The instrument in question had been around elsewhere, but was introduced in Boston by Vega employee and musician Herb Fandel in 1909. According to David Day, production began in 1910 or 1911. It was marketed as a Banjo-Mandolin in Vega ads at least until 1915, perhaps because they were targeting Dance Band mandolinists looking for a louder instrument that could cut through the din of shuffling feet on the dance floor. 

Composer and teacher George Lansing (Feb. 1922 Crescendo), recalled that "eventually the limitations of the tiny instrument in the upper register were disclosed".  The tenor banjo began taking its place in dance bands around 1914 (recalled by David Day). By around 1916 or 1917, Vega was marketing this in its catalogue as the Mandolin-Banjo, perhaps to better align with their other products : Standard Banjo, Piccolo Banjo, Tenor Banjo, Plectrum Banjo.

In the January, 1924 issue of Cadenza, mandolinist Giuseppe Pettine's column asks "Who Made the First Mandolin-Banjo?" Both Herb Fandel and David Day are quoted, providing the info appearing in the first two paragraphs above. In 1924, both use  the term "mandolin-banjo".



 

My Gretsch banjos attached above were labeled (tongue in cheek) according to the replies received in this thread. To be entirely transparent and forthcoming Gretsch was of the "Banjo Mandolin" school. See attached.

Sears and Roebuck Fall #110 year, 1900

Didn’t Jonathan Swift write about almost the exact same thing…except in relationship to cracking eggs…

So, in 1900 it was hyphenated. :-)

In 1977 Scott Hamby presented a dissertation: "Mandolins in the United States Since 1880, etc". One chapter is entitled "The Development of the Mandolin-Banjo". On pages 241/242 Hamby seeks to distinguish between the two "forms" (mandolin banjo vs. banjo mandolin) and in summary postulates that the banjo mandolin (1) had a larger head; (2) had a thicker rim; (3) could have just 4 strings; (4) often closed back or with detachable resonator - than the mandolin banjo. Hamby's approach is attached.

In April 1898 Rettberg & Lange originated their "Banjo Mandolin" and the announcement, description and image from Music Trade Review is attached.
(Joel - Thanks for the Sears scan for the early dimensions of the instrument)

Looking at this from a purely linguistic perspective:

In English, an adjective precedes a noun, as in “red car.” “Car” imparts more important information than “red.”

Connecting two nouns with a hyphen creates a new hybrid noun, as in “banjo-mandolin” or “mandolin-banjo.”

So these are two fundamentally different constructs.

If we consider the adjective-noun construction, you have to decide which component is more important. Either the core of the instrument is the suspended skin head on a pot, giving it its distinct tone, or the four double courses of strings, making it painful to play.

This would be determined by your starting point - are you a banjo player looking to add some mandolin tones to your repertoire, or are you a mandolin player looking to add banjo tones? Or from the point of view of the producer: who is your target customer?

However, I do suggest that four double courses tuned in fifths means you will be using mandolin technique. This, in my opinion, makes it a mandolin with a banjo pot, and not a banjo with a mandolin neck. That would make it a "banjo mandolin." However, due to the stress patterns, to my ear that sounds awkward. Which may be perfect, in this case. 

Regarding the hyphenated compound nouns: I am not aware of any standard method of judging relative importance in such constructs. That doesn’t mean there is none.

For people who are neither mandolin nor banjo players, I call into question your wisdom for selecting an instrument which combines the worst features of two potentially irritating instruments. I say this as a banjo, mandolin, banjo-mandolin, and mandolin-banjo player, so don’t get your panties in a twist. One of my manjos is even strung with octave courses, for that particularly annoying string/jug band sound.

My wife's term for the instrument includes neither "banjo" nor "mandolin," and is unprintable. 

I hope this has been edifying. I am going to go play “Dallas Rag” on my banjolin now.

Let's hear it for the hyphen, it makes the word make sense and allows banjo players to legitimately call it a Banjo-mandolin and mandolin players call it a mandolin-banjo, or vice versa, and players of both to call it what-you-will

The neck determines the style of playing. So, a mandolin neck means you're playing mandolin, regardless of the body, thus a banjo mandolin. A five-string neck with a mandolin body (e.g.: a Pohlmann) is played like a banjo, not a mandolin, hence a mandolin banjo. A six string "banjo" is played like a guitar, so it's a banjo guitar (and banjo guitars were used to increase the volume of the guitar player in the band/orchestra back in the day). When you name it, it's body first, neck second.

Banging on about the hyphen again - as it looks like the original marketers of the product hyphenated the name, it is a new thing (new to 1890). Yes, it's a hybrid instrument and is also referred to by a hybrid, but new name (banjo-mandolin), and, perhaps colloquially a compound new name (banjolin). It is its own thing. The name is simply to give the reader of the advert an reasonable idea of what this new thing is. I wonder how many prospective buyers walked into the music shop and exclaimed "Ah, mandolin banjo, I thought it was a banjo mandolin!!!"
This begins to remind me of the 'Dobson heel'. Experts say it isn't but we all know and can imagine what is meant.

quote:

---

Originally posted by BanjoMc

After I sent that I began to wonder if one COULD tune a 4 string mandolin banjo to CGDA and play it like a tenor banjo. Hmmm.

