PDA

View Full Version : Loar Picture of the Day



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-21-2007, 2:36pm
This might look better

tnpathfinder
Jun-21-2007, 2:51pm
That's wonderful! Thanks Darryl. I guess they really did realize they had rasied the level of mandolin design.

JEStanek
Jun-21-2007, 3:19pm
Whether they realized it or marketed it as such is a point of contention. This was a new design, for them, that hadn't been fully market tested. By charging a premium for something and advertising it as the best people will believe it. Is a Rolex / Tag / Schweitzerkn÷÷dle watch really any better than my Timex?
Time has proven the brochure true. You can read similar propaganda off many import websites regarding their instruments today. That's a great brochure. I hope Darryl adds it to the others Dan has in the Archive. It's an important document of Gibson's History and marketing program.

Jamie

Glassweb
Jun-21-2007, 5:28pm
Darryl, thanks very much for posting this great brochure! I have always felt that the F5 was really an instrument unto itself and not particularly mandolin-like. Simply stated... it's the instrument we all call an F5, or sometimes an F5 mandolin. Same goes for the L5 guitar - they are creatures unto themselves and continue to be the inspiration for builders all over the world. Darryl is so right stating that we can't/shouldn't let this thread die! And so, I'm going to make an appeal to all the Loar and Fern owners out there. PLEASE consider taking some good digital images of your F5s and sending them to Dan "The Man" Beimborn so that we can have a more complete archive. There are way too many instruments listed that have no images whatsoever, and even more which could benefit from better quality images - pretty easily done with the advent of digital cameras. I realize some can't be bothered and others might have privacy/security concerns. But when all is said and done, the more info listed and displayed for these mandolins, the better it will be for us all... especially if an instrument becomes lost or stolen.

Timbofood
Jun-22-2007, 8:57am
I really enjoy all the old printed promo stuff from that era. Delightful use of language!
As fot the Timex vs. TAG concept, They both keep time. I'll bet my TAG will outlast your Timex. A Yugo and a Ferrari are cars too. If you want to chat watches, I'm happy to, that collection is bigger than my mandolin closet.

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-22-2007, 10:50am
Note that the brochure above depicts the "phantom" Loar. #A 22 or 23 Fern Loar with the early style script, double binding and a unique pickguard bracket. #None which have been seen. #There is some reason to believe it exists as "what did the illustrator use for a model". #Or, 70281 may be it and was modified later.

Here is the other depiction of the mando from Catalog N. #Catalog N is early 23 and does not mention style 5 guitars, mandolas or mandocellos. #No fern has been seen that dates earlier than March 24 when the other instruments in the family appeared.

Jim Hilburn
Jun-22-2007, 12:53pm
I wonder if there's ever been other examples of an instrument that was so perfectly concieved yet was rejected by the public for whatever reason, in this case the changing musical landscape.
The Les Paul guitar comes to mind, especially the later ones with humbuckers, but it only took 10 years for a musical style it was perfect for to bring it out of obscurity to be first a workhorse for so many big names and then on to be the holy grail it has become. Similar production numbers for both but the Les Paul really wasn't as drastic of a new concept as the F-5.

Jonathan James
Jun-22-2007, 2:21pm
Cool shot, Darryl. I've got a copy of that brochure page as well, framed in my music room for Loar inspiration!

Glassweb
Jun-22-2007, 3:31pm
I'm not just saying this because I own one, but I believe that clean, all original signed Loar mandolins are still seriously undervalued. Not just as rare collectibles, but as supremely playable instruments as well.

12 fret
Jun-22-2007, 7:02pm
[QUOTE]

Similar production numbers for both but the Les Paul really wasn't as drastic of a new concept as the F-5.

Don't know if I buy into this. The F5 was a product of an evolution that went back 20 years. The Les Paul was a bolt out of the blue and delivered sounds players had not even concieved as possible prior to its introduction. They do seem to be following the same path as early unusual Les Pauls are well into the six figure range now.

12 fret
Jun-22-2007, 7:59pm
Has anyone heard of Loars being counterfeited. I don't mean the crude stuff from Ebay but real pro jobs intended to deceive. Lots of stories about pre war D28's being converted to D45's. At $200K each, it would almost seem inevitable that some convincing fakes would be floating around.

JEStanek
Jun-22-2007, 8:46pm
12Fret There was a thread on that a year or so ago in the Vintage section I believe. This thread (http://www.mandolincafe.net/cgi-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=7;t=31075;hl=fake+and+loar) on Loar Clones still being built was interesting.

Jamie

12 fret
Jun-22-2007, 9:33pm
Thanks for the link to the thread, interesting reading.
The consensus among the experts seemed to be that it would be difficult to fool them, but that misses the point. If you're going to fake the Mona Lisa, you're not going to try and sell it to a DaVinci expert. As the financial incentive to fake these things goes up with the price, would expect there's a fair number of well done forgeries floating around.

waynejnc
Jun-22-2007, 9:59pm
Prototype
70281 Headstock

Glassweb
Jun-22-2007, 10:01pm
Thanks to this web site, the internet and knowledgable dealers handling vintage mandolins, I think it would be pretty hard to find a buyer ready to pay "Loar money" without knowing what he or she was getting into. More likely that a lucky someone would pick up a genuine Loar for a steal from an estate sale than to get fleeced by a fake.

waynejnc
Jun-22-2007, 10:01pm
Sorry, thought image was attached! Will try again later.

WJ

waynejnc
Jun-22-2007, 10:09pm
Here it is.......70281 Headstock

waynejnc
Jun-22-2007, 10:11pm
70281 signature

waynejnc
Jun-22-2007, 10:15pm
70281 Front

waynejnc
Jun-22-2007, 10:20pm
70281 Back

Brian Aldridge
Jun-22-2007, 10:43pm
Thanks Wayne. It is a thrill to see Loar #1.

Hans
Jun-23-2007, 6:23am
Interesting indeed! Single bound pickguard and black line inside the ivoroid binding...too bad about the poor repair job on the top. Outside patch on the ff hole...ouch! Thanks for the closeups, Wayne.

carleshicks
Jun-23-2007, 7:26am
70281 has the inward canted tuners, I didn't think that feature showed up until mid 1923. also The truss rod cover looks like it is mounted a little high or maybey the inlay is just a little low.Does 70281 have different arching in the back than latter F-5's. in the pic it looks like near the head block the center seam comes to a ridge like my 22 F-4.
I don't think this is the catalog N Loar, The Phantom Fern has a one piece neck in the picture, Also if you look at the side view in Catalog N it has a different pickgaurd clamp than the face veiwe.

