Gibson 1934 L-5 Reproduction

[randyc]

I don't normally look at gibson.com - my browsing is oriented toward archtop.com, elderlyinstruments.com and similar sites that feature used classic designs. BUT for some reason, I looked tonight and found this beauty:



This - the 1934 L-5 reproduction - is it new? Haven't heard any internet chatter about this instrument. It sure looks beautiful and the price is good, by my standards. (I normally make the presumption that about 30% off Gibson's asking price can be negotiated.)

I'm thinking that I could have probably got this baby for not too much more than what I'm paying for the Carvin <sob> ! What are your impressions and have you heard anything about this instrument?

cheers,
randyc

PS: I'm envisioning the De Armond "clip-on" (that I've temporarily misplaced) on this sweetheart ... It's not the $1,000 Rythm Chief that shows up on Ebay but it formerly resided on a 12-string over thirty years ago, and sounded great.

[Squint]

I dunno... at least the Carvin's neck will never break and you will be able to play more styles than with this Gibby.

I can't imagine this new model sounds anything like the original...

[randyc]

I dunno... at least the Carvin's neck will never break and you will be able to play more styles than with this Gibby.

I can't imagine this new model sounds anything like the original...

Well, OK, but why would any guitar neck break (Carvin, Gibson, Fender, Harmony, Danelectro, Kay, Harmony, Samick, Peerless, Ibanez, Teisco and so forth)? That's an improbable problem, right? One would have to DRIVE over the guitar case, right?

I definitely agree that the new model can't sound as good as the original; age of materials is a big contributor to the sound of stringed instruments as we all know. BUT from that perspective I can think of no other guitar manufacturer that can claim superiority of age. There are no older archtop jazz guitars than Gibson guitars; Strombergs, D' Angelicos, D' Other-Somethings, Epiphone, Guild instruments are replicas of Lloyd Loar's work.

NOT that I value more the mass-produced Gibsons over the marvelously hand-crafted and limited-production New York instruments. The market has definitively spoken about relative values - I WISH that I could own one of those 1940-1950 masterpiece instruments !!!

It's said that Gibson still has "the wood", that's the claim to fame - not denied by any credible source. Tooling, drawings and fixtures may (probably) still exist, the craftsmen are competent - certainly no worse than craftsmen employed by other companies. So about 90% of the variables in the equation have been accounted for ... at least in my opinion.

You are totally correct about the lack of versatility. The '34 L-5 can only do one trick!

But here's a thought for a jazz guitarist: this reproduction (accounting for the negotiated price and inflation) would be a bargain even in 1934 !

Cheers,
Randy

[Baltar Hornbeek]

this beauty:



This - the 1934 L-5 reproduction

What are your impressions...about this instrument?

cheers,
randyc

Of all the guitars I've seen online and never played, that's the one I'd try first. The thing is lush.

[randyc]

But here's a thought for a jazz guitarist: this reproduction (accounting for the negotiated price and inflation) would be a bargain even in 1934 !

Wrong ! After calculating the inflation and including the price that I think I could negotiate the guitar downward, this instrument wouldn't be a bargain in 1934. I come up with just under $300 in 1934 value and the L-5 probably sold for about $100 at that time. Does anyone know, BDLH ?

[82Benedetto]

Nothing great about it but the name....

[randyc]

Nothing great about it but the name....

Sorry, don't get it - does that mean you've evaluated the instrument and weren't impressed? Please tell all -

cheers,
randyc

[Drifter]

A comparison in sound, old vs new, would be extremely interesting.

[derek]

That is probably one of those guitars that you either will really love or not. For me, noncutaway, no electronics are as you say, one trick ponies. While certainly an asthetically beautiful guitar, just not versatile enough for me. Haven't heard a thing about it being a new repro model.

[Baltar Hornbeek]

I've been shopping for The Loar 700....poor man's version of that Gibson. I wish they copied the pick guard. The curves on the original so eloquently reflect from the body design.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Wrong ! After calculating the inflation and including the price that I think I could negotiate the guitar downward, this instrument wouldn't be a bargain in 1934. I come up with just under $300 in 1934 value and the L-5 probably sold for about $100 at that time. Does anyone know, BDLH ?

