# General Mandolin Topics > eBay, Craig's List, etc. >  Banner headstock Gibson J-45 at Goodwill, bidders go nuts

## mrmando

Here is a wartime Gibson guitar; I think it is a J-45 but I would be happy to be corrected. 

https://www.shopgoodwill.com/Item/100965833

This instrument is far too cool for Goodwill, but bidding is already at $10K, and a quick Google search reveals that these can sometimes be had for less. This one has either finish cracks or actual top cracks (hard to tell from the photos). Am I missing something? Have Goodwill bidders lost their minds?

----------


## grassrootphilosopher

Let me make you happy  :Smile: 

This is no J-45 but an LG1 or 2 (I think). Look at the waistline of the guitar and the soundhole. The dreadnaught sized J-45 has a wider waistline and the soundhole therefore appears to look smaller. The LG-1 LG-2 is a totally different animal to a J-45 as I think an LG1 is ladder braced and the smaller size gives it a different tone. However the LG models may be braced, they are generally used as fingerpicking guitars or "folksy" flatpick guitars. The price of 10 k for such a guitar (even in totally unused vintage condition) is completely out of the picture. 

If it were a J-45 though the price would not necessarily be out of the ballpark even though it would be considered high.

----------

Eric Platt

----------


## Eric Platt

Agree that it's a wartime LG2. Not sure how one could tell the difference between LG1 and 2 during wartime as they were supposedly the same bracing, just different wood quality. (Per Gibson's Fabulous Flat Tops). The FON isn't in Spann's book. But would fit in with the 1940-45 timeline. Checking the Kalamazoo Gals book, it appears this was probably shipped in 1943 as the neck block appears to be poplar which was used that year (page 185).

Overpriced, IMO. Even a J45 would need some special features like maple back and sides to be worth that much. Especially with a lifting bridge. It does appear the cracks on the top have been repaired.

----------


## Timbofood

That’s cool!
Too rich for my blood.

----------


## sunburst

The bridge is sure shiny...
Looks like the top has had cracks glued and either refinished or over-sprayed, bridge and all.
I've had an early 50s LG-2 for years, in need of a back. I've been waiting for an LG 1,2,3 to show up with a trashed top and neck so I could grab the back.
BTW, my LG-2 is X-braced. I believe only the LG-1 is ladder braced and that is how you tell 1 & 2 apart, in later years at least.

----------


## pops1

> The bridge is sure shiny...
> Looks like the top has had cracks glued and either refinished or over-sprayed, bridge and all.
> I've had an early 50s LG-2 for years, in need of a back. I've been waiting for an LG 1,2,3 to show up with a trashed top and neck so I could grab the back.
> BTW, my LG-2 is X-braced. I believe only the LG-1 is ladder braced and that is how you tell 1 & 2 apart, in later years at least.


You are right John, the LG-2 is X braced.

----------


## rcc56

LG-1's were all ladder braced.  LG-2's were all X braced.  From the outside, they appear identical.  Any minor differences in wood quality or finish color are not consistent enough from instrument to instrument to distinguish one model from the other with any degree of certainty.

If I were to hazard a guess whether this is a 1 or 2, I would lean towards 1 because of the width of the top grain.  But there is no way to confirm that without examining the bracing.

The bridge is coming loose on this instrument.

Gibson did lacquer some of their bridges at the factory in the 30's and early 40's, sometimes quite heavily; but the practice was not at all consistent.  I think the instrument has been heavily buffed; and perhaps oversprayed, perhaps not.  I see no evidence that it has been stripped and re-finished.  But it doesn't matter-- because of the deep scratches and top cracks, this instrument is certainly not worth even $5k, and certainly not 10k or 34k by any stretch of the imagination.

There is something _very_ wrong going on here.  At this moment, the current bid is 34K.  Banner LG-2's typically bring no more than $5,000 or so [though some folks try unsuccessfully to get more], and they probably shouldn't bring even that much.  Either someone is bid fixing, or Goodwill has their decimal point placed too far to the right.

----------


## slimt

Thats not a 10k Guitar at any rate..

----------

Timbofood, 

William Smith

----------


## rcc56

I see that Goodwill was indeed displaying the price with the decimal point in the wrong place.  They have fixed the problem and the current bid is now $3,760.00.

