1924 A2Z (?) questions

[Hendrik Ahrend]

Also...back to the Spann serial number thing. If his assertion of serials assigned at shipping were fully fact, then consecutive serial numbers with matching FON's would be ultra rare, not the norm

But then again, why are later serial numbers assigned to earlier FONs so often?
F5 #75325 / FON 11965 vs. A2Z #80515 / FON 11963 or
F5 #71634 / FON 11739 vs. A #71103 / FON 11744

And what would be the purpose of serial numbers in the first place?

[Darryl Wolfe]

But then again, why are later serial numbers assigned to earlier FONs so often?
F5 #75325 / FON 11965 vs. A2Z #80515 / FON 11963 or
F5 #71634 / FON 11739 vs. A #71103 / FON 11744

And what would be the purpose of serial numbers in the first place?

I don't see a lot of discrepancy in that data. Could easily be the size of the batch or how long it took the build to get to the serial part of it. That data does not reek of waiting until it was sold or shipped to assign a serial number, nor of the instruments within the batch not being consecutive serials

[Hendrik Ahrend]

I don't see a lot of discrepancy in that data. Could easily be the size of the batch or how long it took the build to get to the serial part of it. That data does not reek of waiting until it was sold or shipped to assign a serial number, nor of the instruments within the batch not being consecutive serials

I beg to differ. A2Z #74749 has a 1923 FON 11971 (according to Joe's list) and 1923 hard ware. The aforementioned A2Z #80515 has an even earlier FON 11963 but later machine heads (worm over!). Both ser.# and tuners point to 1926, which leads me to believe that FON and shipping date are closely connected. I may be wrong, Darryl, convince me.

[Darryl Wolfe]

Let me temper all of my comments as...this is my opinion, but based upon my observations

Well, first off, 11971 is not a '23 FON and worm under tuners were used until they ran out well into '25 and '26 (on some instruments)...not so on A models

FON 11985 is a known FON that covered Dec 1, 1924 Loars and most of the unsigned Loars Both of your examples are far too close to that number to be '23's and fall directly into the middle of "they had both tuners by now"

My July '23 snake A2 is 11865, sporting a 73922 serial..worm under, no worm over spotted yet

My '24 A2z is FON 11919 serial unknown, but this aligns with known mid-late '24 (around 78962 in serial number, a batch of A2z's with that FON)...and has worm over tuners

BUT...the most important part, is that they did not drill for tuners until after they were finished, and right when they were strung up. So with that said...anything can have any tuners...and this is why tuner placement/inlay placement sucked on some..they didn't care

Explain this:
http://www.mandolinarchive.com/gibson/serial/79719
and this
if not so
http://www.mandolinarchive.com/gibson/serial/86104
http://www.mandolinarchive.com/gibson/serial/87346

[Hendrik Ahrend]

Well, first off, 11971 is not a '23 FON and worm under tuners were used until they ran out well into '25 and '26 (on some instruments)...not so on A models

Since my assumption is that Joe's FON list is quite reliable, 11971 is, indeed, a '23 FON.

FON 11985 is a known FON that covered Dec 1, 1924 Loars and most of the unsigned Loars Both of your examples are far too close to that number to be '23's and fall directly into the middle of "they had both tuners by now"

My July '23 snake A2 is 11865, sporting a 73922 serial

[/B][/B]
My '24 A2z is FON 11919 serial unknown, but this aligns with known mid-late '24 (around 78962 in serial number, a batch of A2z's with that FON)...and has worm over tuners

BUT...the most important part, is that they did not drill for tuners until after they were finished, and right when they were strung up. So with that said...anything can have any tuners...and this is why tuner placement/inlay placement sucked on some..they didn't care

Explain this:
http://www.mandolinarchive.com/gibson/serial/79719
and this
if not so
http://www.mandolinarchive.com/gibson/serial/86104
http://www.mandolinarchive.com/gibson/serial/87346

Ouch, my statement didn't make sense. I accidentally mixed up FON and serial number. Of course I meant that shipping (not the FON) is tied to the serial number. Darryl, of course, you are right. Sorry for the confusion; my bad.

But still, I maintain that Joe's FON list is correct even for 1923, and that the above mentioned FONs 11919, 11971, 11985 are, indeed, from 1923. And especially that assumption would explain a lot. When Harry Ferris joined Gibson by Oct. 2nd 1923, we know that one of the first measures he took was putting a halt to overproduction. Now, in that light, it makes perfect sense to me that the costly but unsellable F5s were his first target. Especially the Master Models must have remained basically untouched and left lying half-done (to varying degrees) on the shelves between 1923 and 1925 and were assembled sporadically whenever an order came in. They were made ready for shipment largely in the order they were prepared earlier. But occasionally an earlier half-done '23 F5 was finished and signed in 1924, such as the side-bound #75706 from the well-known July '23 batch. That would also answer the question, why the later F5s (starting with FON 8231) are such a different animal: There is this gap of about 2 years between the last Loars (and unsigned Loars) and the first "real" post-Loar F5s. (I'd bet the Fern Loars - so different from all other F5s - may well have a 1924 FON; the H5s do).

And of course you are right, they drilled for the tuners, when the mando shipped. Exceptions are to be expected. #79719 is a good example. Note that all A2Zs up to ser. #76024 have worm under gears and all A2Zs after #77613 have worm over gears, but the FONs are all over the place. Which just indicates that gears, serial number and shipping belong together.

