benstang

Sorry its not a Gibson! I have Gibson(s) too. Its a 1999 Larrivee L5 the bridge is glued on - no screws. The open crack just barely lets a sheet of paper in at its widest spot so seems kind of dramatic to open it further without trying to cleat and seal first. I'll try some more moisture as well. I guess if the attempt fails this more aggressive option is available. No material that can bridge that .003-.004 gap? Thank you for sharing - and caring.

Got this guitar recently and the top cracks were quite evident - it was presented that they were humidity cracks and had been previously repaired by a local shop. I'm now trying to figure out what really happened, (or didn't happen). one of these cracks is clearly open - a sliver of light shines through with a bright light shinning from inside. The other crack allows NO light. I took some pics with a borescope inside the guitar and the one crack is evident on the inside as well. But the other crack shows NO evidence at all of a crack. Also neither "crack" seems to show any evidence of a repair being done - no glue residue anywhere. Does that make sense? the open crack I can just barely get a piece of paper to slide in. The humidity is good so I don't know if I can get it any tighter. I tried clamping the sides and it does not seem to close the crack any further so I'm tempted to leave as is. Its a poly finish guitar (Larrivee - sorry) My plan is to use CA (Glu boost) to fill the one through crack as well as both of the finish cracks on top. Am I missing something? top view (cracks are 8 grains below and 11 above the center seam) this is the inside view of the top crack (center seam is the white line in the upper right corner). I dont see any witness of crack or repair... this is the lower crack - clearly a crack but does not look like any repair has been attempted... any thoughts or input appreciated.

thanks again - I tried to sign up on that forum and had technical difficulties...

Hi - my "sandwich" comment was a general one - all guitars have the bridge/top/bridge plate stack that is glued together, so would one more glue joint really matter. I will check out that forum (even though its a Gibson, lol)

Thanks for the feedback. In my original note I said need to raise the bridge/saddle combo by .01". The correct amount is actually .1" (2.5mm) . As it has been shaved down, I don't think the current bridge slot is deep enough to hold a saddle that much taller. That's why I'm thinking to raise the whole bridge. Also looking to do this myself and seems like a lot less room for error to add on the bottom than make a whole new bridge, locate the holes, etc. Its a nice guitar, but a refinish is underway so its never going to be super valuable. The bridge assembly is a glued together sandwich of bridge, top and bridge plate, so will one more glue joint make that big a difference? One thing on my mind is that the wings of the rebuilt bridge would be thicker (from 0.1" to about 0.16") which may change a the way it shakes the top a little bit. That might actually help? I also figure a pic can help. The height of the bridge is right about 0.2" now and total height of strings over the soundboard is under .4". I'd like to get the string up to .5" and planning to do that by thickening the whole bridge by .065 and running the saddle .035 higher.

My LG2 got a bit of a bridge shave to lower the action and could probably use a neck reset at some point soon. Have not been able to source a replacement bridge (the small rectangle one from early 50s LG2s so options are to have a new one fabricated or find a way to recycle. Is it reasonable to remove the bridge and install a spacer on the bottom? probably needs 0.01" or a shade more. I'd use rosewood to match the bridge. There is still enough slot to hold a moderately high saddle. This seems like a pretty/obvious easy fix, but I've not seen anyone ever chat about it, so maybe I'm missing something. Also, does a neck reset typically change the geometry enough that you need to relocate the saddle? Or can shaping the saddle typically get you intonated. Thanks for any ideas / inputs.

The top measures .011" at the back of the soundhole - the only place I can get a good measurement. And the bracing is (as far as I know) standard X-bracing for a 1951 LG-2. The bracing all seems intact from wiggling it - nothing is loose enough to move, and tapping around the soundboard does not yield any loose noises either. The guitar is not particularly "lively" or reverberant when played - but thats another whole can o' worms I think. thanks for your help.

Looks great. I have thought about going all the way to a natural finish, but I'd still need to deal with those scratches. How much sanding did this guitar need? Thanks

I'm a DIY 'er and have re finished about 10 guitars over the years. I like putting my stamp and a little elbow grease into my instruments and have always been happy with the results I recently picked up a 1951 LG-2 that had previously been refinished ( its already been done - so no need to tell me NOT to do it 😗). Some pretty bad "relic" work had been done with an exacto knife ? to simulate lacquer cracks and I decided I didn't want to live with it that way. I've carefully sanded back the finish and found that many of the cuts go a little ways into the wood. Does anyone have any advice on how to proceed? My plan is to bring it back as close to the original burst finish as I can get to. The black outer ring doesn't worry me too much but there are a few scratches in the lighter areas in front and behind the bridge that are filled in with some darkness and will look like crap through the new finish. I expect these can be sanded out as they aren't super deep, just not sure how much wood I can remove safely. I'd greatly appreciate any tips, tricks, advice on this one. pictures are the area just in front of the bridge. The condition behind the bridge is similar. Should I keep sanding? I tried soaking the black lines with some lacquer thinner on a q-tip but it did not really help.