Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29

Thread: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

  1. #1
    Lost my boots in transit terzinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    1,589

    Default Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    Yah, I know it's personal preference, but I don't get out much.

    Looking at the Weber Gallatin A-style (hoping like heck to find a used one, but folks must hang on to these once they get them), and I'm curious about opinions/comparisons of both the Oval vs F-hole models.





    I tend to like the appearance of F-holes better, but I think some say the Ovals have a fuller sound. Because I don't think of the OM as a "bluegrass" instrument, I'm less hung up on the hole design.

    So, what's the feeling out there of the type of sound holes on an octave mandolin? Do those of you with experience with both have an opinion on the difference in sound/tone?

    And, as I like to include a bonus question, what kind of rye do you prefer in your Manhattans?

  2. #2
    Registered User foldedpath's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    5,293

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    I don't have a very wide experience with different archtop OM's, especially with regard to hearing an instrument from the same builder and only the sound holes being different, like that Weber example. But I do own a Weber OM with F-holes, and I've briefly played and heard a few non-Weber archtops with oval holes. So here goes, just one person's limited experience and opinion:

    As a very rough generalization, I think a typical oval hole archtop OM sounds a little more rich in harmonics, a bit more balanced from lows to highs, and maybe a tiny bit louder to the player, due to the large oval hole closer to your ears. It can be a great sound if you're playing alone at home. A typical F-hole archtop OM might sound a bit "punchier;" i.e. more focused and midrangy in tone, with slightly better projection away from the player.

    My personal preference has been the F-hole version, because a carved archtop OM with either sound hole arrangement is already somewhat dark in tone compared to mandolin. I think the punch and projection of the F-hole design helps balance that. If you're playing with other musicians in a jam or trad session, it cuts through a little better than most oval hole archtop OMs I've heard.

    Keep in mind that these distinctions are pretty subtle, when you get down to it. Either sound hole design on a carved archtop OM will sound noticeably different from the sound of a flat top, flat-back OM designed like a bouzouki. That's a more obvious difference in tone than oval hole vs. f-holes, in my experience.

    On the bonus question, I'm not a Manhattan drinker and don't know from ryes. Give me a nicely aged rum, neat, no "spice" nonsense, something like an old Cruzan or a Bacardi Ocho Años, and I'm happy.

  3. #3
    Lost my boots in transit terzinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    1,589

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    Thanks, that's a great answer. I'm leaning towards F-holes, but it might depend on what I find available.

    This is a related question; what's a good price for a used Gallatin A-style OM? New List is $2899. Would you say $1500 for an excellent-condition used one? $2000?

  4. #4
    Registered User foldedpath's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    5,293

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    No idea what the current market is like for used OMs, but for what it's worth, I bought my Weber Yellowstone F OM used on Ebay, at roughly half the retail price at the time (about 3k compared to 6k new). That was five years ago, I think.

    Generally speaking, somewhere around half the retail price is where I think I'm getting a good deal as a buyer with a high quality "name" instrument with good resale value like a Weber. I'll pay a little more, closer to 60-70% of retail if it's something I know is in high demand and hard to find. Instruments from the individual luthiers who are not very well known might take more of a hit on resale.

    So yeah, I guess somewhere in the $1500 zone for a used Gallatin A would be a sweet deal, and you might go to $2,000 if you're not seeing many coming up for sale. Or if the octave mandolin acquisition syndrome (OMAS?) is starting to hurt too much.

  5. #5
    Lost my boots in transit terzinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    1,589

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    Quote Originally Posted by foldedpath View Post
    Or if the octave mandolin acquisition syndrome (OMAS?) is starting to hurt too much.
    The pain is so incredible I can't even tell you.

    I have John McGann's Octave/Bouzouki book, and I listen to those tracks daily. It is hardly a salve. It's salt in the wound, is what it is.

