# Instruments and Equipment > Equipment >  "Space age flat pick" I-Tone

## Drew Egerton

http://bluegrasstoday.com/space-age-...k-from-i-tone/

NFI or knowledge about these other than the article, I'm a BC user. The real question will be, can these demand the same kind of endless arguing that the BC has blessed us with?  :Laughing:

----------


## Br1ck

May I be the first to say, with absolutely no knowledge of the product, that no pick is worth $35?

----------


## DavidKOS

> May I be the first to say, with absolutely no knowledge of the product, that no pick is worth $35?


Tell that to all the Blue Chip users!

----------

Paul Statman

----------


## sblock

My oh my.  That news release is truly incredible, in the original sense of the word!  It even goes so far as to say (italics mine):

"_Literally_ made from material used on the Space Shuttle, this new flat pick is _literally_ something out of this world!"

That is _literally_ an incorrect use of the word 'literally.'  (Also, an overuse of the word.) As we all know, the Space Shuttle is made from many types of different materials, including steel alloys, aluminum alloys, multiple types of plastic, glass and ceramic, and so on. Most of these materials are thoroughly conventional, and not "out of this world." Their ad copy-writers need to appreciate the difference between 'figuratively' and 'literally.'

At .041" thickness (= 1.04 mm), the I-Tone pick would seem to be a bit on the thin side for many of us. The most popular BlueChip picks tend to be in the thickness range of .050" to .060" (= 1.3 mm to 1.5 mm), and the CT55 is .055" = 1.4 mm.  This material would have to be awfully stiff to not over-flex at that thickness. But who can say, since we have no idea what the material is?  Plus, it's only available as a teardrop shape, which is fairly popular for guitar players, but less so among mandolin players, who tend to prefer triangles or rounded triangles.

That said, I'd be very interested in hearing any reports from folks who have directly compared this pick to the BlueChip, which I now consider to be the _gold standard_ -- figuratively speaking, that is!   :Grin:

----------

almeriastrings, 

DavidKOS, 

Joey Anchors, 

Mandobart, 

Paul Statman

----------


## Jim Garber

Interesting (I guess). Another mysterious material to make picks from. I wonder if it is this one:



> Much of the shuttle was covered with LI-900 silica tiles, made from essentially very pure quartz sand. The insulation prevented heat transfer to the underlying orbiter aluminum skin and structure. These tiles were such poor heat conductors that one could hold one by the edges while it was still red hot.


I wonder what the advantage or differences are from BC picks:



> It’s an absolutely great alternative to picks from manufacturers like Blue Chip. The only downside is that it is currently available in only one size and shape. As a teardrop guy who used to religiously use triangle shaped picks, I have to say it’s not my favorite design ever, although if they made a teardrop shape in it I’m sure I’d purchase several.


Hmmmm...

- - - Updated - - -




> Tell that to all the Blue Chip users!


I think Br1ck is joking.

----------


## keithb

I ordered one - I'll post up some detailed pictures and a comparison with a BC when it arrives.

----------


## sblock

Jim,

About your speculation...

Most of the Space Shuttle heat tiles were made from an extremely lightweight and porous silica-based ceramic, which is filled with insulating pockets of air (or vacuum, in space). It has the consistency of a foam, only it's rather brittle.  It would definitely not work as a pick material!

Other heat shields, on leading edges, were made from reinforced carbon-carbon, or RCC (this is what had become cracked and failed in the Columbia disaster).  This material is jet black, and not the same color as the white I-Tone picks, so we can probably rule it out immediately.

Other heat insulation was provided using Nomex (found in oven gloves, fire-fighter suits, etc.), but this is a fibrous, heat-resistant plastic woven into a material, and not suitable for a pick.

I don't think the I-Tone is made from any of these things.

You could make a pick from ceramic, of course -- but not in the form used in the heat tile.  Ceramics tend to be rather brittle, though.  That said, I have seen some thick picks made from glass, or from glassy materials like agate.  But these are always quite thick, because they cannot flex, and simply crack under strain when made thinner.  To most of us, an ideal pick has just a bit of give to it.

Special "space-age" plastics, like certain formulations (and there are many, depending on cross-links and polymer lengths!) of *polyimide* and *polyetherimide*, seem to have made the best picks, so far.  These materials have high melting points, are extremely wear-resistant, and yet retain flexibility.  BlueChip and PrimeTone and ProPlec picks are _all_ made from these types of plastics. The formulation of polyimide used in the BlueChip (Meldin, from Saint-Gobin) is very costly to buy, by the way, if you were tempted to make some of your own.  I looked into this once, and decided I could better spend my money buying the chip from Matt Goins at BlueChip!

----------

almeriastrings, 

Billy Packard, 

Drew Egerton, 

Jim Garber, 

Joey Anchors, 

red7flag, 

stevedenver, 

Timbofood

----------


## Mandoplumb

I need me one of them there picks that don't get hot sos I could stop burning my fingers on them fast songs.

----------

Billy Packard, 

choctaw61, 

George R. Lane, 

Jim Hudson, 

MrYikes, 

sblock, 

SlowFingers, 

Timbofood

----------


## Willie Poole

The Prime Tone picks are made from pretty much the same material as the Blue chip and they cost about 1/10th of the price and I do not see where any pic can sound any better than the P T`s that I am using,, No I have never owned a B. C. but I did try one once that a young lady had and I didn`t see anything so great about them but we all look for something different in sound...I am sure the hype will warrant many of us to try one of these new pics..

    Willie

----------

billkilpatrick, 

DavidKOS

----------


## sblock

> The Prime Tone picks are made from pretty much the same material as the Blue chip and they cost about 1/10th of the price and I do not see where any pic can sound any better than the P T`s that I am using,, No I have never owned a B. C. but I did try one once that a young lady had and I didn`t see anything so great about them but we all look for something different in sound...I am sure the hype will warrant many of us to try one of these new pics..
> 
>     Willie


Actually, no, sorry -- that's not quite right.  BlueChips made from a type of polyimide, PrimeTones are from a type of polyetherimide.  Those _words_ may sound similar, but the plastic materials are really _quite different_, both chemically and physically.  Polyetherimides are widely available and quite inexpensive to buy.  But in contrast, most polyimides (like Vespel and Meldin. Kapton is also a polyimide) are comparatively rare and VERY expensive to buy -- up to thousands of dollars for a sheet the size of a typical manila envelope!  And that mostly accounts for why you can buy a Primetone pick for about 7 times less than a BlueChip pick.

Many formulations of Meldin plastics also contain some graphite in them, and they have the property of being self-lubricating when they come into contact with something like metal.  A BlueChip pick slips off the string more readily than a Primetone pick, and this is not simply because the BC pick is more highly polished:  it's because the sliding friction is instrinsically lower! 

Don't get me wrong:  Primetones are great picks.  But those of you who think they are "_just about the same as BlueChips_" are either missing something important or insensitive the very real differences, which are certainly there.  But pick choice is a very personal thing, so what one person likes best may not be the same as for the next person.  And in my own opinion, the BlueChip pick sounds better than the Primetone on my mandolin.  But YMMV.

----------

almeriastrings, 

atbuckner21, 

Billy Packard, 

BradKlein, 

ccravens, 

Charles E., 

f5joe, 

Ivan Kelsall, 

Joey Anchors, 

MrYikes, 

RustyMadd, 

stevedenver, 

Timbofood

----------


## foldedpath

> The Prime Tone picks are made from pretty much the same material as the Blue chip


It's not the same material, as far as I know. I believe the BC material was identified a while back as "Meldin" and it's expensive to buy:

http://www.professionalplastics.com/MELDIN7001

The other difference is that BC's are machined from this flat sheet material, and from the looks of the Primetone picks, those are a molded polycarbonate (to get the indent and extruded logos and bumps). Someone correct me if I'm wrong about that.

Neither material is objectively better than the other; it's all down to individual preference in tone and feel. Personally, I like the smooth "self lubricated" feel of BC picks, but I can certainly respect anyone else's choice of a different pick. I think it's great that we all obsess over this stuff, because it's no different than fiddle players talking endlessly about their bows. We just get to spend a LOT less money trying alternatives!

I think I'll pass on this new Space Age pick though. Excessive hype is never a good sign.

