# Instruments and Equipment > Builders and Repair >  A's and F's

## Mike Bunting

I was reminded of this in another current thread. I'm posting here to avoid hijacking that thread. It seems to be the common opinion here that there is no difference in sound between A and F styles. I have to say that I can't discern any difference in tone that I can attribute to the different body shapes but when I posed this question to two very prominent builders and I got responses to the contrary. They can hear differences between the two. They don't claim superiority of one to the other but say they can hear a variation between them. I give them credence because that listen in a focussed and critical way to a lot more instruments than I do but I'd be interested to hear the opinions of other builders on this.

----------

robert.najlis

----------


## testore

The real test would be behind a screen and I think there would be a wide range of results. It would be a very fun thing to do.

----------


## JeffD

The thing is there is of course a difference. There is a difference between the sound of any given instrument and any other instrument. The thing is, how much difference can be attributed to the difference in body types. A particular F body instrument may sound different from another F body instrument more than it does from a given A body instrument.

I also think a given builder that makes both As and Fs, could likely make an F that sounds more like his As and an A that sounds more like his Fs.

----------


## Mike Bunting

> The thing is there is of course a difference. There is a difference between the sound of any given instrument and any other instrument. The thing is, *how much difference can be attributed to the difference in body types.* A particular F body instrument may sound different from another F body instrument more than it does from a given A body instrument.
> 
> I also think a given builder that makes both As and Fs, could likely make an F that sounds more like his As and an A that sounds more like his Fs.


I made that qualification in my original post.
As for the rest, I know all that.

----------


## sunburst

You can find builders who say they hear a definite difference and you can find builders who say they hear no difference. Builders are human beings with similar prejudices, preconceived notions, influences and biases as everyone else.
It would indeed be fun to set up a blind listening test (behind a screen). My bet would be on nobody being able to tell the difference reliably from sound alone.

----------

Mike Bunting

----------


## Dale Ludewig

I've done the blind test with my own instruments, FWIW.  I couldn't identify A from F.  There were only 8 instruments in the test, so it's not very scientific, to put it mildly.  But allowing for the difference from instrument to instrument, I don't see why there should be a significant difference.

----------

Bluejay, 

Mike Bunting, 

robert.najlis

----------


## Jay G Miller

Im not a builder, but I do find this thread extremely interesting. I've always thought there is too much variance instument to instrument to be able to decern an A from an F. Its cool to see others thoughts on this.  I own A's, but have played a load of F's that were awesome through and through. I'm not partial to shape at all, just to all the other good stuff great instruments offer. If money was better for me, I'd probably have a nice F too!

----------


## Mike Bunting

I'm not a proponent of either style but was prompted to post after a couple of conversations I had with these two prominent builders. Their experience is with their own mandos and say that, to their ears,  it's a very subtle difference.  Because of their long experience in building both models I was curious about what other builders had to say. I haven't listened up close to a bunch of f hole A's, just O'Brien's Nugget, Jody Stecher's Miller A and a friends Red Diamond and to my poor ear there didn't seem to be any difference. I heard Stecher's Miller A on the same stage as Butch Waller's Miller F. I was just wondering hat the more experienced ears of other builders had to say on the matter. Thanks to them.

----------


## David Newton

The crux of the situation is the overwhelming preference in Bluegrass for F's.
A's just don't cut it.
There has to be a reason, right?
So it must be the sound.
I don't mean to say that A's are not well represented in Bluegrass, they are, and they serve very well.
But there is a difference, you know?

----------


## Randolph

I am curious about this as well. And, I say thank you to all that reply, builders and others. :Smile:

----------


## Keith Newell

I have built a few of each. Eyes closed I can tell a difference until I pic up the other model, then I REALLY can tell a difference until I pick up the other model and I REALLY CAN TELL A DIFFERENCE. Then I take a break and WOW THEY OPENED UP AND I REALLY REALLY REALLY CAN tell a differeance.

----------

Mark Wilson, 

Tommcgtx

----------


## JeffD

> The crux of the situation is the overwhelming preference in Bluegrass for F's.
> A's just don't cut it.
> There has to be a reason, right?
> So it must be the sound.


Nah. Tradition. The look.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> The crux of the situation is the overwhelming preference in Bluegrass for F's.
> A's just don't cut it.  There has to be a reason, right?  So it must be the sound.






> Nah. Tradition. The look.


Yes exactly Jeff -- but I wonder if David's post did not contain a faint whiff of sarcasm?  :Laughing: 

Behind a curtain no one could tell the difference between A's and F's --I'd bet the family farm on it! (of course I no longer own the family farm).

----------


## John Soper

I don't know about y'all, but I can [I]see[I] the difference in the sound!  Just can't hear it... :Whistling: 

I love and appreciate the time & effort that goes into the creation of F-style mandolins (own some), but boy is there a lot of sonic value in an A-style or 2-point (a la Old Wave C#).  If one has limited resources, the best way to get into a higher end mandolin is to purchase an A.  

That being said, I'm still saving my pennies, tho, for a Nugget or Ellis or Kimble or (insert name of upper echelon builder here) F...

