73 year old Banner J-45, basically mint

[Lars68]

This guitar is in unreal condition, considering its age. I would not dare play it!

 

http://www.folkwaymusic.com/vintage-instruments/gibson-guitars/1944-gibson-banner-j45-maple-0217/

 

Lars

[j45nick]

The condition of that guitar is surreal, but there are also a couple of oddities. Looks at the shape of that bridge in the closeups. I have never seen another exactly like that, with a sloped,curving transition to the wings.

 

Not sure what the "beanwood" is that is used of the fretboard, but it may or may not be as wear-resistant as rosewood, which could be an issue if you really want to play the guitar.

 

I've only played a couple of maple banner J-45's, and they are different. At least to my ear, they don't have the warmth of a mahogany J-45, although they can have very pronounced trebles.

 

It's a beautiful guitar, but I'd almost prefer one with a little bit of playwear so I would feel less guilty playing it. But I wouldn't turn it down.

 

Wonder what it sold for?

[EuroAussie]

How much was it going for Lars ?

 

Actually, i dont find it that appealing. One of the things I love about the banners Gibsons is all the dings, scratches and mojo they come with, its part of the package.

[Buc McMaster]

Mother Mary and Joseph! Pristine. Just wow.

 

And here's a kick in the pants:

 

".........considering that the guitar has never been humidified or otherwise babied through 73 Canadian winters, its outstanding condition is that much more unbelievable."

 

It seems worries over humidity are greatly overblown.

[OldCowboy]

Truly amazing 'time travel' guitar! I hope that whoever purchased it does it justice, one way or another.

[fortyearspickn]

Looks like it's already sold. Definitely an exciting find. Hopefully going to a collector or a collection. Too special to treat as a 'player 'in the hands of a duffer like me.

[Lars68]

I sometimes lurk on the UMGF, and found out about the guitar from this thread.

 

http://theunofficialmartinguitarforum.yuku.com/topic/184074/Maple-Banner-J45-at-Folkway-WOW?page=1#.WL2Ch9I0OUk

 

The new owner is a member of the UMGF and shares some info about the guitar in the thread.

 

It's an interesting piece, but like EA, I find that a big part of the charm in having a vintage guitar is the mojo that comes with age. That guitar is too clean for me. I think that the right amount of wear looks cool!

 

Lars

[j45nick]

I sometimes lurk on the UMGF, and found out about the guitar from this thread.

 

http://theunofficialmartinguitarforum.yuku.com/topic/184074/Maple-Banner-J45-at-Folkway-WOW?page=1#.WL2Ch9I0OUk

 

The new owner is a member of the UMGF and shares some info about the guitar in the thread.

 

It's an interesting piece, but like EA, I find that a big part of the charm in having a vintage guitar is the mojo that comes with age. That guitar is too clean for me. I think that the right amount of wear looks cool!

 

Lars

Going through the thread on UMGF, someone else pointed out the same anomaly I saw in the bridge shape. It's a new one on me.

[kidblast]

It seems worries over humidity are greatly overblown.

 

well it did get a neck reset..

 

but this is an endless debate that never really gets answered one way or another.

 

I guess it's up for discussion if the the difference on modern guitars is the finish thickness and materials used.

[Buc McMaster]

well it did get a neck reset............but this is an endless debate that never really gets answered one way or another.

 

Cold, dry conditions such as those during a Canadian winter are what we would expect to cause top cracks, loose braces, sunken tops and the like. Heck it may have needed a neck rest when new........not likely, but possible. I have always wondered how great examples of instruments from the 30s-50s survived in excellent structural condition without the feverish fretting over humidity that abounds today. But you are correct that the debate is endless..............

 

Regardless of what it's made of or how it survived, it is still a wonderful piece of history.

[sbpark]

This guitar is in unreal condition, considering its age. I would not dare play it!

 

http://www.folkwaymusic.com/vintage-instruments/gibson-guitars/1944-gibson-banner-j45-maple-0217/

 

Lars

 

I used to be skittish and worried about playing vintage guitars (not that I've owned many or played a ton of them). But the few chances I have I realized that they've been around longer than me, and they've been through way more than what I'm about to do to them which is just strum some chords and pick some notes. It's not going to implode and crumble in your hands. It's meant to be played!

[tpbiii]

The comparative rarity of maple J-45s has driven the price up quite high because of the "collector" effect. Overall, maple flat top guitars have always been a bit of a sonic mystery to me. It is one of those mysteries that could be studied using the same techniques we used understand audibility of signals in noise, so careful spectral analysis and the application of critical band masking theory should tell the tale -- but that sounds too much like work at my age.

 

In addition to the spectral properties of the guitar, the audibility of the guitar is effected by its volume, the acoustic environment in with it is being played, and background noise. In this sentence, the "noise" would also incluse the other instruments in an acoustic band or jam.

 

So what is the effect. If you play a maple flat top solo, and compare it to similar RW and mahogany guitars, then it sounds relatively bright and loud -- something you would expect to "cut" in an acoustic string band or a jam with other guitars. But when you actually play in those environments, the effect is the opposite -- RW cuts best, mahogany cuts well, and maple gets buried.

