|
Pre War Gibson Banjo
Testing ... Listening to what the Wood has
to Say
I wanted to use one
instrument (or some of it) as a control in
order to isolate the influence that the wood
rim and resonator alone contribute to the
tone and response of a banjo. That is
exactly what I was able to achieve in the
experiment that follows.
I know that my Gibson style 3
banjo sounds good … it sounds older than it
really is, if that makes sense to you. Most
people who play it (including professionals
you would recognize) ask if it is pre-war,
but it isn’t. I am fortunate to have wound
up with a wood rim that sounds good and a
resonator that also sounds good that is
coupled with a good neck and a Huber tone
ring. The combination is great if you like
that fat, classic, Gibson sound.
The wood rim is a stock
Cooperman and it is more responsive than
most of those I have played in the past. The
resonator is one with a poplar core. The
neck is a “V” shaped, mahogany style 3,
leaves and bows inlays and a Brazilian
fingerboard that fits well. The tone ring is
a standard, Steve Huber tone ring, fitted a
little looser than a slip fit. The banjo is
outfitted with a 5/8” Huber bridge and a
Taiwan Remo head, a Presto tailpiece and
D'Addario J69 Light strings. The head was
tuned to between a G and a G# and the action
between the top of the 12th fret
and the bottom of the strings is set to
3/16”.
3 tunes were recorded using
this banjo. This banjo was then dismantled
and the wood rim and resonator were switched
out with those from a 1929 Gibson style 4,
Serial (order) number 9027-38. This banjo’s
wood rim originally had a 40-hole archtop
tone ring, but it has been turned down to
accommodate a flathead tone ring and the
outside was turned and finished to
accommodate a one-piece flange (a horrible
sin to some, I know, but this is exactly the
way it arrived). The fit of the tone ring on
the pre war rim was identical to that of the
Cooperman. The resonator on this 1929 banjo
is mahogany. The banjo was allowed to settle
in for 2 weeks, the setup was checked to
make sure that everything was as identical
as possible, and the same three tunes were
recorded again.
The recorder is a Boss
BR1600CD and the microphone is an Audio-Technica
Pro 37 (phantom powered) mounted in an
Avantone shock mount. The microphone was 9
inches away from the banjo and pointed at
the spot where the neck and the pot meet. I
found this to be the spot that picked up the
best while maintaining as much balance as
possible while eliminating pick noise.
The three tunes that I played
were: John Henry in standard C tuning
(gCGBD), Fire Ball Mail, in G tuning
and the key of G, and Banks of the Ohio
in the key of A (G tuning, capo at 2). This
provided a nice range without having to
record a lot more tunes.
These recordings were done
completely solo and with no special effects
added whatsoever. They are as dry and
unaltered as a desert. What you are hearing
is me playing these banjos, in the same
room, with the same equipment, in the same
chair in the same location, using the same
picks, with the settings exactly the same
for all of the recordings. The beats per
minute are exactly the same for both
versions of the comparable tunes but vary
for each pair of tunes. The head, bridge,
neck, tailpiece, freshness and brand of
strings and everything else is the same with
the exception of the wood rim and
resonator. Any variances are due to the
banjos and any mistakes that I happened to
make while playing.
I found the two versions of
the same banjo were distinctly different
from each other. I can tell you that
changing the tone ring would likely not have
yielded such a dramatic responsive and
timbre difference. This is the most
difficult part of the process … and the
reason for the recording, because it is
impossible to describe, with any
degree of accuracy, things tonal. Knowing
that things are subjective, I would still
like to say that I usually reserve the term
“better” for things that I personally think
work better for me. Well, to me the
pre war parts sound better. It isn’t just
about a difference in volume. Even if the
volume between the two were identical or if
the pre-war parts were diminished in volume
(they were not) I would still like the sound
better. It has a more concentrated depth.
There was a slight increase
in volume with the pre war wood rim and
resonator. There was also the classic, ever
so slight, complex set of overtones that are
indicative of pre war Gibsons. Additionally,
there was an open sounding, ever so slightly
hollow boom present with the pre war
parts. Some people would call that a dryer
sound that is usually associated with J.D.
Crowe.
I highly recommend that
listen to these files through a good set of
speakers or on a headset of good quality in
order to better appreciate them. If
you are looking for a “breakdown” or
“melodic” playing, you should turn
elsewhere. My intention is to allow you to
hear what the banjo sounds like. It isn’t
about how well I can or can’t play or how
fast the playing is or isn’t. I know that
some of you are going to be tempted to tell
me (and others) that you don’t like that
head, those strings, that tailpiece ….
please … that isn’t what this is about. It’s
about the differences in the tone and
response of the wood, not my personal setup
and hardware choices.
Click
Here to experience these audio files
The pre war wood rim will soon
be fitted by Steve Huber with a brand new Huber
H-30 tone ring and my style 3 will return to its
former state of being. I’ll be building a
mahogany neck with hearts and flowers inlay for
the pre war it and I hope to debut it during
Cabin Fever Super Pickin’ Party in Hampton,
Virginia March 4-7, 1010. It should be killer!
Richie Dotson 12/29/2009
|
