Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 109

Thread: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

  1. #51
    Registered User f5loar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Salisbury,NC
    Posts
    6,468

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    you got that right. There is some mighty fine post Loar Ferns out there.

  2. #52
    Registered User almeriastrings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Almeria, Spain
    Posts
    5,442
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    It was very good marketing!

    Still works after all these years.
    Gibson F5 'Harvey' Fern, Gibson F5 'Derrington' Fern
    Distressed Silverangel F 'Esmerelda' aka 'Maxx'
    Northfield Big Mon #127
    Ellis F5 Special #288
    '39 & '45 D-18's, 1950 D-28.

  3. #53
    Registered User doc holiday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    alberta
    Posts
    1,338

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    "the war started on DEC 7th '41 so I guess the 8th isn't pre war." Actually, the war had been going on since 1939.....

  4. #54
    Registered User doc holiday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    alberta
    Posts
    1,338

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	texasloar.jpg 
Views:	286 
Size:	50.6 KB 
ID:	85674....the Texas unsigned Loar...

  5. #55
    Registered User almeriastrings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Almeria, Spain
    Posts
    5,442
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Quote Originally Posted by f5loar View Post
    There is a big difference in design and construction between a 1938 and a 1941 D45. Many changes were made before 1942.
    Absolutely correct.

    This is a mandolin forum, so delving into the minutia of pre-war (1939) and war-time Martins is probably a bit too off-topic, but one of the 'big' changes in that period was from the 1 3/4" nut width to the 1 11/16" width. That occurred in late 1939. I have one of the last D-18's with the wider nut from that year. The "war period" instruments are very interesting in their own right. Use of plastic tuner buttons, ebony rod neck reinforcement, etc. I have a "matched pair" of 1945 D-18 + 000-18 both in their original, brown Lifton hardshell cases. These are super, super-light guitars. Light as a feather... but I digress.

    Back to Mr. Loar.
    Gibson F5 'Harvey' Fern, Gibson F5 'Derrington' Fern
    Distressed Silverangel F 'Esmerelda' aka 'Maxx'
    Northfield Big Mon #127
    Ellis F5 Special #288
    '39 & '45 D-18's, 1950 D-28.

  6. #56
    Registered User Ivan Kelsall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Manchester - Lancashire - NW England
    Posts
    14,187

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Frm f5loar - "..There is some mighty fine post Loar Ferns out there." Absolutely,& who could say with certainty,that those Mandolins,had Lloyd Loar still been around,might not have been signed & thus become 'true' Loars. I can't help but feel that the current Gibson MMs would come under that category.The one's i've heard have been as good as it gets for me,
    Ivan
    Weber F-5 'Fern'.
    Lebeda F-5 "Special".
    Stelling Bellflower BANJO
    Tokai - 'Tele-alike'.
    Ellis DeLuxe "A" style.

  7. #57
    Registered User doc holiday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    alberta
    Posts
    1,338

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Ivan, the......"mighty fine post Loar Ferns" being referred to are the later 20s examples. While the modern Derrington era MMs are fine mandolins....(like the Martin D18A/'real '37 D18 comparison)......regardless of similarity of construction.......put them side by side and they are not in the same league. After another 70 years of aging who can say. But for the purpose of this topic....they are apples & oranges.

  8. #58
    Registered User almeriastrings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Almeria, Spain
    Posts
    5,442
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Quote Originally Posted by doc holiday View Post
    Ivan, the......"mighty fine post Loar Ferns" being referred to are the later 20s examples. While the modern Derrington era MMs are fine mandolins....(like the Martin D18A/'real '37 D18 comparison)......regardless of similarity of construction.......put them side by side and they are not in the same league. After another 70 years of aging who can say. But for the purpose of this topic....they are apples & oranges.
    This always fascinates me. In what way are they apples and oranges?

    Certainly in value and collectable status. No argument there.

