" instrument for playing tenor lines in such an orchestra. Gibson propaganda actually derided octave mandolins as inferior hybrid instruments. The Gibson model was more or less successful in the States but not so much in the rest of the world. And that's why "mandola" means something different in the United States than it does elsewhere.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> Actually there is a modern bowed counterpart, but it hasn't caught on in any big way.  It's called the "tenor violin," and it's tuned like the violin, one octave lower.
> 
> Among the reasons it hasn't caught on is that it's an awkward size, and neither its makers nor its players can seem to agree on whether it should be played on the shoulder (like violin and viola), on the knees (like viol da gamba), or pegged to the floor (like a cello).


Just my opinion and that does not count for much but I wish the tenor violin HAD or WOULD "catch on"  they sound just wonderful!

----------


## Mandobart

I have a "tenor violin"; its a regular fiddle with octave strings.  Tuned like a normal fiddle, one octave lower.  It has a nice low, rich sound, but as you might expect not as full as it would have with a 18 - 20" scale.  Of course, I've played a 20" viola and it was quite a stretch!  Here's a thread on Fiddle Hangout where I discuss some problems I had with the super sensitive octave strings.  I need to post a video of it some time, up close (or amplified) it's a cello sound out of a violin.

----------


## bratsche

> Actually there is a modern bowed counterpart, but it hasn't caught on in any big way.  It's called the "tenor violin," and it's tuned like the violin, one octave lower.
> 
> Among the reasons it hasn't caught on is that it's an awkward size, and neither its makers nor its players can seem to agree on whether it should be played on the shoulder (like violin and viola), on the knees (like viol da gamba), or pegged to the floor (like a cello).


In other circles, the name "baritone violin" is given to a regular full-sized violin fitted with heavier strings to make it play an octave lower.  That is tricky, and the key seems to be that the worse, most harsh sounding violins make the best octave violins.  I've seen one, but was unimpressed with its lower register (maybe the violin used was too good?)  I thought it would logically work better to string a bigger-bodied viola in low GDAE tuning.  So I currently have my backup viola set up that way, just for the fun of it.

bratsche

----------


## bratsche

Hey Mandobart, I was typing that while you were posting.  :Laughing: 

How do you like your octave/tenor/baritone fiddle?  I haven't tried the special octave strings (viola length), but was just making do with some odd ones I had lying around.  The worst part for me is getting the bow hairs to give  sufficient traction on the low strings (I use an old heavy "beater" bow for best results so far!)

bratsche

----------


## RBMB

My take on this is that when the US became independent all _ _ _ _ broke loose and instrument naming became out of control.  If we had a King we would have official names and less confusing posts.  This is not unlike the confusion experienced when Cambridge was invited to play in the first Rose Bowl.  Until the UN finally forms a commission on the uniform naming of instruments perhaps these instruments should be referred to as "the instruments that can not be named."  (Apologies to Harry Potter fans.)

----------


## Beanzy

Based on what we call them in our orchestra I don't think there should be any confusion.

As people have pointed out the mandola came first (GDAE) if people mean anything else they say "do you mean an American mandola?" (CGDA). That way it's clear where the blame for any confusion lies.  :Wink: 

If anyone goes to America we have to take on board many other interesting uses of words and we'll cope with translating "tenor mandolin" no problem.  :Whistling:

----------


## tmsweeney

I know Darol Anger plays what he calls an "Octave Violin" not sure how he tunes it  but I assume GDAE
I have seen it when he was playing with TISQ and the body is larger than a standard viola and comparable to what we call an "octave mandolin"

also worth noting Darol plays an "octave mandolin" F style ( Monteleone?) on both the Duo album with Mike Marshall and on his Heritage album.

----------


## Chip Booth

> also worth noting Darol plays an "octave mandolin" F style ( Monteleone?) on both the Duo album with Mike Marshall and on his Heritage album.




Are you refering to Mike Marshall's Monteleone mandocello?

