Gibson J45 1947 post banner

[jt]

Oh, the ledgers exist. When I photographed the ledgers from 1936-46 (4,400 pages), they were piled on the floor in a closet that held office cleaning supplies. Three years ago, a Nashville Gibson insider sent me this photo of them:

 

[j45nick]

JT, how complete are they? Do they run up at least through the point (1979?) when Gibson started using a coherent and understandable system that was year-based?

I would contribute towards the digitization of those if Gibson would make them available to the public.

They really are a priceless archive. There seem to be about 60 volumes there.

Blowing the photo up, you can read some of the dates on the spines, but not all. Some don't have obvious dates on them.

Edited November 23, 2019 by j45nick
further information

[jt]

2 minutes ago, j45nick said:

JT, how complete are they? Do they run up at least through the point (1979?) when Gibson started using a coherent and understandable system that was year-based?

I would contribute towards the digitization of those if Gibson would make them available to the public.

They really are a priceless archive. There seem to be about 60 volumes there.

Nick,

I don't know how complete they are. The earliest at Gibson HQ in Nashville, when I was there, was 1936, but I know someone with a photocopy of all the pages in the 1935 ledger.  I also know of a few very early ledger books, also not at Gibson HQ, but in a private collection of a lot of early, historic documents.

I simply grabbed the earliest up through 1946 - not bothering to look through the other volumes - and decamped to an office for several days to photograph them. One day my sister assisted me and a couple of other days my friend Willi Henkes joined me. Folks at Gibson HQ were quite nice, providing me the office, and office guitar (L-00 Legend), and tickets and meet and greet with Elvis Costello. Great fun. But, I was told to close the door and hide should a certain CEO enter the building.

[jt]

2 hours ago, Dafgog said:

... the fabulous The Kalamazoo Gals book ...

Thank you for the kind words!

[j45nick]

35 minutes ago, jt said:

Nick,

I don't know how complete they are. The earliest at Gibson HQ in Nashville, when I was there, was 1936, but I know someone with a photocopy of all the pages in the 1935 ledger.  I also know of a few very early ledger books, also not at Gibson HQ, but in a private collection of a lot of early, historic documents.

 

Those really are important historical documents. Gibson is a big chunk of "modern" American music history. Until those are digitized, they are vulnerable to loss.

Gibson may not appreciate what a valuable selling tool they could be for new guitars, not just as an historical resource for vintage guitar geeks like some of us.

People don't just buy a new Ferrari or Corvette because they are great new cars. They know they are buying into a piece of well-documented history.

To have an idea of where you're going, you need to know where you came from.

[Dafgog]

Has any of you guys ever contacted Gibson with a view to examining  and recording for posterity, for owners and for players some of these post war ledgers? The Post Banner Ledgers - theres another book jt...If not, anyone up for the task? They can only say no (why???)

[Dafgog]

1 hour ago, jt said:

Thank you for the kind words!

You're welcome - really enjoyed the life stories as much as the factual details. How about a new venture "The Post Banner Ledgers" ?

 

Edited November 23, 2019 by Dafgog
grammar

[jt]

34 minutes ago, Dafgog said:

You're welcome - really enjoyed the life stories as much as the factual details. How about a new venture "The Post Banner Ledgers" ?

 

I don’t know if I’ll get access again. Initially, a Gibson VP invited me to Nashville and assisted me in setting up to photograph the ledgers. The company so embraced my project that it underwrote my book release party and initiated a project to produce a limited run of replicas of my personal collection.

Then, stuff got weird. When producing its hourlong radio documentary about my book and me, the BBC contacted Gibson. The company’s head of global PR told the BBC that Gibson had never heard of me or my book, but asserted that I’d violated Gibson copyright by accessing the ledgers.

The head of PR told me the same thing when the BBC referred her to me. I asked her if she knew that Gibson had underwritten my book release party. “Can you prove that?” She asked. I responded that I didn’t need to prove anything, but that she could view a YouTube video of a Gibson VP at the party saying just that and praising me and the book. The PR woman then said that I’d illegally accessed the ledgers. When I laughed and said that a Gibson executive had welcomed and assisted me, she threatened to sue me unless I revealed the exec’s identity. I laughed at that, too, of course.

So, strange times under the old management. As best I can figure, no one had cleared with Henry Gibson’s involvement with me. When folks began to fear the wrath of Henry, folks stopped the replica project (it took me nearly a year to get my guitars back, at one point Montana told me that they didn’t know where they were) and, for good measure, threatened to sue me.

Things are looking up with the new management, though.

[Dafgog]

20 minutes ago, jt said:

I don’t know if I’ll get access again. Initially, a Gibson VP invited me to Nashville and assisted me in setting up to photograph the ledgers. The company so embraced my project that it underwrote my book release party and initiated a project to produce a limited run of replicas of my personal collection.

