bobouz
-
Posts
3,933 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by bobouz
-
-
Great family photo, Bruce!
-
Wonderful guitar, and the top appears to be free of any cracks.
Definitely worthy of a top-notch luthier’s care.
Thanks for sharing!
-
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.
-
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!
-
1 hour ago, rbpicker said:
BTW, the F5 I played was gifted to the owner some years ago by a late uncle. She toted it around in her car for weeks before it appeared at my house one night after she loaned it to a friend of mine. He was going to “work on it” for her. I explained what she had there and pleaded with him to not touch it. He listened and returned it to her. She took it to Elderly for an appraisal. They sold it for 135K.
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!
-
On 7/14/2021 at 5:13 PM, rbpicker said:
I was sort of kidding in my post above regarding Loar. I noted that the mandolin is an oval hole. Did Lloyd Loar only make only f-hole instruments? I’ve seen and played one of his (a ‘24). It was f-hole style, so I don’t know about the others he may have been involved with..... whatever it is it is cool and likely worth a lot of money.
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 in the production of the F-5 master model, most Gibson mandolins from the '20s typically sound very good. As an example, I have a plain-jane 1922 oval-holed 'A' model, and imho, it's tonally a superb instrument - well played, but with no body repairs whatsoever & a dead-on straight ebony fingerboard. So regardless of the exact year of production, your Grandma owned & played one of the finest high-end mandolins out there at the time. Although the F-2 does not command the incredibly high prices of a Loar F-5 model, it remains a highly desirable instrument.
One other comment regarding the truss rod of your J-45: Some people feel compelled to mess around with the truss rod - myself being one of them. When acquiring a vintage Gibson with a truss rod, before attempting to loosen the nut, I use a pencil-type applicator of WD-40, and being very careful not to get any on the wood of the instrument, I apply a small amount to both ends of the nut. After giving it some time to let the WD-40 soak onto the threaded portion of the rod, the nut has always loosened without undue pressure. Of course there's always a first time, but thus far, I've never had one where the nut wouldn't budge. If you attempt this, use a light touch when attempting to first turn the nut - and if it doesn't readily move, Stop!
Thank so much for sharing your story with us, and enjoy that treasure of an instrument!
-
Admittedly, aesthetics are important to me - and to my eye, that top is flat out gorgeous!
Bold grain lines with no runout..... perfect.
-
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).
-
1
-
-
On 6/28/2021 at 9:28 AM, Sgt. Pepper said:
That right there is called greed.
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!
-
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.
-
There are a number of interesting electrics in there, but imho, the prices don't seem all that friendly.
-
3 minutes ago, E-minor7 said:
It happened to my 1984 D-35 15 years ago. Okay it stood up in a small very hot loft-chamber for a summer month or so, but pling-pling it said - and 2 out of 4 bindings popped at the waist.
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).
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Sgt. Pepper said:
Remember the blind lead the naked in the QA department at Gibson.
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.
-
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!
-
26 minutes ago, zombywoof said:
I had a 1935 Gibson-made Capital archtop (the house brand of Jenkins Music) which was X braced. But I thought all Gibson archtops from around 1935 to 1939 were X braced. We used to refer to them as having a two hump top.
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!
-
6 hours ago, RBSinTo said:
Bobouz, I have no affiliation with the Twelfth Fret other than as a customer for their Luthiers in the Repair Department, so when I post regarding items they have for sale it is merely as a favour to others on this site. I have no interest in, nor knowledge about this particular model of guitar, and have no idea about its value or playability. RBSinTo
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!
-
18 hours ago, RBSinTo said:
This particular guitar is not one I would ever consider buying, but I only mention it because there may be someone who frequents this site who might be interested in it.
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.
-
Looks to be a late ‘68 or early-mid ‘69. Key to this guess is the bridge, which appears to be a replacement for an original belly-down adjustable bridge. Use a automotive-type inspection mirror to see if the bridgeplate has additional holes left over from the adjusting posts of the original bridge.
Additionally, the pick guard & tuners look like replacements. Along with the bridge, it would have been rather common in the ‘70s for a repairman to recommend changing these items out (to reduce weight on the top via the bridge & pickguard, and to improve tuning w Grovers). Otherwise, from what can be seen including the back-bracing, the guitar appears to be period correct.
Edit: Measure the width of the fingerboard at the nut. If it measures 1-9/16”, the build date will be narrowed down to a portion of the mid-to-late ‘60s.
Interesting guitar - Thanks for sharing!
-
17 minutes ago, RBSinTo said:
It's all relative.My father-in-law died in 1978 at the age of 56. I was 30, and thought that he was "pretty old". Not one foot in the grave, but hovering over it.Skip to 2021 when I'm 73, and I realize that he was just a kid.
No kidding. I was almost eight years old when my dad died in 1959 at the age of 46. Hence as mentioned earlier, just making it to fifty seemed like a reach. You truly never know how things will pan out.
-
I have a 2012 J-185, as well as a 2015 J-50 and a 2002 J-45 Rosewood. Very different animals, but because the J-185 is rather rare compared to Gibson roundshouler models, imho, it would be worth the time & effort to try out that J-185 while you have the opportunity. If nothing else, you’ll be expanding you future frame of reference with an actual in-hand example.
-
1 hour ago, zombywoof said:
A Cortez has the same body specs as a Gibson LG2/B25. So basically any 00 or classical size guitar case will fit a Cortez. Case specs are readily available and there are a whole lot which will work. I believe Sweetwater has a case finder.
Yes, typically this would all be true. The kicker is the extended length of the Epiphone headstock compared to it’s Gibson clone. Be sure to carefully measure the full length of your guitar! I prefer thermoplastic cases, and have my ‘66 Cortez in an oddball size case made by Road Runner. Unfortunately, it’s no longer in their current lineup, but try a few Guitar Center stores with the guitar in hand & you may get lucky. Otherwise, just keep looking for a classical-size case with the necessary extended length. And btw, congrats on your new-to-you Cortez!
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, DanvillRob said:
Happy Birthday, ol' buddy!
Maybe this'll cheer you up!
Ha! Now I’ll go listen to the Beatles version instead!
-
Well, apparently the laminate maple-bodied group of instruments you’ve been drawn to have tonal characteristics that match up extremely well with your ears and the type of music you play.
Personally, I’m very partial to flattop maple bodied acoustics & have a wide variety of them. This includes Gibson 17”, 16”, & 15” jumbo-shaped (with solid woods), Guild 17” & 16” jumbo-shaped & one standard dread-shaped (all with solid sides & arched laminate backs), and a fully laminate ‘81 Ibanez, made in Japan.
Each one has it’s own unique sound, but what binds them together is the percussive short-decay tone that maple bodies often exhibit. That’s the primary characteristic of maple that draws me in, and after that, the subtle differences from one to the next are like adding a mixture of special spices. If a player leans heavily towards mahogany or rosewood, none of that probably matters & they all sound equally mediocre!
-
24 minutes ago, Sgt. Pepper said:
There are ones from the 60's on Reverb right now listed for $1200 - $3000 depending on condition.
Well, isn’t a fool born every minute?
Therefore, hope springs eternal.
Would I regret this?
in Gibson Acoustic
Posted
Another vote here for the natural finish J-50 with batwing pickguard.
My 2015 has very distinct wide grain, which I'm also quite fond of.