Post a picture opost a picture of your fake gibson

**Gutbucket** · Jan-06-2008, 7:49am

I think it is just poorly cut. I'm thinking of having some voo-doo done on that old relic. Plus some setup. It plays easy, but the tone is shallow and cramped. Well you know what I mean. It could be fuller. It is a great conversation piece at Jams.

**jim simpson** · Jan-06-2008, 10:22am

Gutbucket,
Do you know who made your mandolin?

**Gutbucket** · Jan-06-2008, 10:24am

I found it in a hollow log. Email me and I'll tell you the real story.

**markishandsome** · Jan-06-2008, 2:09pm

Originally Posted by

Sellers often refer to any instrument made in Japan in the 1970s as "lawsuit" instruments. They do that either from their own ignorance or hoping to profit from the ignorance of potential buyers.

I usually see these listed as "lawsuit era" instruments, which is more historically accurate. It's like calling a 1924 F4 a "Loar era" F4.

**Rroyd** · Jan-07-2008, 4:38pm

"Found it in a hollow log."? That's a likely story. I knew a fellow who played an Ibanez Les Paul copy with the F-5 style peghead, and the girl friend of the bass player got mad at him one night, and when they were loading up after their gig, she stashed his guitar under a dumpster. So that's where its second owner found it. (He got it back when he walked into a club 200 miles away and 3 years later and saw it being played on stage. When he described a couple of distinctive dings he had put in it, the fellow looked over the guitar and then just handed it back to him.)

**Gutbucket** · Jan-08-2008, 10:45am

The former owner past away, and I think he's buried in Rosine Kentucky

**Rroyd** · Feb-08-2008, 10:55pm

Here's one from Randy Wood, Jan. 10, 1970, #4. It was a fine instrument right out of the gate, and the years haven't altered its quality a bit, except maybe a little in appearance, as distressing wasn't the vogue then.

**Rroyd** · Feb-08-2008, 10:59pm

Here's the back. Looks a lot better than the front, distressed by many years of playing and an encounter with the airlines.

**Rroyd** · Feb-08-2008, 11:08pm

Here's the label. You can see the date and some of the signature. The previous photo shows what I believe to be replacement tuners; I'm sure the originals were closer to those found on the old Gibsons, although I don't believe the peghead was redrilled.

**Gutbucket** · Feb-09-2008, 9:18am

Nice Fake. Hows it sound? Dumb question. If Randy built it, it probably sounds sweet.

**Gutbucket** · Feb-09-2008, 3:27pm

That sounded real nice. Lloyd would be right proud.

**cooper4205** · Feb-09-2008, 3:32pm

anybody see the <a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/1988-Kentucky-KM-1000-Mandolin-F-5-F5-F-style_W0QQitemZ270209780717QQihZ017QQcategoryZ1017
9QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem" target="_blank">converted Kentucky KM-1000</a> on ebay?

**Rroyd** · Feb-09-2008, 4:27pm

The Wood copy sounded great right out of the box it was shipped in. #The top was relatively thin, and I remember wondering if that was a compromise for instant tone which might eventually deteriorate, but it still sounds great nearly 40 years later, so I guess it wasn't. #It originally had a rectangular case that was a great copy of the 20s cases.

**f5loar** · Feb-11-2008, 3:01pm

I'm sure Randy could tell you about the tuners but seems I remember in those days before Gibson came out with their new revamped F5 in 1971 with open back tuners that these Kluson closed back Gold tuners were the best you could get at the time.

**swiba** · Feb-13-2008, 6:42pm

Hey Cooper,
I have been biding on that Kentucky for 2 days now and right at the end with 2hrs. left the seller rejected by bids for lack of points on ebay. Go figure, Now that I have a little pocket change to buy a conversational piece the guy refuses to sell it to me?

**Rroyd** · Feb-14-2008, 8:52am

I was able to contact the original owner of Randy Wood #4, and those are the original tuners, so F5Loar's recollections are better than mine.

**Jim Hilburn** · Feb-14-2008, 10:25am

I'm sure you had to take what you could get your hands on in those days. It was tough when I made my first mandolin in '79. Like that bridge with the big wheels.
Randy was getting very close to the original when you consider that there weren't any prints or books to order up. I'm sure he had a lot of access to some originals though.
What's up with the bridge being so far to the rear?

