Late 60s Gibson L-5

[customxke]

Anyone have any thoughts on these? I'm wondering about the diminished headstock angle and overall build and tonality. Specifically speaking of an L5, and not a CES. Anyone with some experience?

[rpguitar]

Beware the 1 9/16" nut width, which should be gone as of 1968 (but always ask or measure). I have a 1970-72 L-5CN. It has a 1 11/16" nut and a somewhat slender neck depth, which I consider very comfortable. Other than plain maple on the back and sides, it's an extremely fine guitar. I did need to do a refret and have a new nut made, but with a proper setup, it takes no prisoners in my opinion. It has a floating Johnny Smith pickup.

I also have a 1947 L-5N non-cutaway. It has a bit of a different sound, but I also use bronze strings on it, so the two guitars are never set up to match in order to properly compare. The '70 is worth less in the collector's market, and people will tell you it's Norlin so it's not worth what you are asking, blah blah. As a player, I don't care. Late 60s you generally escape the Norlin association, but you have the nut width issue instead.

[Jabberwocky]

To add on to Roger's comments, a few of the narrow nut widths slipped out in 1968-1969, L5s and Super 400s, so it pays to get it measured if the narrow nut bothers you.

[wintermoon]

mid '69 is when the switch back to 1 11/16" occured on electric and acoustic L-5's and Super 400's
my main gigging guitar for the last 20+ yrs has been a '69 CES model. it has a slightly wider than 1 11/16" nut.

I have a couple 1960's L-5's, an early 60's one w/the earlier 17 degree angle and the '69 w/the 14 and they sound similar acoustically. the tonality isn't affected that much by the headstock angle IMO, though some folks are fanatical to the contrary but to me, it's either a good guitar or it isn't. mine sounds and plays incredibly great.

one point though, they went back to carved two piece backs in 1970, and that would affect the sound of an acoustic more than the 14 degree headstock angle IMO

[Jabberwocky]

Sorry, Wintermoon, don't mean to quibble with you. I thought that the laminated back and sides affected only the CES models with the Florentine cutaways from 1964 up to 1968. With the return to Venetian cutaways in 1969, all CES models had solid maple back and sides. I do not know when exactly the changeover in nut widths from narrow to standard occurred. I do know that a few 1969 Super 400CESs have the narrow nut widths as do a few L5CESs.

The acoustic Cs always had solid maple back and sides from what I gathered.

[wintermoon]

correct on the last part jabberwocky, the acoustics were always carved
don't believe all the things that are published, there's been a mixture of solid carved backs and plywood backs on electric L-5's and Supers, going all the way back from the late 50's through '64. all the CES models from '65 through '69 are plywood, never seen one to the contrary.

[Jabberwocky]

All right. You have one. I don't . However, I am getting one in April, a 1969 Super 400CES. It has a seam down its back. Is that a reliable indicator of a carved maple back?

[Patrick2]

My own personal experience is exactly what wintermoon points out. I had a 1969 blond L5CES. !-9/16", laminate one piece back. I'll try to post a picture . .. of a picture that I have of it. I was fortunate to sell it to a Japanese buyer for $4,500. That was a bout 15 years ago.

[Patrick2]

All right. You have one. I don't . However, I am getting one in April, a 1969 Super 400CES. It has a seam down its back. Is that a reliable indicator of a carved maple back?

Absolutely reliable!! That's a solid carved back for sure!!

[Jabberwocky]

Absolutely reliable!! That's a solid carved back for sure!!

Whew!

[wintermoon]

nice one jab!
how do you know it's a '69?

[Jabberwocky]

I have the serial number which traces it to 1969. It has the Orange Oval Label, if that helps.

[rpguitar]

I guess it's worth pointing out that acoustic L-5 models from that era are always rare, not so much CES's. So if the OP is seeking one, just be aware that some of the published specs are a "guide only" due to the individual attention the acoustics surely received.

I am anxious to see the guitar that prompted this thread.

[customxke]

Thanks for all the input. The guitar I'm considering has the much maligned 1 9/16" neck, but that only ever bothers me when it's time to sell.

[rpguitar]

Maligned or not, I have a 1967 ES-335 with that neck, and the neck itself is very chunky. The nut width doesn't actually bother me as a player at all. Weird, since I like 1.75" nuts whenever possible, but it is what it is.

Wouldn't mind seeing it (hint hint)!

[Patrick2]

The picture, of a picture . . isn't really that good. I took it for insurance documentation way back when storing photos on a computer wasn't even a thought in anyone's mind. lololol But, you can probably make out how thin the nut width is anyway. You can also see the off gassing deterioration of the pick guard, which I'd forgotten all about.