Well, the Super 400 was $400 when it came out, and it was considered very expensive, so I can't imagine an L-5 in 1934 going for much more than $100-$150.

But to get to the original idea: projecting "reissue" guitars back to their original price. Does it matter? If the reissue is cheaper than probably means it was built overseas, and if it's considerably more expensive it means it's destined to be displayed on some dentist's den wall. And much as I hold the Gibson company in high regard, I realize it's the historic company, not the present day one. But I think this model goes a long way towards making up for the Lee Ritenour "L-5".

EDIT: I was just checking. 1934 was the year the L-5 grew from 16" to 17". This guitar looks like it's a 17". That's the way I like it!

[randyc]

I've been shopping for The Loar 700....poor man's version of that Gibson. I wish they copied the pick guard. The curves on the original so eloquently reflect from the body design.

You're right - newer L-5 pickguards are considerably shorter than the original but it was lost on me that the uppermost curve was omitted.

If you buy that Loar and need to dress it up, send me a PM. Given a few measurements I can make an orginal L-5 configuration pickguard for it (I have a small machine shop and a woodworking shop). It's a matter of twenty minutes to run a pickguard once the design has been established. I don't have the "tortoise shell" material but I do have some of the three-ply "ES" style pickguard material.

Two small holes would be required to mount the guard, one very near the neck and one in the "valley" between the two bouts. You can drill them yourself or take guitar + pickguard to the local guitar guy and have him mount it.

(I told BDLH months ago that I'd make one for his L-5 but he doesn't trust me I think )

cheers,
randyc

[chrisp]

[ 82Benedetto] >>>Nothing great about it but the name

Well, that may be too much of an interested-party evaluation.

But I (pretty safely) assume that this L-5 has the soft goopy finish of a modern Gibson, and the fret ends that start sloping and rounding way too close to the E strings. So two serious strikes against this really great-looking guitar.

The Loar looks really worth a serious look for value in a non-super-versatile guitar. A custom pickguard is not a big deal at all to add if you otherwise like the instrument. Dirt cheap even - if you can live with a beveled edge faux binding - Stewmac sells a nice-looking material with layers of black and mint under the tortoise.

[SamBooka]

The Loar has a 175 Style with a carved top and floating PU. I was considering it but reading reviews of the Loar guitars in general left me a little cold for something I cant try before buying. Anyone have any hands on experience with these guitars?

EDIT: And Chrispy has a good ping about the PG. Nothing beats a bound PG BUT from 6 FT away the Stewmac 5 ply looks pretty good (not that you play your guitars from 6 ft away)

[randyc]

Hmmm ... negative opinions from two people who haven't even SEEN the guitar? Gentlemen, you are excused from the jury pool - that's called prejudice.

I'm going to make a presumption that the same folks that made my L-5CES and my L-4CES will be making that re-issue instrument. Which means that I would doubtless like it very much since I absolutely LOVE these two custom shop guitars.

I just haven't noticed their "goopy finishes" and since - like almost all jazz guitarists - I don't do string bending, that "sloping and rounded" fret thing hasn't troubled me with either instrument (although that doesn't mean that it wouldn't bother another person).

Anyway, I'm still very interested in hearing from anyone that actually KNOWS something about the guitar.

Thanks,
randyc

[chrisp]

>>> Gentlemen, you are excused from the jury pool

Hmmm. Summarily dismissive.

A discussion between you and only those who have handled this seemingly rare and new guitar may be a little limited?

My opinion of new Gibsons is that all I have handled or owned have too soft a finish (to keep them from coming back due to checking) and that the fret work is really awful on the outer edges. Others just love these guitars, for reasons that I often find somewhat prejudicial (and seemingly kool-aid influenced.) But that is opinion, and no cause for me to appoint myself jury foreman (or judge?).

[randyc]

Of course it's dismissive, you have no knowledge of the product and a built-in bias. How could your opinion be considered germane to the discussion?

So, would that really bad fret work look like this photo that I just snapped and enlarged 10 times?



PS: I'm still looking for those "sloped and rounded" frets ...

