Identification?

[tsubotat]

My grandfather who is currently 80, handed down his old gibson, that he bought new when he was 17-25 years old. Its a sunburst archtop, most likely L-7 model, maybe an L-12. just trying to find out the date it was made, and the model. the fon number is something like 90732, it is considerably faded, but its the first 2 numbers are most likely 90. Ohh and im currious about the white bell shaped truss cover, cause i dont think ive ever seen that before. The pick guard has fallen off, and the bridge has been replaced to my knowledge, not sure what else has been altered.

 

pictures are at http://www.flickr.com/photos/57173687@N05/

 

any ideas or suggestions apprecieated, cause im at a loss, stuck between 30's and 40's. and L-7 or L-12

[L5Larry]

The details of your guitar are a little confusing, so let's call it a "transition" model.

 

It is an post-'42 L-7, as denoted by the split-parallelogram fretboard markers, 17" body, and the flat bar pointed end raised diamond tailpiece (an L-12 of this era would have a different tailpiece and gold plated hardware).

 

What gets confusing is that the peghead logo is "generally" thought of as mid-30's, and the serial number (if correct) would be from 1933. But, the L-7 wasn't introduced until 1934, didn't become a 17"er until '35, and didn't get that tailpiece and fretboard markers until 1942.

 

The headstock logo was also in a transition period during this time from small straight script, to large straight script, to large slanted script, to the logo similar to today's. This all happened in a matter of about ten years.

 

Without confirmation of the serial number (a 96XXX number would be more period correct for the features of the guitar), I think it would be safe to say that you have an early 40's L-7. This would also make it one of the earliest examples of the "advanced body" L-7 with all it's final configuration features.

 

PS: It would have most likely have had a single ply black truss rod cover. If you decide you want a new pickguard, a repro L-5 non-cutaway pickguard (available from AllParts) would fit this guitar beautifully (that's what I put on my 1947 L-7).

[JimR56]

The details of your guitar are a little confusing, so let's call it a "transition" model.

 

It is an post-'42 L-7, as denoted by the split-parallelogram fretboard markers, 17" body, and the flat bar pointed end raised diamond tailpiece (an L-12 of this era would have a different tailpiece and gold plated hardware).

 

What gets confusing is that the peghead logo is "generally" thought of as mid-30's, and the serial number (if correct) would be from 1933. But, the L-7 wasn't introduced until 1934, didn't become a 17"er until '35, and didn't get that tailpiece and fretboard markers until 1942.

 

The headstock logo was also in a transition period during this time from small straight script, to large straight script, to large slanted script, to the logo similar to today's. This all happened in a matter of about ten years.

 

Without confirmation of the serial number (a 96XXX number would be more period correct for the features of the guitar), I think it would be safe to say that you have an early 40's L-7. This would also make it one of the earliest examples of the "advanced body" L-7 with all it's final configuration features.

 

PS: It would have most likely have had a single ply black truss rod cover. If you decide you want a new pickguard, a repro L-5 non-cutaway pickguard (available from AllParts) would fit this guitar beautifully (that's what I put on my 1947 L-7).

Nice work, Larry, that is a confusing set of factors.

 

What a nice old treasure to have passed down in the family. Sounds like you're going to take good care of her.

 

It would probably be more expensive, but I believe you could have a new pickguard made using the original guard's binding. Maybe somebody here has some experience with that approach.

[retrorod]

Nice family pass-down! Not sure if this guy still makes repro pickguards ,as he is into building archtops now. He made one for my '67 Byrdland back in the '90,s. Good work and reasonable....

http://www.acguitar.com/article/default.aspx?articleid=7945

[tsubotat]

everyone, thanks for all the help, and yes, i do plan to take good care of her. Im just in the process of figuring out what year and model, which you guys helped on :) and seeing if she is playable. As in that me playing wont damage the guitar. not too concerned about the pick guard, cause ive never used a pick, i just play slack key guitar, which is just picking, which almost ironically i dont use a pick for. But i do love the look of the guard, so ill probably end up getting one down the road.

[pfox14]

I believe what you have is a Gibson Special #7. These were budget guitars discounted to dealers (never appeared in a catalog), and were put together using parts from other guitars. Many times you'll see the fingerboard from one model & the peghead veneer from something completely different. They were 16" archtops with sunburst finish. Only made in 1941. It may also explain the blank label, which may have been the back off an standard L-7 that was used to compete it. The #7s usually did not get a "official" label & serial #.

 

Gibson also had a Special #3, which was a black L-30 model & a Special #5, which was a black L-50 - sometimes called "The Black Special". Gibson made the #3 & 5 from 1937-1942. There were only 98 Special #7s made between May & Nov., 1941 - according to Gibson's shipping ledgers. Ledgers do not have any serial #s or FONs for the #7s.

 

There was one that sold on eBay recently that was very similar to yours, but had a c1932 Gibson L-2 "jester" peghead veneer design & fan-shaped FB inlays.