Then, stuff got weird. When producing its hourlong radio documentary about my book and me, the BBC contacted Gibson. The company’s head of global PR told the BBC that Gibson had never heard of me or my book, but asserted that I’d violated Gibson copyright by accessing the ledgers.

The head of PR told me the same thing when the BBC referred her to me. I asked her if she knew that Gibson had underwritten my book release party. “Can you prove that?” She asked. I responded that I didn’t need to prove anything, but that she could view a YouTube video of a Gibson VP at the party saying just that and praising me and the book. The PR woman then said that I’d illegally accessed the ledgers. When I laughed and said that a Gibson executive had welcomed and assisted me, she threatened to sue me unless I revealed the exec’s identity. I laughed at that, too, of course.

So, strange times under the old management. As best I can figure, no one had cleared with Henry Gibson’s involvement with me. When folks began to fear the wrath of Henry, folks stopped the replica project (it took me nearly a year to get my guitars back, at one point Montana told me that they didn’t know where they were) and, for good measure, threatened to sue me.

Things are looking up with the new management, though.

Incredible and unbelievable how some companies just dont get it - what a marketing opportunity missed for Gibson. Lets hope the new management are more enlightened. We musnt give up hope!

 

[olie]

It now seems obvious that the previous regime was doing very little, if anything, to help to create a brand similar to Martin - an historic leader in iconic American culture.

 One can only hope that Gibson will regain its position as an undisputed leader in that musical pantheon. Many of us have never lost faith in the brand but some may still need convincing.

Let's hope that the corner has been turned.

[62burst]

5 hours ago, jt said:

. . . Then, stuff got weird. . . 

This has been recounted before on this forum, but it is good to be able to have it replayed here again, as a log of Gibson's ever-changing story.

41 minutes ago, Dave F said:

 

where can you decipher the ledger as the LG as being a return? I can't make out the word in the second line after the date. thx

[jt]

2 minutes ago, 62burst said:

This has been recounted before on this forum, but it is good to be able to have it replayed here again, as a log of Gibson's ever-changing story.

where can you decipher the ledger as the LG as being a return? I can't make out the word in the second line after the date. thx

The returns are in red.

[62burst]

33 minutes ago, jt said:

The returns are in red.

¡doh!😬 thx .

[Dafgog]

On 11/19/2019 at 1:39 PM, j45nick said:

 

That makes things more clear. The back braces in this period are what some of us call "knife edge" braces, because that are tall, thin, and tapered in section. The transition from fabric to wood side stays (the thin vertical inside supports with the scalloped ends) apparently happened at roughly the same time as the switch to the block logo.

Apparently, sometime in late 1947 or early 1948, the characteristics that we see in your guitar, pretty much defining the J-45 of the late 40's-early 50's  were finalized: belly-up bridge with slot-through saddle, closed-back single-line Klusons, block logo,  tapered headstock, wood side stays rather than fabric, fattish full-C neck profile with nut width of about  1 11/16" (about  43mm) or just over that, small bridgeplate of either spruce or maple.

If your guitar has an easy-to-read and clearly printed FON of 1017, that may date to very late 1947 or early 1948 by some sources. It could be one of the earliest examples we've seen with all those post-war characteristics in one guitar.

Unfortunately, the actual Gibson FON sequences we read may be single-source that gets repeated as fact by other sources, leaving the impression that they are authoritative. Only the shipping ledgers tell the true tale.

It would be nice if Gibson would digitize those shipping ledgers if they still exist. A lot of mysteries could be solved for a lot of people that really care about vintage Gibsons.

It's no secret I'm a big fan of these particular guitars. One thing you have to be aware of when looking at them is that they are notorious for loose back braces because of the very small gluing area of that brace profile. If you have mysterious buzzes or ripples in the back, these braces are the most likely culprit. John Shults of True Vintage Guitar tells me he rarely sees one from this era without the same issue. 

Fortunately, that's an easy fix for a competent luthier.

These guitars may lack the mystique of the banner Gibsons, but they epitomize Gibson output shortly after WW2. And they have classic vintage Gibson tone.

In any case, you've found a great guitar. Enjoy it, and play the heck out of it. Experiment with strings until you find the sound you want, but don't do anything irreversible to the guitar. 

Do not replace the tuners. As my luthier says, all the tuners have to do is hold the strings to tension. I've developed a clean-up protocol for those tuners that makes them function well and look good, while maintaining their vintage appeal.

