Gilchrist Restoring the First Loar

[Timbofood]

I must be missing something, I have not seen anything saying that this has gone to the shop or if it's still waiting. Maybe I'm just missing the chronology of some of these pictures.

I have been told that I live under a rock though.

[Josh Levine]

Have ya'll seen this? Incredible tone coming out of that thing.

[vates]

Pure magic.

[Tobin]

Dang, that did sound great. And an excellent choice for a tune to demonstrate on! Old Ebeenezer is one of my favorites for bringing out a good old traditional Monroe-ish mandolin sound.

[mtucker]

still needs more spankin'...

[f5loar]

Good to hear the No. 1 Loar is remaining in North Carolina. I got to see the photos of the restoration and must say Gilchrist did a remarkable and beautiful restoration of this fine Loar. And as I suspected, with the proper set-up (and repair of the damaged top) it is indeed one of the finest of all the signed F5s.

[JAK]

Does refinishing it take away from, add to, or keep it the same regarding its value?

[Ivan Kelsall]

From JAK - "Does refinishing it take away from, add to, or keep it the same regarding its value ?." . Well,these pics.should answer your question. This is what it looked like pre. & post gluing - photos.courtesy of Steve Gilchrist,
Ivan

[JAK]

Yep Ivan, in this case a picture is worth more than a thousand words. Thanks.

[f5loar]

No question, the value increased after this restoration. How much? It would have at least put it into the price range of a refinished Loar.

[Jeff Mando]

Being the "first" Loar is a pretty good selling point, as well!

[AlanN]

No question, the value increased after this restoration. How much? It would have at least put it into the price range of a refinished Loar.

+ $$

[Tobin]

I'm not up on my Loar history. Is this one truly documented as the absolute first Loar F5 prototype? Or is it just the earliest surviving example that we know of?

[PVia]

If it's structurally stable, I'd play this instrument as-is, no restoration...it sounds great!

Carter's has another Loar, known as the drunken Loar with a big, not-well-repaired crack in the back as well as a dubious refi from the Gibson factory. It sounds amazing and is 75k...great video of Sierra Hull playing it, and over on YT a video of Andy Leftwich with it.

I've been tempted by this one many times...

[Hendrik Ahrend]

I'm not up on my Loar history. Is this one truly documented as the absolute first Loar F5 prototype? Or is it just the earliest surviving example that we know of?

#70281 is the earliest Loar accounted for. It may well be a prototype, as several features are different from all later F5s, such as binding, tuner placement, pick guard bracket and shape of braces. At some point, an earlier Loar may have existed, though. "#70279" is inscribed on a pick guard, which is installed on a July 9th '23 F5.

[Darryl Wolfe]

I'm not up on my Loar history. Is this one truly documented as the absolute first Loar F5 prototype? Or is it just the earliest surviving example that we know of?

Henry is correct. I have been documenting Loars for nearly 40 years. This mandolin is the only known June 1, 1922 mandolin and that is 5 months before any other Loars. Essentially, there are no stand alone known Loars on a particular date other than this one, and it is indeed the earliest documented one.

So, at minimum it is "the prototype" or one of 3-4 prototypes of which none of the others has appeared. At this time in my documentation efforts, I find it quite unlikely that more than one other will ever appear...if that

The only real aching factor is the first Loar depicted in a Catalog. It had a fern inlay and possibly could have been one of the other two. Many of us think that mandolin could be out there.

[Oliver A.]

The only real aching factor is the first Loar depicted in a Catalog. It had a fern inlay and possibly could have been one of the other two. Many of us think that mandolin could be out there.

When was that first depiction of a Loar first issued? If it was in '22, then there is a better chance that the depicted instrument does or did, indeed exist as a prototype. If the catalog came out later, it might just be a depiction of a later model.

On another note, no one has mentioned the binding on this instrument. In the photos, it appears as though it is very discolored or it is something other than ivoroid. It appears to have dark streaks/blotches in it.