[MikeEdgerton]

If you assume that Gibson was like any other manufacturing company then you can also assume that they found additional inventory from time to time and just used it. When a case or partial case of tuners was found they didn't just eat the cost they probably put them into production. That would explain the overlap. I didn't realize they didn't drill the tuners before they finished the instrument.

[Hendrik Ahrend]

(It's sometimes late at night when I post, and I get confused.) Well, what I meant was, they drilled for the tuners, when the mando shipped. But in the case of #79719, they put a newer (later '20s worm over) set of tuners on an older ('24) Loar.

[Timbofood]

This is the kind of information I do so enjoy about this site! You guys have made such an in depth and "ONGOING" study of the information. The generosity, knowledge and, the civility with which it is shared is heartwarming. The humor isn't bad either!
Strong work, people!

[Darryl Wolfe]

But still, I maintain that Joe's FON list is correct even for 1923, and that the above mentioned FONs 11919, 11971, 11985 are, indeed, from 1923. And especially that assumption would explain a lot. When Harry Ferris joined Gibson by Oct. 2nd 1923, we know that one of the first measures he took was putting a halt to overproduction. .

I'm sorry Henry, but I cannot agree. Yes, I agree that they changed in late '23 as far as their philosophy.

But I do not agree with Mr.Spanns list of FON's He clearly states 1917-1923 FON's as 11000 to 12000. But, he says it is from visual examination of instruments. He states no firm source other than opinion (of which I am simply stating mine)

The problem that flies in the face of his info is Catalog price lists and their issue date and Catalog listings for certain instruments. Now, we know it takes time to add and instrument to a catalog and publish a new one. But price lists were published fairly often and reflected new instruments.

If, we were to believe Spanns FON information at face value, then all Loars were made In 1923, including '22's and 24's (which obviously have signature labels in them) Now, I realize they could have been signed and serialized at any time. But, the information presented by Spann implies that A2z's were all made in '23, and dont't even show up on a price list until '24 nor a catalog until '25. The same goes for the obscure style 5's such as L, H and K which show up far later than their respective FON's

Spanns range of FON's covers 7 years for 11000 - 12000. For creativity let's extrapolate that over his time period. Let's assume 1917-1923 was fairly stable in production. That would be 1425 FON's a year. That would mean 1923 started off the year at 10575 and that truss rods did not show up until late '23, years after the patent. It would also mean that the mando-viola 70321, and FON 11721 is a '23 creation...later '23 at that. Now, Spanns serial number listing conveniently more or less agrees with common understanding during this period, and would date the mando-viola and all signed 22 Loars, dated '22 as '22 models.But by late 23, 24 and 25, his serial number list seems to derails a bit

How can that be if his FON list says the were built in at least mid to late '23. My extrapolation cannot be 60% off. Again, study the price lists that have actual dates on them

I have in my possession a purchase coupon/receipt for A style mandolin number 77762. It is dated the day after Christmas 1924. This is a 1 1/2 years before Mr. Spann indicates that serial number is issued. The date on the coupon fully is in line with conventional thinking on dates during the Loar period. And It fully supports the December 1, 1924 signature date for Loars and their respective 11985 FONs and 798xx serials. Now, just think, when was that purchased mandolin built. Being a higher sales model, probably not too long before purchase. But if we wish to argue that it could have been in the store for a long time...then this pushes things even further from what Mr. Spann is saying


There is one crack in the fence of my stand here. I do believe that it is possible that it took much longer to complete these batches of instruments than we think. We all know that the FON originated off of a consecutively number pad of paper that probably had multiple carbon copies

Someone decides that they need 24 A2z's. The FON at this point exists and is attached to what will become reality before it even makes it out onto the factory floor. We do not know the backlog, we do not know how long it takes to make them, and we do not know if varnished F5's have to hang for 4 months after they a brush finished. So it is very conceivable that the FON's did indeed originate in '23 that we are arguing over. But these situations are not factored into stated "construction" dates.

I much prefer to look at it from a finished instrument stand point and what FON is attached

[Darryl Wolfe]

Out of respect for the original poster of this thread, I have asked Scott to move some of this to a new thread

Edit:

Scott is tied up, so I'll do the best I can

Here's a link to the new one

http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/sh...son-discussion

[danb]

Here are 60 A2zs at the archive.

The z sometimes drops from the label when it's clearly the whole package (blonde top, w/b binding). There's at least one paddle head z.

The A3 seems to be the basis for the a2z- the same binding & purfling was used minus the white top, and + the snakeahead.

Tuners are all over the place- your best bet to make sense of them is to sort by fon, then serial. Fon is probably when it was build, serial is when it was set up & shipped.

So FON will pretty much put them in build order, and serial might catch the transition from one type of tuner to another.

Some have Loar Tuners (pearl buttons, silver plated arrow-ends). Some have plain square plates, some have arrow-ends. Wiggle-end tuners are in the earliest snakehead batches only, and I don't recall seeing a Z with them.

Some people call an A2 a "black a2z" if it has the black/white binding- but like Darryl says we reckon a lot of leftover bodies were made into whatever was ordered.. so it might have started out meaning to be a z but got black top and an A2 label.

Sound-wise- some Zs are great, some aren't. Same distribution as any snakehead to my ear. Over time and trying lots of instruments, I think any snakehead can sound great, any paddle head too.