Direct quote from Steve:
"From my observations and work, up until the 20's Gibson used spirit varnish on all models until they started introducing the "new finish" - nitrocellulose lacquer (see catalogue pic attached) on a few of the lower models from about 1918 when Lloyd Loar first joined the company until they changed to using it (nitro) on everything by mid 1925, eg. the opaque white top A3, L3 and "sheraton brown" A models of the early 20's. "
Mr. Gilchrist has his own experience and a catalogue reference from Gibson to back up this statement. Read the description from the catalogue: "The new finish is a happy medium between the two extremes of soft, yielding oil varnish and the hard, flint like French polish". This tells me (and Mr. Gilchrist) that Gibson is using something "new" and it is not oil varnish nor spirit varnish. There are other hints provided on that page as well. Does anyone here have an old A3 or Sheraton brown A that has typical lacquer checking / spider cracks etc. to confirm this? When it comes to old Gibsons, I defer to Mr. Gilchrist over just about any living person, other than those that were actually there and I think it is safe to say that they are all gone. Read Steve's post and the attached catalogue pic closely. I wish I had a clearer copy that was a little easier to read. It looks like the instructor in the picture's last name is Eagle. Might be a relation Henry!?
Sean
Last edited by sgrexa; Sep-09-2014 at 10:41am.
PS- Does anyone have access to a better, more legible copy of this catalogue? I would be interested in reading more.
Thanks!
Sean
Well Sean, I would defer to Steve over any living person as well. Point taken.
Now we all know that lacquer does not always weather check. When lacquer does weather check, the "spider" cracks present in the finish are pretty common and pretty easy to tell from similar but much smaller patterns sometimes seen in varnish. Charlie Derrington did an amazing job recreating these with the early Master Models. I quickly browsed through the old late teens and early twenties A3s and Sheraton brown A2s in the Archives. Unfortunately, many of the photos are nowhere near the level of resolution needed to to be of any help. The following photo was borrowed from the Archives and is from a 1922 snakehead A2. If you look very closely to the right of the tailpiece, you can see what I am looking for and how difficult it is to photograph and spot (click the image thrice to enlarge):
I also found what appears to me to be a very obvious lacquer check in this 1924 A2Z (1922 FON):
This checking is near impossible to see on the whitetop A3s but I have not looked all that hard. So I think it is entirely possible that Sheraton brown snakehead As as well as A2Zs may have been finished in nitro. At least some of them. To be honest, just by looking at photos alone, it is tough to tell. Old finish, whether spirit varnish or lacquer, tends to look very similar even in higher resolution photos. It is an interesting debate though, and until I see evidence contrary to what Steve Gilchrist provided, I am going to stay in his camp. Again, if anyone has an old white topped A3 or Sheraton brown late teens or twenties Gibson (or A2Z or snakehead) that might show evidence of lacquer, please photograph and share. Of course, I am all ears if anyone has contradictory evidence as well.
Sean
Last edited by sgrexa; Sep-09-2014 at 3:34pm.
Sean, I actually do. The name of the fellow in the picture's last name is "Charles F. Engle, Director". No relation; after all, my real name isn't Eagle anyway, at least not in English.
Like Adrian and Ken, I believe we are merely talking about two new colors, and are, at the same time, looking at Gibson's usual advertising prose, which was never technically reliable.
Steve Gilchrist observed very well that the Gibson essay on varnish in catalogues J and M (1917 and 1921) was largely copied from Ed Heron-Allen's book "Violin Making-As It Was And Is". The "Advantages of the new Finishes" (on the right) could well be marketing hype.
Since to my knowledge, and with all due respect to Steve, there was no such thing as nitro cellulose lacquer, certainly not in 1917 and probably not in 1921.
As far as I understand, Steve's own varnish ("as a base it has always been shellac in the form of fresh blonde flakes or raw seedlac tears, partly sprayed and french polished") today in new builds and refins might well be closely related to what he found on early '20s Gibsons:
"spirit varnish (...) a combination of shellac (blonde or orange/seedlac) and smaller amounts of alcohol (spirit) soluble tree resins such as sandarac, mastic, copal, etc., (...) has aged exactly like the teens Gibson era with that beautiful fine eggshell crazing patina"
Wouldn't that fall right into Gibson's ideal compromise of "a happy medium between the two extremes of soft, yielding oil varnish and the hard, flint like French polish"?
Anyhow, I happily own an old Gibson mando, which was very nicely refinished by Steve, and I find all of his work stunning and very interesting.
Anytime I see finishes artificially "distressed" like that in the photo above, they always look too extreme to be caused by natural aging and therefore phony looking. I've never seen a vintage Gibson varnish crackle that looked as dense or concentrated as what that pic shows. Obviously there is an art to making something new look old. Ol' Cliff Sargent sure had it figured out.