Edit: Ninja'd by sblock.  :Grin:

----------

atbuckner21, 

Joey Anchors

----------


## DavidKOS

> At .041" thickness (= 1.04 mm), the I-Tone pick would seem to be a bit on the thin side for many of us. The most popular BlueChip picks tend to be in the thickness range of .050" to .060" (= 1.3 mm to 1.5 mm), and the CT55 is .055" = 1.4 mm.  This material would have to be awfully stiff to not over-flex at that thickness. But who can say, since we have no idea what the material is?  Plus, it's only available as a teardrop shape, which is fairly popular for guitar players, but less so among mandolin players, who tend to prefer triangles or rounded triangles.


Actually I'd like a thinner pick with the needed stiffness, and I prefer pointed teardrops to triangles or ANYTHING round, but I am not playing archtop Gibson-design mandolins. 

The stiffness is the real issue - not so much thickness. One of the things I like about the original TS picks that now are not legally available, is how stiff they are at a 1mm or so thickness. So any material like Ultem that comes close to that stiffness/thickness is OK by me. Celluloid, nylon, etc., are usually too flexible at the same thickness.

- - - Updated - - -




> Excessive hype is never a good sign.


Especially with musical instrument accessories. There's a long history of highly hyped gimmicks that didn't stand the test of time.

----------


## Tom C

> The Prime Tone picks are made from pretty much the same material as the Blue chip and they cost about 1/10th of the price and I do not see where any pic can sound any better than the P T`s that I am using,, No I have never owned a B. C. but I did try one once that a young lady had and I didn`t see anything so great about them but we all look for something different in sound...I am sure the hype will warrant many of us to try one of these new pics..
> 
>     Willie


where do you see 1/10 the price? They are also $35 each just as BC
- I just ordered one. I need to know  :Smile:

----------


## sblock

Tom -- you seem to have misread. He meant that Primetone picks are 1/10th the price of BlueChip picks, not that I-Tones are!

----------


## Tom C

ahhhh

----------


## Jim Garber

> My oh my.  That news release is truly incredible, in the original sense of the word!  It even goes so far as to say (italics mine):
> 
> "_Literally_ made from material used on the Space Shuttle, this new flat pick is _literally_ something out of this world!"
> 
> That is _literally_ an incorrect use of the word 'literally.'  (Also, an overuse of the word.)


That word makes me cringe, too.

----------

DavidKOS, 

MrYikes

----------


## Br1ck

> Interesting (I guess). Another mysterious material to make picks from. I wonder if it is this one:
> 
> 
> I wonder what the advantage or differences are from BC picks:
> 
> 
> Hmmmm...
> 
> - - - Updated - - -
> ...


Br1ck is indeed joking.

----------


## Atlanta Mando Mike

Sblock, great informative posts!!!

----------


## LadysSolo

I will wait for the review, as I am currently happy with Blue Chip.

----------


## pops1

I have a 35 BC, about 1mm and it doesn't flex, same for the Wegen at 1mm. I like the glide of the BC, but the tone of the Wegen. I think if they would make one thinner it would sound better on my mandolin. I started with a BC 60, then 50, then 40 now 35, each time it sounded better and not so dull. If you have a bright sounding G string the heavier picks would be great, but with some depth to the G they lack clarity for me. Sure like the glide tho.

----------

RustyMadd

----------


## Jess L.

Several observations...  

It *is* a regular *triangle* pick shape, *not* teardrop. At the manufacturer's website, the About page says:




> "The I-Tone Pick is currently made in an ultra-precision beveled *triangle* shape."


Although, is it my imagination or does their picture show slightly less-rounded shoulders compared to, say, regular Fender guitar picks? That might bother me a little, as sometimes I like to turn the pick sideways and play with the rounded top shoulder instead of the more-pointy part.
Someone mentioned hype. Seems to me that it's mostly coming from the magazine writer, not the pick manufacturer. Not sure how it works with that bluegrass magazine, but I've seen instances of other magazines' articles (about people I know personally) where the person being written about didn't even get to read *any* of the early drafts of an article, let alone the final version. Sometimes it works out good, sometimes not so much if there are errors or if the writing style doesn't portray things in the right light. 
Probably an aside, but for what it's worth, the co-inventor ain't no slouch on mandolin,  :Mandosmiley:  check out his video, music starts at 0:59



_(or direct link)_
Wish he'd do some pick comparisons using other picks though, might help the undecided to make up their minds. The room sound seems a little harsh (from too many hard surfaces or something), not a studio recording I guess, but maybe that's good because it's more of a real-world situation? Anyway, I'm not qualified to comment on high-end picks, as I prefer 50-cent Fender mediums,  :Disbelief:  but the only thing I noticed in this video is a few times _someone's_ pick hit _something_ -- I'm guessing it's the mandolin pick hitting the mandolin's fingerboard-extension-thingie (personally I'd get rid of that extension), most noticeable around 2:15-2:19, but heck for all I know it's an intentional rhythmic effect or something. Trivial detail though, doesn't detract from the music. I really like their playing.  :Mandosmiley:   :Mandosmiley:  
If I wasn't such a cheapskate (and quasi-reformed packrat) I might be tempted to buy one of their picks just to check it out, make sure I'm not missing anything.  :Whistling:  Maybe someone needs to add one to the Traveling Pick Sampler? 
Misc.: I don't see the phrase "space age" on the manufacturer's website, so may we assume the magazine writer chose that phrase? Huh. Didn't realize "space age" was considered a desirable thing anymore, thought that phrase went out after the 1960s (yes I'm showing my age) when people realized they weren't going to get a Jetsons flying car and have a robot maid and never have to exercise.  :Laughing:

----------


## Bertram Henze



----------

billkilpatrick, 

Timbofood

----------


## Jim Garber

> Misc.: I don't see the phrase "space age" on the manufacturer's website, so may we assume the magazine writer chose that phrase? Huh. Didn't realize "space age" was considered a desirable thing anymore, thought that phrase went out after the 1960s (yes I'm showing my age) when people realized they weren't going to get a Jetsons flying car and have a robot maid and never have to exercise.


Shawn mentions NASA and the space shuttle in the video plus on the store page linked from the review:



> Made from the same material as the Space Shuttle, the I-Tone Pick produces the clearest tone AND has the most wear-resistance and overall durability ever produced in a flat pick!

----------


## Jess L.

> Shawn mentions NASA and the space shuttle...


Yes I know, but my point was that he didn't specifically use the phrase "space age", which has a somewhat different and more dated connotation: 




> "The Space Age began with the development of several technologies that culminated on October 4, 1957, with the launch of Sputnik 1 by the Soviet Union.... The launch of Sputnik 1 ushered a new era of political, scientific and technological achievements that became known as the Space Age.
> 
> "The Space Age *was* characterized by rapid development of new technology in a close race mostly between the US and the Soviet Union. Rapid advances were made in rocketry, materials science, computers and other areas. Much of the technology originally developed for space applications has been spun off and found other uses.
> 
> "The *Space Age reached its peak with the Apollo program*, that captured the imagination of much of the world's population. The landing of Apollo 11 was watched by over 500 million people around the world and is widely recognized as one of the defining moments of the 20th century. *Since then, public attention has largely moved to other areas.*[3]
> 
> "During the 1990s funding for space related programs fell sharply as the remaining structures of the Soviet Union disintegrated and NASA no longer had any direct competition."
> 
> -Wikipedia


However, despite the above quote's use of the past-tense "was", that page does display a definitely-non-1960s space shuttle picture prominently near the top of the page. One might conclude that the Space Age still exists as a technological era, in that we still send things to space. 

But it certainly *doesn't spark the imagination of the masses* like it did in the 1960s. Maybe it's a regional thing, but around here the term "space age" is considered quaint & passé, nearly dead & gone as far as big high-profile space programs that capture public attention. 

Maybe the phrase "space age" is finally making a retro comeback?

----------


## MediumMando5722

It's interesting they chose the same price point as BlueChip. It will be more interesting to see the big name players we see promoting these picks in the near future.

All that said, I love BC picks, and if they choose to make this one available in a 1.4 or 1.5mm thickness, I'd be curious to try one. Funny, I convinced myself the cost of a BC wasn't that great because I'd only have to buy one. Now I have two, and would like to try one of these. 

Attention anyone who hasn't broken the $35 pick barrier: Do so at your own risk  :Smile:

----------


## sblock

All complaints about the regrettable sales hype aside -- regardless of who generated this hype, and why! -- I am genuinely interested in how this pick compares to a BlueChip (say, the CT55 model). It would be great for someone on the MC to carry out some A/B comparisons.

