Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

j45nick

All Access
  • Content Count

    11,469
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

j45nick last won the day on November 14 2019

j45nick had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

353 Excellent

1 Follower

About j45nick

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    South Florida
  • Interests
    Guitars. Music. Building stuff. Sailing. Politics. Fine wine. My wife. (not necessarily in that order)

Recent Profile Visitors

29,190 profile views
  1. That factory order number (FON, analogous to a serial number) indicates 1950. The post-war LG-1 was introduced in 1947 as the lowest-priced Gibson flat top model in the LG line to bring Gibsons to a new consumer market. It was touted as a student model, but has developed its own following over the years. From the picture, yours appears to be in very nice shape.
  2. The serial numbers of two modern Gibsons should not be the same as each other. The serial number is an individual identifier. Some COA certs and labels seem to have the model and serial number printed, and others are hand-written, without obvious rhyme or reason. Those COA's appear to be hand-signed as well. Legend-series guitars such as the L-OO and J-45 would not typically have a label inside the guitar, as they are exact reproductions of guitars that would not originally have had labels.. The serial number should be ink-stamped on the neck block inside the guitar. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the guitars, we might be able to help you if you could post some photos. By the way, these COA's are a totally different format from the one that came with my 1937 L-00 Legend. That COA has errors in that it talks about "1940s building techniques" and a "custom 1940s redline case", which are curious properties for an instrument replicating a 1937 guitar. Just some of the little quirks that come with owning Gibsons.
  3. some more info on the difference: bronze strings
  4. A nitro finish achieves highest gloss through buffing/polishing. Spraying a completed guitar requires a lot of careful masking. Provided the satin finish is perfectly clean, with no surface contaminants, there's no obvious reason you can't spray nitro-on-nitro. The solvents in the new nitro actually activate the underlying nitro surface so that the two coats bond, as I understand it. That's why you can "melt out" some scratches on vintage guitars using lacquer reducer as a solvent. What I don't know is if there are any additives in the satin nitro finish that are used to keep it consistently dull, as is done with polyurethane finishes. If so, those might interfere with getting to where you want to get. In any case, you'll probably still need to buff the guitar after the overcoats to achieve the best results. Building up more coats allows you to buff more effectively without cutting through the finish, but buffing is not risk-free. It's shockingly easy to cut through a nitro finish, according to the guy who works on my guitars. I've had him buff out scratches on some new guitars, and he always warns me that I own those scratches, and the results are not guaranteed. When he says he can't go any further because he might cut through the finish, I believe him.
  5. It's a vision in MOTS, but an iconic variant of the L-series 1930's guitars. No abalone or oysters died in the making of that fretboard. I didn't know anything about Richard Hawley before seeing this, but I like his attitude, his playing, and his voice
  6. BK, who doesn't want "several"? You, of all people, should understand that. At least you're not spending your hard-earned Pacific Pesos on cigarettes, whiskey, and women since you got the urge for more guitars. How's the guitar fund coming, after your latest additions?
  7. Thanks, JC. That finish looks very much like the VOS on my L-OO Legend when I got it. I very carefully went after it with Virtuoso, both the cleaner and polish, by hand, and basically got it to the point of about a 95% gloss on the top, close to 100% on the back and sides thanks to the tight grain of the mahogany. It was surprisingly easy to do, and it does look better to my eye. Others may prefer the straight VOS. It was probably safer to do with Virtuoso rather than abrasive buffing, since Virtuoso claims to work by chemical reaction rather than mechanical abrasion. There appear to be buffing swirls and orange peel on some of these Historics, but it's one of those things you can only evaluate first-hand. I assume the are using EIR for all the rosewood bits. The Legends used Madagascar for rosewood parts--fretboard and bridge. It's a gorgeous wood, but does add to cost. Those Adi tops look really, really fine on all of these Historics. It looks like they are using a proper tapered bridge on the AJ. There are nice details in these guitars. I want several...
  8. JC, Thanks for posting these. Gibson Acoustic has taken on a lot with this expansion of the product lines, and I hope it's a success. I note that Don was careful to say that these Historic guitars were as close as possible to the original, but not necessarily replicas. What did you think of this finish, looking at in in person? Don said only four coats of lacquer, rather than the usual 9, which is pretty astounding. However, it looks pretty crappy in the videos, sort of hazy with a lot of orange peel, essentially as it comes out of the spray gun. One advantage of nitro is how it can be buffed out to a gloss, but I understand that you could quickly buff through this finish. I'm just not sure. Maybe six coats instead of four, which might allow a decent light buff while maintaining a thin finish. I would really have to look carefully at one before taking that leap of faith. This thin finish would be most obvious on the top, just because of the way spruce growth rings work, particularly Adi. These are all appealing, but the AJ and the rosewood Southern Jumbo are most appealing to me. I wonder how either of those would stand up to a 1937 D-28 Authentic, which is what I've been looking at as a "next" guitar. I've never owned a square dread of any type.
  9. It may be the lighting angle, but that looks like a belly-down (Martin style) bridge, which would likely be a replacement. It should be a rectangular bridge. The finish looks intact, but rough. If I were insuring it, I'd place a value of around $5k on it, but you might struggle to get that if selling. The market is up and down on early post-war J's, particularly if they are player-grade. Based on what I've seen, '46 with script logo and wider neck brings a slight premium compared to block-logo J's from about 1947-1952, which are generally all the same spec. I don't know what Gruhn charges for an appraisal these days, but he slightly higher value he may determine might be good for insurance purposes, even if you have to discount it if you want to sell at some point.
  10. Read the section on nitrocellulose lacquer in this link: lacquer
  11. They used lacquer for car finishes in 1960.
  12. Strings make a huge difference, and are a personal choice. If you don't like the way a guitar sounds, try different types of strings to see if you can get the tone you are after.
  13. Agree with you on this one, but old lacquer has some interesting properties. The video below shows how Mamie Minch of Brooklyn Lutherie repairs surface scratches on brittle vintage lacquer surfaces while maintaining the original finish. (You'll want to skip the ad at the start if it shows up.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FISY9I6pQdQ
  14. Has anyone from Gibson ever talked to you about your collection? After all, you do have some of the finest vintage Gibsons and Martins anywhere. The models they have picked for this series are certainly most of the classic Gibson flat tops, which is pretty astonishing in itself for a company that at times has seemed to have only a casual acquaintance with its history.
×
×
  • Create New...