# Instruments and Equipment > Videos, Pictures & Sound Files >  Post a picture opost a picture of your fake gibson

## f5loar

There are 1000's of these out there to post. Ah go ahead and let's see them. That way those that don't know might get an idea of what exactly should you look for in a true honest to goodness fake Gibson. And if they look too good I'm sure Gibson will step in and take their legal action.

----------


## jimbob

I agree with f5loar...

----------


## Gutbucket

I agree boys, but I hate sitting in court. Kinda cuts in on my golf time.

----------


## MandoHog

Here is one. Early 70's, F5 copy, by Rolfe Gerhardt and Jeff Harrison.
(picture deleted)
Oh well, I have been advised to take this picture off for fear of retribution from Gibson.

----------


## Jim Hilburn

That one's nice, but it's not going to fool anyone into thinking it's a Loar.
Owning such instruments is not a crime and no one is going to take any legal action because you possess it. These instruments were REPLICA's of a long extinct instrument and while the company that made them was still in existence they had stopped making anything that even resembled the original's which is why individuals took it upon themselves to attempt to re-create them.

----------

Paul Statman

----------


## mandopete

Nice try, he he!

----------


## Gutbucket

Geeze, I feel like I'm living in Nazi Germany. The mandolin Police are out there.

----------


## Pen

Proving my ignorance I'm sure - but why would posting a picture of a fake even remotely concern Gibson?

----------


## RLPOOL

Someone is trying to pass this fake off as a Gibson, oh wait this is a Gibson

----------


## woodwizard

Folks... Folks

Gibson IS still making them. And as long as they are you can be asured that they will protect their name. Fake Gibsons are exactly that. Fake and Gibson has every right to take it away from you if they so choose so I would be careful if I had one.

----------


## Scott Tichenor

We have an ex-Gibson employee who in my opinion is being overzealous in predicting the wrath of Gibson's lawyers upon us so he's warning everyone privately. My opinion is this is overblown. I'd recommend you ignore it, but do as you wish. I'm not here to get into the "this is right" or "it's wrong" discussion. Just posting this to let everyone know I'm aware and not too pleased about it, but it's his time to waste as he sees fit.

----------

Paul Statman

----------


## mythicfish

&lt;We have an ex-Gibson employee who in my opinion is being overzealous ...&gt;

S.T. ... you are a master of tact and restraint.

----------

Paul Statman

----------


## Grandude

Ok, so here's a "real fake", (or so I've been told). This is one of the most recognized replicas; one that's been around since 1968. Anyone recognize it?

----------


## Jim Hilburn

Randy Wood?

----------


## Joe Parker

Yes,it was made by Randy Wood and was owned by Roland White for many years.Who owns it now?? JPP

----------


## wayfaringstranger

Here's one that I had a couple of years ago. Good mandolin that I nicknamed floyd (fake + lloyd, naturally).

----------


## Daniel1975

Floyd

----------


## Danny Clark

here is one i recently sold.

----------


## Crowder

That Marty Stuart better watch out. One of Gibson's lawyers is liable to take his mandolin right out of his hands while he's on stage.

----------


## jim simpson

Here's a shot of my (former owned) copy made by Chris Warner. I posted this before in other threads - it seemed appropriate to post again in this one. Has there been a definitive yet on who made Marty Stuart's?

----------


## Gutbucket

They can take mine anytime they want. Just SHOW ME THE MONEY!

----------


## Big Joe

Guys, I have no dog in this fight. You are certainly welcome to do what you wish. I only hope none of my friends are hurt by such blatant advertising of fake instruments. Scott may not think there is much harm is this, but he has never been where I was and has not had to deal with the legal department. 

I will stop informing my friends and you can do as you please. I get nothing out of this in any way whatsoever. From this date forward I really don't care what people do or whatever. If a word of warning from someone concerned for the cafe member is not appreciated, then so be it. Have a Great Day!

----------


## Gutbucket

There's a monument in my home town with my grandfather and father's name on it dedicated to veterens of foreign wars. Some names on that monument never got a chance to come home. Supposedly their sacrafice was in the name of freedom. Ain't nobody gonna take away an instrument I paid for. Ya, I'm waving a flag and my neck might be a tad red. If they do want to take it, I'll smash it. Maybe even with a fireplace poker.

----------

Paul Statman

----------


## Scott Tichenor

If posting an image of a 20 year old fake violates the law, it's news to me. This isn't a forum for selling. If it appeared on the classifieds, that'd be another thing. It's simply unnecessary to employ scare tactics with users. If Gibson has a problem with this they can inform me. I've always been on good terms with David Harvey. He has an account and knows how to post and is free to contact me if this is of concern to him.

----------


## mandopete

One of the points that was being made in the opening of this thread was how one might discern a "fake" Gibson from a real Gibson.

Would any of the experts around here care to comment on what they would look for in trying to make this determination?

----------


## woodyboyd

Just my 2 cents, but Gibson© has bigger problems then this thread and whatever fake mando's may be in/or on the market, like...Quality control and price:D. Most of the "fakes" I have heard and/or played were far better then new ones at ten grand a pop.

