Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

brians356

Members
  • Posts

    371
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

3 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. Guitar@OZ (got a name?): You might be interested in putting some metrics to the neck set and action, for your own edification: 1) Verify (and possibly adjust truss rod to attain) a reasonable neck relief. Capo at first fret, hold down a string at 15th fret, and see that there is a slight gap, about the thickness of a high E string, between the string and the top of the 7th or 8th fret. If there is no gap at all, stop. The neck could be back-bowed. You should have at least a slight gap, up to .010" is typical, but even .015" is not exessive. 2) Leaving the capo on 1st fret, measure the space between low E string and top of 13th fret to nearest 1/64". 3) Measure from top of bridge to bottom of low E string at front of the saddle, to nearest 1/64". The "ideal" is a saddle height twice the 13th fret string height. E.g. if the 13th fret value was 6/64", then 12/64" or 6/32" at the saddle for the same string is "ideal." However, saddle heights considerably lower, 75% or even 50% of ideal, is typical and not considered a problem by many. But when when it approaches 50% (e.g. 6/64" in this example, or equal to the 13th fret value) or lower, it is a definite candidate for a neck reset. Note that this method is a more precise proxy for the common method of laying a straightedge on the frets and seeing where the edge hits the bridge. "Ideally" the edge just touches the top of the bridge or base of the saddle (assuming the bridge hasn't been shaved!) which is equivalent to saddle height = 2x 13th fret string height. Simple geometry at play here. Now you see why shaving a saddle is a way to cheat and "restore" proper neck angle!
  2. With all due respect to Freddie Green, RIP, who was a great rhythm guitarist, he either didn't know squat about guitar tech, or he is being misrepresented here.
  3. I'd like to get it alongside my original "under the bed" '57 for comparison. Does it have ladder bracing? Brian
  4. The chap who makes Fret Doctor oil writes this about so-called "lemon oil": Lemon Oil, Almond oil, Walnut oil, etc., if food grade, are probably O.K., but make sure they don't contain solvents like naphtha or other petroleum distillates. Solvents can weaken any adhesives used in instrument construction. Be aware that most "lemon oils" are no more than lemon-scented mineral oil, as are most bore oils. Real lemon oil is quite acidic, with a pH of 3.7 to 4.2. It is an effective cleaner, but wipe it off when you are finished. Rosewood oil does not even come from the same plant that your fretboard wood came from, not even the same country! It is consists mostly of an aromatic solvent with a Rosewood oil scent added.
  5. Google "FretDoctor" and read up on the oil he sells. It was originally developed as bore oil for woodwind instruments like clarinets, oboes, and wooden flutes, to keep them from drying out. Is is not cheap but a small bottle will last you a lifetime, as a drop goes a long way. He makes a good case that the popular oils used on instruments all have severe drawbacks or limitations. Read and decide for yourself. I bought some, and I am a supreme cynic.
  6. Chaps, you must consider this was 1946, a very odd transition period in the US labor force. Although WW-II was over, millions of men were still in uniform, and many jobs normally filled by men were still filled by women. This of course reverted back to "normal" as servicemen returned to the civilan workforce in large numbers, and women were "repatriated" to their then customary roles as "homemakers." This is not to say that women couldn't or didn't perform at least as well as men at skilled labor, it's just that there were disruptions and discontinuities that could affect quality control. This period in the Gibson workshop could probably be charitably described as "chaotic." And remember that the country had not recovered from severe materiel conscriptions which included steel and spruce. Believe it or not, spruce was still a strategic material even though combat aircraft had evolved to largely metal construction. Some boats and patrol aircraft were still made from spruce and canvas. Finally, the LG series of guitars were the lowest grade of Gibson guitars, and we can rightly assume that the lowest grade of workers were assigned to build them.
  7. It would be great for Ren to explain how to tell when a post-war LG without FON was made. Maybe you could take notes and get back to this forum? You might get to him to write the year of mfgr. and autograph it inside. It would be to ask him to anyway, to make him laugh.
  8. John, Ok, did that. Anything in particular you wanted me to check? Since the original silkscreening on headstock is gone, I don't know if it was a Banner guitar or not. My LG-3 has tapered headstock, tortois guard, bridge is non-belly, I think "rounded" wings if I understand the pics, but not through-saddle! Tuners are Kluson "3 pl 3*" with the waffle-pattern brass rivet heads. Mahogany body and neck (w/ adj. truss), spruce top. And of course, no FON. There is a very faint three-digit number pressed lightly into the back of the headstock: 777 I owned the guitar 25 years before noticing that 777. ???
  9. If you try to sell it, call it a 1946 LG-2, no one can possibly dispute it from the evidence, and a '46 will fetch the highest "post-war" price. In fact, I'll give you $2,000 for it right now. Ok, I'll give you a little more than that. TM, you seem to know these guitars, I have an LG-3 that has no numbers inside. Also, the headstock logo has been replaced with a crude substitute, so I don't know what the original looked like. It has the rectangular bridge and tapered headstock. Which years did Gibson often fail to ink a serial number inside the guitars? 46 through '51? Or can it be narrowed down more?
×
×
  • Create New...