Late 60s Gibson L-5

[Jabberwocky]

Wintermoon and Patrick. Thank you for the heads-up. I shall have to ask the seller a few more questions.

There is a picture of the back of the headstock here: . The first JPEG was misnamed as it was thought mistakenly to be a 1968 instead of a 1969.

It shows NO serial number impressed in the back of the headstock. Cause for concern? The lacquer is checked and the lines only show when the light rakes across it just right. Could it be the lighting in the room that shows the neck as being darker than it is? The ebony bridge base is from an Ibanez.

I appreciate your comments.

I apologise to the OP for derailing his thread.

Edit: I searched the Web and found a few 1969 Super 400CESs listed. It appears that none of the few have the serial number impressed in the back of the headstock.

[rpguitar]

I would think that NO serial number is different from a serial number that appears "not quite as deeply impressed into the wood" due to additional layers of finish spray. And the neck doesn't look dark to me at all. Compare the stinger area in the first (full body) pic with the close-up. The first pic is under-exposed under incandescent room lighting. The neck is clearly mostly yellow with the orange-to-red burst at the ends. Looks lovely and wouldn't deter me in the least.

[Spook410]

Interesting stuff. Always amazed at the history kept by many of the contributors around here.

I have a Gurian with a 1 5/8" that drives me nuts. Would not be able to live with a 1 9/16".

[Patrick2]

Yep! That's what I remember seeing. I would seriously doubt that the neck has been refin'd. The crazing on the back of the head stock is a little unique. But, it wouldn't alarm me . . . just create curiousity on how and why it might craze like that. Over spray at some point? The bridge base inlays are not typical of Gibson Super 4s. They typically have the propellers.

However, I seriously doubt that the handle and the lock on the door are original.

Anyway, as I said when I first saw this Super 4 in an earlier thread . . . . WOW!!!!

edit . . . by the way, I questioned Walter Carter quite a few years back while he was still with Ginson, Nashville about the no serial number stamped into the back of a head stock (actually, they're pressed in not stamped). He told me that some of the arch tops did indeed get out of Kalamazoo without it. Now, I've learned it's not unique to Kalamazoo period Gibsons. My 2010 L5 Wesmo has no stamp (empossment) either.

But, with all that being said . . knowing me as I do . . the first thing I would do upon receiving that guitar (after I did "the dance"), would be to black light it .. . the whole guitar but especially the back of the head stock.

[Jabberwocky]

Back of neck of a 1978 Super 400CES: versus Back of neck of a 1969 Super 400CES:

(I got these off an auction website.)

Thank you, rpguitar, for your comment. I am grateful to all who have weighed in and thank you all.

Patrick, you gotta teach me the Dance. Show me some of your moves, brother.

[Patrick2]

LOLOLOL . . . I already explained "The Dance".

[wintermoon]

the '78 Super in the link Jabberwocky posted has the shaded edges [next to the binding] that I was referring to that Gibson used in the late 70s-80s. it matches the finish in the pics of the back of the '69 he's considering buying, but I can't really see it in the shot of the back of headstock he posted where it's laying in the case [1970s-80s case btw, hmm]

that heavy checking on just the back of the peghead is very unusual, I'd have to inspect that puppy in person.
the Kluson tuners are definitely 80's vintage though. compare them to the ones on the '78 and '69 w/the quilted back. the old style tuners had the small nut between the buttons and the housing, the 80s ones have the nylon washer and no nut.

replaced guard as well as the aforementioned bridge, but those two issues wouldn't be a deal killer for me.

[Patrick2]

[QUOTE=wintermoon;286998]the '78 Super in the link Jabberwocky posted has the shaded edges [next to the binding] that I was referring to that Gibson used in the late 70s-80s. it matches the finish in the pics of the back of the '69 he's considering buying, but I can't really see it in the shot of the back of headstock he posted where it's laying in the case [1970s-80s case btw, hmm]

that heavy checking on just the back of the peghead is very unusual, I'd have to inspect that puppy in person.

Yeah .. . nothing gets past a black light

the Kluson tuners are definitely 80's vintage though. compare them to the ones on the '78 and '69 w/the quilted back. the old style tuners had the small nut between the buttons and the housing, the 80s ones have the nylon washer and no nut.

replaced guard as well as the aforementioned bridge, but those two issues wouldn't be a deal killer for me.

