Gibson Master Model vs Fern

[carleshicks]

I wonder if the Gibson MM is like that? If an instrument looked particularly promising, it got selected?

Well not exactly. A MM starts it life as a MM. It might make the upgrade to a DMM but it is intended from the begining to be a MM.

Here is an interview with Mr. Derrington from 2003. http://www.mandozine.com/resources/CGOW/derrington.php
In it he answers all of these questions from the wood selection to the finish. He also talks about the difference between a fern and a MM.

[Big Joe]

There was absolutely nothing sub standard about any of the Gibson mandolins. There was not real "factory" either. Most people have the view of 100 people working in an assemblly line building these mandolins. Nothing could be farther from the truth. There were a handful of people, each who did specific jobs and did them very well. Most were cross trained but usually did a particular job on a regular basis. The mandolins were built to very high standards, and each single one was played and checked by several people before they were approved for shipment. Any mandolin that could not be brought to standard was cut up in a band saw. No 2nds period! They were great mandolins and the standards of build were very high.

That being said, the MM was built a bit different. First, the woods for the MM were seperated from the others upon grading. Only a select few backs, rims, necks, and tops would pass the inspection. If it did not pass, it would not be used on the MM. Since these woods were selected specifically for the MM they were never selected to be any other model. While in a rare occasion a back might be grabbed from the MM stash to build a different mandolin, that was very rare. The tops were never substituted. The MM was the only one allowed to have the red spruce (yes...I know there were a few G's with a red spruce top). We could not pull any other model off the line to be an MM because there were several differences in the materials...and the glue.

The MM was handled differently with more attention and essentially only one guy in the build and graduating. He did the MM's and not the other mandolins. The level of expectation was substantially higher than on the other models. Nothing was sub standard by any means, but the MM was held to a standard that was extremely high in the areas felt important to Charlie. He was the King and we his lowly servants . Seriously though, the MM was a very special product and was held to a particular standard different from the others. Again, none were sub standard, but the standards for the MM were a bit higher...as they well should be.

The DMM started out as an MM and was distressed later. In order to properly distress them we had to completely build them. We even completely finished them, played them, and then selected the ones we wanted to distress. We selected the candidates we felt would respond best to the process. This was a product that was at the top of the price spectrum for a modern mandolin, and we were very careful to choose the right product for this process. Just think of it. Your new...worn out mandolin...actually started life as a highly polished mandolin without flaw. We did not chose those with flaws in the finish to distress. The distressing had to be right and just fixing a poor finish or ??? would be too obvious and not look correct by any means. The DMM was the best of the best available at the time we needed a DMM.

I hope this clarifies the process a bit. All the mandolins were carefully built by hand by a small team of highly dedicated and gifted people who had an incredible amount of pride in the work they were doing. These people were incredibly dedicated and wanted to produce the best product they possibly could. Not a slacker in the bunch. Only the very best of the best were allowed to touch the MM. That was a very small, very elite group of dedicated employees.

[BradKlein]

Hey Joe. It's always great to hear your first-hand memories of that exciting period in Gibson's long history. It was obviously a special time and delivered some great instruments. And I believe that I've only heard you say, or seen you write complimentary things about the many other fine builders out there. Hope I'll have a chance to visit the store someday. Best wishes.

[Mike Snyder]

Big Joe is certainly capable of speaking for himself, but I distinctly recall him saying, in a previous thread, that a Gibson mandolin is a Fern, or F9, or MM from the first day the parts are collected. One will not be "pulled out" to become a MM, because it was a MM from the git go. This is a great thread. I'm enjoying it immensely.

[Bernie Daniel]

Originally Posted by Bernie Daniel View Post
I wonder if the Gibson MM is like that? If an instrument looked particularly promising, it got selected?

Well not exactly. A MM starts it life as a MM. It might make the upgrade to a DMM but it is intended from the begining to be a MM.

Here is an interview with Mr. Derrington from 2003. http://www.mandozine.com/resources/CGOW/derrington.php
In it he answers all of these questions from the wood selection to the finish. He also talks about the difference between a fern and a MM.

OK, Mr. Hicks I agree with that 100% -- but I wasn't the one that wrote that statement you quoted -- because I know they start off with different top woods!

[Aehle]

Waverly's on the MM.

[Bernie Daniel]

Waverly's on the MM.

Good one! There is $500 difference right there!

[Bernie Daniel]

There was absolutely nothing sub standard about any of the Gibson mandolins. There was not real "factory" either. Most people have the view of 100 people working in an assemblly line building these mandolins. Nothing could be farther from the truth. There were a handful of people, each who did specific jobs and did them very well....I hope this clarifies the process a bit. All the mandolins were carefully built by hand by a small team of highly dedicated and gifted people who had an incredible amount of pride in the work they were doing. These people were incredibly dedicated and wanted to produce the best product they possibly could. Not a slacker in the bunch. Only the very best of the best were allowed to touch the MM. That was a very small, very elite group of dedicated employees.