  6. #6
    fishing with my mando darrylicshon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    atlanta
    Posts
    1,303

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    I like both but I'm having a om F style built and i'm going with F holes for basically the same reason as said above.
    Ibanez 70's 524, 521, 3 511's,2 512's,513,1 514,3 80s 513's, 522
    J Bovier F5-T custom shop
    Kiso Suzuki V900,
    The Loar lm600 Cherryburst
    morgan monroe mms-5wc,ovation
    Michael Kelly Octave Mandolin
    Emandos Northfield octave tele 4, Northfield custom jem octave mandolin 5 octave strat 8
    2 Flying v 8, octave 5, Exploryer octave 8 20"
    Fender mandostrat 4,3 Epip mandobird 2,4/8, Kentucky. KM300E Eastwood mandocaster
    Gold Tone F6,Badaax doubleneck 8/6

  7. #7
    Innocent Bystander JeffD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    24,807
    Blog Entries
    56

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    The focused percussive sound of a well played f hole mandolin is a perfect match for bluegrass.

    My preference is for oval holes, because I like the beauty of the less focused more balanced longer sustain sound, and because I am not predominantly a blugrasser. For bluegrass and similar, f holes rule, outside of that there are choices.

    I heard this description, which you can hang on to or not:

    F holes - audience says "what beautiful mandolin playing"

    Oval holes - audience says "what beautiful music"



    If you are buying an octave mandolin, you are not going with orthodox bluegrass anyway, my taste would be to go with the oval, and play pretty.
    A talent for trivializin' the momentous and complicatin' the obvious.

    The entire staff
    funny....

  8. #8
    Registered User foldedpath's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    5,293

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffD View Post
    My preference is for oval holes, because I like the beauty of the less focused more balanced longer sustain sound, and because I am not predominantly a blugrasser.
    I wouldn't agree with the statement that oval hole instruments have more sustain than F-hole instruments, especially at these longer scale lengths compared to a mandolin. My 22" scale Weber F-style OM has sustain for days. I've heard oval hole OMs with less sustain than this, from other builders.

    I think Weber's fairly chunky "baseball bat" neck might have some impact on how well these OMs ring out. I know not everyone is a fan of the somewhat chunky Weber OM necks, but it feels good to me. Scale length is another factor, as there will generally be more sustain at a 22" scale than 20", but the design and build of the instrument has a lot to do with it also. At this scale and with this construction, I think oval vs. F-hole is more about differences in timbre than differences in sustain.

  9. #9
    Barn Cat Mandolins Bob Clark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Beautiful Salem County, NJ
    Posts
    2,004

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffD View Post
    My preference is for oval holes, because I like the beauty of the less focused more balanced longer sustain sound. . . If you are buying an octave mandolin, you are not going with orthodox bluegrass anyway, my taste would be to go with the oval, and play pretty.
    That was the logic I followed in buying my arch-top oval hole Weber OM. Incredible sound. I love it. I'd go with an arch-top oval hole if I were buying again. That's just my opinion, though. There is a good reason these come in lots of varieties.

    Problem is, it's a lot more difficult to find a variety of these to try that it is to find a variety of mandolins to try. Good luck!
    Purr more, hiss less. Barn Cat Mandolins Photo Album

  10. #10
    Registered User Mandobart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    3,652

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    Oval. I like the sound better. Richer, deeper tone with more sustain. I have an oval hole mandola, oval hole OM, oval hole mandocello, f hole OM and f hole mandocello.

  11. #11
    Registered User foldedpath's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    5,293

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mandobart View Post
    Oval. I like the sound better. Richer, deeper tone with more sustain.
    I'll still contest that "more sustain" description for oval holes.

    "Richer and deeper" maybe, at the expense of projection, but I don't see how less sustain would result frm a difference in the sound holes. String sustain is an acoustic/mechanical function determined by how stiff the intervening parts are between the nut and the bridge saddle, break angle on the saddle (which will be the same for oval and F-holes), and how much soundboard surface area is available for the bridge to drive.