[chrisp]

Fair enough, I appreciate your corrective input and i am sure it helps keep this place in line.

Probably best for me to move on. Thanks again for your helpful input.

[82Benedetto]

>>> Gentlemen, you are excused from the jury pool

Hmmm. Summarily dismissive.

A discussion between you and only those who have handled this seemingly rare and new guitar may be a little limited?

My opinion of new Gibsons is that all I have handled or owned have too soft a finish (to keep them from coming back due to checking) and that the fret work is really awful on the outer edges. Others just love these guitars, for reasons that I often find somewhat prejudicial (and seemingly kool-aid influenced.) But that is opinion, and no cause for me to appoint myself jury foreman (or judge?).

I agree with your assessment.

RandyC, you are very quick to jump to conclusions. Would you kindly stop the prodding? If you don't wish to hear dissenting opinions, you should consider not posting on a public forum.

I have played this guitar. Not only was I not a fan of the original, I'm even less impressed with the repro. I'll keep it short, but it carried much of the stigma associated with poorly manufactured, newer Gibson guitars, and most importantly I was not wowed by the timbre of the instrument.

Then again, I've not found a newer Gibson guitar I like that I've played, but I do take the time to go and play the guitars before I render an opinion. I'd choose an Epiphone Elitist over the Gibsons, honestly....maybe they should consider making a repro...

[randyc]

...RandyC, you are very quick to jump to conclusions. Would you kindly stop the prodding? If you don't wish to hear dissenting opinions, you should consider not posting on a public forum...

Well, my goodnes, the times they are a'changing. The words that I highlighted are exactly the words that I wrote to YOU less than a month ago when you were touting your Asian guitars. Maybe you might recall that.

Regarding your experience with the guitar that we ARE discussing, you made a terse five or six word negative comment, no basis, no substantiation, no explanation. Most of us, making a comment about the guitar - positive or negative - would have pointed out specific features or areas of performance that elicited the comment. When these are not forthcoming, then it's not uncommon for one to make the assumption that the criticism is not cut from whole cloth.

You DON'T need to keep your comments short if you've actually played the instrument. What good are a few brief sentences concerning a multi-thousand dollar guitar? If people are genuinely interested in the instrument, whether or not they LIKE it, don't they deserve more than a few tossed-off lines?

You're not a Gibson fan, fine, many people aren't but I find the lack of respect for the ORIGINAL 1934 L-5 incredible - not this reproduction but THE. REAL.THING. Your wording was ambiguous, just as it was ambiguous when discussing the reproduction. HAVE you played the original? You didn't say that but it was implied, right?

We don't need to go into your conflict of interest problems too far but that's just an amazing statement. The most virulent, vitriolic critic of the company would never make a statement about the original jazz guitar, grand-daddy of all jazz guitars. Astounding.

Ignoring your import ideas, I'd formed the opinion that you were within the mainstream of jazz guitarists and I've agreed with your opinions publicly several times. But THAT statement is way out of the mainstream. It's like saying that the Model "A" Ford was a piece of junk, get it? Or like saying George Washington was a rotten president, LOL !

Nobody can deny the advances in technology and materials that differentiate products made today from their pioneering predecessors. That's something that goes without saying. But wow, man, that's some weird way of expressing discontent with the MODERN product - by spitting on the ORIGINAL product.

Since you are freely offering me advice about my conduct perhaps you'll allow me the same privilege: lighten up, leave business out of personal life, enjoy the give-and-take of the interchange on the forum. You may enjoy yourself more.

Sorry that you think I'm prodding. It's unintentional, I've been an engineer and an engineering manager for forty years and I talk to everyone in exactly the same way. If I think someone is wrong, I say so, ditto when I think someone does good things.

cheers,
randyc

[NSJ]

Just out of curiosity, how different in sound and design was the OLD pickupless '34 L5 to the L7 acoustic archtop (I used to have a '49 L7--I thought it was ok, but still wound up selling it--no regrets on the sale, I wasn't playing it, and I got what I paid for it). The disparity in price between these 2 models must be huge!

EDIT: looks like I spoke too soon, and the Custom Shop has a new replica of that, as well, and for good coin, too--by way of a comparison, I sold my L7 for around $1K.

