ID this guitar

[William81]

Hi! first post here. I need you peoples knowledge to help me id this guitar and if you think it is worth 390£. The seller says it´s a 1956 Harmony but is unsure.

[William81]

I'll throw in another question as well. Has anyone played the Tanglewood with a solid cedar top. Can't find any information on it at all more than specs. I know these are cheap guitars but it's what I can afford at the moment and they are available close to me. So how are they compared to other guitars in that price range.

[MikeEdgerton]

Hi! first post here. I need you peoples knowledge to help me id this guitar and if you think it is worth 390£. The seller says it´s a 1956 Harmony but is unsure.

Are there any numbers stamped inside? One will be like F-52 or S-35. The other will be multiple numbers with an H in the middle.

[William81]

He couldn't see any numbers. I looked at the harmony guitars database and the H1020t looked most like this one but with a different neck (shorter scale?) and headstock. And that one is made of birch wood which I don't want.

[AndyV]

At first glance I thought May Bell, but no I don't think so.
That doesn't look like a Harmony build to me. Without finding pics for comparison, the headstock shape seems a little off and I don't think they used that tailpiece. Maybe Oscar Schmidt?

That's not a birch top?

[Seter]

Wasn't birch the default for back and sides in the first half of the 20th century? Did maple/mahogany become more popular post-WWII?

[MikeEdgerton]

I'm more inclined to think it's a Regal instrument. Here's one Jake has on his site. Whoever built that one built this one. I think it might be a decade or two earlier than the seller says it is.

https://jakewildwood.blogspot.com/20...d-maybell.html

[AndyV]

Ah yes. I assumed William81 doesn't want a birch top, not NO birch.

If that's not a spruce to 390 seems a little pricey to me, but I guess you pay a premium for vintage US made across the pond.

[AndyV]

You nailed it. May Bell.

I know Jake says it a Regal built May Bell, but I don't think so.
There seems for some reason to be this idea that Slingerland/May Bell could not have built their own guitars, mandos, etc. Lots of comparisons are made saying this build aspect, or that is similar to Kay, to Regal, Harmony... but no evidence that they came from those factories.

[William81]

AndyV: You're right! I didn't made myself clear enough. I don't want a Birch TOP. At first I thought it was a Levin since both me and the seller are from Sweden. Quite similar headstock but more rounded on top of it. Thanks for all the answers.

[nmiller]

It's definitely a Regal build; essentially the same guitar that was re-branded as a May Bell, but without a brand mark it could have been sold under three dozen different names. The overall design indicates mid '30s to early '40s.

[MikeEdgerton]

Regal, Harmony, Kay et al made "for the trade" with no brand name so the retailer, distributor, teacher, school whatever could sell them with their own with a paper label or no label. It was common in the musical instrument business as well as other industries in the first half and into the second half of the last century. I've heard the Slingerland arguments, and seen many of their instruments but I think that they, as well as others eventually started contracting out the businesses that wasn't their core business the same way that other brands started having Slingerland make their banjos.

[AndyV]

It's definitely a Regal build; essentially the same guitar that was re-branded as a May Bell, but without a brand mark it could have been sold under three dozen different names. The overall design indicates mid '30s to early '40s.

Can you post a pic of or link to an example of the Regal branded version? Thanks!

[AndyV]

Regal, Harmony, Kay et al made "for the trade" with no brand name so the retailer, distributor, teacher, school whatever could sell them with their own with a paper label or no label. It was common in the musical instrument business as well as other industries in the first half and into the second half of the last century. I've heard the Slingerland arguments, and seen many of their instruments but I think that they, as well as others eventually started contracting out the businesses that wasn't their core business the same way that other brands started having Slingerland make their banjos.

I think it went the other way. Slingerland contracted other to build some of their ukes early on, then brought it in-house.

