Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Need help identifying vintage gibson 12 string...


Daylen90

Recommended Posts

 

Hello everyone, I have here this vintage gibson 12 string acoustic. But i do not know anything about it as far as model goes. It was obtained in a trade by my grandfather and he passed it down to me. Man he got it from said it was a 50's or 60's hummingbird but i do now know for i am no expert in vintage guitars. The man also said it was made for a famous country singer in louisiana named "Doc" savage. I did not believe that until years later. So im not sure what to think about this. If anybody could please tell me what you think this is i would greatly appreciate it. It has a story behind the guitar but i dont know whether or not to believe it. It went through a house fire as you can see and survived miraculously. But not completely unscaved.

 

A couple days ago i found a hand written note on the inside of the body on the underside, only visible by mirror that reads " Made by M.... W Savage "doc" 1715 filhiol Monroe, Louisiana. December 11, 1973" Monroe is a town near me where the said singer originated.

 

So the questions i need answered are:

 

1. What model gibson do you think this is?

2. Does the note written on the inside necessarily mean it was built in 1973?

3. Do you think it would be worth sending to gibson repair and restore?

4. Do you think it can even be restored?

5. Whats the least amount i should expect to pay to have it restored, just shoot me a number.

post-38578-019740500 1324871729_thumb.jpg

post-38578-077502800 1324871818_thumb.jpg

post-38578-068287600 1324871838_thumb.jpg

post-38578-091363900 1324872651_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This looks like one of the many different 12-string models Gibson produced in the very early 1970's. The 12-fret-to-the-body neck, belly-down bridge, rosewood back and sides (which may be laminate), and three-piece neck say "Blue Ridge 12", but the headstock finish should be walnut rather than black, and the pickguard is probably wrong for that model.

 

However, Whitford says Gibson produced an astonishing variety of acoustic 12s in this period, echoing many of its six-string guitars, so it will take someone with a lot more knowledge than me to pin this down properly. It looks like you can just see a serial number on the back of the headstock. Having that would help us date it, although serial numbers in the period are notoriously confusing.

 

As far as "restoring" it goes, it's hard to know what the guitar needs without examining it. I would not send this to Gibson in any case. It should go to a qualified independent luthier for evaluation of its needs.

 

It is impossible to say what the cost of any work would be, since there is no way of knowing what the guitar needs without examining it.

 

Gibson 12-strings are not particularly valuable. The best ones acoustically--the early B-45-12s--are notoriously fragile structurally. The later ones such as this, which may be structurally stronger, are not known for their acoustic qualitities.

 

If you want more input, you should post a lot more detailed photos, using photobucket. Instructions for posting these can be found in the "forum feedback" section, as the first post.

 

The problem with making significant repairs to any vintage instrument is that a given repair will cost the same thing on a $1000 guitar that it costs on a $4000 guitar. With a guitar with less upside value potential, the cost of major repairs would quickly exceed the value of the instrument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a '64 B 45 12 N. Acoustically, a boomer, nothing I've played since has even come close. Structurally, still sound. No numbers though but since I bought it in 1968 it's the real deal. This may be a real Gibby but there are a lot of deviations from what I would expect from that era. I turned down buying one that had no numbers on the headstock B 25 12 N. Good Luck. Let us know what happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1

 

It looks like a guitar someone has tried to make look like a Gibson.

 

If it is a Gibson , its been Changed ... a B45 Neck.. and a Bridge,, J200 pickguard... whats with the Truss rod cover.. ? Its Not Gibson.. any more pictures? heel shots? back of neck?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I lived in that general neck of the woods for quite a few years and have heard of Doc Savage. He was both a member of a bluegrass band and an istrument maker. I believe he was around in the 1960s and performed with fiddler Fred Beavers (one heck of a player) for a bit. I believe Doc passed away in the mid-1970s. I have never even seen one of his guitars so can't tell you a thing about them. Who knows, it might be something just put together from various parts or in fact be a cool guitar made by a talented builder. But my opinion, for what it is worth, is to go ahead and have it fixed up and rest easy knowing its value lies not in dollars but as a long-time member of your family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had planned on passing it onto my children or grandchildren, i believe i will take that advice to heart zombywoof. Such a small world i cant believe you know him. Everyone that my grandfather knew that knew him has passed away. But i will treasure it gibson or not (sounds like a gibson lol)