If I was looking for a guitar and came across one in similar condition, with no doubt about the originality of the finish, that's about the most I would want to pay.  And I would have to _really_ like the instrument.  And that would only be if the instrument was confirmed as being an LG-2.

I can't recall if I've ever seen a banner LG-1, but I know some were made.  Does anyone else remember seeing one?

And if anybody is considering placing a bid, be advised that despite the conflicting statements in the ad, the bridge definitely _is_ lifting and will need to be re-glued.

----------

Eric Platt

----------


## Jeff Mando

Being vague seems like a weird strategy when selling a vintage guitar, but it is getting a lot of bids, so what do I know.......?

Gibson usually stamps the model number in ink inside on the reinforcing back ribbon clearly visible through the soundhole -- there is a shot of this, but it can't be enlarged enough to be read clearly..... :Crying: 

People were happy to bid $4722.99 for this without better pictures or even knowing the model number.................amazing!  :Cool: 

There must be a certain psychology at work, that ONLY works online, again - being vague on purpose, something to the effect of "OMG, I found an old Gibson on shopgoodwill, and, wait a minute, it's a BANNER and I'm gonna win it -- I'm probably the only one who noticed it is a banner...........!!!!"  Yep, you and 40 million other vintage guitar fans!  :Confused: 

Last time I checked, $4722.99 is a lot of money!

The big question, "where are all these gullible bidders when I try to sell something online???"

I would accept this as an isolated example, but it seems we discuss something similar almost every week on this forum.

----------

jim simpson, 

Timbofood

----------


## slimt

> The bridge is sure shiny...
> Looks like the top has had cracks glued and either refinished or over-sprayed, bridge and all.
> I've had an early 50s LG-2 for years, in need of a back. I've been waiting for an LG 1,2,3 to show up with a trashed top and neck so I could grab the back.
> BTW, my LG-2 is X-braced. I believe only the LG-1 is ladder braced and that is how you tell 1 & 2 apart, in later years at least.


Actually these banner LG1s were X braced till after the banner logo was dropped.  Then they went to a ladder brace.  These are pretty rare guitars. This is where JT comes in on the Kalamazoo gals. His info is great.

----------

Eric Platt

----------


## rcc56

There may be a reason for the increasing bids on this instrument.
After careful examination of the pictures, it looks like this one might have a maple back, although the pictures are too dark for me to say so with a certainty.

For those who are enthralled by LG's, SJ's, and J-45's with maple backs, I will add the following caveat:  Most, if not all of the maple instruments of those particular models are believed to have been built with laminated backs and sides.

I suppose _if_ this guitar is indeed maple, some might consider that to be justification for the current price of $4722.  Personally, for that kind of money, I would rather find a really good L-00 or a nice '40's Martin 00-18.

I can find no references to X-braced LG-1's in any source that I have on hand.  Gruhn's Guide and "Those Fabulous Gibson Flat-top Guitars" by Whitford, Vinopal, and Erlewine both specifically state that all LG-1's were ladder braced. 

Sunburst, you might just have to make a new back for your LG-2.  I've got a good recipe for matching the Gibson brown finishes from that period, and it is pretty easy to do.  I'll be glad to pass it on to you if you're interested.

----------

Eric Platt

----------


## slimt

> There may be a reason for the increasing bids on this instrument.
> After careful examination of the pictures, it looks like this one might have a maple back, although the pictures are too dark for me to say so with a certainty.
> 
> For those who are enthralled by LG's, SJ's, and J-45's with maple backs, I will add the following caveat:  Most, if not all of the maple instruments of those particular models are believed to have been built with laminated backs and sides.
> 
> I suppose _if_ this guitar is indeed maple, some might consider that to be justification for the current price of $4722.  Personally, for that kind of money, I would rather find a really good L-00 or a nice '40's Martin 00-18.
> 
> I can find no references to X-braced LG-1's in any source that I have on hand.  Gruhn's Guide and "Those Fabulous Gibson Flat-top Guitars" by Whitford, Vinopal, and Erlewine both specifically state that all LG-1's were ladder braced. 
> 
> Sunburst, you might just have to make a new back for your LG-2.  I've got a good recipe for matching the Gibson brown finishes from that period, and it is pretty easy to do.  I'll be glad to pass it on to you if you're interested.


https://forum.gibson.com/topic/76351-1942-lg-1/

And I as usual could be very much wrong.    I did read as well in 42 ladder brace done.  So who knows.

