# Instruments and Equipment > Builders and Repair >  Octave Mandolin Project from Eastman Mandolins

## PFCG

Hello All!

My name is Pat, and i design instruments here at Eastman Guitars and Mandolins.

I have been present on a couple of other forums, and since we are working on a new project, we thought it would be a good idea to seek the feedback of you kind folks here on the MC forum. 

We are working on an Octave Mandolin, that is an A style with and Oval Hole. 



The picture is a drawing i did in a program called Rhino.

I have made this drawing to include some of the details that some of our dealers have suggested as being important elements. 

Nut width is 1.375 Inches, and the width at the 12th fret is 1.750 Inches. The snakehead design for the headstock is our existing style, and the A style an enlarged version of our A style Mandolins.

Some things we have not gone over are the type of fret wire, and the depth of the body.
I have considered using the fretwire we use on our Acoustic guitars, and making the body about 2.25 inches wide in the ribs. Color is also something we have looked into. We usually default to the Classic Finish, but we could always do a sunburst, although a natural blonde would most likely not be an option. 

Please respond with your feedback and maybe some color choices. We look forward to what you have to say!

----------


## Clement Barrera-Ng

Welcome Pat. I believed I have seen your posts before on other guitar related forums. Glad to see you posting here.  

One quick question: will this have a carved top or flat top?  As for the fret wire choice, I definitely think standard guitar frets would get my vote.  

This is a very exciting project and I appreciate you sharing it with us here and getting our feedback.

----------


## PFCG

certainly it will have a carved top and back

----------


## Eddie Sheehy

Pat, 1.75" is a tad wide at the nut I think 1.5" is more suitable.  Scale length?  21", or 22" or..?  The body should be at least 3" deep (minimum I should think).  A good break-angle at the neck-body to facilitate a tall bridge (about 1" high).   Deffo wide fretwire, radiused fretboard, lose that fretboard extension... Flat back, Flat Top...  could be nice...  I like Eastmans, Eastmen, Easters...

----------


## Eddie Sheehy

Oh, carved top and back, nicer....

----------


## Bill Snyder

Eddie, he said 1.375 at the nut (1 3/8).

----------


## Pete Braccio

Hi Pat,

From a player's perspective, it looks like the body should be a bit shorter and a bit wider. My preference would be to see a body depth of at least 3" as well. Without that extra volume in the sound chamber, you stand the risk of being over powered at sessions.

The oval hole seems way big as well.

Just my 2 cents. The proof will be in how a prototype sounds.

Pete

----------


## Anglocelt

Hi Pat,

There could be a big market for what you are proposing here in the UK (and probably elsewhere in the EU) amongst 'celtic' musicians. To appeal to this market I would suggest: about 21 inch scale (no longer), carved top but not necessarily carved back, non-sunburst finish (the more natural the better), keep the ornamentation plain, wide frets are OK, dimensions pretty well as Eddie Sheehy suggests and make sure it fits into a standard tenor banjo hard case. Even better if Eastman made a larger version of  their classic A style fibreglass case to fit your new model.

Good luck with the project!

Kevin

----------


## PFCG

Let me clarify, the ribs would be around 2.25 inches wide, so the top and back being carved would make the instrument at least 3 inches deep around the bridge. 

The scale length will be 20 inches

Also, the sound hole looks large because of the rosette, although we can cut it to whatever dimension needed

The nut is 1 3/8 inches wide, the 1 3/4 is the width at the 12th fret. It is just to show you an accurate taper.

----------


## Markus

I am not a fan of that fretboard extension. I would far rather have the soundhole exposed than have frets to play there.

----------


## Gregory Tidwell

Hi Pat,  What price range is this going to be in?

----------


## Ed Goist

Welcome Pat!
I too vote for large frets (say 80X43) and a radiused board (10").
Your proposed body depth sounds good.
For color options I'd suggest (in order of preference): natural, pumpkin top, black top and sunburst. Also, I think a matte finish might be a better choice than glossy for this instrument.
Additionally, I think that some sort of classy Irish or Celtic inlay on the peghead might be a smart design feature from a marketing perspective.
Finally, I don't like the fretboard extension either, and be sure to move that marker from fret 9 to fret 10!  :Smile: 
Thanks so much for asking for input here!
Oh, and be sure to ask for input over on our 'tenor guitar sub-forum' when you guys realize you should add tenor guitars to your selection of fine instruments!  :Smile:

----------


## Shelagh Moore

Not keen on the fretboard extension either... otherwise it looks a nice design. 21" scale and 3 ribs would sound about right for my tastes... a 20" scale will necessitate quite heavy strings. For "Celtic" players at least I think the natural finish would be more popular.

----------


## Steve-o

I agree with the others - go with the slightly longer 21" scale length and guitar size fret wire, lose the fretboard extension, stick to more natural top colors (no sunburst), and add a couple celtic elements (headstock and/or fretboard).  Or if you don't want to follow traditional design elements, consider a GOM.  That would be my next CBOM purchase.

