Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Resurection of an old B-25
13 views
Skip to first unread message
Kevin Hall
Sep 24, 2012, 2:19:14 PM9/24/12
to
As some of you know I'm not a big fan of a lot of the things Gibson did to
their guitars in the late 60s through the 70s, but freely acknowledge that
many of their designs can build up into wonderful guitars. This summer
I've been attacked by a number of '60s Gibs from B-45-12s to SJs and J-45s,
and the trend continued this past week with the arrival of a '64 B-25.
When Gibson 'improved' the delightful old LG-3 design into the B-25 in the
early 60s they burdened it with a number of features which had far more to
do with increasing speed of production than performance, among which was a
ridiculous plastic bridge secured to the top by means of 4 self tapping
screws and 8 little spacer washers. They also got adjustable bridge saddles
along with all the attendant hardware those required. That made a total of
12 holes through the top and bridgeplate in the small area of the bridge.
Two of those holes are considerable, being about 3/8" in dia. for the brass
retaining pillars into which the saddle supports are screwed.
Under all this they switched from solid hardwood bridgeplates of modest
thickness to a large, 3-ply plate which was stiff and heavy enough to
dampen the most determined of vibrations.
Needless to say the plastic bridges warped and twisted, the bridgeplates
buckled and often cracked through all 3 plies along the line of the
bridgepin holes, leaving the top to fend for itself. Being too stiff for
the job the ply plate often cracked away from the top as well, leaving very
little to control the twisting caused by string tension. In short these
things sounded bad ( subjective judgement, I know but in comparison with
the older model it's no-contest) and encountered all manner of structural
problems.
Often ignored by guitar buyers because of their less than inspiring
performance and reputation for fragility the B-25s from the early to mid 60s
can actually be made into delightful little boxes fairly easily.
The example which came to me this past week was pretty typical, with the
plastic bridge cracked and distorted. At some point someone had tried to
keep it down by shoving gouts of glue under both front and back edges, then
whizzed a matching pair of 1/2" wood screws through the wings of the bridge
and into the top. Unfortunately he managed to wind those into the two
lower legs of the X brace, and rather than screwing into those they pushed
both braces off the top for about 3" on each side. Of course that didn't
help keep the lid flat. Nor did the fact that the bridgeplate and top had
both cracked along the row of bridgepin holes. Those holes were of course
drilled much too close to the back edge of the bridge so such cracking is
expected.
In an attempt at keeping the top from dropping ahead of the bridge and
coming up behind it some inventive soul had carefully picked out the length
of back seam reinforcement which sits behind the #2 back brace and replaced
it with a stick about 1/2" thick. That was a stiffener to support the 5/8"
dia. hand-whittled soundpost which was jammed and glued in between top and
back at that point. Imagine the heavenly sounds unleashed by a strum on
such a delightful collection of sins.
With the plastic bridge binned, ply bridgeplate nuked and replaced by one
made in maple, the braces reglued, sound post deep-sixed and the back
centre seam strip returned to it's original form the top regained its'
original modest arch. A rosewood bridge with a good bone saddle topped
things off and the guitar came to life with a new set of strings.
The wee beast makes a good 50% more sound than it ever did before, and it's
a sound that is pleasant to hear. The bass is warm and rich, typical of
the lightly built Gibsons of the previous decade, and the treble is sweet
all the way up the neck. It's a great little guitar, surprisingly a
little better under a flat-pick than fingers.
One interesting side-note for me is the fact that the wretched plastic
bridge came with the ceramic version of Gibs. adjustable saddle rather than
the sound-sucking wooden ones which were more common. Switching the more
collectible Gibs of that era from a wooden saddle to the ceramic version
retains a good deal of originallity for those to whom such things matter,
but it provides a very quick gain in overall acoustic performance. The
ceramic saddles themselves are very hard to find these days and I've seen
them go for $100 or more, some being sought by collectors who sprung for
the J160E reissues of a few years back and who were disappointed in the
acoustic performance of those with their wooden parts.
