mvolcjak - Posted - 04/21/2013:  22:08:23

I have recently been involved in threads that put forth that (Gibson) pre-war tone is essentially a result of the “aged” wood rim. In other words, take any pre-war sub-mastertone, add the appropriate “Mastertone” parts (pre-war or repro) and the results will be a killer banjo with “that” pre-war sound since an old Gibson rim was used.  While I do currently own a pre-war Mastertone, (Style 4) and I believe I understand what they are talking about, (the unique sound), something here does not add up.  I posed this thought within a thread about a different subject, and have had no one respond.  I figured the individuals following the thread either did not know, or never thought about Earl’s banjo being relatively new during his “golden” era.  That being said. here is what I asked:

Back in the 1950's Earl's '34 Granada was less than 30 years old. In fact in the 40's it was not even 20 years old! So it was not “vintage” at the time, yet it had "that sound" even back then, when it was relatively new. So, it would seem that it is not the "age" of the wood, but the wood itself, where it came from, (the Gibson rim forest?), how it was glued together or whatever - else an aged, or perhaps "submerged" wood rim banjo could be made to sound like Earl's Granada. By the same token, any pre-war rim, from any other maker's banjo (that could be adapted to a Gibson pot) should also yield that prewar Gibson sound. So it appears that Gibson must have done something significantly different to their rims, (and that would be span the tube and plate era through the 1PF era), to make them so unique to the point that they cannot be recreated today using any wood (new or aged), manufacturing technique, etc.  Does anyone know what that difference actually is?

Take it Easy ... MarK

Rick Polston - Posted - 04/21/2013:  22:26:35

Great question. Anxious to see what the expert builders have to say. I have found that a good quality ring on an old rim produces a fantastic sound but as you say Earl's banjo "had it" back years ago so this will be interesting...

desert rose - Posted - 04/21/2013:  23:03:21

It sounds like you are asigning a significant amount of voodoo and fairy dust to the process, where NONE exists.

Scott

beegee - Posted - 04/21/2013:  23:12:51

Most of what we call the pre-war sound at the time it was recorded was due to hide heads and the recording technology. Fast-forward 50 years and whatever that sound is, we attribute to 50+ years of aging and we try to replicate something that cannot be objectively defined.

mvolcjak - Posted - 04/21/2013:  23:14:23

Scott.

While I do not (necessarily) disagree with you. then what about all of these testimonials about old Gibson rims??

Take it Easy ..; MarK

mvolcjak - Posted - 04/21/2013:  23:30:08

Beegee,

Your point is taken.  I do not disagree with you either.  I am asking this question to all of the individuals who have modified sub-Mastertones (or any one else for that matter) who is assigning something to pre-war Gibson rims that may, or may not, actually be there.

If sub-Masterone (and Mastertone) rims are something different, the why?  It is not merely age - It has to be something else...

Take it Easy ...  MarK

steve davis - Posted - 04/22/2013:  03:17:47

My '29tb2 conversion sounds different from my new banjos.
It has a deeper and fuller tone.
I would be happy having only the 2 conversion for an only banjo.

davehicks - Posted - 04/22/2013:  03:28:17

In my opinion it has to do with the actual wood itself. Back when gibson was building those rims, the wood they used was an old growth wood. The climate was clearly diffrent then than now, longer colder winters caused tighter growth rings in the tree's, resulting a harder wood, that is more consistent throughout each ply. I believe there are some fine rims being built today, but I agree with you on the prewar rims, they sound really good and have a more consistent tone than rims of today.

RB3WREATH - Posted - 04/22/2013:  03:31:04

It is a complicated answer, first Earl wowed the world with his playing. During this time people were trying to understand how he played and to Beegee's answer, yes the tone was skin heads and such. Slowly these banjos start to gain demand. I remember when many banjo players viewed an old Gibson as kind of old news and not the ultimate banjo. I listened to the first Stelling owners when they were first sold and many never even entertained buying an old Gibson. Back then you could buy a pre-war OPF arch top for $400-$600.00. 

If you had a RB flathead in 1950 and had a good right hand you could sound kind of like Earl because Earl was also playing an RB flathead banjo with less than 20 years of age. If you had that same banjo in 1980 you still had the same chance of capturing that sound because it is being compared to a constant (Earls tone) and that constant moves through time with all PW flatheads. No voodo or fairy dust just apples to apples.

Joe

steve davis - Posted - 04/22/2013:  03:37:36

Pre war non tonering Gibsons sound better with a new tonering than new rims with new tonerings,imo.

