I need a history lesson - Gibson Bs and LGs

[Geoffrey Lawton]

Heh folks,

I'd like a little info on the B 25 and the LG 1 and 2.

Quality-wise - which of these was supposed to be the 'better' instrument?

How were they marketed - or to whom were they marketed?

Were they student models? Less-expensive versions of other models?

Thanks

Geoff

[J-200 Koa]

Try this:

 

http://www.provide.net/~cfh/gibson6.html

[ksdaddy]

I wouldn't consider the smaller bodied Gibsons student models, although it's easy enough to rationalize that a large percentage of students are young people who would likely buy a smaller guitar. And the fact that Gibson made gazillions of the LG0 at around a hundred bucks retail and were likely marketed directly to the new young guitar player just adds to it.

 

I think it's more a preference for body size is all. Besides the ergonomics, they just sound different. It depends on what you want in a guitar and some fingerpickers want something that responds quickly and has a good balance. Myself, I prefer I big thumpin' bass so I'm not a huge fan of the LGs.

 

Many people claim there's a big difference in tone between the ladder bracing and X bracing. Maybe so; but I've found that legends about Gibson construction aren't always true. Case in point, I owned two B25s within a few months, an early '67 with lighter bracing, small bridge plate, upside down bridge..... sounded uck. I owned a late '67 B25 with heavier bracing, big pad, belly-down bridge, all "bad" stuff. Sounded great!

 

But back to original point, I think because of the relative austerity of the LG models they have a rep of being lower end models overall. I think if Gibson had made an LG with fancier appointments there might not be that sweeping generalization. Something with fretboard binding, larger inlays.... something like a CJ165 maybe. At least then the line would have run the gamut a little more.

 

Someday I will be hung for being an armchair quarterback.

[nid2007]

I agree Ksdaddy on the suspect conventional wisdom. These are guitars that have to be tested and experimented with. In addition, a good luthier can do amazing things to these guitars. I have a banner LG-2 that sounds and plays like magic--like a 000-18GE, but with a lot more mojo. But I've also played banner LG-2's that can't compare in sound to my '67 B-25N. Go figure. And i have '57 LG-1 that I prefer to a '57 LG-2 that I once owned, but go to a store an pick up an LG-1 and it could sound dead. ??

 

That providenet site is the best little history I've seen. A lot of good info can be found on the UMGF vintage section as well.

[Geoffrey Lawton]

Thanks so much for the insights - and the website!

Really helps.

Geoff

[sfden1]

Geoff: another good source is Gibson's Fabulous Flat=Top Guitars, An Illustrated History & Guide (Eldon Whitford, David Vinopal & Dan Erelewine). Great photos, lots of good information. Although somewhat out of date, and at times not entirely accurate, it's still the best book available on vintage Gibson's and Gibson acoustic history. You can probably pick up a used copy on Amazon.

 

As your probably aware, the B-25 was the successor to the LG-2 and LG-3. Basically the same guitar with some minor tweaks. The Fabulous Flatatops book seems to indicate that the LG-2 (1942) was response, at least to some extent, to materials shortages during the war (the LG-3 came out in 1946). I agree with ksdaddy that these were not necessarily student guitars. The LG-1 (1947) and LG-O (1958) though seem to have been intended to appeal to a market with less cash, including students. The LG-3 was the most expensive of the L:G line. Still, all were well made, good sounding guitars, especially after 50 or so years.

 

All of the above information is from Fabulous Flattops. An interesting book to have.

[grampa]

My F-25 has the same size body as the LG's and B25 but is 12 fret 2" wide neck. The sound is wonderful, well balanced with that great gibson thump. This guitar is rarely mentioned by anyone other than myself it seems, but it is a great guitar.

[DenielSetuplet]

I once wrote a whole essay on Gibson Bs this is a topic for a big discussion)

[fortyearspickn]

Zombie Thread -  BUT ....         To dispel the "Student Guitar Myth" ....     I bought an LG1 new in 1964. Had it for 40+ years before giving to my son.  I paid $125 for it.   The minimum wage at the time was  $1.25.   I know, because that was the source of my funding!  Roughly 100 hours of work at the local Mom & Pop grocery store.    My previous/first guitar bought a couple of years earlier was $25.   THAT was the definition of a 'student guitar' back then.    Today, the minimum wage is $7.25.  100 hours will not get you a new Gibson anymore.  Gibson is higher priced/valued - because now, unlike in the 60s -  there was not a plethora of Chinese guitars available. 