----------


## dcoventry

I have to say, consider F-holes instead of the oval. It makes a big difference in clarity and punch

----------


## Mandobart

Hello Pat, thanks so much for asking our thoughts on this.  My personal opinion, there are lots of A model short scale OM's out there, not too many carved top & back though.  I definitely vote for carved.  I also have no love for fretboard extensions.  Also like the natural (non-burst, non-stained) look.  My .02 on design is that since the demise of the MK octave plus (not in the same league as Eastman, IMHO, as I own said Octave plus and an Eastman mandocello) there are no affordable F-style OM's, and certainly no guitar-bodied OM's out there unless one goes to the fine instruments made by builders like Fletcher Brock, Mike Black, etc.  I'd like to see someone build something along those lines in the ~$ 3k range.  I also like a little longer scale, maybe 22"?

----------


## JEStanek

The soundhole looks really big to me, too. I would like it in the Golden Age (Eastman's version of Pumpkin top) with the classic stained back.  I like the 20 inch scale. Keep the price under $2k and I think you have a keeper!

Jamie

PS Welcome!  We've been wanting an Eastman OM for.... years.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

First thanks for sharing.  Overall, I think the appearance is very favorable -- the rosette, the headstock, the overall perspective is quite nice.  
I'll go along with others -- the fretboard extension is overkill -- shorten the "florida" to 20 frets thus leaving the sound hole free and clean looking.  

Please do not release the octave mandolin with a fret marker on the 9th fret -- should be on the 10th.  

Personally, I favor a 21" scale although it seems 50:50 on that versus 20".  

Are the backboard and sides maple, mahogany or rosewood?  

Finish?  I would like a traditional tobacco sunburst but also pumpkin-face would be nice as would a blonde face.  Why not offer all three options?  :Smile:

----------


## Eddie Sheehy

... and, of course, a Giacomel-designed OM/Bouzouki a la Tim O'Brien to augment the Dawg series...

----------


## Clement Barrera-Ng

Lots of good feedback here, and definitely would love this to be a carved top and back model - I think the carved top feature will set this aside from every other OM out there. I am more partial to a 21" scale, but can work with a 20" if need be.  And what sort of bracing will the top have? A lateral brace (is that what the Gibson Mandocello has) or a more modern X brace?   

As for color choices - I actually would love to see a natural blond version of it, or a natural top with vintage toner (a darker yellow color), and must say I have not been a huge fan of the classic finish.  Perhaps a black top also?

----------


## Galimando

Wow, this looks like an awesome idea!  I was just looking around for this very instrument only to find they don't really exist in the way I envisioned.  

That being said, I think a deep body with f-holes and some sort of x-bracing would maybe give a good balance between depth and punch.  (I'm not a builder, but that'd be my expectation, anyway.)  I would say don't go shorter than 21" on the scale because wouldn't you'd have to put, like, piano strings on it to get it to tune to GDAE.  (Whatever you do, though, don't go longer than 23".)  For a finish, I'd say a pumpkin or natural top would be awesome, and since I'm piping in (because I think this instrument idea is awesome), _please_ don't put any kind of Celtic ornamentation on it. I think it always looks cheesy.

What is the manufacturing schedule for this?  Will a prototype be traveling around for people to play and get excited about?  If so, how do I get on _that_ list?

edit: I originally wrote "don't go longer than 22"" and I typed wrong.

----------

Brandon Sumner

----------


## foldedpath

Some feedback here from an owner of a Weber Yellowstone F OM, and who has heard (and played) a bunch of other OM's in local Irish and Oldtime Sessions, both high and low-end instruments:

Carved top and back is a very good start, if you're going to distinguish this from other offerings at the more affordable end of the price range. I'm a fan of F-holes for this type of instrument, but you'll probably sell more with an oval hole.

Lose the "Florida" fretboard extension. It doesn't look right and serves no useful purpose here. I prefer a slight "wave" or S-curve termination, but a straight cut-off at the end of the fretboard will probably be less expensive to make.

That scale is too short (IMO). You'll lose some sustain, and "standard" OM strings (not that there is such a thing) like D'Addarion J-80's will be too light for a good powerful "chorng" sound. My Weber OM is 22.5" and I can still manage to play melody lines. I'd recommend a 21" minimum, and 22" would put you closer to what I think a lot of people consider the sweet spot for an OM. That's still much shorter than Bouzouki range, but with the kind of sustain that makes you pick up an OM instead of a mandola. But that's just my personal opinion. You'll get other opinions here.

Fret wire -- I'd personally prefer fat frets.

The oval hole is too big, both aesthetically and (probably) as a port for the Helmholtz resonant frequency. Most players are looking for a deep tone with these things.

As for finish... that's another deeply subjective area, but I'd recommend an amber-stained natural finish, no sunburst. That's a universally acceptable color, and it gets you into the "affordable Sobell" look. If the price point permits it, then use a very thin glossy lacquer finish, not satin or matte.

If this were a custom instrument, I'd probably order it with a Cedar top with Walnut back and sides, but the market may be more receptive to a Spruce top over Indian rosewood.

Good luck with the project!

----------


## foldedpath

> Lots of good feedback here, and definitely would love this to be a carved top and back model - I think the carved top feature will set this aside from every other OM out there.


Hey, what are Weber carved top and back OM's? Chopped liver?
 :Wink: 

P.S. that's my "F on steroids" Weber OM in the avatar image at the left, behind my Lebeda mandolin.

----------


## pjlama

I guess I'm the only one who likes the fretboard extension. God help you, asking for feedback on a design here, you're a brave man indeed.

----------


## downtowndalebrown

I could personally take or leave the fretboard extension (I think the classic Eastman S curve would also look very classy), and I think the classic finish would look great.

I, for one, however am fully in favour of a 20" scale; I'd rather use heavier strings than have to stretch to hit tunes at 100mph!  If this clocks in at under $1500, consider it sold (likely even if it's a little over).  If it's under $1000, I'll take 2!

----------


## Ivan Kelsall

Firstly,isn't it really nice to be asked for an opinion on a proposed new instrument ?.While my personal preference is for a Guitar shaped Octave mandolin,i can see that there would be a lot of interest in this new Eastman project,& i happen to like the design very much indeed. Regarding the colour choices,one easy finish to do (compared to 'bursts') would be a 'black-top',that could look stunning,especially with natural back & sides. I tend to agree with *downtown* above regarding the fingerboard extension.
Maybe you could show us what the same instrument would look like with the standard Eastman f/board termination shape ?.
   A question please - given that you decide on a final design,is there a proposed launch date ?,
                                                                                                                                Ivan :Wink:

----------


## mrmando

I'm with pjlama. I like the Florida.

----------


## Ed Goist

As a tenor guitar player primarily, my personal opinion is that the scale should be 22".

From a tonal perspective, I am firmly in the _'play the longest scale you can get away with'_ camp. I believe that longer scale instruments have a tremendous tonal advantage, particularly when it comes to chords and rhythm lines.

However, form a market standpoint, I think an instrument like this would really appeal to folks looking for the shorter scale in an octave mandolin.

This leads to an interesting quandary...If I were designing this instrument for me, I'd go with a 22" or even a 23" scale, but if I were designing it for consumption in the marketplace, I'd probably go with the 20" scale like you plan to.

----------


## TijnBerends

It looks very nice :Smile:  I'm with most other people, in that the soundhole looks too large. It doesn't look nice, it would make for a very punchy sound I think, and it might even affect the structural integrity of the little sweetling. Also, I'd not use the fretboard extension - it's no use at all for playing, it just gets in the way of your plectrum.
As for the scale, I think it depends on whether you want to play melodies or rhythms, and on the size of your hands. I have a 66cm (26.4") scale bouzouki which I can still play tunes on (though with the flat top, pin bridge and deep body, it's really built for rhythms), but it's not really comfortable. My mandola has a 50cm (20") scale, carved top and floating bridge, which works great for melodies but not for rhythms.

----------


## foldedpath

> From a tonal perspective, I am firmly in the _'play the longest scale you can get away with'_ camp. I believe that longer scale instruments have a tremendous tonal advantage, particularly when it comes to chords and rhythm lines.


Sustain is a big part of that tonal advantage, for me. The sound of my 22.5" scale Weber OM when capo'd up the neck, is the reason I'll probably never get a traditional acoustic mandola. The sustain is just another whole world to work in, especially for finger articulations like hammers and pull-offs when playing melody. 




> However, form a market standpoint, I think an instrument like this would really appeal to folks looking for the shorter scale in an octave mandolin.
> 
> This leads to an interesting quandary...If I were designing this instrument for me, I'd go with a 22" or even a 23" scale, but if I were designing it for consumption in the marketplace, I'd probably go with the 20" scale like you plan to.


From a strictly marketing perspective, I'd have to agree. They'll probably sell more at that scale length, because I think most first-time OM buyers are nervous about being able to play melodies on 22" - 23" scales. 

From the player perspective though, and if you're not intending to play melody in an Irish session (which frankly isn't that easy at full dance tempos even on a 20" scale), I think newbies to OM's may not realize how well these instruments perform when using a capo. If you're playing melodies at home and not coordinating with other instruments, just throw a capo on the 2nd or 3rd fret, and suddenly you have a nice comfortable reach for melodies, without giving up the power and sustain of the longer scale. You still have access to GDAE or GDAD for playing arpeggiated or strummed backup chords with the capo off. You'll be adapting your mandolin chord shapes anyway, even with a 20" scale. 

But all of this is hard to put in a product brochure, so 20" scale OM"s continue to be desirable. People with smaller hands need options, too. I just think it would be a shame to cramp the potential of something like this with a shorter scale.

----------


## otterly2k

First, I'd suggest posting this query down in the CBOM discussion area.  There are some builders that frequent CBOM world, but more importantly, I think you'll reach more people who regularly play (and buy) OM's, and their/our perspective could be quite informative.

My 2c re: the design is-

- OM's are more typically flattops (or slight induced arch) for the styles of music that most commonly played on them.  However, there does seem to be recurrent interest in _affordable_ carved OM's.  If this could come in at a price point between $1-2k, I think that might appeal to a lot of players.

- People buy OM's for the LOW end, not the high end.  Ditch the fretboard extension... it is not useful, aesthetically questionable, and why have anything interfering with the sound output?

- As much as I personally prefer (and need) shorter scale, I think that 21-22" scale is probably a good target for most OM players.  This allows for both chording and melodic playing options, depending on the preference of the player.  At 22", some of the standard OM string sets can be used.  That convenience factor makes a difference.

- I wholeheartedly agree with the recommendation to make sure this instrument fits existing case and gigbag options.  We CBOMers sometimes have a lot of trouble finding cases for our non-standardized instruments.