----------


## rcc56

Well, if Mr. Thomas is correct about wartime LG-1's having X-braced mahogany tops, then the Goodwill instrument would most likely be an LG-2-- its top is clearly spruce.  That is, if it is indeed X-braced.

I have seen at least one war time LG with a mahogany top and banner logo.  That was a few years ago at a store in middle Tennessee.  At that time, everybody just called it an LG-2 with mahogany top.  I don't recall whether or not I checked to see how that one was braced.  And I've heard of a couple of others like it over the years.

But one thing I'm sure of, _nothing_ can be considered to be consistent about Gibson's wartime models.  I've seen mahogany used for tops on J-45's, SJ's, and LG's, maple back and sides on all the available models usually made in mahogany, and even a combination of maple and mahogany for the backs and sides on an instrument.  I've even seen a late L-00 with maple back and sides.  I've seen necks made in 3 and 5 pieces, poplar neck blocks, bridge plates made of what looked like wood salvaged from old palettes, etc.  The order of the day was to do whatever was necessary to get an instrument out the door, despite war time shortages of materials.

While I do not recall seeing one, I would not be at all surprised if there are some war time ladder braced LG's out there, with either a mahogany or a spruce top.  

I've also seen materials substitutions on war time Martins, but they were generally more minor in nature.  One example was a '45 D-18 with celluloid bindings around the top and rosewood bindings around the back.

And whatever the specs and probable model name on the original wholesale invoice, an LG would have to both sound earth-shatteringly good and be in unusually clean condition for me to even consider paying anywhere near the price the Goodwill guitar will bring.  I hope the new owner will be happy.

----------

Eric Platt

----------


## mrmando

The last really expensive guitar I saw on Shopgoodwill was a Ramirez classical guitar with a big repaired crack in the top. It was listed twice -- I'm thinking perhaps the original bidder didn't pay, or there might be a return policy on at least some items.  IIRC the selling price was lower the second time. 

 We'll see if this one comes back.

----------


## rcc56

I don't think it will come back.  LG-2's are very popular right now, and people covet the banner logo.  Despite the generally flat market, LG's have significantly increased in price over the last ten years.  I'm not sure of the reason, except possibly that Chris Stapleton plays one from time to time.  J-45's have also gone up quite a bit.

----------


## sunburst

I've seen at lest one banner J-45 with a mahogany top. They were using anything that would work in those days.

----------


## slimt

> I've seen at lest one banner J-45 with a mahogany top. They were using anything that would work in those days.


I sold a 43 banner J45 last year.  With a mahogany top ,sides and back. And no truss rod. It was a nice guitar.

----------


## rcc56

The war time plant manager's dilemma:  What are we going to run out of this month, and what are we going to do about it?

I think that the only things that Gibson did not run out of at one time or another during the war were pickguard material and thick white binding.  They must have bought a huge supply of it in 1940 or 1941.  At various times, they ran out of spruce, mahogany, steel, and plastic rosette material.

We have no concept of what it was like to live through a world war.  Gas rationing, victory gardens, steel shortages, no new automobiles, etc.  The list goes on and on.

My father was in Patton's infantry.  It changed his life forever.

On my piano is a picture of my father, my grandmother, and my uncle's young wife taken about 1942 or so.  It was taken before Dad turned 18 and went overseas.  My aunt is there because my uncle was already fighting in Europe, and in those days, if a family had a married son in the army, it was common for the young wife to live with her husband's parents.

----------

Bernie Daniel

----------


## John Thomas

Hello, folks, John Thomas, the Kalamazoo Gals guy, here. My ears were burning.

To answer a minor question in this thread, yes, the first issue LG-1s were X-braced. Gibson only shopped 139 of them, 138 in 1943 and 1 in 1944. Like all first-issue Banners, these were beautiful and highly decorated guitars, with multiple purfling top and back and fancy rosettes. Unlike the LG-2s and LG-3s, the LG1s had mahogany tops. The finish was like no other in Gibson's history. Here's my LG-1, shipped June 23, 1943, held by Jennifer Nettles, of Sugarland (Emily Saliers of the Indigo Girls is holding my battered and beautiful went-to-WWII 1943 SJ(:

----------

Eric Platt, 

John Van Zandt, 

Timbofood

----------


## mrmando

There's a stage musical about Sister Rosetta Tharpe that I went to see in Seattle, back when going to stage musicals was something people did. Among the instruments played by the lead actor was a banner-headstock Gibson -- but she was playing it while depicting events that took place in the mid-'30s. By the end of the '30s the show had her already playing a white Gibson SG electric like the one she was known for playing in the '60s.  