What was the fabric around the X bracing centre - original or evidence of a previous repair? Currently trying to upload photos but failing

Edited November 27, 2019 by Dafgog

[j45nick]

3 hours ago, Dafgog said:

What was the fabric around the X bracing centre - original or evidence of a previous repair? Currently trying to upload photos but failing

That is original reinforcement of the joint. It is typically white muslin, but I've seen it in a darker fabric. Sometimes you will see it on other brace joints as well. It was a standard detail at least through the late 1960's, if the guitars I own are any indication.

It is basically a strip of muslin soaked in glue that is laid over the joint where the two components of the x-brace cross.

Prior to 1947-'48, the vertical wood stays you see on the inside, all around the rims, were strips of this same glue-soaked muslin.

Modern Gibsons, except some reproduction models, do not have either the fabric reinforcements or wood stays that you see in your guitar.

[75 Hummingbird]

Here a couple pics of my mystery year Gibson . Feed back would be great in helping narrow down the year .

Absolutely no serial number or F.O.N . Popsicle stick style side stays . Headstock export ..made in u.s.a  stamp .

Photo of original tuners ... Shes been rode hard and put away wet .. sounds dry, warm and full ..

The neck profile is darn near my 1994 j 45 ..amazing .

 

[j45nick]

1947 J-45, by the visual characteristics.  Last of the rectangle bridges, first of the block logos.

Zombywoof will know the history of those tuners. That was just about the time Gibson switched to the closed-back (rather than open gear) Kluson strip tuners. It was also about the time they went from fabric strip to popsicle stick side stays.

[75 Hummingbird]

Thanks Nick ,i hope Zomby can weight in on this .

[75 Hummingbird]

Thanks Nick ,i hope Zomby can weight in on this .

[HipStrap]

Hi!

Im getting offered a 40s J45... FON is between 700 and 799 but it has a belly up bridge. 

According to the FON its a 47 but according to the belly bridge should be a 49.

Would this be normal or might be a changed bridge? 

 

[HipStrap]

Here's a pic! thanks in advance

[j45nick]

If it is a J-45, the top has been stripped and re-finished natural. 700's FON says 1947. 

Bridge may have been replaced, but the angle of the photo is wrong to evaluate whether it is the correct belly-up bridge or not. A straight-on view will be more definitive, but will not absolutely indicate whether it is original if it is properly done. The switch from rectangular to belly-up bridge may have been in late '47-early '48, but that FON is fairly early in 1947, so I would have expected a rectangular bridge.

Since the top has been refinished, it could have had a new bridge at the same time.

Another indicator would be whether it has fabric or wood side stays (vertical strips of either wood or fabric on the inside of the rims).

The actual point in time when some of these characteristics changed is not carved in stone. That FON is reasonably definitive.

Tuner buttons at least are probably replacements, as I've never seen them that white on a guitar of this vintage. Tuners could be either open back or closed back Klusons. If closed back, would probably be single-line Klusons with lube hole. A photo of the tuners would probably tell if they are original or not.

I looks like a really nice guitar in any case. I have two J-45's from 1948-1950. The post-war J-45s through about 1952 can be really great guitars.

The re-finish hurts the value significantly--is it just the top, or has the rest been done as well? It is usually easy to tell.

[HipStrap]

 

@J45nick thanks for the reply.

Yes the guitar has been stripped and re finished natural. The back, sides and neck finish looks original. Theres a bit of black finish in the sides of the headstock.

FON is 707. Tuners are late 60s Gibson Deluxe. There are some repaired cracks.

Im attaching some more pics.

What do you think?Thanks in advance.

[j45nick]

Back looks like it may have been stripped as well, as does the neck, so possibly a  complete refinish. The back, sides, and neck in this period were normally stained very dark walnut, which is the stain used on the classic J-45s.

J-50's, on the other hand, sometimes had the dark walnut stain, but more often had a pale filler stain, leaving the mahogany a little bleached-out looking.

The bridge shape and proportions are correct for the belly-up bridge. Dimensionally, it should be just at or over 1" (25.4 mm) wide across the ends, and just about 6" (152 mm) along the straight back of the bridge. A careful examination may or may not tell you whether it is original, if it is a really well-done repro.

Are you sure it is a J-45 rather than a J-50? Sometimes in this period, there is a faint in stamped "J-45" or "J-50" on the centerline back strip directly below the soundhole. It can be very faint, almost disappearing, so look closely.

If it is a J-45, there is often dark stain overspray  from spraying the sunburst top, visible on the transverse top brace just under the end of the fretboard, if you look inside the soundhole towards the neck. The stain usually has left a sort of "half moon" shadow on the brace.

All in all, a very attractive guitar.

And welcome aboard.

[nick_p]

I don't know if this thread is still ''alive'' but I own a similar J45 with the FON 1017-7.  Same spec as the one described on this thread...  47-48-49?!