----------


## Mandobart

> Hey Mandobart, I was typing that while you were posting. 
> 
> How do you like your octave/tenor/baritone fiddle?  I haven't tried the special octave strings (viola length), but was just making do with some odd ones I had lying around.  The worst part for me is getting the bow hairs to give  sufficient traction on the low strings (I use an old heavy "beater" bow for best results so far!)
> 
> bratsche


Bratsche - I like the sound of my "octavated" fiddle.  The only downside for me is the lower volume, which I've corrected by adding a two-head internal piezo.  I use the viola incredibow with Pirastro cello rosin; pulls more/better tone out of those fat strings than a violin bow.

----------


## tmsweeney

Chip Booth - nope
on the Duo album they do a couple of tunes with just mandocello or guitar and octave mandolin ( rotagilla, children's dance, it's dark)
I don't have the vinyl copy anymore but there were pictures of Darol holding the octave
I think Mike had a Gibson mandocello at the time - not his  Monteleon

on his Heritage album they do an instrumental of "talk about sufferin" Darol plays the octave with pencils like a hammered dulcimer
he might play some octave violin on Diary of a Fiddler

----------


## Dr H

> Based on what we call them in our orchestra I don't think there should be any confusion.
> 
> As people have pointed out the mandola came first (GDAE) if people mean anything else they say "do you mean an American mandola?" (CGDA). That way it's clear where the blame for any confusion lies. 
> 
> If anyone goes to America we have to take on board many other interesting uses of words and we'll cope with translating "tenor mandolin" no problem.


Fair enough.  

Just don't be too shocked at what you get when you order "tea and biscuits" in Pennsylvania.   :Wink:

----------


## Bertram Henze

> Just don't be too shocked at what you get when you order "tea and biscuits" in Pennsylvania.


Curious now. I've been to Pittsburgh but never arrived on the idea they could drink anything but black water refilled indefinitely in diners there under the name of "coffee" (that was before the advent of Starbucks). Now what would have happened to me if I (a tea drinker) had ventured such an unusual request?

----------


## Dr H

> Curious now. I've been to Pittsburgh but never arrived on the idea they could drink anything but black water refilled indefinitely in diners there under the name of "coffee" (that was before the advent of Starbucks). Now what would have happened to me if I (a tea drinker) had ventured such an unusual request?


I'm thinking you wouold have gotten a cup with a Lipton(tm) teabag in it, a pot of boiling water, and maybe one of these:



Or perhaps a corn muffin, if it were Tuesday.  :Smile:

----------


## Bertram Henze

> I'm thinking you wouold have gotten a cup with a Lipton(tm) teabag in it, a pot of boiling water, and maybe one of these:
> 
> 
> 
> Or perhaps a corn muffin, if it were Tuesday.


Doesn't look too bad - with that butter (?) on the side it's almost like that usual scone & clotted cream they give you in Cornwall.

----------


## Dr H

> Doesn't look too bad - with that butter (?) on the side it's almost like that usual scone & clotted cream they give you in Cornwall.


Whereas "scone" always makes me think of something like one of these:



... and probably best not to to say what "_clotted_ cream" makes me think of...

Was it Oscar Wilde who observed that Great Britain had everything in common with America except for language?  :Wink: 

But, we seem to have digressed from mandolins.

----------


## Chip Booth

> Chip Booth - nope
> on the Duo album they do a couple of tunes with just mandocello or guitar and octave mandolin ( rotagilla, children's dance, it's dark)
> I don't have the vinyl copy anymore but there were pictures of Darol holding the octave
> I think Mike had a Gibson mandocello at the time - not his  Monteleon
> 
> on his Heritage album they do an instrumental of "talk about sufferin" Darol plays the octave with pencils like a hammered dulcimer
> he might play some octave violin on Diary of a Fiddler


Interesting, I will look into that.  I did notice that Darol was giving an OM seminar at Wintergrass this year and I thought that was odd, since I had no knowledge of him playing one.