Flash forward to today.  Is a Gibson G-45 Studio at $1,000 -  a 'Student Guitar" because it is at the bottom end of their price ranges?    Not when you can buy a brand new Epiphone for 1/4 of that.   Some 'students' in our local high schools have brand new Cameras. Better cars than many of their teachers.  Does that make the Camaro a 'Student Car' ?   In the mid-60s, when even indulgent parents would not shell out 4x the cost of an instrument hoping their kid would take to music -   I  doubt there were any struggling with Mel Bay #1  who had a Gibson.  

[DenielSetuplet]

I once wrote a whole essay on Gibson Bs (this is a topic for a lot of discussions). I use my article removed there are many useful citrumets if you are not a writer. You can read the article here removed In short, you cannot pick a guitar yourself. Let the guitar pick you. That's the whole story of these guitars.

[Murph]

Man, those were the days...

[jt]

LGs, anyone:

 

[fortyearspickn]

A truly DroolWorthy guitar !   By any measure !!

[zombywoof]

I know if wishes were horses but for me one of the biggest mistakes Gibson ever made was I guess in 1941 when they went to a skimpier string spacing at the bridge.  While I obviously cannot speak to J.T's. LG3, I have played and owned Banners with a 2 1/8" spacing.  Yeah, I can play them but as a fingerpicker I do appreciate some extra right hand room.

Speaking of Bannerhead guitars, I just realized that today is an anniversary of sorts for me as it was on Columbus Day I got my fixed up 1942 J50 back into my hands.  As this was before J.T. stated sharing his research with us all, I still believed it was a J45 which had lost its finish because the Pros from Dover at the time told us the J50 was not introduced until 1947.

Edited October 10, 2022 by zombywoof

[tpbiii]

Here is a weird LG comparison -- 57 LG-1, 46 LG-2, 42 LG-3

Here is a less odd presentation

 

Here are the ones I own that are sort of in the family

26 L-1 l, 31 L-2 x, 34 HG-Century x, 34 L-00 x, 36 L-00 3/4 x, 35 KG-14 l, 37 KG-Century x, 39 HG-00 x, 43 KG-Sport l Model, 46 LG-2 x, 49 CF-100, 55 LG-1, 57 LG-1 , and 65 F-25.  The 26 L-1 is basically the same body shape as the earlier L-1 archtop model with poplar B&S -- think Robert Johnson.  The body footprint from the late 20s to about 1941 was shared by many models, and the new (but similar) shaped LG body shape started in the early 1940s.  Early 30s models had 12 frets, as did the Hawaiian models and the 60s F-25.  Most were spruce over mahogany, but the HG-Century and L-Century had maple B&S.  The rest had 14 frets.  The 1942 LG-1 had a mahogany top.  The CF-100 had a cutaway.  Most were x-braced except KG-14, KG-Sport Model, and LG-1 (after the early 40s) were ladder braced.  The L-00 3/4 and Kalamazoo Sport Model were 3/4 size.

There are many demos on my vimeo sight -- www.vimeo.com/tpbiii/videos.  Just search for the model you are interested in.  EG LG-1 search results in https://vimeo.com/tpbiii/videos/search:LG-1/sort:date.

There are over 1200 videos of many other things there.

Best,

-Tom

 

Edited October 10, 2022 by tpbiii

[jt]

7 hours ago, zombywoof said:

I know if wishes were horses but for me one of the biggest mistakes Gibson ever made was I guess in 1941 when they went to a skimpier string spacing at the bridge.  While I obviously cannot speak to J.T's. LG3, I have played and owned Banners with a 2 1/8" spacing.  Yeah, I can play them but as a fingerpicker I do appreciate some extra right hand room.

