Gibson L-5 Tailpiece Question

[deacon Mark]

Most L5's have the standard L5 tailpiece with the engraved diamond in the middle. Most of the time the diamond is silver plated or possibly it is nickel. Sometimes I have seen the diamond plated in gold not silver. There is also period of time in the late 1980's had an ebony insert with L5 inlay. Personally, I like the traditional diamond inset. However, does anyone have information on the diamond being either gold or silver and does it vary? I ask Larry Wexer and he said from his dealings it does vary and no pattern. That seems odd but Gibson did things odd at times.

[Gilpy]

On my 73 L-5s, it’s silver plated brass. It will tarnish. I could see the brass in an area that was worn.

[wintermoon]

The only ones I've seen w a gold badge/insert/medallion/lozenge were either replated or not authentic Gibson.
afaik they never left the Gibson factory in gold on a production guitar, though I suppose it's possible someone custom ordered one like that at some point.

[Danny W.]

I've owned a ton of them from the early '50's to 2011, none with anything but this:


(1960 L-5CT George Gobel)

or this:


(1987 L-5C)

Easily replaceable parts are easily replaced.

Danny W.

[Midnight Blues]

Here's my WesMo:

[omphalopsychos]

My 47 has a gold one. The insert plating looks as old as the rest of the tailpiece. I can take a blacklight photo to check. Never considered it might not be original.

[lawson-stone]

The insert on mine is tarnished to a blackish/grey. I probably should give it a polish.

[wintermoon]

My 47 has a gold one. The insert plating looks as old as the rest of the tailpiece. I can take a blacklight photo to check. Never considered it might not be original.

here's an old '46 I used to have. the silver was wearing off down to brass.
maybe that's what you're seeing on yours?

[deacon Mark]

My 47 has a gold one. The insert plating looks as old as the rest of the tailpiece. I can take a blacklight photo to check. Never considered it might not be original.

Wintermoon is a Gibson expert on many issues but Larry Wexer did say he has seen them in both varieties. Also I notice on one of the pictures the engraving L5 is on the top cross section by strings. Normally the engraving is right at the end of the tailpiece near rim. GIbson can be all over on some things. Looking at and studying pre--war L5's, some have tailpieces that are hinged, others no insert (medallion,) and once the insert was added you will still find old style L5 tailpieces. Gibson did not list natural finish L5's until 1939 but they actually date to even 1937. Then looking at machine heads the map is all over the place. I think it is whatever they had on hand at the time and where they stored the materials.

[omphalopsychos]

Actually, I found a large number of other 40s examples with a gold insert. Pretty sure it was a thing. It's improbable that this many L5s have had the inserts replated in gold. Note the photos are each of distinct guitars.

[wintermoon]

Actually, I found a large number of other 40s examples with a gold insert. Pretty sure it was a thing. It's improbable that this many L5s have had the inserts replated in gold. Note the photos are each of distinct guitars.

imo

pic #1 the t.p. has obviously been worked on, even the L-5 engraving is almost gone

pic #2 the whole t.p. is worn down to brass [remnants of silver on side edges]

pic #3 looks like my old '46, silver wearing down to brass

pic #4 can't make it out clearly

[omphalopsychos]

I responded before you raised the possibility that it would wear down to brass. I didn't realize the insert was brass under the silver plating. Your explanation makes sense.

[wintermoon]

I responded before you raised the possibility that it would wear down to brass. I didn't realize the insert was brass under the silver plating. Your explanation makes sense.

Yeah, you can see the steel mounting bolts in pic #2
Notice the additional engraving on the earlier t.p., a square on the crossbar and extra lines on the medallion and the star around the Varitone hole.
The earlier one is virtually unchanged since the introduction of the modern style L-5 t.p. in the late 30s which is still in in use today, though the engraving changed to the simpler type on your '47
it's not unusual to see both the old and modern styles in the immediate postwar period as Gibson was using up old stock, just like you'll occasionally see the earlier tweed Geib cases in that era when the brown cases made their debut and became the standard.

[omphalopsychos]

I bow down to the expert.

[wintermoon]

I bow down to the expert.

please, that knowledge and $5 will get me a latte @ Starbucks
but I've never been to Starbucks,or even had a latte, will $5 cover it?

[omphalopsychos]

If we are ever geographically co-located I'm taking you out for a proper meal!

[deacon Mark]

I owe Wintermoon at least a Guinness and Ruben if get in the neighborhood.

[wintermoon]

I owe Wintermoon at least a Guinness and Ruben if get in the neighborhood.

Thanks Mark but I'm off the sauce. But let me take those 2 fancy Italian guitars for a test drive one day and we'll call it even.....

[customxke]

Wintermoon is a Gibson expert on many issues but Larry Wexer did say he has seen them in both varieties. Also I notice on one of the pictures the engraving L5 is on the top cross section by strings.

That’s an L5S….the solid body L5 variant. Those tail pieces are shorter and shallower.

[Danny W.]

1973 l-5s:

[Hammertone]

More:

[Jimmy Mack]

Wow, this thread is a "ride". The knowledge, and the "porn"!

Beautiful guitars, and great photography, by the way.

I'd have to say (as a hollow body fan) that the L5 tailpiece on the L5S looks..... I dunno, way out of scale?? JMO

[Danny W.]

I'd have to say (as a hollow body fan) that the L5 tailpiece on the L5S looks..... I dunno, way out of scale?? JMO

If that bugs you, don't look at these:





Danny W.

[Hammertone]

Wow, this thread is a "ride". The knowledge, and the "porn"!
Beautiful guitars, and great photography, by the way.
I'd have to say (as a hollow body fan) that the L5 tailpiece on the L5S looks..... I dunno, way out of scale?? JMO

If that bugs you, don't look at these:

The Sigs are interesting. Great idea, great playing and sounding guitars, but with a couple of major visual design fails that, thankfully, do not affect functionality.

1. The pickguard is not scaled down to the scaled-down size of the box. It's still sized for a 17" L-5. This is simply laziness, inattention, incompetence, whatever. Dead easy to fix by using an L-4CES-sized pickguard, but they didn't do it.

2. The f-holes are not scaled down along with the scaled-down size of the box. Not only are they too big, but, leaving them in that size and position means that the points of the f-holes do not even remotely line up with the bridge placement, which is pushed lower because the guitar has a 25 1/2" scale length. This looks really wrong. They could easily have used the L-4CES f-holes (and bound them), and located them to approximately line up with the bridge. They could even have had the neck meet the body at the 15th fret, although that might have been too much for them. Bad Gibson!

3. The Tailpiece could have been made a bit shorter, but doesn't bother me at all.

All IMO, YMMV, etceteras.
Here's what a 16" L-5 can look like when the Gibson folks ARE paying attention (this one was built in 1957, has a short scale, and never had a pickguard installed):

[Danny W.]

None of the changes you recommend particularly appeal to me, nor do I think they'd make for a better-looking instrument. What I really like about these guitars is the small body size + longer scale length, and if that puts the bridge in a non-traditional location, so what? As you said, great sounding, great playing guitars.

Danny W.