----------


## Jay G Miller

> I don't know about y'all, but I can [I]see[I] the difference in the sound!  Just can't hear it...
> 
> I love and appreciate the time & effort that goes into the creation of F-style mandolins (own some), but boy is there a lot of sonic value in an A-style or 2-point (a la Old Wave C#).  If one has limited resources, the best way to get into a higher end mandolin is to purchase an A.  
> 
> That being said, I'm still saving my pennies, tho, for a Nugget or Ellis or Kimble or (insert name of upper echelon builder here) F...


I can relate to limited resources. 20 years ago I could only afford a Standard Nugget A style, and believe me when I say I payed more for my Pava recently then I did my Nugget A. Back 20 years ago +-,  Scott Tichenor was kind enough to allow me a minute on his wonderful F Nugget. At the time I was happy with my Flatiron but playing that Nugget changed me. I quickly found I could no way afford the F, but the A was do-able in a plain jane model. I've never been disappointed in it and have loved it many years. Had I not gotten the A, I would have been Nugget-less with no way to ever afford one now. I owe that to Scott too, because he warned me that would happen. I'm glad I listened. If you're reading Scott, thanks for what you did, you didn't have to share.

----------

sgrexa

----------


## mandobassman

> Nah. Tradition. The look.


That's exactly what it is.  I have a friend that referred to the A style as wimpy. This was not based at all on sound but it was the look. I don't care. My A sounds better than many Fs that I have heard, and way better than any of my previous Fs.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> That's exactly what it is.  I have a friend that referred to the A style as wimpy. This was not based at all on sound but it was the look. I don't care. My A sounds better than many Fs that I have heard, and way better than any of my previous Fs.


By a landslide one of the very best mandolins I ever played was a "lowly" 2002 Gibson A-9.  That mandolin was loud beyond loud and it was as "woody" and "woofy" as you could imagine. Bought it from Dennis when the Mandolin Store was still in Washington Courthouse, OH.   I liked to watch the eyes pop out on people when they picked on it the first time.  Dis-belief was the first impression.....never should have let it go but I did.  I probably would still have it had it been an F-9 -- dumb decision for sure.  

Back to the topic, I suppose you could say that was an A-model that sounded different from an F-model.  It sounded *better* than most of them!   :Laughing:

----------

DataNick

----------


## JeffD

I started with As and yea I do have pretty strong scroll envy. 

When I first saw the scroll and points design, in pictures in a magazine way back when I was just getting into things, I thought it was ugly, or at least a distortion of clean lines and symmetry. I have since really learned to appreciate the in your face whimsy of the scroll.

----------


## allenhopkins

> The crux of the situation is the overwhelming preference in Bluegrass for F's.  A's just don't cut it.  There has to be a reason, right?  *So it must be the sound*….


Disagree.  There are evident reasons for the prevalence of F-model mandolins in bluegrass.  One of the obvious ones is the fact that the "Father of Bluegrass," Bill Monroe, played a Gibson Lloyd Loar F-5.  So the iconic silhouette of the bluegrass mandolin was that F-model.

Second, the F-model has a graceful and distinctive shape.  You can read a multitude of Cafe´posts along the lines of "I really like the F style," or "I'm _upgrading_ to an F-style mandolin," or "I get dissed at my bluegrass jam 'cause I play an A-model mandolin."  These attitudes have little to do with the *sound* of the instrument, IMHO.

Also, don't forget that the F-model mandolins were Gibson's best models when they were first introduced and manufactured.  So pro musicians who wanted the best would buy them and perform with them -- not just country and bluegrass mandolinists, but "pop" mandolin players like Dave Apollon.

To say that F-models and A-models -- *as classes of instrument* -- sound different, one would have to determine what differences in construction would influence the acoustics of the two groups.  The distinctive "ornaments" of the F-model are parts of the instrument's rims, not the vibrating surface.  If the vibrating surface and the size of the "sound box" are effectively identical, the only apparent difference is the thicker parts of the rim that comprise the scroll and points, and some added mass and possibly stiffness of the rims that these additions provide.

I'm not a builder, but I've read enough in the many threads covering this topic, to realize that most of the builders who respond here don't perceive a systematic class difference in sound -- surely not enough to surpass the individual sound variances one would find between any two mandolins, even those identically shaped and made from very similar materials.

----------


## avaldes

Not a builder, so probably getting in over my head. I would think a blindfold rather than a curtain, because the curtain might affect the sound. I would be interested in playing or hearing mandolins of the same supposed wood grade and build quality (say Eastman 5XX in A and F).

----------


## robert.najlis

I have heard builders say there is no difference.  I did however hear one builder refer to the A model as a very "light" instrument, meaning lacking some of the needed weight of the F.

----------


## mtucker

> If the vibrating surface and the size of the "sound box" are effectively identical, the only apparent difference is the thicker parts of the rim that comprise the scroll and points, *and some added mass and possibly stiffness* of the rims that these additions provide.


Okay, I'll bite, Mike  :Wink: … I'd say the F is a tad more focused with a more consistent fundamental.. :Popcorn:

----------


## Willie Poole

I will say that years ago there probably was a difference between A`s and F`s made by the same factory because I just don`t believe the builders put as much attention into the A`s as they did the F`s because they sold at a cheaper price...But now days an independent builder puts just as much attention into the A`s as he does the F`s so they should be the same assuming they were built with the same wood and carved to the same dimentions, after all the size of the inside is the same, because the points are solid so the air chamber is going to be the same...Makes sense to me although I am not a builder....How can a good comparison be made between two different brands of mandolins as they are made with different woods etc...

    Willie

----------


## testore

Avaldes, yes a screen would interrupt some sound waves but at least it would be equal for all instruments being compared. 
I sold an A model to a student of mine back in November. He was in need if an upgrade and his dad wasn't interested in jumping to one of my F models. His son was disappointed with a lowly A model but that was his dad's decision. Fast forward to our lesson this week and his A model is equal to the F model that I use and I have to remind him to not play louder than me when he's doing backup to my melody playing. He then said that he's in love with his A model and doesn't think he's interested in a F model anymore.

----------


## testore

Willie, yes wood differences are huge but the test would only be to try to hear the difference in models. The test wouldn't be in any way an attempt to say which one was the best sounding mandolin. That's a whole new topic. The question is, is there a universal audible difference between A models or F models. I say no.

----------

DataNick

----------


## Larry Simonson

I would think a statistician could design a test using n top quality mandolins, randomly chosen, playing a well chosen composition by a good player to a blinded audience of m qualified hearers who would mark each instrument as an A or an F and seeing if there is any correlation of these marks with the truth, but wouldn't that spoil all the fun we are having in this endless issue?

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> I would think a statistician could design a test using n top quality mandolins, randomly chosen, playing a well chosen composition by a good player to a blinded audience of m qualified hearers who would mark each instrument as an A or an F and seeing if there is any correlation of these marks with the truth, but wouldn't that spoil all the fun we are having in this endless issue?


Yes if someone ever finds out for sure how many angels can dance on the head of a pin I am going to be very upset!

----------


## Spencer

When I bought my latest mandolin (scroll), I compared it to a new instrument of the same design and an A model built at the same time of comparable materials (these two built at the same time), as well as comparing it to my previous A model - all instruments reasonably new, same builder, same bracing design, same materials, same room, both the builder and I playing them.  We spent quite a bit of time listening and comparing tones, including blind testing and decided that there is an ever-so-slight difference in the tone between the scroll and non-scroll version, the scroll versions seemed to have a little more of what I would call depth.  I think is due to differences the lower tones. I think it stands to reason that the scroll vibrates and contributes to the mass of the instrument, so there can be physical reasons for differences, but to repeat, the difference we observed was quite small.

I now have one of each type, and love them both, and play each of them a lot. 

Spencer

----------

robert.najlis

----------


## sunburst

> ...the scroll versions seemed to have a little more of what I would call depth.  I think is due to differences the lower tones. I think it stands to reason that the scroll vibrates and contributes to the mass of the instrument, so there can be physical reasons for differences...


We have studies (with pictures) to show that the scroll doesn't "vibrate" significantly. It's fine to hear a difference and form an opinion, but when we start attributing the difference to imaginary behavior of parts in the mandolin, when we have studies that show how a mandolin works and are free to read and study, we're moving into pure baseless speculation. In other words, if someone can show that they hear a difference, fine, but if he/she doesn't understand what makes the difference, it's best to "leave the mystery be" rather than make something up to explain it.

----------

Jim Adwell, 

Larry Simonson, 

Pete Jenner

----------


## JeffD

> including blind testing and decided that there is an ever-so-slight difference in the tone between the scroll and non-scroll version, the scroll versions seemed to have a little more of what I would call depth.


However carefully compared and measured, there will be a difference. Ever so slight to clearly perceivable. But that is only because any two mandolins will sound different. One could probably easily find another scroll that sounds more different from your scroll than either A.

----------


## Spencer

> We have studies (with pictures) to show that the scroll doesn't "vibrate" significantly. It's fine to hear a difference and form an opinion, but when we start attributing the difference to imaginary behavior of parts in the mandolin, when we have studies that show how a mandolin works and are free to read and study, we're moving into pure baseless speculation. In other words, if someone can show that they hear a difference, fine, but if he/she doesn't understand what makes the difference, it's best to "leave the mystery be" rather than make something up to explain it.


Yes, I did speculate, as I used the word "can" in the answer.  But I don't think the word imaginary, regarding scroll vibration is accurate. I just went in and checked, and at least on my mandolin, I can feel the vibrations in the scroll when I strike the G string, so it is vibrating.  I could actually feel some beat frequencies in it.  Whether that is "significant" or not is something else, but IF there is a difference between scroll/non-, where else is one to look other than at the scroll?   

I just wanted to report the experiences of a couple sceptics in probably as repeatable check as one can do, because I never thought there was any difference at all between the two styles either until we did this.  The only reason we did what we did was to compare mandolins in the process of buying one, and any prejudice was opposite to what we heard.  

