1924 A2-Z body with replaced neck.

[M Lavelle]

Obviously I have (gifted from a neighbor) an A2Z body with a replaced neck, refined, non original pick guard and tuners.

My question is did Gibson stamp the serial number on the back of the headstock when they installed a new neck or is the work of someone else? The work over all is very nice and the original fingerboard may have been salvaged. The logo looks a little sketchy also.

Any comments are welcome. My neighbor told me she was gifted the mandolin from a friend in the late 60's and it's exactly as she received it.

Thank you for taking the time to read.

[atetone]

That is a pretty nice gift. No one gifts things like that to me!

If I owned it I would now be agonizing about whether to put an era correct neck on it.
No,,, on second thought I would definitely be looking for a neck for it.

[MikeEdgerton]

Is there a number stamped inside on the neck block?

[M Lavelle]

is there a number stamped inside on the neck block?

11919 ~ the original Gibson factory label is intact and has the same serial number that's embossed on the back of the headstock.

[mrmando]

Nice neighbors!

Yes, it was common in the early '60s for Gibson to stamp serial numbers on the back of the headstock of an old instrument that came in for shop repair work. I have a friend who owns an A2Z that was refinished in that time period (but not re-necked), and bears a similar stamp.

However, the logo and diamond on the front of the headstock are from the '30s, not the '60s, and the stamp looks like the numbers were stamped one at a time, not with the sort of multi-digit stamping jig Gibson was using in the '60s. Furthermore, the presence of the FON on the neck block suggests that perhaps not the entire neck was replaced. Any lines or signs of a joint or graft anywhere along the neck?

A2Zs are fantastic instruments, and although this one won't have any collector value, I hope it still sounds sweet.

[Br1ck]

In the classical stringed instrument world, no one would blink an eye at a replaced neck. Most very big buck instruments have had necks replaced. Things wear out over three or four hundred years. No big deal.
Maybe in two hundred years a non original mandolin neck won't be a big deal either.

[M Lavelle]

However, the logo and diamond on the front of the headstock are from the '30s, not the '60s, and the stamp looks like the numbers were stamped one at a time, not with the sort of multi-digit stamping jig Gibson was using in the '60s. Furthermore, the presence of the FON on the neck block suggests that perhaps not the entire neck was replaced. Any lines or signs of a joint or graft anywhere along the neck?

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

Yes, a very nice neighbor for sure.

There are no lines or signs of a joint or graft anywhere along the neck. The neck joint is slightly separated at the body and may need some attention once I get it strung up.

The tuners that came on it are Waverly and shot. So I ordered a set of Golden Age with the .931 post spacing.

[mrmando]

It's possible that the neck was replaced in the '30s and the new block was stamped with the old FON, since stamping FONs inside instruments was still Gibson's practice at the time.

That doesn't explain the SN on the headstock, but that may not be factory work anyhow.

[MikeEdgerton]

The tuners that came on it are Waverly and shot. So I ordered a set of Golden Age with the .931 post spacing.

I seriously doubt they will fit. Those are worm over tuners. They should be the modern .906 spacing. The one you're going to want is this one:

http://www.stewmac.com/Hardware_and_...in_Tuners.html

I'll be real surprised if it isn't that size. That FON is the FON of batch of A2z's from 1923. The FON is a better way of dating than the serial number is.

I agree with Martin (mrmando), I don't think it was re-necked by Gibson. The inlay and the stamp on the back of the headstock is just wrong and not done well. I think a fairly competent luthier did the work but they were in unknown territory. Somebody managed to get the neck off without disrupting the neck block.

[MikeEdgerton]

It's possible that the neck was replaced in the '30s and the new block was stamped with the old FON, since stamping FONs inside instruments was still Gibson's practice at the time.

That doesn't explain the SN on the headstock, but that may not be factory work anyhow.

I have seen Gibson mandolins with new necks added later. I've never seen one where the inlay was that sloppy, but hey, who knows. In the 30's you'd think they have the inlay already cut and the jigs to install them.

[fatt-dad]

if it's structurally sound, I'd just play it. Play it a lot!

I'd bet is sounds as good as a snake, even if it no longer looks it?

I think it's a very unique gift!

f-d

[M Lavelle]

I seriously doubt they will fit. Those are worm over tuners. They should be the modern .906 spacing. The one you're going to want is this one:

http://www.stewmac.com/Hardware_and_...in_Tuners.html

I'll be real surprised if it isn't that size. That FON is the FON of batch of A2z's from 1923. The FON is a better way of dating than the serial number is.

I agree with Martin (mrmando), I don't think it was re-necked by Gibson. The inlay and the stamp on the back of the headstock is just wrong and not done well. I think a fairly competent luthier did the work but they were in unknown territory. Somebody managed to get the neck off without disrupting the neck block.

Thanks for all the info Mike.

I measured the spacing on the Waverly tuners that are on it and they are .931 centers. So I'm good on the tuners I ordered, however before I measured I had already selected the ones you made note of.

Thank you for the information on the FON number.

I don't think it was done by Gibson either. Decent work none the less, however just too many little things over looked.

