Loar Picture of the Day

**Darryl Wolfe** · Jun-01-2005, 3:04pm

Originally Posted by (Charlie Derrington @ June 01 2005, 10:57)

Wish I could look at this one a little more closely.

I can't tell (through the yellow) if the headstock binding is white or ivoroid and it looks as if the body binding is white ??

Again, it's hard to tell, but the whole thing (if period correct) should be white binding.

Charlie

I tend to think that one is ivoroid (on the peghead)..lending credibility to the odd assembly process I mentioned. #We are actually beginning to think the overlays may have be installed (in some cases) after the instrument was finished. #We are almost certain the pegheads were drilled after the instrument was finished (as in varnished, laquered) #There are just too many unexplainable oddities in the process, and weird to our current way of thinking assembly orders make them make sense

**danb** · Jun-01-2005, 4:53pm

Charlie- check the fingerboard extension photo. You can sort of see it there. Where there is wear, it's white. I think it's the lacquer over the original finish that makes it yellow.

**Charlie Derrington** · Jun-01-2005, 6:48pm

Yeah Dan, I was pretty sure about the body and FB binding. It was the head veneer that caught my eye. I'd almost bet the HV binding was also white.

Charlie

**danb** · Jun-02-2005, 2:33pm

Yes again

There are a few tiny wear spots where it's pure white!

**meskalito** · Jun-06-2005, 10:08am

I am grateful for all the work that has been done in this thread. I've enjoyed it.

What kind of finish did the Loars have?

**76547** · Jun-23-2005, 1:47pm

Hi all,

Back a few pages I see the Veiock loar. Mr. Veiock being an instructor and Gibson agent from New Brighton, PA. It makes me wonder if he was the guy who introduced my grandfather, Chas. Carter - 1st owner of 76547, to the Gibson mandolin. New Brighton is very close to where my grandfather was.

**danb** · Jun-23-2005, 3:27pm

That's an interesting link Jack.. probably a bit too much of a coincidence to not have some kind of relationship

**danb** · Jun-26-2005, 9:04am

F5 #75554, Feb 18 1924 is at Elderly.. previously undocumented, same signature date as John Reishman's..

**danb** · Jun-26-2005, 9:17am

Yum..

**danb** · Jun-26-2005, 9:18am

It's a good week for documenting new Master Models... more in the works..

**danb** · Jun-26-2005, 9:19am

Back..

**danb** · Jun-26-2005, 9:20am

Scroll.. not quite as angular as JR's..

**danb** · Jun-26-2005, 9:30am

Here's a nice new photo of F5 #73994 July 9 1924

**jasona** · Jun-26-2005, 11:11am

Can you say "mint"? Wowsers!

**mandophil(e)** · Jun-26-2005, 11:26am

Dan:

Can you or Darryl explain the comment in the description of #73994 about "holdover featuessuch as the bulge in the fingerboard extension". I'm looking at it versus early '23 Loars, and am not seeing it. Thanks.

**Brian Aldridge** · Jun-26-2005, 11:39am

is 73994 lacquered? Looks like the same finish as 82369.

**danb** · Jun-26-2005, 2:56pm

73994 is just very clean.. it's easy to take a shot from the right angle that hides the typical varnish craze lines, but if you look at this one..

About "holdover features".. We use that to describe a mandolin that shows features of 2 distinct building periods or batches.. the idea being that it was made at one time, and the final set-up or finishing even might have occurred later.. This explains some of the "Unsigned Loars" that have batch numbers or serial numbers from the middle of the Loar period, later tuner types/etc.. Perhaps some of these were built faster than the orders came in, so they weren't built all at once.

So, on 73994..
Darryl notes that there is black in the finish, which is more a '24 feature..
I noticed that the stamping on the tuner plates (flowers etc) looks like the March 24 batch (including Jack's Fern)
The bulge on the fingerboard extension (bass side) is a '24 feature usually.. most of the 22/23 ones are straight on the bass side of the extension..

So anyway, this adds up to a couple of possibilities.. maybe it was partially built during the July 9 batch, finished in '24? Darryl also noted to me at the time that that matches Monroe's on some of the features.

**mandoman15** · Jun-26-2005, 5:23pm

love that 24 from elderly. Does anyone else do this or am i just crazy, I clicked the "buy it" button just for fun, with no intention of buying it, but it does bring you to a new page where it shows the buyers information and subtotal ect. it's kind of like geting one step closer to owning a loar, this is completely ridiculous, but afterwards, i was shaking slightly. I discovered that MAS sensation pick up and it was cool. i call it a loar buzz.

thankyouy for putting up with my silliness:p

**Brian Aldridge** · Jun-28-2005, 7:20am

Look at the long lines of crazing in the finish of 73994 in this pic.
http://www.mandolinarchive.com/perl/show_image.pl?4527
Doesn't that look like the same thing as what is going on with the finish on 82369, which is lacquer, in this pic?
http://www.mandolinarchive.com/perl/show_image.pl?4026

**Darryl Wolfe** · Jun-28-2005, 9:07am

Originally Posted by (Brian @ June 28 2005, 08:20)

Look at the long lines of crazing in the finish of 73994 in this pic.
http://www.mandolinarchive.com/perl/show_image.pl?4527
Doesn't that look like the same thing as what is going on with the finish on 82369, which is lacquer, in this pic?
http://www.mandolinarchive.com/perl/show_image.pl?4026

Yes, I suspect a light lacquer coat on 73994. There were many instruments that came out of the factory during the Loar period with it. It is particularly noticeable on the Loar signed mandolas and L5's. This is just a "what if" suggestion, but I think they may have been experimenting with topcoats to speed the drying process. Many Feb 18, 24 Loars have it too.