The difference observed was worth a lot less than all the time spent discussing it.  If you can barely hear the difference in 4 similar instruments from the same builder, other factors are way, way more important, but then we know that already.

Coffee's ready now :Smile:  :Coffee: 

Spencer

----------


## Dave Cohen

Attached is an ESPI image I did in 2004 of the (0,0) mode of a '24 F5.  I did all of the normal modes, both top and back plates, up to about 1.5 kHz.  When the current to the coil is increased, the interference fringes push out more toward the edges, but never make it very far into the scroll.  Also did an F4.  Not much going on in that scroll either.  Also did numerous A models, a Lyon & Healy A, a Vega cylinderback,....  

Couple of things to take from the image,  Notice that the normal mode shape extends through the area of the soundhole(s).  The holes are not barriers to motions of the top plate.  Also, in principle, the modes are all "global", i.e., they occupy the entire plates.

It is likely that what Spencer felt when he put his hand on the scroll was a combination of barlike bending motions of the entire (i.e., neck plus body) instrument, plus maybe some high-frequency "wagging" of the entire scroll - not very significant in terms of sound radiation.

http://www.Cohenmando.com/

----------

allenhopkins, 

Dale Ludewig, 

fatt-dad, 

j. condino, 

Jim Adwell, 

Pete Jenner, 

sebastiaan56, 

sunburst, 

Tommcgtx

----------


## belbein

> but when we start attributing the difference to imaginary behavior


OK, John, so in one clause you just destroyed my profession and my avocation.  Thanks a lot.  

Now I'll have to become an actuary or something.

----------

Steve Zawacki, 

sunburst

----------


## testore

I think what this really means is that differences between mandolins is not confined or determined by its model. The differences are not more noticeable between A models vereses F models than they they would be if we were comparing only F models or only A models.

----------

DataNick, 

sgarrity

----------


## David Houchens

I would think the only difference would be from extra mass in the F and that could be added to the A, I would think, by using heaver neck and tail block wood, etc..
Personally I like A's as much as F's in most instances.

----------


## Tommcgtx

Considering how subjective the "sound" of a mandolin is, how much of that is affected by what we see? How much does the one sense affect the perception of the other? Sense of smell affects what you taste, does looking at a purdy scroll, (assuming you consider scrolls purdy), make what you're hearing more pleasant, full, woody, etc.?

----------


## sunburst

> Considering how subjective the "sound" of a mandolin is, how much of that is affected by what we see? How much does the one sense affect the perception of the other? Sense of smell affects what you taste, does looking at a purdy scroll, (assuming you consider scrolls purdy), make what you're hearing more pleasant, full, woody, etc.?


I'm convinced of it.

----------

Tommcgtx

----------


## j. condino

Excellent response Dave, thanx.

As for the A vs F: 

If at some point in life you are lucky enough to get to play the original L Loar signed "Griffith" A, you'll realize that the entire conversation is silly. Ask almost any hardcore Loar signed F mandolin geek around and they will all agree that is one of the best mandolins anywhere, scroll or no scroll. That's my favorite.

If you're into the whole curly scrolly things, then focus on those. If you're not, then get yourself a great sounding A model and enjoy the pmped out d-luxe six week long vacation on the beach in Costa Rica with the money you saved.... :Wink: 

j.
www.condino.com

----------

stevedenver

----------


## barry

> Okay, I'll bite, Mike  I'd say the F is a tad more focused with a more consistent fundamental..


Without any baiting or "pot stirring", I would agree.   However, I don't think it's something that is as apparent from the listener's perspective as it is from the player's.

----------


## CedarSlayer

Listeners vs players perspective is a large issue.   When playing the difference in sound from one pick to another is dramatic and amazing.  When listening, it is rare that my ear can tell that a change in pick was made let alone what thickness, shape or material was involved.   I don't think it is entirely an illusion, the difference between played and heard.   I think that our sense of touch and feel of immediate vibration can strongly color what we hear.   

Bob

----------

stevedenver

----------


## Bernie Daniel

FWTIW, here is one opinion!  They sound basically the same to me.

----------


## sunburst

> FWTIW, here is one opinion!  They sound basically the same to me.


Me too. Try listening without looking and guess which is which.
(same wood, same hardware, same inlay, same player, same mic, same computer, same speakers... how much difference can I expect?)
But... I heard it on the internet, so they _must_ sound different! (_Very_ different, I believe is what he said, in fact.)

----------


## barry

They sound the same up until the 3:30 mark.  After that, the F seems to have a bit more "density" on the G string.

----------


## David Houchens

For any difference I thought I might have heard, I'd sure save some money and buy the A.

----------


## JeffD

"you can hear the difference between [this] A style mandolin and [this] F style mandolin."

----------

Bob Clark

----------


## Mike Bunting

> Okay, I'll bite, Mike … I'd say the F is a tad more focused with a more consistent fundamental..


 :Smile: That puts you in a very select group of 4 people who say they can discern some kind of difference.

----------


## Mike Bunting

> FWTIW, here is one opinion!  They sound basically the same to me.


I have to agree.

