Cheap/low-end mandolins...

[jclover]

To me my Strad-O-Lin is my preferred instrument when it comes to an "old" tone. I have played pre WWI Gibson F-4s that I didn´t like as well. When it comes to my expensive instrument admittance is necessary that there was a certain vanity that had to be fed. Power of the instrument was a topic too. The "Bill Monroe thing" comes to mind. My Strad-O-Lin does everything that I want it to do in a wonderfull manner. That I also drive another car does not say anything about "preference".

So you like your Strad-O-Lin because it sounds like a more expensive mandolin, not like a "cheap, low end" mandolin. Nothing wrong with an inexpensive mandolin if it provides the sounds you want. But that is the exception, not the rule. The rule is that the better tone costs more money, because better materials and craftsmanship produce that tone. Personally, I don't go for do-dads. My own intruments are good quality but plain - F9, MTO, 315. I dont need fancy inlays, I need sweet tone, and that is what I am paying for with a higher quality instrument. Maybe I could get lucky and find something more inexpensive, but it won't be low end or cheap.

[mandobassman]

Maybe I am the one missing the OP's point. But it seems to me the question revolves around making a "cheap" mandolin your primary one by choice, because that is what you prefer for your signature tone or style.

This is exactly what I have been thinking while reading through this. Certainly you can get very good sounding mandolins inexpensively. I have a J Bovier A5 that is outstanding and I got it for $625. But what seems to be missed here is that, I think, most players would not "prefer" a cheap mandolin to a much more expensive one if the person had the financial means to buy it. I would love to have a Nugget, or a Gilchrist, or Phoenix, or Silverangel, etc..., But I don't have the financial means so I bought the best mandolin I could afford. I'm very happy with my A5, but it doesn't mean I wouldn't buy one of the top makers if I could.

[jclover]

This is exactly what I have been thinking while reading through this. Certainly you can get very good sounding mandolins inexpensively. I have a J Bovier A5 that is outstanding and I got it for $625. But what seems to be missed here is that, I think, most players would not "prefer" a cheap mandolin to a much more expensive one if the person had the financial means to buy it. I would love to have a Nugget, or a Gilchrist, or Phoenix, or Silverangel, etc..., But I don't have the financial means so I bought the best mandolin I could afford. I'm very happy with my A5, but it doesn't mean I wouldn't buy one of the top makers if I could.

Agreed. There is just no musical niche where a low end mandolin provides something necessary or unique to the sound, that would not be done better with a higher quality mandolin. Nothing that I am aware of anyway...but I could say no one likes having their fingernails removed with a pair of plyers, and someone would beg to differ!

[bart mcneil]

I paid roughly $60 for my Srad-O-Lin in broken condition, repaired it myself and ended up with an instrument which will hold its own among instruments costing much more. A used Mid-Missouri (now Big-Muddy) has tone well beyond its new or used price of as low as $300.

I don't think a financially challenged individual has to get by with an inferior sounding instrument. His instruments may lack scrolls but not everyone wants those. Judicious research and price watching can give him or her a remarkably good sounding instrument for a reasonable and affordable price. But it takes research, self-education and patience to find one in his or her price range. Though it may come with a scratch or wear marks the sound can be had without breaking the bank.

[Joey Anchors]

I paid roughly $60 for my Srad-O-Lin in broken condition, repaired it myself and ended up with an instrument which will hold its own among instruments costing much more. A used Mid-Missouri (now Big-Muddy) has tone well beyond its new or used priceof as lo as $300.

I don't think a financially challenged individual has to get by with an inferior sounding instrument. His instruments may lack scrolls but not everyone wants those. Judicious research and price watching can give him or her a remarkably good sounding instrument for a reasonable and affordable price. But it takes research, self-education and patience to find one in his or her price range. Though it may come with a scratch or wear marks the sound can be had without breaking the bank.

Very well said.. And exactly how I feel.

[jclover]

Very well said.. And exactly how I feel.

Ah, the OP. From your response to the above post, it seems you are nterested in knowing if a mandolin with good tone can be inexpensive. Of course it can. I must have misunderstood your question, sorry.

