Possible Larson?

[plinkey]

I do not know anything about the Larsons and their work, however, I keep seeing many various mandolins for sale being identified as "Larson made" all the time. Therefore, I have come to wonder about the following general issue:
(1) In the absence of any Larson labels, how can their mandolins be identified positively ?
(2) How could the notion of Larson mandolin's tonal excellence develop in the first place, if we can not positively ID any mandolins as Larson made ?

[Jim Garber]

I do not know anything about the Larsons and their work, however, I keep seeing many various mandolins for sale being identified as "Larson made" all the time. Therefore, I have come to wonder about the following general issue:
(1) In the absence of any Larson labels, how can their mandolins be identified positively ?
(2) How could the notion of Larson mandolin's tonal excellence develop in the first place, if we can not positively ID any mandolins as Larson made ?

1) In most cases, you can't tho you can try based on particular attributes
2) Prob more from the guitars. Some of the mandolins they made are very different tho and only attributed to them. For instance the one below:

[Jeff Mando]

I will let the experts delineate the specifics and why, but a similar dialogue exists concerning other brands, as well. Stella, being a common example. Many "no name" guitars are attributed to Stella when it comes time to sell, regardless of fact. A 100+ years ago, many instruments were made unlabeled for "the trade", as they say, to be retailed in various outlets. I think today we are much more brand conscious.

One of the Euphonon guitars that recently sold, was previously owned by a friend of mine, who sold it to Chinery, (though Gruhn) many years ago. So, "we" have been following these rare guitars (and mandolins) for some time.

[barney 59]

I do not know anything about the Larsons and their work, however, I keep seeing many various mandolins for sale being identified as "Larson made" all the time. Therefore, I have come to wonder about the following general issue:
(1) In the absence of any Larson labels, how can their mandolins be identified positively ?
(2) How could the notion of Larson mandolin's tonal excellence develop in the first place, if we can not positively ID any mandolins as Larson made ?

There could have been builders that copied Larson instruments back then just as there are some building copies of Larson instruments today. I guess if they did and were good at it then some of those instruments could possibly be attributed to Larson even by experts. We know that Maurer, Prairie State, and Euphonon are Larson Bros. brand names. We know that they supplied instruments to Stetson,Stahl and Dyer. So, if it has all the attributes of a Larson made instrument and is branded by one of those distributors then it is almost certainly a Larson. The OP brought to the table a mandolin with Larson features that was branded Wurlitzer. It's not a stretch that Wurlitzer might have had some instruments supplied by Larson just as they had some instruments supplied by Martin. There are speculations always, and with controversy, that maybe some instruments branded by some others, Harwood and Regal(Hartman has attributed some Regals to Larson) come to mind, were possibly built by the Larsons. I was a big doubter when it came to the reverse scroll mandolins that get attributed to Larson. I figured Regal had the expertise and the patent to build it so why wouldn't it be a Regal? I recently sat down with Schoenberg with one in hand and I am now absolutely convinced that it is a Larson! Larson's flattop mandolins are not uniquely different in design to some others that were available but they have certain features that set them apart. Build quality,the visible line of the fretboard below the binding, combining that with the head stock shape and the way that they do their inlay work there is almost no way that it's not a Larson-- but then all things are possible. The point is that there are not no instruments that we definitely can attribute to Larson for comparison! So, if you compare a no name unbranded instrument but it fits to a "T" one that is known to definitely be a Larson what do you think you have?
As far as guitars go --the gray area is some "student" grade ladder braced guitars that Larson manufactured, they don't always stand out and there are other instruments definitely built by others that are similar and the most common instruments for others to try to pass off as a Larson. There is a tendency for some people to either wish for or dishonestly hope to fool people who don't know much into believing that some old ornate instrument is a Larson--it happens everyday! The other guitars are top tensioned with a unique bracing style and that pretty much leaves no doubt.
There are a few experts out there-- Bob Hartman,Dan Alexander, I would personally accept the opinion of Eric Schoenberg or Banana Levenger. There are probably a few others out there as well but it is pretty much accepted that if someone like Hartman says it's a Larson then it's a Larson -at least from then on!

[Jim Garber]

I suppose there could be contemporary copiers of Larson instruments back in that day. However, I would bet more on the fact that L&H, Wurlitzer and other retailers contracted out with multiple shops to supply them with instruments. Considering the fact that Larsons did not use their own names for anything, I would say that most players would not necessarily distinguish by the maker. Euphonon guitars I am certain were noticed by a small sampling of players, but most others would not know about the Larson Brothers. More likely the retailers might contact an alternate contractor and they would say, "We like the way this one looks, so make us a few dozen of those."