----------


## Rick Lindstrom

I don't know how often I've seen this topic discussed here in one guise or another, with the same results, in the years I've been reading this forum on the Cafe, but it's always been a more or less perfect example of confirmation bias at work.

----------


## Rush Burkhardt

> Excellent response Dave, thanx.
> 
> If at some point in life you are lucky enough to get to play the original L Loar signed "Griffith" A, you'll realize that the entire conversation is silly. Ask almost any hardcore Loar signed F mandolin geek around and they will all agree that is one of the best mandolins anywhere, scroll or no scroll. That's my favorite.
> 
> www.condino.com


Having played many Loar's, I'd vote for a test. In 2010 I had the great fortune to play the Griffith Loar at the IBMA. At the time it was consigned to Stan Werbin (Elderly) and his display afforded me the time to play her and 3 other Loars. My experience changed my appreciation, as I felt the Griffith A5 was the best of the 4, and perhaps the mandolin I'd ever heard, much less played. (Please keep in mind, I'm a bluegrass-er and there are certain sound criteria that are important to me. Griffith had them all.) Since that day I've looked for an A that would somewhat replicate that sound. (Not to replace my Wood conversion, '37 F-12.)

Read in another thread about the Henderson A at Carter's and the comment that it sounded like the Griffith A! Guess I've gotta' go back to Nashville!

So as to be true to the OP theme...it seems to me that often the great sound is in the eyes of the beholder!
 :Popcorn:

----------


## testore

I too have heard the Griffith is incredible.

----------


## allenhopkins

Started talking about "different," now we're talking "best."

I've heard thousands of mandolins in my misspent life, and played a couple hundred here and there.  So many variables causing them to sound "different."  And my ears are different from others' ears, and react differently at different times.

Remember, the question was not whether one F-model sounds better/worse/different from one other A-model, as similarly built, strung, and played as possible.  It was whether there is a *systematic* difference between A- and F-models, *that can be defensibly attributed to the variations in construction that define the two types of instrument.*

I vote "no," but doubt the question will ever be settled to the satisfaction of all.

----------

Mark Wilson, 

Petrus, 

stevedenver

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> ....I vote "no," but doubt the question will ever be settled to the satisfaction of all.


I think you are correct even if we do THE BIG DOUBLE BLIND TEST....so why bother?   :Smile:   Anyway we* need* topics like this I guess.

----------


## mtucker

> That puts you in a very select group of 4 people who say they can discern some kind of difference.


I'm honored ...who are these people, i want to meet them!  :Laughing:  Oh, thanks Barry, just noticed.. :Smile: 

I've owned a number of ff A's and happen to like the way the F model responds consistently better, both it's fundamental and it's focus (I have a very good 'A' BTW). :Grin: 

Granted, this may be a breakthrough notion (I seriously doubt it though) there are others out there eager to speak out!  :Cow:

----------


## Mike Bunting

> Started talking about "different," now we're talking "best."
> 
> I've heard thousands of mandolins in my misspent life, and played a couple hundred here and there.  So many variables causing them to sound "different."  And my ears are different from others' ears, and react differently at different times.
> 
> Remember, the question was not whether one F-model sounds better/worse/different from one other A-model, as similarly built, strung, and played as possible.  It was whether there is a *systematic* difference between A- and F-models, *that can be defensibly attributed to the variations in construction that define the two types of instrument.*
> 
> I vote "no," but doubt the question will ever be settled to the satisfaction of all.


Yes, I only posted here to see if any one actually could hear any difference, I didn't ask which was better, what's better anyhow?
I appreciate your vote, that's all I really wanted to hear. My experience basically agrees with your yours. I have played for more than 30 years and I know that my ear has become more attuned to subtle variations in tone etc. and I really can't a difference but one person who hears a difference, a subtle one to be sure, has been building them for that same length of time. I figure that the kind of focus that he applies may contribute to a more sophisticated ear than I have. I was just curious is all, it doesn't matter if anyone is satisfied.

----------


## barry

Every subtle change affects the tone of an instrument.  The sub-species of wood selection, the subtle angle of a neck set, changes in graduation and arching by tenths of a millimeter, all sculpt the personality of an instrument to various degrees.

Why then, is it so hard for people on this forum to accept that some big, honkin', extra pieces of timber on the main body of the instrument changes the sound?

----------


## Mike Bunting

> I'm honored ...who are these people, i want to meet them!  Oh, thanks Barry, just noticed..
> 
> I've owned a number of ff A's and happen to like the way the F model responds consistently better, both it's fundamental and it's focus (I have a very good 'A' BTW).
> 
> Granted, this may be a breakthrough notion (I seriously doubt it though) there are others out there eager to speak out!


Oops, I missed Barry. Make that a group of five, three of whom don't post here.

----------


## Vincent Capostagno

We have heard several luthiers say that the scroll is inert and doesn't contribute to the sound and that if they use identical construction parameters they can't tell the difference between their A's and F's.  Are there any luthiers out there who claim otherwise?

----------


## sunburst

> ...Why then, is it so hard for people on this forum to accept that some big, honkin', extra pieces of timber on the main body of the instrument changes the sound?


I can't speak for anyone else, but for me it's because I don't hear a difference.