---

Yes, mandola strings exist so that you don't have to seek out custom gauges.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandolin-banjo

Wikipedia calls it a "Mandolin-banjo". If you disagree with that, and feel you've got good evidence to support it, please help by contributing to the discussion. If you're successful, you will be preserved in history as a Wikipedia contributor!

Also, if you enjoy this type of discussion, I encourage you to become a wikipedia contributor for any other topics you have interest and expertise in. It's a community effort, and we are the village.  

quote:

---

Originally posted by eljimb0

Probably there is no resolution to this exercise. Here is some more wood for the fire. We all know the "banjo five string" and the "banjo tenor." How many of us own a "banjo long neck" or a "banjo parts" If you own one you can call it anything you want. ... but please don't cut the rim, as it will destroy the value to collectors banjo.

Why does someone always have to mention "FIRE" when discussing these instruments??

Interesting topic. What happens if we throw banjo-guitars, guitar-banjos, banjitars, and guitarjos into the mix...?!

quote:

---

Originally posted by mikehalloran

Ok, I'll bite:

Q — What Is It's Proper Name?

A — The worst of both worlds.

I love 5 strings, piccolos, lady banjos, plectrums, tenors, plectrum-tenors (Gibson PT), ukulele banjos, cello 5 strings, cello 4 strings, tango banjos, long necks...

Love'm almost all except for the mandolin-banjo-mandolin. I've never played one that I could stand. Ok, truth to tell, I'm not fond of the banjo bass either, 

 

---

I agree with you. I love and play both banjo and mandolin, and perhaps that's why I dislike the sound of a mandolin banjo. They are even worse than resonator mandolins. As far as I'm concerned, they work best outdoors in a street corner blues or jazz band where that extra volume and bite helps cut through the mix with the horns. They don't sound good, but they sound loud.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alvin Conder

Didn’t Jonathan Swift write about almost the exact same thing…except in relationship to cracking eggs…

---

Jonathan was a good satire writer, and his mom, TAYLOR, is a fairly successful song writer, as is his son, Sweet baby James.

But my favorite Swift is Jonathan's twin brother,  Tom, the inventor of the cellphone camera,  back in 1914.

Gibson did not exactly set any standard for Banjos in that era.  They did not produce any banjos until aroun 1918 when they began to make mando banjos and tenor banjos and did not make a five string banjo until about 1920.

In the period discussed they were neither the authoritative, nor the major company producing 5 string banjos, or considered to top of the line company doing that, even if the use of Gibsons by Earl in the post war period made Gibson popular among bluegrass banjoists.

---

Originally posted by RB-1

To me the Standard of Things -banjo wise- is Gibson pre-1945.

So if they were listing a banjo as "Mandolin Banjo MB-3", to me that more or less settles it.

 

---

great to hear you are still at it John,  There is a wonderful generosity to the seriousness that you tackle these problema and this issue.,  if I see you posting here I immediate print the who discourse out in PDF.

As I see it there were a whole set of banjo and mandolin combinations especially in the period between 1905 and 1920, including a number of instruments that no longer are extant, or that did not last.  The banjolin is one that comes to mind.  I also believe the melody banjo belongs in this school and from the work I did on the Clef Clubbers, it seemed that there were two or three mandolin-derived banjos that appear in pictures of Clef club units besides what might properly be called a mandolin banjo

Being from Hartford, I am curious to what degree Ferris' instruments had any impact on the story as a whole with the major makers such as they were.  

But  I am just happy to see you are still at it John.  I feel very thankful for all you have done over the years about getting this corner of banjo history straight.  Thanks for all

Joel you know this is not right!    The tenor banjo is one of the descendants NOT of the Mandolin but of the Mandola.  The tenor banjo was created by Mandola banjoists, transforming their 8 string banjos into 4 string banjos, and by instrument makers and banjoists agreeing to a standard for this.

Years ago the great Ed Britt led a discourse which may still be here on the Hangout, but which I think I have somewhere on my hard drive, on the origin of the tenor.

Thanks for all you do.   If we had only 5 more Joel Hooks and 5 more John Holts,  there would be less confusion in the banjo world!

---

Originally posted by Joel Hooks

Considering that it is fundamentally a mandolin and only “banjo” in body construction to take advantage of the membrane soundboard, it is a mandolin first and period and “banjo” only in marketing.

Likewise, the “tenor banjo” is a descendent of the mandolin, and is a “tenor banjo” and not a “banjo tenor”.

---

John I always wondered why the used the K? Was Gretsch originally operating in Germany>  Gus Cannon obtained a Broadkaster 5 with the money Sam Charters and others got for him from Walk Right In.  Gretsch started calling it a "Bacon" Broadkaster and even briefly made a Broadkaster guitar!

Thanks for your example John

It seems that in 1887, the body then neck rule was already in place.