Ken Waltham
Jun-23-2007, 9:42am
Thanks, Wayne.
Those are the first decent pics I've seen of this, the very first Loar.
Carls, I agree, that's 1921-ish profiling at the neck heel area on the back. Very, very interesting.The colour is interesting as well, more like a mid '23 than the 22's and earlier 23's.
Darryl has told me this F5 sounds great.
This one needs a decent truss rod cover, and a trip to Steve Gilchrist in the worst way! The repairwork I've seen him do on Loars would boggle your mind. That F5 would come back looking so "right".
F4 tailpiece cover... it would've been engraved, I'd assume??? Tough to know on the very first one, but I'd think so....

Glassweb
Jun-23-2007, 9:57am
NOW we're talkin'! Many thanks to Wayne for these fantastic new images of the first known Loar... amazing shots! OK all you Loar and Fern owners... Wayne has started the ball rolling... let's get these unphotographed and "underphotographed" mandolins looking good on the Archives. I'm even gonna go out and (finally) buy a digital camera myself! Will be taking some new images of a Loar that will be heading this way soon.

danb
Jun-23-2007, 11:02am
Very nice Wayne, thanks for posting those. Is it ok for me to put them on the archive? I'd like to see a closeup of the unique pickguard attachment too if that is possible!

BradKlein
Jun-23-2007, 12:14pm
Again, thanks to Wayne for posting the pics of 70281.

For those of us less 'in the know', what can you tell us about this instrument's history, early and modern? It certainly looks like it has some stories to tell.

BK

f5loar
Jun-23-2007, 3:39pm
Dan, Darryl has close ups of the PG bracket. I've picked on this one several times and it's very "monroeish" in sound. A trip to Gil would be nice for even a set-up but I doubt he could savage the top and probably not worth putting a new top on it since it's so great as is. He could no doubt make it look better. So could the Dude. If you compare the grain on the back of that one to the artist's photos on the brochures it matches. No doubt this is the prototype that went through many factory changes before it was sold. I'll let Wayne let out the history on it if he wants to but it has had few owners.

markishandsome
Jun-23-2007, 5:51pm
If you compare the grain on the back of that one to the artist's photos on the brochures it matches. No doubt this is the prototype that went through many factory changes before it was sold.

Or it could have been renecked at some time after it was sold, maybe at the same time at the wood putty treatment. What's more puzzling is that they would have used the fern inlay and then not used it again for 2 years.

Pure speculation:
The honchos thought it would be easier to introduce the F5 to consumers with the already idtifiable flowerpot logo and put the fern templates on the shelf for a couple years.

or

The drawings in the brochures may have been partially based on the prototype, but artistic liscense taken on some of the details.

or

Rather than the drawings being based on the prototype, maybe the prototype was based on the drawings, and the builders didn't follow through with all of the designer's prescriptions.

carleshicks
Jun-23-2007, 7:25pm
i am guessing that the reneck theory is possible seeing as how it has the inward canted tuners that did not appear until 1923, but it has a different pickgaurd bracket than the catalog N drawing.

markishandsome
Jun-23-2007, 9:03pm
The whole guard is different. The one in N is multi-bound. Enough has happened to this instrument that there's no telling what else could have been changed. Who knows, this could be the 10th tailpiece cover it's sported...

f5loar
Jun-23-2007, 9:28pm
No photoshop back then but with the stroke of a pen you could remove the 3 pc. neck in the photo pretty easy. The inlay overlay could have been changed out and holes redrilled. That Fern pattern is rather thick compared to the '24 Ferns. Artist interpetation of the fern pattern?
I would suspect a lot of the work was closely supervised by Loar over that famous workbench we see him at in photos. When you study the original spec. sheet for the F5 you can see some of these changes on that mandolin. There could have been several prototype pickguards and brackets. The F5 pickguard is so different from the '22 F4 pickguard no doubt it took several attempts to get it to the Nov. '22 guards. It's been a long time since June '22 and no other prototypes or pre-Nov. 22 F5s have surfaced.

waynejnc
Jun-23-2007, 9:28pm
Dan,
Feel free to use any photo that I might post. 70281 is as Monroe sounding as I've ever played! This mandolin needs serious set-up work and as you guys know, a trip to Steve Gilchrist....... I was fortunate to have the opportunity to hold a piece of history and even play it for a couple of hours.

WJ

waynejnc
Jun-23-2007, 10:09pm
70281 Headstock rear

AlanN
Jun-23-2007, 10:46pm
Yup, I was lucky too to pick on this one a few times. A dandy mandolin.

JEStanek
Jun-23-2007, 10:51pm
Wayne,
Thanks for posting these. To be able to see Loar number one is pretty darn cool. I really like the last one where you can see how neck pieces are in there.

Jamie

carleshicks
Jun-24-2007, 6:33am
how much do you think 70281 would sell for today. It is in very rough shape but it is the first proto, I think it would go for $200,000.

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-25-2007, 7:23am
Thanks for posting the pictures Wayne. It was 1978 when I last saw that mando, so my digital camera was not with me http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

I have a ton of 35MM pics of it that need scanning

dgw

Ken Waltham
Jun-25-2007, 8:39am
I wonder what it would bring. I am thinking well below market, but if Gilchrist had a hold of it.... well...
The Parrot Loar was a good example of what altering or customizing Loars do to their value. In hindsight, it was foolish not to buy that one.
This one has a terrible condition thing against it, but, it has the "first Loar" thing going strongly for it....
Who could tell?
For what it's worth, I feel Monroe's mandolin, apart from him having owned it, if you remove that factor, would fetch well below market value. Probably same here.

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-25-2007, 10:40am
My impression of the condition thing on the June 1 Loar was that the crack was re-repairable. I believe one could escape with most of the finish intact. The rest of the mandolin simply needs cleaning and a bit of touch-up.

Truss rod cover-I believe it to be original. Many illustrations depict an abalone cover.

Ken Waltham
Jun-25-2007, 11:52am
No doubt it could be repaired. And, I bet too that a lot of the finish is under that mess.
Truss rod cover... really?

f5loar
Jun-25-2007, 12:48pm
yeah Ken I'm with you on that TR cover. If it was shapped like one from the period maybe so but the pearl ones I've seen have been the right size and shaping. This one looks homemade and not close to the pattern but then maybe Loar made it homemade one off.
No doubt it's an old one and been there as long as we have known it but it's possible current owner did it too. Maybe Wayne knows or can ask him.

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-25-2007, 2:10pm
Woops, I should have gone back and looked at the picture. #No, that truss rod cover is likely not original, However, I have seen a few from the period that appeared like they could be. #The one on Bobby Osborne's Fern appears original as does a few others I have seen. (note: the picture above has Phillips head screws too)

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-25-2007, 2:21pm
Here's a closer look at Cat N. You can see that they had the double binding like 70281, but a triple bound guard is shown. I would venture to suggest that the original illustrations went through changes to the original artwork

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-25-2007, 2:35pm
and.. the tuners in the later orientation

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-25-2007, 2:39pm
I have posted this before, but certain things are worth revisiting. Wm. Griffith, Atlanta Music Company, circa 1923 with 72615. Scanned from the original linen textured photograph given to me by Tut Taylor

waynejnc
Jun-25-2007, 8:57pm
70281 is owned by a gentleman from eastern NC. As far as I know he's owned it for more than 30 years. He bought it from a lady in Florida. He says that he's never changed anything on the mandolin. I have a friend that took pictures the same time that I did and he is supposed to email them to me. If there are any good shots I will gladly post them.