Joe, that was a great post and I think it should be required reading by anyone trying to make a connection between Pac-rim "factory-made" or assembly line produced mandolins and the construction of those mandolins made by a large American instrument company called Gibson.

[carleshicks]

OK, Mr. Hicks I agree with that 100% -- but I wasn't the one that wrote that statement you quoted -- because I know they start off with different top woods!

Sorry about that. I am actually not even sure how that happen. I just hit reply with quote.

[Bernie Daniel]

Sorry about that. I am actually not even sure how that happen. I just hit reply with quote.

Not a problem in the least -- I plan to join you soon. Retiring at the end of August and my first mission as a free man will be to acquire an MM or a DMM!

[carleshicks]

Not a problem in the least -- I plan to join you soon. Retiring at the end of August and my first mission as a free man will be to acquire an MM or a DMM!

Congratulations on the retirement. A Master Model would make a fine gift for yourself

[goose 2]

You would think that the differences between the Fern and the MM would not make a big difference in tone but they really do. I have played numerous examples of both models, owned both models, and I think that they sound like very different instruments. I think they are different just like I think a D-18 and a D-28 are different. Both are Martins made by the same luthiers but are different in the tone woods used and some of the appointments. To me, they sound like completely different instruments. If you consider this and factor in the differences in tone wood, hide glue, Waverleys (esp their weight) extra attention to carving and bracing, etc., then its easy to sound how Ferns and MMs could sound so different. Some folks prefer the D-18 tone, some prefer the D-28, and nearly all like both. Same with Gibson mandolins. The Ferns are really well made and nice sounding mandolins but I prefer the MM tone. Oh and BTW, I'm a D-18 kinda guy.

Yes there is a big difference in price between the two just like there is a price gap between for example, the Authentic D-18 and the Authentic D-28. Gibson in not unique as we are now seeing significant price gaps between the models of some of the boutique masters like Bob Altman and Steve Gilchrist. Their higher end instruments simply take much more time to build and time is money. Same goes for the MM.

[Cullowheekid]

I guess I'll post some of my thoughts here. I think the pyhsical differences between a MM and Fern have been answered. As far as tone differences, it's not as easy to answer. First, I'm a fan of Gibson mandolins and have owned a few. A 91 F5G, 03 varnish F5G, 04 Derr. MM, and now a 03 F5G. I'm working my way up and down the ladder. They were all excellent sounding instruments and I feel it would be hard to tell which was which, or better in a blind listening test. Just listening, it would be very hard to say which had a mortise&tenon neck joint, varnish finish, hide glue, lacquer, etc. Percentage wise, maybe the MM's sound more Loar like than your average Fern, but I don't think it's true in all cases. It's also true of other fine handcrafted mandolins based on the Loar design model. That's the beauty of acoustic instruments, or the dilemma.
I think if your looking for a great sounding and collectable mandolin, and can afford it, go play some MM's. You probably won't be dissapointed. Then again, you can find some lesser models that can sound pretty close, if not the equal. I suppose you have to develope an ear for the tone you want, find the instrument you feel has the tone potential, and figure out how to pull your tone out of it. I'm still working on it and hopefully getting closer. Oh, and by the way, I wish I could have kept the MM. Eric

[sgarrity]

All of Gibson's non-Master Models are essentially the same mandolin. Standard F5, sitka top, lacquer finish. The Goldrush has slightly smaller ff holes and maybe a bracing difference? The Doyle Lawson has bound ff holes. The Sam Bush has a chunkier neck. I never understood what they were trying to do with their signature models. They are all just Ferns with different appointments. And from the sampling I've played are very hit and miss. Although I have played some very good ones.

The Master Models (MM, DMM and Skaggs DMM) have all been on a different level. I've played somewhere around 10+ of them and they've all been spectacular mandolins. These mandolins compare to the best of the best being made today.

[45ACP-GDLF5]

All of Gibson's non-Master Models are essentially the same mandolin. Standard F5, sitka top, lacquer finish. The Goldrush has slightly smaller ff holes and maybe a bracing difference? The Doyle Lawson has bound ff holes. The Sam Bush has a chunkier neck. I never understood what they were trying to do with their signature models. They are all just Ferns with different appointments. And from the sampling I've played are very hit and miss. Although I have played some very good ones.

The Master Models (MM, DMM and Skaggs DMM) have all been on a different level. I've played somewhere around 10+ of them and they've all been spectacular mandolins. These mandolins compare to the best of the best being made today.

Just another opinion NOT based on fact....kinda comical though

[Chris Biorkman]

I don't see what's so funny about it. Seems like a pretty spot on opinion to me.

