1930's Gibson L00 bridge plate replacement - FRETS.NET2024-03-28T19:47:37Zhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/forum/topics/1930-s-gibson-l00-bridge-plate-replacement?id=2177249%3ATopic%3A88042&feed=yes&xn_auth=noWell, I just got my '36 L00 b…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2015-01-11:2177249:Comment:1417512015-01-11T02:20:58.527ZGerald Cummingshttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/GeraldCummings
<p>Well, I just got my '36 L00 back today. When I bought this guitar, it had a bridge that was different from usual. It definitely had been changed, but according to my luthier, there was no footprint of a bridge of any different dimensions on this guitar ever. He's worked on enough true vintage guitars to see remnants of original bridges, and has come to the conclusion that this guitar ALWAYS had a larger bridge on it. He's convinced, and the one he made to replace that one is the same size. I…</p>
<p>Well, I just got my '36 L00 back today. When I bought this guitar, it had a bridge that was different from usual. It definitely had been changed, but according to my luthier, there was no footprint of a bridge of any different dimensions on this guitar ever. He's worked on enough true vintage guitars to see remnants of original bridges, and has come to the conclusion that this guitar ALWAYS had a larger bridge on it. He's convinced, and the one he made to replace that one is the same size. I couldn't locate a serial number on the heel block, just a red pencil marking. It does have MADE IN THE U.S.A. stamped in the back of headstock. The guitar was bought in Canada, which might explain this bridge mystery. I'll upload some pics for you folks. It's a lovely playing & sounding guitar in all, without a doubt.</p> Is that the same bridge as th…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2014-12-09:2177249:Comment:1401522014-12-09T15:44:24.449ZJohnhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/John631
<p>Is that the same bridge as the one Gerald posted?</p>
<p>Is that the same bridge as the one Gerald posted?</p> I think this one probably sho…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2014-12-09:2177249:Comment:1401482014-12-09T01:28:50.811ZNed Knepphttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/NedKnepp
<p>I think this one probably should have been a new thread but sometime people that are new are not sure what the specific forum traditions are. Some places, the residents would get upset if they felt like someone started "another thread about L 00 "was started. Other sites, like this one, tend to like new threads, particularly if the existing threads are old. Until a new member learns how a forum works it can be a crap shoot. </p>
<p> Posting about the same instrument/topic on two threads just…</p>
<p>I think this one probably should have been a new thread but sometime people that are new are not sure what the specific forum traditions are. Some places, the residents would get upset if they felt like someone started "another thread about L 00 "was started. Other sites, like this one, tend to like new threads, particularly if the existing threads are old. Until a new member learns how a forum works it can be a crap shoot. </p>
<p> Posting about the same instrument/topic on two threads just confuses everything now matter what. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Gerry, if you read this, next time don't worry about starting a new thread. Most of us would prefer it to pulling old threads back to the top to present a new instrument/problem. </p> No FON on this one...just a v…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2014-12-08:2177249:Comment:1401472014-12-08T02:10:53.008ZGerald Cummingshttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/GeraldCummings
<p>No FON on this one...just a very faint 77 in red pencil at the heel block. It has MADE IN THE U.S.A. on the back of head stock. I inquired as to why some have MADE IN THE USA while some do not, and they said that any Gibsons going out to another country, such as Canada where it was originally purchased, often had that stamped into the headstock while others not going for export didn't have that. This is only information I googled...it may not hold water. After calling Gibson themselves, the…</p>
<p>No FON on this one...just a very faint 77 in red pencil at the heel block. It has MADE IN THE U.S.A. on the back of head stock. I inquired as to why some have MADE IN THE USA while some do not, and they said that any Gibsons going out to another country, such as Canada where it was originally purchased, often had that stamped into the headstock while others not going for export didn't have that. This is only information I googled...it may not hold water. After calling Gibson themselves, the "vintage" person told me that Gibson has little or no records of what went on in that period. It's all a mystery, and my only real concern, is the resale value. Will I get my ca$h back IF & WHEN I have to sell it? I know I'll be able to play this gem, that's all I'm excited about. I may lose some monetary value with the belly bridge style, but I cannot see it being a drastic loss. Thanks much.</p> No, as I've always said, the…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2014-12-08:2177249:Comment:1402522014-12-08T01:54:59.712ZGerald Cummingshttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/GeraldCummings
