1963 f-12--thoughts?

[recharred]

Hi,
Gruhn's is sending out the attached F-12 for me to look over, and I was wondering if you all had any pointers on what especially to look for while I'm deciding whether it's a keeper.

The only issue that's really got me worried is the low bridge, which may indicate the need for a neck reset at some point in the near future, and that would dramatically change the whole value equation. Are there any telltale signs of recent slippage and the like that I can look for?

I'm not worried about the replacement saddle or missing pickguard, unless that saddle is changed to make up for a bad neck angle!


http://www.boysbugler.com/fam/MF7408.jpg

[theBlood]

You're not likely to encounter misrepresentation from Gruhn, I would say. You may pay towards higher blue book, but you're buying from a recognized authority which is worth something. If the neck needs to be re-set, I would expect that to be divulged by this seller.

Relative to the model, and you haven't mentioned your particular attraction, I would guess that re-sale may not be as easy as it would with some others. So I would make sure I really like the tone and playability.

Also, top sinkage is the more common response to pressure than necks pulling forward (unlike guitars). The way this fingerboard is configured, it could be that the neck was installed at somewhat less of an angle than prior f models. But, we've hit the ceiling of my knowledge...

[Paul Hostetter]

I too would first listen to it and see if it spoke to you. Then I'd check details like neck relief and fret condition and so on - basic playability issues. I think bridge height is a bit overrated. I would assume the heel of the neck is tight to the back, so if it's been this way since 1963, it's really doubtful it'll change or need a reset.

[527]

George can and has been wrong. Use your own eyes and hands to inspect it.

If it plays well and sounds good with no unexpected cracks, loose braces, bindng rot, or top sink, I think you're ok.

[recharred]

Thanks Everyone!

It's clear that Gruhn's has a reputation for fair dealing, which is one reason I looked extra close at their inventory for anything that caught my eye.

I liked the look of this one, in part because the color is a little unusual and also because I actually like the block letter logo from this era--it matches my guitars and my #t-shirt http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif Also, in terms of $$, it's a bit easier to get into an f12 than an f5, and I'm looking for something to play rather than an investment piece. I've heard that the f12s are sometimes quite good, sometimes not, so it seemed like a reasonable thing to look into.

Over the phone, the tone sounded quite suitable, with a good bark and clarity, and I like the nut width at 1 1/8 rather than the too skinny (for me) 1 1/16 on so many newer Gibsons. We'll see if I'm still impressed in person when it arrives tomorrow, but I'm guardedly optimistic.

It's good to hear that the low bridge is not in itself #grounds for serious concern. I'll be sure to look over the rest as mentioned.

One thought: if I decide I can really love it and I plan to keep it, I will swap off the strings right away for a newer set. Is there anything worth giving one last check while I have the strings off? If there is an issue with it, would the neck feel loose or wiggly when the tension is off? Anything else that might show up with the strings off?

Thanks again for the wealth of info already. I don't know how one could make these decisions before the 'cafe!

[Darryl Wolfe]

That is a quite nice looking example and it has a maple neck (whereas they are usually mahogany) and some decent curl to the back. #That is a plus. #It is apparent that they would occasionally pick up an F5 in the white and finish it out in F-12 appointments. #(F-12's are usually birdeye maple or plain Jane)

[allenhopkins]

Intrigued by the "Custom" inlay on the truss rod cover. #What about this instrument would make it a "custom"? #I mean, of course, of the features visible from the photos.

[Paul Hostetter]

Well, I suspect they were hardly ever making any Florentine mandolins in 1963, so even a rank-and-file F-12 might have qualified as being "Custom," but Darryl enumerated a number of things that would have raised the ante toward "Custom" status.

Thinking about this again, I first visited Parsons Street in 1964. I saw such amazing things there, yet I was so benighted about carved mandolins at that point, I wonder who was actually making them, or if they had old roughed-out items left over from bygone days that were being finished for the occasional order. I guess Walter Carter would know.

[recharred]

Thanks again for all the info. I have an update, now that the mandolin has arrived. The bottom line is that I've decided to keep it.

I like the look of it even more than I expected. The color is even nicer in person than the picture captured--more mellow hues of reddish brown and yellowish brown than simply reds and yellows. There are a couple of bubbles in the lacquer, but otherwise the instrument is in outstanding shape all around. No cracks, and very little wear of any kind at all.