So...may I suggest that those of you who are looking for guitars from time
to time give more than a passing glance to the Gibs of the early to mid 60s?
Sure they have lots of things about them which severely limit their stock
performance and reliability, but if bought 'right' they can soon be turned
into excellent musical tools by a competent tech.
KH
their guitars in the late 60s through the 70s, but freely acknowledge that
many of their designs can build up into wonderful guitars. This summer
I've been attacked by a number of '60s Gibs from B-45-12s to SJs and J-45s,
and the trend continued this past week with the arrival of a '64 B-25.
When Gibson 'improved' the delightful old LG-3 design into the B-25 in the
early 60s they burdened it with a number of features which had far more to
do with increasing speed of production than performance, among which was a
ridiculous plastic bridge secured to the top by means of 4 self tapping
screws and 8 little spacer washers. They also got adjustable bridge saddles
along with all the attendant hardware those required. That made a total of
12 holes through the top and bridgeplate in the small area of the bridge.
Two of those holes are considerable, being about 3/8" in dia. for the brass
retaining pillars into which the saddle supports are screwed.
Under all this they switched from solid hardwood bridgeplates of modest
thickness to a large, 3-ply plate which was stiff and heavy enough to
dampen the most determined of vibrations.
Needless to say the plastic bridges warped and twisted, the bridgeplates
buckled and often cracked through all 3 plies along the line of the
bridgepin holes, leaving the top to fend for itself. Being too stiff for
the job the ply plate often cracked away from the top as well, leaving very
little to control the twisting caused by string tension. In short these
things sounded bad ( subjective judgement, I know but in comparison with
the older model it's no-contest) and encountered all manner of structural
problems.
Often ignored by guitar buyers because of their less than inspiring
performance and reputation for fragility the B-25s from the early to mid 60s
can actually be made into delightful little boxes fairly easily.
The example which came to me this past week was pretty typical, with the
plastic bridge cracked and distorted. At some point someone had tried to
keep it down by shoving gouts of glue under both front and back edges, then
whizzed a matching pair of 1/2" wood screws through the wings of the bridge
and into the top. Unfortunately he managed to wind those into the two
lower legs of the X brace, and rather than screwing into those they pushed
both braces off the top for about 3" on each side. Of course that didn't
help keep the lid flat. Nor did the fact that the bridgeplate and top had
both cracked along the row of bridgepin holes. Those holes were of course
drilled much too close to the back edge of the bridge so such cracking is
expected.
In an attempt at keeping the top from dropping ahead of the bridge and
coming up behind it some inventive soul had carefully picked out the length
of back seam reinforcement which sits behind the #2 back brace and replaced
it with a stick about 1/2" thick. That was a stiffener to support the 5/8"
dia. hand-whittled soundpost which was jammed and glued in between top and
back at that point. Imagine the heavenly sounds unleashed by a strum on
such a delightful collection of sins.
With the plastic bridge binned, ply bridgeplate nuked and replaced by one
made in maple, the braces reglued, sound post deep-sixed and the back
centre seam strip returned to it's original form the top regained its'
original modest arch. A rosewood bridge with a good bone saddle topped
things off and the guitar came to life with a new set of strings.
The wee beast makes a good 50% more sound than it ever did before, and it's
a sound that is pleasant to hear. The bass is warm and rich, typical of
the lightly built Gibsons of the previous decade, and the treble is sweet
all the way up the neck. It's a great little guitar, surprisingly a
little better under a flat-pick than fingers.
One interesting side-note for me is the fact that the wretched plastic
bridge came with the ceramic version of Gibs. adjustable saddle rather than
the sound-sucking wooden ones which were more common. Switching the more
collectible Gibs of that era from a wooden saddle to the ceramic version
retains a good deal of originallity for those to whom such things matter,
but it provides a very quick gain in overall acoustic performance. The
ceramic saddles themselves are very hard to find these days and I've seen
them go for $100 or more, some being sought by collectors who sprung for
the J160E reissues of a few years back and who were disappointed in the
acoustic performance of those with their wooden parts.