[fatt-dad]

in the realm of flat-top mandolins there'd be no return on sound to advance above a Flatiron, Big-Muddy or some of the other sub-$1,000.00 custom shops. There is no multi-thousand-dollar alternative!

f-d

[Astro]

I paid roughly $60 for my Srad-O-Lin in broken condition, repaired it myself and ended up with an instrument which will hold its own among instruments costing much more. A used Mid-Missouri (now Big-Muddy) has tone well beyond its new or used price of as low as $300.

I don't think a financially challenged individual has to get by with an inferior sounding instrument. His instruments may lack scrolls but not everyone wants those. Judicious research and price watching can give him or her a remarkably good sounding instrument for a reasonable and affordable price. But it takes research, self-education and patience to find one in his or her price range. Though it may come with a scratch or wear marks the sound can be had without breaking the bank.

Very well said.. And exactly how I feel.

I am starting to feel like Eddie Albert in Green Acres.

You are giving a great answers, just to a different question than was asked in the op. ?

But I am glad all are happy with their mandolins so all is good.

[fatt-dad]

I am starting to feel like Eddie Albert in Green Acres.

You are giving a great answers, just to a different question than was asked in the op. ?

But I am glad all are happy with their mandolins so all is good.

O.K. so tell me where I blew it. I still think I'm responding to the OP. I mean, he's not complaining and I think I'm on point. I guess you don't?

f-d

[Petrus]

Are there mandolin players who perfer cheap/low-end mandos ($500 and less) to the Gibsons, Collings, Weber...ect?

The answer is definitely probably.

A trickier question is why. Three possibilities.

1. They can't afford the high-end instruments, so it's sour grapes.
2. Their ears legitimately can't tell the difference, so it's not worth it for them to pay more than a certain amount.
3. They can hear the difference but they legitimately prefer the sound of the lower-end mando.

Now the first two questions don't really lead you anywhere, they're just what they are and that's that. The last question is the interesting one. What exactly is it about the sound quality of the low-end instrument that might lead someone to prefer it, who can tell a difference between low/high end mandos and could afford the higher end one if he wanted it? And are we talking about all low-end mandos, or only certain select ones that are exceptions to the rule?

[Astro]

Sorry F-D that wasnt directed at you. I have gone back and edited (adding the "reply with quote") to make up for my own misdirect.

The OP asks if a group of folks are known to prefer the sound of a cheaper mandolin over a more expensive one because of a signature tone or feel known to be characteristic to the cheaper mandolin.

At least thats how I read it.

Many of us say no, at least not that we know of.

But many (including the original poster later in the thread) seem to answer the question by saying they like their inexpensive mandolin just fine, thank you. Even seem a bit riled by the whole thing for some reason. ?

Well I'm glad they do like their inexpensive mandolins --and I like mine too-- and there is nothing wrong with a good sounding inexpensive mandolin, but thats not an answer to the original question.

So we likely have a misunderstanding of the original question going on here that has been running through the entire show a bit like Eddie Albert and Mr Haney. My guess is after a few responses the "remembrance" of the actual question is blurred and everyone just answers the question they feel most defensive about.

Such is life on a forum-com.

[Petrus]

The OP asks if a group of folks are known to prefer the sound of a cheaper mandolin over a more expensive one because of a signature tone or feel known to be characteristic to the cheaper mandolin. Many of us say no, at least not that we know of. But many (including the original poster later in the thread) seem to answer the question by saying they like their inexpensive mandolin just fine, thank you. Even seem a bit riled by the whole thing for some reason. ? Well I'm glad they do like their inexpensive mandolins --and I like mine too-- and there is nothing wrong with a good sounding inexpensive mandolin, but thats not an answer to the original question.

This begs the question, why do they like their inexpensive mandolins, if not for their "signature tone and feel(s)"? I suspect some of the responders could afford more expensive mandos (or already own them), so it can't be only because of the cost factor.

