ksdaddy

I don't believe they are making any carved archtops, or any plywood archtops for that matter. When I was at the Gibson Garage in October, the gentleman I spoke with said he didn't know of any plans to begin again. That sounded worse than I meant it. He stated there was not a plan in place to begin production again, with (my injected) caveat that things can change with a phone call.

Volute puts it 1970 or later.

Last time I heard from Hogeye was 2022. He was encouraging me to bring a u-haul to Bozeman so I could buy out the contents of his storage shed. I drive 150 miles and I’m ready for a nap.

As it pertains to “contract” stuff like the Cromwell, Recording King, etc, and the high probability that some or most would have pressed tops, I wonder, did Gibson even have the equipment to produce pressed tops? Obviously they did later on, what with the huge number of ES models produced, but in the 30s, did they have the equipment? Or for the purposes of producing pressed guitars, might it have been easier to just buy them from Kay? Sometimes more questions are produced than answers.

Addendum: I stand by what I said about the Kay f holes but those are NOT Kay rims. Too rounded at the shoulder.

I once played a Kalamazoo archtop from this era. It was a smaller bodied one, 14-1/2” or so, kinda odd shaped. I think the L-30 and ES-100 might have shared the same body mold. What I do remember is that the F holes looked exactly like the ones on this Cromwell, which is exactly like the F holes on virtually every 15” Kay archtop in existence. (Even some 17” Kays, but more rare) Makes me wonder, in the mishmash of “sorta Gibsons” that have been made in the 30s and 40s, could Gibson have just bought pre-pressed and stamped tops from Kay in Chicago?

I’m very sorry to hear of your loss. I went through it in 2011. I learned firsthand that there are no words to convey to anyone the feelings you went through.

I’ve seen that pickup before, I just can’t place it. The mounting bracket is quite wide and angles downward, as you might guess looking at the mounting screws.

They did offer an L-7E in the late 40s, early 50s, but they’re scarce. Gibson tailpieces…. inconsistent at best. Don’t go by that.

What was OJ’s favorite soft drink? Slice

He died just before he was going to get remarried. He wanted to take another stab at it.

OJ’s casket will fit him like a glove.

Not a 350. They didn’t make a non cutaway. The non cutaway version would be an ES-300 but that would have a P90 with top mounted controls. It does resemble a Super 300 but it’s difficult to tell at that weird angle. A “Super” (300 or 400) both have markedly longer headstocks and the f-holes are more vertically oriented, both attributes being not really clear in the photo. The Supers are also 18” across. Doesn’t look that big in the pic. An L-4 is 16”. If I were on the witness stand I would say it it an L7.

Fair enough, but I think that criteria was changed at some point, as #1, I’ve sold a few “brand new” items on reverb before and their description was more generic, i.e. “new, unused and in the original packaging” with no mention of warranty or being a dealer. #2, had I known about this change I would have abided by it. Bad on me for not re-reading the rules every time I list something 😉 . I’m a scofflaw but if I’m picking the hill to die on, it will be more of a capital offense, so at least I get my name in the paper.

My youngest daughter got this one with her DSLR.