 sj |
||
|
||
Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole?
|
|
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: GUEST,Coastal Jetsom Date: 27 Nov 08 - 01:38 AM add complication to types . Martin's more common mandolins are bent tops , similar to the bowl backs they made 100 years ago, but the top has more surface area, as the back moved closer with the flat back style . And there are flat top flat backed , a classic design gibson made for the troops , hence Army-Navy name attached to those , pancake body almost round. then there are the carved arch top and back types that Gibson makes and so many emulators replicate , those in FF hole and Oval. generally focus of sound of FF hole mandolins is out there , projects away, the sound seems to be more widely disburse nearby with oval hole sorts there is a lot of creative cross breeding , banjo-mandolins and the like , so I'll leave curiosity being stoked . try a bunch to hear what they sound like as said : writing about music is like dancing to explain architecture.. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Ebbie Date: 27 Nov 08 - 01:38 AM Dick G, when you asked that question about where to put the other end of the strap, my immediate visualization was that it is held between the teeth. *g* And yes, I do play the mandolin. And no, that's not how I secure the strap. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: astro Date: 27 Nov 08 - 01:02 AM Dick, It would be good if I read my own writing...might make more sense, but if you string the strap by the tuners, you will not mar the mandolin... JiK, I think that I can take pride in my own ignorance, I can achieve it without any help at all from anyone.... pdq, it is where I got my Collings, they do a great business via mail...many were packed up ready to go when we got there. It was one of those wild hairs, seeing a mandolin (barely used) that got the juices going and Desert Dancer and I in the car to fast make it up there before it closed for the weekend...with great speed we made it up in time to say yes to a new instrument...a great time... astro having fun here for Thanksgiving.... |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Desert Dancer Date: 26 Nov 08 - 08:26 PM pdq, that's where astro got his Collings. (Not from the roof, though!) A Saturday road trip from Tucson... |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Cluin Date: 26 Nov 08 - 07:58 PM What the hell? I think I forgot to carry the 2. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: dick greenhaus Date: 26 Nov 08 - 06:51 PM John- Nicely, if not succinctly put. It's been said that the IQ of a group of people equals the sum of the IQs of the individuals in the group divided by that square of the number of people in the group, But we don't really believe that, do we? |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: JohnInKansas Date: 26 Nov 08 - 06:35 PM ... I hate to rely solely on my own ignorance. Good idea, Dick. Our combined ignorance is much deeper and more profound than any single person could possess, and flaunting it in our flagrant and inimitable communal manner adds much to the quality and effectiveness of its propogation. John |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: pdq Date: 26 Nov 08 - 06:23 PM ...just for fun (scroal down to pics): Rhonda Vincent in AZ |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Cluin Date: 26 Nov 08 - 06:00 PM The Mandolin Cafe was mentioned before as a resource for all things Mando. Great lessons there on developing pick control, scales, etc. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: dick greenhaus Date: 26 Nov 08 - 05:56 PM Many thanx. That's about what I thought, but I hate to rely solely on my own ignorance. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Cluin Date: 26 Nov 08 - 04:27 PM One other point... the strap is usually shorter so the mandolin is slung higher on the body, not down below your crotch like some rockers do with their guitars. The higher position makes trills and quick alternating picking easier (from the elbow for less fatigue) than trying to control them with your wrist only at the bottom of your arm extension. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: GUEST,astro Date: 26 Nov 08 - 04:20 PM Dick, There are two ways you can go... 1. at the local music shop have the repairman place a button next to the neck on the mando's body, or which is what I do, 2. work the strap around and under the strings next to the tuners and tie it up at the top of the neck...this way you do mar the body... Then two ways to deal with the strap...over the neck around the shoulders or around only one shoulder...I do the latter, though some players think that that is not balanced well and can bring on fatigue... I had a Gibson F-9 and found it kinda of dead, so traded it for a Collings MT-2...which I love...f-holes... Astro in Los Angeles |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: JohnInKansas Date: 26 Nov 08 - 04:20 PM The commonly used mando straps have a "string" end that can be threaded under the strings (above the nut) on the head, and tied on there. I've seen a couple of people using more "exotic" attachments, but that's the most common among my acquaintances. A variation