**mandophil(e)** · Jun-28-2005, 9:17am

So does the Loar currently at Elderly look like one of those?

**Glassweb** · Jun-28-2005, 11:14am

"Knowledge without experience is pure speculation." - Roberto Tacchi, master Florentine wood sculptor

" I'm just speculatin' on a hypothesis... I know I don't know nuthin'. " - Police Chief O' Doole in the film "Miller's Crossing"

"Vas ya dere Charlie?" - Marlon Brando in an interview with Larry King.

As everybody is having so much fun disecting my mandolin # 73994, I just couldn't help resist diving into the fray! This mandolin which yes, I paid a ridiculous price for a few months ago, is a spectacular example of a Loar era F5 mandolin. It has an absolutely amazing sound with huge volume, superb balance, great bass and treble strings and a complex, epic tone that is, at the same time, wet and dry, woody and bell-like. Every note frets beautifully and it has a perfectly tapered neck. For my personal style of playing it is the ultimate mandolin. Oh yes, it's absolutely beautiful and completely original. Now, regarding the finish... as far as I can determine, none of us were working at the Gibson plant in Kalamazoo in 1923. So any observations regarding any of these mandolins should be read, noted and then accepted for what they are - speculations on facts that may or may not be "true". My mandolin does have very interesting crazing on the finish - but most Loar era F5's have all sorts of wierd inconsistencies. For example, a Loar that I just purchased at Skinner last month has tuner plates with 3 and 5 screws, a white plastic binding on the headstock facing front and ivoroid binding on the body. It is a March 31st 1924 Loar mandolin - signed on the same date as most of the "Fern" Loars. Strange? Well, yes and no... cause to my way of thinking nothing at Gibson was ever perfectly consistent during its heyday. How about the beautiful Loar currently up for sale at Elderly. I've owned two other Feb. 18th Loars and they were BOTH completely different from this new one. One of mine had a Virzi - one didn't. One had a very thick neck, the other was very, very thin. They both sounded fantastic. They both had an ivoroid binding on the side headstock. The Elderly Loar has (just speculatin' on a photo here!) what appears to be a front-facing, white plastic binding on the headstock (like a March 31 Fern Loar) and an unsusual yellow-black-white binding around the body - just like the binding that was on my Dec.1st "unsigned" and other signed Loar mandolins from that date. So what are to think about this? And does it really matter in the final wash what we think? It sure would be nice to see more people discussing the tonal qualities of these instruments or the music they play on them. I don't know about everyone else, but I PLAY my Gibsons for hours a day and they are one of the greatest pleasures in my life. I feel that the Loar F5's are truly America's "Strads" and, in some ways, an even more significant development in the history of string instruments. If you 've ever played an old tater bug mandolin (c'mon... we all have!) and also played a Loar (or any good F5 for that matter) you know that what the folks at Gibson did in the 20's was literally reinvent the mandolin. Not bad for a bunch of guys working with hand tools in Michigan over 80 years ago! So yes, let's keep talking about, speculating and hashing over all the details that make these mandolins the amazing musical works of art that they are. In my mind there is no more beautiful stringed instrument than the Loar era F5s. I guess that's why we love them so much and also why the F5 has become, in a sense, "the violin"... that is to say the model of what every mandolin builer since (including Gibson) has tried to recreate. OK - I've had my say... time to get back to making music. Many thanks to Scott Tichenor for creating such an important and user friendly website for all mandolinists...

**Darryl Wolfe** · Jun-28-2005, 11:34am

Here is our buddy F5Loars July 9, 23..6 numbers past Glasswebs 73994. #(74000). It too has the hard topcoat

**danb** · Jun-28-2005, 1:08pm

Yeah, most of us can just look.. it's really two separate levels of appreciation, one is describing them, the other is feeling them. I'd say a lot of this discussion focuses on what they look like. How they can make you feel is a whole other ballgame!

I wouldn't look at this as a dissection so much as folks coming to understand in greater detail how these were put together. I had no idea that the old axiom of "all loars are varnished, all post-loars are lacquered" isn't as black & white as I previously thought!

**Charlie Derrington** · Jun-28-2005, 2:10pm

As we've said before.......

The July 9 (sidebound) batch was different in quite a few ways. The top-bound ones (again just as a general observation) have that standard mid-to-late '23 finish appearance while the side-bound ones have that "harder" look and slightly different crazing pattern. I don't think we should, however, make statements based on broad generalities and just agree to agree that (as Steven previously stated) the Loar period Gibson F-5s are the pinnacle of American instrument manufacturing....Strads, indeed.

Although I just can't help myself... I agree that that batch was some type of finish experiment while Loar was on tour. My early '25 is certainly more like the standard '23 finish (sans color difference). #

Charlie