Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

TM

Members
  • Content Count

    417
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TM

  1. TM

    Pre war L-1

    That is an interesting L1. the Label is most odd. Notice the added 0 on the paper label where the serial number should go. Also A braced or full X. The Bridge shape is accurate to the original. That odd bridge shape was used near the end of the production when the L1 went to X bracing.
  2. That is quite a downsizing, but you chose well for a keeper. I would be wanting that Nick Lucas if it was floating around.
  3. TM

    End of an era

    I've got some of their price list going back to the late 1970s. I will have to scan them.
  4. Gibson made a 12 fret large body Nick Lucas, no pickguard. They tried to duplicate the original finish and it turned out rather odd to me. This has been a few years back. I saw a couple for sale. They may have been for the Japanese market. They did not look at all like any of the other NL reissues. I recall it was a Ren build. Here is a mahogany Kay Kraft and original Nick Lucas (non original bridge. I have seen one other mahogany round neck Kay Kraft, most were maple. While the Kay Kraft is a great guitar it does not have the sophistication of the Gibson Nick Lucas and doesn't have the same price. I would seek out a Fairbanks NL instead of a Gibson reissue. I haven't played one, but the talk is good, they sure look the part unlike any of the Gibson reissues. Gibson should contract with him to build their Nick Lucas line.
  5. I got that guitar 8-10 years ago? I have strung it up. It does not have a bridgeplate, never had one as far as I can tell. I have a lot of very nice vintage Gibson guitars, some just get put back. I may dig one out when I am doing a post then keep it out for some playing. I don't get them out much lately. I do want to get pictures posted and get the link out. I have many pics of my collection and other guitars I have seen. I just noticed I have an all mahogany L0 hanging on the wall in front of me. It has a variation of the H brace, It was painted red, I bought it for the beautiful condition three tier bridge like the one pictured on the Nick Lucas above. There was a peak of information 3-4 years ago, lot of information/guitars coming out. Gibson has a complicated history with many mystery remaining. I'm forgetting some of it, and I could recite most of the details on late 20s guitars, with a special interest in the Nick Lucas Gibson Special. I sort of found out what I was looking for with help of others. Owning the guitars is the expensive part of the deal, but a lot of them got sold for a better one, a step up. I have owned/own most of the guitars I dreamed about, wished to own. lot of fun.
  6. I found a another pic of the two specials. I have owned 7-8 of this size Gibson including two Montana guitars. Two magnificent sunburst finishes on these two. This small body Nick Lucas c.1928 has an original "hand rubbed finish". This guitar was H braced and a very fine sounding/playing guitar. I sold two and kept the odd duck 50s Gibson re-neck Nick Lucas. Compare the finish on each of the guitars.
  7. This a a full scale small body L1 as I see it, as are both the guitars I pictured. What makes you think it is 3/4 scale?
  8. In their effort to make a business work they produced a wide variety of instruments. Guitars were one part of the business. Guitars evolved through the 20s early 30s pretty quickly. Gibson was always experimenting, all the small bodies went through many changes and each sounds different. H, A, X bracing, spruce tops/mahogany tops, different bridges. Interestingly I have vintage tenor ukes from this period with the same progress in bracing. To me your guitar is certainly worth 1K if it plays well. I think guitars as yours/mines are so typical Gibson. Get them on the road, keep on the road. Evidently they had quite a repair business, with custom work. I have a very unique Gibson L5 that was renecked at the factory late 50s while the owner worked for Gibson. I have a black small bodied Nick Lucas with A bracing that has a c.1950 neck. I think the factory work is easy to see, they had a way of redoing guitars close to what was available at the time, with a hint of vintage restoration. Your bridge is very much Gibson of early 50s. I would have to hands on your guitar to say more. I thought your posted a picture of the interior bridge plate and X brace? I thought there was something unique in that shot. Lack of an FON; not sure what that means if anything. it does meant something if is there not so if is not. they fade. both of mine have period FONs. I have at least one other oddball Gibson flat top, no one can quite explain. I like special guitars like your L.