    Sound, though? I have to say, even though I love vintage instruments, and have several fine examples - I honestly could not say there were invariably superior to the best modern examples (once those have been played in a bit). In true blind test I very much doubt I could say which was which. Exactly this was found with that recent trial involving seriously desirable vintage violins vs. fine modern examples, and with Tony Williamson's "ID the Loars" project, apparently "no-one" could really say for sure:

    http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/sh...n-Loar-contest

    I goes beyond simply telling them apart... it also comes down what you like best. The vintage, super-collectable ones do not always win there either. They might be worth ten or twenty times the best modern "equivalent" but there is no automatic guarantee they'll sound any better (or even as good) to you. There is a lot of variation... those 20's and 30's instruments were factory produced. On a production line, by mostly semi-skilled workers. They were not "master luthier" built. There is some interesting old movie footage showing the CF Martin factory in 1939 (I like to think it is my old D-18 being worked on there!). It would be fascinating if something similar existed of the Gibson plant in the 20's. There are some good still photos, though, and Joe Spann's book is very instructive.
    Gibson F5 'Harvey' Fern, Gibson F5 'Derrington' Fern
    Distressed Silverangel F 'Esmerelda' aka 'Maxx'
    Northfield Big Mon #127
    Ellis F5 Special #288
    '39 & '45 D-18's, 1950 D-28.

  9. #59
    Registered User doc holiday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    alberta
    Posts
    1,338

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Almeria, the topic is 'unsigned Loars' & that refers to a specific group of Gibson F5s from a very narrow window of time. Ivan K, then posits that he thinks MMs are for him 'as good as it gets.
    ' Frm f5loar - "..There is some mighty fine post Loar Ferns out there." Absolutely,& who could say with certainty,that those Mandolins,had Lloyd Loar still been around,might not have been signed & thus become 'true' Loars. I can't help but feel that the current Gibson MMs would come under that category.The one's i've heard have been as good as it gets for me, Ivan"
    The apples and oranges is that we're discussing a small group of vintage mandolins.....not what one prefers, or which might sound better.... While my experience with vintage Martin guitars, like yours shows some variance, modern instruments 'factory made' like current Martins vary as well.....but in the end vintage and modern instruments are different.....but that isn't the topic of this thread.

  10. #60
    Registered User Ivan Kelsall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Manchester - Lancashire - NW England
    Posts
    14,187

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Herschel Sizemore,who i believe owns 3 Loars,is one of my 2 favourite Mandolin players,the other is John Reischman,who owns what is widely regarded as the best of the Loars.Whether it is or not is a matter of your own personal opinion,it sounds fine to me. In his tuition DVD,Herschel Sizemore plays a Gibson Master Model (MM) & i have to say that 'for me',the Loars that he's used for the majority of his recordings don't sound any better at all than the MM.Ok,i am comparing recordings not 'real life'- 'in the wood' tone etc.,but given the quality of today's recording equipment,i think that the comparison is still valid. If it isn't valid,then it throws Tony Williamson's Loar 'comparison' recording out of the window.
    That the sound of any particular instrument is a matter of personal taste,is self evident,that's why one player will choose a Gibson over an Ellis, or an Ellis over a Heiden & ................ I feel as does Doc H,that after years of 'maturing',many of the superb instruments being made today will be every bit as good as the Loars. But that again,will be a matter of personal opinion, & around we'll go again.
    To return to the original point - 'un-signed Loars',there aren't any.Call them what you will,if it isn't signed then it's NOT a Loar,given the criteria that Loar had to inspect them & find them 'superior' & then sign them. As i said in my first post,i firmly belive that many of those instruments that were never signed (because he'd left Gibson), must be very fine instruments indeed,maybe or maybe not worthy of Loar's signature,but,as they weren't signed,they are not 'Loars' as we think of them (IMHO),
    Ivan
    Weber F-5 'Fern'.
    Lebeda F-5 "Special".
    Stelling Bellflower BANJO
    Tokai - 'Tele-alike'.
    Ellis DeLuxe "A" style.

  11. #61
    Registered User G7MOF's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Lancashire/UK
    Posts
    1,411

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    I totally agree with you Ivan, the name Loar makes them more collectable, not playable.
    I never fail at anything, I just succeed at doing things that never work....