----------


## Desert Rose

LOTS of voodoo and mis information here

This is NOT Nazi Germany and no matter what Gibson would like to float about voodoo if anyone thinks the mandolin police can come knocking at your door and demand your mandolin

They better take a LONG read at a couple of related documents

The Constitution of the United Statede of America

Bil of Rights

For starters, these trump anything dreamed up in Nashville

Its quite illegal to make a copy, once it is in the hands of a customer, its still an illegal copy BUT Henry must abide by the above documents no matter what he thinks

You can post the pictures all you want of YOUR copy without fear.

You can even say you have a copy, nobody has the right to enter your home and ask, look or question withour legal search warranty and due process

End of story

Just to add a bit of bona fides to my statements, between 1980 and 1984 I was the senior masterbuilder of Fender Musical Instriments

One of my jobs was to work closely with the CBS Patent and Trademark legal authorities (VERY elite group)When ever a fake Fender was aquired it was my job to instruct the legal minds of the exact points about the instrument in order to asses the legal proceedings to be taken

I learned from the Trademark holders side exactly what they can and CANT do, and what the worrys are from these lawyers side if the copyier gets a smart lawyer what they better not try and do

----------

Paul Statman

----------


## f5loar

I see there was a genuine "fake" Loar F5 made by MKKirk stolen here in NC yesterday. Looks like his fakes have gotten considerably better after 25 years of practice. Photo posted in the cafe ads if someone can repost it here. Sure hope the theif doesn't try to pass it off as the real deal. How do you spot a fake in 1000 words or less? Don't think I could do that.
Once you've been around over a hundred of the real ones it becomes easier to spot the fakes from a distance. The hardest fake to detect these days is the new Gibson DMM models but I guess they aren't really fakes. But that may be determined by your definition of the word "is" is!

----------

Paul Statman

----------


## nolady

mandolins and guitars are like teenage girls. they all look alike to me. wouldn't know a fake from a real

----------


## MikeEdgerton

> mandolins and guitars are like teenage girls. they all look alike to me. wouldn't know a fake from a real


I ain't going there. In actuality darn near every F5 copy is a fake Gibson in a sense, if Gibson isn't chasing down the private builders and the pacrim builders, I don't think they are going to be concerned about a few copies made over the years, then again I do have an eraser on my pencil.

----------


## Tom C

They are not fakes. -Just replicas.

----------


## f5loar

Geniune authentic exact duplicates

----------


## woodyboyd

> Geniune authentic exact duplicates #


...but better

----------


## wantaloar

Since this thread was started to show how to tell a fake Gibson from a real one  I am going to post a number of Real Vs. Fake photos so you dont get duped. These are a few areas to look for, but certainly not all of the ways to detect an impostor

-Peghead Front and Back should be Maple Dyed Black. Not EBONY WOOD like this fake.

-The" Modeling" of the carved shape of both front and back are not correct. 
The circle that is formed at the end of the scroll should continue its "circle like shape", not oblong or egg shaped such as this fake

-The scroll begins to "rise" at the sides farther from the end unlike a real Gibson

-The linings that secure the top and back to the sides are mahogany instead of basswood which Gibson used during the 1920's

-The label appears to be tampered with, note the changed numbers and the 8 which appears to have been added

-The top and back were removed at one point (look next to the binding on this side view)

I hope this is just the beginning of more detailed photos documenting these fakes. Good Luck and always have it checked out by an expert whenever in doubt. Thanks Sam
Here is the Fake F Scroll

----------


## wantaloar

Real F scroll

----------


## wantaloar

Fake Headstock with ebony wood

----------


## wantaloar

Real headstock with Dyed maple wood

----------


## wantaloar

Scroll beginig at the sides rather than at the 12 oclock position Fake

----------


## wantaloar

Real scroll on a real Gibson

----------


## wantaloar

Side of FAKE top and back removed

----------


## wantaloar

Side of Real Gibson

----------


## wantaloar

Fake label

----------


## wantaloar

Back of FAKE headstock (Ebony)

----------


## wantaloar

Back of headstock (Real)

----------


## wantaloar

Fake label Close-up

----------


## wantaloar

Lining FAKE with mahogany instead of Basswood.

Last one Thanks Sam

----------


## wantaloar

FAKE Gibson Script

----------


## wantaloar

REAL Gibson Script

----------


## f5loar

Standing the 2 side by side would be of great help in seeing an overall difference. With a label like this one it was meant to fool someone. You are comparing a mid 20 Fern fake to an early 20's flowerpot so harder to compare details in inlay however I see the fake did not use the "tit"on the "T" or the dot over the "i".

----------

Paul Statman

----------


## Stephanie Reiser

Boy, I never realized that some of those fakes went so far as to make a counterfit label. To me, it is one thing to build a Gibson "look-alike" for your own amusement, or whatever . It is totally different to counterfit that label in an attempt to actually fool someone for capital gain. Hopewfully THOSE days are over with.

----------


## Jim Hilburn

If you ask me, THIS is a real F Scroll.
Courtesy of Darryl Wolfe.

----------


## f5loar

The days of faking the labels with actual in line serial numbers might be over but there are already 100's out there that by now have been naturally distressed over 30 years and look more like the real thing then you could ever imagine. It's like I tell a lot of those ebay sellers that say they have this when they obviously have that.... get a 2nd opinion when in doubt. Same goes for those of you who might think you have come across a deal on a Loar. It might not be such a good deal when you find out you bought a fake.

