Model?

[weldaar]

Can someone tell me what model Gibson this is? I know it's from the 1940's

[PTC Bernie]

Possibly an L-50? Do you have the pickguard?

[weldaar]

This is the way it came to me. There is a pretty nasty crack on the back as well. I know someone who can repair that. I know it affects the value, but it's an heirloom and most likely never be sold.

[weldaar]

Possibly an L-50?

I was looking at pics, and the L50 has a larger headstock then this one does.

[HHP]

Looks more like an L-30

[weldaar]

Yeah, that looks a lot like it. Thanx

[Wade Hampton]

Weldaar, could you post a photo that gives us a better view of the body shape, the way the guitar in HHP's post is shown? It does look as though the guitar you have has the same shape as the one HHP showed us, but at that angle in the photo you showed us it's hard to tell.

Next question, how wide is the guitar at the lower bout? If it's 16 inches, as I suspect, it probably got built in the original Lloyd Loar L-5 body mold, as did the J-185.


whm

[weldaar]

Unfortunately this guitar is at my friends house. I will post better pics when I get it back. It is around 16" give or take. Wouldn't the S/N tell something?

[Silly Moustache]

One of the most important aspects is whetherthe fretboard extension is glued ontothe top, or whether it is above the top.

I think that any with the fretboard on the top (as you would see on a flat top) then it is a more budget model - which are L xx, whereas ones with raised fretboards tend to be L-x (L-5, L-4 etc).

See: http://www.guitarhq.com/gibson2.html

[Wade Hampton]

Originally Posted by weldaar

Wouldn't the S/N tell something?

Oh, man, it's clear you haven't delved too deeply into vintage Gibson guitars, or you'd know better. Gibson serial numbers are incredibly chaotic, at least from the era in question. It's not a nice, neat, linear system like Martin's, where the serial number will tell you what year the guitar was made. From what I understand, with Gibson there can be as many as six different guitars that have the same serial number.

That's no longer the case, and hasn't been for at least twenty or thirty years. But back then.....

Bear in mind that I am by no means a vintage Gibson expert, and it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if one of those Gibson experts were to show up and tell me I'm completely wrong about those specific archtops built in that specific five year period.

Or whatever.

But Gibson guitar history can get very murky, and don't expect consistency or accurate record-keeping from them. Going from Martin's precise, measured approach to Gibson's "Yee haw, what the HAY!" approach is kind of like going from the mathematical precision of Johann Sebastian Bach Brandenburg Concertos to Lewis Carroll's "Alice In Wonderland."

So, short version: with an old Gibson guitar you tell what you have more accurately by looking at the various appointments and construction details than you can by the serial number.

Hope that makes sense.


Wade Hampton Miller

[weldaar]

Oh, man, it's clear you haven't delved too deeply into vintage Gibson guitars,

Ding Ding, we have a winner No I haven't, that is why I am asking others who know more than I do. Plus, I am new to acoustics as well. Especially older ones. But thank you for enlightening me on the S/N issue.

[weldaar]

According to the link you posted, this is what this guitar appears to be. Very close to this. The flat back really stands out in my mind.

Model: L-30 Acoustic Archtop
Available: 1935 to 1943.
Collectibility Rating: D- (a very basic non-cutaway model).

1935 L-30 introduction specs:
14.75" wide, flat back, adjustable bridge, trapeze tailpiece, elevated unbound pickguard, single bound top and back, dot fingerboard inlays, silkscreen peghead logo, black finish.
1937 L-30 specs:
dark mahogany brown sunburst top, brown mahogany finish on back and sides.
L-30 discontinued in 1943.

[Wade Hampton]

After I wrote:

Oh, man, it's clear you haven't delved too deeply into vintage Gibson guitars,

Weldaar replied:

Originally Posted by weldaar

Ding Ding, we have a winner No I haven't, that is why I am asking others who know more than I do. Plus, I am new to acoustics as well. Especially older ones. But thank you for enlightening me on the S/N issue.

Oh, hey, I understand. I wasn't meaning what I wrote as a putdown, I was just remembering when I first started looking into old Gibsons myself. Having come from the neat, orderly world of old Martins, it was was discombobulating to come face to face with the near-total chaos of old Gibsons.


whm

[weldaar]

No worries, it's all good. This is how we learn, right?

[weldaar]

OK, More pics. Sorry for the poor quality, these were taken with a cell phone for me.