Martin vs. Favilla sopranos: Share your experiences.

Sanfe

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 5, 2014
Messages
96
Reaction score
0
Location
SoCal
I have played a few Favilla sopranos quite extensively and have played Martin sopranos of a similar vintage here n' there. My impressions is that they're pretty similar sounding.

The Favillas I've played sounded different form each other but seem to share a soft top-end sound to them. Meaning, the highs sounded velvety and warmer (WTH am I saying?) compared to some K-brands I've played which can sound really bright and in your face.

I liked the presence of bass in the Favillas that the Ks I've played seemed to lack.

One Favilla had a prominent mid-range bark to it.

The few times I played a Martin soprano from a similar era, I sensed that they shared similar characteristics: a warmer sound than the Ks I've played. I guess this can be attributed to the mahogany vs. koa construction.

I would like to hear from people who've played a lot of both Favillas and Martin sopranos. I accept the idea that within the same brand and era, there can be unique characteristics from one to the other. But assuming that there is a general shared characteristic from these ukuleles from their respective eras, has anyone noticed and glaring differences?

How about in neck size and playability?
 
Last edited:
I have two Martin Style 1s from roughly the 50s and I have one four-dot Favilla from the 50s that looks a lot like the other two. I have Worth brown mediums on all three. I can't tell the difference between them with my eyes closed. Someone else might, but I sure can't. They all have the same set-up, so they all play they same.

I've got a Gretsch soprano from the 50s that sounds good, but not like the Martins/Favilla.

Old Kamaka pineapples have a sound like the Martins/Favillas, but I agree that they are possibly brighter.

JMHO. :)
 
One day my daughter asked me if everyone saw the same colour in the same way. My reply was that they did. HA! I had a cataract removed from one eye. What a difference right within my own head. It was astounding.! I now wear two hearing aids. They have different settings which I can choose. I can make adaptations to my environment and my own mood. To those without such technology, they are stuck with what they have naturally. (Yes..I did get the other eye upgraded). Why are we so concerned about how it sounds to other people who may or may not be auditorally competent. The other daughter is a dynamic pianist. If you think shopping for a ukulele is a challenge, try it with a piano. One day she made the pronouncement "THIS is MY piano. I can hear it as clearly at the keyboard as if I am in front of the open lid." We bought it for her. 28 years later, it still sits in her living room. She uses it for lessons with her students at home. At the college where she teaches, she uses theirs. Perhaps we should adapt 'follow your heart" to "follow your ears".
 
Good point CraftedCow. It's amusing how some perceive tone based on price and brand but are fooled by a blind test. Guitar forums are great for this. The high end acoustic vs their eastern equivalent makes for great threads. Much backtracking once the play order is revealed. :rolleyes:

I wondered if the 30's Martin style 0's are similar to the 60's style 0's. ukeval did a Flavilla/Bruko/Martin test. I remember being surprised by the Flavilla at the time having not heard of the brand.

https://youtu.be/PCgM9inKIuc
 
I have a 20's Gibson, sounds like any of the Martins and/or Favillas I have played. Solid mahogany with lots of bark in the voice.
 
I have a c. 1940 Martin style 3M and a similar vintage Favilla. I think the Martin has a bit more subdued tone and the Favilla is louder and more forward, plus a little brighter. The Martin has fairly newish Worth Brown lights and the Favilla has ancient WBL but not a lot of play time on them. The Favilla has a wider waist and the body is about 1/4 inch or so longer, but the Martin is deeper and has a curved back, where the Favilla's back is flat. The Favilla has an ebony saddle as does the Martin, but the Martin has a bone nut where the Favilla has ebony. The Favilla overall has a little more of a snap to the strings, probably just my playing because the action is higher. The Martin has an ebony fretboard, the Favilla's is rosewood. Both have roughly the same degree of sustain, the Favilla seems to have more resonance.

The Favilla's fretboard ends at the body, the Martin has 17 frets thus an extension. I would guess that the extension makes the difference in volume.

Both sound like mahogany to me, lol. The Martin has a bit more sophistication in the sound, either that or my ears are influeced by what I ended up paying for it.

Regarding sight, seeing color is somewhat subjective. I've known my partner for 14 years, and just recently figured out he may have some color blindness (or he's just ignorant). I'm not sure but maybe the red/green version; he has to ask me if something is blue or green if it's a mix, he can't tell if it's more blue or more green. He also has trouble with orange and pink. As an artist I'm used to looking at and naming shades of color from using paints, so know a lot of the chemical compositions.
 
Last edited:
A lot of ukuleles have passed through my hands. Some Favillas Sopranos sounded equal to Martin Sopranos others not so much. Not knowing the back history of the instruments, you don't know if they were used as a canoe paddle or what. From my experience there seems to be more consistency with Martins. It could be that owners keep better care of their Martins than Favillas. That seems to be the case when comparing the styles to one Martin to another of the same vintage. If reasonably cared for and set up the Style 0 plays as well as a Style 1,2 or 3 up to the 12th fret.
 
Both my samples were abused, the Favilla was attic or garage stored and covered in rat crap, I got it off Craigslist for $20, it's missing its 12th fret wire and has two tight top cracks that disappear with humidification. The Martin had a case but got kicked or the like while out, and had a long side crack and a chunk out. At least they didn't lose the piece. Both appreciated cleaup and repair, both are solid little ukes. But yeah, abuse happens. Both intonate well but I can't compare past the 12th fret (via harmonics on the Favilla).
 
One day my daughter asked me if everyone saw the same colour in the same way. My reply was that they did. HA! I had a cataract removed from one eye. What a difference right within my own head. It was astounding.! I now wear two hearing aids. They have different settings which I can choose. I can make adaptations to my environment and my own mood. To those without such technology, they are stuck with what they have naturally. (Yes..I did get the other eye upgraded). Why are we so concerned about how it sounds to other people who may or may not be auditorally competent. The other daughter is a dynamic pianist. If you think shopping for a ukulele is a challenge, try it with a piano. One day she made the pronouncement "THIS is MY piano. I can hear it as clearly at the keyboard as if I am in front of the open lid." We bought it for her. 28 years later, it still sits in her living room. She uses it for lessons with her students at home. At the college where she teaches, she uses theirs. Perhaps we should adapt 'follow your heart" to "follow your ears".

I completely understand what you're saying, and for the most part, completely agree that subjective perception can really make asking for opinions, especially on the internet, a futile endeavor.

The intention of my original post comes from a less than honorable motivation: I just want to own a Martin. Seems like if one is going to own old ukuleles, one must at least have a Martin in the stable.

But I also have the uncanny ability to reason myself out of purchases and keep my money in my wallet. So, what makes my post even more foolish is that I'm trying to reason myself into buying a Martin.

So what you guys are witnessing here is the back-n-forth that goes on in my head on the topic of whether to spend money on a Martin when I already have, what I consider, fine ukuleles.

In short, I'm fighting what you guys call UAS. The thing is, I usually win. But this time, I'm wondering if I should relent, subject myself to UAS, and buy a Martin to round out the "collection."

But I'm totally with you on how we all perceive things differently. So hard to accept on a lager scale especially when it comes to people. Just as it is with Martins and Favillas, it is with people: there are all kinds . . . How labels fool us into thinking otherwise.
 
I have two Martin Style 1s from roughly the 50s and I have one four-dot Favilla from the 50s that looks a lot like the other two. I have Worth brown mediums on all three. I can't tell the difference between them with my eyes closed. Someone else might, but I sure can't. They all have the same set-up, so they all play they same.

I've got a Gretsch soprano from the 50s that sounds good, but not like the Martins/Favilla.

Old Kamaka pineapples have a sound like the Martins/Favillas, but I agree that they are possibly brighter.

JMHO. :)

Oh no . . . You had to mention Gretsch . . .

Okay, so based on your experience, they're similar to Martins and Favillas, but not as good? Now you got me curious. Can you describe the difference?

But from your post, you would put Favillas and Martins in the same category?
 
A lot of ukuleles have passed through my hands. Some Favillas Sopranos sounded equal to Martin Sopranos others not so much. Not knowing the back history of the instruments, you don't know if they were used as a canoe paddle or what. From my experience there seems to be more consistency with Martins. It could be that owners keep better care of their Martins than Favillas. That seems to be the case when comparing the styles to one Martin to another of the same vintage. If reasonably cared for and set up the Style 0 plays as well as a Style 1,2 or 3 up to the 12th fret.

Ahh, and the man who's responsible for my current strife.

Dear Mr. Spongeuke, your ad selling all those Martins has been killing me. And yet who better than you to chime in? I'm still kicking myself for not jumping on that less-than-perfect 3M you had for sale a few months ago. I wish I had the luck to come across abused vintage instruments. (Though water-logged samples may make me think twice.)
 
I have a c. 1940 Martin style 3M and a similar vintage Favilla. I think the Martin has a bit more subdued tone and the Favilla is louder and more forward, plus a little brighter . . .

Both sound like mahogany to me, lol. The Martin has a bit more sophistication in the sound, either that or my ears are influeced by what I ended up paying for it.

Funny, that was my experience too. The Favillas I've played were more in-your-face, whereas the Martins were more mature sounding.

Regarding sight, seeing color is somewhat subjective. I've known my partner for 14 years, and just recently figured out he may have some color blindness (or he's just ignorant). I'm not sure but maybe the red/green version; he has to ask me if something is blue or green if it's a mix, he can't tell if it's more blue or more green. He also has trouble with orange and pink. As an artist I'm used to looking at and naming shades of color from using paints, so know a lot of the chemical compositions.

As mentioned earlier, I have colorblindness too. And to think I thought about majoring in art when I was younger . . . My biggest problems are blues and purples, and dark-greens and browns. Once in a while, grays and pinks . . .
 
Top Bottom