    Fylde Touchstone Walnut Mandolin.
    Gibson Alrite Model D.

  12. #62
    Registered User tim noble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    SE Pennsylvania
    Posts
    63

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    "The signed "Loar" label was an advertising gimmick. There is no such thing as one that did not pass muster. IMHOI" answers the big question on unsigned Loars. I presume that Loar signed all production F5s during his tenure. Some companies actually destroyed products that did not meet their standards but not sure about Gibson. While a label adds significant value it doesn't change the intrinsic value as a musical instrument.
    Tim

  13. #63
    Registered User doc holiday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    alberta
    Posts
    1,338

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Thank you Tim.

  14. #64
    Registered User tim noble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    SE Pennsylvania
    Posts
    63

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Doc
    The instrument that Shylock3 just posted and this whole discussion reminds me of of my initial involvement in this forum. I am the proud 2nd owner of one of the 10 or so documented 1921/1922 Cremona sunburst F4s. I've changed my thinking based on these discussions. Initially I considered it "Loar Period" then "Loar prototype" (finish). After digesting a lot of expert advice its now just a 22 F4 with Cremona finish. The rest is as Daryl stated - marketing. I think the finish may be an initial experimentation with a brown finish rather than the standard red but that doesn't change the potential for the mandolin, only the color. If there is added value its due to the rarity of the finish on F4s or due to the fact that someone prefers the burst. I generally agree that if an F5 was constructed during HIS tenure, shares the subtle distinctions common in the signed examples such as wood, finish, binding, etc. and was even sent out after he left, it can be considered and "unsigned Loar". IF only he signed mine?? smile
    Tim

  15. #65
    Registered User Ivan Kelsall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Manchester - Lancashire - NW England
    Posts
    14,187

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    If the signing of the 'Loars' was a gimmick,then why weren't they ALL signed ?. From what i know,the criteria for Loar to sign the label was that the instrument should be 'exceptionally good' (in Lloyd Loar's opinion),by comparison with others made at the same time. From Tim - "I presume that Loar signed all production F5s during his tenure ". If that's so,why are there so called un-signed Loars,instruments made during his tenure with Gibson that he didn't sign ?.
    All this is making me think that i can begin calling my 'Tudor' wristwatch (made by the Rolex Co.) an un-signed Rolex !!. Apart from being laughed off the planet that is,
    Ivan
    Weber F-5 'Fern'.
    Lebeda F-5 "Special".
    Stelling Bellflower BANJO
    Tokai - 'Tele-alike'.
    Ellis DeLuxe "A" style.

  16. #66
    In The Van Ben Milne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    To the left of the Southern Cross
    Posts
    1,287

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Kelsall View Post
    If that's so,why are there so called un-signed Loars,instruments made during his tenure with Gibson that he didn't sign ?
    As discussed, this was due to his sudden departure. There are a small number of transition instruments.
    Hereby & forthwith, any instrument with an odd number of strings shall be considered broken. With regard to mix levels, usually the best approach is treating the mandolin the same as a cowbell.

  17. #67
    Registered User f5loar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Salisbury,NC
    Posts
    6,468

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Right. These few were so near completing had Loar come back to work after the holidays he would most certain have signed them as the next batch of Master Model F5s. But he didn't as he was "let go". You don't usually fire upper management employees. You ask them to "retire" early or "let them go". He was let go and these few mandolins continued on to be completed without his signature label. Calling them "unsigned Loars" is a proper term but remember the lack of the signed label reduces the price significantly so no harm done. I call them "bargin bin" Loars. Best bang for you buck in a prewar 20's F5.

  18. #68
    music with whales Jim Nollman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Friday Harbor WA
    Posts
    1,633

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Speaking of the vagaries of one's own personal taste, I have heard John Reischman perform several times at the Vancouver Folk festival. I was aware that he owned one of the premier Loars, so i listened closely to the sound of that one, and also noticed he sometimes reached for another mandolin on certain songs, with a slightly more jazz-inflected sound. I believe it was a Heiden.