Having the prewar resonator helps,too.

Edited by - steve davis on 04/22/2013 03:38:13

southerndrifter - Posted - 04/22/2013:  04:05:53

The wood is an important contributor to the sound.......but not the only contributor. And it's not only the rim wood, but the resonator wood, the neck wood...........and believe it or not, even the BRIDGE wood!

And to my ear, the sound of Earl's Granada changed over the years. It did not stay static, but evolved over time. Some of that can be attributed to Earl himself.........because his playing evolved. But some of it can be attributed to the many changes 9584-3 went through. Reworked neck, replaced fingerboard, replacement necks, new metal (except tonering), refinished resonator, plastic heads, etc.

The "magic" lies in the sum of all of these things.

pick it - Posted - 04/22/2013:  04:21:36

if there was a pre-war tonering and a pre-war wood rim and I had to choose between the two,to build a banjo around I would take the tonering,and take my chances on finding some good wood.what do you say?

davehicks - Posted - 04/22/2013:  04:33:55

I'm with ya on that Tim!

steve davis - Posted - 04/22/2013:  05:22:58

The fit of the neck is very important to the tone.

No need to take your chances with anything.Put in what sounds best.

Edited by - steve davis on 04/22/2013 05:24:01

TLG - Posted - 04/22/2013:  05:31:34

A few years ago I put a JLS #12 ring in a TB 1,early 30", by request of the owner & by the recomendation of the neck maker, Wyatt Fawley. If I remember correctly, Wyatt said it was made in th depression days & the wood used for the rims were local to the Kalamazoo area since Gibson didn't want to spend the money to transport wood because of cost. (If Waytt is on this thread he can correct me if this isn't true) I cut the rim & installed a new #12. I set up the banjo with higher action than I like , at the request of the owner. No "settling in" time here, it had that so called "pre war" sound, the very best, excellent pre war sound immediately. New neck, new tonering, plastic head, new strings , new bridge,----call it voodoo or fairy dust or whatever, the rim would win here I suppose.
Recently, I did the same with a #11, not the same at all . I changed the ring & it did improve considerably. So would the ring win on this one ??? Maby it needs "settling in", maby I'll switch the ring again, maby I need some fairy dust, I don't know.

Tom

Goldstarman - Posted - 04/22/2013:  05:34:22

On some of that early stuff the recording process was so raw I dont know how yo ucould tell anything from the tone of the banjo, that being said I thought the tone was so-so, Jds tone was much better.

AndyM - Posted - 04/22/2013:  05:35:29

Having very little technical knowledge related to the rims and rings and fit of a banjo, I cannot contribute anything, however, I do know that the fellows that have been working with Steve Huber developing the recent rings and rims have put extensive study and work into this subject.  They probably know more about it than anyone imho. 

Mumble Peg - Posted - 04/22/2013:  05:35:39

Maybe the aging of the rim after it was made is not as important as the age of the wood before it was made into a rim.

Banjophobic - Posted - 04/22/2013:  05:41:34

I use this equation for prewar banjos: X+Y=Z. This breaks down to "X" being a great sounding prewar banjo, "Y" being the players skill at pulling tone, and the result is "Y"- the great prewar tone you are talking about. If you have "X" (and all it parts intact, including that rim) but don't have "Y", you'll not hear the "Z".  

Rick Polston - Posted - 04/22/2013:  06:25:02

So many want to attribute tone to primarily the right hand of the player - "Oh Earl played my Kay and he sounded just like Earl" - his picking sounded just like Earl" but not the tone. Obviously Earl heard something very unique unique and special in the Granada and had his eye (ear) on it for a while or would never have traded for it. Call i fairy dust if you want but there is no doubt in my ear that an old rim with ring properly installed will sound better than a new rim with the same ring. I think Yates has hit on the sound the old pre wars had when they were new - and I imagine they will get even better over time. I agree Earl's banjo had different personalities through the years as the result of different necks, heads etc. It no doubt kept the "something" Earl first heard years ago. Yes a pickers picking will sound the same regardless of what banjo they play - their tone will vary greatly however.