----------


## Jim Hilburn

I've yet to see one of these "convincing" fakes.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

Adding another dimension to the discussion. #

Where do you place many of the altered Gibsons made 1950's through 1976 (circa)? I am talking here about the F-12's (etc.) that have been converted to pre-war F-5 appearence. #

They are real Gibsons but not real F-5's. #Many of these look absolutely super and sound wonderful too. #These would be potentially very hard to spot I would think.

Concerning the question of owning a "fake" Gibson. #The company can take any "position" it wants but last I heard it does not have its own police force and court system. #

I believe the only crime committed was in making the copy (in fact at the time it was done was it clearly a crime?) and possibly the purchase of the fake by the first owner (not sure about that either). #

Gibson sued Ibanez for their copies not Bill Monroe who owned one.

Besides some of those folks who made F5 copies have since passed away along with the first owners in some cases. #Winning a case against person far down the chain in terms of time and ownership in a court of law would cost much more than it would possibly be worth. #There is a limit even to things lawyers will try.

(I'm not sure about that last part.  )

----------


## Jim Hilburn

I think the conversion F-12's were the first attempt to increase the number of mandolins that had the Loar sound, specifically to get the Monroe sound or at least the bluegrass sound. In the process the secrets of how the instrument was constructed were revealed which led to making them from scratch.
Someone had to do it.

----------

&lt; Gibson sued Ibanez for their copies not Bill Monroe who owned one. &gt;

I didn't know Bill Monroe owned an Ibanez-copy Les Paul guitar. I thought he was pretty much an acoustic type guy.

----------

BTW, the only things on a Gibson F-5 mandolin that Gibson "owns" are the Gibson script logo and the bell-shaped truss rod cover. Gibson did own the patent on the adjustable truss rod but that ran out before WW2.

They don't now and never have owned the scrolls.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> Neptune: I didn't know Bill Monroe owned an Ibanez-copy Les Paul guitar. I thought he was pretty much an acoustic type guy.



Well I guess there are a lot of things folks don't know about Bill Monroe. #But one thing we do know is that he owned and played an Ibanez F-5 copy. #

I assume that your comment was in jest but if not Gibson also filed suite to stop production of the Ibanez F-5 mandolins did they not?

This was in the late 1970's.

----------


## Gail Hester

I've had the oportunity to work on several of these copies and while a couple were great sounding mandolins I don't think they would have fooled anyone as being the real deal. #Here is a picture of a great sounding Sargent that we used to own, before it got a makeover.

----------


## cooper4205

> I assume that your comment was in jest but if not Gibson also filed suite to stop production of the Ibanez F-5 mandolins did they not?
> 
> This was in the late 1970's.


Gibson didn't sue them over F5 copies.

----------


## Jim Hilburn

At that point mandolins were still completely off Gibson's (Norlin) radar. Electric guitars was where the action was.

----------


## f5loar

And those Ibanez copies didn't even look close to a 20's F5. They didn't use the logo name either. As far as the 50's/60's/70's conversions whether it be the F12 or the F5 if it was altered to look like something it's not it's a fake. Anything other than the real thing is a fake.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> f5loar: And those Ibanez copies didn't even look close to a 20's F5. They didn't use the logo name either. As far as the 50's/60's/70's conversions whether it be the F12 or the F5 if it was altered to look like something it's not it's a fake. Anything other than the real thing is a fake.


Yes they are fake F5's but they cannot be fake Gibsons since they were made there -- I probably should not have even brought the topic up in this thread -- it is an apples and oranges thing.

As to the legal actions of Gibson vs. Ibanez, what did happen then? #I recall a conversation at the Columbus Folk Music Center in Ohio (must have been around 1973) about legal action between the two companies concerning an alleged the violation of some aspect of the F5 mandolin construction. Also sellers of those Ibanez mandolins often offer them as "law-suite" models.

----------

Gibson did not sue Ibanez or any other Japanese company over mandolins of any kind. They didn't. It didn't happen. Sellers often refer to _any_ instrument made in Japan in the 1970s as "lawsuit" instruments. They do that either from their own ignorance or hoping to profit from the ignorance of potential buyers.

The lawsuits were about the electric guitars being imported at the time.

Gibson has yet to attempt to take a counterfeit instrument from an _individual_ through the courts. That doesn't mean they will never try, it only means they have not done so yet. They did file suit against a retailer and forced that retailer to buy a counterfeit banjo _back_. I guess that comes pretty close to taking an instrument away from a private owner.

----------


## Bluegrass Boy

I recently was in a jam with Nugget #1, which as a Gibson copy, complete with Gibson logo and flowerpot. Cool old instrument.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> Neptune: Gibson did not sue Ibanez or any other Japanese company over mandolins of any kind. They didn't. It didn't happen. Sellers often refer to any instrument made in Japan in the 1970s as "lawsuit" instruments.


Thanks for the infomation and clairification. Sounds like the Gibson "mandolin lawsuit" is essentially a urban legend then.

----------


## MikeEdgerton

> Thanks for the infomation and clairification. #Sounds like the Gibson "mandolin lawsuit" is essentially a urban legend then.


