Loar-signed mandolin banjo?

[mrmando]

Seller is claiming that this mando-banjo has Lloyd's signature on the underside of the head!

A photo would be nice. For $2,999 you'd think the seller could manage to document this particular claim.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Gibs...AAAOSw~otWcd4A

[JeffD]

It would be a legitimate question to ask the seller I would think. I am not an ebay member myself so I can't ask. (I do ebay through a proxy, a friend of mine).

[jtsc]

So interesting. Also, FON 8699-22 - does that mean it was an Factory Order # 8699 and instrument #22 of that production batch? If 8699 is chronological for MB's and other "banjo" instruments, wouldn't that date it to '26 or even '27, right after Loar left Gibson?

[MikeEdgerton]

I'd still love to see the label.

[jtsc]

Here's an eBay listing for a pretty TB-3 with a FON of only 8719, only 20 #'s away and it appears to be a '27.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1927-Vintage...25.m3641.l6368

Did Loar sign anything in 1926?

I've asked the seller for an image and await reply.

[MikeEdgerton]

Did Loar sign anything in 1926?

Possibly his rent check. He was gone from Gibson (according to F5Loar) right after the office Christmas party in 1924.

[G7MOF]

Curiouser and curiouser!

[jtsc]

Seller replied to my inquiry that he is unable photo the signature until he takes the instrument apart and he may take it off eBay for a while until he can do that. He said he saw the signature last when it was cleaned before he posted. Seems absurd that he never thought about taking a pic of the signature. Hey, the whole listing seems absurd.

[northfolk]

Seller replied to my inquiry that he is unable photo the signature until he takes the instrument apart and he may take it off eBay for a while until he can do that. He said he saw the signature last when it was cleaned before he posted. Seems absurd that he never thought about taking a pic of the signature. Hey, the whole listing seems absurd.

To my knowledge you only have to remove four screws that hold the resonator in place?

[MikeEdgerton]

Four thumb screws. That is correct.

[journeybear]

Learned sirs/madams, you seem to not be seeing the elephant in the room. It's a banjolin. It doesn't matter who's signed it, it will still sound like shinola, or that other stuff. Unless it can be demonstrated that Lloyd Loar's sonic design wizardry could somehow have had an extraordinary effect on this item's design and resultant sound production, of course. Yes, as a collectible it might generate some interest, of course. But as an instrument, worth playing and hearing and paying ten times the going rate for similar instruments - not so much. In my humble opinion, of course.

[MikeEdgerton]

Actually, if it had a signed Lloyd Loar label in it it would rewrite history of sorts even if it did sound like shinola. If it has Lloyd's signature on the bottom of the head it is somewhat interesting but no much more. I'm going to guess that it has Jos. Rogers signature on the bottom of the head.

[journeybear]

Oh, for sure. I'm just shaking my head at the thought that a master luthier would have had anything to do with this sort of a contraption. Such a consideration doesn't seem to have perturbed the seller.

[mrmando]

Oh, for sure. I'm just shaking my head at the thought that a master luthier would have had anything to do with this sort of a contraption.

A man who played an electric viola and a musical saw would have had no qualms about going near a mandolin-banjo, methinks...

[Ray(T)]

Possibly his rent check. He was gone from Gibson (according to F5Loar) right after the office Christmas party in 1924.

Could he have signed it "at" the Christmas party? It does have '25 style tuners but these were used in '24.

[goaty76]

If it was an instrument he personally owned he might have put his signature on it.

Phil

[T.D.Nydn]

What's the differences between a mandolin banjo,a banjo mandolin, and a banjolin?

[Jim Garber]

I will bet that the signature is Rogers who signed many skin heads, not LL.

[journeybear]

A man who played an electric viola and a musical saw would have had no qualms about going near a mandolin-banjo, methinks...

What he did on his own time was probably different from what he did on the company's time. I understand he was quite accomplished on the saw, not a mean feat. I usually lump the "instrument" in with other objects of derogation in those kinds of jokes - the others being bagpipes, accordion, bassoon, b*njo, one or two more - even though I have heard some amazing music come from what masters have been able to wring from them. His ventures into electrics ... Well, that may be ascribed to his proclivity for innovation. He'd already conquered acoustic instruments, after all .

What's the differences between a mandolin banjo,a banjo mandolin, and a banjolin?

None, really. Price, maybe.

[Bob Bass]

Hi T.D.Nydn-

Mandolin Banjo (MB) is the term used most frequently here on the Cafe and also in Gibson historical catalog i.d.s for the instrument pictured in the ebay offering- 4 pairs of strings in mandolin tuning, banjo head, neck joining the head at 12th or 10th fret.

Banjo Mandolin is used by some folks interchangeably w/Mandolin Banjo, despite Gibson history and custom here. Some manufacturers have used this and other different terms to describe their instruments in this category. Vega and Orpheum also made frequently seen instruments in this category.

"Banjolin" usually describes the MB configuration w/4 single, rather than paired strings, in mandolin tuning.

It is possible that journeybear was using this term ("banjolin") loosely because of the well-known difficulties in setting up MB instruments with both ease of playing, and good tone w/reasonable (as opposed to too loud or too soft) volume. This sometimes leads MB owners to go to a 4 single string configuration to be able to handle both melody & chord playing. It is easier to set up the 8 string (4 pair) version for melody work, rather than chord work. Persistent application can yield an instrument that does both effectively. Vol Stevens w/the Memphis Jug Band in the late '20s and early '30s comes to mind on this, and it's likely that there are a number of Cafe members who have managed MB w/4 pairs of strings set-ups to handle both melody and chord work.

[journeybear]

Actually, I was using "banjolin" for convenience's sake. I view the term as interchangeable with mandolin-banjo, it just has fewer syllables and letters. Heck, "mandolin" has too many syllables and letters, but I'm stuck with it. I've always gone with double strings, BTW. It would sound too banjo-like otherwise. Or so I'd think. I've never even considered going with single strings on one. The only single-string mandolin family instruments I own are electrics. BTW & FWIW.

[WW52]

I'd think if he was actually going to sign a banjo-lin (for historical purposes) he'd have signed it on a more permanent surface. The skin head is usually the first thing to go.

[MikeEdgerton]

Oh, for sure. I'm just shaking my head at the thought that a master luthier would have had anything to do with this sort of a contraption. Such a consideration doesn't seem to have perturbed the seller.

From the Siminoff website:

Lloyd’s work on banjos was equally astute. Loar developed a new banjo design with a hollow tubular tone chamber supported by spring-loaded ball bearings. This instrument was the foundation of the heralded Gibson Mastertone banjo line and the many pot-assembly hardware derivations that were to follow.

[MikeEdgerton]

I'd think if he was actually going to sign a banjo-lin (for historical purposes) he'd have signed it on a more permanent surface. The skin head is usually the first thing to go.

I suggested it was on the skin, it might be on a label on the rim.

[HonketyHank]

I bet the signature is that of 'J. B. Rogers Jr', the company that supplied many manufacturers with premade banjo and drum heads. Usually this is rather faint and thus could be deciphered as belonging to just about anybody, especially in hazy hindsight. So I second Jim Garber's response, above.