----------


## southcoastsounds

Oscar Wilde - the "two nations divided by a common language".

----------


## Dr H

> The problem with this is that the tenor violin, as you admit, isn't part of the "core violin family." It's a Hutchins octet instrument that hasn't caught on in the mainstream violin world, so your argument here is mostly self-defeating.


Well, not exactly.  There existed historical tenor violins in the 17th and 18th centuries, as well.




> "Octave" is just as descriptive of its pitch range as "tenor," methinks.


It isn't, though.  "Octave" simply tells you that one instrument is tuned a certain interval away from another, but it doesn't tell you _in which direction_ that interval lies.  There is, for example, an instrument known as an "octave guitar" which is tuned an octave _higher_ than the standard guitar.

On the other hand, "tenor" places the interval in a specific directional relationship to something like "soprano" or "bass".




> And the octave mandolin is actually the oldest instrument in the mandolin family, not some 20th-century concoction by a nutty professor. So there is no valid point of comparison to the tenor violin other than that they happen to have the same tuning. 
> 
> Well, I'm not interested in perpetuating, any further than necessary, the myth that the mandolin family of instruments are derived from the violin family. They're not. They have some things in common, but each family of instruments has its own line of development.


Well, I agree with you that the mandolin and violin families have separate lines of development; I wasn't suggesting otherwise.

I would dispute, however, that the octave mandolin is the oldest instrument in the mandolin family.  The most plausible histories I've seen trace the mandolins back to the  16th century _mandore_, and the various tunings of the mandore were closer to those of what we now call the "mandola" (in the US) than to the octave mandolin.

I will concede, however, that there isn't 100% consensus on this lineage among authorities.




> We owe the confusion over the term "mandola" in large part to the Gibson Company, which decided somewhat arbitrarily that a mandolin orchestra should have instruments with the same tunings as a string orchestra. This led to the promotion of the CGDA mandola as the "proper" instrument for playing tenor lines in such an orchestra. Gibson propaganda actually derided octave mandolins as inferior hybrid instruments. The Gibson model was more or less successful in the States but not so much in the rest of the world. And that's why "mandola" means something different in the United States than it does elsewhere.


I agree with you about the Gibson connection, as well.

There is a lot of precedent for instrument-makers attempting to distinguish their particular wares from those of competitors by coining distinctive names for them which didn't always have much to do with their actual construction or function.  Witness such curiosities as "contralto clarinet"; "baritone guitar"; or even "English horn".

----------


## southcoastsounds

The late Alison Stephens had a wonderful bowl-back octave which she called The Beast.  See 

http://www.alisonstephens.com/ and click on Instruments then Beast.  You can hear this being played on Differencias on her 2009 album Souvenirs for Mandolin & Guitar.

There's a very useful interview with her here about how she acquired it.  In this article she refers to the instrument being called either an octave mandolin or an octave mandola.  

It's a shame that there still isn't a common usage for it.  Paul Hathway, a maker in London who made the instrument I have calls them an octave mandola.  I think I prefer this really despite the arguments against. 

Tom

----------


## Bertram Henze

> It's a shame that there still isn't a common usage for it.  Paul Hathway, a maker in London who made the instrument I have calls them an octave mandola.  I think I prefer this really despite the arguments against.


That's what Roger Bucknall of Fylde calls it also. I understand that's common UK nomenclature. Germans call it just Mandola, b.t.w.
The name business is what Shakespeare called it: _full of sound and fury, signifying nothing_ (I may have taken liberties with the context here  :Grin: ).

----------


## Dr H

When it comes to instrument nomenclature, it usually does eventually boil down to an argument just for the sake of argument.  Look at the "baritone guitar", for example, which has been variously described as "a guitar tuned [an octave; a fifth; a forth; a major third] lower than a standard guitar."  or "a six string bass guitar".

I still have trouble wrapping my head around the term "Irish bouzouki", which sounds to my ear similar to "Jewish Catholic" or "dry water".