Bernie, This is a recent thread that contains a link to the lawsuit story.

----------


## Jim Hilburn

When Kendrick Amplifiers of Austin decided to make a guitar called "Pearly Gates" after Billy Gibbon's famous burst Gibson "persuaded" them to change some features including the body shape. I don't think they felt like going to court over it.

----------


## Spruce

_"At that point mandolins were still completely off Gibson's (Norlin) radar. Electric guitars was where the action was."_

Yeah, Gibson really _nailed_ those electrics back then, didn't they....

----------


## mrmando

Here's a Gibson copy that wasn't very good ... but even Gibson thought it was a Gibson!

----------


## Gutbucket

What the.....?

----------


## sides7

I purchased this mandolin in the 1970's new. it was called a "Kopt Kat" as is a copy of the 1970's Gibson F-5. It took it a long time to open up, but seems to getting better every day. It is definatly a keeper. Craftsmanship is vey good and it's a very structurally sound instrument. I will never part with it.
Sides7 below is another couple of pictures

----------


## dirty harry

None of the Replica's I have scene on the Cafe look very good. Save one!
Enter the lesson. #If one builds an exact replica Master Model Loar, it will fool almost everyone.
Just ask Gruhn............
Many are called few are frozen....... # #or Chosen

 # #

----------


## woodwizard

A 1970 Gibson I'm told is a bad Gibson example to copy. I had one once with the fancy inlays on the fretboard. They sold for about 1499.00 in 1970. I gave $1500 in 1980 for it and sold it in 1990 for $1500. Seemed like the back wood on any of those were all sort of plane jane.

----------


## wantaloar

> I recently was in a jam with Nugget #1, which as a Gibson copy, complete with Gibson logo and flowerpot. Cool old instrument.


If you looked inside that Nugget #1 you will see a label that states that it is a Gibson copy with Mike's signature. That mandolin was never made to be passed off as a genuine Gibson. And oh yeah it sounds great, even better when the owner plays it.

----------


## wantaloar

Here is a full frontal view of the mandolin that I showed earlier. Seller stated it was a 1927 Gibson F5 "Fern", He also stated that the following items had been changed by him since he owned it in the early 1970's
-Fret board replaced
-Bridge replaced
-Pickguard replaced
Truss Rod cover replaced
Other than those mentioned above most people would be fooled upon first glance that it was not a real Gibson. The difference with this one compared to the others shown, is that this was being passed off as the real deal.

----------


## wantaloar

Here is the Back

----------


## jim simpson

Back when I owned the Chris Warner that I posted in this thread, I was playing it at a jam at Sunset Park (West Grove, PA - r.i.p.). A fellow with a 70's era Gibson looked at mine and stated "now there's a real Gibson". He was surprised and I think bummed when he realized that the Warner was not Gibson. He was not happy with his Gibson.

----------


## Rocky Top

> Here's a Gibson copy that wasn't very good ... but even Gibson thought it was a Gibson!


I saw that on ebay earlier today and was puzzled by the Nouveau name on the headstock, but Gibson on the diamond shaped inlay. I Goggled Noveau and found this- http://reviews.harmony-central.com/reviews....1 . Now in this article, it's talking about a guitar, but I figure that the Nouveau mandos probably have the same basic story.

----------


## Bill Snyder

There have been several previous threads on Nouveau mandolins. They were a Gibson offering several years ago. I do not recall any positive reviews given of them on any of the old threads I read.

----------


## Salty Dog

This thread reminds me of a book I read a number of years ago by a fellow who billed himself as "The Furniture Doctor" - I think he also had a newspaper column. #From memory, he was an antique furniture expert particularly expert on antique chairs. #On the side, he was quite expert also at faking antique chairs. #He claimed his greatest dilemma was the few occasions that he (as an expert) was asked (probably paid) to authenticate one of his own fakes. #Should he show his expertise by identifying it as a fake or promote his expertise by authentication? #He claimed one of his chairs was still in the Ford museum at the time he wrote the book (not necessarily one he authenticated). #My point is that there might be fakers out there who are good enough to fool the experts, but to do so might require being recognized as an expert; possibly being asked to authenticate their own work.

----------


## Spruce

_"My point is that there might be fakers out there who are good enough to fool the experts, but to do so might require being recognized as an expert; possibly being asked to authenticate their own work. "_

Loars ain't chairs or guitars or even violins, for that matter....
It's an _extremely_ difficult object to fake, although threads like this one will be invaluable to anyone who might want to tackle it in the future.... #  

I'll go out on a limb here and say that there is not a single fake "Loar" floating around out there that is masquerading as the real deal....
Which is more that you can say about some "fine" "old" Italian violins that are kicking around out there....
Or Strats. #Or Les Pauls. #Or chairs....

And, in 100 years, when you run into a Gibson MM or DMM with fake labels and 100 years of wear on it, it wouldn't pass muster either, despite their claims that they are "virtually indistinguishable from an original." #(Their words, not mine)....
The list of neglected "tells" is pretty long.....

----------

carleshicks

----------


## wantaloar

Charlie told me at Loar Fest 06 that Gibson puts security features within the construction of the Distressed MM so it would never be passed off as a real Loar. I dont know if they are in all master models or just the distressed, maybe Big Joe can help with this one.

