# General Mandolin Topics > Vintage Instruments >  Astounding New Developments in Loar History Found Here

## Darryl Wolfe

I really hate to link to other forums, but some unbelievable info is being hashed out over here:


http://theunofficialmartinguitarforu...ster/1/?page=1

----------

f5joe, 

Hendrik Ahrend, 

Rush Burkhardt, 

William Smith

----------


## JeffD

Astounding indeed: 




> So.....the real situation here, which is somewhat unfathomable, is that there are more Style 5 instruments out there pre-dating anything recorded.

----------


## pfox14

I just don't think the Gibson shipping ledgers are that accurate. There are so many examples of mistakes and errors in them, that those L-5 serial #s could be just wrong.

----------


## Timbofood

If I had to hand write any of this, it could be interpreted almost any way!  Handwriting is such a variable!

----------


## goaty76

Thanks, I was actually going to put a link too and welcome others join in on the discussion if they had any info to add.  I debated over which forum to make the OP in but went with the UMGF as it was really a guitar question.  Although many here might have more experience with actual Loar instruments.

Phil

----------


## Bob A

Interesting data, but note that the price list of models includes the infrequently-seen A3-Z. Not to say that anything else on the list might be erroneous, but . . .

----------


## Masterbilt

> Interesting data, but note that the price list of models includes the infrequently-seen A3-Z. Not to say that anything else on the list might be erroneous, but . . .


Noticed that too, but it actually says "A-2-Z" and also "F-2" - the type "2" was maybe somewhat smudged so it looks odd, or maybe because of the scan quality. 
Note that the typed "3" has a straight top line (A-3 and L-3), not rounded like the "2". (Attached linked pic from UMGF)

----------


## Darryl Wolfe

I can understand Pauls skepticism, but those ledgers (in the other thread) contain three seperate entries.  Two of those entries are confidently written and have serial number in the 6xxxx range.  There is no confusing 66xxx with any earliest known 73xxx L5 in my mind.  If any one of the entries is valid, the whole thing becomes a new mystery.  All three entries are L5 and imply an instrument made more than a year before the earliest one we have recorded and even before the first known F5 mandolin.

Another interesting aspect is that the serial numbers fall smack in a group of extremely odd other instruments with "Loar" features before Loar instruments.

Tell me how a relative of Julius Bellsons ends up with a 1920-21 mandolin with a truss rod, '22 Loar finish and a 29 fret F5 fingerboard.

Here is something I posted there:


Edit:  Gentlemen, The 67155 and 66825 serial number align exactly with the first recorded truss rods, adjustable bridges, rectangular cases and oddball mandolins with 29 frets in odd finish colors....previously owned by Albert Bellson in Mandolinarchive.com

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/gibson/serial/66719

http://www.mandolinarchive.com/gibson/serial/67328

----------


## FL Dawg

If we throw out the inconvenient ledger data, don't we have to throw all of it out?

----------


## Joe Spann

> If we throw out the inconvenient ledger data, don't we have to throw all of it out?


To say nothing of confirmation bias....

I'm happy and somewhat astounded to have started this ruckus.

Joe Spann

----------


## barney 59

Wouldn't it be possible that they are prototypes or post prototype pre -production models. They must have made a few before they offered them as production models, it would then take a little time -weeks or months(years?) before they had the line up and running. If they made them then why not sell them?

----------


## f5loar

Interesting indeed!  What I see in the 67155 is an L3 based on other examples of the way the "3" is written, so I would not even consider that one to be an L5.  And Darryl is right in saying the other number is not price but rather the case no. it was shipped back out in.  Most all of the numbers line up with my '23 case no. catalog.  So that leaves the 66825 as the real odd ball L5.  I assume this particular one has not surfaced for us to look at photographs. I also find it odd that Bellson did not mention such a thing to Darryl when he interviewed him way back. I look at Gibson Co. similar to other Companies that wanted to stay ahead of the competition by doing research and having proto/one off models that never saw the light of day in production. GM/Ford/Chrysler all have photos of cars they made but did not put into production.  Some called them the "cars of the future".  From some of the odd ball/one off guitars that have been found made by Gibson it's no surprise an odd-ball L5 is out there.  Maybe when it was first made it did not carry the "L5" or Master Model name but rather just a serial no. with XXX as model no.  When it came back for repairs over a decade later they then called it an L5 in the log book because that is what it looked most like.  That leaves us to sheer speculation on what it might or might not be in terms of conforming to what we know as standard L5 specs of the one '23 and other '24s.  I would speculate it started life as an L4 and sometime along the way was just used to experiment on an F hole guitar after the first June '22 F5 or about the same time.  It just kept it's original L4 serial no. in case they converted it back to an L4.

----------

