Gibson HG 20 just came in...

[Andrew]

Where to start with this one... Well, the guitar belonged to an ex customer of mine (he done died) who was a lefty and had it converted to left handed at some point, and it now belongs to his young friend who now wants me to change it back to right handed. Ive seen the guitar before but never worked on it. Repair - wise, this thing has been through the ringer, to the point where Im almost afraid to work on it, the way one thing leads to another, and I know this guy doesnt have a lot of dough.

Im not really sure what Im getting at with this thread, just kinda sharing I suppose and am interested to gather your thoughts, as I am by no means an encyclopedia of vintage instrument identification and information. I'll just list point form what I 'know' or have observed, post some pics, and maybe let you folks take it from there. Give me your thoughts etc, criticize/question my notes, or whathaveyou. Here goes..

- Im pretty certain, based on some brief googling, that this is a 1932 HG 20, due to the following info:
FON 205 is stamped in ink on the "inner body" over the neck block; inner and outer body are flatsawn maple, braces and top are spruce, neck and end block, and inner body brackets are mahogany; single bound top, unbound back; unbound rosewood fingerboard with dot inlays; Gibson logo painted on headstock in white, no headstock inlay.

Previous work I know for sure has been done is as follows:
- R2L conversion
- neck reset (f board extension was cut off) (poorly)
- refinished (poorly - but they worked around the headstock logo); top was stained black and the rest was lacquered black, brush marks here and there, and the odd subtle run
- bridge was capped OVER bolts which secure it to the bridge plate
- Repair work was signed and dated 1973 on the inside of the top, next to what was originally the bass side of the x brace

Previous work I suspect (and why) has been done in no particular order:
- f holes reshaped (see pics) god knows for what reason
- the top or back was removed at some point (location and neatness of the repair signature)
- pretty sure it was the top that was removed (due to squeezeout of whitish-clear glue that appears to be pva type all around the lining and)
- the top binding appears to have re done (it doesnt look as wide as the pics of other HGs Ive found and)
- the top appears to have been "rounded down" to meet the shorter binding
- much of the top bracing looks reglued (with the same stuff and the squeezout looks similar)
- bridge plate might not be original (looks a bit too newish); it is mahogany and somewhat triangular
- has probably been refretted (the frets dont look 84 years old)

Other notes and questions:
- The back is poorly fitted to the sides - most of it doesnt even touch the lining, and the braces are all way off from the recesses in the lining by 1/8" - 1/4" roughly. Dunno if this was typical factory work?
- the ends of the brack braces re mostly chipped and broken, some fall well short of the lining. Maybe it was the back that was removed, but I dont see any new glue there or even evidence of cleanup
- the back lining is just a mess in general
- some if the inner body brackets dont fit the back too well
- top binding is seperating at the waist
- neck is pretty bowed and Im afeared of that truss rod
- I dont think these Grovers are original, but I could be wrong
- Overall the body seems pretty stable, and it sounds quite nice.

Oy. Okay, heres pics:

[Andrew]

More pics

[Andrew]

...

[Andrew]

...

[Andrew]

...

[Andrew]

...

[Andrew]

And finally...

Sorry bout posting these one at a time, ning doesnt like my ipad. I do have more but that was getting tedious. I also apologize about the shaky hands - I have a bit of an anxiety thing. If anyones interested in a specific area not pictured, Ill gladly post a pic of it.

[Frank Ford]

Tuners are those awful Grover Futura models - a cheaper alternative to the Rotomatics - could have been stuck on during the repair done 1973.

[Kerry Krishna]

Andrew, in my books, this axe is  far beyond doing anything with short of hanging on the wall as an ornament. If this were in my shop, I would call the guy, hand it back to him and say sorry.

If you do decide to work on it, it will be a black hole of fixing other people's mistakes.  Just my opinion though.

[Andrew]

Pretty much my thoughts as well, but I get the reason he's gonna want to play it for sentimental reasons. He mainly wants to play slide with it, so at least I wouldnt have to worry so much about the neck set and truss rod adjustments...

[Kerry Krishna]

His sentimental reasons in this case, may not be a good enough reason. Good luck with what ever you decide to do.

[Glen Choitz]

I have a guitar that was my Dad's, he played it every evening, it was always nearby him...just a cheap acoustic from the 40's...he had 'refinished ' it in the 60's by sanding it down and brushing shellac on it...runs, drips everywhere...It will not stay in tune or play very well at all. It will always be just like it is...I play it once in awhile and I always go to tunes he used to play as I remember hearing him play them...Slack guitar style usually. Lot of memories in that old guitar, as is they will stay...if I redo it, they are gone, I have then changed it to fit me, not him. Owning a lot of guitars, it is my most valuable, not in $$ value, but in the feeling I get when ever i pick it up. I won't risk changing that.

So even with all it's faults, I would not do anything more than the very minimum to make the guitar you are working on playable for the new owner. put it back to right hand play and hand it back to him...you cannot repair or replace sentiment once gone.

Just my take on it....

[Andrew]

Yes I think that will be the plan Glen, after all it is still pretty stable with that second body inside it, and it does sound pretty neat...