- I think most OM players are not attached to the idea of a scroll the way so many mando players are.  The expense is not worth it.  A shape such as you have, or a two-point design, would be my recommendation.  

- I agree that the soundhole looks too large for that body size, not just b/c of the rosette.  

- I have a bias against sunbursts.  I prefer a natural wood look, or solid stain in a natural looking color.  I won't make claims for general preferences. But I will say OM market is not the same as the bluegrass market... more instruments are natural than bursts, and I don't think there is necessarily the same burst bent that there is among grassers.

- I think price point is very important.  Trinity College and the like have OM's that hit at about $500 that are pretty decent.  Most of the luthier built ones come in at $2k or above  (there are exceptions, of course, and they are good ones).  If you can hit a price point between $1k and 2k, you will be adding an option to a place in the price range where there are perhaps the fewest options. 

- Finally, and most importantly, it has to sound great.  

Looking forward to seeing how this develops.
KE

----------


## PFCG

Attachment 87866Attachment 87867Attachment 87868

I changed the end of the fingerboard to reiterate the curve of the headstock, although responses we have had so far on and off the board combined, seem to be split decision.

The sound hole is not changed in size. If it goes smaller, it will be too small. The rosette really throws people off but i removed all the external rings and this is how large it really is.

This instrument will be a carved Maple back and sides as well as a Carved Spruce top. Fingerboard and headstock overlay will be Ebony. I am thinking that this will be in line with our 5 Series Mandolins. 

Also, the 20 inch scale will cater to a variety of players who want to play chords over longer stretches.
The bracing is going to be a traditional X brace. We wanted to make one model that would really hit a lot of bases, and this seems like it will be well received by the majority of folks. Of course everyone has likes and dislikes, and we cannot accomodate everyone, so i want to make sure that everyone knows that we will always do what sounds best and is most functional as well as what is the most stable in terms of build quality. We do things a certain way that sometimes go against the grain if you will. For example, we brace lightly on our flat tops, and it makes them sound unparalleled in their price range. We finish with a thinner finish to make sure the instruments sound better. We always want to make the instruments sound the way they should, and that is why we pick some of the specs. 

Fret markers can be placed wherever we want, that is not a huge issue. And as much as i personally like Celtic ornamentation, i don't know if it is really something that says "Eastman" 

We will have to make some prototypes of this model before we launch it into full production, but this is an important stage for us. It will most likely take some months to complete a first working model, because making one instrument is not as big of an issue, and smaller builders can make one offs without a hitch, but we have to make a whole tooling system for when we think up a new model.  

I think the Golden Age finish would be nice as well, but we will certainly do a bit more listening :D

Please remember that a drawing can be deceiving sometimes when you can only see a small picture. My computer can show it in full and extended scale as well as in 3 dimensions but not everyone has the ability to see it like that.

----------


## pjlama

> I'm with pjlama. I like the Florida.


Great minds. It looks bitchin'

----------


## Galimando

> Attachment 87866Attachment 87867Attachment 87868


Hey, there's nothing at these links – did you intend to attach images?  I'd love to see them!

Also, do you intend the instrument to be tuned GDAE?  What gauge strings do you intend it to be used with for the 20" scale length?  (I ask because 20" is the scale length of some 17 fret tenor banjos and I always found it a bit short; I have a 16 fret tenor with a 21" scale and in a lot of ways it's an ideal length for a short scale banjo –#maybe an OM too?)

----------


## Eddie Sheehy

On a 20" scale I'd be expecting J76 or equivalents (FT76 etc.) - need at least .052 G string...

----------


## David Rambo

I'd like to see the pictures, too.  All I get is a message that says: 

Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator.

----------


## PFCG

Do  these work?

----------


## dunbarhamlin

To my eye, the fingerboard end styling makes it look like a left hander.

----------


## kidgloves2

Thank you for asking us for input. If you go with a 20" scale, I would market it as a short scale octave... not a true octave. If you think of it as an octave, I would make it 22" scale. That's how many people in the mandolin community will see it. 

Weber's octave is 22"
Flatiron used to make an octave that was 23 5/8" scale.

----------


## Eddie Sheehy

Flatiron's Octave was labeled as a Bouzouki... a rose by any other name...

----------


## Primarilywoodcharlie

22" very good.
please make some so I can buy one.

----------


## kidgloves2

Now if you make a 22" F-style octave for less that $1000..... we're in business!

----------


## Tavy

I've stayed silent on this thread, not because I don't care, but because if you ask three pickers for their thoughts, you'll likely get 4 opinions  :Wink: 

Never mind here goes anyway:

1) I like the revised plan, but I agree the fingerboard shape looks like what you'd expect on a lefty (reversed image maybe?)
2) Soundhole size looks right on the revised plan, I conclude that what folks were seeing on the original was an illusion based on the rosette.  In any case, it's functional, build it the size that sounds right.  Too small and very likely the same folks who complained about it being too big will complain about it sounding tubby  :Wink: 
3) There's no ideal scale length.  Currently I play a 20" scale OM, and while I like the like the shorter scale and the sound, I don't like the thick strings.  So I'm contemplating something longer - but that's just as much a compromise too.  I guess you just have to go with your gut on that one.
4) Finish?  I quite like blondes (no jokes please!), but the classic Eastman finish would be something pretty different and distinctive too.  Choices.... choices....
5) This is a really good idea.
6) A really really good idea!

