Are there still Loar clone builders

[banjo1]

IF so .................how can we identify thier work?

If they build with thier own labels inside and not a copy of a signed Loar lable, seems ok to me.

Not fraud if the proper information is on the inside.

Just a question that has been on my mind since joining the Cafe.Not and I repeat not trying to give anyone a bad wrap, just info. that I want

Have a great year.

[Greenmando]

I think the best Loar clones are being made by Gibson right now.

[banjo1]

Great answer Tom, though that is a little different that I expected.

[Michael Lewis]

It will be interesting to see what Darryl Wolfe comes out with. He has been so focused on the details of the original F5s that I think his stuff should be pretty close.

It is true that Gibson is on top of making Loar copies. There are also several individual makers that try to duplicate the Loar F5. Cliff Sargent was very focused on the Loars and was remarkably sucessful at replicating the sound and look. Both Gilchrist and Nugget mandolins come pretty close to replicating the Loar but they also have some distinct differences.

I have used information that I measured from some Loars, but I don't really make a copy, unless you consider the basic shape of the F5 to be a copy. There are some very interesting aspects of the Loars that continue to intrigue me and I will continue to learn from them, but in the long run I want to make something a bit different.

[banjo1]

Thanks Michael
The looks are what I am after in this question.The sound is as important and I love em, but an exact copy.Down to the logo, inlay(flower pot or fern),color of a certain serial number, binding, same number piece in a neck, pick guard.
You guys know..................a true copy. ,
but with thier own label inside.

This may be a little touchie for some, I dont know.

[banjo1]

I had a chance to buy Monteleone #2 which was a clone which John added his own label inside, some years ago and passed.
OUCH ..............I let my bride talk me out of it.

KICK KICK KICK

[grandmainger]

Adam, do you mean a non-Gibson Loar copy with a "The Gibson" inlay on the peg head? If so, no reputable builder would do that, because that's downright illegal, with or without a 'disclaimer' label inside the mandolin... There has been extensive discussion here about the trademark status of the flowerpot inlay itself (run a search, you'll find pages and pages), but there is no question that only Gibson has the copyright/trademark over the "The Gibson" inlay...

Germain

[Antlurz]

I *think* one is within the law if they make one for themselves, but at the same time, would be in a heapa trouble if they tried to sell it.

Ron

[Mando Medic]

Adam, If your question leans in the direction of, "Builders making near exact copies or forgeries of Loar F5's," then the answer is yes. It has been going on for at least 35 years and is still going on. Kenc

[Tom C]

"If so, no reputable builder would do that, because that's downright illegal"
Maybe so but, I would think there's nothing wrong with doing that. If I built one and kept it for myself with no intent of selling it or making a profit, what is Gibson suing me for? Especially if my last name happened to be Gibson.

[grandmainger]

"If so, no reputable builder would do that, because that's downright illegal"
Maybe so but, I would think there's nothing wrong with doing that. If I built one and kept it for myself with no intent of selling it or making a profit, what is Gibson suing me for? Especially if my last name happened to be Gibson.

Agreed of course. However, I think Adam's question was referring to copies for sale...

[Big Joe]

Even if your last name is Gibson, the name is a trademark of a corporation and is not allowed to be used by any other mandolin builder. If you build one for any reason you risk being in danger of trademark infringement and potential lawsuits. Gibson takes that very seriously these days!

[Michael Lewis]

Adam Hardcastle, my advice is that you should not butt heads with the gibson legal department, you most probably would regret the process and outcome.

The problem of "making one just for me" is that eventually the instrument will go to other hands. No body lives forever and the stuff that is left gets inherited by someone. So you can't really say that it will never be for sale because it goes out of your realm of control.

[glauber]

Now, if you would make one and call it "The Gobson", for example, it might qualify as protected speech, as a parody! (IANAL)

[Big Joe]

As long as it cannot be mistaken as a Gibson at a distance of 20 feet you might...might get away with it .

[glauber]

Are you kidding? Nothing could ever be mistaken for the legendary quality of the Real Thing!

[banjo1]

I am not wanting to but heads with anybody.
It is a big problem if you do this infringment on any bodys copyright.i was just asking a question and still want to know (how do we recognise thier work)
I am not asking anybody to do anything against the law.
I had a question and I know how wrong it is to do this.

