WW2 era Gibson LG2

[pocaloc]

I just played a WW2 banner LG2, I never did find out the exact year. Anyway it had a nice warm tone, and I think maybe a fair price at $2995. It has one repaired back crack and a repaired side crack. Cosmetically, other than that it is excellent. I think the case is not original, but period. It doesn't have a truss rod, and is one of the mahogany tops. Do think $2995 is a fair pice?

[EuroAussie]

I very recently bought a 43' LG-2 for exactly the same amount. Very happy with the guitar, just the tone I was looking for.

 

Seems the price is about right although Ive seen these 40's LG-2 even up to $5k.

[zombywoof]

I swear it is raining Banner LG-2s. I know these are the most common of all Banner guitars but there do seem to be a whole lot of them being snagged as of late.

 

I would just make sure you would be happy with a mahogany top guitar. Especially in the smaller body instruments these tend to sound more "polite" or mellow than a spruce topped guitar. But if warmth is what you are looking for a mahognay top guitar might be just what the doctor ordered.

[pocaloc]

Do you think that is a fair price, when considering the two repaired cracks and non original case?

[j45nick]

Do you think that is a fair price, when considering the two repaired cracks and non original case?

 

 

Seems a bit high to me. For some reason, there are several of these hog-top banner LG-2's on the market now.

[jt]

I love the mahogany topped Banner guitars.

[pocaloc]

I think the mahogany topped sunburst Gibson from this era are the coolest looking guitars ever. Something about the sunburst on mahogany looks so nice to me.

[jt]

I think the mahogany topped sunburst Gibson from this era are the coolest looking guitars ever. Something about the sunburst on mahogany looks so nice to me.

 

I agree! That mahogany mellows the 'burst in a very appealing way. Though, here's my favorite finsih for an all-mahogany Gibson, my 1943 LG-1:

 

[pocaloc]

That is a great looking guitar.

[zombywoof]

That is a great looking guitar.

 

And about as rare as it gets. Lawdy JT, you must have been riding with the angels when you stumbled on that one.

[jt]

And about as rare as it gets. Lawdy JT, you must have been riding with the angels when you stumbled on that one.

 

Evidently!

 

At the time I acquired the guitar, no one knew this model - the Banner LG-1 - existed. It was I who discovered its existence and production count (139 ever made).

 

My favorite kind of guitar: extremely rare and not very valuable!

[tpbiii]

Evidently!

 

At the time I acquired the guitar, no one knew this model - the Banner LG-1 - existed. It was I who discovered its existence and production count (139 ever made).

 

My favorite kind of guitar: extremely rare and not very valuable!

 

 

 

Well, sort of I guess.

 

They were out there and well known -- but they were generally misslabeled. We have had ours since the early 1980s, and actually at one time I knew where 5 of them were -- this was one of those odd quirks that sometimes happens where a statistically unlikely case does actually occur. A similar thing happened to us with Martin 00-18Hs where we actually own about 2% of all of them created (4) even though we did not search them out.

 

It just happened, like the Trojan in 1998, in 2008 when I sent you to Steve Huber on the trail of the Gibson ledgers no one (that I know of) had made the connection -- Fred Oster had one which he dated correctly but called a mahogany topped LG-2. Once you and Willi had the ledgers, then the link could be made from the FON and the ledger entries. I guess you are saying that you not Willi made that connection? Well, whatever is the case, I am glad to know it is an LG-1. I think we owe a lot to people like you, Willi Henkes, Joe Spann, Lynn Wheelright. Greg Earnest, and all those people who have studied the ledgers since the late 1990s and helped fill out this picture.

 

Here is ours -- bought it in a pawn shop for $200.

 

 

All the best,

 

-Tom

[jt]

Well, sort of I guess.

 

They were out there and well known -- but they were generally misslabeled. ,

 

My point, Tom. I found the "LG-1" listing in the shipping ledgers. Before my discovery, Gruhn, et al. had reported that the LG-1 was a post war creation. But, yep, they obviously existed before my discovery a few years ago. Otherwise, I'd not have found them.