----------


## Jim Baker

I thing 21" scale should be minimum for an O.M.. Otherwise the strings need to be very heavy.

----------


## Charlieshafer

I'm on the same page as those who like a longer scale. As mentioned, you really don;t want an om sounding or playing like a mandolin or mandola unless capoed. You really want a great low end and hours of sustain. I also vote for a guitar-bodies shape to get a little more volume in there. Little oval-holed "a" shapes are all over the place. If you make that for a lower-priced model, I'd also love to see you do a higher-priced one with a different body, either archtop guitar style, or my personal favorite already in your line, like the John  Pisano series or the Pagellie series, or if you really want to have some fun, and maybe sell too few instruments, the electric El Reys in an OM. I'd buy that in a heartbeat.

----------


## Keith Newell

Soundhole is too big, body depth too shallow and probably price is too low   :Smile:

----------


## foldedpath

Do any of the usual string suppliers even make a packaged set of strings that will work on a 20" scale OM? 

I don't think D'Addario J-80's will work well at that scale length, although they're fine for 22". Many of us end up putting together custom gauge sets for our CBOM's anyway, but it's nice to have a packaged set to start with. Also nice for the instrument builders, if you don't have to put together custom strings to ship with your instrument.

----------


## Tavy

> Do any of the usual string suppliers even make a packaged set of strings that will work on a 20" scale OM? 
> 
> I don't think D'Addario J-80's will work well at that scale length, although they're fine for 22". Many of us end up putting together custom gauge sets for our CBOM's anyway, but it's nice to have a packaged set to start with. Also nice for the instrument builders, if you don't have to put together custom strings to ship with your instrument.


Good point, but if someone with Eastman's clout produces a 20" scale instrument that becomes the "new standard", and I'd be willing to bet the string suppliers would soon follow.

----------


## Galimando

PFCG, have you considered perhaps doing a couple mock-up drawings of the same instrument (à la a few posts above), but with the longer 22" scale?  I think people would be interested in seeing them, if only for visual comparison's sake.

----------


## Peter Kurtze

I'm not really a fan of the new "pompadour" headstock design, but if you must echo it in the fretboard end, put the bulge on the treble side.

----------


## kidgloves2

> I'm not really a fan of the new "pompadour" headstock design, but if you must echo it in the fretboard end, put the bulge on the treble side.


Yea, the fretboard extension must be on the treble side.

----------


## Graham McDonald

I would put another vote in for adapting the El Ray body shape with 2.5-3" deep sides and using it for a 22" OM. A 22" scale means fairly readily available 12-46 gauge strings and less of a mandola sound to it. It wouldn't be hard then to use a longer (guitar scale) neck for a bouzouki and you would cover both those markets. 

cheers

graham
(who has been building these things for 30 years)

----------


## luthierseye

I like the revised design much better except for one item: I liked the shape/curvature of the extended fingerboard,but not the long extended finger; so I suggest that you revert to the basic original but shorten the finger to where it is a little shy of the rosette-just a thought. Scale length: I play a 20" and would probably like a 21" a bit better for several reasons-string gauge being one- but no longer than 21" as the reaches get tougher for melodies. One thought is that the 21" would be kinda unique being not too short and not too long either and just might create a desirable niche. Color: I would vote for either a natural top or a "honey" top like my Weber Gallatin Mandola in a satin finish with the back and sides any dark color but black. And your classic Eastman finish is acceptable as well. I like the carved top & back with the oval hole. Thanks for asking players opinions- we always have one.. or two; and an idea may come up that you had not thought of.

----------


## Jeff Budz

I think you are right on track with the design, my preferences are for 21.5" scale, natural or pumpkin finish, radius fingerboard, guitar frets, no Celtic ornamentation.  I have owned 20" and 23" scale OMs, I think something in-between would fit me best.  I'm so tired of sunburst, I sanded my MD515 natural and now it's sweet.  Black would be cool too, but orange would be best IMO..

Thanks for asking opinions!

----------


## PFCG

> I think you are right on track with the design, my preferences are for 21.5" scale, natural or pumpkin finish, radius fingerboard, guitar frets, no Celtic ornamentation.  I have owned 20" and 23" scale OMs, I think something in-between would fit me best.  I'm so tired of sunburst, I sanded my MD515 natural and now it's sweet.  Black would be cool too, but orange would be best IMO..
> 
> Thanks for asking opinions!


I would like to see that! Post some pictures of that 515!

I have edited the drawing a bit to include a 21 inch scale, but the bridge moves off of the center point of the body in order to accomplish the right balance and have the 15th fret meet the binding channel.

----------


## Gerry Cassidy

I have posted this thought I've had a couple of times over the past couple of years:

This is a pic of an Eastman El Rey guitar I owned a couple years ago:



It was very neck heavy and the dive was too much for me to deal with so I sold it, but I have always thought it would be a great template for an OM, or 'Zouk.

If you were to put the neck from your drawing on this body, I'd think you'd have a pretty nice OM.

As for scale length, I currently own a 20" flat top which has all the jangle and percussive tone you could ever want for tone purposes. It's just isn't very loud. 