So...may I suggest that those of you who are looking for guitars from time
to time give more than a passing glance to the Gibs of the early to mid 60s?
Sure they have lots of things about them which severely limit their stock
performance and reliability, but if bought 'right' they can soon be turned
into excellent musical tools by a competent tech.
KH
JimLowther
Sep 24, 2012, 10:18:09 PM9/24/12
to
I can't decide if this old Gibson I have is an LG-2 (which I was told
it is) or a B-25. Unlike the LG-2 described in Gruhn's guide, it has
a top belly bridge. Unlike the B-25 it is a Rosewood bridge, not
plastic. It does have the adjustable saddle (mine is not wood, not
sure if it is not plastic). This is a nice playing and nice sounding
finger-picker. I have not had the strings off it yet, so cannot say
anything about the bridgeplate. It all seems to be pretty tight.
Best wishes,
Dr. Jim Lowther
hank alrich
Sep 24, 2012, 11:19:34 PM9/24/12
to
puppy should speak right up.
(And Kevin, as always, thanks, and write that book!)
--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri
ple...@nospam.us
Sep 24, 2012, 11:35:02 PM9/24/12
to
On Mon, 24 Sep 2012 14:19:14 -0400, "Kevin Hall"
<timbe...@webhart.net> wrote:
...
>When Gibson 'improved' the delightful old LG-3 design into the B-25 in the
>early 60s they burdened it with a number of features which had far more to
>do with increasing speed of production than performance
Hi, Kevin,
Almost all of the B-25s I have played have been dogs in their original
configuration. I have no experience of a B-25 that has been restored
and improved the way you did this one. However, as proof of the
capriciousness of the universe, I have played ONE B-25 with the
original plastic bridge (although a fixed saddle) that sounded superb.
I should have bought it, but I was unable to part with the money to
buy anything with a plastic bridge. It was a very fine-sounding
guitar and it was set up very well. The bridge had not warped, which
is unusual in itself. Sometimes, the tolerance stackup is in your
favor. Unfortunately, usually not.
Thanks for the "blast from the past" story.
Al
<timbe...@webhart.net> wrote:
...
>When Gibson 'improved' the delightful old LG-3 design into the B-25 in the
>early 60s they burdened it with a number of features which had far more to
>do with increasing speed of production than performance
Almost all of the B-25s I have played have been dogs in their original
configuration. I have no experience of a B-25 that has been restored
and improved the way you did this one. However, as proof of the
capriciousness of the universe, I have played ONE B-25 with the
original plastic bridge (although a fixed saddle) that sounded superb.
I should have bought it, but I was unable to part with the money to
buy anything with a plastic bridge. It was a very fine-sounding
guitar and it was set up very well. The bridge had not warped, which
is unusual in itself. Sometimes, the tolerance stackup is in your
favor. Unfortunately, usually not.
Thanks for the "blast from the past" story.
Al
Tony Done
Sep 25, 2012, 2:57:10 AM9/25/12
to
> KH
>
>
>
I have one of those ceramic saddles. I replaced it with a cutom made
design to hole a martin-width UST. Chipped at both ends but looks OK
from the top and still serviceable. Free to any of the regulars here.
I had a B25-12, tailpiece and narrow rosewood bridge. Not bad, but the
neck was too big for my small hands.
--
Tony Done
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=784456
http://www.flickr.com/photos/done_family/
Mouldytone
Sep 25, 2012, 8:46:02 AM9/25/12
to
Thanks for another interesting and informative post Kevin.
Tony Moulder
Tony Moulder
Ed Edelenbos iPad
Sep 25, 2012, 9:22:25 AM9/25/12
to
It seems to me that it would be easier to find a guitar that is well built
and sounds good in the first place. But I guess that's just me.