Agreed. Wouldn't be a deal breaker . . . . . unless the guitar is priced consistent with a 1969 all original.

[wintermoon]

really nice back on the one jabberwocky's considering
one other thing, a center seam on a bookmatched back isn't always a true indicator of a carved back.
matching up the wood pattern through the f-holes is the way to check of course
Gibson and others would often use laminated two piece backs on electrics, I have a '63 Super 400 sitting next to me right now w/a 2 piece lam.

there's a slight difference in sound, but it doesn't make a huge difference on electrics

[Patrick2]

really nice back on the one jabberwocky's considering
one other thing, a center seam on a bookmatched back isn't always a true indicator of a carved back.
matching up the wood pattern through the f-holes is the way to check of course
Gibson and others would often use laminated two piece backs on electrics, I have a '63 Super 400 sitting next to me right now w/a 2 piece lam.

there's a slight difference in sound, but it doesn't make a huge difference on electrics

VERY strange!! A '63 with a 2 piece lam back??? How have you confirmed that? Did you look inside the F holes for consistent graining with the inside and the outside of the back? Or, some other way?

I've been a Gibson historian for quite some time now . . . 35 years maybe?? . . . and I've never heard of a 2 piece matched maple back being laminated. Also, I couldn't for the love of me understand why? Not doubting you (well, I guesss I am) but I've never heard of it before.

[wintermoon]

Patrick,
yes, not so strange, please re-read my post. Gibson used them randomly on electrics even going back to the 50's.
for example check out ebay for ES-5 Switchmasters or ES-350's and you'll probably see one or two. and we know those guitars are all ply.

[wintermoon]

here's a couple examples....

1960 Gibson ES 5 Switchmaster | eBay

1953 Gibson ES 350 D RARE Blonde Finish GAT0293 | eBay

[Patrick2]

here's a couple examples....

1960 Gibson ES 5 Switchmaster | eBay

1953 Gibson ES 350 D RARE Blonde Finish GAT0293 | eBay

Well, you definitely "learned" me something wintermoon. But, for as much trouble as it would be to slice maple planks thin enough to use as the top veneer of a laminate, I'm really hard pressed (no pun intended) to understand the logic behind it.?.? Maybe less expensive aesthetic appeal for their slightly less expensive arch tops? We know that Norlin did it for cost savings, even on the top of line arch tops. But, that was one to two decades later.

Also, if you've ever seen the gluing and pressing process used to create a laminate back and top . . . two piece book matched seems even more questionable. I've seen this done at the Heritage plant . . . and on one of the very same machines Gibson used when they were doing this back in K'zoo in the '50s and '60s. Heritage uses this machine

While believing you to be 100% accurate, I will once again go back to my ultimate sources of Gibson information, Aaron Cowles and Marv Lamb to find out why. (Been out of touch with Walter Carter for some time now . . . )

[Hammertone]

Bookmatched laminated plates are no big deal - they have been used for as long as laminated guitars have been made.
When manufacturers buy their flitches of veneer, it's common practice to bookmatch them - it looks pretty and allows for a narrower veneer sheet. Here's a typical example:



Hofner and Otwin both used one-piece laminate and bookmatched laminate layered backs and tops on their archtops in the 1930s. Most post-war German makers used them as well.

[wintermoon]

depends how you define mid 60s
my '64 CES has a carved back and I've seen others. never seen a '65 w/ a carved back though.

[wintermoon]

florentine, there are no venetian cut CES models after mid 1960 until '69 except for a handful of custom orders floating around out there, ala Wes' guitars.

[wintermoon]

yes, check through the f-hole and see if the grain lines up perfectly w/the back.
for example I have an early 60s Super 400CES w/a bookmatched back w/moderate flame, but the inside is heavily figured which = plywood

[Jimmy Mack]

A lot to learn??? It seems that no two are alike.

My '81 L5 CES has a bookmatched 2 pc. back - on the outside, mild flame. Inside, after pulling the neck p/up and staring inside, I find it hard to match inside grain to the outside. Unfinished wood inside does not show flame like the finished outside. Linear grain is hidden in the dark (black) lacquer on the outside, but not on the inside.

But I can see very clearly, how the inside back is very carved out, to match the arch of the back.

So, I'm assuming it's a carved 2 pc. back of maple ???