New Gibson K-5C Mandocello

[mrmando]

Mandolin Store now has another one.

When is Gibson going to make one of these with a correct 10th-fret marker?

[Gerry Cassidy]

Mandolin Store now has another one.

When is Gibson going to make one of these with a correct 10th-fret marker?

It's the same one. Hasn't sold yet. Just sits there tormenting me!

I imagine when they make a 10th fret marker it will be the correct one.

[Bernie Daniel]

It's the same one. Hasn't sold yet. Just sits there tormenting me!

I imagine when they make a 10th fret marker it will be the correct one.

What would you do with it, play fiddle tunes?
Maybe not.

I agree with Martin, the dot on the 9th fret IS a pain. I had to deal with it on two arch tops that I converted to mcellos and of course you have to convert the side binding markers too.

[Gerry Cassidy]

What would you do with it, play fiddle tunes?
Maybe not.

Haven't gotten over that yet, huh? Have faith. You'll make it through, eventually.

I agree with Martin, the dot on the 9th fret IS a pain. I had to deal with it on two arch tops that I converted to mcellos and of course you have to convert the side binding markers too.

Seriously? I mean, a fret mark? Seriously? I thought Martin was joking.

[mrmando]

No, I am not joking. You can tell this is a guitar fretboard because it has a marker at the 9th fret. A mandocello fretboard should have a marker at the 10th fret instead. For what the instrument costs you'd think you could jolly well have the correct board put on it.

While the K-5C looks nice, I think I prefer this James DeCava cello that's for sale in Connecticut. It certainly looks like a bargain next to the Gibson, although I don't know what it sounds like. No markers except at the 12th fret, but that's easier to deal with than having one in the wrong place. Looks like the neck has tortoise binding with white markers.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/James-DeCava...item19cf6cb823

[Jim Garber]

I know Jim DeCava. He has done a bunch of work for me over the years, he does make some nice instruments and has been concentrating on archtop guitars over the last decade or so. That mandocello does look rather nice and the price is reasonable.

This one has only 7 strings at the moment. I wonder if the previous owner had removed it to avoid the jangling of the c strings. I know that some folks do that.

[Bernie Daniel]

Haven't gotten over that yet, huh? Have faith. You'll make it through, eventually.



Seriously? I mean, a fret mark? Seriously? I thought Martin was joking.

As to fiddle tunes - not much to get over really -- I'm having good fun playing them on my mandocellos. Check out the videos of Dave Harvey and Tim May playing fiddle tunes as a mandocello duet. Sounds awesome. Also Tony Williamson and Mike Marshall have been known to play them as well. I especially like playing jigs, hornpipes, and reels on the mandocello I think its a great learning experience. Not only do you have to transpose the tune but you also have to work your little finger really hard -- builds it up.

As to the dots -like Martin says its on the wrong fret for a mandocello.

I do not know where the tradition started but most arch top guitars have it at fret 9 (that is not true for flat tops -- go figure). It only becomes a problem when you quickly slide down to those fret -- don't want to have to think about it.

I have 4 mandocellos and the two I converterd from arch top guitars had the dot 9 while the other two-- like my Gibson K-1 -- have the dot on 10 --so it is, at a minimum a distraction --for me at least.

[mrmando]

This one has only 7 strings at the moment. I wonder if the previous owner had removed it to avoid the jangling of the c strings. I know that some folks do that.

Hm. I kind of got the impression it was a new instrument and had no "previous owner" as such. I've heard of removing one of the C's but not found it necessary on my Andersen.

I'm afraid the Andersen's 24-fret neck has also spoiled me. The DeCava has 21, although there's certainly room for a few more. BTW, Steve did mess up on one of my cello's side dots ... 15th fret IIRC. You can see where he originally punched a hole in the binding at the wrong fret, then filled it and punched at the correct one.

[Gerry Cassidy]

No, I am not joking. You can tell this is a guitar fretboard because it has a marker at the 9th fret. A mandocello fretboard should have a marker at the 10th fret instead. For what the instrument costs you'd think you could jolly well have the correct board put on it.

Where is the standard that says they have to put it on the 10th fret? Hmmm... I guess it just doesn't matter that much to me. I have played fretless instruments all my life and haven't ever visually memorized the fretboard. It's always been repetition and muscle memory.

Also, if this is a guitar fretboard as you say, then it is one of the smallest guitar fretboards I have ever played.

[Bernie Daniel]

Where is the standard that says they have to put it on the 10th fret? Hmmm... I guess it just doesn't matter that much to me. I have played fretless instruments all my life and haven't ever visually memorized the fretboard. It's always been repetition and muscle memory.

Also, if this is a guitar fretboard as you say, then it is one of the smallest guitar fretboards I have ever played.

I'm not sure there is a "rule", so to speak, but I think you will find most mandolins are made with markers at the 3rd, 5th,
7th, 10th, 12th (double dot), & 15th frets? So by extension -- an mandocello being part of the mandolin family is the arguement I guess.

Actually its kind of interesting in this particular case because certainly Gibson might be considered the "standard" for mandocellos in the US and all Gibson mandocellos I have ever seen or owned were marked with the pattern I mentioned except the early oval holes (including F-2's and F-4's ) that did not have a dot for fret 3. In fact I even think some Gibson F-5's do not have a 3rd fret marker.

If you are over at the Mandolin Store again sometime try to see if the nut on that monster is 1.5" or 1.69" (1 11/16").

[mrmando]

Well, yeah, if you want to know where the "standard" comes from, it comes from every other mandolin-family instrument Gibson has made in the past 122 years.

There is one surviving K5 that has the 9th-fret marker ... because it had been converted to a guitar and Grisman converted it back, or something like that. Why the K-5C's fretboard is based on that one instrument, and not on the standard set by all the other Gibson mandocellos in existence, is something I can't begin to fathom.

[Bernie Daniel]

Well, yeah, if you want to know where the "standard" comes from, it comes from every other mandolin-family instrument Gibson has made in the past 122 years.

There is one surviving K5 that has the 9th-fret marker ... because it had been converted to a guitar and Grisman converted it back, or something like that. Why the K-5C's fretboard is based on that one instrument, and not on the standard set by all the other Gibson mandocellos in existence, is something I can't begin to fathom.

Let me take a shot at that. Something like two years (or so) ago I sent the the adjustable bridge from my '36 K-1 down to Steve Smith at Cumberland Acoustics -- (the saddle had failed -- they are too thin for an m'cello IMO).

Anyway Steve was really busy supplying bridges to some of his buyers and I was not really using the K-1 anyway so it was a back burner thing. So after about 8 months or so I gave him a call one afternoon and he noted that he had just kind of pulled my bridge backup on the bench because Dave Harvey had been in the shop, saw my bridge laying there, and said he might have use for a few of them.

OK fast foward about one year and all at once we have two new Gibson K-5C's.

So I hypothesize Dave walk in one morning and handed some of the luthiers two new mandocello bridges and said take two L-5C's and make me a couple of K-5C's. So they started life with a guitar neck and hence a 9th fret dot. When you are Dave Harvey there are lots of things you can do!

That's why I'd like someone to put a ruler on the nut of the m'cello -- I'll bet it is 1 11/16" and I'll bet the scale is 24.75 just like a Gibson guitar.

[mrmando]

The only thing wrong with that scenario is that it makes Dave Harvey look as though he doesn't care about details like this. I don't know Dave but I would not care to attribute that kind of indifference to him if I wasn't certain about it.

[Bernie Daniel]

The only thing wrong with that scenario is that it makes Dave Harvey look as though he doesn't care about details like this. I don't know Dave but I would not care to attribute that kind of indifference to him if I wasn't certain about it.

Well I wonder. He is primarily a mandolin player?

So if he was not really into arch top guitars I suppose it might be something that could have escaped his attention? For example, I first "found out" about it when I converted a 1951 Epiphone arch top to a mandocello. It was after I started playing it that I realized the fret marker discrepency.

But I do take your point they should have spent an hour of bench time and addressed the issue considering the $$ they are asking for it.

[mrmando]

Maybe this is the problem ... they just don't have any spare boards.