The sound and playability compare favorably to everything else I've played recently (including a late 80s F5). I got a chance to go between that F5 and a bunch of Collings and Webers recently, and I really liked the F5L, but it was just too spendy. The F5L I tried certainly wasn't any better than the Collings, but it had the voice one associates with Gibson, and going back and forth helped me to realize that's really what I like. (Actually, I know I will have to have a Collings someday too, but that's another story ;-) Since I really couldn't afford the F5, I thought I'd take a chance on this F12.

Anyway, the F12 feels and sounds like I remember of that F5, at least after the F12 opened up after a bit of hard playing. The mandolin arrived yesterday, and I've been playing on it like mad ever since. It took awhile to wake up, but after pounding on open chords for a few minutes, it opens up with a voice that can only be described as having that "Gibson sound." It is not as throaty as my A9, but it definitely barks. I know F12s of this era have a reputation for being of uneven quality, with many of them sounding too thin, so I was especially pleased to find that this particular instrument has a warm and mature tone. The consensus seems to be that many of these instruments have too think a finish to let the wood sing--a phenomenon I know too well from my old Michael Kelly--but this F12 is not at all choking on the finish, which does not look thick like that MK did either.

After it opened up, it is also plenty loud. My wife says she thinks it's louder than my Eastman 815, which folks have told me is a real cannon. It doesn't seem quite as loud as that to me, but it may be that the warmer tone of the F12 keeps its punch out front better. I'll have to get someone else to play it for me so I can hear for myself how it carries.

My original concerns about the short bridge seem to be of no matter. The original ebony saddle was in the case, and that saddle appears to be considerably shorter than the replacement bone saddle, which explains why it is adjusted so far down. I can find no evidence that the neck has moved or is going to move. I'll have to put the original saddle on sometime to see how that sounds.

My only concern now is that it still seems rather tight higher up the neck. Is it possible that it is more well played in at first position? I hadn't noticed any of my other mandos breaking in unevenly, but who knows? If I keep playing higher up the neck, is it likely to open up more there?

The tiny little frets (at least compared to my Eastman) will also take some getting used to, but I think that's just a matter of adjustment. None of them seem dead or worn (they were dressed at Gruhn's), but there doesn't seem to be much left of them. I suppose that means a re-fret sometime in the future, but that's certainly not a show-stopper.

The final analysis: I really like this F12. Since I went ahead and decided to have it sent here, I've been guarding against talking myself into liking it; this is a pretty significant chunk of change to drop on something unless I really love it, so I have crossexamined myself (and my wife) on it and I'm quite sure it's a nice instrument. In fact, it seems so good to me that I wonder whether their reputation has kept people away from what might be some really good instruments. I don't doubt that many of these are dogs--and from the discussions I've seen here, it sounds like the 70s examples are quite consistently bad--but is it possible that there are lots of these from the 50s and 60s languishing in shops just because folks don't want to take a chance on them?

[RB250]

Recharred,

Can you tell me (PM me if you'd rather) what the F-12 sold for? I ran across one at an estate sales last year and walked away from it as I thought it was too pricey (or not enough of a deal!!)and wasn't quite blown away by the sound. But I may have been too cheap. The F-12 is a classic and I should have bought it. Thanks

[recharred]

I paid $3500 in what Gruhn's described as Extremely Fine condition, which matches the low price listed in the 2007 Vintage Guitar Price Guide (which assumes what they call Excellent condition). This instrument is all original (as far as I can tell), no damage and very little wear, but missing the pickguard.

I don't think I got a huge bargain, but it seems a perfectly fair price. There are lots of other good mandolins in that price range, but I already have a few nice newer instruments, and I wanted something with a bit of that old instrument mojo and gravitas.

How much was the one you walked away from?

[mandroid]

I look at the picture and see the bridge was, perhaps, low, because the construction was done like the A50's with the fingerboard and the top made to meet each other , rather than the elevated fingerboard construction style .

Not anything wrong with A40, EM 150 and A50's ... I've owned one of each and they are fine music making instruments.

now the experts will speak..

[Paul Hostetter]

The bridge height and the type of connection between the board and the body (elevated or not) are not connected. You can build any angle of tilt into either style of neck joint, resulting in any bridge height you want. Lots of Montana Flatirons with elevated boards had really low bridges. .

[recharred]

This one has an elevated board, but it's hard to tell from the pic. I understand the raised fingerboard starts in 1959.

