I'm still working on the write-up of a current project that focuses exactly on rims. I've got four very different ones of the same dimensions that I can fit with the same (not similar) neck and other hardware. There are two different woods and 3ply vs. multi construction. This comparison eliminates the so many other design and set-up variables that obviously impact the sound. And I found that recordings of played tunes and plucked notes are easy to identify with the particular rims.

The underlying difference is that the 3-ply ones are stiffer for the same weight. That gives a quicker rise time and longer sustain. That's the easy part to measure, understand, and explain in terms of physics. (I'm still working on teasing out the impact on timbre; it's complicated.)

The paradigm example is the comparison of the original Deering Goodtime to the later 3-ply rim version.

There's no objective answer to which is better. I suspect it's like taste in food, i.e., whichever your Momma played when you were little.

By the way, I have a hunch for block vs. 3-ply construction. For the same wood, dimensions, and weight, the 3-ply should be stiffer -- based on my understanding of wood grain and stiffness anisotropy. I'd do the comparison if someone would make me a maple block rim of exactly the dimensions of a Goodtime.

I have a feeling it might depend on banjo type. And perhaps the wood used. Many people have said how the bluegrass resonator banjos with multiply rims sound good. Perhaps the tone ring is more important.

But beyond that type of banjo there are lot of different types of multiply rimmed banjos. My reasonably well specced but quite cheap Asian made open back with a multiply rim and rolled brass tone ring is nowhere near as good as my Asian made 2 ply rim rolled brass tone ring banjo. My multiply maple banjo with a whyte laydie style tone ring is not even close to my whyte laydie style tone ring with three ply maple rim banjos. All Asian made or Asian made parts. So perhaps with resonator thinker rimmed banjos there is a difference but it's hardly noticeable above the tone ring sound. The other question is are there better multiply rims?

Gibson thin rims from my experience were made of a SOFT multiply type of wood & were really the worst however i have a maple RB 800 multiply from that period full thickness that will knock your socks off !

One aspect that Ken LeVan pointed out once was volume of glue: the more plys, the higher glue-to-wood ratio you get in the rim. He made a great recommendation of using epoxy specifically designed for lamination gluing, a product that is both extremely brittle and gap filling as compared to titebond, I forget the name... let me know if you are interested and I can try to dig it up.

It's noted that you asked why people tend to say 3-ply is better than multi-ply, rather than if/why they actually are. I would guess that the primary reason people say this is the same reason people tend to say a one-piece flange is better than a two-piece flange, and the same reason people say a flathead is better than an archtop: Because that's what the big names of the 50s-70s played.

For my part, purely anecdotal, but I've heard terrible banjos with 3-ply rims and I've been surprised by quite a few 70s/80s Japan/Korea imports with multi-ply rims. My recommendations to beginners include seeking a 3-ply or block rim, not because I think those rims are better than multi-ply but because the use of 3-ply/block typically (but not always) indicates higher quality across the board.

And this is, of course, all within the resonator bluegrass world. This 'common wisdom' isn't nearly as prevalent in the open-back / old time world, and in fact some of the best banjos in that realm are 2-ply thin rims with dowel sticks that, when compared to masterclones, aren't all that stiff/rigid. Which, as an aside, really calls into question the entire theory of thick/stiff rims universally providing the best tone. 

I have nothing scientific to offer. My analysis is pretty simple. Most of the banjos I like the sound of have been 3 ply rims.

First of all, DavidPPP, thanks so much for your, like usual, amazing scientifically accurate opinions!!!

OK you guys, the question here is mostly related to the "standard" question in the Shopping Forum: "should I buy this 3 ply one or that multiply one?" The answer usually is, "the 3-ply one is where it's at." Meaning of course, in their opinion, multiply rims suck.

It always seems to me that the proper choice always is "3-ply over the multiply" without  even the slightest effort to validate hatswhoever! I don't recall any substantiation of that "ever so favourite, "gotta be 3-ply" verdict whatsoever.

My personal take: which, of course, could be totally stupid & totally wrong: if any of the layers start to delaminate then multi-ply should be way better because there's more "leftovers" that still are properly glued up. And, if one of the 3-ply layers starts to delaminate then, well, I'll leave that to your imagination...

I guess what I'm trying to say is that perhaps coming down too hard on the multi-layer rims is, well, hmmm, could easily be kinda, well, uhm, way too harsh a verdict without even ever having heard the diff of the various jos you're trying to evaluate.

By all means, Do YOUR OWN evaluation research of whatever banjo instead of simply relying on that "carved in stone expert" nonsense that insists that, without any kind of proof, 3-ply simply is way better...