<p>No, as I've always said, the bridge on MY Gibson L00 was definitely replaced at some point in time. Although, the original bridge on this particular guitar, not the one you showed, but MINE, was apparently the same size, because there was absolutely no evidence of a bridge 1"X6" ever on this particular guitar. Having worked on many vintage Gibson , Martin & other named acoustic guitars, my luthier has come to the conclusion, that no bridge that resembles the 1'X6" bridge you'd see on…</p>
<p>No, as I've always said, the bridge on MY Gibson L00 was definitely replaced at some point in time. Although, the original bridge on this particular guitar, not the one you showed, but MINE, was apparently the same size, because there was absolutely no evidence of a bridge 1"X6" ever on this particular guitar. Having worked on many vintage Gibson , Martin & other named acoustic guitars, my luthier has come to the conclusion, that no bridge that resembles the 1'X6" bridge you'd see on every other vintage Gibson L00 from that period, was ever on this guitar. I'm kinda sorry that I even brought this up, because as long as it plays even better than it did before I got it worked on, which it will, then everything is copacetic in my view. Thank you for your valued opinions on this post folks. Have a wonderful and safe holiday season to all.</p> Even though they had been usi…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2014-12-07:2177249:Comment:1403562014-12-07T19:08:20.887ZPaul Hostetterhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/PaulHostetter
<p>Even though they had been using the standard 1x6 already, and continued to do so, on a tiny handful of guitars in 1928, Gibson used this bridge:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.lutherie.net/gibson.nick.lucas.1928.4.jpg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img class="align-center" src="http://www.lutherie.net/gibson.nick.lucas.1928.4.jpg?width=721" width="721"></img></a></p>
<p></p>
<p>It was an intergrade between this one (from 1927) and the 1x6 they settled on for most of their production flattops:…</p>
<p></p>
<p>Even though they had been using the standard 1x6 already, and continued to do so, on a tiny handful of guitars in 1928, Gibson used this bridge:</p>
<p><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.lutherie.net/gibson.nick.lucas.1928.4.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.lutherie.net/gibson.nick.lucas.1928.4.jpg?width=721" width="721" class="align-center"/></a></p>
<p></p>
<p>It was an intergrade between this one (from 1927) and the 1x6 they settled on for most of their production flattops:</p>
<p><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.lutherie.net/Gibson.1927.L-1.7.pin.bridge.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.lutherie.net/Gibson.1927.L-1.7.pin.bridge.jpg?width=721" width="721" class="align-center"/></a></p>
<p>And it had the same details, like the crisp pyramid-ish lines, but of course not the 7th bridgepin. The one above was a flop because it was a bridge glued on top of another rosewood platform, and that glue joint tended to fail. They're shorter and much wider than a 1x6.</p>
<p></p>
<p>I don't know the dimensions of the odd one on the Nick Lucas, above. You hardly ever see them, as they were also a flash in the pan. Maybe that's what your guitar once had. It's obviously less than six inches and noticeably wider than one inch.</p>
<p></p>
<p>Sure wish you could read that FON number, because the rest of what you imagine are identifying characteristics don't really help date it.</p> I never understand why some p…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2014-12-07:2177249:Comment:1402492014-12-07T18:15:04.560ZPaul Hostetterhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/PaulHostetter
<p>I never understand why some people conduct two parallel threads on the same subject. </p>
<p>I never understand why some people conduct two parallel threads on the same subject. </p> Gerry
It looks like you poste…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2014-12-07:2177249:Comment:1402462014-12-07T12:25:01.941ZEd Minchhttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/EdMinch
<p>Gerry</p>
<p>It looks like you posted on an older thread a few days ago:</p>
<p><a href="http://fretsnet.ning.com/forum/topics/1930s-gibson-l00-has-elevated?page=1&commentId=2177249%3AComment%3A140026&x=1#2177249Comment140026" target="_blank">http://fretsnet.ning.com/forum/topics/1930s-gibson-l00-has-elevated?page=1&commentId=2177249%3AComment%3A140026&x=1#2177249Comment140026</a></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px;">Look at the bridge location on the photo at the top of…</span></p>