Edited by - Rick Polston on 04/22/2013 06:28:39

Banjophobic - Posted - 04/22/2013:  06:40:13

Yeah, I don't think anyone who knows what they are talking about would think "Earl sounded just as good on a Kay Banjo" and he did on his Granada. But once the banjo is part of the equation, the player has to be up to the task of pulling the tone. I've heard many many great banjos, played by folks who can't pull tone and the results are always less than spectacular-.  The test can come in common forms like a great player like JD, playing many excellent banjos in a jam session. As long as the banjos are high quality sound producing capable, he will sound like JD on all of them...up to a point. But then match JD up with 'Banger'  or any other great pw flathead, and the magic really happens. You can't have one w/o the other and get that magic, imo. 

wfawley - Posted - 04/22/2013:  06:59:21

It's been said: "You can lead a horse to water ... but that don't make him a duck"

There's no voodoo involved. It's not rocket science. Take a red maple rim properly constructed and seasoned, with a 3 1/4 pound tone ring properly mated to the rim ... with a tightly fitted flange, and you'll be right where you want to be. I've built new banjos that sounded like Earl's ... and it's not all that reverb...well, part of the tone...but ... reverb as a studio enhancement didn't even exist in the early days.

If you want to build a banjo that sounds like the old Granada, you can do no better than a JLS No 12 on a "4 hole back" 100 pot. Those rims tend to be very lightweight. You can recognize these rims by the soft "rounded" bottom edge. The equation changes dramatically when you get to the ones with the semi flat rim bottom. It's apples and oranges.

Alan Jamison (may he rest in peace) knew this. He used to give me the dickens for telling people. I always told him .. No need to worry, Alan ... they won't be inclined to believe  it anyway". Here we are 10 years later... asking the same question, as though nobody ever addressed it.

Wyatt

Hotrodtruck - Posted - 04/22/2013:  07:02:57

Those great sounding pre-war banjos were only 15 or 20 years old (or so) when they were making history. Do they sound better now than then? No one knows how old the tree was when the wood was harvested. The quality of the components, set up and the picker are the key factors. Of course, they did sound better than new banjos in the days when banjo quality was down. That is why pawn shops and music shops were searched for these old banjos. They were better than what was available at the time. I don't think that has been true for a long time now.

YOMV

Mike

banjoez - Posted - 04/22/2013:  07:12:57

I don't always buy into all the prewar voodoo but I think there is something special about the old rims. It seems like everyone has been obsessed with tone rings (me included) but recently the focus has turned towards the rim as possibly having just as much or more to do with the tone as the ring and I think that has been an "ah hah" moment. Huber has recognized this as have others as Wyatt has pointed out.

I tinker a lot with modern banjos and do a lot of part swapping and by far the biggest factor that makes or breaks a banjo is the rim, not the ring. I've taken many quality modern tone rings and on certain rims they sound great and then taken the same rings and installed them on another rim and they just don't have it anymore.  Setting aside for a moment the tone that the skill of the player produces and the many setup variables involved I wholeheartedly agree that the wood/construction used in the rim is possibly the most critical component in a banjo to produce good tone. That holds true for modern banjos just as much as the old ones. Earl's Granada sounded fine regardless of age, head, bridge, strings and the several different necks that have been used down through the years. Earl's banjo had a good rim right out of the factory

Edited by - banjoez on 04/22/2013 07:22:18

banjo5string - Posted - 04/22/2013:  07:59:25

Build it, and they will come.....

bluegrassonthetube.com/page2481.html

TLG - Posted - 04/22/2013:  09:56:38

Great version of Big Spike Hammer, one of my favorite tunes.
I used to pick with the guy that owned that guitar, looks good on Russell & glad it's got a good home.

Tom

johnbodle - Posted - 04/22/2013:  10:29:17

 Just some thoughts here....

Seems as if most newer banjos that have been assembled  for a while and have all the right stuff ( quality ring/ rim)  come into their own after a while and get to sounding great. More on this in a second..

Consider that the greats that started this music and picked those old banjos probably had more bad days with the instrument misbehaving due to those skin heads and would have to change their attack to compensate for a thuddy banjo or lighten up to compensate for a "dear god it's about to blow" tight head....and still got that kind of tone? That's why I have a day job.......

That kind of experience ,of knowing how to get tone out of less than optimal conditions has to be part of this equation.

 Now about old versus new...... In addition to good materials, those old banjos having hide heads probably had their parts seated together much quicker due to the unreal amount of tension to get a snappy sound out of those things. plus getting played in....

Maybe that's why those banjos sounded good when they were only 20 yrs old. :)  

Maybe We should just run hide heads for the 1st 20 years of our new banjos life and then switch to plastic.........:)

All kidding aside... I think the new banjos being built by the boutique makers ( Fawley, Hatfield, Yates, R.Smith, Zack Deming....etc....) are the new pre-wars........ they got it figured out... We can still get good rims and the banjos are being very well built with great attention to detail. About  the above mentioned makers, I have played on all of them... there is not one that hasn't been rediculously fantastic ........