Similarly it worked the same way in the East. There was Favilla, Ciani, and other makers in the NY, plus others in NJ, Boston and Philadelphia who made instruments for retailers to sell under their own label. In addition, some were relabeled for store sales but made in contract shops.

[barney 59]

I guess to a price point a retailer might contract with someone to copy a Larson but would it be worth it? Larson were already wholesaling their instruments and seemed pretty willing to sell to anyone. I have never heard anything about "Larson copies" from the period that Larson was building instruments. I would think though that at least some,if not all,builders acquired instruments from other builders to have a look see at what the competition was doing and maybe if they saw a good idea they might adopt it!
My point to the poster was that unless that happened(actual copies) that Larson made instruments are pretty distinct and recognizable to people who care to know. While some instruments may have had external appointments that are very similar to Larson made instruments there is also what is inside. My guess is that the visual similarities of instruments during that period was mostly based on what people wanted and were willing to pay for. To that point they were all copying each other and that would include the Larson Bros. I think a lot of that stuff -inlay,bindings,rosettes and pick guards etc. were probably supplied by other jobbers because you see the same thing on a lot of instruments by a lot of different builders. It's pretty much the same thing today both in styling and parts!
What I find most amazing about the Larson Bros. was how what you hear is that there were just the two of them and they put out a pretty astounding amount of instruments in a lot of different styles! How they took orders, kept supplied, cleaned up, designed,built jigs, shipped orders,paid all the bills, answered the phone, did the banking etc. and still had time left over to build all those instruments is mind boggling!
The OP has obviously done some homework and acquired a couple of instruments at reasonable prices so that even if he was wrong he didn't do bad! I tend to think the flattop is a Larson and if not a Larson it is still worth at least the $300 he paid! He took no risk! I'm unsure of the bowlback though it has some Larson features but with both of those instruments I would take them to a recognized expert and find out what they have to say. Larson Bowlbacks really don't seem to be worth all that much unless they are of high presentation grade quality. Nobody seems to want old American made bowlbacks much no matter who made them! I would say that unless you do study up on them that you shouldn't just take someones word for it when it comes to Larson claims in purchasing a instrument unless it comes from a bonnafied(sp) source.

[Jim Garber]

Maybe I was not clear. I meant to point out that it was unlikely that people were knowingly copying Larson instruments. If the Larsons could or would not make a specific batch of instruments the retailers would then go to someone else.

Raphael Ciani (D'Angelico's uncle) and Angelo Mannello among others also built a lot of instruments. I wonder if it is absolutely known fact that the Larsons never had any assistants or farmed out their work to other shops. Frankly, with a lot of these makers there is so much we really don't know and probably will never really find out.

BTW two features that appear on their guitars were laminated braces and some had an internal support rod. I don't think they did either on the mandolins but please correct me if I am wrong on that count.

[barney 59]

By the way ---I would still like someone to point to an instrument with the little reveal of fretboard below the binding that is clearly not a Larson---

[barney 59]

No Jim, I understood you. I just thought you might have thought I suggested that someone was copying Larson designs.

I have a top tensioned Wulshner Regal guitar(in very bad condition and presently completely disassembled) with an unlaminated style of bracing very similar to a Larson which I have wondered if maybe it was an early version Larson made instrument. Notice I said unlaminated. Wulshner ended and was purchased by L&H during a similar time frame that the Larsons took over Maurer from their boss. I guess I'll never know....If it's not a Larson then someone else was experimenting with top tensioning at least as early as the Larsons were! I somehow got the impression that Emil Wulshner made instruments but now I have learned that "Wulshner and Sons" was a several story tall music store in Indianapolis and more than likely most of their wares were jobbed out! There is a Wulshner Regal mandolin that Hartman credits to Larson.

[plinkey]

Folks, thank you for educating me on the Larson attributions.
Let us assume that we can round up a 1/2 a dozen or so of playable mandolins, be they flatbacks or bowlbacks, where the experts in the field would agree that they are Larson made.
Then we put together a similar collection of flatback and bowlback mandolins labeled Vega, C.F. Martin and L&H.

Which mandolin group do we think would be judged as superior in sound, i.e., the Larsons or the Vega/Martin/L&H ones ?

[Jim Garber]

Folks, thank you for educating me on the Larson attributions.
Let us assume that we can round up a 1/2 a dozen or so of playable mandolins, be they flatbacks or bowlbacks, where the experts in the field would agree that they are Larson made.
Then we put together a similar collection of flatback and bowlback mandolins labeled Vega, C.F. Martin and L&H.