From a manufacturer's point of view, though, if the odd name gets you to notice their instrument, that's what it's all about.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> I still have trouble wrapping my head around the term "Irish bouzouki", which sounds to my ear similar to "Jewish Catholic" or "dry water".


Each of these pairs tells a chronological story backwards (after - before). Water can run dry, and people can change religion. The Irish have a tradition of sucking foreign instruments into their own music world, thereby making them Irish. There are other examples, such as the Irish tenor banjo or the Irish violin (aka fiddle).

----------


## southcoastsounds

More strangely, the most commonly played concertina in Ireland is actually the "Anglo/German" system.

----------


## Eddie Sheehy

That's because the other choice is an "English" concertina...  :Wink:

----------


## zoukboy

> I still have trouble wrapping my head around the term "Irish bouzouki", which sounds to my ear similar to "Jewish Catholic" or "dry water".


Might as well get used to it...   ;-)

Seriously, though, the customary names for instruments have more to do with who you are as opposed to exactly what the instrument actually is.  The desire for standardization is understandable in our post-Darwin age when we tend to generate a taxonomy for everything, but the processes of instrument change and adaptation are fairly complex and a simplistic "family tree" sort of approach really doesn't end up being very helpful. The reasons certain peoples adopt certain instrument names are usually socio-cultural and political and trying to argue "sense" from a point of view that assumes a genetic relation based on nomenclature is bound to cause frustration.

----------


## Dr H

I don't disagree with you, Zoukboy, but I also recognize that we are subjected to certain tribulations due to that lack of standardization in nomenclature.  

For example, in these very fora are documented my attempts to determine the actual stringing ang tuning for a tiple.  My tiple turned out to be a "tiple Colombiano" which is, in fact, very different from an American tiple -- different number of strings, different number of strings per course, larger size, etc.  Several of the suggestions I was offered didn't seem feasible with the gauges of strings involved.  

I went to string-makers, and was originally sold a set of "tiple" strings, supposedly for the Columbian instrument I had, but they also weren't feasible for the tunings suggested.  Turns out they were indeed Columbian tiple strings, but for a _third_ variation of the instrument, the tiple Colombiano _requinto_.  Note that all concerned simply refered to all of these instruments as "the tiple".

Eventually I worked it out, but it was a long and arduous road, littered with more than a few broken strings along the way.

Recently, I have gone through the same thing with the charango family, trying to find a set of strings for a ronroco.  One group of experts tell me the ronroco uses charango strings, but offers a tuning an octave below the charango which makes the strings sound like loose bailing twine.  Another tells me the ronroco is only tuned a 4th below the charango, and that it's the _charangon_ that's tuned an octave lower.  A third expert tells me that "ronroco" is another name for the "charangon".

Well, I eventually worked that one out as well, down another long and winding road.

I am imagining the fun a new clarinet player would have, searching for "clarinet strings," in a culture that called the clarinet a "mandolin".   :Confused:

----------


## zoukboy

> I don't disagree with you, Zoukboy, but I also recognize that we are subjected to certain tribulations due to that lack of standardization in nomenclature.  <snip>


I feel your pain, but that whole process sounds like fun to me. I stopped buying sets of strings years ago (except for electric guitar) because I prefer to use a tension calculator and micrometer to figure the optimum gauges for any instrument I own. Speaking of which, this forum is a great place for researching such information. Chances are one of us will know something or someone that can help.  :-)

----------


## journeybear

My head hurts from merely scanning through these posts. Having just bought this intriguingly named instrument ("Electric - Mandolin - Octave Mandolin - Tenor Guitar - Ukulele") and curious to learn what the conventional consensus regarding tuning an OM might be, I took a look here and ...  :Disbelief:  ... oh well, can't win 'em all. I did ask the seller to string it to be tuned GDAE. I'll see what I get. I am well aware eBay listings are often entitled in such a way as to attract maximal prospective buyers, especially when the seller isn't completely sure what the item actually is. Not necessarily the case here, but my understanding (or hope) is that an OM is tuned GDAE while a tenor guitar is typically tuned CGDA, mandola-style.  :Wink:  At least mine is. 