 Now to my point........ just maybe we all just need to let those new banjos settle in, seat together and play the snot out of them instead of changing bridges and tone rings all the time..... if they start out kinda good they might get amazing if just played a lot......

No offense.:)

mvolcjak - Posted - 04/22/2013:  16:36:30

Thanx for all the feed back. I am of the opinion, at this point, that the wood does make a difference.  I just do not think that one has to start with a pre-war sub-Mastertone wood rim and cut it up to get “that” sound, as this is not merely a function of the wood being “vintage”.

Just think of the preference guitar players seem to have for Brazilian rosewood as compared to rosewood from India. (And I am referring to “new” instruments, not vintage guitars.)  One would think rosewood is rosewood, but there is something different about the stuff from Brazil, and so I gather it does make a difference where the wood is from.

With this in mind, if Gibson's maple came from the forests of Michigan, (as Tommy suggested), then perhaps that explains one difference in Gibson rims.  I would think that there are still trees in Michigan (or even Canada), that are slow growth trees and would match those “magic” trees harvested in the 20’s and 30’s, as slow growth is a function of more than just colder winters.

So, I have to agree with Wyatt about just using the correct (maple) wood to make the rim.  I guess using an old Gibson rim eliminates the guess work as to what that correct wood actually is.  I appears to me that one can make a new rim from new wood, or even from salvaged old wood and get a great pre-war sounding banjo, (if this sound could ever be quantified),  that most, if not all, could not tell from the “real” thing in a blind test.

Take it Easy … MarK

Guitarman 10 - Posted - 04/22/2013:  17:16:14

I agree with Lynwood that all the parts make a difference,  but the big thing is the tone ring.   This I know for sure I have known part of this for years but never did put it together.   A person I know figured it out,  so I know that the tone ring is the biggest difference.   But like Lynwood says all of the parts that are in a banjo can make a big difference.   The way the neck is cut and fitted can make a difference,  the size of the neck,  the type of wood and on and on.

steve davis - Posted - 04/23/2013:  05:27:56

I've tried 3 different tonerings in my '29 2 and they all sounded great.

Randall - Posted - 04/23/2013:  07:12:57

So... If I understand Wyatt correctly, a properly fitted flange is just as important as a properly fitted tone ring, a properly fitted neck, and so on! If the tone of a banjo is crucial to the sum of ALL parts, and each part contributes, then each part must given the same attention to fit and setup. I have heard others, respectable builders, say the fit of the flange makes a difference in tone.

Clyde RF - Posted - 04/23/2013:  16:39:15

Obviously I'm not suggesting that it should be done even if it were an option, but if Earl's granada tone ring and the other granada metal parts were to be properly installed on a modern quality rim which was only a few years old, and that combination were ideally set up and played by Earl in his prime, the tone produced would for all practical purposes be indistinguishable from that produced by the intact granada. We've all shouted this one out before, but its been a while. I've heard the results in several instances of prewar flat head Gibson rings being installed on what were at the time recent Gibson rims (some permanently and some temporarily); they produced a tone almost identical to their sound on the old rims. But the tone was altered dramatically when different PREWAR flat head rings were shifted on the same old rim. There was universal agreement concerning interpretation among those present at the time. On the rim consideration, I believe many are riding a red herring; it's the rings, not the rims. I'm aware that other knowledgeable folks posting on this thread have had experiences which have produced conflicting evidence, and I don't doubt that they heard what they heard. We should each follow our pragmatic directives.

Rick Polston - Posted - 04/23/2013:  17:42:42

All components play a part but none as much as the rim then ring.

Randall - Posted - 04/23/2013:  17:46:11

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rick Polston



All components play a part but none as much as the rim then ring.

---

I strongly agree!

mvolcjak - Posted - 04/23/2013:  19:39:03

I also used to think it was the ring, but rings are metal and metal can be reproduced.  Pre-war tone rings are being manufactured today, based on the study of the originals, as metallurgy is a science, not voodoo.

Wood is not as easy to “replicate”.  Every wood component (rim), while similar, will be different as that is the nature of wood.  Finding similar wood will yield similar results, but never identical.  Any instrument is a sum of all of its parts, their quality and how well they are put together.  These will impact the overall sound.  But it is the wood components that are the “wild cards”.   Just look at the differences in sounds in a group of “identical” guitars.  While they all may sound good, there will always be 1 or 2 that sound distinctly “better” than the rest.  The difference here has to be the difference in the wood, as that is all there is to a guitar.