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-26-2007, 9:11am
Thanks Wayne. How is that gentleman doing. It's been almost 30 years since I've seen him.

waynejnc
Jun-26-2007, 9:47am
Darryl,
He must be in his 80's. A friend of mine supposedly has 1st shot at the mandolin if he decides to sell. Actually my friend could have bought the mandolin a few years ago but he knew the old man would regret it later so he just told the guy to let him have 1st shot at it. As far as value, they were discussing 100k and the top loars were bringing 125k then. Honestly, I think the mandolin should bring top dollar because I know what lies beneath the #### on the top and in Steve's hands could be brought back to life! I can't get the sound out of my head that this mandolin had, even with such an awful setup.

Glassweb
Jun-26-2007, 9:58am
Lets say you were to buy that Loar... what would you do? If Steve G were willing to take it on would you have him do a total restoration including a refinish or would you just have him clean up the "sins" of the past? I know he could make this look like new, but then there's the question of how the sound might be affected. As Johnny Casper once said in Miller's Crossing - "an interesting ethical question"... What would y'all do??

Spruce
Jun-26-2007, 10:19am
"Honestly, I think the mandolin should bring top dollar because I know what lies beneath the #### on the top..."

What is that #### anyway?

Is that water damage, or what?

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-26-2007, 11:08am
The mandolin has a long crack in the top. #The bridge pressure pushed the top down on that side. #All that has been done is adding wood putty to smooth out the transition of the crack. #The wood putty simply has stain and/or some shellac on it. #The rest of the mandolin simply needs scraping of the dirt/sticky varnish off the binding, cleaning of the finish and french polishing. #

The top finish can be salvaged with out redoing the entire finish of the top. #If you want a more cosmetically correct job, then the top needs to come off, the crack needs to be cleaned and repaired and then refinish the top. #I do not think the mando requires that. #A really good repairman can clean the crack as-is and touch up the instrument.

waynejnc
Jun-26-2007, 11:33am
I agree with Darryl, do as little work as possible to get the job done.

WJ

waynejnc
Jul-06-2007, 9:32pm
Darryl,
Do you have any pictures of a June 13 with the sides of the headstock finished blond? Supposed to be original from the factory. Probably a custom mandolin.

WJ

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-09-2007, 8:25am
No I do not Wayne. I may not have that serial number either as most of my 6/13 entries have notes about the mando

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-09-2007, 11:45am
Happy Birthday to me..84 and counting

danb
Jul-09-2007, 11:47am
And Happy Birthday to Tom too!

Glassweb
Jul-09-2007, 12:07pm
And happy birthday to whoever recently acquired my July 9th from "GG"... hope you're diggin' it!

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-09-2007, 12:23pm
Just so we all know what we are talking about (in case someone did not)

Timbofood
Jul-09-2007, 2:31pm
Shoot, I don't look that good and I am not quite 50!

Lowell Levinger
Jul-10-2007, 1:35am
Here's a shot of the birthday party for #73723http://www.vintageinstruments.com/photos/museum/3loars/3loarsfrntweb.jpg

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-10-2007, 9:02am
Thanks Lowell. Tell us about the mandola http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

GTison
Jul-10-2007, 9:58am
I usually don't have much to add on these threads, but I do love to read and look at the pics. #I do have some speculation in regards to the Catalog print of the 22 Loar. #Perhaps someone else can explain more about the state of graphic arts of the time period. #I have worked around some commercial art for about 14 years. #I have seen many photos taken and then traced and "redone" if you wish for the final printed media. #Some done with the camera and then taken to the art table and the "negative" touched up. (an outdated method now) These catalog pics have the look of the old colorized photographs. #My point here is that these catalog pics look like photos that have been touched up to fit the look of the catalog and be printable. #I think the fine details of the photo would Not have been changed, including wood grain, binding, finger rest hardware, and other details. #The inlay does however look "funny" and out of place somehow. #That is one looks like it could have been possibly changed. #Details can be changed but on the graphics table it has to be worth the change in looks to make the change on paper worth it. #Someone ( the boss) has to dictate that kind of change. #
# # Are there other examples of the brochure mandolins changing grain, binding, or other details?

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-10-2007, 11:23am
I agree with you Bowfinger. I need to check to be sure, but I believe all of the colorized F5 pictures have the same grain on the back shot, whether the mando is F-pot, fern or whatever.

Timbofood
Jul-10-2007, 1:55pm
I used to work in an art store here in Kalamazoo, I will see if any of the "OLD" style artists are around and see if they can shed any graphic design light on that. #Might take some time, #one of them actually did work for "The Company." Unfortunately, he has passed on some years ago. #I knew I had questions for him!

K3NTUCKI8oy
Jul-11-2007, 2:26am
Another
http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/73987_front_display.jpg
that mandolin sure looks sad and lonesome.

GTison
Jul-11-2007, 10:26pm
I haven't looked at it in a few months. It makes me a little sad to look at it. So much in that picture. There's alot of who we are in the picture. Friends, Family, God. ... ... .

Calvin
Jul-12-2007, 9:46am
I want it.

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-12-2007, 10:24am
Just think of it. That mandolin has seen over 40 years of music, people and places around the world while in his hands. That doesn't count the 43 odd years of it's previous life.

sgarrity
Jul-12-2007, 11:56am
Do we know much about the history of THE mandolin before Monroe got it?

Mikey G
Jul-12-2007, 4:13pm
There was no history of THE mandolin before Bill got it. From the time he bought it from that barber shop in 1943, bluegrass mandolin time began. Figuratively speaking, I guess you could refer to 2007 as 64 A.B: (After Bill.)
Seriously, it would be cool to know the history of that mandolin in the twenty years before he bought it.

waynejnc
Jul-12-2007, 5:25pm
72060

waynejnc
Jul-12-2007, 5:26pm
72060 back

waynejnc
Jul-12-2007, 5:27pm
72060 headstock

waynejnc
Jul-12-2007, 5:34pm
72060 sig

waynejnc
Jul-12-2007, 5:36pm
72060 serial

waynejnc
Jul-12-2007, 5:39pm
72060 scroll
Greenish tinted binding

Glassweb
Jul-12-2007, 6:21pm
Nice one Wayne... how does she sound?

carleshicks
Jul-12-2007, 6:40pm
I sure do want a Loar.

waynejnc
Jul-12-2007, 9:01pm
Glass,
Clean sound with no overtones. Great virzi mandolin.