 

But to everyone else, how could someone make a "fake" gibson like this and more importantly why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

post-38578-050804100 1324921789_thumb.jpg

 

Is there a number stamped into the back of the headstock? If so, what is the number?

 

It seems odd that someone recognized as a "talented instrument-maker" would put the "Gibson" name on one of his own creations. Most builders have a bit too much pride for that.

 

I think the jury is still out on this one, until we get a bit more information. All of the individual components I see (except the truss rod cover) could be genuine Gibson parts. Given that Gibson was apparently building nine different acoustic 12-string models at the same time in 1969, and still building five in 1971, I would not want to say whether this is a genuine Gibson, or someone else's interpretation of one, without more evidence.

 

From the pictures shown, the only obvious problem with the guitar is some missing tuner ferrules, which seems to happen a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If by ferrules you mean colllars on the machine head shafts then i have those stored away. As i said in the post most of the serial was burned off in the fire... But 3 digits remain and can be made out

 

A3C. Or. ABC doubt its a B though.

 

OK. Just to inject a little confusion (or clarity) into the discussion, here are detail photos of the back and front of the headstock on my 1968 ES 335-12. Note that both my guitar and this one have the standard Kluson double-line tuners, which are correct for this period. If you look at the front detail on both guitars, both the inlaid logo (including the block script itself) and the pearloid triangle inlays were typical of the detail used on Gibson's high-end 12-strings. The general outline of this headstock, and the top detail, are absolutely correct for a Gibson 12. The proportions are a little different from mine, as the acoustic and electric headstocks are not exactly the same.

 

Another thing I noticed on my 12 is that the serial number is barely embossed into the back of the headstock. Exposure to the heat of a fire could cause the finish to bubble so that the numbers virtually disappeared. A serial number beginning in "A", followed by six digits, would be a 1973 serial number.

 

I don't know if this is a Gibson guitar, or a guitar assembled from a mix of Gibson and non-Gibson parts. But it is definitely interesting.

 

It sounds like you have the tuner ferrules, which is good. The ones that go with this type of Kluson tuner are thin-walled pressed nickel or nickel-plated brass, and are not always easy to come by.

 

I find the damaged headstock and tuner buttons really interesting, and I wouldn't touch them if they are intact and sound. At least the headstock of the guitar certainly shows evidence of having been in a fire at one point. Maybe it was damaged and repaired or rebuilt by the man who signed it under the top.

 

It's definitely worth having a qualified luthier have a look at it, but I wouldn't put a huge amount of money into it. Do not refinish it under any circumstances. Do only the required structural repairs, if any are required.

 

It's important to note that it is a good idea to tune all Gibson 12-strings down at least a half step, and use light-gauge strings. Others may disagree on this.

 

ES335-12headstockfront.jpg

 

ES335-12headstockback-1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick this is alot of useful information, ill be sure to relay it when i take it to a luthier to be examined. Your headstock matches exactly to mine , minus the truss rod cover. Now could this be made from a variety of different guitar parts from a gibson factory? Custom built for someone? ( doc savage)

 

Is it possible that this is a conpletely original gibson built from the customers choices of parts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say it is a fake. Too many anomalies. The headstock alone tells me it is fake. The Gibson logo is wrong, the Gibson headsock curl is wrong and the truss rod cover is WAY wrong.

 

Aside from the truss rod cover, I don't quite see what you mean. Did you compare the pictures of my headstock with those of the guitar udner discussion? The proportions of 12-string headstocks are generally different from those of the 6's. The shape of his headstock looks right to me, as does the logo typeface.