 

VERY COOL & UNUSUAL GUITAR THAT ARE UNDER-VALUED IN MY OPINION.

[L5Larry]

Very interesting info pfox14. It is generally accepted that Gibson from time to time would "part" together guitars, I never knew there were official model designations for the frankensteins.

 

I believe what you have is a Gibson Special #7. They were 16" archtops with sunburst finish. Only made in 1941.

 

The guitar in question sure looks to have the body proportions of a 17"er to me (maybe the original poster can verify).

[tsubotat]

its a 17 inch, idk why i didnt include that in the first post. sry

[BlondieL50]

Hi Newbie-first congratulations on your grandpa's Gibson...whatever kind it is! It is in great shape and I know you'll appreciate it. I have a question for you. You are a teenager and I am a grandma of a 6 month old boy. His great, great,great grandpa owned a nightclub with a band. His Gibson L50 (like a L4) was played for 16 years nightly and has many little scratches and nicks. I am willing to totally renovate it through Gibson so that it looks like new or I can partially renovate what is broken and leave the nicks as a part of the guitar's past. I want my grandson to be proud of his great, great, great grandpa's guitar. I don't care if it is worth more or less after the renovation, I only want my grandson to enjoy the guitar. From your teenage perspective would you rather have a 1944 guitar with "scars" or looking brand new? thanks, Linda

[tsubotat]

Hi Newbie-first congratulations on your grandpa's Gibson...whatever kind it is! It is in great shape and I know you'll appreciate it. I have a question for you. You are a teenager and I am a grandma of a 6 month old boy. His great, great,great grandpa owned a nightclub with a band. His Gibson L50 (like a L4) was played for 16 years nightly and has many little scratches and nicks. I am willing to totally renovate it through Gibson so that it looks like new or I can partially renovate what is broken and leave the nicks as a part of the guitar's past. I want my grandson to be proud of his great, great, great grandpa's guitar. I don't care if it is worth more or less after the renovation, I only want my grandson to enjoy the guitar. From your teenage perspective would you rather have a 1944 guitar with "scars" or looking brand new? thanks, Linda

 

firstly thanks for the congratz, and as for your question, well. idk personally, im used to hand-me downs, like almost everything i get is pre owned, usually by my older brother, but ive come to enjoy getting old things. the more marks the better. But that is just me, i cant personally speak for the whole teenage community. Anyways, for me, i would prefer it to be very very minimally restored, mainly to make sure it would be playable in years to come, like straightening the neck, and fixing anything that could cause problems in the future, not so much scratches, but maybe cracks, or anything else major. And when u are given a guitar that is scratched and worn, as a teenager (well probably anyone), you immediately recognize that the guitar is old, that it has some sort of its own past, its own history. and to me that is kinda exciting, with my grandpa's guitar, when i take the time to look at all the scratches, and alll the other "imperfections" it makes me wonder what this guitar has been through. and reminds me that its wasnt originaly mine, its my grandfathers, and i should respect it. So im thinking u want ur grandson to appreciate it as a treasure, which it is. if it was played for 16 years nightly, it must have been loved. So i would say dont get it completely restored like new, even if ur grandson would prefer it to be completely restored. cause then he looses the history in it. simply put, i would want the scars :P good question tho, Tyler

[BlondieL50]

firstly thanks for the congratz, and as for your question, well. idk personally, im used to hand-me downs, like almost everything i get is pre owned, usually by my older brother, but ive come to enjoy getting old things. the more marks the better. But that is just me, i cant personally speak for the whole teenage community. Anyways, for me, i would prefer it to be very very minimally restored, mainly to make sure it would be playable in years to come, like straightening the neck, and fixing anything that could cause problems in the future, not so much scratches, but maybe cracks, or anything else major. And when u are given a guitar that is scratched and worn, as a teenager (well probably anyone), you immediately recognize that the guitar is old, that it has some sort of its own past, its own history. and to me that is kinda exciting, with my grandpa's guitar, when i take the time to look at all the scratches, and alll the other "imperfections" it makes me wonder what this guitar has been through. and reminds me that its wasnt originaly mine, its my grandfathers, and i should respect it. So im thinking u want ur grandson to appreciate it as a treasure, which it is. if it was played for 16 years nightly, it must have been loved. So i would say dont get it completely restored like new, even if ur grandson would prefer it to be completely restored. cause then he looses the history in it. simply put, i would want the scars :P good question tho, Tyler

We are agreeing with you. We found an experienced man in Milwaukee that is going to look at it and make suggestions. If you have time why not talk to your grandpa and ask him where your/his guitar has been. I know a few 80 y/o's and they love to tell about their good old times. Maybe he has a picture or two of him playing his guitar. We would all enjoy hearing his story. Take care, Linda

[pfox14]

Sorry for the error. The Special #7 was a 17" advanced body size. Special 5 was 16" & Special #3 was 14 3/4" wide. Hope that clears it up.