Generally the Kays, Strombergs, Harmonys built their standard model x, y, z, maybe with more or less appointments, or other minor changes, and stuck a different brand on it. These instruments are obviously made by these houses. Kay and Harmony builds will have their model number etc stamped inside. This I think is why so many instruments like this of unidentified manufacture are attributed to Regal; they didn't use easily recognized numbering systems like Kay and Harmony.

[MikeEdgerton]

I'd like to think Kay always stamped but they didn't. Harmony stamped most of the time but not always and some well known builders branded other peoples instruments with their own brand. One of my favorites were the Gretsch New Yorkers. Look, I'm sure you know all about this stuff but unless you've got some actual documentation to prove things I'm a skeptic. The Washburn Book changed the world, Carlin's book opened some new pathways with Regal's, the Larsen book claimed more instruments for them than they never had a part in and the entire Chicago instrument building scene was incestuous at best. Jake had one of these in his hands and he's seen some instruments. If you look at what I said it was whoever built one built the other. Regal built a whole lot of instruments that were attributed to others as well. I look for documentation or known examples. I'm always open to seeing things differently when it makes sense and there's actually something to point things in that direction.

[nmiller]

Slingerland never built any stringed instruments in-house other than banjos. Every one of their guitars, mandolins and ukes can be found with other brands, and every one was built by one of the Chicago-area builders. Some of their early guitars from the '20s may have come from Stromberg-Voisinet, but by the turn of the '30s, all of their guitars, mandos and ukes came from Regal. The same instruments can all be found with the Regal logo or label.

[AndyV]

Thanks nmiller. I'd be really interested is seeing the Regal branded style 81, 83, 881-H and stye 400.

As Mike said, seeing some documentation will be great. Not that any of this changes the instruments.

[AndyV]

From slingerlandguitar.com. (last updated 13 years ago...)

It is a matter of debate, but there is evidence to suggest that Harmony and/or Regal built many of the guitars that ended up with the Slingerland and May Bell labels. For example, the Slingerland Cathedranola from the Scott Chinery collection (pictured on page 47 of "The History of the American Guitar" by Tony Bacon) is listed as being a Regal-made instrument. See "My Instrument Collection" to view that guitar and also 2 other May Bell models of Cathedranolas, and "Other People's Instruments" to view a Tenor May Bell Cathedranola. I have also seen in print that the Cathedranolas were made from 1934-1936. I have made contact with a person who has a Cathedranola that his grandfather played in the mid- to late-20's, and inside is a repairman's signature from 1933. There is also speculation that all of the guitars made with "ladder" bracing were made by Harmony, as that was their style of bracing. This is not to say that Slingerland could not have simply copied the bracing style of one of their major competitors.

Photographs exist that show workmen in the Slingerland factory doing various jobs: sanding the edges of bodies, mortising the dovetail joint for the neck in the body, etc. and a picture of a rack filled with guitars ready to be assembled, as well as pictures of racks filled with finished guitars. One of these pictures also shows a single guitar mold, but this does not prove or disprove that they did indeed make their own instruments.

[MikeEdgerton]

I'm not saying they never made them. Weymann and sons made mandolins for a time and then suddenly you find other known builders instruments with the brand name on them. The same with Gretsch. The same with a bunch of others. At some point in time almost all of them seemed to follow that same model. That doesn't Identify this one, it just shows how the industry went.

[AndyV]

Sure and they all made instruments of various quality. It just seems to me that too often people want to say this unbranded instrument (branded too) was made by Regal when there's nothing to indicate that it was or was not. More than a couple times I've seen the claim "substantiated" with "it's ladder braced".
I speculate that Regal is the go-to because they were prolific as were Kay and Harmony but don't have an easily recognized numbering system like the latter mostly do. Nothing obvious that points to Kay or Harmony, call it a Regal.

I admit, I have had unbranded instruments that I've spent too much time on trying to find the maker.
There have been several Regals I've coveted, and given the choice between a Harmony H1201TG and the Regal branded version, I'd take the Regal just because I think the headstock looks sharper.