 

Anyone else here with a Gibson 12-string from this period with this type of headstock?

 

I'm not saying this is a Gibson. I'm just not willing to dismiss it out of hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the easiest way to tell a fake from the real thing is the TR cover. Gibson never used triangular TR covers with 3 screws - only the bell shape (or slight variations) with 2 screws. This combined with the other fairly obvious inaccuracys makes it pretty darn certain - Definitely NOT a Gibson guitar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its a Mix match of a few Guitars... The neck has been altered.. I see a dowel at the heal.. I dont think its a Gibson either... maybe parts.. but not all...

That is one likely scenario, particularly since it has a signature inside by the guy who claims he made it.

 

What you saw as a dowel in the heel I read as the mark from a strap button, but the detail in these photos is simply not good enough to make any real judgment. We're like a bunch of blind men here trying to describe an elephant by feeling parts of its body. The guy who grabs a leg thinks it's a tree, and the guy who grabs the elephant's trunk thinks it's a big snake. (don't be a smart guy, now: maybe it's a female elephant)

 

This combination of features is unlikely at best. Whether it's a deliberate fake, or a rebuild using legitimate and other parts, I simply wouldn't guess without having it in my hands to examine all the details, inside and out.

 

Trying to determine the authenticity of a guitar by the single most easily changed component--the truss rod cover--is a risky proposition. By the way, look at the truss rod cover on a Flying V sometime: triangular, three screws. With Gibson, there are no absolutes.

 

As Retrorod would say, "jes' sayin'".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was just going on a Visual here of whats posted.. So , I hope I didnt offend anyone.. my guess is as good as everyone elses here.... at first your looks to be a b45 12...

 

Ive seen Mix matched guitars before that a Canadian Builder Frank Gay had done back in the 50s and 60s.. Using Gibson Bodies,, and carving his own necks with his name adorned on the top, in the Day I guess he was a Builder of The Country Singers Bling Guitars.... But by todays standards , hes more of a Hack....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the writing inside is the most telling. I think it should be taken seriously in this case, as it seems very likely the reason he wrote what he wrote is to tell guys like us what it is should one care to ask, and look inside.

 

Just an opinion, of corse, but I don't think it is all that uncommon for a guy who knows how to work on guitars to take parts and match them up. Especially good parts. (I am thinking in 1973).

 

I mean, who wouldn't want a Martin body mated to a Gibson neck?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick has a point, also, the truss rod cover only has 2 screws in mine. Maybe the guitar shop will be able to tell me more about it tomorrow

 

I suspect that pinning this down is beyond the capabilities of the average guitar store, unless they have someone who is a vintage guitar expert. Just look at the number of opinions here from the Gibson experts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the writing inside is the most telling. I think it should be taken seriously in this case, as it seems very likely the reason he wrote what he wrote is to tell guys like us what it is should one care to ask, and look inside.

 

Just an opinion, of corse, but I don't think it is all that uncommon for a guy who knows how to work on guitars to take parts and match them up. Especially good parts. (I am thinking in 1973).

 

I mean, who wouldn't want a Martin body mated to a Gibson neck?

 

Good point.

 

At the least, it tells us the guitar was far enough apart at some point in history for the gentleman to write cursively on the interior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point.

 

At the least, it tells us the guitar was far enough apart at some point in history for the gentleman to write cursively on the interior.

 

Maybe, but if you look at the wood grain on the piece where his name is written, it looks like a doubler plate on the inside of the top, under the fretboard extension, not on the inside surface of the top itself, since the grain of the piece runs diagonally. I'm guessing that plate is glued to the inside of the top, so the name could have been written on a piece of wood that was subsequently glued under the top.

 

There's usually more than one way to skin a cat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just looked it over again, and found that all on the underside of the top except in one section between braces is the light colored wood that runs diagnally as you see in the signed picture. The one oddball brace segment is a darker wood matching the inside of the back of the body.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...