[Astro]

This begs the question, why do they like their inexpensive mandolins, if not for their "signature tone and feel(s)"? I suspect some of the responders could afford more expensive mandos (or already own them), so it can't be only because of the cost factor.

No, not really. The question isn't whether someone likes the tone and feel of their inexpensive mando. Its whether they prefer the tone and feel of it over the tone and feel of more expensive mandos.

I like my inexpensive mandolin. I have liked several inexpensive mandolins. I liked their tone and feel. But I don't prefer their tone and feel over the tone and feel of more expensive instruments.

Many people may prefer to own a good sounding inexpensive instrument rather than an expensive one. For a number of reasons. But I doubt its because that in general, they think the tone and feel of the inexpensive mando is more desirable to them than the tone and feel of the expensive ones.

[Petrus]

Now that you mention it, yours is a more interesting question. I think that was the question I meant to ask but as usual typing in a rush it didn't come out that way. Not why they like their inexpensive mandos (like I put it) but why some players prefer the tone and feel of an inexpensive mando. Or maybe if there was one particular inexpensive mando that they preferred, rather than the category in general.

From my experience with cheapos, the biggest problems I had were with improper (or just plain lack of) set up. The vintage Kays (etc.) that I briefly owned when starting out on the mando were fine structurally, solid wood and all, but often the tuners were shot and the necks may have been out of whack and so forth. I lacked the expertise and time to invest in getting them properly set up. So, I can't make a fair comparison on that basis. I suspect that a well set up cheap mandolin, with a good set of strings, can produce a sound that some players may prefer. I would be interested in reading anyone who has personal experience of this, and if so, if they could provide specific details about the sound that impressed them.

[bart mcneil]

"... I suspect that a well set up cheap mandolin, with a good set of strings, can produce a sound that some players may prefer. I would be interested in reading anyone who has personal experience of this, and if so, if they could provide specific details about the sound that impressed them."

Early blues players, almost all of them black, made their reputations and defined the genre on instruments of lesser value and the tone many mando blues players of today want to emulate is found in those second tier instruments, not the Gibsons which very few black players could afford. In the historic photos of Gibson string bands there appear very few black owners of Gibson mandos, as i recall. That is not to say you can't, or shouldn't play blues on a Gibson or other higher end mando, but for historical accuracy perhaps the tonality of a cheaper instrument might be preferred.

[Steve Zawacki]

I think there's a bit of satisfaction in finding a diamond amongst all the low-end coal. As peculiar as it sounds, a bit of musical kinship occurs with certain instruments over others, and it becomes the "go-to friend" while the others are showroom. A buddy once remarked that it's like the old time house where there was a living room with the fine furniture (often covered in plastic) and a comfortable den in a far corder where the lounging and informal get-togethers occurred. The expensive instrument is like that formal living room - very good, but just didn't have that warmth to it.

I've got an old Fender 101, a low-end by a lot of standards. I've put a lot of time reworking that instrument and that sweat-equity has resulted in an instrumentbwhich I really like, for tone, for warmth and just for the plain fun if it. Tried recently to sell it, but balked in the end - there's just too much "me" in it now. It's illogical, probably musically nonsensical, but I do prefer it over the Others which have entered-exited the stable.

So, the answer is Yes. But that's only because of several factors beyond the technical.

[Joey Anchors]

Ah, the OP. From your response to the above post, it seems you are nterested in knowing if a mandolin with good tone can be inexpensive. Of course it can. I must have misunderstood your question, sorry.

No worries at all.. Their are multiple answers to any given question.

[fatt-dad]

If you like the sound of a mando-banjo, they're cheap. If you like the sound of a flat-top, they're cheap. If you like the sound of a commodium, they're cheap. In none of these cases will you find a "better" sound (i.e., in contrast to these off-beat styles) by spending to a level of Collings or Gibson. You also would not be able to replicate the sound with a Collings or Gibson.

If you like the sound of a paddle head Gibson, they're also cheap. And, you wouldn't find that sound in a currently-made Collings or Gibson.

I doubt a pressed-top laminated entry-level, f-hole, arched-top wannabe would rise to the leval of a Gibson or Collings though. . .

f-d

[Steve Ostrander]

Not me.