Well this is getting into some real geek territory but though DuPont did not attempt to patent nitrocellulose lacquer until 1921, nitro and other similar lacquers had been produced for years by companies like Sherwin Williams and others, as far back as 1904 and perhaps earlier. In fact, it took a couple of years to get the patent approved because it was tough to prove there was anything new at all with "Duco" lacquer. The book referenced in the link below is called "Science and Corporate Strategy: Du Pont R and D, 1902-1980" by David A. Hounshell and provides probably more than you want to know about all of this. Even though DuPont did eventually go on to perfect the formula for nitrocellulose, many ignored the patent as absurd and not valid. This did not stop Dupont from selling millions of gallons to Henry Ford and GM and basically reviving the company from a somewhat sordid past. In short, nitro and varients on the theme had been in use for years, and very well could have been used by Gibson as early as 1918 and even earlier. It just wasn't called Duco yet.
http://books.google.com/books?id=6ld...acquer&f=false
Sean
Last edited by sgrexa; Sep-09-2014 at 7:38pm.
Great source, thanks so much, Sean. So Gibson may have actually used nitro as early as 1918.
At the same time, my own varnished MM from 2000 shows signs of varnish checking with no similarity to the "crackle" in the above example (#31; a varnished MM from '99, available at Gruhn's), but more like the larger checking of the '24 A2Z in #30.
Last edited by Hendrik Ahrend; Sep-10-2014 at 3:32am.
Henry it is a great source. I love how it goes on to say that the appellate court judges basically admitted that the science sounded like jabberwocky to them and they simply didn't understand it. They decided to award DuPont the patent anyway based on the fact that they had already sold millions of gallons, therefore establishing a consumer market and were thus deserving of the patent. You think some palms were greased? This was the way business was done in the 20s and 30s and maybe even today but you have to be a lot more careful these days. Sherwin Williams and others finally gave in and decided to pay DuPont a $.04 / gallon royalty AND let them decide the market price! DuPont ended up making back $400,000 of their $500,000 attorney fees in the first year from Sherwin Williams alone. That was some serious scratch in the depression. As to your varnished MM, you should ask Danny Roberts what he thinks is going on with the checking. Maybe they sprayed a clear coat of something over the distressing for protection?
Sean
The lacquer checking phenomenon is all over the mando and actually not quite as large as on the above mentioned A2Z, but nevertheless way different from the crackled effect on my 2005 DMM. This one from 2000 was dear old Charlie's personal MM that he actually played between 2000 and 2003. I'm well aware that he tested various recipes of finish for his MMs. This one just happens to be so brittle that little chunks stick to the bridge, whenever you try to remove it. So it's not just the top coat. But you know what, I'm not concerned and sure won't bother Danny with this - all the way across the pond. I actually like the effect. Thanks for the hint anyway, Sean.
Off-topic: Has anybody ever encountered a script inlay like this, with open "b"?
Last edited by Hendrik Ahrend; Sep-10-2014 at 10:02am.
Henry, are you sure that isn't a Gigson ;>?
Sean
Steve refers to a couple of Flakes that Charlie Derrington sent him for analysis. Those flakes were off of #72058. We concluded that just a few months ago when I asked him a question regarding a Loar neck repair.
Charlie spent many years working on what he felt was the "true" Loar finish. He attempted different formulas until he felt it was perfect. He had his own recipe for the varnish and his own recipe for the French polish. He was very careful to guard his recipes and when asked he would not give the complete formula. Only a very few ever got his actual recipe. Just like Loar, he applied the water stain to the bare wood before applying the varnish. Once level and thick enough he would begin applying the French polish. Charlie sprayed the varnish but the French polish was applied by hand. Charlie was interested in all things mandolin, but the aspect that fascinated him the most was the finish. He felt the major difference from Loars instruments and that of other great builders was the finish. The body dimmensions, neck size, and materials used were fairly simple for a careful maker to replicate, the real difference was in the finish.
Charlie did not just make a recipe and leave it. He constantly worked on it and experimented to see what the results would be. Some experiments he really liked, but it altered the outcome ever so slightly and that was not acceptable to him. He was incredibly bright and loved to discuss just about anything, but anything mandolin was his favorite and finish an incredible subset for him. While he was pretty clear in his mind what was perfect, he was never locked into anything without allowing experimentation to ensure he was right. There was always experimentation and improvisation at the shop. It was an incredible opportunity to work with one of the best. He would not often agree with anyone who did things different from him, but he did not shut them out. He was always ready to share great information and learn from others what they had to teach. It was a highly creative environment where everyone was allowed to grow as they could.
There are many great builders today, and Charlie loved watching them blossom and appreciated what they did, even if it was different from what he did. He wanted to build Loar quality instruments. He was not against any others, but he wanted to do what he wanted. He always loved the work of Steven Gilchrist and several others. He never demanded anyone to do things his way, but just do what you do the best you can. It will be ten years since he was killed in a few months. He is still truly missed!
Have a Great Day!
Joe Vest
I have read that some people think that the secret of stradivarious and other great makers was in their varnish. Their recipes were top secret, and I have read that some even added blood to their formula. They think it's the elasticity in the varnish that makes the instrument sound and breathe the way it does, (or something like that...)
Bookmarks