The 1958 Rickenbacker electric mandolins had this problem ... because Rickenbacker hadn't made any mandolins since the '30s, I guess ... then the first batch of recent reissues also had the problem ... because mistakes repeat themselves, I guess ... finally, the latest batch of Ricks have correct boards. I could be wrong, but I believe Fender, for example, has always gotten this detail correct on its mandolins, even though the company has gone for a couple of good stretches without making any. I sometimes see the problem show up when guitar builders decide to get into mandolin building, but they usually learn that there's a difference and then fix it on subsequent mandolins if they make any. I'm just disappointed to see this mistake happening at the company that, more than any other, defined what American mandolin-family instruments are expected to look like.

[mrmando]

Ah, here is another mandocello with a 9th-fret marker:

That's a Santa Cruz Southerner, of course. This one's at Gruhn's for, I must say, a very attractive price considering the MSRP, which I recall being well north of $4K.

Other photos of Santa Cruz mandocellos also show the 9th-fret marker. But this Southerner appears not to have a dot at either 9 or 10. Looks like it skips from 7 to 12:


Not really a characteristic mandocello sound there. More like (surprise!) a guitar.

I clearly remember meeting Richard Hoover at Wintergrass shortly after the Southerner was introduced, and playing the demo model he'd brought to the festival. I don't remember if I talked to him about the fret markers. Maybe, since Santa Cruz is a guitar company, they're trying to market their mandocellos primarily to guitar players, who will be more familiar with a neck that has a 9th-fret marker.

The latest mandocellos to come from Santa Cruz are cutaways based on their "F model" guitar. Still with 9th-fret markers.

[Bernie Daniel]

Ah, here is another mandocello with a 9th-fret marker:
That's a Santa Cruz Southerner, of course. This one's at Gruhn's for, I must say, a very attractive price considering the MSRP, which I recall being well north of $4K.

Other photos of Santa Cruz mandocellos also show the 9th-fret marker. But this Southerner appears not to have a dot at either 9 or 10. Looks like it skips from 7 to 12

Not really a characteristic mandocello sound there. More like (surprise!) a guitar.

I clearly remember meeting Richard Hoover at Wintergrass shortly after the Southerner was introduced, and playing the demo model he'd brought to the festival. I don't remember if I talked to him about the fret markers. Maybe, since Santa Cruz is a guitar company, they're trying to market their mandocellos primarily to guitar players, who will be more familiar with a neck that has a 9th-fret marker.

The latest mandocellos to come from Santa Cruz are cutaways based on their "F model" guitar. Still with 9th-fret markers.

Interesting. I think all this kind of confirms what we've been speculating. All these mandocellos made from guitars have lead to some "sloppiness".

Mandocellos may readily be made from guitar bodies (both f-hole or oval) but they "should" have (IMO) a narrower nut and have a fret marker at the 10th fret not 9th.

As you note Santa Cruz folks are primarily guitar makers so perhaps they are ill-informed about mandolin fret boards. But they do put a real mandocello neck on that thing -- i.e., it has narrower nut and fretboard than the guitars.

Eastman OTOH also makes an oval hole mandocello from a dreadnought body and they just use the standard 1 11/16" 6-string guitar nut/neck -- they do not put any fretboard markers on it.

I think it is important matter because if you switch from mandolin to octave or mandocello you kind of expect the fretboard arrangement to be the same and I found it a nusicance to have the dot on the 9th frets for mandocello.

I suppose someone who only plays guitar and mandocello would not be bothered by it.

I do agree that oval hole mandocellos sound guitar like -- but sometimes its handy. For example an oval hole mandocello could make a great instrument to accompany a singer. Lots of sustain.

[allenhopkins]

...Eastman OTOH also makes an oval hole mandocello from a dreadnought body and they just use the standard 1 11/16" 6-string guitar nut/neck -- they do not put any fretboard markers on it. I think it is important matter because if you switch from mandolin to octave or mandocello you kind of expect the fretboard arrangement to be the same and I found it a nuisance to have the dot on the 9th frets for mandocello...

I think that the oval-hole Eastman mandocelli are specially made for the Mandolin Store; all the ones I've seen, other than in MS ads, have been the f-hole models. While they don't have fretboard markers, the side dots in the neck binding have a dot at the 9th fret.