I also have a 21" carved top & back that is a tone monster. It is my number 1 player. Anything beyond 22" you start forcing a Zouk situation, i.e. Melody lines become increasingly difficult to play. I have a 24" GOM that I can, pretty much, only play doubles and chord comp.

----------


## Galimando

> I have edited the drawing a bit to include a 21 inch scale, but the bridge moves off of the center point of the body in order to accomplish the right balance and have the 15th fret meet the binding channel.


Thanks PFCG!  How would moving the bridge of center point to the body affect tone, do you think?  Is that shift a significant thing?

----------


## Luthier

Well lots of great thoughts.  I do not want to step on toes but I have been asked recently to come up with a mandocello, or mandolla kit.  Sheesh.  Anyway, Pat, if you need to brainstorm or bounce any ideas back and forth, I would be happy to help.
My Octave kits have a 22.875" scale.  I too am on the "feedback" quest.
Don

----------


## Charlieshafer

Well, it looks like there are at least 27,421 folks that replied to this thread that want an El Rey styled OM.  OK, maybe it's three, but that's enough. How about it, Eastman??

----------


## Charles E.

> The soundhole looks really big to me, too. I would like it in the Golden Age (Eastman's version of Pumpkin top) with the classic stained back.  I like the 20 inch scale. Keep the price under $2k and I think you have a keeper!
> 
> Jamie
> 
> PS Welcome!  We've been wanting an Eastman OM for.... years.


That sound hole is too large, you might have problems with the neck. I also vote to not have the fingerboard extension.

----------


## Jared Heddinger

I'd just like to thank you form asking the communitie's opinion on this. It's really amazing seeing a big builder like Eastman asking for and taking advice from us. I'm really quite excited to see how this looks/sounds in the end. I've always been a fan of Eastman mandolins and I have no doubt this will follow the path no matter what decisions you make. 

I'd just like to put my favor in for the longer scale length and perhaps something like the classic finish from your mandolin line. I feel it sets you apart from the rest of the makers while still having a certain amount of class (no pun intended). 

Are there any future plans for something of an A-style mandocello? Or maybe (one can dream), a five string CGDAE instrument?

----------


## Pete Braccio

There were also a couple of of ElRays made with f holes. I was lucky enough to get my hands on this one.



I would love a bouzouki (24.5 - 25.5) with this body shape but just a bit deeper.

Pete

----------


## Tristram

Great that your asking for feedback on a project like this. Time to muddy the waters, a little.

21" scale would be preferable.
The body shape is great, the soundhole as others have noted seems oversized - I love the neck though, and the headstock. The extension is a little ott.

Good to hear about the classic finish, also. Do we need another natural coloured, a style oval-hole octave mandolin?

This is where I may diverge strongly, I feel the 'celtic' market is saturated with options, leaving so very, very few for others that don't necessarily want to go custom. Eastman has a strong history of bold choices, especially with the David Grisman collaborations and even the mandola and mandocello. It would be very gratifying to see the octave mandolin continue in this tradition. What about an eliptical soundhole? Or even stylised f-holes, like on the DG1 but enlarged. That on an a-style body, carved top and back, would get my dollar.

A personal big turn off with all of the oval holes currently made by Eastman are the rossettes around the soundholes. I find them very gaudy and tastless. Hope that doesn't sound harsh.

Would love to see another unique instrument emerge from the Eastman line. 

Yours sincerely,

A very proud owner of a black top DG1, a 905d 2-point and a 615 'dola.

----------


## Galimando

Hey, does anyone know if there's been any sort of follow through on this instrument?

----------


## jim simpson

I've messed with your image to reflect my sound hole choice.

----------


## djweiss

For what it's worth, I'd get behind the 22.75in scale El Rayo body...especially the "f" hole version.  How about a 5 string option, too!

----------


## Rob Sharer

I do a fair few repairs for our local Eastman dealer, so let me tread lightly (but firmly!).

I really think 20" is too short for an octave mandolin.  Having a low G pair at that scale necessitates the use of such heavy strings that a whole series of problems ensues.  

Short, large strings require higher action to ensure adequate room to swing without excessive fret buzz.  Trouble is, it's very easy to bend the fretted note out of tune on such a string, even more so when it's up high.  Additionally, the large size and flabby tension of the strings means you need to space them apart at the nut and bridge so they won't knock into each other when struck.  This can make the pair feel wide and awkward under the fingers, especially at the low tension they're tuned to  - kind of "noodly" - as well as making picking feel odd.  Mostly, though, a short G pair just doesn't speak well, and that's not good for the music that's trying to come out.

21" or thereabouts is significantly better for the G pair, while remaining eminently player-friendly for melody play in GDAE.  As has been pointed out, 23" is the common scale for tenor banjos as used in Irish music (contrary to the text of innumerable ads I've seen for short-scale, open-back Vegas {"perfect for Celtic music!"}, almost every banjo player in Ireland uses a 19-fret tenor with a resonator).  They get tuned to GDAE, and every tune in the considerable Irish canon is reachable at that scale.  

I say, press on with this excellent idea, but use the 21" scale for your lovely little A-style.  For the big-handed boyos who want to raise the rafters, though, the El Rey at 22.75 would be a real contender.

Good luck,

Rob

----------


## PFCG

Please view my other post if you would like to see the specs

http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/sh...2013-NAMM-show!

----------


## Charlieshafer

Pretty, but El Rey, too??