 

Gorgeous guitar! Is that bridge original? To my eyes, it looks slightly different from the 1942-43 bridges. And, the finish looks too translucent to be original. Refinish?

 

Edit: answered my own question. As it appears in the registry:

 

 

Nice work on the bridge replacement, Tom. Who did the work?

 

Thanks for sharing the guitar with us.

[onewilyfool]

Soooooo....what exactly does "WW2 era"....I see guys on Craig's list selling 1949 guitars as "pre-war"...I guess they are referring to the Korean war???? So "WW2 era" means, what, 1948 to 1954??? Gotta love the world of vintage guitars....lol

[jt]

Soooooo....what exactly does "WW2 era"....I see guys on Craig's list selling 1949 guitars as "pre-war"...I guess they are referring to the Korean war???? So "WW2 era" means, what, 1948 to 1954??? Gotta love the world of vintage guitars....lol

 

For US purposes, and Gibson, December 7, 1941 to September 2, 1945.

[tpbiii]

Nice work on the bridge replacement, Tom. Who did the work?

 

Original finish, John Arnold bridge.

 

 

In a forced choice, we had it booked as a '45 LG-3 -- plain topped x braced triple bound. But then there was the H.

 

So now we know.

 

 

Best,

 

-Tom

[jt]

In a forced choice, we had it booked as a '45 LG-3 -- plain topped x braced triple bound. But then there was the H.

 

Tom,

 

That was my best guess when I acquired mine, too. Then I saw the listings in the ledgers.

 

Yes, that "H," signifying, as best we know, 1942. As with all things Gibson, though, no one has discovered a Gibson document fixing those letters (or any FON) to particular years. The guesswork in the land of Gibsonia is what I find most interesting.

[nid2007]

Re the OP:

That is the amount I would pay for an LG2 that is already repaired professionally and made suitable for me. That seems to the the amount of money I end up putting into banner/script logo guitars to get them perfect for me....e.g, purchase and then all the necessary major repair work. Just my experience, can't speak for others.

[pocaloc]

Thank you for the information. It's nice to know that it's priced fairly.

[zombywoof]

For US purposes, and Gibson, December 7, 1941 to September 2, 1945.

 

Martin guys I know tag pre-War as pre-1943 based on I assume when lack of materials starting having more of an impact on how the guitars were made.

[jt]

Martin guys I know tag pre-War as pre-1943 based on I assume when lack of materials starting having more of an impact on how the guitars were made.

 

But the question was "Soooooo....what exactly does 'WW2 era' [mean]?" not "what is prewar?"

[pocaloc]

For US purposes, and Gibson, December 7, 1941 to September 2, 1945.

 

 

As far as I was concerned I just meant the "banner years". So these dates are the banner years? The people selling it referred to it as WW2 era. I'm not very knowledgable about this stuff.

[jt]

As far as I was concerned I just meant the "banner years". So these dates are the banner years? The people selling it referred to it as WW2 era. I'm not very knowledgable about this stuff.

 

pocaloc,

 

The "Banner years" span January 1942 to late 1945. If the guitar has a Banner, it was built during WWII primarily by women. And, imho, it will be a wonderful instrument. I x-rayed a bunch of Gibsons spanning pre-war, post-war, and the wartime/Banner era and published the results in two articles in a radiology journal. My conclusion: the Banner-era guitars are more refined than their pre-war and post-war predecessors and successors.

[tpbiii]

As far as I was concerned I just meant the "banner years". So these dates are the banner years? The people selling it referred to it as WW2 era. I'm not very knowledgable about this stuff.

 

To understand the history of flattop terminology, you must know the history of the American flattop market.