Blame the change from 2 3/8 spacing at the bridge to 2 1/8 on the rise of the use of that horrible implement, the plectrum. 🙂

As a fingerpicker, I also prefer wider string spacing. But at this point, I play guitars with a wide range of spacing and am now comfortable with pretty much whatever.  I suppose that's the benefit of having too many guitars! The one guitar I built and those I've commissioned, though, sport 1 13/16 at the nut and 2 5/16 at the bridge. Still, I play equally poorly regardless of string spacing. 🙂

[rustystrings]

My view of the LG-2 is that it is to the J-45 what the Martin 00-18 is to the D-18; it's the grand concert version, as opposed to the Jumbo/Dreadnaught version.  Same woods, comparable bracing, same neck and scale, etc.  My experience with a '60 LG-2 cured me of any thinking of it as a student guitar, and I would argue the the only "student" guitars Gibson offered were the postwar LG-1 and LG-0 because of their ladder bracing, and perhaps the L-48 with its laminated arched top.  But even then, all of those guitars had the same neck as a J-45 or an LG-2 and they could all be set up to play well and continue to do so, as opposed to a Harmony or a Kay.

 

[zombywoof]

1 hour ago, rustystrings said:

My view of the LG-2 is that it is to the J-45 what the Martin 00-18 is to the D-18; it's the grand concert version, as opposed to the Jumbo/Dreadnaught version.  Same woods, comparable bracing, same neck and scale, etc.  My experience with a '60 LG-2 cured me of any thinking of it as a student guitar, and I would argue the the only "student" guitars Gibson offered were the postwar LG-1 and LG-0 because of their ladder bracing, and perhaps the L-48 with its laminated arched top.  But even then, all of those guitars had the same neck as a J-45 or an LG-2 and they could all be set up to play well and continue to do so, as opposed to a Harmony or a Kay.

 

Kalamazoo never marketed the LG2 as a "student" guitar any more than they did the J45 as a "Workhorse."  In fact, they touted how deep the body of the LG2 was for a guitar of its size.   As far as I can see from the catalogs, nor did they attempt to sell the LG1 which sold for only some $10 less than an LG 2 as anything other than a "top value".  

Not sure though why you think a Harmony or a Kay could not be set up to play as well as any Gibson.  If nothing else Harmonys had necks that Gibsons should have sported from the 1950s on.  

Edited October 13, 2022 by zombywoof

[Dave F]

1 hour ago, zombywoof said:

.....

Not sure though why you think a Harmony or a Kay could not be set up to play as well as any Gibson.  If nothing else Harmonys had necks that Gibsons should have sported from the 1950s on.  

I totally agree. I keep two guitars in my office at work for lunchtime jams. The guys that come in and play them cannot believe how nice they play. I set both of them up and put Martin Silk and Steel on them. One is an Alvarez parlor I bought new for $250 and the other one is a used Ibanez parlor I bought for $100.

Edited October 13, 2022 by Dave F

[Samuel Atkins]

On 10/11/2008 at 1:13 PM, Geoffrey Lawton said:

Heh folks,

I'd like a little info on the B 25 and the LG 1 and 2.

Quality-wise - which of these was supposed to be the 'better' instrument?

How were they marketed - or to whom were they marketed?

Were they student models? Less-expensive versions of other models?

Thanks

Geoff

Hi there! Actually, I need a student models guitar as I am totally newbie. Trying to learn the guitar with different tutorials, but it is quite hard. I've decided maybe I can try the smaller guitar for the beginning. It doesn't seem to be a bad option. I've been trying hard to find good tutorials, so I ended up with the idea of getting a teacher (I prefer offline, but online lessons are also good). I am happy to have a summer holiday, as it was challenging to combine college and learn guitar. Lucky me to have https://edubirdie.org/ the legal service (read a review or their blog to be sure how it works), which helped me with my assignments while I was trying to learn the new song. By the way, the first song I learned was Perfect by Ed Sheeran. It is a simple enough composition, so I guess a lot of you might start from there.

Edited June 9, 2023 by Samuel Atkins

[fortyearspickn]

Not sure if there is a question in there somewhere.   As far as the OP - these types of Gibsons, from 60 odd years ago, are a bit pricey for a student guitar.  Suggest you look at classical guitars  - size is similar and the nylon strings easier to deal with. If you don't lose interest after a couple of years - you can feel confident plucking down five times the cash on an upgrade.   Suggest you practice At Least an hour a day, or you'll not get the momentum most people want:  don't see any improvement, so they quit.  G'Luck.