----------


## Luthier

It looks really nice, Pat.
Don

----------


## Mandobar

I am hoping the string spacing is better on these than the mandocello.  I had to have my luthier make a new nut for mine.  I was pretty unplayable as it was.  

As for the 20 inch scale, Bob Abrahm's Trillium mandola can be strung as an OM and it is a 19" scale.  You just need to use the right string gauges.

----------


## Charlieshafer

> I am hoping the string spacing is better on these than the mandocello.  I had to have my luthier make a new nut for mine.  I was pretty unplayable as it was.


Yes, I remember wasting an insane amount of your luthier's time, both of hoping like heck you'd be late picking it up!

But I agree with Mary, the Eastman 'cello's I've played do show a weakness in the nut/bridge spacing. A little more attention to detail, and they'll be fantastic bargains. Right now, they're only excellent bargains. 

My only hope is that Eastman doesn't pretend to listen, and then not actually listen. How many others called for an "El Rey" style OM, with no response by the Eastman designer here? Hopefully it's not like auto company surveys. 2431 questions asked, and my door still leaks on my pickup.

----------


## Shelagh Moore

> As has been pointed out, 23" is the common scale for tenor banjos as used in Irish music (contrary to the text of innumerable ads I've seen for short-scale, open-back Vegas .... almost every banjo player in Ireland uses a 19-fret tenor with a resonator). They get tuned to GDAE, and every tune in the considerable Irish canon is reachable at that scale.


Slight thread creep here.  I've seen this "authoritively" stated several times here and it simply isn't true. BTW, I'm Irish and I play the tenor banjo (and have always preferred and chosen shorter scale models and know plenty of others the same).

Getting back onto track, the latest design OM looks very nice to me.

----------


## PFCG

> Yes, I remember wasting an insane amount of your luthier's time, both of hoping like heck you'd be late picking it up!
> 
> But I agree with Mary, the Eastman 'cello's I've played do show a weakness in the nut/bridge spacing. A little more attention to detail, and they'll be fantastic bargains. Right now, they're only excellent bargains. 
> 
> My only hope is that Eastman doesn't pretend to listen, and then not actually listen. How many others called for an "El Rey" style OM, with no response by the Eastman designer here? Hopefully it's not like auto company surveys. 2431 questions asked, and my door still leaks on my pickup.


The El-Rey design is something invented by Otto D'Ambrosio, a very talented and creative luthier. We use his designs on a limited basis, and follow his designs. We are not supposed to alter the design without cooperation from Otto. If you were interested in getting an instrument commissioned from Otto, i am sure he would consider it!

We can only really do different colors/pickups/hardware on the El Reys. Turning it into another instrument would most likely be out of the picture. However, the only requests for an instrument such as this has been in this thread. When it comes to making production line instruments, we must always consider the general public; our largest market of buyers. 

We do take into consideration a lot of dealer and end user feedback, which we believe to be very valuable in developing a new products. Your suggestions do not fall on deaf ears.

----------


## Mandobar

When was that, Charlie?  It was there for a while.  You should have said something.  I'd have let you take it home for a bit.




> Yes, I remember wasting an insane amount of your luthier's time, both of hoping like heck you'd be late picking it up!
> 
> But I agree with Mary, the Eastman 'cello's I've played do show a weakness in the nut/bridge spacing. A little more attention to detail, and they'll be fantastic bargains. Right now, they're only excellent bargains. 
> 
> My only hope is that Eastman doesn't pretend to listen, and then not actually listen. How many others called for an "El Rey" style OM, with no response by the Eastman designer here? Hopefully it's not like auto company surveys. 2431 questions asked, and my door still leaks on my pickup.

----------


## Charlieshafer

> When was that, Charlie?  It was there for a while.  You should have said something.  I'd have let you take it home for a bit.


Ha! It was the day you were supposed to picking it up around noon; I remember the weather was going south quickly, and George wasn't sure you'd even be able to make it... If you're ever down again, give a yell, and you can goof around on my Weber 'cello (vintage oval) if you'd like.

----------


## Charlieshafer

> . 
> 
> We do take into consideration a lot of dealer and end user feedback, which we believe to be very valuable in developing a new products. Your suggestions do not fall on deaf ears.


Ah. Understood, then. However, a 22-23 inch scale with some sort of arch-top design, with pickups, would indeed be very cool. Doesn't have to be an El Rey, especially under those circumstances. Could be a sort of a Frankenstien of designs, borrowing from the Giacomel, the D'Ambrosio, and Pagelli or Pisano's. I'll buy it for sure. Just so you know, I'm a dedicated Eastman guy, with 3 violins in the family for school/travel use, a cello, and 3 mandolins, so I'd write a check for one of those. Heck, even make a duo; one an octave, one a mandocello, based on the same design.

----------


## Clement Barrera-Ng

I think it bears remembering that the collaboration is between Eastman and a UK distributor, and so I think the design reflects the predominant design for OM in Europe (oval hole, flat top, tear drop shape etc.).  The same design will also sell in the US as well of course, so I understand why we're not seeing an arch-top or El Rey model, at least at this point.  

I am very partial to the E10 guitar and am looking forward to trying one of these.  What's the scale length going to be? I don't believe I'd seen any mention of that in Pat's previous announcements.