Interesting question. With delamination being a rim killer, which is more likely? A 3 ply rim with two joints or a 10 ply with 8 joints ? Lots of room for discussion on these, but not being a rim builder, I have only speculations.

I bought a new Gold Star 11W in '76.It was hanging in the window of Buck Dancer's Choice when they were on Commercial Street.
Fine sounding mahogany archtop/multi-ply rim w/tube and plate flange,but I wanted a deeper tone and sustain so I bought a Stew Mac t&p 3 ply rim and no hole SM flathead ring for it.

Wonderful change in the voice of that banjo,but I can't say how much the rim alone changed the tone.I will say the combination of ring and rim had a profound effect on the tone.
I really regret trading that banjo away.

Bart..I just did a complete teardown and reconstruct/setup/cleanup on Mr.Lepages old RB 800. It was in need of love. It has the infamous 70's Gibson multi-ply rim that gets lots of hate. I put this banjo back to factory specs, loosened up the tonering(which was one of the 70's lighter weight rings) to rim fit a bit, neck reset, coordinator rods adjusted, new head, etc...and low and behold, it was transformed into a killer barn burning paint peeling tone monster. Those multiply rims should NOT be counted out!!

even scientific measuring never gets to the bottom line on this so I can't jump too much on that band wagon --but it is a great addition that helps that pondering-of -best rim--size of rim-----ring or not--  ring--type of ring--ring fit ( more than just snugness)--many set -up factors-

at the most the properties are identified--and frequencies -with their specific response can be measured--but how the sound waves travel --on a molecular travel has not had the exact routes documented--with all the various shapes--materials and different types of transferring between them--much will never be for certain--
guys Like David Poltzer --Mark Hickler--Jim Rae --Roger Siminoff plus many un named --are certainly going full steam ahead--but to me it seems--testing/evaluating still comes down to much trial and era --then running tests on the results--I certainly applaud loudly their efforts

I miss the trade shows when ibma was close--I could go set behind--many types

The short answer is that more contiguous wood grain has better resonant properties. Even if glue volume is minimized.
This also means that fewer block segments in a block rim would be more desirable (if that were the only factor).
But...
Banjos are one of the wonderful instruments with built in amplification.
So that means there's two sounds going on at the same time.
We've got the initial projection coming right off the head,
And then a resonance or re-sound-ing, in which the entire instrument vibrates.
Other instruments without the added projection that banjos have, rely a lot more on resonance.
Acoustic guitars an violins and that sort, really sound like dogdoo if there's too much glue, or the wooden members aren't shaved to just the right thickness, etc.
But with a banjo, something that isn't so good for resonance, may be adding to the initial projection in a greater measure.
As a general rule, transferring energy through dissimilar materials is less efficient (that's how sound proofing is achieved).
So if we were only considering resonance, it would be a bad idea to have a bunch of separate pieces.
But the power that come off of a heavy bronze tone ring when added to the mix is undeniable.
So in conclusion to my rambling, I'll say I don't hate multiply anything.
A banjo's sound is complex, and what makes it sweet is a bit subjective.
Kind of like chocolate and peanut butter;
Some would prefer more chocolate, some more peanut butter, some would rather a darker chocolate...
But the combination is the thing we love.

Concerning the close inspection of the Gold Star multiply rim I replaced,it was of a very high quality in the fit of the plies.Ends and sides very tight.

I really don't have enough specimens to give an evaluation--But I have heard good ones --in the mulitply group -
Also I kinda think--- the successful world class builders would go for some special perceived tone on at least one model--such as stelling did-- if they heard it--

the rim difference might not have the same effects on an arch-top or vega type ring

quote:

---

Originally posted by davidppp

if someone would make me a maple block rim of exactly the dimensions of a Goodtime.

---

I wouldn't recommend a blockrim for a Goodtime, David as those rims are kinda thin. He's what happened to my home-made 6 segment, 3 layer, 1/2 inch thick rim when I over-tightened the head (by "acciedent" of course): the glue joint cracked wide open at the bottom at all 6 glue joints. Other than that, the banjo still is totally playable 

I'm not guarantying that this is what would happen to you but it wouldn't be impossible either...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bruce Berry Banjos

Kind of like chocolate and peanut butter;
Some would prefer more chocolate, some more peanut butter, some would rather a darker chocolate...
But the combination is the thing we love.

