Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

bobouz

All Access
  • Content Count

    3,842
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

bobouz last won the day on February 9 2018

bobouz had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

258 Good

About bobouz

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The guitar needs to assessed in-hand re it’s structural integrity. Aside from that, I would add that the highest probability is that it was manufactured in 1968.
  2. So very different guitars, it’s almost required to own both! It’s more of a chore to find a stellar J-185, but when you do, they’re hard to tonally purge from your mind. The good news is, you already know what your next guitar should be. For me (substitute a J-50 for the J-45), they would be the last guitars standing if I were forced to thin the herd. Oh & btw, congrats on acquiring the J-45!
  3. Rb, you truly saved the day on that one! Reminds me of a similar Antiques Roadshow piece from a few years back where a woman brought in a mandolin that belonged to a relative & was found in the attic, iirc. They open the case, and there sits a gorgeous Loar signed F-5! It was a real jaw-dropper, and she eventually sold/auctioned it off, but I don’t recall the selling price. The nice thing about oval holed F-2 & fancier F-4 models from the ‘20s is that you get the same exquisite build quality, but they remain reasonably affordable for the average human being!
  4. Coming late to this thread - What a wonderful story and instrument! Wanted to mention that your Grandma's mandolin is an F-2. These were in production many years before Lloyd Loar arrived at Gibson, but her F-2 has a truss rod, which first appeared in late 1921, and became a standard feature on many models in 1922. This means that it might have been from the early to mid '20s (which is indeed when Loar was roaming the floor at Gibson), but the F-2 remained in production until 1934, and the headstock logo on hers looks like a later one to my eye. Although Loar was only involved directly
  5. Admittedly, aesthetics are important to me - and to my eye, that top is flat out gorgeous! Bold grain lines with no runout..... perfect.
  6. Tom should be able to tell you a lot when he can access the pictures. The photos did come up for me, and although my knowledge is quite limited on these, it appears to be a TB-4 from the '20s. The original tuners have been replaced. One thing I can tell you with some certainty, is that it's value to players & collectors will not be up in the stratosphere of banjodom. It's design predates the classic Gibson banjos which have the head of the instrument resting on a tone ring (typically mounted on a 3-ply maple rim).
  7. Well, greed & marketing sillines. Guitar manufacturers have been doing this for a long time, with signature models & the like. It’s ridiculous, but what’s really frustrating is when one of these overpriced beasts has the exact features you’ve been looking for!
  8. My CJ-165 is from 2007, with a cutaway & soundhole electronics: Waist = 9” Upper bout = 10-7/8” Lower bout = just under 15” Body length = 18-1/2” Dimensions on Gibson’s recent Parlor model should be similar, with the exception of a deeper body on the CJ-165.
  9. There are a number of interesting electrics in there, but imho, the prices don't seem all that friendly.
  10. For comparative purposes, I keep returning to Martin’s binding issue because it has been such a frequent problem on USA-made models from, I believe, around 2012 on..... and to date, it still appears to be happening to very recent production examples. Indeed, every guitar manufacturer will have their build quality issues from time to time. But Martin’s binding problem & frequent neck resets on recent production instruments translate into ongoing systemic issues of a more serious nature (which imho, have been inadequately addressed by the company).
  11. This could just as easily have been caused by someone accidentally bumping the end of the nut against a piece of furniture, etc. As much as you feel obliged at every opportunity to point a finger at Gibson for real or perceived quality control issues which are typically minor in nature, I feel obliged to again point out that on the day one of your Martins starts to pop it’s binding at the waist, you will know unequivocally that Nazareth was to blame.
  12. About a week ago, I woke from a dream in which my ‘60s brain was singing the old Tremoloes hit from the ‘60s - Here Comes My Baby. Had to hear it, so I popped it up on YouTube, and along with the Tremoloes version I had rolling around in my head, there was the same tune being done by Cat Stevens! Even though I once had the Matthew & Son album, I had no recollection of him writing & singing this song. Don’t know why it surfaced in a dream after all these years, but I’m glad it did!
  13. That’s my understanding, too. I didn’t mean exceedingly rare, but rare from the standpoint that they were only produced that way for a few years in the ‘30s. When Fender still owned Guild in 2013, they released the Korean-made A-150b archtop, with a pressed solid spruce top & X-bracing (based on a early Hoboken design). I picked one up & still have it today. It does a reasonably credible job of recreating that ‘30s tone. Fun stuff!
  14. Yes, I get that, but appreciated the post & also wanted to share a little info. These X-braced arch tops from the ‘30s are rather rare. Too bad about the price!
  15. Thanks for sharing the info. I'd certainly be interested if the price hovered within the realm of affordability - in particular because this one is X-braced (which was only done by Gibson for a specific period of time in the '30s). I used to own a carved-top 1930s Ward archtop (made by Gibson) that was X-braced, and I found the tone to be very appealing. Might still have it today if the neck had not been a huge V-shaped affair. Bought it at a flea market in the '70s, at a price that was a bit more reasonable: something south of $25.00.
×
×
  • Create New...