1908 Gibson A3 or 1906 Gibson "Orville Label?" Opinions, please!

[Guitardunord]

I am looking to purchase one of two instruments, a 1908 Gibson A3 or 1906 "Orville Label," (small pick guard, glued to top). The Orville label mando was refinished many years ago. I've always loved the sound of the Gibson A models, but know little about the earlier designed model. It appears to have a thicker top, (photograph), but not sure. Does anyone have any experience with them or can speak of the sound, compared to the later A models? I would appreciate any information/suggestion/opinions. Thanks!

[pfox14]

The early one is an A-1 and appears to be in excellent condition. Would love to know the serial #s on both. I am guessing that the A-3 is later than 1908.

[danb]

You should try them and trust your ears!

The "1908" looks a bit later to me, maybe 1911-1913 range..

Very broadly, the earliest "Orville Label" A models can sound a bit "tinny" or overly treble in pitch compared to the later models. There are some real killers in this period though, so it's hard to generalize safely!

Back to the original point, I'd say you should probably play both of them and see what you think. I think the older ones look much nicer though!

[goaty76]

I am aware of the earlier mandolin you posted about. I'm really into the earliest Gibsons and it caught me eye. It's from a little earlier than listed. More like '03/'04. On the website there are many more pics of it. I'll leave it up to you if you want to supply a link. It would probably be helpful for discussion and I don't think anyone here would snap it up from under you. Anyway, a couple of couple of cool features of it are that it still has the long "Orville" velute on the headstock as well as probably still having an enlarged cavity by the neckblock. It does have the pointed neck heel, unlike the earliest ones, but is probably one of the first to have this now standard feature. It's probably the earliest Gibson Co. instrument for sale anywhere right now.

Phil

[Polecat]

...you should probably play both of them and see what you think. I think the older ones look much nicer though!

Absolutely.

I recently bought this 1908 A3, and am loving it. Living in Southern Germany, and the vendor being in Kansas, USA made it something of a leap of faith, but the salesperson was kind enough to make a video of him playing the instrument and send it to me which helped a lot in the decision. I deliberately didn't ask for advice here because I wanted to make up my own mind and am really glad that I did.
As danb pointed out, one can't really generalize regarding tone, but if either of the two mandolins you're considering sound at all like mine and your taste approximates mine, you'll be happy.
There are much better informed members than me, but if the A3 is from 1908 (which is easy to tell from the serial number), the tailpiece cover is probably not original (if that is important to you).

[Bob A]

You might want to ponder whether your preference might be historical rather than musical. I imagine Orville-labeled mandolins are rare; if the one pictured has its original finish, it would be even more unusual. (FWIW, it seems too bright and fresh to me to be over a hundred years old, but I'm no expert on these things).

There is no shortage of Gibson A-style mandolins from later periods.

If your decision is based on musical qualities, you'd have to compare the two, preferably side-by-side, to decide. While they both appear to be in very good condition, in-hand examination is necessary to rule out potential problems.

[Guitardunord]

Thank you, all, for the info and comments. The older A1 has been refinished. I would love to decide with them "in hand," but one is in Canada and the other in New York. I appreciate your help!

[Guitardunord]

And, the serial number on the A3 is #9036.

[Ken Waltham]

I will make a generalization on this topic for what it's worth. First, I will say Goaty76 is the guy to ask about early Gibson/Orville instruments. He knows the most. Most knowledge, most in hand experience.
Second, for me, the earlier they are, the worse they sound as a general rule. Go into the mid/late teens or twenties, they are the good ones IMHO. And, there's tons of them. As a rule, they're all great.

[mrmando]

Well, if they're being sold by reputable dealers, you should be able to buy both of them on approval and return the one you decide not to keep.

I have a weakness for A3s and suspect I would prefer the A3 in terms of tone and playability. But the early A1 is pretty cool. Are the asking prices similar?

[F-2 Dave]

And, the serial number on the A3 is #9036.

My A-4 has serial no. 9041 and has an Orville label and pineapple tailpiece. I would think serial no. 9036 would have the same, but it wouldn't have to. If I was looking to buy without playing first, I'd probably go with the A-3, but the A-1 is pretty cool.

[JeffD]

I would think that any differences inherent to the design are going to be hidden by the much larger differences in how they have fared these many many years since they were built.

[mrmando]

It could be that the A3's serial number is really 19306 or 29306, with the first digit being too faint to read. We'd need to know the factory order number to clear up the mystery of its age.

[Guitardunord]

Yes, both around $1,600.

[bootinz]

I have this old warrior. It has seen better days but I believe it is 1902ish? the label is unreadable so I don't know the serial #. I thought it might be an interesting contrast to the other mandos shown.

[goaty76]

Ken, thanks for the kind words.

Bottinz, nice mando. It appears to be from that '03/'04 time. Slightly earlier than the one in the original post as it still has the top of the back rounded instead of the later pointed design. However the back doesn't seem to have the "Orville carve" so not one of the very first ones. If I had to guess it would fall roughly between serial numbers 2700-2875. If you look at the side of the headstock there might be a serial number stamped into it. This was done on the very early Gibson Co. instruments.

Phil

[pfox14]

A-3 serial # 9036 would date to late 1909 or possibly early 1910, which makes sense to me. Gibson stopped doing the inlaid pickguards or "guard plates," as they called them, in approx. mid-'08 and by 1909, all the mandolins had elevated pickguards.

[mrmando]

A-3 serial # 9036 would date to late 1909 or possibly early 1910, which makes sense to me. Gibson stopped doing the inlaid pickguards or "guard plates," as they called them, in approx. mid-'08 and by 1909, all the mandolins had elevated pickguards.

It seems early for the Guaranteed label and the tailpiece, though. If we could see the pickguard clamp we'd have a better idea.

Love that old wildflower inlay on bootinz's mando.

[mrmando]

Yes, both around $1,600.

It sounds fair for the A3, maybe a little high for the A1. Hard to price the A1. Refinish reduces the value, but on the other hand it's very old, so it's rare, and that increases the value.

[Bob A]

Rare is nice, when coupled with desirability. Consider how extensive the market might be if you're attempting to establish value. Alterations like refinishing are major detractors for a collectable.