----------


## Spruce

_"Charlie told me at Loar Fest 06 #that Gibson puts security features within the construction of the Distressed MM so it would never be passed off as a real Loar."_

Yep...

But I was referring to the build details, and how hard they are to replicate....
Points, buttons, F-holes, scroll, inlays, etc.

----------


## jasona

On this topic, do all Loars have all of the hallmarks of Loars? In other words, what is the degree of acceptable variability on allows when judging a Loar to be legit?

----------


## f5loar

yes,some of the time, maybe, not always, more than likely,within certain limits,near likeness,sure,no.
Does that answer the question?

----------


## Spruce

Yes....

----------


## JEStanek

DMM Lowjack? Bluetooth trussrod?

I'm interested in how much Loar makes it a Loar. At what point of diminishing originality does a Loar lose its luster? Refinish, hardware, binding/points, fingerboard/frets or neck, baked in an oven- rebuilt after smashing... I would imagine still a Loar! What if it is rebacked or topped? Maybe the top is more critical? 

I suppose as there is a continuum of changes to originality there would be a similar continuum in price the instrument could capture and they all still be called Loar... I guess you really need that signed label in there at least...

Jamie

----------


## Mark Walker

> Charlie told me at Loar Fest 06 #that Gibson puts security features within the construction of the Distressed MM so it would never be passed off as a real Loar. #I dont know if they are in all master models or just the distressed, maybe Big Joe can help with this one.


I doubt too much should be revealed - lest it allow those crafting 'replicas' to embed said 'security' features into the fakes! #But it would be interesting to know if those 'security' features were in all Gibsons or just certain ones.

Interesting thread though. #I thought the sequence of 'real vs. fake' photos in the previous pages (thanks to 'wantaloar') were very beneficial. #I had no idea about those little 'details' which differentiate the 'real Gibsons' from the 'faux' versions. #(Not that I'm looking for either - but interesting nonetheless!)

Thanks to all the folks posting on this topic! #

----------


## Spruce

_"I doubt too much should be revealed - lest it allow those crafting 'replicas' to embed said 'security' features into the fakes!"_

Some violin makers are imbedding metal "signiture" tags in the blocks on their fiddles that will show up on x-ray...

It's still going to be a mess sorting things out in 150 years or so in the violin world...

Much more of a challenge than it will be sorting out the real F5s from the fakes...
(As of now, anyway... # #)

----------


## Desert Rose

The security feature used is a computer micro chip

Gibson is not the only maker using this

Scott

----------


## Big Joe

Actually Gibson did not use a micro chip in the MM or DMM. It is the details in the build that you do not see that will be the tells. An Xray will quickly reveal the real from the MM or DMM. No need for any micro chip. 

Most experts can tell the difference from the MM or DMM and the original Loar without having to do an xray, but there are a couple DMM's that have fooled some experts. Hope this helps.

----------


## jasona

> An Xray will quickly reveal the real from the MM or DMM. No need for any micro chip.


Like this?

----------


## Spruce

_"....but there are a couple DMM's that have fooled some experts."_

Well, there are "experts" and then there are _"experts"_...

For instance, in the violin world, there are really only 2-3 "go-to" shops for authenticating a violin....
Charles Beare in London being one of them....

So-ooo, there are probably only a few folks I'd trust with authenticating a Loar, and some of them hang out around here...
A few good close-up shots of certain areas on the instrument-in-question posted here would go a long way to telling whether it's real or not. #
Which is what this thread is all about, I guess.... # #

----------


## Spruce

> Originally Posted by  (Big Joe @ Jan. 03 2008, 21:47)
> 
> An Xray will quickly reveal the real from the MM or DMM. #No need for any micro chip.
> 
> 
> Like this?


Whaddoya got, a _lead_ pickguard on that thing??

----------


## jasona

> Originally Posted by  (jasona @ Jan. 03 2008, 21:17)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Originally Posted by  (Big Joe @ Jan. 03 2008, 21:47)
> 
> ...


I've always heard it said that mass adds to tone...

----------


## Gutbucket

Here's my Mandolin. Inspired by Mr Monroe. I named it "Rawhide".

----------


## Gutbucket

Here's the Headstock. Sorry about the bad flash.

----------


## Kip Welty

anyone ever see a lefty fake ?

----------


## Stephanie Reiser

Gutbucket, interesting mandolin you have there. I think that even a novice such and I can tell it isn't a loar, but who cares. I'm sure you enjoy it very much.
Question, though: Is it at all possible that your nut is on backwards?

----------


## Gutbucket

I think it is just poorly cut. I'm thinking of having some voo-doo done on that old relic. Plus some setup. It plays easy, but the tone is shallow and cramped. Well you know what I mean. It could be fuller. It is a great conversation piece at Jams.

----------


## jim simpson

Gutbucket,
Do you know who made your mandolin?

----------


## Gutbucket

I found it in a hollow log. Email me and I'll tell you the real story.

----------


## markishandsome

> Sellers often refer to any instrument made in Japan in the 1970s as "lawsuit" instruments. They do that either from their own ignorance or hoping to profit from the ignorance of potential buyers.


