BluesKing777 Posted October 31, 2011 Posted October 31, 2011 Is this correct? I am no expert but I have never seen a natural hog top L-00 before. http://www.ebay.com/itm/1934-Gibson-L-00-/380381815300?pt=Guitar&hash=item589085e204 BluesKing777.
BigKahune Posted October 31, 2011 Posted October 31, 2011 . The binding is confusing. The L-0 was all mahogany in the 30s, but I don't think it had top binding. So they're thinking L-00 which had the top binding. I think a saw an all hog L that was claimed to be an L-00 recently - maybe a link from a thread here. .
modoc_333 Posted October 31, 2011 Posted October 31, 2011 an all hog top did happen during this period, and MANY people mix up the L0, L00 and L1 from this period due to the specs constantly changing, and Gibson putting the wrong pictures in catalogs at the time.
vincentw Posted October 31, 2011 Posted October 31, 2011 looks like mahogany...definitely not spruce.
j45nick Posted October 31, 2011 Posted October 31, 2011 I have trouble believing it will fetch that kind of money.
Jinder Posted November 1, 2011 Posted November 1, 2011 What a beautiful ol' box...definitely all-Hog, in those days specs changed daily, there were a fair few all-Hog J45s around too, I believe. Ps, did anyone else notice that it appears someone has written "Prick" on the headstock of that Hog L-00...rather odd!
j45nick Posted November 1, 2011 Posted November 1, 2011 What a beautiful ol' box...definitely all-Hog, in those days specs changed daily, there were a fair few all-Hog J45s around too, I believe. Ps, did anyone else notice that it appears someone has written "Prick" on the headstock of that Hog L-00...rather odd! Looks like "Packy" to me. Maybe Packy was a p****.
jt Posted November 1, 2011 Posted November 1, 2011 It's an L-0, not an L-00. At that particular point in Gibson history, circa 1930, the L-0 had binding front and back and was all mahogany. The L-1 had a spruce top and binding front and back. The L-00 was spruce with binding only on the front. These circa 1930 L-0s are wonderful guitars. I sold mine to Eric Schoenberg to fund the purchase of a 1931 gold sparkle L-2, an even better guitar. But, I miss that L-0. I like all mahogany Gibsons. The Banner era all mahogany J-45s and LGs are great, too. My favorite all mahogany Banner is the 1942 LG-1, which was X-braced just like the spruce topped LG-2 and LG-3.
BluesKing777 Posted November 1, 2011 Author Posted November 1, 2011 I like all mahogany Gibsons. The Banner era all mahogany J-45s and LGs are great, too. My favorite all mahogany Banner is the 1942 LG-1, which was X-braced just like the spruce topped LG-2 and LG-3. I have a 000-15 martin hog top and a LG-0 hop top and I love both. Unfortunately if I bought another guitar while still waiting for a delivery of another one(12 string), I am pretty sure Mrs BluesKing777 would send me to live in the park. The only beef (pork?) I have with hog tops is that (mine) sound different when the weather gets too humid. It says 'Packy' on the headstock - says so in the text on eBay. If it was 'Pr&*&^&' or 'Packing', it would be the result of an ex-wife??? BluesKing777.
j45nick Posted November 1, 2011 Posted November 1, 2011 It's an L-0, not an L-00. At that particular point in Gibson history, circa 1930, the L-0 had binding front and back and was all mahogany. The L-1 had a spruce top and binding front and back. The L-00 was spruce with binding only on the front. These circa 1930 L-0s are wonderful guitars. I sold mine to Eric Schoenberg to fund the purchase of a 1931 gold sparkle L-2, an even better guitar. But, I miss that L-0. I like all mahogany Gibsons. The Banner era all mahogany J-45s and LGs are great, too. My favorite all mahogany Banner is the 1942 LG-1, which was X-braced just like the spruce topped LG-2 and LG-3. There you go, my friends. As usual, JT provides the definitive answer.
BigKahune Posted November 1, 2011 Posted November 1, 2011 It's an L-0, not an L-00. At that particular point in Gibson history, circa 1930, the L-0 had binding front and back and was all mahogany. .... I figured it would come down to that binding. I thought the L-0 was the most inexpensive of the bunch - less binding - which was confusing me. Thanks for the lesson JT.
jt Posted November 1, 2011 Posted November 1, 2011 Thanks for the kind words, folks. What I know simply comes from owning, playing, and writing about way too many old guitars. As for values, the L-1 flattop was first. When Gibson came out with a cheaper model, then around 1926 and mahogany topped, it became the L-0. Later, when it came out with a still cheaper model, it was the L-00 (and the L-0 took on aspruce top at the same time). The L-2 was more expensive. Here are my old Gibsons. Back row are 1928 L-1, 1929 Nick Lucas, 1930 L-1 (I sold that mahogany topped l-0 to fund this gutar, then sold this one to get a 1931 L-2). Front row are 1932 L-00, 1936 L-C, 1942 LG-1, adn 1943 SJ.
j45nick Posted November 1, 2011 Posted November 1, 2011 Here are my old Gibsons. Back row are 1928 L-1, 1929 Nick Lucas, 1930 L-1 (I sold that mahogany topped l-0 to fund this gutar, then sold this one to get a 1931 L-2). Front row are 1932 L-00, 1936 L-C, 1942 LG-1, adn 1943 SJ. JT, you've got some beautiful bits of guitar history there. I'd have trouble choosing between the 1930 L-1 and the SJ.
jt Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 JT, you've got some beautiful bits of guitar history there. I'd have trouble choosing between the 1930 L-1 and the SJ. Thanks, Nick. I've been lucky. I've since added one more Gibson, a Banner L-50 to go with the LG and SJ:
j45nick Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 I've since added one more Gibson, a Banner L-50 to go with the LG and SJ: Could you describe the sound of the L-50 compared to the SJ? Archtops and flattops are such different beasts.
jt Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 Could you describe the sound of the L-50 compared to the SJ? Archtops and flattops are such different beasts. Nick, as you point out, it's a very different beast from a flattop. Louder, less bass, less sustain. At that point in history, the L-50 was Gibson's lowest priced, carved top and back archtop. I once had a nice 1936 L-7, but like this L-50 better. A bit more sustain. A great blues/ragtime guitar, but not as refined a tone as the L-7 and not as good a jazz guitar. I actually bought it because it's one of the really rare archtops with the "Only a Gibson is Good Enough" banners (only on the L-50 and only on a handful). My favorite kid of guitar: very are, not very sought after, and quite inexpensive (maybe half of the current price of Gibson's cheapest, new flattop). I'll try to do a comparison recording.
Steve Swan Posted November 3, 2011 Posted November 3, 2011 The 1930 L-Os are feather light and usually sound great with light guage strings. the asking price seems pretty ambitious on this one.
onewilyfool Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Is the Mahogany topped L-0 ladder braced or x-braced?
jt Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Is the Mahogany topped L-0 ladder braced or x-braced? X braced. All of the larger body L flattops (post rounded, Robert Johnson era models) are x braced.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.