My council to anyone thinking of buying a guitar with a nut width of 1-9/16" would be . . . if you havent played one already with that nut width, be sure to do so before you buy . . . especially at the prices of late '60s L5Cs. Also, I agree with Roger . . . an L5C might not have even been tampered with in the Norlin years. It very well might be 1-11/16"

[hot ford coupe]

I definitely agree with Patrick on the narrow nut width problem. I had a 61 Byrdland with the thinner neck and I wound up getting rid of it because it was so uncomfortable. Even though I have small hands, my fingers would run into each other all the way up and down the neck. Play that narrow neck first. It could mean the difference between a great playing guitar or a pain in the butt.

[wintermoon]

Jabberwocky,
the guitar looks great but have you inspected it in person?
the reason I ask is that I've seen a few w/that very dark sunburst on the neck w/the unusual shading on the edges and they had factory refinished necks. this was a finish that Gibson was using standard around the late 70s and early 80's.
I passed on an early 60s Super last year that had that finish on the neck, you could clearly see that it was refinished.

check and make sure the impressed serial number is still crisp on the back of the peghead and not faint.

not meaning to rain on your parade, just be careful, hope it works out...

[Patrick2]

Jabberwocky,
the guitar looks great but have you inspected it in person?
the reason I ask is that I've seen a few w/that very dark sunburst on the neck w/the unusual shading on the edges and they had factory refinished necks. this was a finish that Gibson was using standard around the late 70s and early 80's.
I passed on an early 60s Super last year that had that finish on the neck, you could clearly see that it was refinished.

check and make sure the impressed serial number is still crisp on the back of the peghead and not faint.

not meaning to rain on your parade, just be careful, hope it works out...

Well you bring up a very good point with the shading on the neck. Jabber showed pictures with greater detail in an earlier thread. I don't remember the neck looking that dark. In that very same thread, he confirmed the oval orange label, no volute and no Made in USA stamp on the back of the head stock.

I often reference a player local to the Jersey Shore area and a former jazz guitar instructor of mine . . . Vinny Corrao. Vinny's got a 1964 Florentine cut away Super 400. Bought it new in '64. Toured the planet with Brother Jack McDuff with that guitar when he was hand picked by George Benson to replace him in that project. He played the guitar so much . . and rode it so hard . . that he had many refrets and at one point even needed the finger board replaced. The work was almost always done by Tommy Doyle. But, on each refret, Vinny insisted on new fingerboard binding so the nibs would be restored to original condition. So, each refret . . and certainly when the finger board was replaced, the neck needed to be refinished. However, the shading was matched perfectly to the to rest of the guitar. I wonder if that might be the case with this guitar . . . with the shading not perfectly matched?

In any case, a refin'd neck would not be a reason to pass on such a guitar, unless a head stock crack necessitated the refin. However, if refin'd for any reason . . . that should be taken into consideration for a selling price.

[2bornot2bop]

Jabberwocky,
the guitar looks great but have you inspected it in person?
the reason I ask is that I've seen a few w/that very dark sunburst on the neck w/the unusual shading on the edges and they had factory refinished necks. this was a finish that Gibson was using standard around the late 70s and early 80's.
I passed on an early 60s Super last year that had that finish on the neck, you could clearly see that it was refinished.

check and make sure the impressed serial number is still crisp on the back of the peghead and not faint.

not meaning to rain on your parade, just be careful, hope it works out...

Geez, I wouldn't mind one with a factory refin'd neck. HA!

[Bebop Tom]

I have a 1966 L5CES that I find to be my most comfortable archtop to play. I just measured the nut width, and it is 1 10/16". Did Gibson have a transitional width before going to 1 9/16"? Its neck has a nice rounded profile of medium thickness. It is easier to play than my Wes L5, which has a 1 11/16" nut and full sized neck which gets thicker as you move to the upper frets.

[Patrick2]

Geez, I wouldn't mind one with a factory refin'd neck. HA!

Not so fast my friend. I would, and should depend upon why the factory needed to refinish it.

[Hammertone]

I put together a deal for a '68 L-5CES awhile back for a friend

- 1 11/16" nice big neck
- 2-piece carved back
- venetian cutaway.

Nothing about it suggests it was a special order.

[Hammertone]

FWIW, here's some Gibson production information from around then:

Year-------------'64----'65----'66----'67----'68----'69----'70----'71----'72
__________________________________________________ _______
L5C.................23......15......25.....10..... .36......70........8.....10.......6
L5CN.................9........1.......9.......0... .....3......19........2.......2.......6
L5CES.............42......34......23....102....189 ....170......71....101...128
L-5CESN..........10......10.......1........5......11 ......55......25.....26.....65

[wintermoon]

hammertone, I'm going to respectfully disagree.
there are no '68 L-5CES's w/carved backs and venetian cutaways.