Loar Picture of the Day

**f5loar** · May-11-2005, 10:10pm

They are simply put the "Rolls Royce" of the Loar signed mandolins holding a near tie to the famous "resversed" side bound July 9th batch. Only a few dozen made in both batches. The Fern pattern was considered Loars prized possession in his early work at Gibson.

**avanti** · May-12-2005, 7:00am

Hey, top bound July 9ths are at least Bentleys.

**Darryl Wolfe** · May-12-2005, 8:04am

Come on Tommy...do you have reincarnatable ESP abilities? #Lloyd Loars' personal F5 was a flowerpot. #The Fern Loars are indeed rare, and since it is "fancier" and rarer it can be considered more desirable. #But beyond that a Fern Loar is just another Loar signed F5 mandolin. Given, if all Loars were to dissappear except for one representative example, I would vote for a nice clean Fern Loar w/Virzi. But I wouldn't be voting that way with overall best killer Loar sound at the top of my list.

There is much evidence that the original design for the F5 was intended to be a Fern. #It appears that the design took a while to implement though. #Reasonable assumption would be that they ordered the pre-cut fern inlay from Germany and it took over a year to receive the large order..hence the first Fern inlays in March 24 instead of the mid/late 22 period when the F5 was introduced

**Charlie Derrington** · May-12-2005, 8:41am

Darryl..

I'm not so sure that the F-5 was originally planned to be a Fern pattern. The earliest prints I can find have a Flowerpot inlay. These prints are dated 1921. It's more likely that after they ordered the initial run of head veneers, they rethought things and decided the Fern was the way to go.

Charlie

**danb** · May-12-2005, 9:06am

Doesn't the first catalog show a fern peghead though?

**Darryl Wolfe** · May-12-2005, 9:24am

The first catalog renderings are the basis of my assumption. I have nothing other than that to go on. My only other thought on the subject is that it seems prudent that a new model would have a new inlay or higher level of trim.

The original spec sheet for the "new model" indicates that the rim/back dimensions shall be "same as F4". When it addresses the peghead veneer it specifies "according to drawing", not "same as F4". All of this is very subjective.

**danb** · May-12-2005, 9:27am

That catalog image has always made me wonder if there is somewhere a prototype with a fern on the peghead.. that that image was drawn from..

I guess another question might be if they did the catalogs before or after the model was in production!

**mandophil(e)** · May-12-2005, 10:30am

So are Fern Loars identical to other '24 Loars other than the inlay? Same dimensions and construction? Did they command a higher price when new?

**danb** · May-12-2005, 10:38am

Different peghead yes.. they mostly seem to get a nice brown/orange sunburst with a medium-sized (roughly the light area matches the f-holes in diameter).. have nice woods.. almost all virzis (because they are '24s when that was the default).. they aren't as common as any other batches, so they have an added badge of rarity. The body & construction is the same as far as I know.

The later ferns (post-loar) are lacquered and have a different look to the fern inlay. The Loar ones usually have some green abalone in the mix, later ones start getting more of a pearl to plain white look.

To me there is just something about the combo of that fern inlay and the brown/orange burst that I really like. I'm also a virzi fan..

**Charlie Derrington** · May-12-2005, 10:57am

Yeah, I know Darryl and Dan.......

However, those prints give me reason to question my original assumptions. Also, you know how it is, get it built and introduced....we'll deal with the details later.

Charlie

**Ken Waltham** · May-13-2005, 9:46am

I had never really thought about the idea of the Fern peghead inlay being the original intent of the new Master Model F5 before. That is an interesting hypothesis.
You know, given that catalog drawing, and the overlay to be "according to drawing", that could just be.
An interesting thought. I will say, I still prefer the flowerpot, and I think always will. I love the understated elegance, which is what draws me to Loar F5's in general. They are not overly flashy, but have that European, violin type look.
But, seeing what I have over the years, it would make perfect sense to me that Gibson would use up some F4 flowerpot inlays, until the "new" Fern inlays became available for production.

**danb** · May-14-2005, 4:18pm

The "Roy B Veiock", f5 #72211, from an anonymous submittor

**danb** · May-14-2005, 4:20pm

A business card from the original owner, still in the case:

**danb** · May-14-2005, 4:20pm

The front isn't half bad either..

**Charlie Derrington** · May-15-2005, 12:44am

Now we're talking !!

Charlie

**danb** · May-15-2005, 8:43am

only 2 or 3 years of playing time on that one.. the original owner died in a car accident in 1928, after taking delivery of it in 1926. Another interesting thing about that is the fact that it was signed & dated in 1923, adding more direct evidence to ideas Darryl has expressed that many of these Loar-signed f5s didn't leave Kalamazoo until well after Lloyd had moved on.

Check the condition of the tailpiece cover, among everything else. Eek!

Edit- oops.. I'm mixing up stories between instruments. I have no information about when this instrument was shipped.. sorry for the confusion! I also had stated it was signed 1924.. it was 1923. (slaps self on head)

**f5loar** · May-15-2005, 4:44pm

As far as Lloyd's personal F5 being a flowerpot he just grabbed the first one that he liked going out the door to tour with the Gibsonians that summer. Sure it happened to be a July 9th but it was not a reversed binding one and there were no Ferns laying around for him to grab. He pretty much had his pick of all of them until December 1924 to be his own Lloyd's Loar. He could have held back any F5 previous to that July 9th one to have as his own.
Why not a fancy gold plated one like they made for William Place? Or he could have done up one Fern in July for his own. I'd think he carried enough weight at that time to get what ever he wanted.
And Darryl it's hard not to be in support of Fern Loars when you own one. They are special!

**ronlane3** · May-15-2005, 10:08pm

Very cool. Talk about a dream come true, having your pick of any instrument made in 1923 or 24.

**mandoJeremy** · May-16-2005, 1:23am

Dan, that is SO beautiful. It does remind me of some of the current Master Models.

**mandopete** · May-16-2005, 9:13am

That buisness card is cool, I feel like I'm watching Antiques Roadshow!

**Darryl Wolfe** · May-16-2005, 11:43am

F5Loar/Tommy...I hate to keep contradicting you..but Lloyd's personal Loar was not a July 9. It was an FPot Feb 18, 1924 w/Virzi. The serial number will remain withheld by special request, but there is no question as to the batch the mandolin belongs to.