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/SJL7VSNH/

[derek]

So the bottom line is, no one has seen or played this model yet, right?

[SamBooka]

Tavern Rules:

1) Dont speak unless you have a question or something useful to add.
2) If you dont like people who speak without contributing something usefull, unplug your computer. This is the internet. Get used to it.

I have not played this guitar. My comments on the quality of Loar instruments was based on reviews from Harmony Central. I dont even recognize the f*^&$ HC site anymore so I cannot find those review.

Back to my drinking.

Drew

[82Benedetto]

So the bottom line is, no one has seen or played this model yet, right?

First:
Randy, there is a big difference here. You have strong, anti-asian sentiments and have been deliberately trolling my posts, attempting to discredit anything I say. You try to pick a fight with anything I say, and this is no different. Just stop it and act your age, please. Why is there any reason to bring up completely unrelated things in this discussion?

Derek, if you look before Randy's post, you'll see I actually had the opportunity to play it.

Why is it so impossible to post here without being bombarded with personal attacks or criticisms? Is there an ignore button or something?

All I did was say I played the guitar and didn't care for it, and Randy, once again, has to write a page long post going off on me, attacking my credibility and opinion.

And why am I not allowed to dislike the original guitar? It's not some kind of blasphemy. Are the guitar-review nazi's going to find me and lock me up because some people like it and I'm not allowed to have an opinion? Randy, cut the facist BS. You consistently take anything I say, contort it, and present your own screwed up interpretation to make me look like a dick.

I didn't like the original. It wasn't a player, I was never wowed by the tone, and it was a bit of a one trick pony for me. I played the repro, and it felt like an off the line instrument. If I wanted a guitar in that style I'd get a non cutaway eastman. What else do you want me to say? I didn't like it. It's a pretty guitar but it didn't feel right in my hands, I wasn't thrilled with the attention to detail, and the tone wasn't in my wheelhouse. Get off me.

I'm the only one here that's played it, I commented, and for some reason it's another flame war. Can we delete the rude posting, please?

[randyc]

NOTE: I wrote this before the previous person DRAMATICALLY revised his response. I'll not modify what I wrote except for the P.S. that indicates withdrawal of my previous offer to privately discuss disagreements.

Look - I'm a fast typist, I simply type what's going through my mind conversationally, as if we were sitting around cafe tables as a group. You seem to think that I'm "picking on you" and that's not so. I think that I mentioned (in the post that you're complaining about) that I've publicly taken your position several times.

Do you think that you might be overly sensitive about some of these things? For example, what you perceive as an anti-Asian bias is no such thing. My comments deal with economic issues almost exclusively but they are couched in terms that most of us can relate to, such as guitars and amplifiers. (The only Asians that I've ever been biased against were <ahem> shooting at me, LOL.)

I have a great deal of concern about vanishing key industries and infrastructures in this country and I have pretty much made that my portfolio on all of the forums where I participate. The economic focus, misleading advertising and silly urban legends regarding guitars/amplifiers are areas that I think musicians are not as well-informed as they could be.

It's not possible to be real likeable when topics like this are discussed and I can't pick and choose who to be sensitive with and who to be forthright with ... I'm not intentionally singling you out because I don't LIKE you, there are only TWO threads in which I disagree with what you've "said".

No cause for paranoia - heck if TWO threads suggest that I'm gunning for you there wouldn't be a person who posts routinely on this forum that wouldn't be convinced that I disliked them.

FWIW, there are many members that feel as I do - they are less confrontational and more courteous about these things but they frequently express private support AND private disagreement. I wish that I could be more tactful but when you've been doing this stuff for nearly seven decades ... well, I just don't have the TIME to think about everyone's feelings and how to be inoffensive while still making my point.

Relax ... enjoy. If you want to talk about this further, send me a PM, I'll send you my private e-mail address and we can discuss the perceived problems without getting everyone else involved, OK? (I get cranky sometimes because I'm not in good health and I HURT

cheers,
randyc

PS: WOW - revision of history! I just noticed that you edited your last post and it reads very differently from the original. Please ignore my invitation for private conversation. NOT useful at all.