 

This effect broke my heart many. many years ago when I fell in love with the solo sound of a couple of maple flat tops (34 HG-Century and 36 L-Century) at home and then had them fail when we took them out to jam (and show off).

 

I guess another feature of maple Gibsons flat tops from 1933 to 1969 is that most of them are plywood. I am not sure why that is true -- does someone know? Wood property issues? The general effect of plywood back and sides in general is to reduce volume.

 

I have never really studied the world of maple archtops. That seems like a whole different deal -- different sound pallet and different band applications.

 

-Tom

[JuanCarlosVejar]

For a maple lover like myself this guitar is a dream.

Vintage circa now 😂😂😂😂

 

 

If only it were a lefty

 

 

Don and the guys in Bozeman need to catscan that thing

 

 

 

 

JC

[j45nick]

I guess another feature of maple Gibsons flat tops from 1933 to 1969 is that most of them are plywood. I am not sure why that is true -- does someone know? Wood property issues? The general effect of plywood back and sides in general is to reduce volume.

 

I have never really studied the world of maple archtops. That seems like a whole different deal -- different sound pallet and different band applications.

 

-Tom

 

 

Good points. Most sources say that at least some of the banner maple guitars are ply (maybe unidirectional ply rather than cross-ply?), which would have very different vibration characteristics compared to cross-ply construction. The cross-ply maple bridgeplates Gibson used in the late 1960's and 1970's are notorious tone and volume sinks.

 

Some maple bodies like the J-200's in the 1950's were laminate, I believe, as were some mahogany J-45s (I can't verify that personally) in the same period.

 

The carved solid maple archtop/archback Gibsons like the L-5 and L-7 are different animals, for sure, having being designed specifically to cut through as rhythm instruments in loud ensemble settings like jazz orchestras in the pre-electric days.

 

In any case, maple guitars, no matter how rare, aren't for everyone.

[J-1854Me]

There's a bit of mythology around the topic of laminated backs and sides in older Gibsons that's starting to entrench itself as fact.

 

Not that I have a dog in this fight, so to speak -- it doesn't really matter to me whether "that great-sounding guitar has laminated back/sides/both back and sides -- oh darn!"

 

However, my experience has been that maple Gibson acoustic guitars from the '50s were characteristically made using solid maple backs and often sides too.

 

This banner-era maple J-45, referenced in the OP, is much more likely to have been made using laminated maple b&s, although I cannot recall what Mark Stutman's description of it was on the Folkway website. My recollection is that every maple J-45 and LG of the era was made using laminated maple.

 

But many of the '50s J-200s and J-185s were made using solid. Laminates show up again in the early '60s, with the introduction of the Dove and the maple Hummingbird, and persist even in mahogany backs and/or sides in J-45s, SJs, and so on throughout the '60s and '70s.

 

Fred

[kidblast]

Cold, dry conditions such as those during a Canadian winter are what we would expect to cause top cracks, loose braces, sunken tops and the like. Heck it may have needed a neck rest when new........not likely, but possible. I have always wondered how great examples of instruments from the 30s-50s survived in excellent structural condition without the feverish fretting over humidity that abounds today. But you are correct that the debate is endless..............

 

Regardless of what it's made of or how it survived, it is still a wonderful piece of history.

 

amazing condition for sure.

 

just for a side discussion I have a 1978 Alvarez Yari, granted 30 years younger, but at 40 years old, this guitar is also in incredible condition. Back when I first got this, the whole notion of humidifying guitars I don't even think was a point of discussion never mind a product to buy that would do the job. I can't even remember when the last time was I adjusted the truss rod. I do keep a dampit in there now, from habit more than need.. I don't think it matters if I do, or if I don't.

 

This is what makes me think the EPA friendly materials used for finishes could be part of the equation

 

BTW. the mark on the top just below the sound hole isn't a gouge, I think it's what would be called bear claw in the grain on the spruce top.

[Lars68]

In regards for the need to humidify, I firmly believe that dry wood cracked in 1944 and dry wood wiil crack in 2017. It is a matter of physics. Today we only see the guitars that survived. The ones split and cracked beyond repair along the way are long gone. We don't know anything about the history of this particular guitar. If it spent its entire life in a case in a closet in a frequently used laundry room, it might in fact have accidently been humidified all along. Who knows...

 

Lars

[E-minor7]

Youch, , , almost hurts not to be able to hear and play this one.

It would be highly interesting to know how those many years sit in an untouched guitar.

 

You'll probably get the vintage vibe, but in a stiffer virginal version.

 

So fascinating these needles in the hay still exist here and there on the planet.

This maple slope shines like gold.

Fortunately it seems to have found the right (second) owner.

He intends to play it inside out ~ and may the acoustic saints be with him

[jt]

A good friend in Europe now owns this guitar. Happily, I'll be visiting him sometime this year.

 

As for the laminated back and sides, as I point out in Kalamazoo Gals, these were components destined for Gibson's hollow body electric guitars that were repurposed during the War Production Board's most restrictive periods for use in flattops.