I usually see these listed as "lawsuit _era_" instruments, which is more historically accurate. It's like calling a 1924 F4 a "Loar era" F4.

----------


## Rroyd

"Found it in a hollow log."? That's a likely story. I knew a fellow who played an Ibanez Les Paul copy with the F-5 style peghead, and the girl friend of the bass player got mad at him one night, and when they were loading up after their gig, she stashed his guitar under a dumpster. So that's where its second owner found it. (He got it back when he walked into a club 200 miles away and 3 years later and saw it being played on stage. When he described a couple of distinctive dings he had put in it, the fellow looked over the guitar and then just handed it back to him.)

----------


## Gutbucket

The former owner past away, and I think he's buried in Rosine Kentucky

----------


## Rroyd

Here's one from Randy Wood, Jan. 10, 1970, #4. It was a fine instrument right out of the gate, and the years haven't altered its quality a bit, except maybe a little in appearance, as distressing wasn't the vogue then.

----------


## Rroyd

Here's the back. Looks a lot better than the front, distressed by many years of playing and an encounter with the airlines.

----------


## Rroyd

Here's the label. You can see the date and some of the signature. The previous photo shows what I believe to be replacement tuners; I'm sure the originals were closer to those found on the old Gibsons, although I don't believe the peghead was redrilled.

----------


## Gutbucket

Nice Fake. Hows it sound? Dumb question. If Randy built it, it probably sounds sweet.

----------


## Gutbucket

That sounded real nice. Lloyd would be right proud.

----------


## cooper4205

anybody see the <a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/1988-Kentucky-KM-1000-Mandolin-F-5-F5-F-style_W0QQitemZ270209780717QQihZ017QQcategoryZ1017
9QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem" target="_blank">converted Kentucky KM-1000</a> on ebay?

----------


## Rroyd

The Wood copy sounded great right out of the box it was shipped in. #The top was relatively thin, and I remember wondering if that was a compromise for instant tone which might eventually deteriorate, but it still sounds great nearly 40 years later, so I guess it wasn't. #It originally had a rectangular case that was a great copy of the 20s cases.

----------


## f5loar

I'm sure Randy could tell you about the tuners but seems I remember in those days before Gibson came out with their new revamped F5 in 1971 with open back tuners that these Kluson closed back Gold tuners were the best you could get at the time.

----------


## swiba

Hey Cooper,
 I have been biding on that Kentucky for 2 days now and right at the end with 2hrs. left the seller rejected by bids for lack of points on ebay. Go figure, Now that I have a little pocket change to buy a conversational piece the guy refuses to sell it to me?

----------


## Rroyd

I was able to contact the original owner of Randy Wood #4, and those are the original tuners, so F5Loar's recollections are better than mine.

----------


## Jim Hilburn

I'm sure you had to take what you could get your hands on in those days. It was tough when I made my first mandolin in '79. Like that bridge with the big wheels.
Randy was getting very close to the original when you consider that there weren't any prints or books to order up. I'm sure he had a lot of access to some originals though.
What's up with the bridge being so far to the rear?

----------


## niaflsbob

JUST MY OPINIONS; NEVER COULD FIGURE OUT WHY SOMEONE WOULD PUT " THE GIBSON" ON THE HEAD STOCK OF A MANDOLIN THAT WASN'T A GIBSON. TWO EXAMPLES. WAS AT A FESTIVAL A WHILE BACK WHEN A GUY HANDED ME HIS MANDO TO PLAY. IT WAS ALRIGHT, TO BE GENEROUS. AFTER PLAYING IT AND NOT BEING OVERLY IMPRESSED I COMMENTED THAT "IT SEEMED NICE' IT WAS THEN HE DISCLOSED THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY AN ALVAREZ THAT HE HAD SOMEBODY INLAY "THE GIBSON" ON THE HEADSTOCK. SO WHAT WAS THE POINT OF TAKING AN AVERAGE MANDOLIN AND PAYING MORE TO MKAE IT SEEM (AT LEAST VISUALLY) SOMETHING IT WASN'T? AND THEN THIS WEEKEND I PLAY A GREAT SOUND MANDOLIN MADE BY A VERY OBVIOUSLY TALENTED MAKER THAT AGAIN HAD "THE GIBSON" INLAID IN THE HEADSTOCK. WHY NOT BE PROUD OF YOUR WORK AND PUT YOUR OWN NAME OR BRAND OR WHATEVER ON THE HEADSTOCK INSTEAD OF TRYING TO MAKE PEOPLE THINK IT WAS A GIBSON? I AM IN NO WAY SLAMMING GIBSON, BUT WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF FAKING A BRAND NAME?

----------


## swiba

In my opinion as for me I was interested in buying the one that Cooper posted about a couple of posts up. My sole intention for buying it was as a conversational piece to take to festivals and jams. After all you still only have a Kentucky when the night is over.
 Others see financial gain   Some poor MAS person not knowing what to look for or what they are looking at finds what apperars to be a gibson for a couple of thousand dollars cheaper from someone who takes the label out and replaces it with one they made on their computer. 
 I am sure everyone has their own opinion on this matter but I would have to say if your coping a Gibson most of the time it would be for financial gain where it be from the lawsuit companies of the 70's or joe shmo down at the pawn shop.
 I think this is why is pays to know your instruments inside and out. But like I said it's just my opinion.