Glassweb
Jul-12-2007, 9:51pm
Love to hear the word "great" used in the same sentence as Virzi. Some of the best Loar instruments I've played or owned had Virzis... when they work, they really work well! Thanks Wayne... N-JOY!

danb
Jul-13-2007, 6:51am
Thanks for posting those Wayne. Is it ok for me to add the pictures to the mandolin archive listing?

waynejnc
Jul-13-2007, 10:33am
Dan,
Feel free to add any photo that I post!

Regards,

WJ

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-17-2007, 1:36pm
Check out this magnificent just post-Loar L5
L5 (http://www.mckenzierivermusic.com/01417.html)

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-17-2007, 1:37pm
front

Spruce
Jul-17-2007, 2:01pm
Wow.... http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

Glassweb
Jul-17-2007, 3:03pm
Yow!!!

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-17-2007, 3:08pm
For those not so familiar with Loar L5's, they usually have a birch back and are fairly dark in color. This example has spectacular curly maple and is finished in the fairly rare lighter redish/brown mahogany color seen in 1925 and 1926 with gold parts.

danb
Jul-17-2007, 3:39pm
yeah, when Darryl linked me I boggled. I think that's the nicest maple back I've yet seen, F5 or L5..

MandoSquirrel
Jul-17-2007, 5:02pm
Almost psychedelic http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
(lust)

Calvin
Jul-18-2007, 9:48am
That Mandolin looks like a Gibson

earthsave
Jul-18-2007, 12:31pm
Double Wow!! Nice backside.

Hans
Jul-18-2007, 12:57pm
Oh my!

B. T. Walker
Jul-18-2007, 1:21pm
Whew! Beautiful!

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-31-2007, 3:58pm
February 2006 LoarfestWest

Brian Aldridge
Aug-12-2007, 11:05pm
hey Darryl, do you know if that is Charlie's 81250 that Scott is holding?

danb
Aug-13-2007, 3:41am
Brian, I believe it was the refinned early loar Charlie had with him in the prototype calton

danb
Aug-13-2007, 6:05am
I've got a couple more shots from right around that moment- Darryl was there talking to Charlie with Scott. Charlie was holding Darryl's July 9 and also the Schultz Loar in various combinations. If I remember Brian, you were right nearby at the time too. I was standing in the corner where Jack & Sharon had 76547 and Charlie was showing his mando and that loar that had had the back off a couple times.

Brian Aldridge
Aug-13-2007, 4:11pm
thanks Dan. A lot of good times that weekend. I believe you are right that that is the '22- Charlie had the truss rod cover with his name on the unsigned.

Glassweb
Sep-10-2007, 4:16pm
Just noticed that a 1924 Loar from the March 31st batch was stolen. What a drag! Listed in the Archive? Yes! Pictures? NO!!! There are good reasons why Loar owners should include pictures of their "babies" with their Archive listing... so we other Loar owners CAN HELP YOU RECOVER YOURS! Ya dig?

mrmando
Sep-10-2007, 4:59pm
I don't agree. Unless this particular Loar has some distinctive repair, wear marks or other anomaly, what good will a picture do? The general public doesn't know a Loar from any other F5. For the tiny number of people who have enough expertise in the subject, there's sufficient information in the listing to identify this Loar without a photo.

Glassweb
Sep-11-2007, 9:58am
That's probably true... but it's a pretty tight community in which these Loars circulate and visual info never hurts... those non-fern March 31st mandolins are pretty special creatures...

Darryl Wolfe
Sep-11-2007, 10:23am
I disagree with MRMANDO. The Journal and Archive are aware of this mandolin solely because George Gruhn and Walter Carter let me know it existed. This was fully in the spirit of documenting it. They did not divulge the owners name and did not forward the pictures that the owner sent them.

Every Loar has distinguishing characteristics. Without photos, the serial number is not sufficient to recover this Loar. Erasing the serial number would remove concrete proof that a mandolin in hand is indeeed the same one that might be missing.

Unfortunately, Gruhn does not retain photos and email correspondance after two months have passed.

I am sure this Loar will surface, but it's true identity may be lost without confirmable photographs.

Note that this Loar was undocumented as of 6 months ago, so there is not likely to be a covey of friends and experts that can look at the mandolin and vouch that it is indeed the one representing the subject at hand

Darryl Wolfe
Sep-11-2007, 10:25am
FWIW, it is a Fern Loar with silver plated hardware

mrmando
Sep-11-2007, 12:03pm
Well, if the owner sent pictures to Gruhn, then the owner can use those pictures at his/her discretion to help recover the mandolin. That could well include sending copies of the photos to people likely to be able to identify the instrument.

But to call Loar owners "paranoid," as Glassweb did, and insist that they slap pictures of their instruments on the Archive for unfettered public access ... I'm not going that far. I've seen plenty of eBay/Craig's List scams using published instrument photos, including some from the Archive. People may just not want to deal with the headache of having their photos misused; that doesn't make them paranoid. It's important to have good photos of your instruments, but not necessary to hang those photos where everyone can see them.

On the other hand, one begins to see where photos can be useful. Darryl says it's a Fern and the insurer's ad says it's a flowerpot...

Dan Cole
Sep-11-2007, 12:13pm
Fern Loar or Flower Pot Loar? The Stolen page says it is a Flower Pot Loar. Or am I confused?

Glassweb
Sep-11-2007, 12:26pm
See, that's the thing... is it a March 31st Fern or is it a March 31st Flowerpot! Two different animals there. And I probably overeacted in stating that Loar owners that didn't post photos were paranoid. I'll remove that quote and try and be more measured with my posts in the future... sorry to those I may have offended.

danb
Sep-11-2007, 12:32pm
we don't know for sure what it is yet, we're awaiting images to be able to help out a bit more.

pickinNgrinnin
Sep-11-2007, 9:33pm
I hope this Loar is returned to the righful owner, in good condition as soon as possible.

I've read cafe stories of folks who travel with their Loars, take them to festivals for late night campfire jams, etc. It would take a good amount of something to do that. Knowning you are carting around a treasure that cannot be replaced if it comes up missing and is never to be returned, is a pretty dark consequence.

Glassweb
Sep-11-2007, 10:23pm
Usually we Loar owners like to take them out and play them in public, at jams, for recordings... you know, just like they're "regular" mandolins. It may be hard to believe, but most Loar owners I know usually take them out "in the world" and play em'! Of course, there's always "the t*rd in the punch bowl" that makes all our lives the poorer for committing such a shameful act. I hope the owner of this mandolin is lucky enough to get it back... so keep yours eyes and ears open and NEVER let a valuable instrument go unattended unless you're 100% certain that you're in an ultra-safe location.

pickinNgrinnin
Sep-12-2007, 5:09pm
The owner probably did feel the Mandolin was in a safe location - only to find out that it was not. I think it would be difficult to reach a 100% certainty point that your Loar is in a ultra safe place.

It's great that the owners take these Mandolins out and about. Although they do so at obvious risk.