Dr. H.: That is not a scone, but rather a sconce. I suspect you might have known that all along.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> ...but my understanding (or hope) is that an OM is tuned GDAE while a tenor guitar is typically tuned CGDA, mandola-style.


Mostly not. If there's other hopes of yours I can shatter, just let me know  :Cool:

----------


## journeybear

I'm thinking of the chart Dr. H. presented in post #19. Also, if you look at the instrument I mentioned and scroll down, you'll see a chart of tunings and corresponding string gauges. If this is reliable, for GDAE it recommends 42-29-19-12. I also present this chart at emando.com, which offers a range of possibilities. Like Fox Mulder, I want to believe ...

----------


## Bertram Henze

I was rather referring to the tenor guitar part. Same ambiguity as with a tenor banjo.

----------


## journeybear

OK. See, this is what I'm talking about - this is just a dizzying array of tunings and string gauges, only part of which I was aware of before this. I must confess, I am having some doubts about my new purchase. Might be a bit more complicated than I had thought, getting the string gauges right.

----------


## zoukboy

> OK. See, this is what I'm talking about - this is just a dizzying array of tunings and string gauges, only part of which I was aware of before this. I must confess, I am having some doubts about my new purchase. Might be a bit more complicated than I had thought, getting the string gauges right.


I like how the chart says "This is a guide line. Some common sence is needed to use this chart."  :-)

Use of one of the online string tension calculators is essential. And a micrometer comes in real handy.

----------


## Sweetpea44

> If this is reliable, for GDAE it recommends 42-29-19-12.


Or does he recommend 46-32-20-12 under 'Electric String Chart with Truss Rod'?

----------


## Bertram Henze

The real gauges depend on scale length and what is the optimum tension for the instrument, therefore I am a bit suspicious about a one-size-fits-all chart. My 21" OM, for instance, has 56-39-25-15, but don't try that at home  :Whistling: 
Electric instruments can generally deal with light strings - after all, they are just control devices to tell the amp when and what to bawl.

----------


## journeybear

Yes, Sweetpea44, I saw that after I posted.  :Redface:  I guess it will take a bit of trial and error to get everything optimal. Fortunately Martin at emando.com is kind enough to charge the same for custom sets as regular. (Yes, that sounds like a plug, but it's true.) I expect I will go with something light as I like bending strings. A lot.  :Wink:  I imagine this will come strung up with what the chart says, and I'll take it from there.  :Mandosmiley:

----------


## Eddie Sheehy

Let Martin be your guide...

On my non-electric OM's I use a Mandola set for my 21" scale -  J76, or FT76.  Bertram's gauges are closer to the CGDA portion of my Crump Cittern CGDAE .054, .042, .032, .018, .012 
23" scale I'd go with a J72 set (.049, .034, .023, .014)
Over 23" scale I'd go with an Irish Bouzouki set (unison).  I have a big bunch of bulk single guitar strings in a variety of gauges to mix and match the above.  For a 'dark' sound on the OM use TI 174.

----------


## Dr H

> I feel your pain, but that whole process sounds like fun to me. I stopped buying sets of strings years ago (except for electric guitar) because I prefer to use a tension calculator and micrometer to figure the optimum gauges for any instrument I own. Speaking of which, this forum is a great place for researching such information. Chances are one of us will know something or someone that can help.  :-)


I've been doing that with guitars for many years, but when I take up a new instrument I like to start simple, and go with whatever is conventional at the time.  I'm not shy about experimenting, once I've found my way around a bit.  

In the case of the tiple Colombiano it wasn't only the strings that were in question, but also the tuning.  There are several, and the one that is considered "standard" today wasn't the standard 15 years ago.