----------


## K3NTUCKI8oy

Gibson mandolins to me are the #1 model look of a bluegrass mandolin.If anyone
is actually capable of reproducing one with their own 2 hands I say well done!
I'll buy 1 for sure....lol

Sorry there Big Joe.

----------


## Mike Bromley

> Back when I owned the Chris Warner that I posted in this thread, I was playing it at a jam at Sunset Park (West Grove, PA - r.i.p.). A fellow with a 70's era Gibson looked at mine and stated "now there's a real Gibson". He was surprised and I think bummed when he realized that the Warner was not Gibson. He was not happy with his Gibson.


I know why....I have a 1975 F5, that was stifled by gobs of varnish, had no recurve, and although outwardly cute, was thin-sounding and all but useless as a bluegrass mando.  I "Monroed" it, cleaning the lacquer off the top, which helped.  A luthier pal of mine took it on, thinned the top and stripped a mountain of lacquer, which greatly improved the volume, but the tone remains sort of lifeless.  Nice to play physically, but it doesn't hold a candle to today's 9-models, nor my new Triggs, which literally kicks a**.

----------


## f5loar

Lacquer on a 70's Gibson F5?  Quote from the 1975 Gibson F5 catalog:
"Gibson uses a rare European Varnish on it's mandolins that requires 30 days just to apply. The ultimate finish doesn't just look beautiful while it protects the instrument's rare woods...it actually compliments the tone of the instrument." 
From a 1973 Gibson mandolin one-page model spec. sheet on all models from that year including the F5:
"High Gloss Varnish Finish"
While it might have been a thick varnish finish applied to a rather thick top, sides and back in the 70's it was still varnish. 
I stand to be corrected as usual.

----------


## fredrob

I simply don't understand given the amount of work it is to build a carved mandolin that someone would put another name on the peghead

Fred

----------


## kidgloves2

One thing that gets me is Gibson picks and chooses who they go after. PRS Guitars had to stop making single cutaway guitars because Gibson claimed they copied the Les Paul design. And they aren't the exact shape of a les paul. PRS won their case in court and can make them again. I'm pretty sure a lot of other big companies made knock-offs that more closely resembled a les paul, Like Guild, Ibanez and a bunch of others.

Which Leads me to Mandolins. Doesn't Gibson own the F style design? Or is the design so old now that it's public domain? It seems like there are a lot of companies and private builders taking away business from gibson. If you consider all of the companies as one big threat, which is the case, what percent of F-style mados are Gibson's these days? I bet it's small. When I'm in the market for a new one, I'm not thinking gibson. It will be either Collings or Weber. Or a private builder like Andy Poe. 

Why wouldn't Gibson want to get rid of all of them? Whether they're fakes or F-style in general.

----------


## MikeEdgerton

Gibson waited too long to claim the F and A style mandolins as their own. They were too busy going after the guitar builders.

----------


## Andrew B. Carlson

I'll bump this one. 

  Are there still builders out there that make Gibson replicas including "The Gibson" on the headstock? Or are they more nervous than they were in the 70's?

----------


## baptist mando55

probably not its a different world today.

----------


## f5loar

Gibson Co. seems to do little about the fakes of the past so I doubt they would do much for any made today.  Where was Gibson Co. on this last fake on ebay?  They allowed it to go on and bring the value of a real one. What has Gibson Co. done about the 1000's of  fake imports of A and F models using the Gibson logo and labels with serial nos?  Even a major TV show exposed a Fake Gibson mandolin.  It has been reported to the Gibson Co. and they do nothing.  I've not seen any current builders that are well known use the Gibson name in vain but you do see quite a bit using inlays and exact body shapes to the point it only lacks the logo and labels.

----------


## Bill Bradshaw

I guess if someone from the Gibson Company wants this one, they are welcome to it.

Bill

----------


## mrmando

Is that one a fake? We don't often see the widebodies being copied.

----------


## Bill Bradshaw

> Is that one a fake? We don't often see the widebodies being copied.


Well, it was given to me, and when I sent pictures to someone at Elderly to help figure out what it was, he told me it was a fake.  I was really surprised and said something like, "Really, how can you tell?.  I think he thought I was maybe trying to run a scam or something, but he sort of indignantly said he'd seen hundreds of them and that it was a fake.  I didn't (and don't) have any reason not to believe him though.  I've had nothing but good experiences with Elderly and trust them.  

Bill

----------


## MikeEdgerton

I've never seen that Headstock shape on a Gibson mandolin and I don't see any spec for the A-1 or A-50 wide body that it was made with a different headstock. I've been wrong before. That doesn't mean somebody couldn't have altered it I suppose. Can you post some closer pictures of it? Maybe somebody here can shed some light on it.

----------


## Bill Bradshaw

I'll post some close ups, but it will have to wait for a bit.  Gotta go do some stuff.

BB

----------


## Dobe

My A-5 Loar copy- tip of the hat to so many of the great builders that, early on, did the dirty deed !  
 :Laughing: 

(Fla. now scooped !  Just couldn't take it anymore.)