I hope the owner gets it back.

Timbofood
Sep-13-2007, 12:25pm
I think instrument thieves are pretty much the lowest form of humanity! Certainly hope the Loar is restored to it's rightful owner before somebody screws it up. If anybody out there runs across a D-18 serial #196835 It belongs to Billbows! Stolen from me back in about 1978. One never knows where or when it might pop up.

f5loar
Sep-13-2007, 8:26pm
Well Darryl says it's a Fern and the guy that posted it stolen says it's a flowerpot. Who do you believe there?
Anyway no doubt photos in the archives would help identify it should it be altered for resale. The back grain and stain patterns are like fingerprints as no two are the same. Easy to compare with a photo.
Inlay placement also another good indicator but you need photos to compare too. No doubt the owner does have a set a photos should it surface but like others have said it could go through several sales and wind up in the hands of someone who knows it's value that is a recluse type picker that is out of touch with the mandolin world here and not know it was stolen and just keep it at home.

Scott Tichenor
Sep-13-2007, 8:52pm
I think this needs clarification. I actually posted that notice for the insurer at their request. There is indeed a discrepancy between the agency that provided the coverage for this instrument--and who I understand has a copy of an appraisal--and the individual making the stolen claim regarding flower pot or fern. What is displayed on the classified ad is what the Hershman agency sent to me via email and was copied directly into that ad. I'm not going into any detail beyond that including who made the appraisal or not and whether the claim in the ad is the insured's or the insurer's. If you wish to speculate, and you will, that's your business. Just clarifying that what's listed there is exactly what the Hershman Insurance agency asked me to list, and the agency is of course aware of the discrepancy between insured and their records.

Darryl Wolfe
Sep-27-2007, 11:50am
Here is a very nice early 30's F5. A new number 94336

Darryl Wolfe
Sep-27-2007, 11:51am
Back

Darryl Wolfe
Sep-27-2007, 11:52am
Nice view

Darryl Wolfe
Sep-27-2007, 11:53am
Nice

Darryl Wolfe
Sep-27-2007, 11:54am
Fairly rare tuners with thrust washers on the shafts/worm

Darryl Wolfe
Sep-27-2007, 11:59am
This mandolin displays that ever slight vertical eggshapedness of the scroll. A dead givaway for 30's F5's

Bill Van Liere
Sep-27-2007, 3:17pm
Man, that thing looks brand new.

Has it ever been played?

doc holiday
Sep-27-2007, 5:34pm
Sam Bush must have ordered the distressed model!

MandoCowboy
Sep-27-2007, 5:54pm
Hi Darrel,

What material is the nut made out of on that 30's F5. Same as Loar's or different.

Glassweb
Sep-27-2007, 7:50pm
That's a clean machine... nice one Darryl!

f5loar
Sep-29-2007, 8:18am
Looks like it was made by the same guy that made my '35 Fern. And just as clean looking. Nice case!

Glassweb
Sep-29-2007, 9:51am
Any block inlay Fern owners out there that have had problems getting their mandolins to play in tune? The two or three that I've played over the years seem to have had fret placement problems... as do many black-top snakeheads with "The Gibson" stenciled on the headstock. Just curious as to what your take is on this... anyone?

danb
Sep-29-2007, 12:12pm
There is at least one batch of late snakeheads that have eccentric fretboards. I brought one in to Frank Ford, and he mentioned he'd seen a few others. My old snakehead ajr had non-parallel frets! Since replaced by the new owner

Darryl Wolfe
Nov-26-2007, 3:05pm
My new acquisition on the right

sgarrity
Nov-26-2007, 3:23pm
Looks pretty nice there next to the Loar. But I can't make out the label..... http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Glassweb
Nov-27-2007, 12:25am
Wat'cha got there Darryl?

Darryl Wolfe
Nov-27-2007, 10:00am
amazing what the Chinese can do for $1195 -KM-1000 Unquestionably digitized off a real Loar

Rroyd
Nov-27-2007, 10:11am
Durn! I was going to guess "Crusher," with the electrical tape still on.

Darryl Wolfe
Nov-27-2007, 10:21am
wood is pretty nice too

uncle ken
Nov-27-2007, 3:03pm
Hi Darryl, how did they do on the details? I'm actually a fan of Chinese manufacturing as I work with them quite a bit. Waiting for lead paint comments now.

danb
Nov-27-2007, 7:13pm
Crusher's not just taped any more http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Paul Weber
Nov-27-2007, 10:51pm
I picked up a KM-1000 for $950 & it really captures that dry, focused red spruce sound & chop. The low end has an unexpected growl and the E string is very sweet sounding. I might have to try some J75s to beef up the treble side a little. Saga did a wonderful job of copying a Loar and after some tweaking you have a wonderful Loar sounding mandolin at a reasonable price.

cooper4205
Nov-27-2007, 11:29pm
how is the body-depth of the KM-1000 compared to the Loar (I know they probably varied themselves)? There was a post made a while back where someone stated their new KM-1000 was thinner than what's found on a Gibson F5 (current ones). Seeing how the KM-1000 is a Loar copy, I wondered if there really was that much difference or any at all.

Darryl Wolfe
Nov-28-2007, 1:00pm
Mine is the standard 1-3/8 deep. I have not sat and measured things, but I spot no significant bad details. I fully agree with Northstar that it needs some tweeking via some heavier gauge strings. I do note that the neck angle is a bit steeper than the average Loar, and believe a heavier bridge will help add some additional tone and clip off a bit of the treble.

One detail that I can undertand is their continued use of black inner binding. This provides significant cosmetic hiding and reduces scrape time. It also pretty much negates the urge to refinish it in varnish and "clone one up"

BradKlein
Nov-30-2007, 10:30am
Re: Loar depth

Wouldn't 1 3/8" be fairly shallow for a Loar F-5? (measuring at the tailpiece) I understand that there is variation, and that some have been altered from original spec during top or back off repairs. #Would 1 5/8 or 1 3/4" be more typical though?

Thanks

Darryl Wolfe
Nov-30-2007, 10:35am
Brad, you are probably thinking of the overall outside dimension. Depth is usually noted as the height of the rimset itself (bottom of binding to bottom of binding) Loars and most modern F5's are 1-3/8" A models were 1-1/2"

BradKlein
Nov-30-2007, 11:16am
Thanks Darryl. That was indeed my mistake.

I also hadn't realized that the binding aligned so closely with the thickness of the top and back. I see now that it is easy to confirm the depth of the rimset by looking at the 'north' end of the scroll where the meeting of top, back and sides is not obscured by the binding.

Thanks for the insights.