  9. Both of my guitars have 30s bridges and bridge bolts which places them no earlier than around 34. Like your guitar both of mine are X braced. These guitars went through several variations of bracing, the last was X. This was at the end of that body size. You see small body L1 with X bracing but not common, they were being phased out for the more "modern" body shape/size as seen in today's L00. The transition was around 1929. The larger bodied L1 went through a series of changes too. I've discussed these guitars on UMGF. "Floor sweep" guitars was probably coined there. Joe Spann does as well as anyone as explaining Gibson during the pre/war years. He has mentioned many unfinished guitars about the factory. Gibson was a business and acted like one, they sold what they had and when they could. I bought the guitar pictured on left on ebay in a town about 50 miles, so I was able to pick up the guitar. I did not quite know what it was because it didn't look like it was suppose to. It was being sold by the daughter of the original owner. She said he bought it just before WWII and she thought it was bought as new, she did know know that it had ever been back to the factory. To me, it looks like a guitar finished in the late 30s, the top being added at that time, hence the larger soundhole. I have not played it in some time, but it is a monster of a little guitar. The one pictured on the right is similar to another on the UMGF. Perhaps the most interesting sunburst finish I have seen on a Gibson guitar. I have not seen quite the shading/colors, but then I'm more into that than most. I think a bit earlier more mid 30s, a left over from the late 20s..It has no bridgeplate, never had one. Also amazing sounding guitar. I have pictures of the one very similar to yours with the new Gibson logo and finish, don't remember if it had a pickguard. I first saw it on a Japanese website, then ebay and maybe other classifieds. What do you think? Terry
  10. I thought those were the guitars. Does you guitar have a FON, numbers on the neck block inside? Both of mine have period, late 20s FONs.
  11. These two are X braced oddballs, probably the "floor sweep" models. I have seen one more similar. Your guitar looks like a 50s Gibson factory re-do. I have seen another very much like your guitar including the logo. Terry
  12. Biggest difference here is a 12 fret vs 14, mahogany top vs spruce. The bracing on the 12 fret is probably lighter. Some 12 frets were black, some sunburst, some natural. Some black faced guitars have mahogany tops. Earliest 14 frets had raised fingerboards. L1 had back binding and usually fancier tuners. Some 12 fretters had pickguards glued on and some had raised many had no guards. Then there is the size of the sunburst. Bridges had many subtle changes. Go by features on these guitars not the name. The name seems to cause more confusion. Terry
  13. The red letters are numbers of guitar in the batch. Often fades with time. Don't help identifying the year. You say he bought it 49 or 50 which makes sense.
  14. Well put. I collected data on these early post war guitars for a time. Not a large sample. I owned a few so I could exam them, then whatever I could get from the internet. I just quit with the data collection because it didn't make much sense. Side reinforcement: fabric or wood changes in those years. I would guess those are solid sided guitars. These era guitars are not to be slighted.
  15. The Banner Head maple J45 is everything a good guitar is not suppose to be. Laminated back and sides, thick top, heavy bracing, thick finish. amazing what the maple did in those guitars. The new red one in that clip sounds pretty good too.
  16. The earliest post war Gibsons, 1946 had the old Script logo only. No one is exactly sure of the date of the "new" logo as mentioned above, but pretty quickly after that. The wartime LG will have the Banner. The reverse alphabet numbering began in 1952. The three digit number could be anywhere from 47-51.
  17. I would agree the back is maple. Value? Depends on what you want to do with it; play it, restore it, flip it. A nice original banner head, maple, lg2 will bring maybe $3200? Not saying you can run out and get one. Quality guitar repair is expensive. The maple Banner Head guitars have a very different tone than the standard mahogany. Kinda love/hate with people who have played them. In my buying days I would probably go near a 1K bid and be looking to flip as is.
  18. Very nice to own a family guitar. No doubt it is a post-war LG2, 47, 48.
  19. I took the link to the UMGF and read that before I saw the pictures. I was trying to visualize the Martin. Wow! I find it hard to believe Martin even put their name on that hideous looking guitar. If I was Gibson not sure I would stop that one from production. Reminds me of the "lawsuit" guitars from the 70s. Is this an inside joke I don't understand?
  20. Have you posted this L2 on UMGF? I'm getting too old to remember. Is that the original top finish? Is the FON listed in Spann's book?
  21. TM

    Southern Jumbo

    This SJ with a four digit FON, belly up bridge with through saddle is probably a 1948-50. Most 51s have a very distinctive pick guard color, a 52 would have a different set of number/letters. Prior to 48 they used a rectangle or belly down bridge. There are date ranges published for the numbers on the neck block. I'm not a firm believer in those numbers, they make sense in some cases and in others they do not. Too complicated to explain. That is also the correct/original case from that era. By 51 they were using a different case, although these changes did not occur that cleanly. Terry
  22. Yes, the bridge is correct. I would get to a competent repair person. They can assess the neck angle, look for loose braces, check the bridge glue etc. Get it playable without the tailpiece. The L1 12 fret is a desirable guitar in the Gibson community. Many consider them to be the best of the small body variants. You have a great player or a nice guitar to sell. Terry
  23. It is an L1, 9595 built in 1930. I can't see the bridge well enough to see if it is original. The tailpiece an afterthought common on older guitars with loose bridges. Nice guitars. Considered to be one of Gibsons finest. These are very nice guitars in demand by players. I can not see if the bridge is correct. Terry
×
×
  • Create New...