---

Mmmm... chocolate rim with peanut butter tone ring.   Crunchy peanut butter probably wouldn't sound good, you'd have to stick with smooth.

quote:

---

Originally posted by davidppp

The paradigm example is the comparison of the original Deering Goodtime to the later 3-ply rim version.


I'd do the comparison if someone would make me a maple block rim of exactly the dimensions of a Goodtime.

---

I've done this over 10 years ago. BHO member Helix made me a block rim, which I fitted to a Goodtime 2. It became a surprisingly loud banjo, and a banjo I should have kept. A friend of mine liked it so much, he convinced me he had to have it, and he played out with it for over 10 years, until he passed away, and I lost touch. That banjo may still be out there somewhere... recognizable by a Helix decal added to the headstock. 
 

I've owned both an old multi ply Goodtime, and now own a 3 ply Goodtime. So the purest comparison, without any tone rings or hoops added. I honestly don't think it makes any difference. With head choice, string choice, good set up, tailpiece height, and bridge selection, they both sound great, and I doubt anyone could tell in a sound comparison. I'm currently looking for another vintage Gumby Goodtime... so someday I may be able to actually make side by side comparison. 

Dean T -- I knew a block rim would be possible. Bart's problem (see above) is that a glued joint that's mostly end grain is the weakest possible. You have to lay the blocks like brickwork so that the end-like joints in each layer lie above along-the-grain joints. The more layers the better.

My four (!) Goodtime banjos sounded like Goodtimes. (Duh!) But even I can hear the differences in their sounds. The old 11-ply rim really does have a slower attack and shorter sustain than the newer 3 ply. I can measure it, but I'm not saying who will notice in normal playing or whether it's enough to care. Another of my four rims is the Deering-made "Cherry," which is actually cherry-maple-cherry 3 ply. It's sound is the closest to the maple 3 ply but, again, measurably different. (It's not quite as stiff with the same weight -- with the necessary consequences.) The fourth is something I put together with a drum shell: 12-ply cherry but only about half the Goodtime thickness. It's both sweet and snappy -- definitely a different banjo. As mentioned originally, all were recorded with the same neck, hardware, and setup, and they all sound different, in one way or another. The downside of the method is that there could be no side-by-side live comparison. (On the other hand, different necks made the same pot sound different.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by davidppp

Bart's problem (see above) ~ ~ ~ You have to lay the blocks like brickwork so that the end-like joints in each layer lie above along-the-grain joints

---

put yer glasses on David, that's exactly the way I glued them up

Bart, the problem with your rim is it only looks like 2 primary layers and the block butt joints are not a good structural bond.

It looks like what happened was all the head tension is pulling at those butt joints trying to separate them. Mostly because all the hook/shoes go thru the bottom layer of blocks and there is nothing holding those butt joints together. The hooks want to open the rim like peeling a partially sectioned orange.

Had you put a set of cap blocks on the bottom of the rim it would probably have held up. Just as David suggested more layers of blocks would have made a much more structural rim.

A two course block rim is just not very structurally strong.

Waiting for the first person to tell me in person that my Waverly made Vega rims are somehow inferior. These were laminated into a pipe and slices were cut into rims. Banjos sound great and I loan them frequently for others to use when they record. Oh, there's one on the BHO who has said so many times but I've learned to ignore that nonsense.

The early Gold Star/Saga rims are built like a tank. Here's one I have in stock now.

When I was still building banjos I went through different stages on rim performance. The tone I was after in my earlier years was a deeper tone, and I preferred 12" rims that were thick. I used block rims at first, then switched to 3 ply maple laminated rims, after I had two block rims made by two different reputable makers develop gaps between blocks that you could see daylight throug.

For a long time I thought thicker laminated rims were the best. I built several banjos for Dwight Diller and that was what he always specified, though he didn't care if they were laminated or block rims.

Then, as an experiment I built two light weight banjos using Turkish had drum rims which were 12" and only about 5/16" thick.
The first one was made for a civil war re-enactor who wanted a banjo that looked the period, but with frets and geared tuners.
I never heard from the guy after the banjo was finished, so I kept it. I carried that banjo to Clifftop in 2017 and Diller played it up on the hill at the Field Collector's booth every day of that week, and took it home with him, holding on to it until I built him one like it.

Those two thin multi-ply rimmed banjos sound just as good as my usual banjos, and this convinced me that my previous thoughts on rim construction were opinions based on what seemed good logic, but as it turns out I think the main thing impacting tone is simply the size of the air chamber.

I think it just doesn't matter as much as people think it does whether the rim is 3 ply, multi-ply, thick or thin. It is the depth and size of the rim that matters more.