[Joey Anchors]

I think there's a bit of satisfaction in finding a diamond amongst all the low-end coal. As peculiar as it sounds, a bit of musical kinship occurs with certain instruments over others, and it becomes the "go-to friend" while the others are showroom. A buddy once remarked that it's like the old time house where there was a living room with the fine furniture (often covered in plastic) and a comfortable den in a far corder where the lounging and informal get-togethers occurred. The expensive instrument is like that formal living room - very good, but just didn't have that warmth to it.

I've got an old Fender 101, a low-end by a lot of standards. I've put a lot of time reworking that instrument and that sweat-equity has resulted in an instrumentbwhich I really like, for tone, for warmth and just for the plain fun if it. Tried recently to sell it, but balked in the end - there's just too much "me" in it now. It's illogical, probably musically nonsensical, but I do prefer it over the Others which have entered-exited the stable.

So, the answer is Yes. But that's only because of several factors beyond the technical.

Fully agree. I've never been one for flashy high dollar items and much perfer plain good quality. I think that's why I love my Gretsch G9310 so much! It doesn't have binding, fancy figured woods, and I get to do upgrades (tuners/bridge) to get the most out of this little guy along with making it my own.

[stevedenver]

I guess, since I was young, and into guitar,
I love sustain, deep rich woody tone , complex and shimmering overtones. Oh, and ease of play and correct intonation.

I guess too, what lured me to mando was Grisman, Thile, Reishman, Flinner-all commanding tones from their instruments, that, im pretty sure, one cannot get from a cheap mando, even if you're those guys.

And, I would be delighted if the OP or others could link to cheap mandos whose sound they like.

OTOH, IMHO< Jimmy Pages A' s sound mighty good, in context. Not sure if that qualifies as cheap.

With mando, and it's pitch and tonal range, and, for me the lack of electronic effects which color the sound well-like almost none, without getting into guitar-like sound territory, I don't find cheap to add that distinctive color or grit which say, a cheap old guitar can have in some applications. Add a mic, and tweak the eq, maybe......

Jack White and others have popularized the 'anti-big name trend', and have found some great guitars.....

not so sure about mando being in the same place.

[Jeff Mando]

For me the "one that got away" was a 50's Harmony I played at a flea market 30+ years ago. It had volume, tone, and the lowest action I've ever played. Just something weirdly magical about it. The man wanted $30 and I didn't have the cash on me and he didn't take plastic--so I didn't get it and still think about how great it was years later.

Was it as great as a Loar or a Gihchrist? Probably not, but I guarantee it was great by anybody's standard. I think we all do get hung up on the price of the hobby, when it is supposed to be about sound, right? Otherwise, we might as well be talking about expensive golf clubs or alligator shoes.....

[Hudmister]

I suspect that a well set up cheap mandolin, with a good set of strings, can produce a sound that some players may prefer. I would be interested in reading anyone who has personal experience of this, and if so, if they could provide specific details about the sound that impressed them.

I usually play a Gibson F5G, but when I play blues I choose my old Harmony Batwing that has been restored. It has an authentic funky blues tone and amazing sustain. It lacks the volume of the Gibson yet has a cheap honky-tonk like sound that makes it a go to blues mandolin. I doubt it is worth much, maybe $250 on a good day but it's got the soul.

[bart mcneil]

I have a Harmony batwing also which i bought for its mojo and in honor of Yank Rachell, not expecting it to have great tone. It is just such a great looking instrument I figure you can just stand there with it and look so cool it doesn't have to sound great.

Another low end instrument in my collection which I bought for looks only is a Regal reverse scroll "Lyra" mandolin, sold under lots of brand names but looking so cool it doesn't have to sound great. apparently very common in the '30s.

[jclover]

With maybe a few exceptions, it seems we are mostly talking about inexpensive vintage instruments with the mojo. It does seem there is a niche for this type, so I stand corrected. In general, I still expect I would prefer the tone of a better vintage instrument to a starter vintage instrument, but to each their own!