[Bernie Daniel]

I think that the oval-hole Eastman mandocelli are specially made for the Mandolin Store; all the ones I've seen, other than in MS ads, have been the f-hole models. While they don't have fretboard markers, the side dots in the neck binding have a dot at the 9th fret.

Interesting! I wonder how we could push back a bit and notify some of these builders about this discrepancy? I have changed the position of both fret board markers (top and side binding) on a couple of mandocellos and it not such a big thing to do. OTOH it is not such a big thing to have it come “right” from the builder either!

I wonder if Dennis has been reading this string? He reads a lot of stuff here and this story started with "his" mandocello. I suppose he could mention this to Eastman but it might result in an increased price from Eastman.

But I think if Gibson decides to make more of these beasts they really ought to try to match it up to their historical versions. (IMO).

[Beanzy]

I'm sure I'll never get the difinitive answer on this one about the fret-markers. I was always under the impression that the fret markers were originally there as a guide to where the whole note rows were stacked. That seemed to make sense across the whole mandolin family and explained why on the older instruments you don't get the 3rd fret marked. That all made sense to me as it seems to be later on that the 3rd fret marker came in. Which makes the guitar 9th fret marking all the more weird for me, I think the 5th 10th and 12th frets are about the only place on a guitar where you get whole-note rows. Are the guitar ones done on some other priority like chord positions?

[mrmando]

Vas ist ein "whole note row"?

[Beanzy]

Where the notes are just plain old notes in a row of 5ths(no sharps etc) ie: GDAE, CGDA, DAEB, FCGB etc
People used to use them as a quick-start way to learn the fingerboard then fill in the gaps(I did it that way too)

[Beanzy]

ie: GDAE, CGDA, DAEB, FCGD etc

Oops! - rushing again.

[mrmando]

Interesting ... well, the correct term for a note that's neither sharped nor flatted is "natural." "Whole note" refers to a note that's held for four beats. On a mandocello, neither the 9th nor the 10th fret would yield a complete series of naturals ... you'd have an F# at the 9th and a Bb at the 10th.

I always figured the fret markers were there to help with shifting and position playing, but apart from that I'm really not sure. They're common on 20th-century American instruments, starting with Orville Gibson and Raphael Ciani ... 19th-century instruments seem to be more hit or miss.

I bought an inexpensive mandolin once that had fret markers in the wrong place. Paul the luthier popped out the bad markers, filled the holes and put markers on the right frets. Cost about $70; I could have paid more for cosmetic perfection but I didn't want to. That job was about half what I paid for the mandolin ... but then I was able to sell it for enough to break even. If you're going to pay twelve large, though ... you have a right to expect it to be dealt with first.

[Beanzy]

Yes by 'whole note row' I really meant a whole row of natural notes. You'd think I'd get the hang of the jargon by now.
The fret-marker is probably one of those ideas that was useful for people learning, and then they expected it on all their other instruments. I think I'd probably forget about them and just have a 12th fret side-marker if I commissioned a mandocello.

Like I said the natural note stacks was just how I used them to learn moving about the fretboard. I prefer your idea that they are related to position shifts.

I'm only familiar with where we have shifts on the violoncello, perhaps someone could say if it's different for the mandolin family.

So when I shift my index finger from 1st to 2nd position it is on the C (on a mandocello located at the 3rd fret).
Similarly 3rd position gives the 5th fret D for the index finger, 7th fret E for 4th.
However the next cello finger position is 5th position on the F & that's only a semi-tone up at the 8th fret, which never gets marked from any instruments I've seen.
I need to jump to the 10th fret to get the G for 7th position and the 12th fret for the A again at 8th position, with that also being where the thumb goes at the 'thumb position' to get around the instrument size and carry on up. I've not learned anything beyond that on the cello as I'm not good enough

So if my assumption that the violoncello position shifts hold for the mandocello, the dot markers would seem to tally more with classical position shifts for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 7th, 8th/thumb positions than anything else.
Would any classical guitarists be able to shed light on how this relates to the guitar and the 9th fret?

I think there seems to be no reason for it on 9th fret on a member of the mandolin family & I'd be annoyed by one there, especially given the money spent as you point out.