----------


## ADAL

I can't tell any difference,but Tim O'brien doesn't look right playin anything but that blacktop A Nugget.

----------


## Mike Bunting

> We have heard several luthiers say that the scroll is inert and doesn't contribute to the sound and that if they use identical construction parameters they can't tell the difference between their A's and F's.  Are there any luthiers out there who claim otherwise?


Actually there are two that I've spoken to, although I don't know what they have to say about scrolls etc. But do you hear any differences, that was the original question.
  Again, there is no point to be made here, just want to hear people's take on the question.

----------


## brent1308

> Me too. Try listening without looking and guess which is which.
> (same wood, same hardware, same inlay, same player, same mic, same computer, same speakers... how much difference can I expect?)
> But... I heard it on the internet, so they _must_ sound different! (_Very_ different, I believe is what he said, in fact.)


I did notice a difference in sound listening to the video blindly through very good headphones.  Based on what he stated the differences were though, i guessed wrong.  I thought the A sounded more focused and was a slightly better instrument at least over the internet through good headphones (but regular mac processing).  Neither seemed to embody what many people (wrongly I think) seem to attribute to each style. If he payed 4 gallatin's I'm guessing they would all vary slightly.

----------


## fatt-dad

If only somebody like Collings would take the time to capture the sound/sound-properties of their MT and MF mandolins.  I mean one right after the other, over and over again.  I'd think then there'd be sufficient population to normalize any instrument-to-instrument bias and we'd know the answer!

My benchmark is an a-model (thanks Dave!). I doubt there's an f-model to trump my uncommon, but humble mandolin.

f-d

----------


## CedarSlayer

If you go back and listen, there are some distinct differences that may or may not be related to the A or F nature.   I think these difference are easy enough to hear.   

On the long final notes, the A gives more of a long even tapering off sustain with all strings audible.  The F seems to yield it's energy faster on the sustain.  As if the F projects more sound at the beginning of the sustain and tapers of more quickly since the energy is spent.

On the last piece, the G string on the A sounds a touch more thuddy, more like a rubber band.  I suspect that the intonation of the A is a bit off, but it could easily be a variation in how the player managed the different instruments.


[/QUOTE]


Bob

----------


## Benski

Fatt-dad: you have Ellis #303, which is an A model (and a very beautiful one at that, judging by the pics you posted) and I have #304, which is an F5 Special that I'm in love with.  Your mando is bracketed by another F model, #302, which is currently for sale at Fiddlers Green. Looking especially at the backs of yours and mine, I'd have to wonder if at least some of the parts didn't come from the same tree. I'd also bet they've gotten roughly the same amount of playing time on them. I'm in Jersey...it sure would be fun to meet halfway sometime and A/B them. Enjoy and cheers.

----------

fatt-dad

----------


## Tommcgtx

Three men did a blind sound test,
And something they did find
They came upon an Two-Point
And that they left behind
The Irishman said it's an A-style
And the Scotsman he said nay
The Welshman said it's a F-Style
and the scroll's been blown away

----------

Charles E., 

Marty Jacobson, 

Pete Jenner

----------


## Jay G Miller

I hear a difference in the two Gallatins. I don't know exactly how to explain it, but cedarslayer comes about as close as I've heard yet. There is a definate difference, but without hearing several of each shape we are still down to possible individual differences in stead of shape being cause. 

I was looking at Northfield's A master and in trying to make a decision as to what mando to buy I called two times on two occations and talked to two different gentlemen. Both of them said there was a sound difference, and it must have been somewhat substantial because both gents commented their A model was their personal favorite for sound. Mike Kemnitzer also told me when i ordered my Nugget (almost 20 years ago) that his A models had a sweeter more sustaining voice then his F. Both makers also said their F models were still very good though.

----------


## JeffD

Do Sunbursts sound better than solid color? I know my sunburst sounds better than my Sheridan brown. I can hear it. There is a difference.

----------

Bob Clark, 

sebastiaan56, 

Tommcgtx

----------


## barry

> Do Sunbursts sound better than solid
> color? I know my sunburst sounds better than my Sheridan brown. I can hear it. There is a difference.


Maybe.  But I think it's slightly more subtle than the difference between a fern or a flowerpot headstock inlay. :-)

----------

Tommcgtx

----------


## stevedenver

In listening to mando music for decades, jazz, BG, blues, etc., I have never been able to tell any 'characteristic' difference between A or F, granted most pros use Fs.

That being said, I can hear often if a guitar is a single coil or humbucker, but not always.

I am in the camp that your mind biases what you think you hear, see, taste, etc.

The idea that every difference in construction has impact, isn't lost on me, but the question really is it is discernible, and if so, is what you discern because of any certain construction difference?  Like those that swear the fingerboard being ebony or rosewood can hear a difference in attack. 

Name one album where someone hears a distinctive A sound.  (not talking oval hole here , either).

I think, (dons flame retardant suit) it is a matter of style and fashion.  And that's OK, but as pointed out, we still fight the shadow of ol' Bill.