I tried the original ebony saddle on it last night, but it sounded muddy compared to the bone saddle so I put that back on. No surprise, since the original owner presumably put the bone saddle on for a reason, but I wanted to hear it for myself.

The bottom picture gets the color better than anything with a flash.

http://www.boysbugler.com/fam/F12c.jpg
http://www.boysbugler.com/fam/F12e.jpg

[mandroid]

Ah I see , a modest elevation , , the lighting made it a less pronounced look,
happy picking..

[allenhopkins]

That is one nice-looking mandolin. Happy picking!

[f5loar]

That's a nice one for a '63 like Darryl said with fancy wood. First off if that bridge saddle is ebony it's not original. All 50's and 60's F12s and F5s came with rosewood bridges not ebony. They went back to ebony in the 70's. I can't tell from the photo if this has the screwed on top type pickguard or the pins in the side of the fingerboard type. Looks like it should have the pin holes on the side but I can't see that side. You can get a really decent replacement PG from Cumberland Acoustics. I've seen the bracket holders on ebay too if they don't have the gold hardware you need to mount it. The Custom cover was standard for that year. Never could figure out why some did some didn't for those many years but even the F5s had some years that did not have Custom on it in the 50's and 60's yet for the most part they were all custom ordered either by indivduals through a dealer or dealers stock. Then to for $2 you in '63 through a dealer you could order a Custom cover and put it on yourself. Back then only the bigger stores would dare have one in stock and it didn't last long as those Gibson F mandolins were "scarcer then hen's teeth" as the saying would go in the South. When you consider they only turned out 26 F12s and 34 F5s in '63 you see why they were hard to come by. Bluegrass was starting to take off with the insurgence of Hootennany and The Beverly Hillbillies. The Darling Family helped sell a few mandolins too along with the weekly Flatt & Scruggs show reaching a wider TV audience. Also to find an original F12 that was not turned into a Loar F5 is a miracle in itself. Generally because the F12s were lighter in weight and less on the finish they sounded beter then the F5 of the same year just didn't look as fancy! I'd keep it.

[recharred]

f5loar:

Thanks for the input. I was especially interested to hear the tidbit about only 26 being made in that year. That's the sort of detail that adds a little spice to conversations about this instrument, and invites speculation about the circumstances of its original purchase. The fact that older instruments all have a story to tell is surely part of their appeal. . .

Now that I look again, I think the saddle probably is rosewood, but it is polished smooth enough that I'm not sure. Upon closer inspection, the feet are certainly rosewood. I am contemplating fitting it with a CA bridge, just to see how that sounds, but it's probably better to leave well enough alone.

As for the pickguard, I prefer to play without one, so the only reason to add one is if it would improve resale value, and I'm not selling!

Your points about the weight and especially the lighter finish certainly sound right. I was a little puzzled when I read other posts dismissing the f12s as having a thin sound from too heavy a finish, but it looks more and more like that is in reference to those from the 70s. In any case, it certainly doesn't apply to this one.

Happy picking indeed!

[lenf12]

Congrats on your newly acquired F-12. It sure is a beauty. I too have an F-12. Mine is from 1956 and some of the observations others have made about F-12s having muted, thin voices can be true of F-5's as well from the 50's through the 80's. My F-12 was an example of this observation however, I don't think it's from an overly thick finish but rather from a thickly carved top. I have owned this mandolin for 5 or 6 years and beat it regularly to open it up and while this helped somewhat, I was never very satisfied with the tone or volume. It would go back to "sleep" pretty quickly as well. I finally decided to send it to Randy Wood to have him regraduate the top and replace the tone bars. I got it back 2 1/2 weeks ago and Randy advised to continue "beating" it because it's essentially a new top needing to be broken in again. He's correct of course. My mandolin is definitely louder but still rather weak in the bass and mids.

Prior to my acquiring this mandolin, it had several repairs or upgrades and can no longer be considered original. One upgrade was a replacement of the mahogany neck with a maple F-5 neck w/ elevated fingerboard (looks to be 70's vintage neck to me). The original fingerboard was put back on. Very nice upgrade once I removed that sticky black paint from the playing area on the neck. Another repair resulted in an overspray of the dark (black) portion of the sunburst on the back. I don't know what was wrong to require that much coverage of the gorgeous quilted maple back but...... I replaced the original rosewood bridge with ebony and also replaced the closed back Kluson tuners with Gotoh open back tuners. These changes (prior to Randy's work) resulted in big improvements in tone and volume My question is, given the extensive changes from "original" condition, would it be worthwhile to consider refinishing this mandolin with varnish and possibly 3 ply w/b/w binding? What would any of you do?

