can anyone please give any info on this l5 supposed to be 47 but did not make blonde in 47

[ay1964]

[ay1964]

[slimt]

I like Blonds... That one is sweet.... Ive owned a few earlier.. and quite a few from later.. but none from the late 40s..

[onewilyfool]

Well...my '47 L-7 is a blonde if that helps you....

 

[jedzep]

Might have been special ordered, as it's not hard to change the finish.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/260939230901?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649

[pfox14]

According to Gruhn's Guide EA 5130 would date this L-5 to 1939. Not 1947.

[j45nick]

According to Gruhn's Guide EA 5130 would date this L-5 to 1939. Not 1947.

 

I agree with Paul. In addition, the label format on your guitar is not the same as that used in 1947, by which time the label text had been greatly simplified. Like Wily, I have a 1947 L-7, although not a blondie. The label text on mine is totally different from that shown on your label, even though the shape is the same.

 

By all the references I have, this is a 1939 L-5.

[L5Larry]

According to Gruhn's Guide EA 5130 would date this L-5 to 1939. Not 1947.

 

I tend to agree with this info. The guitar might also have a FON ink stamped under one of the f-holes, and this would have a letter designated date code. There is published documentation that EA 5173 was used on a guitar with 333 E 5 for a FON (The "E" stands for 1939), and EA 5189 was used with FON 452 F 4 ("F" = 1940). The headstock logo is also period correct for this era, as it changed sometime in 1947 to the slanted script style.

 

For the '39/40 L-5 model year (so to speak), Gibson made the last minor cosmetic hardware changes to the L-5, and it remains virtually unchanged to this day. Natural finish was also introduced at this time (1939), the L-5N (N=natural), and it was the first year of a "cutaway" option, the L-5P (P=Premiere).

 

In 1939/40 a new sunburst L-5 sold for $275, add $15 for a cutaway, and probably a slight upcharge for a natural finish.

 

A couple of notes about the guitar in question:

 

The bridge looks to me to NOT be original to this guitar, or even of Gibson origin. The plastic (celluloid) parts of this guitar seem to be in a somewhat deteriorated state (off-gassing). This can, and will damage this guitar, especially the metal parts, and may already be the cause of the tailpiece tarnish. Although we all know the value of "original parts" to a vintage guitar, the tuners and pickguard should immediately be removed and stored in a sealed plastic bag AWAY from the guitar. New replica replacement parts can be purchased and installed such that NO alterations need to be made to the instrument, and will not affect the value of the guitar.

 

This is one fine looking instrument, I love to strum a few 40's Big Band tunes on this one.

 

Edit: upon further review of the photos...Does the serial number have a faint "6" on the end. IF the number behind the "EA" is 5-digits, it certainly changes the birth-date. Just for reference, Gibson started using the "A" numbers (A-100) in April of 1947.

[ay1964]

There is a faint number after the five digits almost looks loke five or six looks hand written what would that mean, also lower left there is a penciled in 16 not sure if there was a number after that thank you for info so far

[pfox14]

There is a faint number after the five digits almost looks loke five or six looks hand written what would that mean, also lower left there is a penciled in 16 not sure if there was a number after that thank you for info so far

A hand-written number after the EA code would designate which guitar in that particular batch it is. For example: #6 would designate the 6th guitar in batch EA-5130. That wouldn't change the date as being a 1939 L-5.

[ay1964]

It may be stamped but the distance isnt consistant with the rest of the stamp, any way thank you all for the input, now we have to try to put on a price for him to sell it, I know market and the condition all come into play but a while back someone tried to tell him 1500 and I would have to think that would be low based on just looking at others on other sites, once again thank you I know you guys help one another out and thats cool, I sent my dad. Link to this so he can read it after all hes the musician I just am helping out

[ay1964]

Just a little update, left the guitar at elderly for whatever work needed to be done to it. They said it was a 1940 l5 appraised at about 6,500 for ins but sais we are probably loking at 5 to 5 .5 the martin was a 1940 also but valued much less and the 330 was actuall the surprise at about 2,800 thank you so much for the help we will be selling the l5

[Blaster]

I owned an L-5N that was dated from 1948, also still have a L-7N from 1949. There has been enough evidence that some Blonde archtops were built built this post WW2 period, albeit very few.

[slimt]

Just a little update, left the guitar at elderly for whatever work needed to be done to it. They said it was a 1940 l5 appraised at about 6,500 for ins but sais we are probably loking at 5 to 5 .5 the martin was a 1940 also but valued much less and the 330 was actuall the surprise at about 2,800 thank you so much for the help we will be selling the l5

 

Stans Appraisals are Very accurate.. Ive trusted him with a Few of My pieces, and No reason Not too..

 

I would Not use anyone else..