    On the Loar, John certainly demonstrated a masterly if a slightly unconventional deep sounding bluegrass tone. And...I preferred the sound of the other mandolin, upon which he seemed to feature some great chording and double stops (if my memory is correct).

    So it goes.
    Last edited by Jim Nollman; Apr-30-2012 at 1:34pm.
    Explore some of my published music here.

    —Jim

    Sierra F5 #30 (2005)
    Altman 2-point (2007)
    Portuguese fado cittern (1965)

  19. #69
    Registered User tim noble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    SE Pennsylvania
    Posts
    63

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    I enjoy following this thread but I thought it was about a small group of unique instruments built within a short time after Loar's departure not about if their better than new ones??? These several instruments are historically important as a transition from what is considered the best few years of the F5 mandolin. Comparisons are not the point it's the inherent build by the same people- not at the top management but actually those building the instruments.
    Tim
    Last edited by tim noble; May-01-2012 at 6:18pm.

  20. #70
    Registered User John Duncan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Asheville, NC
    Posts
    395

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Kelsall View Post
    the Loars that he's used for the majority of his recordings don't sound any better at all than the MM. Ivan

    From what I understand, Herschel did not use a Loar on "Bounce Away"; he used a brand new mandolin at the time of that recording.
    My Youtube Channel: http://bit.ly/1F9sJ8G

  21. #71
    Registered User doc holiday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    alberta
    Posts
    1,338

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Originally Posted by Ivan Kelsall
    "the Loars that he's used for the majority of his recordings don't sound any better at all than the MM. Ivan"

    This would be your personal opinion. Recordings are only a one dimensional representation of an instrument, and not really the foundation for the reputation of the Lloyd Loar period F5s.

  22. #72
    Registered User f5loar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Salisbury,NC
    Posts
    6,468

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    John R. has a really nice custom made newer Gibson DMM that he uses when he does not want to travel with the Loar. Are you sure it was his Loar you heard? They do look pretty similar from 20 feet away. And Herschel has owned and recorded with so many mandolins for the past 60 some years I doubt he remembers what he used on Bounce Away back in the 80's. I'm thinking the cover showed him at least holding a Loar or else it was a fake Loar.

  23. #73
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,258

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Notice his first name
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  24. #74
    Registered User Ivan Kelsall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Manchester - Lancashire - NW England
    Posts
    14,187

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Ben - I was responding to Tim Noble's's presumption that Loar signed ALL the F5's that were made while he WAS there,which he didn't do,only the ones he thought were 'exceptionally good'.
    Doc - Of course it's MY opinion & of course other folk differ,that's why discussions like this are so interesting,
    Ivan
    Weber F-5 'Fern'.
    Lebeda F-5 "Special".
    Stelling Bellflower BANJO
    Tokai - 'Tele-alike'.
    Ellis DeLuxe "A" style.

  25. #75
    Registered User almeriastrings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Almeria, Spain
    Posts
    5,442
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default Re: Unsigned Lloyd Loar mandolins

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Kelsall View Post
    Ben - I was responding to Tim Noble's's presumption that Loar signed ALL the F5's that were made while he WAS there,which he didn't do,only the ones he thought were 'exceptionally good'.

    Ivan
    Ivan, where does that "exceptionally good" quote/assumption come from?

    I do not think you will find that Loar-period F5 'seconds' as it were, ever emerged from the factory, or that they sawed them in half, as per C.F. Martin rejects (I have one of those, by the way - Dick Boak donated one to me a few years ago)... Loar signed labels. In batches.

    There is a lot on this on Roger Siminoff's site:

    http://www.siminoff.net/pages/loar_contributions.html

    This is also an interesting paper:

    http://www.siminoff.net/Media/downlo...rHear-9-06.pdf
    Last edited by almeriastrings; May-03-2012 at 3:51am.
    Gibson F5 'Harvey' Fern, Gibson F5 'Derrington' Fern
    Distressed Silverangel F 'Esmerelda' aka 'Maxx'
    Northfield Big Mon #127
    Ellis F5 Special #288
    '39 & '45 D-18's, 1950 D-28.

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
  •