Ed
--
This is posted from my iPad
Kevin Hall
Sep 25, 2012, 10:33:50 AM9/25/12
to
Hi Jim;
I'll top-post, which I understand is socially unacceptable, but my
original post was so long and dreary as to give a guy carpal tunnel syndrome
just scrolling down to get at an answer. ;-) The work went very easily and
it was fun, plus the value of the instrument isn't huge in the first place.
I like to keep costs on such jobs as modest as possible since many people
who show up with things like this rather than pre-war Martins etc. aren't
what you'd call rolling in dough.
For me it was about a $450 job. Still a fair chunk of change but given that
it roughly doubled the output and usefulness of the instrument it's a
manageable fee.
It can be hard pin-pointing exact changes in Gibsons since they are nothing
if not inconsistent. There's also the variables introduced by 40 years or
more of repair work and modifications, so it's quite possible yours has had
the bridge replaced. Some techs would ditch the plastic bridges of the
early 60s but retain the adjustable factor. If there isn't a serial number
stamped on the back of the peghead there should be FON numbers inside
somewhere. I don't think I've ever come across a B-25 without the number on
the head though. There are several excellent sources for Gib. serial and
FON number info on the net, as well as Gruhns' book and the one Erlewine et
al did a few years ago.
One way of spotting Gibs built prior to 1950 is to look at the edge of the
peghead. If it tapers front to back from thick at the nut to thinner at the
end of the head, it was built in early ' 50 or before. Later heads were
consistent in thickness.
If I remember correctly they started using the adj. bridge saddles some time
around '56. If the adjustable saddle is original and not wood then it will
be ceramic, the same sort of material used in some modern knife sharpeners.
Those saddles are about 1/4" wide and have forked ends to straddle the
adjusters. There is usually a little metal strip which goes under the
saddle to protect the ceramic from chipping when someone elevates one
adjuster much higher than the other.
KH
"JimLowther" <JimLo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:c18f1abc-5bf8-4895...@v15g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
I'll top-post, which I understand is socially unacceptable, but my
original post was so long and dreary as to give a guy carpal tunnel syndrome
just scrolling down to get at an answer. ;-) The work went very easily and
it was fun, plus the value of the instrument isn't huge in the first place.
I like to keep costs on such jobs as modest as possible since many people
who show up with things like this rather than pre-war Martins etc. aren't
what you'd call rolling in dough.
For me it was about a $450 job. Still a fair chunk of change but given that
it roughly doubled the output and usefulness of the instrument it's a
manageable fee.
It can be hard pin-pointing exact changes in Gibsons since they are nothing
if not inconsistent. There's also the variables introduced by 40 years or
more of repair work and modifications, so it's quite possible yours has had
the bridge replaced. Some techs would ditch the plastic bridges of the
early 60s but retain the adjustable factor. If there isn't a serial number
stamped on the back of the peghead there should be FON numbers inside
somewhere. I don't think I've ever come across a B-25 without the number on
the head though. There are several excellent sources for Gib. serial and
FON number info on the net, as well as Gruhns' book and the one Erlewine et
al did a few years ago.
One way of spotting Gibs built prior to 1950 is to look at the edge of the
peghead. If it tapers front to back from thick at the nut to thinner at the
end of the head, it was built in early ' 50 or before. Later heads were
consistent in thickness.
If I remember correctly they started using the adj. bridge saddles some time
around '56. If the adjustable saddle is original and not wood then it will
be ceramic, the same sort of material used in some modern knife sharpeners.
Those saddles are about 1/4" wide and have forked ends to straddle the
adjusters. There is usually a little metal strip which goes under the
saddle to protect the ceramic from chipping when someone elevates one
adjuster much higher than the other.