----------


## Dr H

> My head hurts from merely scanning through these posts. Having just bought this intriguingly named instrument ("Electric - Mandolin - Octave Mandolin - Tenor Guitar - Ukulele")


LOL.  Been there.  I once bought an instrument listed as a "mandola-dolphin bass ukulele-8-string guitar", mostly because I was curious as to what a "dolphin bass" might be, and the price was right.

Turned out to be a "taropatch" -- an 8-stringed tenor uke, also known as a "lili'u" -- with two dopphin-shaped sound holes.




> and curious to learn what the conventional consensus regarding tuning an OM might be, I took a look here and ...  ... oh well, can't win 'em all. I did ask the seller to string it to be tuned GDAE. I'll see what I get.


I suspect that's the tuning a lot of e-Bay sellers rattle off when they're not really sure what the instrument that they weren't really sure how to describe is supposed to be tuned.  Sometimes it's even correct.  :Wink: 





> Dr. H.: That is not a scone, but rather a sconce. I suspect you might have known that all along.


Of course.  But what's a "c" more or less, among friends?  :Smile:

----------


## Dr H

> OK. See, this is what I'm talking about - this is just a dizzying array of tunings and string gauges, only part of which I was aware of before this. I must confess, I am having some doubts about my new purchase. Might be a bit more complicated than I had thought, getting the string gauges right.


The problem with charts like this is similar to the problem I find with calling an instrument an "octave" [whatever], rather than a "tenor", "alto," "bass", etc. [whatever].  "Octave" only tells you that its an octave away from _something_ but not necessarily an octave away from _what_ or in _which direction_.  

There are no octaves given in the chart.  A 0.022 string (for example) can be tuned to an E3 (below middle C) or an E4 (above middle C), but there's a considerable difference in tension between the two tunings, given the same scale length.  IMO, these charts should _always_ include octave designations.

----------


## zoukboy

> There are no octaves given in the chart.  A 0.022 string (for example) can be tuned to an E3 (below middle C) or an E4 (above middle C), but there's a considerable difference in tension between the two tunings, given the same scale length.  IMO, these charts should _always_ include octave designations.


I completely agree, and always try to use the octave _number_ rather than the combination of upper/lower case + commas and apostrophes, which is really confusing. Once you memorize the octave numbers for, say, guitar and mandolin, then it becomes much easier to keep track of where different tunings lay.

----------


## journeybear

Well, yes, yes, yes, and also, yes. As I referenced post #19 before, and it continues to be useful and pertinent, I'll do so again. It's mostly this part I mean:

Violin --------------- Mandolin --------------- G3 D4 A4 E5
Viola --------------- Mandola ---------------- C3 G3 D4 A4
(Tenor Violin) ------- (Octave Mandolin) ------ G2 D3 A3 E4
Cello --------------- Mandocello ------------- C2 G2 D3 A3
Bass --------------- Mandobass ------------- E1 A1 D2 G2

That OM tuning is what I'm planning to have. And I believe the string gauges referenced in the chart are meant to achieve this. Perhaps assuming context at least roughly defines these things isn't enough, but it should be. Anyway, I believe this will clarify matters, at least concerning my thought process.

----------

Bob Clark

----------


## Eddie Sheehy

I should have said that even though I use Mandola sets - FT76, J76 - or J72) on my OM's they are tuned G2 D3 A3 E4.  Cittern is C2 G2 D3 A3 E4.

----------


## journeybear

Interesting. Checking the gauges on D'Addario I see they are noticeably heavier than what that chart recommends. I don't know its origin nor its reliability. Therefore I am a bit more inclined to follow D'Addario's lead - my acoustic string suppliers pretty much from the get-go. (There was that dark period in the start, when the store in my college town carried only Black Diamonds, and I would hitchhike 100 miles each way to Chicago and shop at Wurlitzer, a seven story temple of music. But I digress ...) Of course, this is moot, as I will be getting _electric_ strings, from emando.com, but it seemed noteworthy.

----------

