Underside of Saddle Notched for Thumbwheels?

[Bill Eisele]

A friend of mine is interested in purchasing a pre-war Gibson archtop from an out of town dealer but has concerns that it might need a neck reset. The two potential signs of that are the underside of the saddle is notched to recess the thumbwheels to allow the saddle to be lowered even more than it would otherwise be. And, there is very little clearance between the tailpiece and the top of the guitar. I am including a photo showing the saddle and the tailpiece. My friend has been told that the action is "good," but we don't have measurements, and that the guitar has never had a neck reset. Have you seen this notching done to recess the thumbwheels before and is it indicative of the guitar needing a neck reset? I guess it's possible that the guitar is stable at this point but is that just wishful thinking?

Thanks!

Bill

[daverepair]

Based on the one photo, IME, I would say it would likely benefit from a neck reset. The saddle is notched for the wheels, and more important, is thin( or low)in height. The saddle also appears notched to lower the high E and B strings, also indicating a neck set is needed. I usually like to see an archtop bridge height of at least 3/4” to 1”( as a rule of thumb), and that bridge appears lower than that. The guitar might still play well, but I have found that tone and volume will be lacking with a bridge that is too low.
What year and model of Gibson?

[ThatRhythmMan]

This is an example of what the bridge would have looked like before the saddle was notched. This bridge has a height of 0.85”. This is on a 1937 L-50 with a neck joint that has the end of the fingerboard elevated above the top of the guitar (for sale if he’s looking for other options). The bridges are usually a bit lower than this on the ones that have the fingerboard that is flush with the top of the guitar in my experience.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bill Eisele]

Based on the one photo, IME, I would say it would likely benefit from a neck reset. The saddle is notched for the wheels, and more important, is thin( or low)in height. The saddle also appears notched to lower the high E and B strings, also indicating a neck set is needed. I usually like to see an archtop bridge height of at least 3/4” to 1”( as a rule of thumb), and that bridge appears lower than that. The guitar might still play well, but I have found that tone and volume will be lacking with a bridge that is too low.
What year and model of Gibson?

Thanks for your reply, davesrepair! All good insights into the reality that it would benefit from a neck reset. And, I hadn’t even considered the fact about tone and volume being diminished with a low bridge. It’s a 1934 L-7. I’m assuming that the previous owner(s) tried to avoid the neck reset by notching out the recess for the thumbwheels and, as you point out, notching the saddle to lower the high E and B strings.

[Bill Eisele]

This is an example of what the bridge would have looked like before the saddle was notched. This bridge has a height of 0.85”. This is on a 1937 L-50 with a neck joint that has the end of the fingerboard elevated above the top of the guitar (for sale if he’s looking for other options). The bridges are usually a bit lower than this on the ones that have the fingerboard that is flush with the top of the guitar in my experience.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for your reply, Chuck! And for the example photo of what the bridge should look like in its intact state. Definitely a good point of reference. I actually sent my friend your listing but he is focusing on the pre-war L-7’s and L-12’s. Ideally he would be looking for a pre-war L-5 with the dot neck or an Epiphone Masterbilt Deluxe. But they have become out of reach for mere mortals. That L-50 is very unique and looks to be a great guitar at a good price.

[ThatRhythmMan]

Thanks for your reply, Chuck! And for the example photo of what the bridge should look like in its intact state. Definitely a good point of reference. I actually sent my friend your listing but he is focusing on the pre-war L-7’s and L-12’s. Ideally he would be looking for a pre-war L-5 with the dot neck or an Epiphone Masterbilt Deluxe. But they have become out of reach for mere mortals. That L-50 is very unique and looks to be a great guitar at a good price.

Ok, he might want to keep in mind that this L-50 is essentially a dot neck, 16” L-7 in terms of build. It has all of the best features to be found in an L-50 and the L-50 can vary a lot. I have a ‘35 Masterbilt Deluxe also, but it’s been retopped. It’s still a great guitar, but not for someone who is looking for originality.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bill Eisele]

Ok, he might want to keep in mind that this L-50 is essentially a dot neck, 16” L-7 in terms of build. It has all of the best features to be found in an L-50 and the L-50 can vary a lot. I have a ‘35 Masterbilt Deluxe also, but it’s been retopped. It’s still a great guitar, but not for someone who is looking for originality.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for letting me know, Chuck. If I was looking for a pre-war 16" dot neck, I would be seriously considering your L-50. It's about as close as you can get to the L-7 without spending the extra money to get there. I did point it out to him but he is focused on finding an L-7 or L-12. And, I did see the '35 Masterbilt Deluxe, but he is looking for originality. Wear appropriate for the age of the guitar is fine and play wear showing that it hadn't been stored away for decades is even better. But no refins, new tops, etc.

[daverepair]

I have seen the Reverb listing for the '34 L-7 in question, in the OP. It does indeed look to be in very nice condition, even needing a neck reset. IMO, and IME, neck resets are often simply 'maintenance', and many(if not most) good archtops and flattops require them, eventually. So the need for a neck reset should not by itself be a reason to not purchase an instrument, especially if the buyer has a trusted luthier to do the work.

[Bill Eisele]

I have seen the Reverb listing for the '34 L-7 in question, in the OP. It does indeed look to be in very nice condition, even needing a neck reset. IMO, and IME, neck resets are often simply 'maintenance', and many(if not most) good archtops and flattops require them, eventually. So the need for a neck reset should not by itself be a reason to not purchase an instrument, especially if the buyer has a trusted luthier to do the work.

I agree with you about the L-7 in question being in very nice condition even with the possibility of needing a neck reset. I think the price of the guitar was just dropped which should cover the cost of the neck reset. And, I'm also in agreement with you about neck resets being considered maintenance because all guitars will need eventually one. Right now the problem is finding a trusted luthier locally to perform neck resets. I have a trusted luthier who has extensive experience performing repairs but was surprised to find out that he doesn't perform neck resets. I'm quite sure he is capable of doing them but I'm guessing that he likes to do repairs that take less time so he can have more throughput with less hassle. He has told me that he much prefers doing setups and fret work over more complicated repairs. So that puts us in the position of trying to either find someone locally who can be trusted to do neck resets or to ship the guitar out and back at added expense and risk of breakage to someone who is capable and trusted to do this kind of work. I'm waiting to hear back from the luthier if he has a recommendation for someone who can perform neck resets locally.

IIRC, a lot of the listings for these pre-war Gibson archtop guitars do indicate the possibility of a neck reset sometime in the past. And, if there is no mention of it being done it probably either needs to be done or it it just wasn't mentioned in the listing. Neck resets for these guitars are just expected sooner or later.