----------


## Bill Bradshaw

Here are some more pictures of my ugly mandolin if anyone wants to take a stab at figuring if it's a fake or where it might have originated.  It is certainly not in the good company of those other mandos folks posted.

Bill

----------


## MikeEdgerton

It looks like somebody cut off the top of the headstock, either it broke or somebody didn't want to have the serial number there any more. I don't think it's fake. Look inside the f-hole towards the neck with a flashlight. Is there a number stamped on the inside? It will be kind of hard to see.

----------


## Bill Bradshaw

> It looks like somebody cut off the top of the headstock, either it broke or somebody didn't want to have the serial number there any more. I don't think it's fake. Look inside the f-hole towards the neck with a flashlight. Is there a number stamped on the inside? It will be kind of hard to see.


I can't see anything up towards the neck, but there is "S  14" and maybe a "C" inside the treble hole.  I can't see anything on the head block either.

Bill

----------


## MikeEdgerton

The S14 looks like a Harmony Date code but there's no way that was made in 1914. Can you take a picture of the top of the headstock? Is there a truss rod under the truss rod cover (yes, I'm serious)?

----------


## Bill Bradshaw

> The S14 looks like a Harmony Date code but there's no way that was made in 1914. Can you take a picture of the top of the headstock? Is there a truss rod under the truss rod cover (yes, I'm serious)?


I had a couple of younger sets of eyes look at the numbers.  The "S" could be an "8" or  even a "9", but they agreed on the "C" and "14".

The surface of the end of the headstock on the back side, where it is angled, is pretty rough, but the photo may not do it justice.  

There is a truss rod under the cover.

Thanks for taking the time to mess with this.

Cheers,

Bill

----------


## RayMan7

> I guess if someone from the Gibson Company wants this one, they are welcome to it.
> 
> Bill


I`m not from Gibson, so I guess I dont count? lol Looks like it had pots in there, musta been electric once..

----------


## Bill Bradshaw

> I`m not from Gibson, so I guess I dont count? lol Looks like it had pots in there, musta been electric once..


Yes, it did have some non functioning electrics when it was given to me.  And heck yeah you count.  You can have it if you want to come down here to get it.  Show up on a Tuesday and we can go to the local jam where you can try it out.

 :Smile:  Bill

----------


## MikeEdgerton

I think it's a Gibson that somebody messed with the headstock on. That looks like somebody cut it off.

----------


## Bill Bradshaw

> I think it's a Gibson that somebody messed with the headstock on. That looks like somebody cut it off.


Thanks Mike.  Maybe it's time to think of it a little more respectfully; ugly as it is.  

Cheers,

Bill

----------


## f5loar

If the FON is 514-C  it is a 1937 A-1 wide body mandolin that someone sanded down the headstock top for some unknown reason.  Logo is correct for 1937 and it has all the specs of the '37-'43  A-1 model.  I'd say it's the real deal.  Does this mean I can get a job at Elderly?

----------

Paul Statman

----------


## Spruce

> ....that someone sanded down the headstock top for some unknown reason.


To fit it into a case??   :Wink: 




> Post a picture opost a picture of your fake gibson....


Not a mando, but.....:

----------


## RayMan7

> Yes, it did have some non functioning electrics when it was given to me.  And heck yeah you count.  You can have it if you want to come down here to get it.  Show up on a Tuesday and we can go to the local jam where you can try it out.
> 
>  Bill



Ahh my car is broken and I cant afford a plane, too bad.  :Frown:  I dont know why you say it`s ugly, looks pretty cool to me!

----------


## RayMan7

> To fit it into a case??  
> 
> 
> 
> Not a mando, but.....:


Dang man, thats the most real looking fake Les Paul I`ve ever seen! If it really is a fake.... 
By the way to fit into a case makes sense, I wonder what they were thinking when they took a saw to their Gibson!

----------


## MikeEdgerton

> If the FON is 514-C  it is a 1937 A-1 wide body mandolin that someone sanded down the headstock top for some unknown reason.  Logo is correct for 1937 and it has all the specs of the '37-'43  A-1 model.  I'd say it's the real deal.  Does this mean I can get a job at Elderly?



Tom, where have you been?  :Cool:

----------


## f5loar

You mean lately?  Just in from 2 weeks at the Grand Canyon and Monroe's 100th BD Party in Owensboro.   Been unemplyed for 15 years and I've got a long way to go before I get SS.

----------


## MikeEdgerton

I just figured you would have bailed me out of this thread before now.  :Smile:

----------


## Bill Bradshaw

> Ahh my car is broken and I cant afford a plane, too bad.  I dont know why you say it`s ugly, looks pretty cool to me!


It's all the holes and cracks I guess.  It's just not as purdy as  my other one.  That's pretty cool that f5loar is gonna go to work for Elderly.  :Grin: 

Thanks again for setting me straight on my "fake". 

Bill

----------


## jim simpson

I got to see Marty Stuart last Thurs. as he played at the Sternwheeler festival here in Wheeling. I got to see close up and hear the Chris Warner "Gibson" copy. It was also a treat to see him play the Clarence White telecaster and Martin D45 (Johnny Cash/Hank Williams) guitar. It nice to see that he's not afraid to take his "treasures" out on the road.

----------