KH
"JimLowther" <JimLo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:c18f1abc-5bf8-4895...@v15g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
Kevin Hall
Sep 25, 2012, 10:42:50 AM9/25/12
to
Hi Tony;
The ceramic saddles had metal strips under them originally but over the
years many of those get lost. Then when someone adjusts one side up much
higher than the other rather than alternating ends the forks of the saddle
get pinched and chipped in the adjustment screws. They still work fine like
that.
In the 70s guys brought those adj. saddle Gibsons in by the dozens to have
them converted to solid type. Given that back then a good J-45 Adj. could
be had for around $300 they were just 'working guitars' and of no particular
interest to collectors, so repairment did the conversions without any pangs
of concience. As often as not the owners didn't want the original parts
back. A few years ago I came across a little box full of those old ceramic
saddles harvested that way over the years, and just for the hell of it I
posted half a dozen or so on ebay with starting bids around $10. The
bidding went nuts, especially from Japan where I understand the John Lennon
repop J160Es had sold very well. Those came with the wooden saddles, and
owners were quick to complain that they should have been ceramic. Not that
that switch would make much difference to those dreadful sounding things,
but the hard core afficionados bid those old saddles up to and in some cases
over $100 a shot.
Using one in place of a rosewood unit in early '60s J-45s, 50s, SJs etc.
makes a very noticeable difference without detracting from the originality
factor in what are now relatively collectable instruments. Your offer to
give yours to a group member is generous and thoughtful.
KH
"Tony Done" <tony...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:k3rkka$hki$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
The ceramic saddles had metal strips under them originally but over the
years many of those get lost. Then when someone adjusts one side up much
higher than the other rather than alternating ends the forks of the saddle
get pinched and chipped in the adjustment screws. They still work fine like
that.
In the 70s guys brought those adj. saddle Gibsons in by the dozens to have
them converted to solid type. Given that back then a good J-45 Adj. could
be had for around $300 they were just 'working guitars' and of no particular
interest to collectors, so repairment did the conversions without any pangs
of concience. As often as not the owners didn't want the original parts
back. A few years ago I came across a little box full of those old ceramic
saddles harvested that way over the years, and just for the hell of it I
posted half a dozen or so on ebay with starting bids around $10. The
bidding went nuts, especially from Japan where I understand the John Lennon
repop J160Es had sold very well. Those came with the wooden saddles, and
owners were quick to complain that they should have been ceramic. Not that
that switch would make much difference to those dreadful sounding things,
but the hard core afficionados bid those old saddles up to and in some cases
over $100 a shot.
Using one in place of a rosewood unit in early '60s J-45s, 50s, SJs etc.
makes a very noticeable difference without detracting from the originality
factor in what are now relatively collectable instruments. Your offer to
give yours to a group member is generous and thoughtful.
KH
"Tony Done" <tony...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:k3rkka$hki$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
Kevin Hall
Sep 25, 2012, 10:54:06 AM9/25/12
to
"Ed Edelenbos iPad" <ed...@huh.wha> wrote in message
news:612622071370272005...@news.individual.net...
have $500 or so in because it sounds so bad, it makes sense to turn back the
clock and put it back to what Gibson would have built in the previous
decade. At least it does for me. The job isn't difficult, isn't really
that expensive compared with new guitar prices, and you end up with a funky
old honest US built instrument with an honoured name and history. You also
end up with one that is actually useable as a musical instrument. What's
not to like? That cheap little box can make at least one more generation
of pickers smile and probably two.
The real 'old time' Gibson sound is something you just can't get out of any
modern guitar this side of about 3 grand. It is totally different from the
almost clinical clarity of most current guitars and has a charm all its' own
especially for vocal accompaniment.
I have a hard time getting my head around advertisments for mid-sixties
B-25s in stock form priced anywhere from $1,500 to $2,400 ( which I've
actually seen lately). That's just nuts. For the most part any $350
import off the shelf will kick those things all over the shop as-issued, so
the price is based on smoke, mirrors and what the traffic will bear. On
the other hand if you find one in reasonable shape which has languished
neglected for years it can often be had for very reasonable money. Stick
another $400 to $500 into it and you have a guitar which is a treat to play
and sounds like a genuine US-built traditional flat-top. Without the
conversion they hang around a store like a bad smell. After the conversion
they invariably sell for a respectable profit within a week, so the proof
is in the pudding.