I am not a guitar geek by any stretch, as the title of this thread will show ... but even I knew that the use of those two guitars was anachronistic.  That and Goodwill are the only places I've spotted a banner guitar in the wild recently.

----------


## rcc56

That's an interesting instrument, John.  It's quite different from other mahogany topped banners that I have seen, which all had typical period sunburst top finishes.
Is the top finish on your guitar transparent or opaque?

----------


## sunburst

One of the more unusual banner LG-2s I've had come through the shop has a mahogany top, triangular maple neck insert (like mandolins) with no adjustable rod, and the top glued over the neck dovetail. As repairmen we've all heard of those and some of us have had the "privilege" of encountering them. 
I believe, as some others do, that those guitars were re-topped for some reason before leaving the factory.

I have some pictures of part of that repair if anyone wants to see them I can post some, but they aren't very good pics.

----------


## rcc56

Yes, please post them even if they're not clear.  I have heard of them, but have not encountered one.  I have also heard that they appeared fairly often during the war.  The reason for assembling an instrument that way eludes me.

A fellow repairman I know has also encountered a covered dovetail on a Martin.  One more thing to be aware of when executing a neck set.

----------


## sunburst

Some pics then...
The triangle of the maple neck insert is visible through the peghead finish.

----------


## sunburst

When beginning the neck, working my putty knife under the fingerboard extender just never felt right; too much doughy resistance. Turns out there was a spruce shim (edges painted black) under the extender and my knife was going into that.

I didn't know why it was there, so I continued with removing the neck. 
You can see the end of the maple insert in the picture as well as the piece of mahogany top wood and spruce shim trapped between the dovetail and the fingerboard.

----------


## sunburst

Going back a little bit:
I drilled through the 15th fret slot and steamed the neck joint as usual. The dovetail released reasonably easily and the neck would wiggle every which way, but it wouldn't come out! That's when I began to suspect the top-over-dovetail. I sawed through the center of the fret slot with a razor saw and through the top below, then used force to remove the neck, splitting the top wood to the sides of the dovetail.

After some cleanup, these little binding tabs were left.

In order for things to go back together and fit correctly I had to make a new shim to maintain the same neck heel position. Rather than spruce I used rosewood to match the fingerboard.

----------


## sunburst

So here's what I think happened.
Something happened to the top of the guitar; split, damaged by an accident, who knows, but it had to be replaced after the neck was installed. If the fingerboard was already in place, it was removed and the top was removed from the box. The top surface of the rim was cleaned up, removing some wood, and that left the neck heel standing proud of the top surface of the rim, but the top of the dovetail cut down along with the top surface of the rim. The new top was glue on over the dovetail and the spruce shim was added to give the fingerboard a gluing surface with the new, lower top position. I'm not sure if binding was already in place of if it was applied later and slipped under the neck heel, but it resulted in the little binding tabs sticking up.

The binding width looks pretty normal around the guitar, so perhaps the binding went on after the top replacement. Hard to tell.

----------


## Jeff Mando

Interesting, but.............REGARDLESS -- mahogany top, x-braced, maple, etc. -- does any of that make it worth almost $5 grand?  That sounds like top retail to me for a small-bodied Gibson -- certainly not the deal of the century, IMHO, Banner or not.  If it were a Banner J-45, that's different story, but still not a giveaway......

People sure get caught up in these Shopgoodwill auctions.................... :Disbelief:

----------


## John Thomas

> Some pics then...
> The triangle of the maple neck insert is visible through the peghead finish.


All Banners from about late 1943 to mid 1944 had these triangular maple inserts in their necks instead of metal truss rods. The War Production Board issued an order limiting stringed instruments to metal content of no more than 10% of the instruments total weight. At the same time, Martin replaced its metal rods (theirs were non adjustable, of course) with an ebony insert.

