ksdaddy Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 It's clearly been refinished and not in a correct manner. The price is wonderful for an L-5 but then I would spend....(how much?).... having it RE-refinished. How much would a blonde refinish cost? $1000? $2000? Should I just spend 5K on an original one? Budget L-5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slimt Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 I think if big money is going to be spent. It should be original . just my thoughts. A while back i bought a 68 l5c refined top and a couple repairs narrow nut. 2500.00 was the purchase price. I would be lucky to see that on a resale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksdaddy Posted October 6, 2016 Author Share Posted October 6, 2016 If it's collecting dust then maybe we can talk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave F Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 That one will be gone very shortly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvi Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 find a different one, just my 2 cents worth J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobouz Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 The top bracing changed in mid 1939, from X-braced to parallel bars. If this guitar is truly a '37, it should be X-braced, and that would be very interesting to hear. Used to have a '30s Wards made by Gibson, with a carved & X-braced top. Tonally a wonderful guitar, but I let it go in the early '80s, in pursuit of something in trade. After all these years, the enjoyable sound of that one still sticks in my mind's eye (or ear!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksdaddy Posted October 6, 2016 Author Share Posted October 6, 2016 I'm scared of X braced archtops. I had a 1935 L-7 with a concave top. Traded it in with no net loss. Earlier this year I briefly owned a 1992 Heritage Golden Eagle with a caved in top. I took a $700 bath on that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L5Larry Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 ... If this guitar is truly a '37, it should be X-braced,... This guitar IS NOT a '37, more likely a '47 (and even says so down in the "specs" portion of the ad), and also states it's a 17", which rules out '37 (the "Advanced" 17" L-5 was introduced '39/40). This also rules out any possibility of X-bracing, they were (and still are) ladder-braced. The serial number is unreadable in the photo, and NOT an "A" number which started around April of 1947, but the 99,XXX's would still be early '47. The headstock logo shown was also used until mid/late '47 The rosewood bridge and saddle look to be StewMac parts, although some early (1940ish) "advanced" models did have a rosewood bridge and saddle. It looks to have been re-fretted with visegrips and a roofing hammer. Then there are the soundboard cracks, and this is what would concern me the most, as it is an "acoustic" guitar. I'm not of the opinion that it is definitely a re-fin. Gibson's bursts were all over the place back then, and I would say that if anything, this one looks too good to have been done in the post-war Gibson paint shop. The finish also looks to be in really good shape for being 70 years old, so..... who knows. Refinishing an L-5 in sunburst is an incredibly tedious process, with all the bindings and inlays. Very expensive too. In my opinion, the asking price DOES reflect the condition of the guitar, and as has been said above, someone will pay it. It just wouldn't be me. As you can buy sunburst L-5CES's all day long for around $5k, you probably won't find a L-5 acoustic, or L-5C (acoustic cutaway), for that price, especially in natural. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.