The Gibson "GY" Guitar - February 1919

[Joe Spann]

A rare advertisement for the Gibson "GY" model guitar from the February 1919 issue of Gibson's Sounding Board Salesman magazine.

[allenhopkins]

A '20's round-soundhole GY from the 12th Fret in Toronto, and a Fretboard Journal article on an ultra-rare 'teens GY, with "cat's eye" soundholes in its upper bouts.

[MikeEdgerton]

You know I'd never heard of these. I'm surprised they don't pop up more.

http://www.12fret.com/2013/01/25/gib...y-around-1920/

[MikeEdgerton]

Allen, it's good to see we were both on Google at the same time

[Timbofood]

I bet I can scrape up $30.00 for one! Ha hahahah!

[goaty76]

A '20's round-soundhole GY from the 12th Fret in Toronto, and a Fretboard Journal article on an ultra-rare 'teens GY, with "cat's eye" soundholes in its upper bouts.

I own the example from The Fretboard Journal and wrote that article. It's a really interesting guitar. A couple of days ago I posted about a "Loar-ish" type instrument that had no discernible real market value. That was the one I was referring to .

Phil

[Joe Spann]

Here's another rare Gibson GY model guitar advertisement, this time from the March 1919 issue of the Sounding Board Salesman.

[Mark Gunter]

I own the example from The Fretboard Journal and wrote that article. It's a really interesting guitar. A couple of days ago I posted about a "Loar-ish" type instrument that had no discernible real market value. That was the one I was referring to .

Phil

Phil, in the photos at the fretboard article I could see the label is visible at the right side sound hole, but a picture of the label is not included. Is it the same label that is in the other GY guitar shown in this thread?



Edited to say, in your front-on picture above, when enlarged, a better view of the label was possible for me though still not an ideal view. I can see that the label is in pretty bad shape, but appears to be very similar to other one shown, if not identical.

[goaty76]

Yup, it's the same standard label used on the earlier Army Navy guitars just placed in the upper bout to be seen through the "cat's eye".



Here's a link to a thread on the UMGF (which connecting to hasn't been easy lately) with some more pics. This thread was started when the article first came out. http://theunofficialmartinguitarforu...itar-in-FBJ-25

Phil

[goaty76]

While we're on the topic of these first Gibson flattops just a few days ago Greg Boyd's House of Fine Instruments advertised this one http://www.mandolincafe.com/ads/103924#103924 which has been listed on their website for some time. It's listed as the earliest example of a Gibson flattop ca.1918. However, I see some issues with that claim. I have emailed the store in the past but nothing has changed in their description so I guess they don't agree with me.



Several aspects of the guitar scream out mid to late 20's. The bridge, the logo, the bracing, etc..... The store told me in an email that it has a 1918 FON but didn't state what that number was. Here's a portion of my email response back to them regarding what might be going on :

"Thanks for the quick reply. Yes, I'm familiar with FONs. Still with a 1918 FON number I don't think this guitar left the factory then. Here's what I believe is a possibility of how there is 1918 FON on it and the rest of the instrument with attributes from the mid to late 20's.

In 1918 Gibson produced a flattop model for the first time called the Army Navy model as seen in this past sale of one http://www.12fret.com/2013/01/25/gib...y-around-1920/

Gibson is notorious for using up old stock of instruments and parts in later years and I think that's what happened here. In the later 20's when they started the standard L-1/0 flattop production they could have had an army/navy body from 1918 laying around and since it was pretty close in specs to the new flattops it was then used up. In that scenario everything about this instrument then makes sense.

Please don't take this as being argumentative. I have wondered about this listing for some time and then when I saw the recent advertisement for it still stating it's unlikely features I thought I would contact you."


So does anyone have any thoughts on this one (Joe?)?

[Jeff Mando]

I guess (for me, anyway) it depends on how you want to define "flattop". I define it as having modern attributes such as the pin bridge and braced for steel strings. If you leave off the "braced for steel strings" part, many 1800's Martins would qualify as flattops, which they sort of are, except....So, I would consider "flattops" with a trapeze tailpiece and floating bridge to be closer to archtops, in thinking, although certainly on their way to transitioning into full-fledged flattops. By the same token I have never heard of a 1918 L-1, I think of it as a mid to late 20's guitar. (which is still super early!) I think Spann's info on FON's has illuminated some areas previously considered gospel (small "g"), but, at the same time opening the door for questions like "who was first?" I personally consider most of those discussions to be academic, because the hobby is ruled by very conservative thinking, mostly talking Martin D size prewar flattops, to the point that Gibson talk for years was mostly about banjos, (and mandolins!) historically speaking.......again not surprising that most of the "electric guitar" talk is centered around Strats and Les Pauls and not Hagstrom or Micro-frets.....

Back to the guitar in question, a photo of the FON might shine some perspective on the guitar, but, I'm not a big believer in people pulling the "prototype" card when they can't find something in the reference books. Again, IMHO.