Banjos, are more complex, component-wise, so what does what can be debated.  But the wood used (neck, resonator and especially the rim) is the one factor that you cannot manufacture.  It is the one component that can vary the sound among “identical” instruments using the same metal hunks.

Anyway, that is what I am getting from this thread and it makes sense to me (at least at this point).

Take it Easy … MarK

steve davis - Posted - 04/24/2013:  03:56:03

It's simple.When it sounds right to you,don't change anything.

grandbob - Posted - 04/24/2013:  08:59:00

quote:

---

Originally posted by mvolcjak

 

Just think of the preference guitar players seem to have for Brazilian rosewood as compared to rosewood from India. (And I am referring to “new” instruments, not vintage guitars.)  One would think rosewood is rosewood, but there is something different about the stuff from Brazil, and so I gather it does make a difference where the wood is from.

Take it Easy … MarK

---

I will add a hearty amen to this.  In 2006 I met and immediately fell in love with a (very limited - only 50 built) Taylor GS with Brazilian Rosewood and Engelman Spruce.  I had never heard or played anything like it, to include top end Martins, and negotiated with my wife   who approved the purchase - which BTW included selling off my Indian Rosewood dreadnought.   I've never regretted purchasing this guitar, except for what it cost in dollars.  (Yeah I know I'm a heretic for owning a Taylor).  I have also owned some quality  banjos over the years, with a ~50 year old Gibson and a new Huber currently in my corral.  All things considered, I would have to come down on the side that believes wood DOES make a difference, and probably contributes at least as much as a tone ring to the sound.

GB

Alex Z - Posted - 04/24/2013:  09:58:59

" . . . on a "4 hole back" 100 pot . . . "

What does "4 hole back" mean?  

steve davis - Posted - 04/24/2013:  10:43:33

I didn't know if it made a difference or not until I played my conversion for the first time.
And it just keeps getting better.

mikehalloran - Posted - 04/24/2013:  11:12:32

>and believe it or not, even the BRIDGE wood!<

No, I think we all believe that the bridge affects the tone.

Mike Casey - Posted - 04/24/2013:  18:00:12

I have a couple Kalamazoo five strings with no metal except the brackets and resonator hardware. They have the pre war tone to their sound. It can't be the metal. There isn't any. It has to be the wood because that is all there is to them. I'm not saying a good tone ring would not give any sub-Mastertone a good boost, but the wood seems to be the heart of great tone quality.

Deaf Lester Crawdad - Posted - 04/24/2013:  22:59:04

quote:

---

Originally posted by mvolcjak

 

While I do not (necessarily) disagree with you. then what about all of these testimonials about old Gibson rims??

---

You need to ask yourself what you'd expect someone who just spent a wad of dough on a prewar rim and the latest (or oldest) tone ring to say about his banjo's tone: Is he going to say, "Gee! My Deering sounds just as good as this one!", or is he going to go on about "Smoky tones from dark hollers in the hills", and say things like "If you have to ask, you don't have a good enough ear to appreciate it", or "It's an indefinable something that I just can't describe", or even "If you don't want one it's only because you can't afford it!"?

I've heard all of the above said more than once, but, human nature being what it is, we nearly all want to think that our instruments are 'special' somehow and will happily grasp any chance to make that claim.   (In short; the prewar aura influences many people's perceptions of a given banjo's sound more than do prewar parts.)

Meanwhile, there are banjos being made today that are easily the equals of anything that came out of the prewar factories and in some cases are actually better built in terms of the parts being used and the construction quality.

Anything else is smoke and mirrors.

~Pete

steve davis - Posted - 04/25/2013:  04:37:13

I didn't have any preconceived notions about my conversion.
I bought it cheap ($600) and complete.
I took it to Jimmy Cox and left it with him to put in the ring and neck.

I was hoping to not be sorry for spending a grand total of $1750 for the finished product.
It was like nothing I'd played up to that point in its tone and power.

I'm real good at not kidding myself or trying to justify my opinions.I just take things for what they are in the real world.
It isn't better for some unknown reason.It's better because it sounds better to me when I play it.
It just is what it is...not what I wish it was.

lightgauge - Posted - 04/25/2013:  04:52:55

Best is in the ear of the listener and there are skeptics everywhere. I have had quite a few different rims and rings over the last several years,  including FF rims, Pass, Lammers, Cox, Cooperman, and several unknowns. Also bought  two 20's TB and had turned for flanges and rims.  I seem to find a clarity that I prefer in the old rims. I have only kept one later model rim, which is in my cabinet. To me, there is something special in the 30's rims, when mated with a good ring. I wish more people didn't , so the price would come down !