[banjo1]

Let me ask this another way.
Are there things that Lloyd Loar did building F5's that knowone, including Gibson has done since.

Most serial numbered, Loar signed, instruments are know about (most), so I want to be able to tell a real Loar from a fake Loar.

Are there any tell tail signs of a fake?

I am sure that I am not the only one with a desire to know that answer to this question.

[Charlie Derrington]

Adam,

I'm not being flip, but it's taken a few of us years and years to be able to distinguish the nuances between a good fake and an original. I'd be glad to tell you how to do it, but I can't put into words how we know. It's the very small and subtle things that are the "tell".

For instance, how does Loar period varnish crack differently from lacquer of the same period, or of shellac of the same period? Where does the 15th fret cross piece lay in relation to the 15th fret? What material are the points made of and how are they cut in? Are the tonebars in the correct spot in relation to the center line or f-holes. Where are the f-holes placed? Are there any signs on the inside of the instrument (or in the scroll) of the finishing materials or techniques? Are there any chips or worn areas in the finish that let's one see under the top coat? How about the areas changed by perspiration..how did they react? What shade is the stain and can you see through it? How does the finish appear under a black-light? What about the bridge, the case, the tuners, the finger-rest, the fret slots, the look of 20's ebony, the pickguard frog composition, binding, miter joints, inlay, glue, scroll carving (front and back), maple look, spruce look, fret edge angle, apex of the carve on the top and back, neck position and angle, heel carve, smell, etc., etc., etc.

I could go on and on and still not be able to explain how we know what we know. It just takes time and working on a few dozen of the things to learn what you need to know.

Sorry I couldn't be more help.

Charlie

[banjo1]

Wow Charlie
Thats enough to keep the whole country busy for some time to come.
Thanks for the time you spent on your little( HA HA ) response.

I have studied rare US coins for the past ten years or so and still dont know all that I need to know to become a dealer of rare us coins.

Great place to visit and to talk and most of all learn.

[danb]

A few more:
correctness of locating pin hole markers in the peghead, filler around inlay, shape of fingerboard extention & position of frets, binding around peghead scrolls, engraving style/quality on tailpiece cover, tuner plates stamping & plating, number of screws holding plates to peghead, drill position of tuner holes, correctness of the buttons to the tuner plates, mitering of the point protectors, materials used & layers visible inside truss rod pocket, wood types, smell inside the box, labels, handwriting on labels, aging of the paper comprising the labels, color of case material, color/thickness of binding, trapezoidal ridges of binding against fret ends, "hidden serial numbers" on PG or bridge base, wood used on fingerboard extension, wood used on bridge & finishing/treatment of the ebony and feaux ebony surfaces..

[Tim Saxton]

As long as it cannot be mistaken as a Gibson at a distance of 20 feet you might...might get away with it .

Sure Joe!!! Right!!

And what trademark infringement law is that under???

[banjo1]

The info. on real Loars are what I was looking for from the start, I just asked it the wrong way. Sorry.

There will always be folks trying to fool the public and we need to arm ourselves to keep it in check.

I can see by the responses that we are all very, very serious about our passion and business.

I have studied some on rare stringed instruments most of my life. I have learned in two months on the Cafe, than in my whole life before.45 Years.

If I were to build anything, I would not want anyone to copy it.

Thanks folks.

[Bill Snyder]

As long as it cannot be mistaken as a Gibson at a distance of 20 feet you might...might get away with it .

Sure Joe!!! Right!!

And what trademark infringement law is that under???

If I am not mistaken that is the criteria that a court used in one or more previous lawsuit(s) in which Gibson prevailed.

[banjo1]

I am always looking for information concerning the topic that I plan to get into.I have ammased a great deal of information in a year and a half of searching.I have bought the best wood that I can get my hands on but the research continues.

We all should learn from the years of building, that some of our fellow Cafe'ers have gone through and its been free .............so far.THANKS TO ALL BUILDERS & REPAIR PERSONS

Good advice is hard to come by and the tried and true info. on the Cafe's chats is a life time of learning, all rolled up in one neat place.

If I ruffeled some feathers and got someone upset, I am sorry for that.It was not my intention.

I am not going to build Loar clones, never thought about it.I am just going to build the best mandolins that I can and research helps us all in that area.