**niaflsbob** · Feb-14-2008, 6:39pm

JUST MY OPINIONS; NEVER COULD FIGURE OUT WHY SOMEONE WOULD PUT " THE GIBSON" ON THE HEAD STOCK OF A MANDOLIN THAT WASN'T A GIBSON. TWO EXAMPLES. WAS AT A FESTIVAL A WHILE BACK WHEN A GUY HANDED ME HIS MANDO TO PLAY. IT WAS ALRIGHT, TO BE GENEROUS. AFTER PLAYING IT AND NOT BEING OVERLY IMPRESSED I COMMENTED THAT "IT SEEMED NICE' IT WAS THEN HE DISCLOSED THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY AN ALVAREZ THAT HE HAD SOMEBODY INLAY "THE GIBSON" ON THE HEADSTOCK. SO WHAT WAS THE POINT OF TAKING AN AVERAGE MANDOLIN AND PAYING MORE TO MKAE IT SEEM (AT LEAST VISUALLY) SOMETHING IT WASN'T? AND THEN THIS WEEKEND I PLAY A GREAT SOUND MANDOLIN MADE BY A VERY OBVIOUSLY TALENTED MAKER THAT AGAIN HAD "THE GIBSON" INLAID IN THE HEADSTOCK. WHY NOT BE PROUD OF YOUR WORK AND PUT YOUR OWN NAME OR BRAND OR WHATEVER ON THE HEADSTOCK INSTEAD OF TRYING TO MAKE PEOPLE THINK IT WAS A GIBSON? I AM IN NO WAY SLAMMING GIBSON, BUT WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF FAKING A BRAND NAME?

**swiba** · Feb-14-2008, 7:48pm

In my opinion as for me I was interested in buying the one that Cooper posted about a couple of posts up. My sole intention for buying it was as a conversational piece to take to festivals and jams. After all you still only have a Kentucky when the night is over.
Others see financial gain

Some poor MAS person not knowing what to look for or what they are looking at finds what apperars to be a gibson for a couple of thousand dollars cheaper from someone who takes the label out and replaces it with one they made on their computer.
I am sure everyone has their own opinion on this matter but I would have to say if your coping a Gibson most of the time it would be for financial gain where it be from the lawsuit companies of the 70's or joe shmo down at the pawn shop.
I think this is why is pays to know your instruments inside and out. But like I said it's just my opinion.

**K3NTUCKI8oy** · Sep-27-2008, 2:40am

Gibson mandolins to me are the #1 model look of a bluegrass mandolin.If anyone
is actually capable of reproducing one with their own 2 hands I say well done!
I'll buy 1 for sure....lol

Sorry there Big Joe.

**Mike Bromley** · Sep-27-2008, 6:11am

Originally Posted by jim simpson

Back when I owned the Chris Warner that I posted in this thread, I was playing it at a jam at Sunset Park (West Grove, PA - r.i.p.). A fellow with a 70's era Gibson looked at mine and stated "now there's a real Gibson". He was surprised and I think bummed when he realized that the Warner was not Gibson. He was not happy with his Gibson.

I know why....I have a 1975 F5, that was stifled by gobs of varnish, had no recurve, and although outwardly cute, was thin-sounding and all but useless as a bluegrass mando. I "Monroed" it, cleaning the lacquer off the top, which helped. A luthier pal of mine took it on, thinned the top and stripped a mountain of lacquer, which greatly improved the volume, but the tone remains sort of lifeless. Nice to play physically, but it doesn't hold a candle to today's 9-models, nor my new Triggs, which literally kicks a**.

**f5loar** · Sep-27-2008, 10:12pm

Lacquer on a 70's Gibson F5? Quote from the 1975 Gibson F5 catalog:
"Gibson uses a rare European Varnish on it's mandolins that requires 30 days just to apply. The ultimate finish doesn't just look beautiful while it protects the instrument's rare woods...it actually compliments the tone of the instrument."
From a 1973 Gibson mandolin one-page model spec. sheet on all models from that year including the F5:
"High Gloss Varnish Finish"
While it might have been a thick varnish finish applied to a rather thick top, sides and back in the 70's it was still varnish.
I stand to be corrected as usual.

**fredrob** · Jan-17-2009, 8:54am

I simply don't understand given the amount of work it is to build a carved mandolin that someone would put another name on the peghead

Fred

**kidgloves2** · Jan-22-2009, 10:51am

One thing that gets me is Gibson picks and chooses who they go after. PRS Guitars had to stop making single cutaway guitars because Gibson claimed they copied the Les Paul design. And they aren't the exact shape of a les paul. PRS won their case in court and can make them again. I'm pretty sure a lot of other big companies made knock-offs that more closely resembled a les paul, Like Guild, Ibanez and a bunch of others.

Which Leads me to Mandolins. Doesn't Gibson own the F style design? Or is the design so old now that it's public domain? It seems like there are a lot of companies and private builders taking away business from gibson. If you consider all of the companies as one big threat, which is the case, what percent of F-style mados are Gibson's these days? I bet it's small. When I'm in the market for a new one, I'm not thinking gibson. It will be either Collings or Weber. Or a private builder like Andy Poe.

Why wouldn't Gibson want to get rid of all of them? Whether they're fakes or F-style in general.