Darryl Wolfe
Nov-30-2007, 12:18pm
Actually, maybe I should clarify further. From an archtop mandolin building perspective, depth is controlled by the rim height, and if asked how deep is it?, the answer is usually the dimension of the rim set. But in listed specs for flat top instruments such as a Martin guitars, depth does in fact refer to the overall dimension

danb
Jan-02-2008, 4:58pm
Here're some great new photos of the parrot Loar # 71055 (http://www.mandolinarchive.com/perl/show_mando.pl?2)

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/71055_back_detail.jpg

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/71055_face.jpg

danb
Jan-02-2008, 4:59pm
Speaking of details showing a retrofitted virzi (other thread!), there are a couple hints in this picture and one small mystery too http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/71055_scroll_back.jpg

danb
Jan-02-2008, 5:01pm
f5 71628 (http://www.mandolinarchive.com/perl/show_mando.pl?10) was recently restored/refinished by Steve Gilchrist. Here's Pee Wee holding it back in the day:

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/71628_2.jpg

danb
Jan-02-2008, 5:02pm
Before Steve had his hands on it:

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/71628_5.jpg

danb
Jan-02-2008, 5:02pm
and after! great work Steve!

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/71628_face.jpg

danb
Jan-02-2008, 5:03pm
This shot really gets my blood pumping http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/71628_scroll_back.jpg

dan@kins
Jan-02-2008, 5:50pm
Here're some great new photos of the parrot Loar # 71055 (http://www.mandolinarchive.com/perl/show_mando.pl?2)
Who in their right mind while looking at the gorgeous maple back of a Gibson F5 (and in this case Loar) thinks 'Wow, that's some gorgeous maple, and a really well done sunburst finish, you know what would really complete this aesthetic? A painting of a rainbow colored Parrot!'

f5loar
Jan-02-2008, 9:43pm
Can you post new photos of the head shot of the PeeWee Loar?
Did Gil reneck it again back to original? If so it would be the 4th neck put in that Loar. The original, the 30's reneck by Gibson and the 1980's copy of the reneck done by David Shepard which is shown in the photo with the hand holding it up(that's my hand!). The 2nd neck is hanging on a wall in Statesville, NC.

danb
Jan-03-2008, 4:31am
here's the head:

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/71628_peghead_1.jpg

mandolooter
Jan-03-2008, 10:38am
Why all the necks on the Pee Wee and whats the deal with the neck/heelcap on the Parrot Loar?

Glassweb
Jan-03-2008, 11:03am
When you see Loars like these two, with all their modifications, refins etc... it's easy to see why the un-messed with ones bring the top dollar that they do. At this point there aren't too many that are still in their original state and even fewer that are clean. As time goes on it will be more and more "acceptable" for these mandolins to have been worked on and restored. I wager there are still a number of unaccounted-for examples lurking around out there...

cooper4205
Jan-03-2008, 12:01pm
Why all the necks on the Pee Wee and whats the deal with the neck/heelcap on the Parrot Loar?
If I recall correctly, Lambert threw it away after a lady at his house has sat on it. Some guy dug it out of a trashcan and sold it to Frank Wakefield.

f5loar
Jan-03-2008, 12:26pm
To each his own..... I would have gone back with the original '22 headstock on this one. This new head does not match the '30s Gibson neck or the Shepard neck so it must be an all new neck made by Gil. It would not have changed the value since the 3rd neck was handmade by a not so well known luthier. If it were me I would have gotten the original 30's Gibson neck from Harry West and restored it. I think the story goes that Frank did get it from PeeWee and neck was held together by a spoon. Frank did his mojo on it even removing the finish and never got it like he wanted it. He traded it to Harry West with no finish on it for the Loar he has now and Harry West restored it with the new neck by Shepard following the old 30's pattern when PeeWee had it. Shepard's neck was not close either. When I played it this had the Monroe sound. Very woody. The top had been scraped,refinished so many times it was rather thin on top. Really looks great now. I suspect Gil had to do some carving around the scroll to make the line more defined.

Darryl Wolfe
Jan-03-2008, 1:10pm
I take exception to F5loars assessment of the peghead. #I think it looks fabulous and I cannot tell it is not original. #In fact, my money would be that it is. #The pearl work is tremendous and the color of the abalone is spot on. #It also matches the Pee Wee picture of the original which was a '29/30 redo or another one of those holdover mandolins. #At any rate the new peghead looks great to me, and I would want the mando to look like it did when Pee Wee had it

f5loar
Jan-03-2008, 2:11pm
I would agree to go back with the PeeWee head but that is not what he did. I've got a close up photo of the PeeWee head and the inlay is only close. Gil's is more centered over the Fern and not into the pearl like was typical of the 30's Ferns. While the Gil inlay does look better and anything other than original is not original it does look great but it's not right. It's not the PeeWee look now it's a close replica. The original neck is just sitting there and could have at least had the inlay overlayed onto a new neck. There is a close up photo of the original PeeWee head in that Green Collectors book.

kudzugypsy
Jan-04-2008, 7:59am
i knew Frank had owned this mando, but i'm confused with f5Loars statement about Frank getting his present Loar from Harry - i have always heard the story that Frank bought that mando from a guy at a festival that "nearly threw it at me when i offered him $200". i think he goes into detail about this on Jim's website.

f5loar
Jan-04-2008, 10:21am
I could be wrong about the one he has now. Frank has been through a few in his day. I just know about the deal with Harry West.

Darryl Wolfe
Jan-04-2008, 11:08am
The original neck is not just sitting there. #Gilchrist used it to his best advantage as a perfect pattern. #The only thing he did not "Pee Wee" is install worm under Loar tuners which changes the location of the string posts. #Otherwise the inlay is exactly where Pee Wee's is

danb
Jan-04-2008, 11:10am
wow, that's just amazing. I had no idea the peghead was redone to that extent

f5loar
Jan-04-2008, 5:35pm
Then that would explain why it does not look the same as the original photos. Gibson was bad about drilling through the pearl to install the current day tuners. I'd still gone with the original set up with the right tuners for the PeeWee look.

tree
Jan-05-2008, 8:54am
Is this the mandolin I hear on the Stanley Brothers "Daybreak In Dixie"? Or maybe The Lonesome River?

f5loar
Jan-05-2008, 11:37am
Daybreak in Dixie would have been Bill Napier who actually wrote the tune with the Stanleys. I think he used a 50's F12 back then. I never saw him with a Loar.

Glassweb
Jan-09-2008, 10:44am
Seems like one of the two Loars mandos listed at Gruhn's is no longer on the list. IF it has indeed sold that would once again point to the cleaner, more original examples bringing the highest values and quicker sales.

Brian Aldridge
Jan-09-2008, 5:00pm
I was privaledged to get to play 72853 this past weekend in Portland Oregon. It's handler let me play it on stage. What a great mandolin it is. I would have loved to have tweaked the action up just a smudge. This April 12th '23 sounded and felt a whole lot like F5loar's April 25. Clean. Purdy.

danb
Jan-09-2008, 6:33pm
That's a nice one indeed Brian, I got a chance to take it for a spin by the very generous owner too a few years back!