 

When the market emerged from the shadows in the mid 1980s, the market had developed mostly around the requirements of the ever more popular rural, traditional bluegrass music and its needs. Some of the earliest recoded data for that market appears in the first Vintage Instrument Price Guide from the early 1990s. Here are the prices for D-28s, D-18s and J-35/45. To give some idea of the market perception of the time, the J-35 and J-45 were combined and things like the AJ, SJ, and even the iconic L-00 were not even included. The SJ-200 and many archtops were tracked.

 

 

You can see the D-28 market before late 1944 is hotter than a firecracker -- there is a difference between the D-28 between A and B, but not so much on the D-18. There is a major drop-off in the beginning of C, which continues to slowly degrade until 1970, when the market collapses.

 

This led naturally to the following (and still widely used in many places) terminology that defines A as "golden era," B as "Wartime," C as "Post War" and A+B as "prewar." All of this makes perfect sense in the Martin market, but it has often be confusing to groups that followed.

 

The early market was driven by the sonic properties of the instruments -- Gibson were largely excluded because of their lack of power. It is now well known, there were some fine power guitars by Gibson in the 1930s, but there were just too rare to get noticed. Note that in 1990, the Gibson market was entirely undifferentiated -- a Gibson was a Gibson, and obviously not very desirable.

 

Now fast forward to 2013. Here is the same graph using current values.

 

 

In the past couple of decades, a lot of new groups have come into the flattop market -- the non rural North East, left Coast, and international markets in particular. They are not so driven by the functional properties of the instruments, but also by their significance as collectables. The genres in which they are used are more diverse -- singer songwriters and mild versions of early African American music ala the folk revival, etc. -- the old Gibsons excel in those contexts. You can see that the current Gibson market is much more nuanced and although nowhere near Martin values for these three models (it is much more mixed for other models), it has certainly risen in a relative sense.

 

From a Gibson perspective, the line was revamped in a major way in late 1936 and again in 1942 (with many other small changes along the way). Martin changed too, but more in materials and not much in models. From a Gibson perspective, C = Wartime is a particularly recognizable era because of all the new models (LGs, J-45, SJ, ...) in 1942 and because of the associate banner headstock stocks. From a Gibson perspective, A+B=prewar.

 

From a Martin perspective, not so much -- obvious changes can be seen in the market, but it is more evolution than a break. The evolved Martin perspective is A=Golden Era, B+C= Wartime (they will tell you the war started before the US got in, and Martin reacted), and D= post war. Prewar is still A+B+C usually. The problem that casues all this confusion is trying to use obvious well know historical dates to describe feature changes, which can't work perfectly.

 

I x-rayed a bunch of Gibsons spanning pre-war, post-war, and the wartime/Banner era and published the results in two articles in a radiology journal. My conclusion: the Banner-era guitars are more refined than their pre-war and post-war predecessors and successors

.

 

I don't know what refined means, but luthiers have told me they are hard to work on because of their production values. My friend Mark Bramlett (luthier and GM of banjo.com) always whines when I bring him one -- he says they have more compound curves than a 40s pinup[biggrin].

 

Best,

 

-Tom

[jt]

I don't know what refined means, but luthiers have told me they are hard to work on because of their production values. My friend Mark Bramlett (luthier and GM of banjo.com) always whines when I bring him one -- he says they have more compound curves than a 40s pinup[biggrin].

 

I find this curious Tom. The N for my study is substantial and in addition to x-rays I've done 3 dimensional modeling via CT-scanning. My data reveal that that Banner guitars are more precise in every way -- bracing joinery, top, back and side plate thickness consistency from guitar to guitar, bridgeplate alignment with bracing and bridge, etc. - than equivalent Gibson models from just prior to and just after the war.

 

I'd like to know what Banner guitars you've presented to Mr. Bramlett and what other Banners he's seen. In particular I'd like to conduct diagnostic imaging on them. In any event, I'm typically skeptical of anecdotal evidence as compared with data derived from formalized study. If another researcher replicates my study and reaches a different conclusion, then I'll sit up and take notice, of course.