    All that considered, I think this "oval hole instruments sustain longer" thing might be a myth, especially for long-scale instruments like this. But maybe I'm wrong. I just can't imagine my Weber F-hole OM sustaining any longer than it does... it's a beast for long ringing notes.
    Last edited by foldedpath; Jan-20-2016 at 12:28am.

  12. #12
    Lost my boots in transit terzinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    1,589

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    I'm looking at a 20" Weber Gallatin, so I'm thinking with the short scale, "percussiveness" isn't going to be the first thing that comes to mind.

    Leaning towards F-holes, but this is a great discussion, whether we bust any myths or not.

    Back on topic, High West Rendezvous Rye makes fabulous Manhattans.

  13. #13
    Registered User Denman John's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Denman Island, BC Canada
    Posts
    663

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    I have a Nyberg oval hole OM and love it. Great open tone that's deep and rich ~ very melodic. I've only played one f style OM (Nugget) and it didn't tempt me in any way. I'll say that the Nugget had great sustain, but more percussive than I prefer. I think that finding an instrument that has a comfortable neck and scale length that you can move around on easily is as essential as finding the tone you are looking for. I know with OM's it's hard to try before you buy, so I would recommend making sure you have a good return policy in case it doesn't suit you. When you find the right one, you'll know it!

    John
    ... not all those who wander are lost ...

  14. #14
    Pittsburgh Bill
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,067
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    So much is dependent upon individual instruments, I find it hard to speak in terms of stereotypical tones from a Mandolin family instrument. I have a D hole Weber mandola and in no way can I make a definitive comparison of tonal differencences.
    We seldom, if ever, get an opportunity to hear a builders like model side by side with f holes and oval holes, let alone D holes.
    Just play it, and if it meets or exceeds your expectations, buy it!
    Big Muddy EM8 solid body (Mike Dulak's final EM8 build)
    Kentucky KM-950
    Weber Gallatin A Mandola "D hole"
    Rogue 100A (current campfire tool & emergency canoe paddle)

  15. The following members say thank you to Pittsburgh Bill for this post:


  16. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Albany NY
    Posts
    2,065

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    I have the oval hole Gallatin short scale octave - it can get muddy in the low end - I am using the John Pierce octave set, but does have great sustain and rich tone, however I think the volume is somewhat subdued compared to an F hole, there's a bunch of you tubes with it, a lot of times I am amplifying as I had a pick put in.
    So for celtic, folk, and other stuff oval is probably better, but for BG punch - probably want an F hole.
    I think you can hear an oval hole better when you are playing it, where as an F hole projects out and you can't really hear what others hear.

  17. #16
    Lost my boots in transit terzinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    1,589

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    Quote Originally Posted by tmsweeney View Post
    I have the oval hole Gallatin short scale octave
    I'm close to obtaining an F-holed short-scale Gallatin. Maybe next week.

    We'll have to compare notes and sound files and tunes.

  18. #17
    Market Man Barry Wilson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Surrey, BC, Canada
    Posts
    1,605

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    My instruments are so varied in mfg and body sizes... I think you really need 1 of each in the arsenal to really appreciate them

    I have 2 oval hole om's now and they sound so different.
    Kala tenor ukulele, Mandobird, Godin A8, Dobro Mandolin, Gold Tone mandola, Gold Tone OM, S'oarsey mandocello, Gold Tone Irish tenor banjo, Gold Tone M bass, Taylor 214 CE Koa, La Patrie Concert CW, Fender Strat powered by Roland, Yamaha TRBX174 bass, Epiphone ES-339 with GK1

  19. The following members say thank you to Barry Wilson for this post:


  20. #18
    Registered User Mike Conner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Murphy NC
    Posts
    246

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    Just to point out that the soundholes may be significant, but more important is the bracing:

    - Oval/round holes are likely to have X bracing. IMO this contributes to the open, more complex sustained sound.

