Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26

Thread: Un signed Loars

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    4,881

    Default Un signed Loars

    some of you Loar experts will have to answer this question for me so I can pass the answer on to a friend that asked me the same question....

    If a mandolin doesn`t have a signed label in it how does anyone tell if it is in fact an "Unsigned Loar"....We know that there are two labels but the one with the serial number on it is also the one that usually has his name isn`t it? Is a non label the same as an unsigned Loar?....If it has a serial number that says it was made during the Loar period but is unsigned does that mean that LL didn`t approve of that instrument meeting his requirements?

    These are questions that I have been asked and I don`t want to answer them without having some more knowledge on the subject...I`m sure some of you will probably answer with stories you have heard but I would like the true facts if possible....

    Thanks in advance.....Willie

  2. #2
    Moderator MikeEdgerton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Howell, NJ
    Posts
    26,875

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Basically, as I understand it, the unsigned Loars were mandolins that were in production when Loar left Gibson. They would have been manufactured in a specific time frame at then end of his tenure.

    I found this excerpt that was taken from the Loar of the day thread but have'nt got the time to go through that thread to find who to attribute it to, but it does explain it:

    "The unsigned phenom was simply mandos in process, built to the exact same specs. Sans the signature due to the fact Loar was no longer there. Is it a Loar? Same animal. No signature. Would it have been signed had Loar still been there? I believe it no doubt would have. BUT he wasn't and it ain't. That is exactly why the term "unsigned Loar" is so fitting to these 13(?) mandolins that fall into that category. This term is not suitable to the true 1925 and later Ferns with the white binding and lacquer. They are a different animal."

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Diego CA
    Posts
    2,200

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    This is interesting. So there are only 13 documented unsiged Loars? Also, I would imagine this is only applicable to the 'Master Model' F5, since it's the only model that bears the Loar signature during his tenure?

  4. #4
    Registered User 300win's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,507
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    What would a unsigned be worth compared to the ones that are ? Thats 13 {? }, compared to 250+/-, is this correct ?

  5. #5
    Registered User Glassweb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    3,110

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeEdgerton View Post
    Basically, as I understand it, the unsigned Loars were mandolins that were in production when Loar left Gibson. They would have been manufactured in a specific time frame at then end of his tenure.

    I found this excerpt that was taken from the Loar of the day thread but have'nt got the time to go through that thread to find who to attribute it to, but it does explain it:



    "The unsigned phenom was simply mandos in process, built to the exact same specs. Sans the signature due to the fact Loar was no longer there. Is it a Loar? Same animal. No signature. Would it have been signed had Loar still been there? I believe it no doubt would have. BUT he wasn't and it ain't. That is exactly why the term "unsigned Loar" is so fitting to these 13(?) mandolins that fall into that category. This term is not suitable to the true 1925 and later Ferns with the white binding and lacquer. They are a different animal."
    HOWEVER... I do know of 2 unsigned Loars that are varnished Fern mandolins... in other words they are like a 25' Fern only they have a varnish finish as opposed to the first "Egyptian Lacquer" or whatever those first lacquered F5's were finished with... you know, the stuff that had all those crazing problems. Perhaps the rarest beasts of all...

  6. #6
    Registered User Glassweb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    3,110

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Quote Originally Posted by 300win View Post
    What would a unsigned be worth compared to the ones that are ? Thats 13 {? }, compared to 250+/-, is this correct ?
    what do you mean by "worth"? because that number of $250K that everybody throws around so freely IS AN UN-MET ASKING PRICE. this isn't a science, but it does seem that they are "worth" (i.e. sell for) tens of thousands of dollars less than a signed Loar. see Gruhn's list for a great, great example that i used to own... the famous "Aubrey Haynie Unsigned". Definitely in the top 5 "Loars" that I've ever played... i think they are asking $135K at this point.

  7. #7
    Registered User John Kinn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    692

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Baldassari's unsigned Loar (flowerpot, lacquer) is considered one of the best as I understand.

  8. #8
    Martin Stillion mrmando's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    13,103

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    And here I thought they were Loars that didn't have a record deal...
    Emando.com: More than you wanted to know about electric mandolins.

    Notorious: My Celtic CD--listen & buy!

    Lyon & Healy • Wood • Thormahlen • Andersen • Bacorn • Yanuziello • Fender • National • Gibson • Franke • Fuchs • Aceto • Three Hungry Pit Bulls

  9. #9

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    It would make a great band name...The Unsigned Loars
    The first man who whistled
    thought he had a wren in his mouth.
    He went around all day
    with his lips puckered,
    afraid to swallow.

    --"The First" by Wendell Berry

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    4,966

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Charlie Derrington had an unsigned Jan 4 (I believe) 1925 that was just like all Loars except the signature labels. It was varnish. Butch's was shortly after that and it was lacquer. The transition was very fast after Loar was gone from Gibson. While there are many similarities, there are also many differences in just a short time.

    I had a 1927 Fern come through the shop the last few days. It was a wonderful mandolin, and though a lacquer mandolin and sounded like lacquer, it was marvelous! I would loved to have been able to keep the mandolin. One of the best mandolins I've ever played was a 1929 and it was incredible. The Loar mandolins are my favorite, though way out of my range, but some of the later 20's Ferns don't take a back seat in any way!
    Have a Great Day!
    Joe Vest

  11. #11
    Registered User f5loar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Salisbury,NC
    Posts
    6,468

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    You got that right. There are some really powerful mid 20's Ferns that are real tone monsters.
    by the way the signature label does not have the date. It had the date it was signed not necessarly the date made and the signature. The serial no. is on the Master Model label and would say F5 also.
    And no F5s were not the only ones signed. Loar signed the H5, K5 and L5 models as well.