Len B.
Clearwater, FL

[recharred]

lenf12:

Unless the current finish is truly awful (especially if it's too thick and pinching the sound), I'm sure the conventional wisdom to never refinish would apply. Even with the alterations already in place, a refinish would constitute a major final step from original.

On the other hand, it may be that none of that bothers you. There are lots of reasons folks like whatever instruments they like, and if there's something about this one that keeps you attached but you can't stand the finish, then by all means make it just the instrument you most want it to be. You may need to figure out why it makes more sense to you to keep messing with this one rather than finding one that is already as you like.

When I'm not picking, I am a professional philosopher (no, really, they pay me to talk about philosophy--it's a cool job:-) Your case reminds me of the famous story of the ship at sea where each plank is replaced along the journey, so that no wood from the original ship remains at the end. The question is, is it still the same ship when she reaches port? If you think the ship is just the wood, then the answer is no, but if you think there's something else that makes it the ship it is, then it makes sense to say it's the same ship, even though it's made of all new stuff.

It seems to me your mandolin is approaching the state of that ship. At what point is this still the same mandolin? I submit that depends on what it means to you, and that can be figured out by reflecting on why you are attached to this particular instrument. Changing the finish will change some things, but not others. What do you want to keep?

On the other hand, I have a habit of overthinking these things. Occupational hazard!

[lenf12]

Richard said; "It seems to me your mandolin is approaching the state of that ship. At what point is this still the same mandolin?"

Thanks for your well reasoned, philosophical reply. My answer would have to be, the same mandolin as what or more appropriately, when during the course of its existence? It is not at all the same mandolin as when it was first produced in 1956. However, the sound box is essentially the same materials only modified dimensionally during the revoicing. Of course the tone bars are new and greatly reduced in mass. The ebony bridge, maple neck with F-5 headstock overlay, tailpiece, tuners and fingerrest are all replacements. The finish on the soundbox doesn't strike me as being very thick and is quite checked from age, a quality that I find attractive in a 52 year old mandolin. Visually, I mostly dislike the oversprayed sunburst on the back because it covers such beautiful quilted maple. Looking at your new acquisition, you can see most all of the maple back and the shading only extends an inch or so from the rim; quite lovely!! On mine, the overspray is black (or darn close) and it extends about 1 1/2 to 2 inches from the rim except towards the tail where it's more like 3 or 4 inches from the rim. I'll try to post a picture to illustrate.

I guess that I like it as an F-12 which is what it mostly looks like (if you don't consider the F-5 headstock). I will most likely keep it primarily as it is now but am strongly leaning towards getting the back refinished. I do really enjoy owning and playing this mandolin and hope that it will someday sound and look as good as I envision.

Thanks again,
Len B.
Clearwater, FL

[allenhopkins]

Your case reminds me of the famous story of the ship at sea where each plank is replaced along the journey, so that no wood from the original ship remains at the end. The question is, is it still the same ship when she reaches port?
I have an ax that belonged to Abraham Lincoln! 'Course, it's had four new heads and seven new handles since he owned it...

[lenf12]

Wow!!! Abe Lincoln's ax, sounds pretty valuable. I didn't know he played guitar ;-). I wanted to post a picture of the back of my '56 F-12 to illustrate the overspray but haven't figured that out yet. Any clues??

Len B.

[recharred]

Here's Len B's F-12.

I like the look of the wood. I can see why you might want to improve the finish a bit, but it certainly doesn't look that bad as it is, at least not to me.

[recharred]

I have an ax that belonged to Abraham Lincoln! #'Course, it's had four new heads and seven new handles since he owned it...
If an axe has a new head, wouldn't that make it a b@#&o ??

[lenf12]

Thanks for posting this photo for me Recharred. I personally don't mind the finish checking at all. It's the black paint covering the maple that bothers me. Otherwise, it's a very nice playing mandolin.

Len B.
Clearwater, FL

[recharred]

Len B: Happy to help out with the posting. I see your point about the black covering the nice maple on the back, but I don't think the look is so bad that it rises to the level of a refinish. Of course, at the end of the day what really matters is whether it would make you feel more in love with your instrument.

Here's the front of Len B's F-12:

[Zigeuner]

That's a nice mandolin that you have. I looked at it several times on Gruhn's website in the past year.

I have a 1949 F-12 that I inherited from my uncle along with a 1923 TB-4 (tenor) Gibson banjo and a 1917 Gibson A-3 mandolin.

The F-12 was originally called "Artist Model" along with some others. Like yours, mine has the gold fittings and the square-cut fingerboard.

I guess that the above posters have helped you a lot. FWIW, I looked at the side view of your bridge and it doesn't look unusual to me. I'll get some pictures of my F-12 tonight and post them.

AFAIK, the only difference between the 1949 model and the year that you have is the pearl inlay on the headstock and the "Custom" engraved on the truss rod cover. My truss rod cover is plain black plastic.

I see F-model pickguards and brackets on eBay from time to time. There is a fellow who sells the small plastic block that glues under the fingeroard with the threaded rod and the side bracket. I bought one and discovered that the side bracket, although gold in color is not quite the same shape but I guess it's OK for a spare. Ha.

As far as the sound on the F-12 as opposed to other F model mandolins, I really am not qualified to say as I have no basis for comparison. Mine has good balance and a nice action. It's not as loud as either my Martin A or my Gibson A model but that may have to do with the F holes, which may change one's perception. It has opened up quite a bit since I got it. I also discovered that it sounds much better with the Gibson or Sam Bush style monel strings, which I think are a medium (.011- .041) IIRC.

My uncle, who was a car dealer in Columbus, Ohio when he was still living, received my mandolin as a present from a Shriner friend who was in Gibson management in Kalamazoo. I have the original build tag showing the date in 1949 when it was finished and it was unplayed when I received it back in 1982.

Personally, I think you got a very nice mandolin at a very good price. I've found George Gruhn to be very reputable in the past and the price that you paid was not bad considering the relative rarity of the model.

As an aside, I'm sure glad that the F-12's don't have that little ramp that runs off the end of the fingerboard. That keeps the other owners from digging out the last few frets to keep from scraping their picks. That wouldn't bother me since I have a rather reserved playing style but nonetheless I've seen pictures of numerous F-5's that have had that modification done to them. Sort of reminds me of female circumcision, but I digress. LOL

I'll come back with some pictures of mine, particularly regarding the bridge. I hope you enjoy your mandolin as much as I have mine. I'm mainly a guitar collector, but mine's not for sale, either.

Regards. #

http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Zigeuner]

Hello again. Here are some pictures of my F-12. It has a rosewood bridge that I have set all the way down. Yours doesn't really look all that much different. I doubt you would need a neck reset. I can't imagine what that would entail on a mandolin...kind of like making sausage maybe.

The pickguard mounts to the side of the fingerboard with two pins ala most other Gibsons. As I said, I've seen them on eBay as recently as last week, so if you change your mind and want one, I'm sure you could find it.

Here goes. Hope this helps.



http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/gnm109/F-12Pictures001.jpg

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/gnm109/F-12Pictures002.jpg

[f5loar]

Is that fingerboard elevated off the top or glued to the top like the A50s? Hard to tell in that photo or I'm seeing a reflection.

[Zigeuner]

Is that fingerboard elevated off the top or glued to the top like the A50s? Hard to tell in that photo or I'm seeing a reflection.

Is that fingerboard elevated off the top or glued to the top like the A50s? Hard to tell in that photo or I'm seeing a reflection.
No, it's not elevated. It has a shim that connects it to the top of the mandolin. Here's a better photo. The non-elevated, rampless fingerboard is the principal difference in appearance between the F-12 and the F-5, other than a little binding here and there and the relatively plain headstock of the F-12.

Regards.

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/gnm109/F-12FingerboardXXX.jpg

[recharred]

Wow! That mandolin is in truly amazing condition.

Mine also sounds much better with medium strings, but I've gone back to the light strings it came with until I can get it refretted. Mediums were trashing my hand with these tiny little frets. But the voice is so much bigger and bolder with the mediums that I'm feeling the need to refret very urgently.

It's good to get more evidence that the low bridge is no need for concern. It's also cool to hear from another happy F12 player.

[f5loar]

yes that photo is much better. Only the first few years had the non-elevated fingerboard and after that the F12 fingerboard was elevated almost as much as the F5 which made a big difference in the sound. Also the very first run of postwar F12s had the short neck like the prewar F12 which put the bridge further back from the center of the F holes. I've got a really nice '49. Can you send me private PM with your serial number so we can compare? Also the stamp number in the lower F hole will help to see if they are from the same batch. They made 85 F12 in '49 so that's why you see a lot of them out there however many were destroyed when converted to Loar F5s.

[Zigeuner]

Wow! That mandolin is in truly amazing condition.

Mine also sounds much better with medium strings, but I've gone back to the light strings it came with until I can get it refretted. Mediums were trashing my hand with these tiny little frets. But the voice is so much bigger and bolder with the mediums that I'm feeling the need to refret very urgently.

It's good to get more evidence that the low bridge is no need for concern. It's also cool to hear from another happy F12 player.
I'd be interested to find out about what frets you might use when refretting. The originals on my instrument are quite narrow, almost like bar frets. I have several feet of mandolin fret wire that I kept when I closed my music store years ago but even that is larger than the frets on the Gibson.

If you have yours done, make sure that the frets aren't too much larger.

Happy Trails!

[recharred]

I don't mind the narrowness of the frets, though I don't really prefer it either. My problem is just that these frets have been dressed so many times over the years that they are practically gone, and this makes it really hard to play cleanly without a lot of force. I don't need anything huge; I would be happy to get them in the same shape as the frets on my A9.

My concerns are getting the job done right to make the instrument more comfortable to play and not having to have it redone again real soon. If I can find someone who will do it, I am inclined to go with stainless steel, but I will defer to the concerns of a good luthier on all this.

In other news, I see there's a pickguard from the era on sale on ebay right now. Since I don't play with one, I would only get it if it makes a significant difference for the ultimate future value of the instrument to have it around. (Even if I never sell it, my heirs might. . . hopefully to a good home.) How much difference in the total value of the instrument would it make? Does anyone have a sense of how hard it is to find an original pickguard? (Is this about the only chance?) It's hard to justify spending the bucks on one just to keep it in the case, but I don't want to be kicking myself over not getting it later.

[Zigeuner]

I don't mind the narrowness of the frets, though I don't really prefer it either. My problem is just that these frets have been dressed so many times over the years that they are practically gone, and this makes it really hard to play cleanly without a lot of force. I don't need anything huge; I would be happy to get them in the same shape as the frets on my A9.

My concerns are getting the job done right to make the instrument more comfortable to play and not having to have it redone again real soon. If I can find someone who will do it, I am inclined to go with stainless steel, but I will defer to the concerns of a good luthier on all this.

In other news, I see there's a pickguard from the era on sale on ebay right now. Since I don't play with one, I would only get it if it makes a significant difference for the ultimate future value of the instrument to have it around. (Even if I never sell it, my heirs might. . . hopefully to a good home.) How much difference in the total value of the instrument would it make? Does anyone have a sense of how hard it is to find an original pickguard? (Is this about the only chance?) It's hard to justify spending the bucks on one just to keep it in the case, but I don't want to be kicking myself over not getting it later.
Hi,

The pickguard on eBay has been listed there before, unless the seller has a big supply of them. It looks OK except it's the style that uses a screw to hold the front part of the pickguard to the body. If your mandolin doesn't already have a hole in that area, I would strongly advise against drilling one.

I can't say what the difference in value with a pickguard would be but it might be nice to have one, whether you install it or not.

It's possible that the 1963 model was mounted that way with a screw on the front but I'm not sure. My 1949 version has the two pins that slide into the fingerboard and then the lower brace screws into the side with a gold-plated bracket. Check your instrument for the two holes in the fingerboard. If it has them, you might want to ask the fellow with the eBay listing if he has the other type. I wouldn't want to pay $79 plus shipping for the wrong type.

I've heard about stain;ess steel frets. They might be OK and probably would wear a little longer although they would not be original. I would find a good mandolin repair person who can do a stock fret job for you. That should last a long time.

Regards.

[Zigeuner]

yes that photo is much better. Only the first few years had the non-elevated fingerboard and after that the F12 fingerboard was elevated almost as much as the F5 which made a big difference in the sound. Also the very first run of postwar F12s had the short neck like the prewar F12 which put the bridge further back from the center of the F holes. I've got a really nice '49. Can you send me private PM with your serial number so we can compare? Also the stamp number in the lower F hole will help to see if they are from the same batch. They made 85 F12 in '49 so that's why you see a lot of them out there however many were destroyed when converted to Loar F5s.
Hello,

I've heard tell that the sound was different with the elevated versus the low fingerboad also. I presume that you mean that the elevated one sounds "better". I really woudln't be able to confirm or deny that. It's still a rumor as far as I can tell. It was probably fostered by the "Gibson F Model Elevated Fingerboard Cotillion". #LOL.

As I mentioned before, it's a shame that lots of folks with the elevated (ramped) fingerboard feel the need to chop out the frets in that area to keep from hitting them with a pick. It sure must cut the value a lot to do that to a mandolin. I'm strictly for leaving vintage instruments completely original. I've followed that rule in my guitar collection and it's served me well up to this point.

The only numbers inside my mandolin are F-12 and A-38XX on the tag inside the F-hole on the bass side. I presume those are the model and serial nmber. It appears on the list I saw on a Gibson site to be 1949. It must be a good list because the build slip that came with the mandolin is, IIRC, Feb. 1949. I don't give out whole serial numbers anymore. There may be some other numbers in there but I've not found them yet. I was hoping for a Lloyd Loar signature, but no cigar.

Regards.

[f5loar]

Hummm.... I can clearly see 2 of the numbers under the pickguard area stamped onto the back as visable through the lower (E side) F hole. Have you looked there? This would be the factory order number. I just wanted to compare that number to mine to see if it was made in the same batch. The serial number clearly puts this one in 1949.
That pickguard on ebay is on about the 6th run. And 6 times I have asked the seller for a clearer closer up photo. And 6 times he has refused to send me a better photo or to even post a better photo. I don't think it's a Gibson pickguard. It has the wrong degree of angle cut on the bevel to be a 60's of any year. I first thought it might be from those Mickey Mouse A5 models as they have a more narrow bevel on the side but they don't have the hole drilled. My guess would be is it is the 70's A5 and someone drilled a hole to fit a 60's hole type or it is from an Japan import model. At any right it's not worth that. He keeps dropping the price. If it was the real deal Gibson it would be worth that price maybe more.

[Zigeuner]

Hummm.... I can clearly see 2 of the numbers under the pickguard area stamped onto the back as visable through the lower (E side) F hole. Have you looked there? This would be the factory order number. I just wanted to compare that number to mine to see if it was made in the same batch. The serial number clearly puts this one in 1949. #
That pickguard on ebay is on about the 6th run. And 6 times I have asked the seller for a clearer closer up photo. And 6 times he has refused to send me a better photo or to even post a better photo. I don't think it's a Gibson pickguard. It has the wrong degree of angle cut on the bevel to be a 60's of any year. I first thought it might be from those Mickey Mouse A5 models as they have a more narrow bevel on the side but they don't have the hole drilled. My guess would be is it is the 70's A5 and someone drilled a hole to fit a 60's hole type or it is from an Japan import model. #At any right it's not worth that. He keeps dropping the price. If it was the real deal Gibson it would be worth that price maybe more.
Hi,
I admit,I've owned this mandoin for some 25 years now and never yet looked in that side. You are quite correct. There are more numbers than I thought. Those numbers are no doubt the elusive Gibson Factory Order Number (FON). They are "603 16". You have some sharp eyes, too. LOL.

I guess you could probably tell me the exact meaning of that or maybe your FON number.

The whole Gibson ID issue can be problematical if you happen to own some. For example, I have a 3/4 size Gibson LG-34 which only has the folowing inside: "1940" and "LG-3/4". I'm pretty sure that the LG-3/4 refers to the model. The 1940 doesn't seem to be a serial number and doesn't have the typical FON format with a number folliwed by a dash and a two digit lot number. I originally thought that might be the year but another fellow on a guitar list told me that the script on the headstock was not started until 1949. I know that the guitar is the same approximate age of my '49 Gibson but I can't be sure. Both instruments came from my Uncle. It's all sort of moot since I never sell instruments.

So, thanks for spotting that! Good old Gibson. Lloyd Loar must be smiling down at us right now. He fooled another Gibson owner. LOL.

Comments?

Rgards. # http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[f5loar]

My '49 F12 is an early one with serial no. A-283X. It surprisingly does not have the FON. Your LG 3/4 sometimes called the LG-2 3/4 is a late '48 by that FON. Not sure why no number after it other than it could be the proto type since it did not offically come out until 1949. Generally the lower end models of these 40's AND 50'S did not have serial numbers only the FON for dating it.