<p>Gerry</p>
<p>It looks like you posted on an older thread a few days ago:</p>
<p><a href="http://fretsnet.ning.com/forum/topics/1930s-gibson-l00-has-elevated?page=1&commentId=2177249%3AComment%3A140026&x=1#2177249Comment140026" target="_blank">http://fretsnet.ning.com/forum/topics/1930s-gibson-l00-has-elevated?page=1&commentId=2177249%3AComment%3A140026&x=1#2177249Comment140026</a></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px;">Look at the bridge location on the photo at the top of that thread. The shape of the removed bridge is the shape of a belly bridge. We all know that the original could not have been a belly bridge so this is clearly a replacement - but it looks like it could be original because the black finish is shaped that way.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px;">The best way to get the glue to hold on a the very critical joint of the bridge to the top is to make sure that the bare wood of the bridge is stuck onto bare wood of the top with no finish on it. So the luthier carefully scraped away the black lacquer so that the bridge would contact wood.</span></p>
<p>If your bridge is not original, perhaps the luthier who installed it scraped the finish off for better contact. It looks like the large bridge on your guitar is 6" wide - the same dimension as the narrower bridge that Gibson used at the time. If this is the case, there would only be finish removal, and no patching.</p>
<p>Something to look for.</p>
<p><br/>Ed</p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px;"> </span></p> No Tom, it's a 1936 Gibson L0…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2014-12-07:2177249:Comment:1400342014-12-07T03:15:59.583ZGerald Cummingshttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/GeraldCummings
<p>No Tom, it's a 1936 Gibson L00 and the bridge was changed. It is not a 1932, 33, 34, 35, 38, 39, or any of the '40's, I'll guarantee you this. it has no serial number on ther heel block...only a barely faint number 77 written in red pencil. I know the year because of the sunburst size, number of frets to the bodsy, logo on headstock, front binding only (back binding come out half way through 1936). I'm positive of the year, it's the original bridge was a mystery. Not any more. Thank you…</p>
<p>No Tom, it's a 1936 Gibson L00 and the bridge was changed. It is not a 1932, 33, 34, 35, 38, 39, or any of the '40's, I'll guarantee you this. it has no serial number on ther heel block...only a barely faint number 77 written in red pencil. I know the year because of the sunburst size, number of frets to the bodsy, logo on headstock, front binding only (back binding come out half way through 1936). I'm positive of the year, it's the original bridge was a mystery. Not any more. Thank you though. I appreciate you all taking the time in this. Happiest Holidays folks.</p> Hi Gerry .. that would be a d…tag:fretsnet.ning.com,2014-12-06:2177249:Comment:1400332014-12-06T18:39:40.307Zonewenthttp://fretsnet.ning.com/profile/onewent
<p>Hi Gerry .. that would be a difficult wish for even Santa to fulfill, since Orville died in 1918, unless of course, the L-00 in question was somehow made in the teens as a prototype! {sarcasm alert}</p>
<p>Historically, Gibson did not have a 'belly' bridge until the early 40s, with the 1x6 rectangular being the standard on their flat tops. Here's one outside shot at clarifying the possible originality of your belly bridge. Have you checked the FON # stamped on the heel block? L-00s were…</p>
<p>Hi Gerry .. that would be a difficult wish for even Santa to fulfill, since Orville died in 1918, unless of course, the L-00 in question was somehow made in the teens as a prototype! {sarcasm alert}</p>
<p>Historically, Gibson did not have a 'belly' bridge until the early 40s, with the 1x6 rectangular being the standard on their flat tops. Here's one outside shot at clarifying the possible originality of your belly bridge. Have you checked the FON # stamped on the heel block? L-00s were made into the 40s, at about the same time Gibson began with a belly bridge on the SJs (1943). (regular line flat tops got them in the early 50s) So maybe, just maybe, your L-00 has an 'H' FON stamp, or an FON stamp consistent with a guitar made in '43 or '44. And maybe, just maybe, someone on the line slapped a new-fangled bridge on the workhorse L-00 that day. That's the kind of whacky stuff Gibson is noted for.</p>
<p>Check the FON and get back, if you can. Use a black light or very strong flash light, there's likely one in there next to the red pencil letters. Tom</p>
<p>PS .. one quick question. Reading back through your posts, Gerry, you posted an image of the bridge in question on Wednesday, correct? If so, that's not a 'belly' bridge, it looks like a rectangular-shape replacement bridge to me. Can you clarify? ..thanks, Tom</p>