[Mike Bunting]

Just another opinion NOT based on fact....kinda comical though

So what are the FACTS then?

[Glassweb]

(Quote/Shaun Garrity) The Master Models (MM, DMM and Skaggs DMM) have all been on a different level. I've played somewhere around 10+ of them and they've all been spectacular mandolins. These mandolins compare to the best of the best being made today. [QUOTE]

I'll agree with Shaun on one point here... the Distressed Master Models I've played (3 or 4 of them) have all sounded spectacular. I don't know how they do it, but they do sound scarily good.

[Bernie Daniel]

I think the point made by 45ACP-GDLF5 was not necessarily a slam or a put down.

It is just a reminder that while it is likely that there would be widespread agreement on the difference tone/sound/projection of an inexpensive mandolin built with plywood and coarsely fitted versus a top end mandolin from Gibson/Weber/Collings/or a private luthier like many of the guys on the board. Such would not be the case (i.e., such agreement) between two or more mandolins both (or all) at the upper end of the quality/price spectrum --probably.

Because as pointed out by 45ACP-GDLF5 this is all opinion and preference.

Some like a "Gibson sound" rather than a "Collings sound" but if they were not able to see the instrument could they pick out their favorite every time or more than 51% or the time? Never been proven one way or the other so no matter how many times it is stated emphatically it doesn't mean a thing -- its just opinion.

We've been over this ground a million times the definitive double blind test to statistically compare top end mandolin sounds will most likely never be done -- it hasn't for violins and they have huge head start in time. With violins several efforts to create a true unbiased double blind test of sound have been attempted -- for the most part they show exactly what many of us suspect even the "experts" will fail at it. But they don't PROVE it one way or the other. So the debate will rage on --but really what's the harm of it anyway?

[sgarrity]

I think the point made by 45ACP-GDLF5 was not necessarily a slam or a put down.

Sure it was. Whoever this guy is, he has a history of being disagreeable. For some reason he likes to respond to my posts in this manner. (He's done it in other threads and to other people as well.) Did he add anything to the conversation? Nope. Did he share his "facts" or even opinion? Nope. He just wants to stop by and say I'm an idiot. Fair enough......I'm an idiot. Are you happy? Maybe now you'll move on and let this thread continue in the spirit it was started. If you truly have an issue with me, send me a private message and we'll discuss it there.

[Chris Biorkman]

Sure it was. Whoever this guy is, he has a history of being disagreeable. For some reason he likes to respond to my posts in this manner. (He's done it in other threads and to other people as well.) Did he add anything to the conversation? Nope. Did he share his "facts" or even opinion? Nope. He just wants to stop by and say I'm an idiot. Fair enough......I'm an idiot. Are you happy? Maybe now you'll move on and let this thread continue in the spirit it was started. If you truly have an issue with me, send me a private message and we'll discuss it there.

He's done it to me too. You're in good company, Shaun.

[Big Joe]

I don't think he was trying to put anyone down, but was commenting on the "hit or miss" comment. That is opinion certainly, though not anything wrong with the comment. Everyone has an opinion about tone and playability. The other items about the mandolins were reasonably accurate. There are a few differences in these models, but essentially your information was reasonably accurate. That is essentially what has been said over the years. While there may be some very slight other differences, they are pretty irrelevant. The interesting thing is that the little differences in each of these models produce a tone that is different from the other models. In other words, the Fern does not sound like a Bush, which does not sound like a Goldrush, etc. Even though there are only minor differences in each of these models, they are designed to have a particular tone and that is achieved.

With that in mind, some like the tone of one model more than another, others don't like any of them, and others like them all. I can say that a really good setup will make a real difference in the tone of the Gibson mandolins just as it does on any other mandolin. Many times those that do not sound as good as the others just need a bit of tweaking to bring the best out of them. While factories and stores try to do a reasonable job of setting them up in a generic way, a really good setup will bring the best out of them and then they will really come to life.

[carleshicks]

It is all a matter of taste and is extremely subjective. Thank God for all of the choices.

[red7flag]

I was fortunate to live near the Gibson Showcase while it was still alive. I loved to spend a morning playing mandos there. I went there over a number of years. I agree which Shaun's assessment. I played some wonderful instruments, but they did not fall in the same model number. In this camparison, I am excluding the DMMs and MMs that I played as they were clearly superior. The best of those I played was an F9, followed closely by a Doyle Lawson. They were clearly better sounding than the rest. Of the rest there were no poor mandolins, but some that I would not pay to own. There was quite a variance in instruments of the same model. I played an F9 and a Doyle Lawson that were not nearly as strong. I was actually surprised at how much variance there was. Keep in mind that this was at same location and run by Gibson and hopefully the same set up (all though I would not sware to that).

[Barry Platnick]

Heres what I know...mine is frigggggin' excellent!!!

Thats all the science I have.