[M Lavelle]

if it's structurally sound, I'd just play it. Play it a lot!

I'd bet is sounds as good as a snake, even if it no longer looks it?

I think it's a very unique gift!

f-d

Thanks F-D.

I concur.

Very nice gift indeed.

[mrmando]

Somebody managed to get the neck off without disrupting the neck block.

What would that entail? Steaming apart the dovetail joint?

Agree the thin & thick of the inlay script is not up to Gibson standards, whatever that term means.

The other thing that argues against this being shop work is the size of the peghead. Not a snake, but slightly narrower than any standard paddlehead that Gibson made.

[carleshicks]

I would have a snakehead neck installed.

[William Smith]

I would have a snakehead neck installed.

I would also, but I would put an elevated board on it with a steep neck angle. "Its already not original" It looks like it has a 30's neck to me, Gibson was sloppy in the 30's. I have seen and own/owned numerous examples as its my favorite period for all the strangeness ya see in Gibson's. The stamped #'s on the back of the headstock are different for sure, that does look like 60's Gibson style? If not Gibson someone did an alright job. Maybe re-necked in the 30's although the diamond inlay wasn't in em till 1940 I think? and worked on again in the 60's? Mystery

Someone also pointed out that re-necks are no big deal, I agree most all the golden age violin makers instruments have had re-necks. People have been converting banjos into 5 strings for a long time from tenor/plectrum, heck even banjolins, so if ya don't know banjers when ya buy ya might get burned! Also people have done to 30's Gibson F models and A's. I know I have

[Capt. E]

If I remember, the Gibson with a diamond dates from 1942. Specs for the 1942 A-50 say "small diamond inlay on peghead". I believe they did the same thing on guitars of that era. That is probably when the neck was replaced. It could have gone back to the factory in the 60's and they stamped the number on the headstock then. Check out this website: www.guitarhq.com/gibson8.html
This site also is chock full of data on may brands. The Gibson stuff alone can take you a while to go through www.guitarhq.com/gibson.html
You say it may have the original fretboard? Does it have the old wire frets?

[MikeEdgerton]

The tuners could still be an issue for you. Again, they are worm over, the ones you ordered will be worm under. That changes where the plate starts and ends. If those are are indeed that size they could be worth a few bucks. Do those tuners turn correctly (the bass side turns counter-clockwise to tighten)?

[carleshicks]

You said the tuners that are on it are shot, i bet they could be easily restored. They look original. They are the same as the waverlys that are on my 25 A-4 and I reworked them and they work fine now. Check out Frets.com for a tutorial on how to go through them.


If they cannot be rebuilt, i have a spare set. Pm me if interested.

[M Lavelle]

The tuners could still be an issue for you. Again, they are worm over, the ones you ordered will be worm under. That changes where the plate starts and ends. If those are are indeed that size they could be worth a few bucks.

Morning Mike.

Without not trying to come across as a smart ass. I've got it covered and measured with a set of Brown & Sharpe dials. But I've been wrong before.

I'm a luthier/repair guy with my own shop for 30 years. I just don't have any experience with vintage mandolins and reached out to this group for expert advice. (which I have received and thankful)

The current Waverly tuners are .931 post spacing and the worm is over. All buttons are still solid. Are these the ones you are referring to being worth a few bucks?

Thanks again for all your help and advice.

[Capt. E]

Actually, I realized the new neck could have been put on in the 60's from "old parts". I am sure Gibson had some WWII vintage A-50 necks in the bin.

[M Lavelle]

Actually, I realized the new neck could have been put on in the 60's from "old parts". I am sure Gibson had some WWII vintage A-50 necks in the bin.

I suppose it's as good as chance as any. However my first impression when I saw the instrument
was that it was refinished in the late 60's.

Does Gibson keep any repair records?

Thanks Capt E.

[Steve-o]

Nice neighbors!

Yes, it was common in the early '60s for Gibson to stamp serial numbers on the back of the headstock of an old instrument that came in for shop repair work. I have a friend who owns an A2Z that was refinished in that time period (but not re-necked), and bears a similar stamp.

However, the logo and diamond on the front of the headstock are from the '30s, not the '60s, and the stamp looks like the numbers were stamped one at a time, not with the sort of multi-digit stamping jig Gibson was using in the '60s.

I have a 1922 A1 that has the same (ugly IMO) pickguard replacement as this A2-Z. I was told mine was refinished in the 30s, but I have no way of knowing for sure. This discussion seems to support that conclusion.

[MikeEdgerton]

Those would be worth a few bucks. The ones you ordered have the same spacing but not the same orientation. The ones you ordered are worm under. Take a look at Paul Hostetter's page on restoring/rejuvenating old tuners. I don't think anyone sells a replica with that spacing and that worm orientation..

Paul's page here will illustrate the difference in the placement of the plate between worm over and worm under tuners.

[M Lavelle]

You say it may have the original fretboard? Does it have the old wire frets?

I'm not sure what you mean by this?

Do you mean bar frets?

To be honest I was basing my assumption on the appearance of the fingerboard and inlays.

Thanks for all the other info Capt E.