occasionally seen is to add a button, usually on the "bottom side" (as the mando is held) of the neck heel near the body. This makes the strap "wrap" a few degrees around the base of the neck so it's less likely to pop off the button. The smaller size of the mando and the tendency to "move it around" while playing makes the button on the bottom of the soundbox sometimes "less than secure," and if the end of your strap gets a little "soft" it's fairly common to get "unexpected releases" there. (But the light weight makes a mando easier to catch in mid-fall?) John |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Cluin Date: 26 Nov 08 - 04:15 PM Usually the headstock, like everybody used to do with guitars. But you can screw a button into the neck heel if you want. Mandolins are so small and light, you only need a thin strap. I used to use a leather workboot lace, until an old narrow leather belt came my way. I cut it, punched a couple of holes, attached a strap button to the heel and Robert is your avuncular relation. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: dick greenhaus Date: 26 Nov 08 - 03:48 PM A last(probably dumb) question. Now that I'm the (reasonably) happy owner of an A-style oval-hole mandolin, I find that I'd like to use a strap with it. Now I know there's a button at the bottom of the soundbox to attach one end of the strap--but where does one attach the other end? |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: dick greenhaus Date: 10 Nov 08 - 12:06 AM FWIW, I bought a Kentucky 172 oval hole. And I like it jes' fine. It's got a nice action (unlike my old egg-slicer) and it sounds good--at least when played by Donal Maguire at a house concert last Friday. I'm working on it. Thanx for all the help and suggestions. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: wysiwyg Date: 01 Nov 08 - 11:32 PM Thanks for the update, Dick. I hope you find just the tone you want. I will say that of all the varied instruments Hardi plays, it seems to me that his mandolin sounds the most different to the one playing it as comapred to how it sounds to the listener. He hears his as sweet. It IS sweet, but from across a large room I also feel an assaultive POP or PING. ??? Whatever! :~) He loves it, and that's what matters. ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: John Hardly Date: 01 Nov 08 - 07:36 PM "Has anyone tried the Kentucky 172 oval hole mandolin?" Yes, I have. I recently added an inexpensive mandolin to my instruments so I would have one I wasn't afraid to take to art fairs. I was actually wanting an oval. My experience is that cheaper oval holes are WAY worse than cheaper F holes at duplicating the sound of the more expensive versions of the same style. Remarkably so. So I bought the F hole and I like it. It's not the mandoling my expensive one is, but it's not bad and it's worth about $2000 less. I can take it on the road. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Cluin Date: 01 Nov 08 - 06:57 PM Glen Reid instruments. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Cluin Date: 01 Nov 08 - 06:53 PM He also has a Glen Reid built octave mandola that is pretty sweet. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Cluin Date: 01 Nov 08 - 06:52 PM Buddy of mine has a Flatiron Oval A that he's partial to. It sounds and plays like a dream. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: dick greenhaus Date: 31 Oct 08 - 07:02 PM Haven't decided yet, but I'm leaning towards the Kentucky 172. I tried one....it's not a Gibson, but it's not bad. And frankly, I like the looks of an oval-hole A model. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: wysiwyg Date: 31 Oct 08 - 03:27 PM So what did you decide, Dick? ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: JohnInKansas Date: 30 Oct 08 - 02:34 PM Pay no attention to the (full name) Bald-Headed Bow-Legged Pot-Bellied B**d Stepchild. He only claims to be a banjo player to keep his mother from knowing he's really a truck driver. John |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: bald headed step child Date: 30 Oct 08 - 02:10 PM I would have to agree with several of the posts here that the only way to decide is to play the particular instrument and decide whether you like the sound of it. I will disagree though on the number of types of mandos. As one post acknowledged there are resonators out there in various types. Tri-cone and single resonators, in both metal or wood bodies, as well as my particular favorite the mandolin-banjo, available in different configurations in relation to body and scale size. Pick the one that sounds good to you for the type of music you want to play,and remember if you play different styles, you may need more than one to fit those styles. BHSC P.S. My father always forgets to sign his full name, John In Rural Kansas. You can check the initials yourself. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Cluin Date: 29 Oct 08 - 08:48 PM I've seen quite a few of those old "tater bug" style mandos, but very few of them were actually playable. They were produced in mass quantities in the early part of the last century when the style of music (Neopolitan tunes) played on them was popular. Quality control wasn't a big deal for them. Thank gawd for Orville Gibson. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Richard Bridge Date: 29 Oct 08 - 08:48 PM Lots more to say on this but with respect John the top of a mandolin is about the same size as that of a violin. About. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Bill D Date: 29 Oct 08 - 06:52 PM "You're wise to avoid the old bowl type...." And most do with a few notable exceptions I watched him play once...amazing..(I'm sure Dick G. knows about him) |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 29 Oct 08 - 05:37 PM Best thing is play ones you like the look of, and see what sounds and feels best. You're wise to avoid the old bowl type. They look pretty hanging on the wall, but they aren't as strong and tend to warp, and also they slip around on the tum. Flat backs are much more comfortable, especially if you aren't over-skinny. That's why Irish bouzoukis are that shape too. (Though I can't see how Greek bouzouki players manage to cope with them, because they don't tend to be over-skinny either!) I prefer round holes to look at and to play, but that's just me, it's not a recommendation either way. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: JohnInKansas Date: 29 Oct 08 - 04:39 PM Richard Bridge - You are quite correct that there are additional "resonances" in most instruments. The point, however, is that the hole only affects the Helmholtz resonance of the box, and is only useful for tuning that particular resonance. If you wish to tune all the other ones, you do it using other methods, as by adjusting the thickness and/or width/length of the panels that vibrate. I've seen a few guitars where rather fancy sound holes were used to "avoid the bracing" on the theory that the "other resonances" could be enhanced in some way; but never could really detect any significant benefit. Of course, I'm not a guitar whanger so it's possible that the benefit obtained just eluded me. In a violin, the top is really quite tiny compared to other instruments in similar pitch ranges, and some have theorized that the F-hole "aligns with the arch" to avoid reducing the stiffness in the longer dimension of the box; and that may be an additional - and significant - reason for the absence of (m)any fiddles I've seen with round holes. For a mando, especially, the top plate is relatively large (compared to a fiddle), making it somewhat less likely that "higher modes" will be strongly enough excited to need "tuning," and the absence of bracing in (most) mandos gives the luthier a great deal of freedom in putting holes - of the proper total size - just about anywhere. A more difficult geralization would be whether an arch-topped mando is "usually" better than a flat top. The usual "arch" in a fiddle top actually is quite complex, with convex and concave curves all over the place. A luthier has incredible flexibility in "tuning the plate" since both the amount of wood(?) trimmed and the exact location where it's removed can have fairly large, but different, effects on both the fundamental frequency for one or more modes of vibration and the coupling between modes. Unfortunately, there are no general rules about "where to cut" and/or "how much" for any particular effect, although there are many theories - a few of which may be "sort of valid." Producing an "exceptional" fiddle depends largely on "working by feel" based on experience. Mando tops, when arched, generally have much less complex curves, so "working the curvature" - actually adjusting the local thicknesses once the basic form is developed - should, in principal, be a little less difficult than for a fiddle; although I've seen no evidence that most luthiers spend a lot of time in trying to tune the "plate resonances" beyond getting the "tap tone" somewhere "about right." There also is no general agreement on what any plates should be tuned to, although getting the lowest plate mode near the box resonance, or a third, or fourth, or a fifth from it, seem to be a rough guides used by some. (There is some agreement that the top plate and lower plate should be at different pitches.) It seems that most mando builders usually just "stop when it looks right." In principle, an arched mando top should offer more "tunability," but I doubt that many luthiers do all that much precise tuning of them. (It's quite obvious that my fairly nice little arch (plywood) topped mando (A-style) has not had any "detail" plate tuning during its assembly.) John |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Melissa Date: 29 Oct 08 - 01:05 PM I just brought home a resonator mandolin and although it's not exactly on-topic, I thought I'd chirp in and say that it is loud without being brash. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: nickp Date: 29 Oct 08 - 04:55 AM Of course, if you have a round hole your picking hand may well cover it as you play so cutting down the sound whereas the f holes keep the outgoing sound out of the way. I prefer round holes though |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Richard Bridge Date: 29 Oct 08 - 04:29 AM Hmm - maybe contentious. Technically, the analyis of box resonance is correct and there are some good loudspeaker cabinet design websites out there that will give you the maths - but they assume stiff box. If the sides of teh box (the top, back, and sides of the mandolin) are flexible - as in fact they are desinged to be - then each wllhave its own fundamental resonance and contribute to the sound. Certainly on guitars the top resonance is a much bigger contributor to the sound than the hole resonance, but this may be a lesser factor on mandolins since most have such stiff tops. If youput a mandolin top under coherent light, you could draw a picture of the waveform pattterns in the top - I've seen such pictures for violins. These patterns (widely assumed to be the principle cause of the characteristic sound of a violin) will be different for an F hole or a round or oval hole, and wil also differ for the horned F-style body and/or archtops and flattops. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Zen Date: 28 Oct 08 - 03:15 PM The "box resonance" depends only on the volume of air inside the box, and the total area of all the holes. The shape of the holes has no effect. Exactly JiK. You said what I was trying to say (as a one-time luthier/repairer) above but much better. It is more the woods, contruction and individual luthier design that affect the sound. Zen |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Hardiman the Fiddler Date: 28 Oct 08 - 03:01 PM Hi Dick and all. I used to have a bowl backed mandolin which is different from the A and F body styles referenced by Wesley S. It had an oval sound hole. Unfortunately the top caved in and it is not in a playable condition. My other mandolin is an older Kentucky that has a spruce top and mahagony sides. Frankly I always liked the tone from the Kentucky Mandolin because it was brighter than the old bowl back. The bowl back was a good practice instrument but it always seemed to be much less responsive. I like to use a pick that has a little more flex in it when I'm playing the mandolin--the choice of pick can make a difference on the tone that you get out of the instrument. Also, in this era of cutting corners, there are a lot of instruments out there that have plywood tops. IMHO There's no way that the plywood topped mandolin is going to produce the quality of tone that a solid topped on will. I've taken the KY mandolin on some retreats and workshops to help provide some relief and I've had some of my colleagues remark that they thought that my mandolin (they called it my little guitar) had a sweet sound. Dick, if you drop up for a visit, you are welcome to try out the KY mandolin. I don't know so much about the way in which the quality of sound differs between the oval or f holes on the instrument. I did discover with the KY mandolin that the tone improved by removing the pick guard. I play the mandolin by holding my little finger against the top and picking which prevents the mandolin top from getting all scratched up. My approach to selecting an instrument has been to go to a music store and to try a variety of mandolins or violins and then try to narrow down the selection by the way they sound to me. Well, thanks for bringing up the topic. Cheers to all. Greg |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: JohnInKansas Date: 28 Oct 08 - 02:50 PM Most of the "characteristics" claimed here are more the differences between how individual luthiers make their mandolins. Generalizing, F-style mandolins do generally have a more "punchy" sound, because people who make F-style mandolins largely have blue Generalizing further, F-style mandolins are somewhat more likely to be disigned for heavier strings, and fairly frequently have a higher (and "stiffer") action because blue All of these differences are due to choices made by the luthier, based on the intended/expected use, and the tried and true methods of getting the most marketable product for the intended Since the prevailing kinds of customers for A-style mandos don't particularly need the loud chops enough to sacrifice as much tonal quality, it's common for A-style mandos to be built to use lighter strings, and to be set up with less clearance between strings and fretboard and hence to have a "lighter" action. Thinner "box" plates commonly are used in A-Styles since players aren't expected to do a lot of the blue You can find "crossover" instruments, in which a luthier made the choice to build a "blue The "classic" difference between using a single hole and f-holes (always paired?) is based on the "need" to adjust the "box resonance" as the instrument is assembled. With a round or oval hole, trimming the hole size while keeping the hole round/oval can be somewhat difficult. With f-holes, only the "local sweep" of the hole edges has to be kept "pretty," so it's easier to make small changes in total hole area. Not all luthiers consider "precise tuning" of the "Helmholtz resonance" to be a critical factor (especially for mandos) and quite a few use "whichever" depending on what they think looks cute, or what they think will sell best. The "box resonance" depends only on the volume of air inside the box, and the total area of all the holes. The shape of the holes has no effect. Other "features" are commonly associated with one or the other kinds of holes (in the minds of luthiers and of John |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Cluin