Here's a recent video of me playing and talking about my 1943 went-to-WWII trussrod-less SJ:

----------

Eric Platt, 

John Van Zandt

----------


## John Thomas

> That's an interesting instrument, John.  It's quite different from other mahogany topped banners that I have seen, which all had typical period sunburst top finishes.
> Is the top finish on your guitar transparent or opaque?


Thanks! It's transparent. Although Gibson applied a similar finish to the 1920s and 1930s all-mohagany L-0s, this finish is limited, as best I know, to the 139 Banner LG-1s. A couple of better pics (taken inside the old Gibson factory at 225 Parsons Street):

----------

Eric Platt

----------


## Eric Platt

> Thanks! It's transparent. Although Gibson applied a similar finish to the 1920s and 1930s all-mohagany L-0s, this finish is limited, as best I know, to the 139 Banner LG-1s. A couple of better pics (taken inside the old Gibson factory at 225 Parsons Street):


Isn't it the same finish used on the one batch of wartime Kalamazoo KG guitars? Or is yours darker? https://www.williesguitars.com/produ...-kalamazoo-kg/

----------


## John Thomas

> Isn't it the same finish used on the one batch of wartime Kalamazoo KG guitars? Or is yours darker? https://www.williesguitars.com/produ...-kalamazoo-kg/


Yes, I think that it's the same finish as on the Kalamazoo-brand equivalent. Thanks for reminding me!

----------

Eric Platt

----------


## Jeff Mando

John Thomas - the shopgoodwill Banner Gibson appears to be spruce with a traditional Gibson sunburst and single binding -- very different from your guitar.  Would you say the shopgoodwill guitar is an LG-2?  Shopgoodwill guitar also has a trussrod and riveted tuners.

----------


## MikeEdgerton

> ...riveted tuners.


Every set of those tuners I've had in my hands appeared to have a glob of brass just dropped on top of the cog. I never even considered they were using rivets and I don't think they were. Granted, they were all Kluson tuners on mandolins. There were a few that weren't anywhere near uniform.

----------


## Jeff Mando

> Every set of those tuners I've had in my hands appeared to have a glob of brass just dropped on the top cog. I never even considered they were using rivets and I don't think they were. Granted, they were all Kluson tuners on mandolins.


I agree, "riveted" is just the word the internet seems to have adopted for describing wartime Gibson tuners.  I think "pressed in" might be a more accurate term -- all this was supposedly to save a teeny-tiny screw for the war effort......anyway it seems to be a simple way to date a wartime era instrument with reasonable accuracy.

----------

MikeEdgerton

----------


## slimt

I have a single three in a row spare pressed post tuner. From 1946. I am looking for a match for the other side of the peg head.

----------


## John Thomas

> John Thomas - the shopgoodwill Banner Gibson appears to be spruce with a traditional Gibson sunburst and single binding -- very different from your guitar.  Would you say the shopgoodwill guitar is an LG-2?  Shopgoodwill guitar also has a trussrod and riveted tuners.


Yes. It's an LG-2.

----------

Eric Platt, 

Jeff Mando

----------


## mrmando

As I more or less predicted, the Goodwill sale must have hit a snag. The guitar has been relisted; they're calling at a J-45 this time, which we have established it is not. 

There is a reserve, which has not been met at $3500. 

https://www.shopgoodwill.com/Item/101985674

----------

Jeff Mando

----------


## CWRoyds

> All Banners from about late 1943 to mid 1944 had these triangular maple inserts in their necks instead of metal truss rods. The War Production Board issued an order limiting stringed instruments to metal content of no more than 10% of the instruments total weight. At the same time, Martin replaced its metal rods (theirs were non adjustable, of course) with an ebony insert.
> 
> Here's a recent video of me playing and talking about my 1943 went-to-WWII trussrod-less SJ:



WOW!!! 
That SJ sounds amazing. 
I love the Southern Jumbo. 
I have a 1949 Southern Jumbo.
Incredible deep tone, similar to the one you have. 
Bought it when I was 15 back in 1983 for $350 from an old bluegrass banjo player in Moneterey Tenn.

----------


## rcc56

The pictures of the top are clearer in the re-listed offering.
5 top cracks are clearly visible.  Despite visual evidence to the contrary, their staff "Evaluator" still claims "The bridge does not have lift."

The most recent bid was $3600, reserve not met, with 5 hours to go.
If there's a last minute bidding rush, I will be surprised.