On still another note, the owner of this mandolin was probably very wise to have Steve Gilchrist restore this instrument. While other luthiers could have pulled it off (non better though) Steve has the proper credentials to impart the most value to this instrument. I'd say that if the owner paid "fair market value" (whatever that is) he probably increased the mandolin's value by more than the cost of the repairs. I think also that the vast majority of Loar fans much prefer to see this restoration done. That first repair was a grotesque crime against instrument history! There was nothing original or endearing about that botched repair and so undoing it and performing a real repair of the highest quality can only improve the mandolin in every way.

[Timbofood]

There's "repair" and there is restoration. Clearly, Mr. Gilchrist understands the difference.
Many luthiers may posses the skill to have done this project, but, when the subject of the restoration is so important (to us) the best choice was made by the owner!
I love this stuff!

[Hendrik Ahrend]

When was that first depiction of a Loar first issued? If it was in '22, then there is a better chance that the depicted instrument does or did, indeed exist as a prototype. If the catalog came out later, it might just be a depiction of a later model.

The first color F5 ad was published in "The Cadenza" in March 1923 in form of a two-page ad they called "The Gibsonite". Probably published around the same time, an F5 sales folder ("The Gibson Master Mandolin" with Loar's essay "A talk about tone" on the back side) showed the same pics. We see the F5 with older style wiggle end tuners angling towards each other at the top, never seen on a Loar in this combination as of yet, possibly because the older tuners didn't have long enough tuner shafts. Apart from that, this F5 looked quite normal and non-proto, except that this tuner pattern (narrowing at the top that is) didn't appear before #72361, signed March 8 1923; but that's a different mandolin. And of course, this thread's #70281, the first known Loar, also has this otherwise later tuner pattern.
The same "photo", this time in b/w, appeared in the July 1923 issue of "The Cadenza".
According to MV member Paul Fox, Cat. "N" was published not before December 1923. At least the side and back views in Cat "N" show the very same mando as in the Cadenza pics, except that the tuners were now of the modern arrow-end style, apparently manally edited. The front shot (taken from pretty much exactly the same angle as the Cadenza pic), however, shows some similarities and some differences, such as b/i body binding (instead of the usual w/b/i), a unique pg-bracket and the Fern inlay pattern.
Apart from the tuners, the Fern inlay looks pretty much, as if it was manually filled in. Since the only known proto type as of yet, #70281, also has this black/ivoroid binding and a unique pg-bracket (though different from the Cat. "N" pic), the problem is, how much in those pics was edited anyway.
Which is why it's not at all clear, whether another proto type ever existed. Clear as mud?

[Darryl Wolfe]

Yes, Henry...I agree. all of these appear to be edited artwork. I do have a Cadenza two-page ad that is in color. I do not know the date. But the photo is as you describe with canted wriggle end tuners

I agree that Catalog N is later '23. I always figured that the fern shown in Cat N was the original intent for the Loar. But when you take the Cadenza photos, the brochure photos into account....that does get murky quickly. Especially now that the signed July '23 fern Loar has surfaced.

Interestingly enough, the tri-fold brochure has those Feb '23 labels depicted. So even that could not be any earlier than say March of '23 or after

A person would also have to consider how long Cat N took to produce. At that rate, the artwork could in fact be earlier than the other published artwork

[Hendrik Ahrend]

Absolutely. I've always thought of b/w/i binding as worthy to be featured. So why would one fill in nice Fern inlay, but photoshop b/i binding?

[Spruce]

Some great pics of the restoration in the new Fretboard Journal, including an amazing shot of the exposed offset dovetail...
Check this out...you can see how the whole neck was moved over about 3-4 mm or so...
Pretty cool...

[f5loar]

The 2nd ad was this one, also in color and was a full page ad. Gibson did some serious ads for the new F5.

[f5loar]

I was able to get to play the newly restored June 1, 1922 Loar and must say it is one great sounding Loar. I'd sure put it in the top 10 of the best ones out there, maybe even top 5. The restoration to the top and the overall instrument was superb. It's good to know this rare Loar is still out there making a gypsy cry.

[re simmers]

The article and picture shows that the top was in bad shape, but Steve didn't add or replace any wood. It says he used glue and saw dust. Anyone know - How big was the space, and what kind of glue?

Thanks
Bob