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Princeton,KY
    Posts
    122

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Big Joe, did you notice Mike Edgerton's comment about the white binding on the "true ferns". Josh might be interested in reading this.
    Dusty Oliver

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    4,881

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Mike, I consider myself half way smart and it never entered my mind that these would be the mandos that were under construction when LL left, so I thank you for that information...so I guess one can go by the serial numbers of that period and consider anything made in that time frame an "Un signed Loar"...of course they would have to run out of mandos under construction at the time he quit sooner or later so I guess that is speculation to a point....I`ll print out all of these responces and pass them on to the person that posed the question to me....Thaks for all of your comments....

    Willie

  14. #14
    Registered User mtucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles CA
    Posts
    1,500

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    ..double post

  15. #15
    Registered User mtucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles CA
    Posts
    1,500

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Quote Originally Posted by John Kinn View Post
    Baldassari's unsigned Loar (flowerpot, lacquer) is considered one of the best as I understand.
    Most probably Butch had something to do with this...


  16. #16
    Registered User John Kinn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    692

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Quote Originally Posted by mtucker View Post
    Most probably Butch had something to do with this...

    No, it must be the mandolin...and that's a good sounding guitar as well..

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    4,881

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    I have never tried to judge or form a final decision of any instrument that is being played through a sound system....Given enough time to tweak a sound system and it`s possible to make a Pac Rim sound great even if it don`t when plaed out in the open......Butch`s sure sounds good and I`m sure many of you have heard it in the raw and know what you are saying when you say it sounds the best that you have heard....Again sound is subjective.....Willie

  18. #18
    Registered User mandotool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Hudson Valley
    Posts
    408

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Is there any speculation as to how long an F5 would have taken to build during the Loar period?
    Thomas Quinn

  19. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    4,966

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    About as long as it does now if you build it the same way. We have progressed in many areas, but you can't shortcut the process of doing a mandolin such as the Loar. They are a LOT of work and there is so much involved and it all takes time. Then, when you finally get it put together, you have to finish the mandolin and the finish used by Loar was very slow to cure and that may well have been the reason they switched from the varnish to the lacquer. Lacquer is reasonably durable and cures much faster.
    Have a Great Day!
    Joe Vest

  20. #20
    Registered User Ivan Kelsall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Manchester - Lancashire - NW England
    Posts
    14,187

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Does anybody know what date the late Ralph Rinzler's Mandolin was ?. I believe that it was originally a 'Flower pot' then converted to a 'Fern'. Anyhow, it's one of the finest sounding Mandolins i've ever heard,
    Ivan
    Weber F-5 'Fern'.
    Lebeda F-5 "Special".
    Stelling Bellflower BANJO
    Tokai - 'Tele-alike'.
    Ellis DeLuxe "A" style.

  21. #21
    Adrian Minarovic
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Banska Bystrica, Slovakia, Europe
    Posts
    3,462

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Kelsall View Post
    Does anybody know what date the late Ralph Rinzler's Mandolin was ?. I believe that it was originally a 'Flower pot' then converted to a 'Fern'. Anyhow, it's one of the finest sounding Mandolins i've ever heard,
    Ivan
    I played it few years back and it's certainly all original very early Fern, possibly '25 or '26. Lacquer (cracked) and greenish/greyish hue to the brown color in sunburst. Strong tone for sure.
    Adrian

  22. #22
    Certified! Bernie Daniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    8,347
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Quote Originally Posted by Glassweb View Post
    HOWEVER... I do know of 2 unsigned Loars that are varnished Fern mandolins... in other words they are like a 25' Fern only they have a varnish finish as opposed to the first "Egyptian Lacquer" or whatever those first lacquered F5's were finished with... you know, the stuff that had all those crazing problems. Perhaps the rarest beasts of all...
    If I recall correctly (and often I don't) that is the first time I have heard nitrocellulose lacquer referred to as "Egyptian" can you expound on origin of that characterization that a bit? Thanks!
    Bernie
    ____
    Due to current budgetary restrictions the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off -- sorry about the inconvenience.

  23. #23
    Registered User f5loar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Salisbury,NC
    Posts
    6,468

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Ralph Rinzler started out with a late 50's F5 flowerpot and had it converted to a 20's Fern model. Then in the mid 60's he got a '26 Fern which was all original. There are not many recordings of him with the '26 Fern so if it is the Greenbriar Boys recordings you are talking about it was the 50's F5.

  24. #24
    Registered User Glassweb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    3,110

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernie Daniel View Post
    If I recall correctly (and often I don't) that is the first time I have heard nitrocellulose lacquer referred to as "Egyptian" can you expound on origin of that characterization that a bit? Thanks!
    Just a term I heard once... haven't a clue as to where it came from!

  25. #25
    Americanadian Andrew B. Carlson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    828

    Default Re: Un signed Loars

    Gruhn has an early 1925 F-5 right now. The say "MF7706 Gibson F-5 (More photos...) , early 1925, EXC, late-1924 factory order number (essentially an unsigned Loar), refretted with correct vintage-style frets, a superb-sounding example, gold-plated hardware, rectangular OHC......$135000".

    Really beautiful instrument. Maybe this would test your "Loar cache" feelings. You could save a cool $100k.
    Mandolin, Guitar, & Bass for Doug Rawling & The Caraganas
    www.dougrawling.com
    2008 Kentucky KM-1000
    2014 Martin D-28 Authentic 1937
    1964 Gibson LG-0
    2022 Sigma SDR-45VS

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •