Modern vs Traditional Tone

[rdb8847]

This may have been asked and answered already but here it goes..........How do you describe Modern Tone as compared to Tradition Tone? My assumption is the Modern Tone is brighter and the Traditional Tone is darker maybe?

[mandroid]

Topic like that should keep people going till spring ..

how much do you want to attribute it to being 80+ years old?

[rdb8847]

Clarification - Of new mandolins built today..

[FLATROCK HILL]

This may have been asked and answered already but here it goes..........How do you describe Modern Tone as compared to Tradition Tone? My assumption is the Modern Tone is brighter and the Traditional Tone is darker maybe?

I would not go along with your description, but that does not mean either one of us is right or wrong. To me, brighter and darker have nothing to do with it.

Without going into any description of Modern vs Traditional tone (yet), I think we can agree that a Gibson F5 mandolin built during L.Loar's tenure would be a 'Traditional' mandolin. Some of them are bright (favoring treble), some favoring mid-range, and some darker (stronger in the lower register). All still Traditional sounding.

Same can be said for modern mandolins with widely accepted Modern tones (Collings comes to mind). Some are brighter, some darker.

To my way of thinking, the Modern tone is very clear and focused. Perfectly round tones that are somewhat sterile to my ears. That's just me. Not saying there's anything wrong with that sound; it's just not my idea of what I want out of a mandolin.

The Traditional tone to me, is a more complex tone. Something not so focused and clean, but a mixture of desirable overtones. This (inadequate description) is the tone I like.

I'm sure many will disagree with my descriptions just as I disagreed with yours. I won't be offended and neither should you be. We all have our own unique set of ears and ideas about what we like.

[CHASAX]

A traditional tone comes from bowlbacks.

[JeffD]

I assume you mean arch top mandolins; traditional tone being that of the 1923 Lloyd Loar Gibson F5, and modern tone being that of modern made bluegrass mandolins.

If I am wrong forgive me.

My first reaction would be just the opposite of what you have said. Those making bluegrass mandolins today are often trying to emulate the original sound. And in my limited experience I think the modern instruments get it real closely, and could fool me in a blind test. But if anything, the modern instruments are slightly darker and punchier than the original.

Others will disagree. This should be interesting.

[FLATROCK HILL]

A traditional tone comes from bowlbacks.

Played by guys with hats and striped shirts in gondolas! Definitely Traditional

[Nicholas L]

I've heard that "traditional" tone is distinguished by a strong mid-range response. "Modern" instruments have a deeper low end and a fuller sound. That's just what I've heard, though.

[Atlanta Mando Mike]

I tend to subscribe to Nicholas L's description. Traditional Loar tone is focused, narrow and dense to me. Not particularly big lows but very mid focused. The modern tone is bigger, louder, more low end, rounder but the notes tend to have less density. That's just my view though.

[fentonjames]

Traditional=bowlback
Modern=Carbon Fiber

[Jordan Ramsey]

I think most of it is in the player. Dawg will sound like Dawg on a "modern" sounding Collings or Crusher. Thile sounds like Thile on a Dude and a Loar. Same with most big names. We need John McGann around to make some more xtranormal videos.

[Mandoplumb]

Like was said about pornography, I can't define "old tone" mandolins but I know it when I hear it.

[onassis]

We need John McGann around to make some more xtranormal videos.

Oh Lordy, I had forgotten about these!

I so miss John McGann.

[fscotte]

This is modern:





This is traditional:




I think that most people will generally be drawn to the more modern tone. The traditional tone has a more hollow sound with brittle high notes.

[Nicholas L]

Ahh they both sound wonderful though!

[FLATROCK HILL]

Yeah... they both sound nice, but I would have liked the 'Traditional' better with long pants.

[grassrootphilosopher]

This is modern:





This is traditional:




I think that most people will generally be drawn to the more modern tone. The traditional tone has a more hollow sound with brittle high notes.

To my mind neither of these mandolins has a traditional tone. The second one is a Nugget, I guess. It sounds like ... a Nugget (somewhat in the direction of Tim O'Brien`s Nugget).

Both instruments are somewhat muffled in the tone department. What I think is the traditional F-5 20ies Lloyd Loar (as opposed to post-Loar) tone is a very (!) clear tone, that is not harsh (not glassy), whereas the post-Loar tone somewhat is more creamy. The modern (F-5 kind of) tone is bass heavy, not as clear, narrow and simply shines when played solo yet will not carry while played with others.

[DavidKOS]

A traditional tone comes from bowlbacks.

I assume you mean arch top mandolins;.

Yeah, they probably are discussing archtop F hole Gibson and similar copies.

But I was going to say the same thing.

Traditional tone to me means a bowlback or at least a flatback that sounds like a bowlback.

"Modern" is the archtop carved mandolin a la Gibson.

You can discuss the sub-flavors of the archtops, they can be wonderful as you all know, but they do not sound like traditional Italian mandolins.

[JeffD]

Hilarious.

"I think you may be high, but not lonesome."

"When Bill Monroe invented music in 1945..."

[JeffD]

Yeah, they probably are discussing archtop F hole Gibson and similar copies.
.

It is an interesting discussion, in part because there is a clear starting point. I would guess that the tone of teen Gibsons would be called "pre-traditional."

If you step back far enough I guess every starting point is arbitrary.

[JeffD]

Traditional tone to me means a bowlback or at least a flatback that sounds like a bowlback.
.

I would love a similar discussion of the tones of bowlbacks. Obviously they are different brand to brand, instrument to instrument, era to era, and likely, country to country. I don't think you can as accurately compare traditional and modern bowlbacks, as one needs to define which tradition.

And the bowlback mandolin doesn't have as well defined an origin story as the bluegrass mandolin. And no origin story in the memory of anyone alive today. And especially not an iconic starting instrument that so many modern makers are trying to emulate in excruciating detail.

I am really enjoying the conversation as it is, so I don't want to hijack the thread. A thread on bowlback tone comparisons would be pretty interesting.

[Caleb]

Kym playing a Collings MT is pretty much the ideal mandolin sound to my ear. I would also say it's a modern sound, but it could fit well into pretty much any setting. My first mandolin was a Kentucky A-style. It was new but sounded like it was 100 years old.

[9lbShellhamer]

Examples of mandolins I consider to have a traditional tone:
Andrew Marlins' Sullivan and Kimball mandolins (From Mandolin Orange)
Chris Thiles Loar (Punch Brothers)
Bill Monroe, (Listen to the duets with Doc Watson)
Caleb Klauder (Listen to the recordings with Reeb. I think he also plays a Sullivan)
Matt Flinner's Gilchrist


Examples of modern mandolin tones.
Chris Thile playing his Dude, on the Not All Who Wonder Are Lost album
Kym Warner playing his Collings
Emory Lester- His northfield recordings sound somewhat in the modern camp, as do his albums
Adam Steffey intro on every time you say goodbye sounds pretty modern, the tone is sweeter and wet, not dry and shimmery


The most interesting note here is that it isn't playing style that describes Thiles tone. He sounds like Thile on the Dude and the Loar, but there is still such a drastic difference in tone that it can't be refuted. Some people play traditional styles on modern toned mandolins and vice versa, but sometimes the tone really stands out. I find a lot of newer Gibsons to actually sit in the middle, like Wayne Bensons, and even Ricky Skaggs Gibsons are more modern than traditional. They sit in the middle. Grisman's gibson though... very traditional. Each mandolin has to be judged on it's own tone, not playing style, not brand, but tone.

[JeffD]

Another monkey wrench. The traditional tone we are talking about is not a 1923 Gibson Lloyd Loar F5 - it is said instrument as it sounded 20 to 30 years after it was built. Or even more, how it sounds over 90 years after it was built. Not the way it sounded new.

How it sounded before bluegrass (before Bill Monroe invented music - cracks me up) is again, pre-traditional tone.

[Dolamon]

And now, for something entirely different ... http://www.anonews.co/music-to-432-hz/ This is a tantalizing sideways look at tone, from a physics perspective. All it takes is a little bitty 8 herz shift to experience it. One of the oddities of modern performance is that the A 440 was only made 'official' in 1953. Current Auditoriums and other performance venues were normally built to function at the new norm. Many of the older facilities have a different resonance and some of the most successful recordings have been done at the old norm of 432.

I've been wondering if this concept or idea is used in broadcast media or in the presentation of ideas. With our new strobe type tuners, you can adjust the A 440 to A 432 and experiment with it at home. If you end up playing with other musicians, it will be a problem.

So ... it is a possibility that Loar and other genius's of the pre digital period were drumming and playing to both a different beat and a different A. It would be an interesting test either way.

(somewhere in my collectibles nonsense I have an old type, non modern standard tuning fork which is calibrated to 432 A. It was a known concept.)

Enjoy the confusion - Dion