Printable View
There is a really good-looking Gibson A-4 in the classifieds. I think it’s from about 1924. $5000.
I recently bought a 1915 A-4, had it refretted and set up beautifully. I have less than $3000 in it.
Besides the truss rod in the Loar-period instrument, is there really a lot of difference between these mandolins? I’m specifically curious about the sound comparison. I love my ‘15 A-4 and it’s hard to imagine one that sounds a lot better.
I have a 'teens A-4, along with some others, and it meets all my needs. I wouldn't spend 5grand just to get a "24.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Buesseler
In my experience, except for those who prefer a smaller neck, no. While I acknowledge that every mandolin is different, they can all be loosely described as being either good, very good, or not good at all.
I will note that I had a late [circa 1930] A-4 pass through my shop a few years back. After I cured its intonation problems, which necessitated replacing the fingerboard, it turned out to be a pretty durn good mandolin. But not as good as some of the best 1910's A-4's that I have played, and better than some of the others.
Well, I will say that Loar era one really looks clean. Like, wow. Even the case looks nice from what I can see in the one photo.
As it has EVO frets and has been gone over by Bruce, it's probably worth that much to someone.
Is it better than an earlier one? Depends on what you have and what you value. If sound is number one, then maybe not. If you want one of the nicest examples out there, then this might be it.
To my mind, that's getting into a worn F2 territory, so would have to consider that.
Who needs to spend 5 grand to get a ‘24? :whistling:Quote:
Originally Posted by Denny Gies
The 1915 A4, if there are no issues, will be hard to beat for that oval hole sound. IMHO the '24 one falls into that category of rare and like snakeheads, somehow more desirable. Maybe to the collector but if yours is all set up perfectly then I'd see it being as good, at least. May even look better with the HANDEL TUNER BUTTONS. Strings, bridge material, set up all come into it. e.g. I find that a rosewood bridge works much better than ebony on my 1919 F4. Also bone nut as opposed to pearl. I'd be content with what you have but are we mandolinists ever content?
The 1924 date of manufacture makes it "Loar era," which means a premium market asking price -- regardless of whether it's a better mandolin than one made five years earlier or later.
At least that seems to be how pricing's going now, from what I've seen. There may be some additional price justification in having an adjustable truss rod, but IMHO the ghost of Lloyd L is what's kicking the price up.
I’ve always thought that the snakehead was just a recognizable visual cue signaling other developments (adjustable bridge, adjustable truss rod, more narrow neck, profile, etc.) favored by modern players.Quote:
Originally Posted by allenhopkins
snake heads sound different than paddle heads.
I kept the latter, but the former costs more.
Cache does play into this; however. Be guided by your ears and fingers!
f-d
The only plus factor I see with snakeheads is that the strings don't touch each other (as they do with certain other old Gibson mandolins) and the nut slots don't have to be sideways as much. I think the original Gibson mandolins would have been better if the headstock had perhaps been a little narrower at the top without actually going as far as the snakeheads, thus avoiding the strings touching each other.
Maybe '22 saw the introduction of the truss rod , my paddle head A4 has a nickel plated TRC proclaiming it's presence..
I have a 1913 A4, but the action is a little high with the fixed bridge. I've ordered an adjustable from Cumberland so that I can adjust the action. The tone on this instrument is so warm and lyrical. No comparison to my newer mandos.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Buesseler
All of those prices seem incredibly inflated; you can get a damned nice modern mandolin for $3-5k that will be much more diverse, useful, and likely blow the doors off a 100 year old Gibson in a group setting. BUT, since the original posted asked:
My notes show that generally:
Teens A models will have ribs in the .100-.120: thickness; snakeheads are more in the .080-.075".
Truss rods in the snakehead eras; triangular cherry wooden insert in the teens.
Teens necks tend to be wider; snakeheads are much smaller and more narrow. I don't believe it is because of the truss rod. I think it is because Lloyd Loar who instigated the changes was a fiddle player and used to much smaller necks.
Plate thicknesses, especially the tops tend to be approx. 20% thinner on snakeheads. Remember that is essentially 20% less beam strength, so it makes a big mechanical difference. You will also find some materials differences. Snakeheads tend to be maple backs but you will find some some variation with birch and maybe poplar backs in the teen years. I'm sure there are other one offs; anything was possible with Gibson...
