Last edited by Doug Brock; Sep-20-2022 at 10:57am.
Doug Brock
2018 Kimble 2 point (#259), Eastman MD315, Eastman MDA315, some guitars, banjos, and fiddles
By the way, I’ve recently heard some podcast interviews with violin collectors in which the collectors noted that hundreds of years ago, violin makers were already doing things to make their new violins look old and worn so that the violins would be more appealing to their customers.
Doug Brock
2018 Kimble 2 point (#259), Eastman MD315, Eastman MDA315, some guitars, banjos, and fiddles
I’m looking at a varnish finish mandolin for my next instrument, either an Eastman 515/v or an Eastman 815/v (and I challenge you to find one of those in the wild, they’re very nearly mythical). I understand those come SLIGHTLY distressed from the factory. I plan to add an armrest, pickguard, and Tone-Gard to try to preserve the factory finish as long as possible.
Kentucky KM-805..........2 Hora M1086 Portuguese II(1 in car)
Hora M1088 Mandola.....
Richmond RMA-110..... .Noname Bearclaw
Pochette Franz Janisch...5 Pocket............Alfredo Privitera pocket
Puglisi Pocket 1908........Puglisi 1912.......Puglisi 1917
3 Mandolinetto ..............C.Garozzo
1 Mandriola...................Cannelo G. Mandriola...Böhm Waldzither 1921
Johs Møller 1945............Luigi Embergher Studio 1933
Marma Seashell back......Luigi Embergher 5bis 1909
"I play BG so that's what I can talk intelligently about." A line I loved and pirated from Mandoplumb
Is it considered "relic'ing" or distressing if you remove the finish off a mandolin neck? Or can it be considered simply a playability improvement if you like the feel under your hand? Because I did do that to my Lebeda mandolin. I admit it was at least partially the visual appeal and similarity to a violin neck.
I'd rather there wasn't ANY factory distressing, but I definitely don't want to add to it.
Varnish finish is famous for showing wear, but also famous for allowing instruments to open up more quickly, and display a more mellow tone. I like the idea of the varnish finish, and accept that it will require more diligent care on my part.
Eastman MD-514 (F body, Sitka & maple, oval hole)
Klos Carbon Fiber (on order)
And still saving my nickels & dimes & bottle caps & breakfast cereal box tops for my lifetime mandolin.
Yes, and since this thread is going into multiple pages I point to my earlier comment here on that very subject of violin relicking: https://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/t...=1#post1878497
Jim
My Stream on Soundcloud
19th Century Tunes
Playing lately:
1924 Gibson A4 - 2018 Campanella A-5 - 2007 Brentrup A4C - 1915 Frank Merwin Ashley violin - Huss & Dalton DS - 1923 Gibson A2 black snakehead - '83 Flatiron A5-2 - 1939 Gibson L-00 - 1936 Epiphone Deluxe - 1928 Gibson L-5 - ca. 1890s Fairbanks Senator Banjo - ca. 1923 Vega Style M tenor banjo - ca. 1920 Weymann Style 25 Mandolin-Banjo - National RM-1
Regarding Charlie Derrington and Joe Vest's comments that the distressed instruments sounded different than their non-distressed counterparts, well, I'm about as much of a luthier as I am an astronaut and couldn't tell you the difference between a Virzi and a cannoli, but this doesn't sound so far-fetched to me.
If we assume that the weight or stiffness or thickness of the finish on an instrument has a dampening effect on the vibration of the wood, then removing X amount of the finish will result in Y amount of increased area where the wood can vibrate differently, no?
What am I missing here?
"I play BG so that's what I can talk intelligently about." A line I loved and pirated from Mandoplumb
Something I read years before the internet days, which I will attribute to Dan Torres, the amp guru. Basically, when discussing instrument finishes, he said " Have you ever picked up a can of paint? It's heavy. You want the thinnest finish you can on an instrument."
I showed up help replace the floor at a coffeehouse I was part of. I was told I have the cleanest tools for man my age that were ever seen.
It may vibrate differently, but is the different vibration an improvement in tone? Or does it sound worse than it did before? That's the crux of the thousands of posts here and elsewhere on the subject, and isn't it odd that everyone assumes it's always an improvement? Human nature strikes again!
I'm obviously a skeptic on that issue, because there are so many variables. As just one example of how difficult this is to discuss, I have a mandolin with a redwood top. That's generally considered a soft tonewood, but this particular top is fairly hard. It has only collected one minor dent in the 15 years I've had it, but it's still redwood and not spruce.
It has a hard lacquer finish, generally considered worse for tone than varnish, but it's very thin. I can see the ripples of wood grain when light reflects on the top. Is this thin and very hard lacquer improving the tone because it's helping to stiffen that redwood top? If I removed the lacquer, would the now-softer top sound worse? I'm not going to try it.
Related to the points above, I would be interested to hear from luthiers whether they consider any & all finish applications to compromise tone in general. Do their instruments sound better in the white but they feel the need to apply a finish to protect them? Do they aim for a certain tone in the white knowing that it will be tweaked (favorably) by the application of their preferred finish in certain ways? I would assume a finish causes some kind of change in the tone. (?)
2004 Gibson F5 Alan Bibey Signature Series
c1930 Gibson A
Eastman MDO 305
2017 RAG F #29
Kay A
NoName "finish it yourself" Ebay beater F
All I will say about it is this:
No finish: Bad for the instrument.
Thick finish: Bad for the sound.
Thin finish: Better for sound than thick finish.
I will add that some of the big factories finish their instruments much too heavily. Lacquered Gibson instruments built over the last several decades often have enough lacquer to cover 3 or 4 instruments.
PS - My style is more distressed playing on a regular mandolin.
Gibson A-Junior snakehead (Keep on pluckin'!)
I purchased a used black top 87' Flatiron Festival ( I confess because Norman Blake is holding a black top F on on the cover of "Original Underground Music from the Mysterious South", and Norman is my hero) so I got it when it was about 33 years old. The top was lacquer but it was faded and very scratched. I had a Luthier (Tom Dobrovich more of a guitar guy) wet sand it off and reapply black lacquer, and it came out great. I don't have any way of measuring or comparing the thickness of the old to the new lacquer, but the new finish seems thicker. Now he did other things like clean up the fretboard and dress the frets, replaced the plastic nut with bone, and reinforced the bridge, but to me the tone is considerably improved, it was on the tinny side before where as now there is more bottom and end and the tones seems more "round" . To Foldedpath's point, the finish may or may not help the sound regardless of the thickness. I think we all agree less is more here. That 87' Festival probably sounded awesome out of the shop, but it did not age well ( lets face it it was abused- Tim's home for mishandled mandolins), as the lacquer faded, I assume it was a thinner layer over the top. So natural distressing is not always positive.
Stormy Morning Orchestra
My YouTube Channel
"Mean Old Timer, He's got grey hair, Mean Old Timer he just don't care
Got no compassion, thinks its a sin
All he does is sit around an play the Mandolin"
Kentucky KM-805..........2 Hora M1086 Portuguese II(1 in car)
Hora M1088 Mandola.....
Richmond RMA-110..... .Noname Bearclaw
Pochette Franz Janisch...5 Pocket............Alfredo Privitera pocket
Puglisi Pocket 1908........Puglisi 1912.......Puglisi 1917
3 Mandolinetto ..............C.Garozzo
1 Mandriola...................Cannelo G. Mandriola...Böhm Waldzither 1921
Johs Møller 1945............Luigi Embergher Studio 1933
Marma Seashell back......Luigi Embergher 5bis 1909
I have a number of older instruments and I play them out regularly. I am cognizant of the fact that I am a caretaker for these, and ultimately they will be passed to other players when I am gone, so I try not to abuse them. But, if own them, they are going to get played in public. A lot.
Every older Gibson guitar I have purchased has had some significant wear around the soundhole, some more than others. This seems to be a constant among Gibson players! So if you are into "distressed", Gibson is the way to go.
Speaking of modern faux distressed instruments, I understand the appeal, but I think it is totally silly. Don't worry, if they last long enough, they will all be distressed at some point. At least then it is honest wear, and not a marketing gimmick.
Bookmarks