----------


## Mandobar

out of it all, it should be playable out of the box.  Designing something that looks nice is okay, but you need to be able to play it right out of the box without having to fiddle with it.

We spend too much time on aesthetics.  Then you sit down to play and it's like getting behind the wheel of your new car and not being able to reach the pedals or the steering wheel is too small.

----------

Charlieshafer, 

Steve-o

----------


## Luthier

....sometimes the seat needs a little adjustment though.

Don

----------


## Mandobar

yes, but the seat should be the right size and shape.

----------


## Luthier

....so does this mean the strap should be considered a seat belt?...(we better stop.  This thread could be making a wrong turn...lol)
Don

----------


## Mandobar

yes, we should, but you get my drift.  I have to say, buying a new instrument, paying close to $2k and then finding it unplayable, well, it's maddening.

----------


## Luthier

I agree. If it is coming from the builder. If purchased from a dealer, that may be asking a lot.  I can't tell you how many instruments I have had to do set ups on.
Don

----------


## Bertram Henze

> ....so does this mean the strap should be considered a seat belt?


...just like the seat belt prevents the car from falling off of you?  :Wink: 

No, like the seat belt relieves you from holding on fast in the bends. It's not so different.

----------


## Pete Jenner

Call me a cynic but I think this thread is just a bit of gratuitous advertising.  i.e.  an abuse of the forums.
No sign of the original poster (an employee of Eastman) and no reply to reasonable questions. If I were king I'd boot him from the cafe.
Perhaps a moderator might like to look into it.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> gratuitous advertising


More a kind of free marketing research to me. Reminds me of that incident when I was approached in the street and asked if I had a few minutes for a test of choc bars in a nearby lab (I went and had a few free choc bars that way - this is where the analogy ends).

And while I am at it, I might mention to the OP marketeer that I would never buy an instrument without a zero fret.  :Wink:

----------


## Pete Jenner

Bertram, when he was originally getting input from members it was market research but then the instrument was released and he linked the new thread announcing the release back to this one in a pathetic attempt to make it look legitimate.

...and now he isn't even around to let us know what the scale length is.

----------


## JEStanek

> Call me a cynic but I think this thread is just a bit of gratuitous advertising. i.e. an abuse of the forums.
> No sign of the original poster (an employee of Eastman) and no reply to reasonable questions. If I were king I'd boot him from the cafe.
> Perhaps a moderator might like to look into it.


The Cafe has a long standing tradtion of threads like these.  You could call the entire Mandolins In Progress Thread gratuitous advertising.  Eastman hasn't tried to drum up sales and has responded to this communities (literally) years of asking for an Octave Mandolin.

Jamie

----------


## Pete Jenner

Jamie - my only questions are - where is he and why won't he answer a simple question about one of the most important specs of all - the scale length?  I know you are fan of Eastman and I own one myself BUT - give us a break - he said "see my other thread for specs" - there were no new specs. I'll warrant they took no notice of all the recommendations they got from the members here. Let's just wait and see if the scale length is still 20 inches.

...and BTW I DO consider 80% of Mandolins in Progress gratuitous advertising ...don't get me started.

----------


## Bill Snyder

Well, I for one am glad they allow the type of gratuitous advertising that goes on in the Mandolins in Progress thread.
But I think anytime a professional luthier posts photos of any of his work on the Mandolin Cafe it is a bit of advertising. Without it I don't think this forum would be nearly as well populated. Of course if the "hit the people over the head, come buy my newest and greatest this or that" were allowed I don't think it would be as well populated either.

----------


## the padma

.

Well Pat ...here be my suggestions




If you use them...please, send me one of the first prototypes.   

thanks and blessings
duh Padma

bl

----------

Dobe, 

jim simpson

----------


## Tom Coletti

Has there been any recent development on this? The Mandolin Store says "Due Fall 2013," but the Eastman octave discussion has been fairly silent as of late...

--Tom

----------


## Clement Barrera-Ng

Bumped! The project is now finally a reality. The mandolin store just got one in stock (check the classifieds). (NFI)

----------


## multidon

TMS Web site says they have 6 in stock! Dennis must think they will sell pretty well. Strange looking tailpiece. Looks like it might be ebony kind of like a cello tailpiece. Wonder what exactly they have to offer over a Trinity College that costs 300 dollars less. Spec look similar except for maple versus mahogany. Would be nice if you got a hard case for that price.

----------


## Tom C

I like the looks of it. Looks a little less Irish in that the tear drop shape does not seem as pronounced. I've never been a big fan of abalone rosettes.

----------


## Dobe

So I guess they decided against the arched plates ?  Here's the link:

http://www.themandolinstore.com/scri...idProduct=9894

----------


## multidon

The link no longer works. The Mandolin Store has pulled this product after only 2 days of listing it on their site. Even if they had sold all 6 they had in stock wouldn't they still list it as out of stock? This was a highly anticipated product here. The only explanation i can think of (purely speculative on my part) it that there must have been something wrong with the batch that could not be corrected in house, causing them to have to send the whole batch back.

----------


## Ted Eschliman

Considering the original poster who started this as a survey has not participated in well over a year, we'll assume further participation will only be a series of frustrated, unanswered questions. We'll leave the discussion of optimal dimensions of what an octave mandolin should be to another thread.

----------