Date: 28 Oct 08 - 01:20 PM As with guitars, the F hole provides a more "punchy" sound, while the oval hole is more mellow. It depends what kind of playing you are doing, as has been mentioned. In a loud bluegrass group, yopu want the high, loud punch because the mandolin handles most of the percussion. In a quieter, folky ensemble, or solo, The A-style would probably suit you more. I've used both and can use either in either situation. But I usually use an Ovation electric-acoustic (that looks like a smaller version of their Adamas guitars. Acoustically, it sounds somewhere between an A- style and an F-style. Though I'm not a fan of the acoustic sound of Ovation guitars, the sound works pretty good for a mandolin. But where it really shines is when it's plugged in. It is a good match for my Guild/Fishman machine. The neck takes a bit of getting used to; it's fairly thick and wide for a mandolin, and the unison strings are a bit farther apart, so it's more of a chording instrument, though I do do a lot of picking on it. If you feel like working with your hands, Stew-Mac has a few kits for building mandolins. The Campfire Mandolin kit looks interesting, but they also have an A-Style and an F-style kit for good prices. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: wysiwyg Date: 28 Oct 08 - 01:17 PM PS I dropped him a note to look in. Also, I understand mando players enjoy re-bridging their instruments for sound adjustments, as do fiddlers. ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: wysiwyg Date: 28 Oct 08 - 01:13 PM Hardi's is a Kentucky. ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Darowyn Date: 28 Oct 08 - 01:10 PM I have had A style mandolins with Oval soundholes and my present one has F holes. They sound different. I have two acoustic guitars with round soundholes, and they sound different too. I have two electric archtops, both with F holes. Same thing applies. Any difference in structure, materials or playing style will be reflected in the sound. I don't think you can generalise, but you can spend many happy hours looking for one that feels and sounds good to you. Cheers Dave |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 28 Oct 08 - 01:00 PM I would imagine if a small child were to feed objects (chips, buttons, coins etc.) into your mandolin they would be easier to extract from an oval-holed instrument than from an f-holed instrument. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: dick greenhaus Date: 28 Oct 08 - 12:57 PM Has anyone tried the Kentucky 172 oval hole mandolin? |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Mooh Date: 28 Oct 08 - 11:36 AM Check out www.mandolincafe.com for more on the subject... Peace, Mooh. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Wesley S Date: 28 Oct 08 - 11:11 AM Yes - It's really the soundhole that makes the difference. Many builders like Gilchrist say there is no difference in the tone between their A style mandolins and their F style body shapes. It's the soundhole. An A shaped mandolin can be found with either an oval hole or an F style soundhole. Same with an F style mandolin. So you have four basic choices: "A" body - oval soundhole "A" body - F shaped soundholes "F" body - oval soundhole "F" body - F shaped soundholes There are others but probably 95 percent of the mandolins made fall into one of these four catigories. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Zen Date: 28 Oct 08 - 10:59 AM Generally as Wesley said although I think it is as much tradition as anything else. I've played a few F styles that were quieter than some A styles so it depends very much on the wood, construction and maker. A styles are usually preferred for "Celtic" (aaarrrggghh) or folk and F styles for bluegrass due to the "chop" as Wesley said. Zen |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Richard Bridge Date: 28 Oct 08 - 10:58 AM You should also try true flattops like Army & Navy and Kentucky Flatirons. I find my little Kentucky flatiron cuts through very well but the sound differs from an F-style's chop. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: wysiwyg Date: 28 Oct 08 - 10:57 AM Dick, Hardi has an oval here you could try out... maybe for longer than a visit. You're overdue for one..... ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: Wesley S Date: 28 Oct 08 - 10:54 AM As always your best source of info can be found over at www.mandolincafe.com - but the general concensus is that an F style mandolin will be louder and have a better "chop". A more precussive effect for the rhythm work needed in bluegrass. Oval hole mandolins are sweeter and warmer in tone. And not as loud. All of this depends upon the builder, the woods used and the setup of the instrument. You may very well want to get an oval hole mandolin unless you want to play bluegrass. How will the mandolin be used? |
|
Subject: Tech: Mandolin-Oval vs. F-hole? From: dick greenhaus Date: 28 Oct 08 - 10:33 AM Is anyone familiar with both types? Pros and cons of each, please. I know something about guitars and banjos, but mandolins are a bit strange to me. I know that I don't want an old-type bowl back, and I don't like the looks of F-styles, so I guess I'm looking for an A-style mandolin. |
| Share Thread: |