Sell THE LOAR and get an f hole flatiron

[Alan Spector]

I have a feeling that this is a VERY, VERY easy question to answer, but I thought I'd pose it anyhow.

I have a "THE LOAR" V-400 (A style), no tone bars, new Cumberland Acoustics bridge. It plays pretty good -- I guess -- sounds different from my 1917 Gibson but it's supposed to.

I could "maybe" make a jump of to a very late 1980's Flatiron (probably have to come up with 1100 more or so, or sell a couple of guitars (or fish a couple of banjos out of the dumpster where my wife keeps putting them....)

The LOAR ain't bad -- but I've got the itch although I'm also going through the "Am I good enough to deserve that?".

Anyhow, what would the differences be in sound, etc. between the two. (I think I know the answer but I thought I'd ask)

[Marty Jacobson]

Carlson-signed late-80's Flatiron A-5's usually sound really good. They also command some of the highest prices of any used A-5 factory-made mandolins. Once you're up into that territory ($3.5k+) there are a ton of good options available, especially if you're not picky about condition or looks and make the decision prioritizing tone and playability.

But yeah, do it.

[sgarrity]

You already know the answer. Do it!!

[Alan Spector]

Carlson-signed late-80's Flatiron A-5's usually sound really good. They also command some of the highest prices of any used A-5 factory-made mandolins. Once you're up into that territory ($3.5k+) there are a ton of good options available, especially if you're not picky about condition or looks and make the decision prioritizing tone and playability.

But yeah, do it.

==============================
Well, it's not Carlson signed, from what I can tell. It's not likely a 3.5K mando. There are some Bozeman Flatiron A's for around 2k.

My general assumption is that THE LOAR V-400 -- carved top, no tone bars, new Cumberland set up) is an excellent BEGINNER mandolin perhaps scratching at the bottom of "intermediate" ... or not.

A late 1980's Flatiron A (I don't think it is an A5 or signed by anyone) is at the very top of "intermediate" and maybe scratching at the bottom of "advanced" or "professional" in sound if not "appearance" -- assuming the neck is good, top is carved well, etc.

I'm assuming that it is louder -- and therefore probably also has louder sustain when needed. (Sustain can be muted if necessary by how one frets....presumably most know that.)

I understand that tone can be measured but often is VERY subjective (my old ears think "bright" mandos don't sound super bright) ... but I'm assuming that the sound is balanced. (I won't be able to play it before buying....but the seller seems reliable.)

So I'm guessing it would be a big jump up from a quality "beater" to a borderline high quality mando (depending of course of the individual mandolin....)

So I'm guessing that it is a BIG leap up from the LOAR 400

That about right? Or am I underestimating the LOAR V-400?

Alan Spector

(if I list all my stringed instruments, my wife might read this and find out....)

[NDO]

This just popped up in the classifieds, NFI.

https://www.mandolincafe.com/ads/185377#185377

[Monte Barnett]

This just popped up in the classifieds, NFI.

https://www.mandolincafe.com/ads/185377#185377

I hope the only thing amiss with that one is the obvious stringing error at the tailpiece!

[allenhopkins]

..."Am I good enough to deserve that?"...

You got the money? Then you are.

[rcc56]

The Flatiron will almost certainly be a stronger instrument. Yes, they were built as intermediate to semi-professional grade instruments [except for the late Asian Flatirons], while I would classify even the upper line of The Loar mandolins as being student grade. As well as I can remember, the late '80's were pretty good years for Flatirons.

Tonal characteristics are variable, so to some degree you will have to judge that for yourself. The best I can do is to say that to me, some of The Loars that I have played were rather thick and indistinct; while I might describe the Flatirons as "chunky, but with better definition."

If possible, try the Flatiron before you close a sale. Make sure that the neck fits your hand. Some of them are not comfortable to me.

"The Loar" mandolins have been rather inconsistent in sound and construction quality over the years. Sometimes they have been "not bad," sometimes "rather poor." The last one I played, which was a new instrument built in 2021, was noticeably better than what I had seen over the previous few years.

I worry about carved instruments made without tone bars. Despite some debates that I've seen that minimize the structural importance of tone bars, several decades of experience repairing instruments convinces me that instruments with tone bars or x-bracing hold up much better than those with no bracing.

You mentioned that you played a little banjo. Although Music Link, which is the parent company for Recording King banjos, is also the parent company for "The Loar," I feel they have been much better at making banjos than they have been with mandolins.

I hope this is helpful to you.

[Charles E.]

I would also consider this.....

https://www.mandolincafe.com/ads/185297#185297

100% small shop-American made instrument. Thats a lot of mandolin for the money.

NFI

[Charlie Bernstein]

It's not whether you're good enough. It's whether you're rich enough.

Flatirons have the mojo. Spring for it!

[Elb2000]

My 1980’s Flatiron had great tone, but I sold it because I didn’t like the neck profile. I think a 2 day trial to look at all aspects of playing is important before deciding on the purchase.

[JeffD]

I'm also going through the "Am I good enough to deserve that?".

A absolutely deny the existence deserving a mandolin. Or deserving a quality of mandolin. I believe that after the first mandolin, which is to see if there is love, after that, always buy the very best mandolin you can afford. I don't deserve any of the mandolins I have, in any real sense.

May I always play a mandolin much much better than by ability to play it. To always have room to grow. To always find in my mandolin some unexplored excellence not previously appreciated. May I never be confused into thinking the mandolin is limiting my ability to play.

My opinion anyway FWIW.

[j. condino]

I know of a US company that made hundreds of mandolins without any top bracing; most are still out in the trenches playing gigs.

The bean counters that didn't play music and called the neck a "handle" insisted that making 3 mandolins a day before lunch for $7 an hour was a fine rate of production and anyone that could not keep up was fired. One of the employees (not me!) found a simple way to adjust for the build time....by leaving out the braces. Nobody found out until years after he left, oddly enough because the cheap taiplieces were breaking, not from any braceless issue....

[rcc56]

And I once worked on a very late [c. 1940] F-4 that did not have a top brace, and showed no signs of ever having had one. It was in for a re-fret and was a structurally stable instrument, so I did not see a reason to add a brace and left the top alone.

But I do wonder whether a certain modern issue instrument with top problems that was recently discussed in another thread and was made by a large US manufacturer might be one of the hundreds that was built without any bracing.

I do know that the tops on most old oval hole Gibsons with loose braces rise up when the brace is re-glued.

I've only worked on one F-hole mandolin with loose braces. It had enough other problems when it came to me that I don't know what the net effect of re-glueing the braces was. I will say that re-glueing tone bars through the f-holes is not my favorite job. Hard to get in there, and hard to make a tidy repair.

I know, I'm contributing to thread drift.

If the OP can afford a better mandolin without hardship, I'd say go for it.

[Eric Platt]

Having owned a Flatiron, I'd say "yes." Sold it in a period of downsizing. Was a Festival A model. Quite loud and a good traditional tone. (It did have bracing.)

Having said that, you might do better getting a Silverangel as mentioned above by Charley. Those are nice, handmade instruments and seem to punch well above their price.

[Mr Fingers]

With both guitars and mandolins, my experience is that true "student grade" (and cheap) instruments will never have the playability, sound, and inspiring character of a serious mid-to-hefty priced instrument. They just don't -- and if they did, you can be sure the prices would be higher. I would lose the Loar if you have any real seriousness as a musician, and then go for the Flatiron or similar grade instrument. I think I particularly dislike any "The Loar" because I think it's chgeesy to the max for a cheap cost-cutter to bear that name.

[JeffD]

I am in favor of you getting the Flatiron, or whatever considered higher end mandolin you ultimately choose. With the 1917 Gibson that makes three, right? Good on ya.

My beef is only with selling the The Loar. It could be useful to have around, to take camping or hiking, to let curious guitarist borrow to see if they might like to come over to the dark side, to keep in an alternate tuning, say AEAE or DDAD, in order to practice some cool serious old time tunes without constantly changing the tuning on your other players, to learn set up techniques, to test out some modifications, to install some electrics so you can play around with amps and effects pedals, (which will obscure any "inadequacy" in its tone)... There is just a ton of fun you could have with it, without putting your new mandolin, or the Gibson, at risk.

So go forward comfortably, but consider keeping the The Loar and enjoying both, er, ummm, all three.

[Charles E.]

Just wondering if the OP followed through and got a Flatiron? Or another upgrade?