I think it more likely that the reserve will not be met and the instrument will be re-listed again; unless Goodwill decides to reconsider their reserve and contacts the high bidder privately.

I suppose that someone might take a chance that the body is maple and put in a high bid.  If any of y'all are considering it, be advised that the bridge will need to be removed and re-glued, there is a likelihood that the cracks will need to be repaired, and it is not unusual for Gibsons from this period to have several loose braces.  The repair bill to put this instrument into good playing condition and address any structural problems could run anywhere from $150 to as much as $1000, depending on the number of glue joints that will have to be addressed and whether or not it will need a neck set.

----------

jim simpson, 

mrmando

----------


## mrmando

Well, at least Goodwill responded to my email by noting in the description that it's an LG-2, although they didn't change the title of the ad.  Perhaps the third time will be the charm.

----------


## rcc56

Auction ended, last bid was $3600, reserve not met.
I won't be surprised if it is listed again.  If so, it will be interesting to see whether or not they list it with the high reserve.

For whatever it's worth, the more recent pictures make me believe the back is probably maple, but I'm not 100% sure.

----------


## Jeff Mando

Guys, help me out!  What am I missing?  I just don't see $3600 worth of fun here.  As an academic exercise, sure, it is an interesting guitar.  As a bargain, it is certainly NOT!

TOP CRACKS.  Hard to get excited about any acoustic guitar with top cracks.  Again, wow!  I don't get it.  Yes, it is a banner.  A repaired side crack I can deal with....But, it has 5 top cracks -- and people are still bidding $3600?  It is a beater.  This MIGHT be a great sounding guitar, but it would only be interesting to me for a bargain price, at $500-700, sure, why not?  But, if you want to pay retail THERE IS NO NEED TO SHOP GOODWILL, is there?  If you want to pay retail, you can go to Carter, Gruhn,  Elderly, Gryphon, etc. and they can tell you the model, the year, what woods are used, etc. and guarantee the guitar to be what they say it is.

But for me the top cracks devalue it by at least half, moneywise.  Desirability-wise it devalues it by much more, IMHO.  There is a reason vintage guitars are advertised as "crack free."

Following this auction has shown us their "staff evaluator" is not an expert in vintage instruments.  For me, the only reason to shopgoodwill for a vintage instrument would be price and they don't want to let this one go cheap it seems.

----------


## rcc56

The thinking that might go along with the $3600 bid might go something like this:

Wow! It's got that ultra-cool banner logo!  And [insert name of favorite singer] plays one that's got plenty of mojo just like this one!  And this might be my only shot at a way-rare maple Gibson!  etc, etc.

I stopped looking for logic in the vintage instrument market a long time ago.

My problem has been that whenever I've gotten a decent old instrument in need of repair at a good price to fix up and sell, I couldn't seem find that $3600 buyer.  Instead, I get people who say "What?  It's not in 100% pristine original condition?  It doesn't have the original strings?  3 frets have been replaced?"

All I know is that if I got the Goodwill instrument at 1/4 of the price and got it into decent shape, I would be very lucky to make a profit on it.

----------

Cobalt

----------


## mrmando

Back for round 3 (identified as an LG-2 this time)

https://www.shopgoodwill.com/Item/102369153

----------


## Jeff Mando

Notice how it suddenly looks smaller now that is doesn't say J-45............................... :Whistling:

----------


## mrmando

Oh boy, another banner Gibson on SGW:

https://shopgoodwill.com/item/141979306

----------


## rcc56

$6666 for an LG????
I know the market has changed since this thread started 2 years ago, but . . .

Either someone is _really_ hard up for a banner LG, or I suspect a shill.
At any rate, they won't get it from me.

I've had a couple of LG's pass over the workbench, and they were decent enough, but $6000 + will buy a much better instrument.
And yes, I see asking prices _are_ way up, but if I did really really want one, it would have to be in much better shape for $6600.

A converted HG-00 will cost $1000 less, and be a much better instrument.

----------


## Jim Garber

43 bids and it ended at $7003. You would have to add the repair bill to that as well.

----------


## Eric Platt

Well, considering what some dealers are now asking for later 40's and 50's Gibsons, am not surprised. Banner headstock instrument prices seem to be taking off in the last couple of years, IMO.

----------