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/72853_scroll.jpg

Grassman
Jan-15-2008, 5:17pm
I just want to add a big Thank You to everyone for keeping this thread going. It's easily my favorite thread on the boards! So many wonderful pictures!

Thanks everybody

Steve Davis
Jan-15-2008, 5:55pm
That hardware neck repair is creative. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

danb
Feb-08-2008, 3:38pm
Here's a nice shot of a hang tag and key from 75693 (new shots at archive)

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/75693_key_and_tag.jpg

danb
Feb-08-2008, 3:38pm
Nice!

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/75693_back_and_side.jpg

danb
Feb-08-2008, 3:39pm
The rest are at the mandolin archive (http://www.mandolinarchive.com/perl/show_mando.pl?194)


http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/75693_front.jpg

Glassweb
Feb-08-2008, 4:06pm
That's the ticket!

Steve Davis
Feb-08-2008, 4:22pm
I guess those WERE the "good old days." $250.00 for a Loar! http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

f5loar
Feb-08-2008, 6:04pm
yeah but that was just for the mandolin. You had to cough up another $25 to get that fancy case with the key!

RichieK
Feb-08-2008, 6:25pm
Tom,
If you didn't have the extra $25, did the Loar come with one of the shaped 'Red Line' cases? Or did you just 'tote it around in a gunny sack'? http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Glassweb
Feb-08-2008, 9:49pm
$250 was a LOT of money for most folks in 1923.

Lefty&French
Feb-09-2008, 9:19am
Today is Lloyd Loar's birthday (9th february 1886).

f5loar
Feb-09-2008, 12:17pm
Happy BD Lloyd. It was $25 if you bought the case with the mandolin at the same time. If not it was $37.50 but you could buy used cases from Gibson from 10% to 50% off the regular price if they had them. The catalog only shows one case for the F5 in 1923. If there was a shape case back then for the F5 it was not listed. By comparsion the F4 shape case was $10.05.

wannabethile
Feb-10-2008, 3:30am
let me get this straight. $250 for the loar mandolin?? holy smokes!! its amazing to imagine anything going for 1,000 times its price over any certain amount of years, haha

Jonathan James
Feb-10-2008, 8:18am
I heard over the weekend that John Reischman bought his Loar for a whopping $8,000 in '81...

markishandsome
Feb-10-2008, 11:58am
I'd always heard he took out a loan to finance that purchase.

tiltman
Feb-10-2008, 8:17pm
$8,000 was a LOT of money for most folks in 1981...

kirk

GTison
Feb-10-2008, 8:27pm
prob. about half a years salary average.

Bernie Daniel
Feb-11-2008, 9:45am
I bought a pretty decent car for about $8K in 1980 - it has since been "recycled" -- I would guess that would not be the case for the Loar.

kudzugypsy
Feb-11-2008, 10:52am
what is more staggering is how much $250 could buy in 1923. the average farm income for a good year would have been $60-75 A YEAR (at that time we were still mainly an agricultural society) - and that was usually all the income a family of 6-10 might make. of course, they would grow their own food. my grandmother said during the 30's, as far back as she could remember, they would subsist on $90 a year and that was a decent living for a family of 5. an old fiddler i use to play with said they could make $4 a weekend playing music then, and you can imagine that was a big bonus.

Jim Hilburn
Feb-11-2008, 1:00pm
Loar's are often compared to the price of a car so I went Googling and read that a Model T in 1908 was $950 but dropped to as low as $280 before it was discontinued in 1927 so apparently a Loar was very near the price of a new car.

Darryl Wolfe
Feb-11-2008, 3:29pm
Exactly right Jim - regarding the car prices

$8000 is exactly the price for a Loar in 1981. #I paid $8000 for the one I have in '82 and $9000 for an investment one in 1988 #(75693 above) #Funny part is that Ferns were only slightly behind in price then $6-7K. 3-4 sold in that period for that range of prices

mandroid
Feb-11-2008, 7:35pm
Any closeup pictures of the signed loar tailpiece covers , just wanted to compare the details of engraved markings and the production marking metalwork techniques.
call me curious , if you want..

Timbofood
Feb-11-2008, 8:29pm
Now, there's an interesting issue about a tailpiece I would not have asked. Another line could go there but,No.
How about that seriously?

danb
Feb-12-2008, 4:04am
Any closeup pictures of the signed loar tailpiece covers , just wanted to compare the details of engraved markings and the production marking metalwork techniques.
call me curious , if you want..
Big one here (http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/73992_tp2.jpg), another one here (http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/75709_tailpiece.jpg),

and here's a favorite shot of the schultz loar one:

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/76547_tailpiece_closeup3.jpg

Timbofood
Feb-12-2008, 9:02am
You know, it's really a delight to have so many of these pictures available. They provide a certain amount of insight into how the old days were "different" and inspiration into how some of that knowledge can be still shared today. Thanks all you folks that save the old bits and share them so freely.

f5loar
Feb-12-2008, 5:28pm
That has to be the most perfect "patina" I've ever seen on a Loar Tailpiece cover.

Glassweb
Feb-12-2008, 5:39pm
That has to be the most perfect "patina" I've ever seen on a Loar Tailpiece cover.
Agreed!

ehb86
Feb-14-2008, 11:09pm
That's a great photo of the "Schultz" tailpiece cover. That got me thinking, did that instrument move on from the family to another owner? It sure was a beauty.

mandoscotia
Feb-17-2008, 3:47pm
Played a gospel gig last night and had a conversation with Fred, our local bluegrass historian and allround amazing guy. He used to own a loar that he bought in a pawn shop in Halifax for.....$100.

Sold it for much more.

Nathan

f5loar
Feb-17-2008, 5:56pm
That would have been famous Dave Apollon '23 Loar.
Fred had it a long time before he reaped his fortune.

Michael Gowell
Feb-17-2008, 7:53pm
Does anyone know the story of how that Loar got to Halifax from Los Angeles? #Seems odd that a fine instrument with a famous owner could go astray like that.

danb
Jun-19-2008, 6:43am
Hmm, not enough Loar here lately. Here's a great curiosity, a unique K5 peghead

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/75255_peghead.jpg

danb
Jun-19-2008, 6:44am
Also the alignment of the F-holes on the body seems unusual to me. Maybe it's the angle of the photo?

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/75255_face.jpg

danb
Jun-19-2008, 6:44am
Plus.. another out-of-the-woodwork f5just fell in my inbox. More details when I have them!

tree
Jun-19-2008, 8:35am
Yeah, that is a funky peghead.

Please, more pics! #Especially of the back of the body and neck.