    - f holes can be tone bar or X braced. The tone bars can lean towards the stronger fundemental and punchier sound typical of mandolins. X bracing with f holes can get the more complex overtones and sustain.

    My point is that the bracing (and arching) is more likely the source of the differences and not the sound hole shape. //mike

  21. #19
    Lord of All Badgers Lord of the Badgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    South West UK
    Posts
    1,327

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    bumping this because I'm having just this conundrum. I admit I don't play bluegrass though, must as I wish I could, and am still more of a chordal player, being primarily a singer songwriter.
    My name is Rob, and I am Lord of All Badgers

    Tenor Guitars: Acoustic: Mcilroy ASP10T, ‘59 Martin 0-18t. Electric: ‘57 Gibson ETG-150, ‘80s Manson Kestrel
    Mandolins: Davidson f5, A5 "Badgerlin".
    Bouzouki: Paul Shippey Axe
    My band's website

  22. #20
    Lord of All Badgers Lord of the Badgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    South West UK
    Posts
    1,327

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    I should add I'm thinking of both octave and tenor
    My name is Rob, and I am Lord of All Badgers

    Tenor Guitars: Acoustic: Mcilroy ASP10T, ‘59 Martin 0-18t. Electric: ‘57 Gibson ETG-150, ‘80s Manson Kestrel
    Mandolins: Davidson f5, A5 "Badgerlin".
    Bouzouki: Paul Shippey Axe
    My band's website

  23. #21
    poor excuse for anything Charlieshafer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Madison, Ct
    Posts
    2,303

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    I'm also an oval hole fan of the bigger-bodied instruments, for all the reasons already listed.

  24. #22
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    4,787

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    I really liked the tone of my carved top, oval hole Weber Hyalite, but just never put in the time on it to get used to the scale. I'll agree that it had a bit more boomy bass and more sustain and overtones than the F-hole OMs I've heard. But, my sample size is admittedly small. FP, my Silverangel f-hole A style has the best sustain of my mandolins, including my two oval hole mandos, so I can believe you when you speak of your OM's sustain. But, speaking in generalities is a must at times.

    I actually like both tones, and feel they can be used in different applications. At the moment I am OM-less, as I traded the Hyalite for a Collings MT, which has worked out well for me given my recently revived mando obsession, but I'll probably venture into longer scaled instruments again in the future. Though, I have to keep telling myself that if I want bottom end, I can always just play guitar or bass...

    BTW, the Hyalite's scale length was 22.5, which I felt was a reasonable compromise between not getting "muddy" when strummed hard and also being reasonable to play lead on. The McGann book is awesome! I still use it, but am just playing the tunes on mandolin now.
    Chuck

  25. #23
    Pittsburgh Bill
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,067
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    I prefer oval holes on my mandolas and f holes on my mandolins. My preference for tone comes with oval holes. I find that my perception, rather real or imagined, is that I get more projection with f holes.
    In that I use my dolas for solo play, I go for the preferred sound Iof an oval. Using my mandolins primarily for group play, the perceived projection I get with f holes is needed to mesh with louder instruments
    Big Muddy EM8 solid body (Mike Dulak's final EM8 build)
    Kentucky KM-950
    Weber Gallatin A Mandola "D hole"
    Rogue 100A (current campfire tool & emergency canoe paddle)

  26. #24
    Registered User Eric F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    2,400

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    I like ovals.

    And to the OP's bonus question: Rittenhouse.

  27. #25

    Default Re: Octaves: Oval or F-holes?

    I have an oval hole Fylde 5 course, and F hole Weber Gallatin and had an oval hole Petersen for a few years. I like all of them. Any generalization will have it's limitations but here's what I think: An octave mandolin has characteristic of a guitar and a mandolin. F holes are a little more mandoliny and oval holes slide a little ways along the spectrum towards guitar.
    Girouard Concert A5
    Girouard Custom A4
    Nordwall Cittern
    Barbi Mandola
    Crump OM-1s Octave
    www.singletonstreet.com

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •