Mandocello Measurements

[Bernie Daniel]

Paul: If you're lengthening the scale, that's all you do. It's the same as taking a capo off the third fret and playing the strings open.

Thanks for the clarification --- I think you exposed a blind spot (vaccant spot?) in my neuron arrary.

I was thinking of F7 vs F5 -- but that is not a valid comparison here is it?

That is a case of puting on a longer neck on the mandolin but keeping the scale length the same -- i.e., not changing the scale length.

BTW great pic --what are those two insturments?

OK never mind -- I just went back and looked closer -- its the same insturment isn't it? Cool!

[Paul Hostetter]

Photoshop to the rescue.

I think an F-7 vs F-5 is analogous:



And not unlike the comparison of an F-4 and and F-5:



All have the same scale, of course.

[Rob Sharer]

Good Lord! I have dreams that look something like this. I agree with your scale-length assessment and salute your Photoshop chops! Cheers,

Rob

If you're lengthening the scale, that's all you do. It's the same as taking a capo off the third fret and playing the strings open.



Same string gauges, same string tension, same top graduation.

[Michael Lewis]

Longer scale with same string gauges will have more tension.

[mrmando]

Is that the Pete Seeger model?

[Paul Hostetter]

Longer scale with same string gauges will have more tension.

Right, because of the added string mass. I didn't make my point very well. Tuning a 27" scale to CGDA (cello notes) yields a certain tension for the set. Capoing then at the 2nd or 3rd fret does not lower the tension—it just shortens the scale and raises the pitch of the strings.

BTW, off a 27" scale, the second fret describes a scale just over 24", so there's not a clear analog between Gibson's 24.75 scale and the 27" of a cello. I was thinking banjos. 27" is about a fret-and-a-half longer than Gibson mandocello's scale. Doesn't seem like a lot, does it?

27" fret scale
fret............. from nut
1.................1.515"
2................ 2.946"
3.................4.296"
4................ 5.570"
5.................6.773"
6.................7.908"
7.................8.980"
8.................9.991"
9.................10.946"
10...............11.847"
11...............12.697"
12...............13.500"
13...............14.258"
14...............14.973"
15...............15.648"
16...............16.285"
17...............16.886"
18...............17.454"
19...............17.990"
20...............18.496"
21...............18.973"
22...............19.423"
23...............19.849"
24...............20.250"

Check the strap:

[Bernie Daniel]

Paul thanks for those fret positions.

This is a follow-up on the idea of creating a better mandocello. I sent an email last night to see if I can still get my hands (for a price) on the Gibson L-48 that had the crushed headstock and cracked neck (there is some minor body damage too but I hope that is also fixable).

My plan is to follow-up on your idea and have a luthier I know remove the original neck then make & install a mandocello neck. I had thought about doing this a few years ago but did not follow up.

Based on this thread if I can still get the guitar I will request a new neck that will support a 27 in scale.

But my only question is has anyone ever done this already and if so how was the playability?

I ask this because looking at your measurements I notice the distance from the nut to the 5th fret on the 27" neck will be almost 6.8" -- whereas on the K1 that I have now it is more like 6.3". That seems like a big difference?

Wondering if anyone here has ever tried to play a mandocello with a 27" scale? Maybe there is a reason Gibson went to the 24.75" scale?

[Paul Hostetter]

I notice the distance from the nut to the 5th fret on the 27" neck will be almost 6.8" -- whereas on the K1 that I have now it is more like 6.3". That seems like a big difference?

A half an inch can be felt in 1st position. The most common baritone guitar scale these days is 27" - borrow one or visit one in a shop and try it out.

Wondering if anyone here has ever tried to play a mandocello with a 27" scale? Maybe there is a reason Gibson went to the 24.75" scale?

I've pondered this for quite some time, including the fact that Lloyd Loar, who could have changed it, didn't. The overly-long mandolin scale and the rather short mandola and mandocello scales were set in place long before LL arrived on the scene. Was it possibly because most of the mandolin players then were women?

Vega made mandocellos with a 27" scale, and I've only had a change to play a few over the years, but loved them. Martin also made a handful of 000-18P plectrums guitars in the early '30's that had a 27" scale on the OM body. Loooooong skinny neck, huge sound. Not a market success, I gather. I think they've all been converted to 6-strings. 27" is also a fairly common banjo scale, which is where that was coming from.

If you have to play 1st position chords on a mandocello, the 27" isn't probably going to work. But if you want it to be a cello, have that sonic authority, and are willing to refine your playing technique to bring out what that instrument logically offers (and confine your chording and doublestops to a little farther up the neck!), it might be the ticket.

[Graham McDonald]

Replacing a neck on a archtop guitar can be a simple way to go to get a mandocello or a bouzouki. I have done a couple of bouzouki conversions on old German archtops with broken necks and they worked very well using a 26" scale. A slightly longer scale with 'cello tuning should be fine if you work out the tensions to be around the same as a jazz guitar set

cheers

[delsbrother]

Note the omitted low string..

[Paul Hostetter]

Did it break?

[Bernie Daniel]

Well -- referring back to post #24 in the string: The L-48 with the damaged neck is no longer for sale it is getting an new guitar neck.

So going to plan B... I see a number of Gibson L series guitars for sale on places like eBay. The vintage L-5's are too expensive and valuable for this project. While L-48's to L-50's can be found for sometimes under a grand it still seems like a shame to decommission a perfectly good vintage Gibson archtop guitar for this.

The L-30's L-37's, L-47's are the smaller body -- so I'm not interested in them -- but the same thing would apply. The Gretsh archtops are nice but also too nice.

I see an bunch of Harmony, Singerland, May Bell, and Kay vintage archtops for sale also but the quality and condition vary -- I'd like to find one that needs a neck reset anyway but usually on those the rest of the body is also beat up to death. Plan B is still viable but I'm still looking....

Plan C... A very good friend --retired physician --here in town has built a beautiful shop his basement and just completed his second 16" Benadetto-style archtop -- this one mahogony. He has already carved out a maple back and a spruce top for his next 16 or 17" archtop and I'm thinking of commissioning him to build it into a mandocello instead -- I'd be his first customer. Probably one he did not plan on. The only downside is it could be more than a year before I see it -- he is very meticulous and is not full time in the shop.

[Bernie Daniel]

Re: post #35 & 36 above:

I don't think the string broke -- no wire in the empty shaft -- I think she finds pressing down a pair of 0.078" strings with a little finger no more pleasant than the rest of us!

[delsbrother]

Sometimes the big fat strings buzz against one another.

[s1m0n]

Couple of years ago I converted an old 6-string square shouldered dreadnought into a mandocello -- the conversion was pretty easy and the resulting mandocello has a thundering voice but the guitar neck is not ideal and much harder to play on then my Gibson.

I'm right in the midst of turning an archtop guitar into a m'cello, and one of the things I'm pondering is narrowing the neck. Can you take a wild guess at a width (at the nut & 12th fret) that would suit you better?

[Paul Hostetter]

Allen's measurements seem like a good template:

Nut width 1.5 inches
Width of neck at 12th fret 2.0 inches

Or if you have a 12-string you like, work from what that neck would be like if it only had four courses. A standard guitar neck is too wide for comfort (I've tried it too). Some of the tag-end Kalamazoo Gibson acoustics had a 1-5/8" neck, which makes items like one of those real late J-45s with the plastic bridge a good candidate. But narrower feels better. Check this photo again:

[s1m0n]

Allen's measurements seem like a good template:

Nut width 1.5 inches
Width of neck at 12th fret 2.0 inches

Or if you have a 12-string you like, work from what that neck would be like if it only had four courses. A standard guitar neck is too wide for comfort (I've tried it too). Some of the tag-end Kalamazoo Gibson acoustics had a 1-5/8" neck, which makes items like one of those real late J-45s with the plastic bridge a good candidate. But narrower feels better. Check this photo again:

Thanks!

[man dough nollij]

Anybody know the scale of Mike Marshall's MC? It'a Monteleone, right? I don't think anyone would say that one has a weak C string.

[Bernie Daniel]

Regarding S1m0n's and Paul's comments from above. I have often pondered the thought of triming the 1 11/16" (at the nut) neck on the guitar that I converted to a mandocello 1 1/2".

Would anyone (who knows what he/she is doing that is ) attempt to carry out this trim down operation while the neck is still afixed the the body?

I'd like to slim-down the neck by by taking 3/32" (at the nut) off each side and then recontouring it to match? Options:

1) doing it with the fingerboard and frets in place?

2) alternatively, removing the fingerboard, shaving down the neck and then trimming down the fingerboard and re-gluing it?

I suppose the tuners would have to be relocated closer to the center too?

The more I think about it the more I think the answer to both the questions above will be "no".

So maybe just having a new neck made up is the ticket?

[Paul Hostetter]

I've thinned necks while still on the body. You of course cannot thin it at the body join, but just at the nut. This is surprisingly effective, if not perfect. You don't need to change anything about the headstock.

[Bernie Daniel]

Really!
Thanks for the information Paul!!

BTW take a look a the other string on "mandocello plans" in this section. Some things are starting to come together.

I might try to PM you about how you cut those necks down.

[Paul Hostetter]

[Bernie Daniel]

One picture speaks a thousand words!

Thanks -- its a beautiful transition! Very impressive!!

I love the middle shot -- did you use some kind of circular saw to trim the edges? It looks like you filled in the the bottom of the headstock?

[Tavy]

One picture speaks a thousand words!

Thanks -- its a beautiful transition! Very impressive!!

I love the middle shot -- did you use some kind of circular saw to trim the edges? It looks like you filled in the the bottom of the headstock?

Looks more like photoshop than circular saw to me I could certainly be wrong though... John.

[Paul Hostetter]

Of course it's photoshop! But not having really documented the process, this got the idea across.

In fact, I do it with a chainsaw.