These folks are asking the same price as a BlueChip ($35), so it seems likely that _either_ the I-Tone is made from some equivalently costly, exotic material (such as a type of polyimide) _or_ their profit margin is extraordinarily high.

If anyone has information on the material used to make this pick, I would be keenly interested.

----------


## JeffD

> These folks are asking the same price as a BlueChip ($35), so it seems likely that _either_ the I-Tone is made from some equivalently costly, exotic material (such as a type of polyimide) _or_ their profit margin is extraordinarily high.
> 
> If anyone has information on the material used to make this pick, I would be keenly interested.


My view is that it is not my business _why_ they charge what they charge. I concern myself with whether it is worth the asking price to me. If it isn't then, I don't care if they are made of gold. And if they work and I like them and they benefit me more than the cost, then I don't care if they cost the manufacturer a penny a piece.

----------

George R. Lane

----------


## JeffD

> The real question will be, can these demand the same kind of endless arguing that the BC has blessed us with?


Yes. With any luck at all.

----------


## sblock

> My view is that it is not my business _why_ they charge what they charge. I concern myself with whether it is worth the asking price to me. If it isn't then, I don't care if they are made of gold. And if they work and I like them and they benefit me more than the cost, then I don't care if they cost the manufacturer a penny a piece.


Gee JeffD -- but then, you miss all the fun! Truth be told, the MC is filled with endless speculation about the prices -- and values -- of all things related to the mandolin.  Why are Gibson Lloyd Loars so expensive, and are they worth it? How can Gilchrists and Nuggets and Dudenbostels command such prices?  Which low-end mandolins offer the best value? What's the best instrument in the middle price range? Are Thomastik strings worth the price? Coated strings? Are BlueChip picks worth it?  And so on.  Most of us here are _very much_ concerned about prices and value. That's because we are not arbitrarily wealthy, and we therefore have to make difficult choices about how to spend our hard-earned cash.  So we ALL ask "_whether it is worth the asking price to me_," exactly as you do!!  And the question of whether it is "_worth the price_" has a great deal to do with what they charge, so I don't quite understand why you wrote that you don't care _why_ they charge what they charge, but you obviously do care _what_ they charge!

Anyway, I pretty much agree with you that we all need to consider if the asking price is worthwhile to us, individually. To me, the mark-up is an important part of that consideration.  To you, much less so.  Items tend to be more costly when they involve large outlays for either the materials (exotic woods, plastics, etc.) or the hand labor (luthier-built instruments). I don't mind paying for such quality.  I do mind paying for outrageous mark-ups, though -- for example, designer brands that offer no more quality than generic (or lesser known) ones, where you only pay for the name.  That's just who I am as a consumer. I will never buy a Coach wallet or Gucci luggage.

Yes, I am indeed willing to fork out $35 for a flatpick, and my BlueChip (which I love) is living proof of that. My back-up BlueChip pick (yow, another $35!) is evidence that I'm even willing to invest $70 in picks, and I also have a few ten's of dollars invested in other picks, including some Wegens and Dunlop PrimeTones.  So I might have around $100 invested, in all.  And that amount is not unusual for an MC member and mando fanatic.

And hey, I MIGHT be willing to fork out another $35 (ouch!) if I thought the I-Tone might sound as good, or better.  But first, I'd like to hear some testimony from fellow mando fanatics who have tried these.  And I'd like to have some idea of what material they're made of, since I'm a scientist and that's the sort of thing I'm curious about.  And, I'd like to know how similar or different these are than BlueChips.

And finally, will these picks ever merit 100+ pages of discussion on the MC, like BC's?  That's a high bar!  :Grin:

----------


## gtani7

I just got a Gravity Gold, which i think is made from a similar self lubricating polymer tho they describe it as thermoplastic.  Not being a material scientist, I'm not sure if those are mutually exclusive or what.  But anyway  I like it a lot, tho the Sunrise shape is really really sharp so I have to adjust RH technique quite a bit.

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/GGSUS15

----------


## Charles E.

Even at $ 35.oo we mandolin pickers have it easy compaired to violin players who have to spend hundreds of dollars for a decent bow! And no, I have not plunked down the coin for a BC yet but may in the future.

----------


## gtani7

> Even at $ 35.oo we mandolin pickers have it easy compaired to violin players who have to spend hundreds of dollars for a decent bow! And no, I have not plunked down the coin for a BC yet but may in the future.


I've been looking at cello strings, a nice set, usually a mix from 2 different brands is > $300, Helicores around $150, that's probably what i'll settle for.

I was talking to a trumpeter friend.  He's atypical in that he only has one instrument (a lot of them also have cornets and fluegelhorsn, which have different mouthpieces) and 3 mouthpieces at $40-80 a pop.  But a lot of players have a dozen or more, and the deluxe ones run $100 for a Yamaha to $200-250 for a Monette.

(Actually, cashflow wise, double reed players may have it the worst, unless they make their own, they can go thru 2-5 a month, at $20-30 a pop, something like that).

----------

Charles E.

----------


## Dave Hanson

If plectrums [ picks ] get any more advanced in the USA pretty soon all you will have to do is show one to a mandolin and it will play by itself.

unconvinced, Dave H

----------


## JeffD

> Gee JeffD -- but then, you miss all the fun!


Yes. Oh my yes.




> I do mind paying for outrageous mark-ups, though -- for example, designer brands


That's where we disagree I guess. To me the designer brands are not worth it, because it is not worth the premium when I can get similar quality for much less. It has nothing, in my mind, to do with the manufacturers mark up, it is entirely that I can get similar enough and good enough for less. I don't care what either the discount brand or the designer brand makes for the manufacturer.

If it turns out that a manufacturer can get the costs way way down below what people are willing to pay, by some clever way that is not illegal or immoral, and that maintains the quality of the item, then more power to him/her. Go for it. If the cleverness becomes public knowledge and so the competition can do similarly, well then there will be a price war and the prices come tumbling down. In the interim before the clever idea becomes public knowledge the manufacturer should "take pie while pie is passing". 

If the manufacturer cannot get costs below the price I am willing to spend, then he/she has to convince me that the higher price is justified, and specifically: why it should be worth it to me. The manufacturer is free to try and influence what I am willing to pay or why I should buy the other one for less, by telling me all kinds of things, and whispering sweet nothings into my ear. In some cases it even works.

My point is that the manufacturer has to come up with the narrative, better more costly materials, better quality manufacturing, much much cooler heritage and mojo, whatever. But that is the manufacturers job. My job is to figure out if the object offered is worth the price at which it is offered.

Maybe we are in violent agreement.

----------

sblock

----------


## Bertram Henze

> In the interim before the clever idea becomes public knowledge the manufacturer should "take pie while pie is passing".


It pays not to be an early adopter  :Wink: 




> ...whispering sweet nothings into my ear. In some cases it even works.


That's the one thing I tend to walk away from. Telling tall stories is equivalent to calling me stupid, and I take that personally. A pick "made from material used on the Space Shuttle"... If the pick sounds good, why do they need to invent such nincompoopery to go with it?

----------

ccravens, 

sblock

----------


## Glassweb

> May I be the first to say, with absolutely no knowledge of the product, that no pick is worth $35?


A flatpick is to a mandolinist what a bow is to a violinist... an essential tool. With the best bows going anywhere from several hundred dollars to tens of thousands of dollars (even hundreds of thousands) I find spending $35 for the best pick I've ever used quite tolerable...

----------

almeriastrings, 

George R. Lane

----------


## Jim Garber

> May I be the first to say, with absolutely no knowledge of the product, that no pick is worth $35?





> A flatpick is to a mandolinist what a bow is to a violinist... an essential tool. With the best bows going anywhere from several hundred dollars to tens of thousands of dollars (even hundreds of thousands) I find spending $35 for the best pick I've ever used quite tolerable...


As I noted above, Br1ck is joking. Someone always makes that comment when a BC or equivalently priced pick is mentioned. This is the problem with typing and why the gods of the Internet provided us with emoticons.  :Smile: 

It sounds like most of the folks on this thread already use BCs and other high-end picks.

----------


## Charles E.

So I will interject a joke here......

A mandolin player is walking along the beach with his instrument and finds a bottle. While cleaning the sand off, a magic Genie appears and grants the mandolin player three wishes. He thinks and replies "I would like to have a pick made from a space age material that will provide the best possible tone for my mandolin, will never wear out and can not be misplaced or lost".  The Genie grants his wish and it is the most amazing pick ever!  The Genie reminds him that he still has two more wishes to witch he responds 'I'll take two more just like this one".

----------

Bernie Daniel, 

Bertram Henze, 

MediumMando5722

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

A pick that's only .041" thick ???. That's a tad under 1mm (.03937 "). A decent pick needs to be pretty stiff,& in my experience, _thin_,stiff picks sound pretty harsh toned. I own a pick made from  material 'x' which is _very_ stiff & also very thin (1mm), & it's like playing with a piece of broken glass !. However,Shawn Lane is one of my favourite mandolin players & Blue Highway is  my current favourite Bluegrass band. I can't see Shawn sacrificing any tone from his Dearstone mandolin,which is as good as any i've heard (IMHO),so something must be happening. Using a thin pick does feel comfortable in one way,it's almost as though there's nothing there & you definitely 'feel the strings'. I wouldn't mind coming into contact with one for an hour or 2,although at £38.40 UK ($48.70 US),it's not going to happen.

   In Shawn's demo,i'd have liked the room to have been more 'damped' acoustically & to have heard the tone he got with hs old pick as a comparison. To my ears,the pick did sound 'clear',but it also had the hard tone that i associate with 'thin,hard' picks. Very hard to evaluate from that demo,you'd have to try one on your own mandolin (as usual).

  Unless i heard it wrongly,i'm pretty sure that Shawn mentioned that the material was used in aircraft 'engines' ?. If that's correct,then unless it's metal (doubtful),then it must be the ceramic material that's used = one tough SOB material indeed,& no wonder it's expensive,
                                                                                                                                                    Ivan :Wink:

----------


## Jeff Mando

It (literally) takes a space-age material to bring out the authentic, natural sounds of mountain music!  :Mandosmiley:

----------

almeriastrings, 

Ivan Kelsall

----------


## Drew Egerton

Well we are off to a great start!  :Laughing: 
Only a few hundred pages to go to catch up to the BC.

Like others have said, I'd be interested to try it out, but I am mostly reluctant on the 41 thickness. The thinnest BC I have used is 50 and I like that fine on the guitar but I don't care for it on the mandolin. The thinnest pick I liked on mandolin was the 55, but have since switched back to a 60.

----------


## Paul Busman

> Well we are off to a great start! 
> Only a few hundred pages to go to catch up to the BC.


Nothing to say at the moment, just helping get the page count up  :Grin:

----------

Ivan Kelsall

----------


## Tom C

I currently play mostly with Wegen 1mm. or BC TP40-1R. Both are stiff with no flex. Thinner picks seem to give me better accuracy so I decided to try something thinner and even pointier with this space age doohickey. Still waiting delivery.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> Nothing to say at the moment, just helping get the page count up


What, is this a funding project?

----------


## Jim Garber

I have a feeling that they are just getting started with these new $35 picks. Maybe they bought a .041" sheet of whatever the mystery material is so they will sell all the picks they can make from that sheet. 

BTW rumors have it that the inside of the glove compartment on the space shuttle is lined with a super-material which amazing acoustic properties. Perhaps that is the material they are using.  :Smile:

----------


## sblock

> Unless i heard it wrongly,i'm pretty sure that Shawn mentioned that the material was used in aircraft 'engines' ?. If that's correct,then unless it's metal (doubtful),then it must be the ceramic material that's used = one tough SOB material indeed,& no wonder it's expensive,                                                                                                                                                    Ivan)


Actually, Ivan, you may have jumped to the wrong conclusion:  it doesn't have to be ceramic or metal to be found in a jet engine -- it can be plastic, only a _special_ plastic! One specific form of Meldin, the polyimide used in BlueChip picks, is used to make thrust bearings for jet engines, and it can withstand temperatures of up to 900 degrees before melting!  So the material in I-Tones picks might be some other polyimide formulation, like Vespel or Kapton.  But I thought Matt Goins patented his use of Meldin for BlueChips, and that plastic material is darker (BlueChip picks are all brown), so perhaps it's not Meldin, but some other polyimide in I-Tones, to get around the Goins patent?

----------

Ivan Kelsall

----------


## ccravens

> I've been looking at cello strings, a nice set, usually a mix from 2 different brands is > $300, Helicores around $150, that's probably what i'll settle for.


I really like the Helicores on my cello. Made a big difference from the strings that the cello came with. Like you, $300 or thereabouts makes me nervous.

----------


## foldedpath

> A pick that's only .041" thick ???. That's a tad under 1mm (.03937 "). A decent pick needs to be pretty stiff,& in my experience,


For playing Bluegrass, maybe...




> _thin_,stiff picks sound pretty harsh toned.


Maybe, if you're playing Bluegrass...




> I own a pick made from  material 'x' which is _very_ stiff & also very thin (1mm), & it's like playing with a piece of broken glass !.


Might be the case if you're playing Bluegrass...  :Wink: 

Sorry, just pulling 'yer leg here. Some of us do use thinner picks, and not all of us play Bluegrass or look for a darker tone. 

I use the 1.0mm (roughly) TAD40-1R Blue Chip for the Scottish/Cape Breton/Irish trad music I mostly play these days. Maybe it's just my technique limitations, but I can't hit the treble ornaments in that music with a thicker pick. I don't feel that I'm sacrificing anything in tone. I do angle the pick a bit on the attack, and I use slightly heavier strings on the A and E course than J74's (.016 and .0115), which may help avoid a too-thin tone.

I do agree that this company had better offer some different thickness and shape choices if they want to go up against BC and Bear in the circa $35 pick market. Both of those companies are successful because they offer choices, not just a single magic pick.

Are we on page three yet?  :Smile:

----------


## almeriastrings

No.

Not yet...  :Whistling:

----------


## Br1ck

Wouldn't the way a pick performs be not only a function of thickness, but also the inherent stiffness of the material? So perhaps a thinner pick performs similarly to a thicker pick of a different material.

----------

Bernie Daniel

----------


## sblock

For those of you thinking about making your own picks out of polyimide plastic (say, Vespel or Meldin), these "space-age" materials can be purchased in small sheets from a number of suppliers, for example, *here* .

But please note that a (10" x 10") sheet of VESPEL SP-1, with a thickness of 0.062" (1.57 mm; perfect for making CT55's or suchlike) costs *$1,100.00*!!  You could probably CNC machine about 100 picks from such a sheet, and that would bring your materials costs down to *$11 per pick*.  _Definitely not cheap!_  If we estimate the labor cost at around the same number, then its costs the maker at least $22 per pick out the door, before factoring in overhead, advertising, and all that. Small wonder, then, that a commercial pick made from polyimide goes for around $35.  Maybe now we'll hear less whining about the price of a BlueChip?  But probably not.

----------

Bernie Daniel, 

ccravens, 

Charles E., 

Jim Garber, 

Johnny60

----------


## Hendrik Ahrend

Thanks a lot, sblock, for the first reasonable remark about BC pricing. Meanwhile, I'm glad such things are available at all and remembering the old Gibson slogan, "You pay for what you need, whether you buy it or not."

----------

stevedenver

----------


## LadysSolo

Heck, that makes the Blue Chip price sound like a bargain! Especially when you consider they will take them back if you don't like them....

----------


## pops1

> Heck, that makes the Blue Chip price sound like a bargain! Especially when you consider they will take them back if you don't like them....



Plus they seem to last for ever.

----------


## sblock

> Plus they seem to last for ever.


Yes, but this incredible durability makes for a rough business model!  If no one ever needs to replace their BlueChip pick, then the only return sales the company gets are when folks lose them, or decide to switch to some other model. That makes for very few return customers, who are satisfied for life. Once all the pickers that love them have their own BlueChips, the market saturates and bottoms out.

And it's hard to see how they could innovate further, to create an additional market  -- but maybe that's possible?

Imagine if your car never wore out, or your shoes...

----------

Richard J

----------


## keithb

> Imagine if your car never wore out, or your shoes...



Ah, but I don't lose my truck in the couch cushions!

----------


## DavidKOS

> Yes, but this incredible durability makes for a rough business model!  If no one ever needs to replace their BlueChip pick, then the only return sales the company gets are when folks lose them, or decide to switch to some other model. That makes for very few return customers, who are satisfied for life. Once all the pickers that love them have their own BlueChips, the market saturates and bottoms out.
> 
> And it's hard to see how they could innovate further, to create an additional market  -- but maybe that's possible?
> 
> Imagine if your car never wore out, or your shoes...


So picks need some planned obsolescence?

love it!

----------


## pops1

I have 3 left, and had a couple more. If you like it and have more than one mandolin then I like a pick and tuner in each case. Big problem for me is I am liking the Wegen now, where will it end?

----------


## sblock

> Ah, but I don't lose my truck in the couch cushions!


When I was younger, I managed to lose my truck in the couch cushions.  But then again, it was a Matchbox toy.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> ...this incredible durability makes for a rough business model!


Businesses are not supposed to last forever either. They are all part of the big fermentation cycle. There's many a product that outlasted the business that made it.

----------


## keithb

Got the I-Tone 41 in the mail this morning. It came in a hand-addressed standard letter envelope with Shawn Lane's return address, containing the pick in the usual style plastic bag and cardboard hanger.

I'm knee-deep in other things today, but here are my quick thoughts:

It's ever so slightly smaller than a Blue Chip TAD, with straighter edges and sharper points. The material is VERY stiff. Tone is good - there's the sharper attack I'd expect from a stiffer, thinner pick, but not too much pick noise and it moves through the strings well. I think I get more volume from my BC CT55, but I'm also used to the BC, and I'm sure I've adjusted my technique to get the sound I want from it.



I'll post a comparison video with the BC, Wegen, etc when I get some time - probably tomorrow.

----------

MediumMando5722

----------


## pheffernan

> I'll post a comparison video with the BC, Wegen, etc when I get some time - probably tomorrow.


I wish you had a Red Bear in the field as well!

----------


## keithb

> I wish you had a Red Bear in the field as well!


Me too! I should really pick one up at some point - anyone know which size is closest to the Fender 346/Blue Chip TAD?

For a mediocre mandolin player, I seem to have ended up with a lot of picks...

----------


## stevedenver

:Mandosmiley: Garfields bb blossom eh? Way cool tune.

----------


## bratsche

I don't play much mandolin, but with mandola, I've evolved toward thick picks to the extent that even a 2mm pick feels thin to me.  It's not at all about just being stiff and unbending, as those things are now rendered moot.  It's more to do with shock absorption.  I draw the best tone when my hand is relaxed.  My hand is relaxed when it isn't becoming sore.  It isn't becoming sore when it can't feel the strings' vibrations through the pick.  The thicker the pick, the less vibration I feel.  Naturally, the bevel must be thinner than the center mass.  Right now, I'm liking the acrylic picks for that combination of center.thickness with smooth, delicate bevel.  I can play for hours on end with a 4mm pointed triangle pick and not get a sore right hand.  Accuracy, speed and dynamic range have very much improved as well.  

I've "broken the $35 barrier", but for that money, I obtained 4 plectrums that will probably last the rest of my lifetime, if I don't lose them.  Resold the BC 60 long ago, because it felt like a potato chip, was too noisy, and made my hand sore from the vibration.

bratsche

----------


## Mandoplumb

Bratsche you better watch how you talk about BC picks on this forem. The pic masters are watching and they don't know the emporer has no clothes.

----------


## Johnny60

@ Bertram (or anybody who recognises it) - what's the car in the photo that you posted?  One seriously nice piece of kit!

----------


## Rodney Riley

> @ Bertram (or anybody who recognises it) - what's the car in the photo that you posted?  One seriously nice piece of kit!


Auburn. Not sure of the year. (Was thinkin Cord or Auburn till I saw the writing over front door of the building.  :Smile: 
And I could be wrong. Since was built maybe 15+ or so years before I was born.

----------


## Johnny60

Thanks, Rodney.  

Just googled it - it's a 1935 Auburn 851 Speedster.

Now I have CAS!!

----------


## Stevo75

> The thicker the pick, the less vibration I feel.  Naturally, the bevel must be thinner than the center mass.  Right now, I'm liking the acrylic picks for that combination of center.thickness with smooth, delicate bevel.  I can play for hours on end with a 4mm pointed triangle pick and not get a sore right hand.  Accuracy, speed and dynamic range have very much improved as well.  
> 
> bratsche


What kind of acrylic picks are you using?

----------


## pheffernan

> Me too! I should really pick one up at some point - anyone know which size is closest to the Fender 346/Blue Chip TAD?


Big Picker Heavy

----------


## LadysSolo

I'm with pops1 - I like a pick in every case, and since I like TD 35 and TD 40, I have one of each in every case. So once I picked out what I liked, the sold a few more to me (when they were having a special on shipping last fall around Christmas, if I remember correctly.)

----------


## FrontRangeMando

I also received an I-Pick in the mail today.  I agree with keithb's comments above.  The pick is thin, but it's *considerably* stiffer that my Blue Chip TAD 50, despite the difference in thickness.

I only had a couple of minutes to try a side by side on the mandola, and the IT seemed brighter to me, in a good way.  I thought the IT was just as loud as BC, or as close as makes no difference.  Not knocking BC; the IT sound wasn't better, just different.  I thought it might just be me, but my wife also noticed the difference in brightness from the next room, at which point I had to explain to her that I'd dropped another $35 on a pick.  She liked the sound enough that she didn't get mad at me, if that's any kind of endorsement ...  

Did not get a chance yet to try it on a mandolin, so I'm not sure how it will sound there.

I almost missed it in the mail, the pick in its plastic package came wrapped in a precisely folded pice of 8.5 x 11 3 hole punch notebook paper in a small hand addressed envelope complete with Shawn's home return address sticker.  If I-Tone is all about about the "hype" and "slick marketing," as some have suggested here, you wouldn't know it from the way the pick arrived.  After trying one, I'd suggest giving the I-Tone folks the benefit of the doubt and entertain the idea that maybe they've done something good here and aren't just out to make a quick buck at our expense.

----------


## bratsche

> What kind of acrylic picks are you using?


Gravity Picks.  I believe the triangle is called a Stealth.  I liked the V-picks too, but they're a little smaller in diameter than the extra large Gravity. 

bratsche

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

Hi sblock - yes,i did know that - the thought occured to me that it might not simply be yet 'another plastic pick',but one of a more esoteric nature such as ceramic. One more 'plastic' (generic term) pick doesn't seem to make the grade these days.

From FrontRangeMando - _"...and the IT seemed brighter to me,.."_ That seems to bare out my own thoughts on 'thin,stiff' picks in general. Also,it's stiffness to thickness ratio might point to it being a ceramic material rather than a 'plastic' material.

   Anyway,at the risk of seeming a bit 'off-hand' (i'm not really, but i don't know how to put an accent above the 'e' in blase !)  :Grin: - we've got another 3 pages of 'supposition' regarding yet another pick made from an unknown material. Interesting,it might be,but will we like them ?,
                         Ivan :Wink:

----------


## Bertram Henze

> ...of a more esoteric nature such as ceramic.


If ceramic qualifies as esoteric already, how about casein?

----------


## Phil Goodson

I remember that when the Blue Chips initially came out, they were only offered in a thin version.  I can't remember whether it was .040" or something similar.   I waited till they made a version a little thicker, 50 & 60 and was glad that I did.   I'm very curious about the IT, but I think I'll wait a little longer till a thicker version is offered. 40 just feels a little too thin between my fingers. :Smile:

----------


## keithb

Here's my comparison video: http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/sh...tone-Pro-Plec)

----------

Drew Egerton, 

Jess L.

----------


## Nick Gellie

I love the tall ships in the background in the demo video.  Where did the pictures come from?  I am a bit of a tall ships fanatic and I love model sailing boats,

----------


## Mark Wilson

> F*or those of you thinking about making your own picks out of polyimide plastic* (say, Vespel or Meldin), these "space-age" materials can be purchased in small sheets from a number of suppliers, for example, *here* .
> 
> But please note that a (10" x 10") sheet of VESPEL SP-1, with a thickness of 0.062" (1.57 mm; perfect for making CT55's or suchlike) costs *$1,100.00*!!  You could probably CNC machine about 100 picks from such a sheet, and that would bring your materials costs down to *$11 per pick*.  _Definitely not cheap!_  If we estimate the labor cost at around the same number, then its costs the maker at least $22 per pick out the door, before factoring in overhead, advertising, and all that. Small wonder, then, that a commercial pick made from polyimide goes for around $35.  Maybe now we'll hear less whining about the price of a BlueChip?  But probably not.


Here's a new pick maker reportedly using the same material as BC and RB.  Cheaper but less refined just looking at pictures.

I'll stick with the BC TAD50-1R, but I am ordering a TAD48-1R(custom thickness) to try.

----------


## Phil Goodson

> Here's a new pick maker reportedly using the same material as BC and RB. ....[/SIZE]


Reported by whom?   I have not found any information about what material they are using; have heard only speculation.

----------


## Tom C

I ordered mine a week ago and still have not gotten it.

----------


## sblock

> Here's a new pick maker reportedly using the same material as BC and RB.  Cheaper but less refined just looking at pictures.
> 
> I'll stick with the BC TAD50-1R, but I am ordering a TAD48-1R(custom thickness) to try.


"...reportedly using the same material as BC and RB"?  I don't think so! Their website doesn't say that at all -- it makes no mention of materials.  Wherever did you get that from?  The materials sure don't _look_ like the one used by Red Bear (casein), nor like the different one used by BlueChip (polyimide). The BlueChip plastic material is protected by a patent, in fact.  Interested readers might want to read the Goins patent, found 
*here* .

----------

Drew Egerton

----------


## FrontRangeMando

> The BlueChip plastic material is protected by a patent


The Blue Chip plastic itself is not protected by a patent.  Polyimide and graphite loaded polyimides at 15% and 40% under the trade names listed in the patent are commercially available to anyone.  

The patent protects the use of these materials in "a pick for use with a stringed instrument."  Buy all of the graphite loaded Meldin you want, just don't make a pick out of it.

----------


## Jim Garber

If you are interested in the patent you can read it here:



Speaking of Charmed Life picks (linked above) the guy who sells those posted on Acoustic Guitar forum last year questioning the *Blue Chip patent*.

----------


## Mark Wilson

> Reported by whom?   I have not found any information about what material they are using; have heard only speculation.


Just forum rumors. If you read their 'about' they hint that as well.  Not interested myself just responding to comment that you could buy a sheet of the material etc etc. Sorry

----------


## Mandolin Cafe

> If you are interested in the patent you can read it here:
> 
> Speaking of Charmed Life picks (linked above) the guy who sells those posted on Acoustic Guitar forum last year questioning the *Blue Chip patent*.


Nice to know a cursory glance of that page and we learn the Mandolin Cafe has not cornered the market in bluster. Carry on. 

 :Laughing:

----------

Drew Egerton, 

FrontRangeMando, 

sblock

----------


## sblock

Let me correct some misunderstandings:

1) Yes, under U.S. law, it is perfectly valid to patent a new and previously unexplored use of an already-patented or trademarked raw material, like Vespel or Meldin polyimide plastics.  No one had produced a flatpick from these materials before Mr. Goins, to my knowledge, so it would seem to be a patentable idea.

2) If you want to buy some polyimide (like Vespel or Meldin or Plavis) and then use it make your own flatpicks, you are perfectly within your rights to do so -- this _does not violate the patent in any way_.  What you may not do is SELL these picks for money, if they are patent protected.  You could give them away to your friends as presents, though.

----------

David L

----------


## FrontRangeMando

My apologies for being "that guy," but technically I'm not sure you can even give them away (or make them for yourself).

I'm not a lawyer but I can Google.  From the US Trademark And Patent Office definition of trademark infringement:

"Patent infringement is the act of *making, using*, selling, or offering to sell a patented invention, or importing into the United States a product covered by a claim of a patent without the permission of the patent owner...Further, *actively encouraging others to infringe patents*, or supplying or importing components of a patented invention, and related acts can also give rise to liability in certain cases."

https://www.uspto.gov/patents-mainta...t-infringement

As a practical matter this may not be a big deal, but here at the MC I'm sure we can discuss this for a couple more pages at least.   :Smile: 

Also, my apologies to the I-Tone folks for being an accomplice to thread jacking.  I used your pick in church on Sunday and really liked the tone and volume it gave my mandola in that large, open space.

----------


## sblock

> My apologies for being "that guy," but technically I'm not sure you can even give them away (or make them for yourself).
> 
> I'm not a lawyer but I can Google.  From the US Trademark And Patent Office definition of trademark infringement:
> 
> "Patent infringement is the act of *making, using*, selling, or offering to sell a patented invention, or importing into the United States a product covered by a claim of a patent without the permission of the patent owner...Further, *actively encouraging others to infringe patents*, or supplying or importing components of a patented invention, and related acts can also give rise to liability in certain cases."
> 
> https://www.uspto.gov/patents-mainta...t-infringement
> 
> As a practical matter this may not be a big deal, but here at the MC I'm sure we can discuss this for a couple more pages at least.  
> ...


Well, yes and no!  There exists an exemption for making patented items intended for "research purposes."  (University scientists use this exemption all the time). So, if you make it yourself for the purpose to testing its effectiveness compared to other picks, you are probably standing on firmer legal ground.  And as a purely practical matter, its costs lots and lots of money -- and time! -- for any patent holder to pursue an infringement case, and NO ONE is ever going to come after you, should you elect to make some picks for your own personal use. There would be nothing to gain in return, no profits of yours to garnish, and no real loss to claim on their part. No sensible lawyer would ever take on such a trivial case.  It ain't ever gonna happen in the real world, believe me. _So, go ahead and make your own picks if you want!!_  But realize that a thin sheet of Vespel, Plavis, or Meldin costs thousands of dollars, and so your materials cost per pick would quickly exceed $10 before you even started (see my post earlier in this thread). It's more cost-effective to just buy a BlueChip pick, and get on with the important pickin' to be done!

----------


## Tom C

I got mine yesterday and used it for a practice session.  While it feels a lot like a BC, there is a huge difference in tone when dropped onto a table. The B.C sounds like a dull plastic tone where the iTone sounds a lot brighter (Almost ceramic sounding as somebody early stated, but tone very close when playing.  I may favor BC, The BC seems to slide across strings better which can be due to pick shape. These are very, very close in thickness. The BC has more of a bowed point. I'll surely keep using it until I come to final conclusion.

----------

Drew Egerton, 

Ivan Kelsall, 

loess

----------


## Jeff Mando

_<violates forum posting guidelines>_

----------


## foldedpath

_<violates forum posting guidelines>_

----------


## Mandolin Cafe

Get it back on track. A reminder this is not a forum for expression of political views.

From the Forum Posting Guidelines:

_Topics started for or end up being used to discuss religion, politics or sex as well as other hot button issues meant to create discord are prohibited. Posts or threads deemed inappropriate or unrelated to our subject matter are subject to immediate removal at the discretion of the forum owner and/or lead moderator._

----------

Roger Adams

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

I read the BC patent as applying to _the use_ of the Polyimide material for 'picks',nothing else. They obviously can't patent the material. 

                                                                                                                                                                              I read the BC patent & although it addresses the pick 'thicknesses',i couldn't find any part that specified what 'shapes' were covered by it. I know that other makers make picks of the same shapes as BC,but _not_ from the BC specified material ?. The patent refers to the pick in Fig. 1 the way through !. Are there further sheets to the patent ?. Shouldn't BC have shown the 'other' pick shapes to be covered  by the patent ?. The only 'shape' they refer to is the shape of the edges Quote :- _" More specifically, the pick 10 is resistant to Wear because it maintains its designed shape during use.."_. 

                                                                                                                                                                            Of course it _will_ maintain it's 'peripheral' shape while in use,(unless your name happens to be Yuri Geller),so it _must_ be the edge shape that the're referring to.


   Have BC failed to cover _all bases_,or have i missed something ?. I'm reminded of the recent Gibson patent on the 'shape' of their  "F" style mandolin headstock + the fern inlay, :Confused: 
                                                                    Ivan :Wink:

----------


## sblock

Ivan,

The BlueChip patent covers the novel use of a polyimide plastic to make a flatpick, citing the special mechanical properties (durability, lubricity, stiffness, etc.) of various commercial formulations of this particular material (e.g., Vespel, Plavis, Meldin).  It also cites a range of thicknesses of that material that are most useful, but that is incidental.  It is the specific _use of this material for a flatpick_ that is the subject of this patent, and not the pick itself, nor its size and shape.

Importantly, the patent does NOT specify the shape of the pick, the type of edge bevel, nor any embossing/holes/grips that might be added.  It does not _need to_ specify these things, because these things are not being patented.  Such attributes _could not be patented_, anyway, because the sizes, shapes, and bevels used for BlueChip picks are all a part of "prior art", and these things pre-date the development of the BlueChip pick by many years, as we all know!

So no, they did not miss something.  Instead, I think you may have missed something (sorry, Ivan!), because their patent is not specific to a teardrop-shaped pick, nor to any other shape.  It's just about the material used to make the pick.

----------

Ivan Kelsall

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

Point taken !. But the_ 'use of that material'_ (point understood), still seems _only_ to apply to a pick of the _specific 'shape'_ in the BC patent. They haven't covered picks of _other shapes_ made from the material - the two do go together.

  It almost seems that by _showing_ a 'specific' shaped pick,they've limited what pick shapes the patent will cover. It's a bit like somebody patenting the wheel & showing a wheel of 'one size & material only'. Unless it's stated that the patent will cover wheels of _''all diameters & widths & materials ''_,it's open day ! (IMHO).

    Last year,the Gibson company patented the 'shape' (outline) of their F5 mandolin headstock & the 'Fern' inlay - so 'shapes', in essence a 'design',_can_ be patented.

   It's simply an argument that could be put forward, 
                                                                       Ivan :Wink:

----------


## Drew Egerton

> I got mine yesterday and used it for a practice session.  While it feels a lot like a BC, there is a huge difference in tone when dropped onto a table. The B.C sounds like a dull plastic tone where the iTone sounds a lot brighter (Almost ceramic sounding as somebody early stated, but tone very close when playing.  I may favor BC, The BC seems to slide across strings better which can be due to pick shape. These are very, very close in thickness. The BC has more of a bowed point. I'll surely keep using it until I come to final conclusion.


Thanks for sharing Tom!
Is the BC 40 your usual go-to pick? I am thinking that the I-tone is more of a contender for people used to that kind of 'thin' pick than it would be for me as I usually prefer the 60s. If it sounds like a pretty good thin pick, then it still sounds like a thin pick!  :Smile: 
Any chance you can post a recording comparison?

----------


## Tom C

Lately it has been. I like the 2 different corners on the BC TP-1R (2 corners are the same, 1 more rounded). The thicknesses of these 2 are soooo close to each other. Even though the BC has a much duller tone when dropped on table, it may be the louder one when playing. Not much difference between in tone though when playing though. I need more time. $35 is not a big investment but I'm glad they don't have a bunch of different shapes right now  :Smile: . I've bought quite a few BC till I got one I was happy with. I listened to too many people and what they were getting."

----------


## sblock

> Point taken !. But the_ 'use of that material'_ (point understood), still seems _only_ to apply to a pick of the _specific 'shape'_ in the BC patent. They haven't covered picks of _other shapes_ made from the material - the two do go together.
> 
>   It almost seems that by _showing_ a 'specific' shaped pick,they've limited what pick shapes the patent will cover. It's a bit like somebody patenting the wheel & showing a wheel of 'one size & material only'. Unless it's stated that the patent will cover wheels of _''all diameters & widths & materials ''_,it's open day ! (IMHO).
> 
>     Last year,the Gibson company patented the 'shape' (outline) of their F5 mandolin headstock & the 'Fern' inlay - so 'shapes', in essence a 'design',_can_ be patented.
> 
>    It's simply an argument that could be put forward, 
>                                                                        Ivan


I am sorry to come across as so disputatious in this thread, but I feel a need to respond again to some misinformation. I apologize in advance for any apparent slight, but you are mistaken here, Ivan. Last year, the Gibson company _trademarked_ their fern inlay headstock pattern (see *here* ).  No, they _did NOT_ patent it! (Besides, a fern headstock is not something that would be patentable, anyway).  The rules about patenting and trademarking are quite different under the law.  A "design," in the aesthetic sense that you've used above, is not something that's patentable, but it can nevertheless be trademarked, if unique.  But a design, in the sense of a novel invention or process, _can_ be patented.  Patent and trademarks are subject to _very different rules_, and you can often arrange to pay royalties to use someone else's patent.  You cannot tromp on someone else's trademark, however, and royalties don't apply there!

With regard to the Goins patent on polyimide picks, I think you have also confused "design," in its aesthetic sense, with design, in the sense of a novel process (i.e., the material used).  Once again, this patent has nothing at all to do with the shape of the flatpick, which seems to be your overarching concern. Instead, it has to do with the _material used to make the flatpick_.  So no, I regret to say that you are not correct when you assert that "Unless it's stated that the patent will cover wheels of ''all diameters & widths & materials,'' it's open day!"  That's just not so. It is not necessary for Goins to include all possible shapes and sizes of his flatpicks in the patent when he seeks protection for the material used.  Furthermore, it is not possible to patent the shapes and sizes of most flatpicks, anyway, because these designs are all prior art from the public domain.  There is nothing novel about the shape of a triangular or teardrop flatpick, with or without bevels, etc.

----------

Ivan Kelsall, 

Rush Burkhardt

----------


## Jim Garber

I believe that designs can be patented, at least that was the case in the old days. For instance, reverse scroll mandolin design was patented by the owner of Regal Instrument Company.



Some definitions are here (from the *US Patent Office*):




> The design for an article consists of the visual characteristics embodied in or applied to an article.
> 
> Since a design is manifested in appearance, the subject matter of a design patent application may relate to the configuration or shape of an article, to the surface ornamentation applied to an article, or to the combination of configuration and surface ornamentation.
> 
> Design is inseparable from the article to which it is applied and cannot exist alone merely as a scheme of surface ornamentation. It must be a definite, preconceived thing, capable of reproduction and not merely the chance result of a method.


They go on to talk about the distinction between design and utility patents. Those of you interested in the specifics can read at the link above.

----------


## sblock

Jim,

The controlling words for design patents here -- i.e., the really important ones! -- are these:  "_Design is inseparable from the article to which it is applied and cannot exist alone merely as a scheme of surface ornamentation. It must be a definite, preconceived thing, capable of reproduction and not merely the chance result of a method._"

What this means is that for a 'design' to be patentable, it must impart a value that is, in essence, _inseparable from the function_ of the article being patented.  Furthermore, that design cannot come about as an incidental (or accidental) result of the process used.  The first sentence of this paragraph means that the design _cannot be purely aesthetic_, i.e., a form of ornamentation.  In fact, the fern inlay on the Gibson headstock supplies a good example of something that is NOT patentable, because it is purely ornamental, and not functional for the sound of the mandolin.  On the other hand, Apple holds lots of design patents on its iPhone line, where the function and design of the user interface are very closely intertwined. And Samsung has been fighting this, mostly unsuccessfully, in court!

If you invented some new kind of flatpick shape that somehow endowed it with better properties as a pick (i.e., not purely aesthetic), AND this shape was novel (not already in the public domain), _then_ you could try to patent it. A concrete example here might be, say, a (non)flatpick that curved slightly in the 3rd dimension to better match the curve of your thumb pad.  But if you decorated each flatpick by placing a pretty scene on it  -- say, a miniature picture of a mandolin -- that would NOT be patentable as an item.  You could, however, trademark picks with this mandolin picture. This example illustrates the BIG difference between patenting and trademarking a design.

I hope we're all on the same page, now. But maybe not?

P.S.  I hold patents, and have also given expert testimony in patent cases, and therefore have a bit of personal experience with this very confusing branch of our legal system.  It's a mess, I can tell you.

----------

gtani7, 

Ivan Kelsall, 

Rush Burkhardt

----------


## Mark Wilson

so does BC have a patent or just a pending application?

----------


## sblock

Mark,

So far as I can tell, the Goins polyimide flatpick (US20090249938 A1) for the BlueChip pick is still an A1 application, which means that it's still _pending_.  Of course, if it's granted, the priority date/filing date will be April 2008. Not sure what's holding it up, because you never can tell with the USPTO.

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

Many thanks for your enlightening comments sblock. However,i believe that the point that Jim Garber made in his post regarding the patenting of a 'design' ie. a 'shape',can be applied. So,if you wish to design & 'patent' a _triangular frisbee_,the door's open !,

_ "A concrete example..."_.Ya got it - Concrete picks !!!!. In thicknesses from 1/2" to 4", in any shape you want (as long as it's square). Picks will come with a 'weight training schedule' as part of the package, :Grin: 
                                                                                                                 Ivan :Wink:

----------


## Bertram Henze

> _ "A concrete example..."_.Ya got it - Concrete picks !!!!. In thicknesses from 1/2" to 4", in any shape you want (as long as it's square). Picks will come with a 'weight training schedule' as part of the package,
>                                                                                                                  Ivan




Yabbadabbadoo

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

Is that the one with the 'speed bevel' then Bertram ?,
                                                                       Ivan

----------


## Bertram Henze

Yes, Ivan, and I recommend a pickguard with that  :Laughing:

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

That would be one of these then ?,
                                              Ivan :Grin:

----------


## Bertram Henze

Well, this time it's concrete I have in mind, easily shaped like a pickguard.

----------

Ivan Kelsall

----------


## liestman

Not sure anyone has mentioned this yet: The I-Tone comes with a right hand bevel, which is not mentioned on the website. Me needing a left hand bevel and not knowing this, I bought one. My note through the I-Tone website Contact Us function on this topic has not received any response in many days. Thought you would like to know those facts. Looks like a good pick though, but I cannot judge how it sounds.

----------

RustyMadd

----------


## Ron Pennington

I like the I-Tone 41.

----------


## Phil Goodson

> I like the I-Tone 41.


Although that's so very important to us, could you tell us why?

----------


## Ron Pennington

Well, I can't answer in any technical terms. I really like the tone and the feel. I've been using the Blue Chips ever since they first came out, but I'm always checking out different picks...(you'd think after 40 plus years I would settle on one!) I also like the Primetone picks. It just depends on the day, the way I'm hearing things that day. Sorry, I know my answer is pretty vague.

----------

Ivan Kelsall

----------


## Jim Garber

> Jim,
> 
> The controlling words for design patents here -- i.e., the really important ones! -- are these:  "_Design is inseparable from the article to which it is applied and cannot exist alone merely as a scheme of surface ornamentation. It must be a definite, preconceived thing, capable of reproduction and not merely the chance result of a method._"
> 
> What this means is that for a 'design' to be patentable, it must impart a value that is, in essence, _inseparable from the function_ of the article being patented.


You are no doubt more experienced in this field and I do yield to your expertise in this matter, counselor.  :Smile:  However, the quote from the Patent office says that "the design is inseparable from the article" with no mention of function. I understand the concept of surface ornamentation, for example, that picture of a mandolin you mention, which could easily be painted over. But I find it strange to consider the reverse scroll Regal design patent and other design patents showing different shapes of mandolins as having much connection to function. You could cut off that reverse scroll and it would still play as well as a mandolin, in other words that it does not affect the function.

Now I was referring to old design patents. Are these no longer patentable. There seems to be a big difference in that the patentee just needs to state that this is an original design, not go into detail on why his/her particular item is unique in functionality. As in the verbiage from the Regal patent I cited:

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

From Ron Pennington ( a recent 'discovery' of mine - awesome player !!) _"It just depends on the day, the way I'm hearing things that day. Sorry, I know my answer is pretty vague."_.   It's not vague at all Ron. I still have many picks that were 'past favourites' & every now & then,if my Primetone pick doesn't seem to be 'doing it' that day,i'll try one or 2 out - just to see (hear). Quite often i'll settle on a pick that sounds better on _'that'_ mandolin _'that'_ day. I've found that with temp.especially,my mandolins do change tonally & swapping to another pick sometimes works,
                                                                                                                             Ivan :Wink: 

PS - 'Brentwood' - terrific CD !!! :Grin:

----------


## Drew Egerton

Has anyone decided that they like this pick that normally uses a thicker pick?
My impression from all I have read so far is that, if you like this thickness in other picks you will probably like it fine. 41 just seems way too thin for my tastes.

----------

Phil Goodson

----------


## Even Steven

Has anyone heard anything a new company called Charmed Life? Supposedly they use the same stuff as Blue Chip.

----------


## Even Steven

> A flatpick is to a mandolinist what a bow is to a violinist... an essential tool. With the best bows going anywhere from several hundred dollars to tens of thousands of dollars (even hundreds of thousands) I find spending $35 for the best pick I've ever used quite tolerable...


This makes a lot of sense to me. Very well put.

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

If you consider the amount of work & skill that goes into the making of a Violin (or any 'bowed' instrument ) bow,there's far more than in making a bit of_ 'shaped plastic_',regardless of the _expense_ of the plastic !. There's no comparison at all with regard to the actual 'price of the item'. That the bit of 'shaped plastic' that is a Blue Chip pick, sounds as good as they do (to 'some' folk), has far more to do with the actual material itself rather than the manufacturers. Give me a piece of the material & very likely i could make a decent pick - making a Violin bow is _totally_ beyond me !.

   I do understand the 'point' however,but let's keep things in perspective. As a % of the cost of most folk's mandolins,the cost of a Blue Chip pick is rather small by comparison,& as such for those folk who like them,they represent good value,but it's still a bit of 'shaped plastic',
                        Ivan :Wink:

----------

Mandoplumb

----------


## Phil Goodson

> Has anyone heard anything a new company called Charmed Life? Supposedly they use the same stuff as Blue Chip.


You may notice a separate thread about Charmed Life Picks. This is a link to that thread.  :Smile: 

They actually have 2 different lines of picks.  One may be like BC & the other is similar to Red Bear IMO.   Word is that a 3rd line may appear next year.  NFI.

----------


## MikeEdgerton

> Has anyone heard anything a new company called Charmed Life? Supposedly they use the same stuff as Blue Chip.


Amazingly enough you have the same IP address as the people that tried to register as Charmed Life Guitar picks and Charmed Life Picks.

And another check and we find another username associated with that address.

----------


## Phil Goodson

My apologies for my response being any part of possible deception.  I had no idea.  CL has lost a few points with me now.  :Disbelief:

----------


## MikeEdgerton

If the product is a good product and the user community wants to discuss it, that's great. When someone wants to use deception to try and sell their product that's a different story. That doesn't go well here. Shills are generally spotted pretty quickly and dealt with. Carry on.

----------


## Mandolin Cafe

This kind of activity is covered in the posting guidelines, particularly the last sentence below. This is not the first time someone has attempted to drum up discussion about their own products by posing as someone just bringing up the discussion. It won't be the last. Posting privileges for this individual have been removed for a second time.

_- Vendors: for the good of our community we ask that all vendors of mandolin/music related products/services exercise good faith in clearly identifying themselves. Vendor participation is welcome and valued, and we expect you to be involved in discussions of your products. Visitors to the site arrive from all over the world and possess widely varying amounts of knowledge, expertise and experience with our subject matter. This is an international web site for mandolin, not a country-specific web site. All visitors should be able to clearly discern a business relationship at all times in discussions of products sold in the retail market._

----------

Gary Leonard, 

Ivan Kelsall, 

MikeEdgerton, 

sblock

----------


## Stevo75

I won't be buying anything from Charmed Life ever.

----------


## Tom C

Last gig I decided to use shoulder of my clown barf pick. I may end up going with this in future  :Smile:

----------


## pops1

I use the shoulder nearly all the time, have for a long time. 5 or 6 years ago went to more rounded picks, regrettably having to go back because of arthritis. If I were playing a thinner pick or a standard teardrop the shoulder is what I would be using.

----------


## Drew Egerton

> My apologies for my response being any part of possible deception.  I had no idea.  CL has lost a few points with me now.


Phil, at first read I thought they were saying it was you! I was about to post something in your defense until I read it again...

----------


## Phil Goodson

Thanks Drew.  I was just fooled by 'Even Steven'.  I'll try to be smarter in the future. :Smile:

----------


## Bertram Henze

> I'll try to be smarter in the future.


I think you weren't to know. Without the inside data access it's a guessing game at best.

----------

Phil Goodson

----------


## varmonter

> Amazingly enough you have the same IP address as the people that tried to register as Charmed Life Guitar picks and Charmed Life Picks.
> 
> And another check and we find another username associated with that address.


Ha..Busted!!....ha...

----------


## Ron Pennington

Thanks for the kind words Ivan, and I'm glad you like my CD! You mentioned temperature affects the tone of your mandolin, my old Gilchrist has always seemed to "like" humid days. I don't know if it's really the mandolin, or just the way sound travels through humid air. But whatever it is, weather does affect tone, or the way we hear it.

----------


## Johnny60

Interestingly, I was chatting to Caleb Klauder after a gig in the UK last week, and he said that humid conditions really bring out the best in his mandolin.  Said it sounds best in Louisiana!   His Sullivan sounded great in Leeds, West Yorkshire!  He was generous enough to allow me a couple of minutes on it - very low action, one piece back, loud and punchy.

----------