Banjophobic - Posted - 04/25/2013:  06:38:57

quote:

---

Originally posted by Deaf Lester Crawdad

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by mvolcjak

 

While I do not (necessarily) disagree with you. then what about all of these testimonials about old Gibson rims??

---

You need to ask yourself what you'd expect someone who just spent a wad of dough on a prewar rim and the latest (or oldest) tone ring to say about his banjo's tone: Is he going to say, "Gee! My Deering sounds just as good as this one!", or is he going to go on about "Smoky tones from dark hollers in the hills", and say things like "If you have to ask, you don't have a good enough ear to appreciate it", or "It's an indefinable something that I just can't describe", or even "If you don't want one it's only because you can't afford it!"?

I've heard all of the above said more than once, but, human nature being what it is, we nearly all want to think that our instruments are 'special' somehow and will happily grasp any chance to make that claim.   (In short; the prewar aura influences many people's perceptions of a given banjo's sound more than do prewar parts.)

Meanwhile, there are banjos being made today that are easily the equals of anything that came out of the prewar factories and in some cases are actually better built in terms of the parts being used and the construction quality.

Anything else is smoke and mirrors.

~Pete

---

So I'm taking it to mean that if you had the choice between a mid 30's 3 ply Gibson rim, and a brand new 3 ply rim made today. If the prices were not too far apart- for your banjo project

Since any well made new rim is 'just as good' as the prewar, you would choose the new one just as often?

TR Dockery - Posted - 04/25/2013:  08:03:26

quote:

---

Originally posted by Deaf Lester Crawdad

 

You need to ask yourself what you'd expect someone who just spent a wad of dough on a prewar rim and the latest (or oldest) tone ring to say about his banjo's tone: Is he going to say, "Gee! My Deering sounds just as good as this one!", or is he going to go on about "Smoky tones from dark hollers in the hills", and say things like "If you have to ask, you don't have a good enough ear to appreciate it", or "It's an indefinable something that I just can't describe", or even "If you don't want one it's only because you can't afford it!"?

I've heard all of the above said more than once, but, human nature being what it is, we nearly all want to think that our instruments are 'special' somehow and will happily grasp any chance to make that claim.   (In short; the prewar aura influences many people's perceptions of a given banjo's sound more than do prewar parts.)

Meanwhile, there are banjos being made today that are easily the equals of anything that came out of the prewar factories and in some cases are actually better built in terms of the parts being used and the construction quality.

Anything else is smoke and mirrors.

~Pete

---

It could just as easily be argued that somebody is going to come--I started to pun "out of the woodwork" but let's just say, "on the scene"-- to cast aspersions on anybody else's opinions that don't match their own.  I just don't understand the need to do that.  There are plenty of great banjos being made today--all trying to capture what sound?  All trying to be the next---what?  If you don't hear it, you don't hear it; but that don't make it "..smoke and mirrors."  Tell Robbie McCoury that; tell Craig Smith that; tell Sonny Osborne that; or the countless other pros who get it or other people who have been enthusiasts for much if not most of their lives who get it.

Happy trails,

Randy in Germantown, TN

steve davis - Posted - 04/25/2013:  08:16:02

I love all my new banjos.
I'd play any one of them exclusively for a year,no regrets.
I wouldn't own them if they weren't outstanding in tone and power.

But this 9469 conversion goes deeper with its expression.

The Pope - Posted - 04/25/2013:  09:33:10

Alex asked: " . . . on a "4 hole back" 100 pot. What does "4 hole back" mean?"  I'm not sure but maybe he was referring to the reso attachment screws/brackets. Sometimes the reso is called "the back". Gibson's usually have either 3 or 4 attachment screws. Other than that, I have no idea. 

Deaf Lester Crawdad - Posted - 04/25/2013:  11:09:36

quote:

---

Originally posted by Banjophobic

 

Meanwhile, there are banjos being made today that are easily the equals of anything that came out of the prewar factories and in some cases are actually better built in terms of the parts being used and the construction quality.

Anything else is smoke and mirrors.

~Pete

---

  Since any well made new rim is 'just as good' as the prewar, you would choose the new one just as often?

---

Try reading it again and read for content this time.  I never said the words "any well made new rim is just as good as the prewar".

If you have to lie to make your point then you didn't have a point to begin with.