KH
Ed Edelenbos iPad
Sep 25, 2012, 11:55:05 AM9/25/12
to
tech looking for either a challenging project or a potential profit making
project, I can see the draw. One of the best sounding and playing J-45s
I've ever played was one that had been found in the trash with a busted up
top and various cracks and such. I think by the s/n it dated from the late
50s. One of "our own" amateur/semi-pro luthiers repaired the cracks and
put a new top on it, along with refretting and refinishing. I'd hardly
call it a Gibson J-45 after all the work that went into it, though.
Ed
Ps: if it doesn't show, I'm not a Gibson acoustic fan.
hank alrich
Sep 25, 2012, 12:24:00 PM9/25/12
to
Ed Edelenbos iPad <ed...@huh.wha> wrote:
> One of the best sounding and playing J-45s
> I've ever played was one that had been found in the trash with a busted up
> top and various cracks and such. I think by the s/n it dated from the late
> 50s. One of "our own" amateur/semi-pro luthiers repaired the cracks and
> put a new top on it, along with refretting and refinishing. I'd hardly
> call it a Gibson J-45 after all the work that went into it, though.
At gigs where we need to plug in, Shaidri plays a 1969 J-50 that Lance
> One of the best sounding and playing J-45s
> I've ever played was one that had been found in the trash with a busted up
> top and various cracks and such. I think by the s/n it dated from the late
> 50s. One of "our own" amateur/semi-pro luthiers repaired the cracks and
> put a new top on it, along with refretting and refinishing. I'd hardly
> call it a Gibson J-45 after all the work that went into it, though.
retopped. Nice guitar. Skinniest neck I've ever seen, which fits her
small hands nicely.
JimLowther
Sep 25, 2012, 1:50:30 PM9/25/12
to
indications it has been worked on. This guitar belonged to a friend's
deceased mother (who bought it new), and had been sitting in the case
for years. I would say the condition is very good+. My friend had it
in an Evanston, IL shop for a comission sale several months with an
asking price of $2000 in a soft market. When I expressed interest in
the guitar she gave it to me. (This is a very long, lomg, log time
almost family type friend.) The Evanston shop told her it was a 60's
LG-2, with a nice Gibson Cherry sunburst. I have the numbers recorded
somewhere (both back of neck and FON inside). To me, the sentimental
value (having known her mother) rates really high, and it is fun to
play.
There muxt be an optimal adjustment of the saddles for tone. It seems
to me it would be best to adjust it down so that the saddle rests
completely in contact with the slot, rather than suspend between the
two adjustable posts. If the saddle is not ceramic I think I might
switch out for the Tusq saddle moulded to fit Gibson adjustable
bridges. I like the Tusq better than other synthetics, and it is
relatively cheap and quick.
Tony Done
Sep 25, 2012, 3:55:40 PM9/25/12
to
On 26/09/2012 12:42 AM, Kevin Hall wrote:
> Hi Tony;
>
> The ceramic saddles had metal strips under them originally but over the
> years many of those get lost. Then when someone adjusts one side up much
> higher than the other rather than alternating ends the forks of the saddle
> get pinched and chipped in the adjustment screws. They still work fine like
> that.
>
>
It's so long ago I can't remember the details, but I know that at one
> Hi Tony;
>
> The ceramic saddles had metal strips under them originally but over the
> years many of those get lost. Then when someone adjusts one side up much
> higher than the other rather than alternating ends the forks of the saddle
> get pinched and chipped in the adjustment screws. They still work fine like
> that.
>
>
stage I made a metal strip out of a junior hacksaw blade to go under it.
I had no idea that they originally came like that.
0 new messages