F5GRun
Jun-19-2008, 9:16am
more..more..I need more. And did you say newly discoverd Loar? http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-19-2008, 11:24am
Yes. Dan was contacted and a out-of-the-closet-Loar exists just a few miles from me. I will let him bask a little when we get more info

f5loar
Jun-19-2008, 11:25am
Note the unbound fingerboard. For a K5 that unusal too.
Is this the Grisman '23 K5?

danb
Jun-22-2008, 5:37am
It's 75255 (http://www.mandolinarchive.com/perl/show_mando.pl?163)

I won't say who has what unless I get permission from the owner to say so, or it's already been widely communicated in public!

Here's the back:

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/75255_back.jpg

Spruce
Jun-22-2008, 12:25pm
Yikes that's nice... http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

Michael Gowell
Jun-22-2008, 12:45pm
Wow, Gibson's first use of the "moustache" design element, tried at the top of the headstock here and used on guitar bridges for decades starting about 20 years later.

mandolooter
Jun-22-2008, 3:10pm
wow that K5 is a real beaut! I bet it sounds even better!

527
Jun-24-2008, 5:26am
Here's the back:
That is some gorgeous maple.

danb
Jun-25-2008, 8:34am
Here's a first look at the out-of-the-woodwork one, it's a july 9 sidebound SN 73997

The pictures I have aren't great, and it sounds like Darryl will have a chance to take some in the near future

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-25-2008, 8:40am
And check out the very cool single bound pickguard. That shows up only on this one and the June 1, 1922 No. 1 signed F5. It works very nicely with the side binding on this one, and remember the June 1 Loar is double bound like an A2z and A3.

danb
Jun-25-2008, 8:49am
Here's the June 1 1922

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/images/70281_front.jpg

Glassweb
Jun-25-2008, 9:32am
Boy, doesn't THAT look sweet! Can't tell too much, but the finish looks right and the frets look original... anyone else? (i.e. Dan or Darryl) Can't wait to see the woods!

Jim Hilburn
Jun-25-2008, 9:43am
Darryl, could you refresh us on what happened to the top of the June 9? It's in the original LPOTD thread but you have to search to find that anymore. It needs a good bump.

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-25-2008, 10:07am
From all appearances, and we are talking 1978 memory since I have seen the mandolin..the top is slightly caved as if the bridge took a blow on the bass side post area. Someone simply smoothed the misalignment along the top crack with wood putty and stained it. Trust me, the mandolin didn't suffer because it is an absolute canon that sounds like Monroes when it was at it's best

Mike Black
Jun-25-2008, 10:11am
Is that pick guard original or was it just put back on this one? It looks like the finish is worn off the upper point. Plus no wear on it. Is the mounting hardware normal with the binding on it too?

markishandsome
Jun-25-2008, 10:29am
I think what looks like wear on the point is just glare from the flash photo and the shadow of the guard.

Glassweb
Jun-25-2008, 10:48am
I think what looks like wear on the point is just glare from the flash photo and the shadow of the guard.
good call Mark... i think you're right on with that observation...

danb
Jun-25-2008, 11:04am
Yes- I had to photoshop a bit to get colors right, this was not a pro photo job!

Here's a treat from Scott, a pdf archive of the original LPOTD thread (http://www.mandolincafe.net/loar/lpod.pdf)

Hal Jeanes
Jun-25-2008, 11:12am
This is a treat! Thanks a lot.

Darryl Wolfe
Jun-25-2008, 12:46pm
Hello Hal-Still holdin'?

Hal Jeanes
Jun-26-2008, 9:09pm
Hey to you Darryl. Still holdin' and enjoyin'

Glassweb
Jun-27-2008, 6:20pm
Lo and behold! Yet another July 9th sidebound has just appeared on Gruhn's list!

mandopluker
Jun-27-2008, 6:25pm
yes sir ......

Loudloar
Jun-27-2008, 7:05pm
6 Loars, 1 Fern. Cliff Sergent took this photo in the late 80's. I was busy holding a mandolin.

Stevehttp://kirtleymusic.home.comcast.net/pix/6Loars1fernS.JPG

Glassweb
Jun-27-2008, 7:56pm
a thing of... errr, beauty! yeah... that's the ticket! the mandolins that is...

mandopluker
Jun-27-2008, 8:16pm
oh yea baby, that's surly the ticket!

Glassweb
Jun-28-2008, 12:59am
now THERE'S a Motley Crew...

danb
Jun-28-2008, 3:28am
Lo and behold! Yet another July 9th sidebound has just appeared on Gruhn's list!
Yes- different from the one that recently contacted me.

Bryan Monarch
Jun-28-2008, 3:53am
Wow, that old LPOTD page is entrancing. Probably a really bad thing that I looked at that page cause now I have serious scroll envy...

Glassweb
Jun-28-2008, 7:05am
Yes- different from the one that recently contacted me.
just goes to show... they're still out there folks!

danb
Jun-28-2008, 9:41am
I think the one at Gruhn is already documented..

danb
Jun-30-2008, 7:40am
Here's a fun chart, this is a list of Loar-signed instruments by signature date (http://www.mandolinarchive.com/signature_dates.html). This is generated from the archive database.. a good way to make sure that my and Darryl's lists are kept in sync!

mandopluker
Jun-30-2008, 7:42am
Dan,

That's VERY kewl! I also have wondered about a similar chart showing the progression of cost from beginning to current. Have I missed one somewhere?

danb
Jun-30-2008, 7:46am
Well I've never created a ticker or cost trend chart. I expect those must exist internally at some of the dealers though.

grassrootphilosopher
Jun-30-2008, 8:00am
Has anyone ever tried to look behind the reason why the dating of the labels were so unevenly spread. Did Lloyd Loar sign the labels as he saw it fit, did he sign the labels everytime a mandolin was completed, did he sign them on apointed dates? What┤s the story. It seems to me that the production proces seems somewhat haphazzard. I am informed that it was in later years and that Gibson always experimented a good deal. Does anyone have any insight? http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Glassweb
Jun-30-2008, 8:05am
Thanks Dan-O... very interesting to see it like this...

uncle ken
Jun-30-2008, 12:09pm
Here's my version of that picture. In this one you can appreciate the tall trees. It was at the Grass Valley festival around 1990 or so. I'm on the far right.

f5loar
Jun-30-2008, 6:58pm
You remember the "Million Dolllar Band" from the HeeHaw show? This looks like the "Million Dollar Mandolin band".
Is that Butch Waller's July 9th Loar? Sure looks minty in that photo as compared to how it looks today.

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-02-2008, 6:48am
Here are some pictures of the new out-of the closet Loar. #This is the way it was brought to me last night. It was wrapped in a clean towel though.

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-02-2008, 6:51am
Here it is to the left of my 73992

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-02-2008, 6:52am
backs

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-02-2008, 6:53am
closer

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-02-2008, 6:55am
more

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-02-2008, 6:56am
peghead

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-02-2008, 6:57am
of course it is side bound

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-02-2008, 6:57am
more

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-02-2008, 7:00am
back

Darryl Wolfe
Jul-02-2008, 7:01am
last one for now--overall this is a nice mandolin