Which mandolin group do we think would be judged as superior in sound, i.e., the Larsons or the Vega/Martin/L&H ones ?

Entirely subjective. Get 12 mandolin players and 13 different opinions. Which is a better fruit: an apple or an orange?

[brunello97]

Which is a better fruit: an apple or an orange?

You would need to get some experts who are out standing in the field. Or in the orchard / grove as the case would have it.

Mick

[plinkey]

Entirely subjective. Get 12 mandolin players and 13 different opinions. Which is a better fruit: an apple or an orange?

I think I know what you mean. However, as an example, assume that the orange was picked immature, therefore it is sour, or it has very thick skin, or it's full of seeds, etc.........in that case I believe most people would say an apple of standard quality is a better fruit than that particular orange.

[MikeEdgerton]

There is a Wulshner Regal mandolin that Hartman credits to Larson

People have always wondered how the Larson brothers built all those instruments and the answer is simple. They didn't. Lots of stuff has been attributed to the Larson's that they never touched.

[plinkey]

People have always wondered how the Larson brothers built all those instruments and the answer is simple. They didn't. Lot's of stuff has been attributed to the Larson's that they never touched.

[Ginridge]

Thanks very much for the lively conversation! I've been out on the road and am just now catching up. For the record, I share the concerns that many of you have voiced about whether or not this is a Larson. I'm still on the fence. I have looked inside again and there is no serial number on any brace on the top. I did note that the inside lining seems to be two layers, the bottom layer is gauze overlaid with a top layer of brown paper.

As for guitars that feature the neck binding ledge, I have experience with 2 others. One I previously owned that was stamped inside on the back strip with the words "The Peach" and "Chicago, IL" along with a bit more that was illegible. That one could possibly have been a Larson, though several knowledgeable folks I showed it to thought not. A second instrument that I do still own also has the fretboard ledge, but does not look like a Larson to me. The fingerboard is not ebony, possibly pear wood or some other tight grained, unfigured wood and it has a Tree of Life inlay in the fingerboard made of copper, aluminum and pearl. The guitar is mahogany with purling reminiscent of a Washburn or Regal (although I was told that the combination of copper, aluminum and pearl on the fingerboard might suggest a Stewart). This one I'm confident is not a Larson. The "classical bridge" was a replacement, of course, and underneath was the ghost of the original fixed bridge. At one point, it appears that someone tried to make this a 12 string.

[barney 59]

People have always wondered how the Larson brothers built all those instruments and the answer is simple. They didn't. Lots of stuff has been attributed to the Larson's that they never touched.

If you took all the questionable and erroneous Larson attributed instruments out of the equation your still left with a lot of instruments. The Stahls, Stetsons.Maurer, Prairie State,Euphonon and Dyers that the Larson's clearly built your have a pretty sizable output. As a craftsman that has been making my living for many years now doing pretty much one off projects I have some idea how much time is involved in changing up what you do. As a two man shop they produced an astonishing array of very different instruments. They didn't just settle on a couple of designs and repeat the process. So,somehow they found the time to not only produce a line of guitars and mandolins they also were able to produce a bunch of "custom shop" instruments very unlike anything else they were doing. I find that to be a big accomplishment and only wish I could be so prolific!
I had somehow fantasized that Emil Wulshner and Sons was a luthier family in Indianapolis building high quality guitars and mandolins beginning in the 1880's under "The Regal" name. That is until I came upon some brass instruments etched with "Emil Wulshner and Sons" and discovered that they were in fact a music store. The possibility that some or all of their fretted instruments were being produced by others is, well, a possibility! Hartmann believes that at least one bowlshaped mandolin labeled "The Regal" was built by the Larsons. He's considered an expert but he could have it wrong. The top tensioned "The Regal" guitar that I have is a mystery. Emil Wulshner and Sons after Emil's death were bought out by L&H who then resold the company to become "Regal" with production in Chicago. Whoever made the Wulshner Regal I have had to do it before 1906. I never even considered that the guitar I had was a Larson. I just thought it was interesting that someone was developing a technique similar to what someone else was developing somewhere else! After I acquired some new information though I began to wonder....
As for the fretboard detail --good, thanks --now I've seen it! I won't have to get overly excited when I stumble onto that detail when I spy it on a ebay listing anymore!

[Jim Garber]

Ok, you luthiers out there: please explain how the Larsons made top-tensioned instruments. I thought most quality "flattop" guitars were made with the tops concave by shaping the bracing. The same with non-carve-top mandolins including bowlbacks. So what did the Larsons do differently? Or did they just arch the tops more than other makers? Please explain.