----------

Bob Clark, 

Tommcgtx, 

Vincent Capostagno

----------


## fentonjames

just imagine if bill monroe would have stuck to playing his epiphone strand and not the loar!  

http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/at...0&d=1266894189

http://web.iwebcenters.com/music/ima...MandoFront.jpg

----------


## Charles E.

> Three men did a blind sound test,
> And something they did find
> They came upon an Two-Point
> And that they left behind
> The Irishman said it's an A-style
> And the Scotsman he said nay
> The Welshman said it's a F-Style
> and the scroll's been blown away


Ha,ha,ha.  I have a recording of The New Lost City Ramblers doing "Three Men Went a Hunting", originally recorded by Byrd Moore and His Hot Shots, classic.
Thanks for that.

----------

Tommcgtx

----------


## Tommcgtx

> Ha,ha,ha.  I have a recording of The New Lost City Ramblers doing "Three Men Went a Hunting", originally recorded by Byrd Moore and His Hot Shots, classic.
> Thanks for that.


I can't get enough of the Grisman/Garcia version.

----------

stevedenver

----------


## Petrus

Let's stick to the soundbox differences. Given two identical instruments (f-holes, timber, varnish, outer dimensions excluding the f scroll), what is the difference in terms of cubic centimeters in the soundbox of an A versus an F? That's the critical issue here. Everyone agrees that a larger body makes for a lower sound (thus we have mandolas.)

If the differences are so little or so subjective as to be meaningless, then there must be other differences that are also meaningless that are only kept for tradition's sake. F-holes are just borrowed directly from the violin, for instance; they could just as well be any shape.  The little notches in the middle of each f-hole were originally put there so you would know where to put the bridge, but a mandolin bridge may be moved around when adjusting for tone.  Speaking of violins, they also have an internal sound post (under the treble foot of the bridge) and a bass bar for tone (running lengthwise under the bass foot of the bridge most of the length of the body.)  These aren't commonly found in mandolins (maybe the bass bar is, though?)  Would we say they make no difference?  (I suspect the $80 viola I bought off Craigslist does not even have a sound post.)

----------


## Hendrik Ahrend

A very interesting thread, although, it reminds me a bit of 19th century approaches of measuring the world (Humboldt &al.).
Believe it or not, there has been research on something like this (psycho acoustics) - no kidding -  a red painted passenger train passing by seems louder to most people than a green one, although the measured volume is exactly the same. As for mandolins, I'm glad to admit that to me the F-model generally sounds better, maybe just because I prefer the looks - for whatever reason. 
Anyone here to scientifically prove that and why music can sound good? :Smile:

----------

sebastiaan56

----------


## Dave Cohen

> Let's stick to the soundbox differences. Given two identical instruments (f-holes, timber, varnish, outer dimensions excluding the f scroll), what is the difference in terms of cubic centimeters in the soundbox of an A versus an F? That's the critical issue here. Everyone agrees that a larger body makes for a lower sound (thus we have mandolas.)
> 
> If the differences are so little or so subjective as to be meaningless, then there must be other differences that are also meaningless that are only kept for tradition's sake. F-holes are just borrowed directly from the violin, for instance; they could just as well be any shape.  The little notches in the middle of each f-hole were originally put there so you would know where to put the bridge, but a mandolin bridge may be moved around when adjusting for tone.  Speaking of violins, they also have an internal sound post (under the treble foot of the bridge) and a bass bar for tone (running lengthwise under the bass foot of the bridge most of the length of the body.)  These aren't commonly found in mandolins (maybe the bass bar is, though?)  Would we say they make no difference?  (I suspect the $80 viola I bought off Craigslist does not even have a sound post.)



Regarding the body cavity volumes of A mandolins and F-mandolins:  If you make actual measurements, you might be surprised.  The old Gibson A bodies (such as the "Griffith Loar") were actually slightly larger than the F bodies.  Helmholtz air resonance frequency is ~proportional to the square root of the inverse of the body cavitry volume, which means that you have to have a substantially larger body volume, other things being equal, to get a modest decrease in the main air resonance frequency.  I have measured the Helmholtz air resonance frequencies for numerous A-style and F-style mandolins with ff-holes or similar.  The frequencies are about the same.  Mostly around 280 Hz, +/- no more than 10 Hz.  Finally, the air resonance frequency is not the primary determinant of bass response in an instrument.  Rather, it is the _interaction_ of the air resonance frequency with the main body reonance that has the greatest influence on bass response and bass/treble balance.  So, it is possible to lower the air resonance frequency and still not have improved bass response, or even to decrease the bass response, depending on where the main body resonance frequencies are.

Mandolins do have bracing similar to bass bars, usually two of them.  Sound posts are another matter, discussed many times on this forum, and not really relavant to plucked string instruments.

Mandolin bridges can be "moved around" to adjust intonation.  You can't make tonal adjustments by moving mandolin bridges without adversely affecting intonation.

http://www.Cohenmando.com/

----------

j. condino

----------


## JeffD

[QUOTE]


> Let's stick to the soundbox differences. Given two identical instruments (f-holes, timber, varnish, outer dimensions excluding the f scroll), what is the difference in terms of cubic centimeters in the soundbox of an A versus an F? That's the critical issue here.