In layman's terms, snakeheads tend to be a bit warmer in voice and many like the smaller neck profile, but...some of the best overall sounding vintage A style mandolins I've played were from around 1915. They may not be quite as warm and tubby, but the added thickness cuts through the mix slightly better. All teens and 20's oval holed As have a different voice than the later 1930s and up A50 style mandolins.
Those are all generalizations. No matter what year oval hole A you have, they will have a similar tubby voice and will never sound like an F5. The Griffith A5 is a completely different beast and is my favorite Loar signed F5!
'Hope that helps.
Well, for those who consider power to be of paramount importance, the three most powerful mandolins I recall playing were [in no particular order] an X braced Gilchrist F-5, a rather beat up Lloyd Loar signed F-5 with a Virzi [despite the conventional wisdom that all Virzi equipped mandolins are weak], and a 2 point D'Angelico oval hole mandolin. But I have my doubts that any of those three would stand up to a particularly aggressive fiddler or banjo player with a powerful instrument. And the only one of those three that had a tone that I found to be particularly appealing to me was the D'Angelico.
As far as oval hole A's are concerned, I have found that they vary considerably in tone character and power. I know of a 1917 A-4 set up with a 1921 aluminum bridge that has a surprising amount of cut. Another strong one was an old early 'teens black A-4 that went through the hands of 2 well known professionals. I would not describe either of those instruments as "tubby."
The only snakehead A-4 that I spent any time playing was a very sweet sounding instrument, but not a powerful instrument.
Me, I'm less concerned with power than I am with tone.
Unless the current market changes drastically, $2000 - $3000 will buy a top notch A-4, depending on condition and color. Add two thousand or more to that if you insist on a snakehead, but it won't necessarily be a better or worse instrument than a 'teens model. I will mention that there are several snakehead A-4's that have been languishing on the market for several years at asking prices of $6000. The sellers may be asking 6+, but they aren't getting it.
I know it's none of my business, but as someone who keeps his eye on the vintage mandolin market, I often wonder how many years a seller will list a vintage Gibson at a certain high price before lowering it to current market value. I can think of a handful of instruments that are, in my opinion, way overpriced, yet they never budge, year after year. Clearly, the sellers are in no rush, or else waiting for a less educated shopper to make an impulse purchase.
I imagine that some of them bought those mandolins when the market was higher and don’t want to come out upside down / are hoping that the prices come back for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by KCNelson
I think we lose sight of who was working at the factory during what era. Those weren't CNC machines building the mandolins, but people --- quite a few -- and the skill of the indivicuals responsible for plate carving in particular has a lot to do with the sound quality of a particular instrument. Like anyone involved with vintage Gibsons, I have my favorite eras at the factory, and the instruments I have held onto reflect that fact. It has a lot to do with who was doing the work.
A4 meant better materials, and supposed better sound, but this is not always the case. I recently traded for a '16 A-O pumpkin top, only intending to flip it, but it sounds so good I have been playing it regularly. (I think 1914-16 is one of the very good times in Gibson history).
I own products from all three of the first decades of the company's existence. They have different strengths, but all sound very good.
I am leery of statements like "all snakeheads sound great." Yes, some sound very good, probably due to who was doing the carving at that time. However, we all know no matter what you do, even instruments made from the same exact boards come out sounding a little different. If you like the smaller nut, that's a factor in your purchase, but it doesn't affect the sound. I suspect snakehead A4's carry such a premium partly because of their rarity, and also because they look so cool. A standard A4 from the same era is just as good an instrument, but it is worth twice what a mid teens brings? It depends on the tone, and what kind of sound YOU want.
Before the CNC was the 3D pantograph carving with a router motor..
The guy who I Met in Oregon had 3D router patterns in Aluminum , he bought in Kalamazoo at the Parsons street moving sale
when Gibson Corp packed up and left town .. to make F type bodies Front & Back ..
:popcorn:
Yep, you have to remember that this state had a significant number of furniture manufacturers, the pantograph seat carving machine was applying furniture “gang cutters” to rough out tops and backs. The final work was done by hand but, we are not talking about everyone of the line workers being fine tuners of the plates they were carving, there were orders to fill. What we now find in modern CNC carved plates are vastly more closely finished before getting to the hands of someone trained more closely in what the desired product specifications are.
Sorry that went way out there but, I wanted to echo mandroid’s statement.
The unicorns and fairy dust left the factory long before Loar did and from what I've heard, they didn't have near the amount of fun that old Lloyd did at the office Christmas party just before he got fired.........;)