[brunello97]

Bob Carlin covers the Indianapolis / Wulschner / Regal story pretty well in his book "Regal Musical Instruments 1895-1955" including a a number of photos from inside the Indianapolis "factory" dated 1901.

Recommended reading.

Mick

[MikeEdgerton]

The Stahls, Stetsons.Maurer, Prairie State,Euphonon and Dyers that the Larson's clearly built your have a pretty sizable output.

Assuming that they made them all. At least they made some of them. The problem is that too many experts have attributed questionable instruments to them. That kind of devalues their street cred.

[barney 59]

From my understanding Stetson instruments were made by Larson. Maurer, Prairie State and Euphonon were Larson brand names. Maurer was an established company that the Larson Bros purchased and they kept that name rather than use their own name. Dyer I'm not sure about but it seems not all Stahl's were Larson built. Stetson,Stahl and Dyer kind of made out that they were the manufacturers of all their instruments as part of their marketing but they didn't. I have never heard or read any suggestion that Larson Bros. may have farmed their instruments out to be built by other shops. They had brand names so I never quite understood where the myth came from that Larson instruments were never signed. They did build for he trade quite a lot and didn't seem to mind that some of the retailers that sold them made out as though they manufactured them!
There are experts and there are those that claim or allude to be experts. To my way of thinking the things are rare enough that probably there are very few people that have had the opportunity to actually have had their hands on very many. The big name, long time dealers like The Music Emporium, Mandolin Bros, Schoenberg,Elderly etc. probably have seen quite a few pass through their doors. Chinery seemed to buy everyone he could find.Bob Hartman and Dan Alexander it seems have made a life out of them. I was lucky that I stumbled on a cache of them(Chinery's) at one point but I only got to look at them and play some --I never had the opportunity to explore the insides and see what makes them tick. I think that a great many people will claim that a particular instrument is a Larson,especially if they own it or want to sell it. That doesn't constitute an "expert" opinion just an opinion. You know, like something I might have!

[Jeff Mando]

It is worth noting, not to be mean, but back in the day MANY in the vintage guitar world considered Chinery to be inexperienced, a newbie, if you will, concerning his choices in forming a collection. SOME might go so far as to say he was an "easy mark" in the eyes of certain guitar dealers who supplied him with instruments, hoping for a payday, all the while pushing the market pricewise. Not only that, he started rather late in the game--example--he had a large "custom color" Fender Jazzmaster collection -- he had started "too late" to amass that many custom color Stratocasters -- even if you had the money to buy them, which he did. Some of those guitars (certainly not many) have been criticized by experts as refins -- refinished guitars. Don't get me wrong, he had a wonderful collection, but too many eclectic and quirky choices. He was strong on Larsons and D'Angelico's, but weak on more obvious staples a collection should have. Not just my humble opinion. Many, many of the guitars he bought that were auctioned off after his death brought LESS than he paid for them.......something to think about. Although, it looks as if the Larsons have caught up with the times!

Don't get me started on the blue guitars...........................

[Jim Garber]

Ok, you luthiers out there: please explain how the Larsons made top-tensioned instruments. I thought most quality "flattop" guitars were made with the tops concave by shaping the bracing. The same with non-carve-top mandolins including bowlbacks. So what did the Larsons do differently? Or did they just arch the tops more than other makers? Please explain.

Doh!!! I meant convex NOT concave. Can anyone answer this?

[MikeEdgerton]

Scott Chinery was a local boy that did well for himself in business. He made his money, cashed out at an early age, and decided to enjoy it and I'm glad he was able to. I never met him but I have friends that knew him well and speak highly of him. My take away is that he bought the instruments that made him happy. They weren't an investment, what he paid for them vs. what they were worth didn't matter to him. He bought and collected what he wanted to buy and collect and he paid what he wanted to pay for them. That, in my mind, is what collecting anything is all about. He died way too young. As to question his knowledge and his choices, it doesn't matter. He was in it for the joy of owning what he wanted to buy. I'd celebrate his decisions rather than question how knowledgeable he was about what he was buying. He got to do something most of us only dream about doing and fifty years from now the Scott Chinery collection will still be viewed as amazing and those that question his purchases will be long forgotten. He started his collection while working in a shop a few miles from where I live when he was a teenager. At the same time he was doing that I was buying strings from that store.

[brunello97]

fifty years from now the Scott Chinery collection will still be viewed as amazing and those that question his purchases will be long forgotten.......

That's what I know.

Mick