My understanding is there is no _necessary_ difference at all. They can be the same or different depending on the designer.

----------


## Mark Wilson

> I am in the camp that your mind biases what you think you hear, see, taste, etc.


Like this?:  The McGurk Effect

----------

Jay G Miller, 

Killian King, 

Randolph, 

Rush Burkhardt, 

sebastiaan56, 

stevedenver, 

Ted Eschliman, 

Tommcgtx

----------


## sebastiaan56

Sums up the whole debate for me Mark!

----------


## stevedenver

well done mark
really well done!


you know, 
speaking of the effect 

fwiw, theres a whole crew on the unofficial martin forum that believe that the abalone rim on the 40 series has a significant, and distinct affect on the 'special tone' of 41, 42, and 45s.  (this was, over the top for me)some bs about the edge of the top being thinner due to the channel, the abalone being harder , etc.  and this is THE single factor which gives the 40 series a special sound.  having owned a couple, I can unequivocally confirm that the series is just as subject to occasionally sounding sock laden as any other model......

and on the les paul forum, there are folks who swear not only can they hear the difference between an ebony and rosewood fingerboard, but between indian and braz rw........'its all about attack'.......attack of the twenty foot tall bs artists....

and on the fender boards, one will often hear that a rosewood board on a telel or strat imparts a distinctly 'smoky' tone over maple boards.......puhleessee...

otoh, it may be :Disbelief: ....but not for me...and I have more than decent hearing. :Cow:

----------


## Petrus

Chladni resonance anyone?  Anyone here have an acoustical resonance imager handy? (I keep mine in the workshop with my electron microscope; I'm something of an amateur quantum physicist.  Or to be more accurate, there's a probability that I'm an amateur quantum physicist.) 



http://www.itsokaytobesmart.com/post...oustic-science

http://chambermusictoday.blogspot.co...-patterns.html

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

----------


## Jay G Miller

> Like this?:  The McGurk Effect



That is stinking awesome and weird Mark! I love it! Lol, proof is in the pudding as far as I'm concerned!

----------


## Killian King

> Like this?:  The McGurk Effect


Spot on. The illusion in the video even relates to an "F" style.

----------


## yankees1

> The crux of the situation is the overwhelming preference in Bluegrass for F's.
> A's just don't cut it.
> There has to be a reason, right?
> So it must be the sound.
> I don't mean to say that A's are not well represented in Bluegrass, they are, and they serve very well.
> But there is a difference, you know?


  A reason ? Of course there is ! Bill Monroe started the Bluegrass sound and he played a F ! A  F style does look cooler ! Had Bill played an A style, perhaps the A style might be the choice of most. For me, I choose an A because I can hear no difference and the value for my money.

----------


## Canoedad

I've heard that the scroll is actually time machine that takes you back to 1945.  And the points get you back home again.   I think there is something to this.

----------

Mark Wilson, 

Tommcgtx

----------


## verbs4us

One more wrinkle in the time machine here...I read recently that John Monteleone's F-style has a _hollow_ scroll (once reason, other than the name on the headstock, that you can get one used for 25 large).  Anyone aware of any other builders going to that trouble?  In theory, a hollow scroll would increase the volume of the sound box, which would alter the sound.

----------


## Stephen Perry

I hesitate somewhat to weigh in.  

I can't tell what a mandolin is from hearing.  But they behave somewhat differently and in consistently different ways between A and F when I work on them.  This doesn't necessarily relate to sound.  I suspect based on having worked on many that the effect becomes more pronounced when the instrument is driven hard, but I can't put my finger on it.  So many variables.

The McGurk effect is particularly interesting.  I had a very odd response.  I listen well and focused.  I also have a minor hearing impediment and tend to rely more than a little on lip reading assistance.  Rather than being sucked into the illusion, I immediately got a dissonant shock when the lips changed, because I was still hearing "bahhh" rather than "fahhh" - imagine that is an atypical response.

Putting lumps of stuff around the edge will make a difference.  But there are so many other effects.  And so many ways to think about such things.  

Back to A models.  I'm working with blocks at each end and with a long rib and lining/kerfing.  Whatever I do at one end propagates along the rib easily.  On to F models.  The blocks interrupting the rib garland interrupt what I'm doing, with the other segments pretty well isolated.  The effect of the blocks propagates into the top and back, and I run across it.  Even up into the bars.  Just knowing that, I would expect a consistent difference. But if it is there, I can't hear it, and I hear all kinds of things pretty well.  It's more that different things get in the way of the sound, rather than that the sound is consistently different.

On necks, the neck and fingerboard combination resonance is important.  Very very important.  Getting the neck vibrating cleanly is nicely important in violin family, and can be done pretty easily.  This tendency to finish everything shiny so I can't mess with it, the mandolin and guitar approach, isn't nearly as helpful!

----------


## Tom Coletti

> I've heard that the scroll is actually time machine that takes you back to 1945.  And the points get you back home again.   I think there is something to this.


Well that explains why a lot of mandolin music is well above 88 bpm...
--Tom

----------