[Zigeuner]

My '49 F12 is an early one with serial no. A-283X. It surprisingly does not have the FON. Your LG 3/4 sometimes called the LG-2 3/4 is a late '48 by that FON. Not sure why no number after it other than it could be the proto type since it did not offically come out until 1949. Generally the lower end models of these 40's AND 50'S did not have serial numbers only the FON for dating it.
So, without regard to the FON number which your F-12 apparently lacks, our two instruments are almost 1,000 numbers apart. That of course wouldn't mean that Gibson made 1,000 of more F-12's, just that the numbers are separated by that much.

I think you may be right about my little Gibson 3/4 model being an LG-2 in 3/4 size. I'm almost certain that it is a 1949 model after doing a bit more checking. #I sure wish I had a catalog for it.

By the way, I was rummaging around on eBay last night lookng at mandolins and guitars and I found an interesting F-7. It's a 1934 model with a short scale. That really looks strange. The price is a tad high, IMHO. Gibson sure had some unusual designs back in the day. That one also has a plain scroll. They were built from 1934 to 1940.

Regards.


http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE....4.l1318 (http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-1934-GIBSON-F-7-MANDOLIN-WITH-CASE_W0QQitemZ330252334620QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item 330252334620&_trksid=p3286.m14.l1318)

[recharred]

Thanks everyone for warning me off that pickguard on ebay. It clearly isn't the one I would want--not even just to keep in the case.

As for the refret, I appreciate the concern for keeping things original, but at the same time it seems to me that the trauma of the operation itself would be a more serious concern for the integrity of the instrument overall. If I could minimize the number of times it needs to be heated and tugged and pounded on by going with stainless steel (or bigger frets or whatever), I suspect that would help to keep everything else original longer.

[Zigeuner]

Thanks everyone for warning me off that pickguard on ebay. It clearly isn't the one I would want--not even just to keep in the case.

As for the refret, I appreciate the concern for keeping things original, but at the same time it seems to me that the trauma of the operation itself would be a more serious concern for the integrity of the instrument overall. If I could minimize the number of times it needs to be heated and tugged and pounded on by going with stainless steel (or bigger frets or whatever), I suspect that would help to keep everything else original longer.
Hi,

I wouldn't worry about having a refretting job done by an expert. Done properly, it won't hurt a thing.

I presume that your mandolin takes the same type of pickguard as the earlier ones - secured by pins up front and a screw on the side. You can find one if you keep on looking.

Regards.

[f5loar]

I believe '64 was the first year for the new way with the screw into the top so the '63 should be side pin mount. You should be able to see the 2 holes for the pickguard and the hole on the side for the bracket. Most of the time finding a used one will fit perfect on the holes. If not just redrill the pickguard hole to match up with your fingerboard holes. There are guys making repos for these.
Usually around $100.

[lenf12]

Hi everyone,

Nice to see some more interest in F-12s and the pictures posted by Zigeuner of the '49. Gorgeous!!! and the back shot is what I would want for my '56. Very nice indeed!!
When I got mine a few years back, I fitted a Loar style ebony bridge with the small adjustment wheels. I can't say for certain that the original rosewood bridge with large wheels was really bad. I just know that swapping it for an ebony bridge and replacing the heavy weight closed back Kluson tuners with open back Gotohs did make a big difference in the tone and volume. Both mods were done at the same time. I have a set on Sam Bush monel strings but haven't put them on yet. They'll get a trial run soon however. I agree that refretting will not alter the value of a vintage instrument any more than changing the oil of a 1965 Ford Mustang would lower its value. They are necessary maintenance to keep both playing or running properly. I think the same can be said of stainless steel frets as well.

Regards,
Len B.

[Jkf_Alone]

wouldn't replacing the frets professionally be about the same as replacing the strings? I can't imagine replacing worn frets would effect the value of an instrument.

[Zigeuner]

wouldn't replacing the frets professionally be about the same as replacing the strings? I can't imagine replacing worn frets would effect the value of an instrument.
Correct. I wouldn't think it would be much of an issue at all. The only thing is that the fret material used on these older mandolins is quite thin and almost looks like bar fret material, although I don't thnk it's quite the same.

In any case, a good repair shop could do the work.