Vintage guitar questions

Goatherd

Obviously, i am new to gypsy jazz and GJ guitars, so bear with me on some basic questions.

I recently bought a "mystery" vintage GJ guitar. It's a pretty nice guitar, but a little unusual. It has an oval sound hole but has a 640 mm scale length and 12 frets to the body. The fretboard is missing, as is the tailpiece. It was probably made round about the 1940's. The neck appears to be attached by a butt joint rather than a dovetail joint and the neck angle is slightly off, side to side, so I will have to do a neck reset. I usually work on much older guitars, mostly old parlor guitars. This guitar is probably not of any great value, still, my goal with any guitar work is to preserve as much of the guitar and its history as possible. But, in this case I am considering converting it to a bolt on neck. When the guitar is strung again after so many years, the geometry is bound to change and the bolt on neck would simplify adjustments that might become necessary in the future. The face of the butt joint might well have been trimmed slightly on the neck, so a Taylor style adjustment shim, might be the easiest way to restore the original geometry. Is this a crazy idea?

I am planning to reset the neck to accommodate a medium height bridge, so that adjustments can be made in either direction. The guitar seems to have had a trapeze style tailpiece or a shorter variant on the Selmer style tailpiece. The "footprint" is hard to read. Is there an advantage to either style other than keeping the vintage appearance? I would appreciate and value any advice from more experienced players.

Bones

How is the condition of the top? Is it still arched or caved in?

Be careful with the neck angle to not put too much down pressure on the top if it looks like it has taken a set over the years depending on how strong it is braced, etc.

Goatherd

Yes,thank you very much, that sounds like good advice Bones. The top is in good condition and still arched. But, the top has just a single brace underneath the bridge instead of two like the Selmers, it has four ladder braces in all, including the one above the sound hole, although I have to depend on my wife's small hands to get inside the box. You could also say that the braces fore and aft of the bridge are farther apart than in Selmers.

The back is slightly arched, but has a section that looks like someone put a weight on it. The back will eventually have to come off, which I am not looking forward to since I can't get my hand inside for alignment. The "depression" on the back won't be hard to fix with the back off, but, I really don't care what it looks like for now. If it sounds good, it will be worth the work, if not, it will make a great travel guitar. Without the fretboard and tailpiece it weighs 2 pounds and 11 ounces. The back and sides are maple with some birdseye, but not exceptional, just pretty nice. The original finish was stripped, so I am going with French polish.

But, it might be a good idea to start with a lower bridge, the guitar is getting on in years. I took notes from Bob Holo's video on set up and I plan to follow his numbers. I certainly appreciate insights and suggestions from more experienced players and luthiers. If I go with the bolt on neck conversion, it would be easier to change the neck angle, but, I'll see what I find when I take the neck off and when I finish the fretboard.

Shawn

Hi Goatherd, do you have the ability to post some pictures of the guitar? It might help some of us identify the guitar or to at least better picture what you're talking about. That "depression" in the back you are talking about sounds somewhat familiar, but I'd have to see a picture to know for sure if what I'm thinking might be correct. I'd hate for you to do the work on the guitar and modify it structurally and then find out later it would have been worth a load of money if it wasn't for the modifications.

Goatherd

I"ll see what I can do Shawn.

The "depression" is a damaged section of the back, which is one piece. The back is lightly braced and there is a sort of crease in the wood. It doesn't look like an impact, but like it was creased by pressure or weight. It won't show up in a photo.

I will try to post some pictures. The guitar has a bogus label from a well known luthier in Paris. It is nothing like his actual labels and although he did make some jazz guitars they are very different from this example. Although the workmanship is pretty good, the sides show signs of being bent in a bit of a hurry, (some very small cracks and a small uneven area at one of the bends.) I am a little embarrassed to say, it's an eBay guitar. I probably paid too much for it, but it has its charm. I can probably post a link. Promise not to laugh at my expense.

The back has recently been off this guitar and the neck face of the butt joint has probably been trimmed back a bit, There are some other signs of surgery at the neck joint. It may be that things have been done to the neck joint that cannot be discussed in polite company. The original finish and fretboard are gone the crow road. But the box is very responsive, even without strings, etc. I see old guitars that have had new necks fitted, but this neck isn't that bad and it is flat in profile, like the old Selmers I think it would be a true "vintage" experience to play. I would prefer it in "old beater" condition, but things didn't develop that way.

The last thing I want to do is change the guitar. It has some battle scars and that's fine with me, it's part of the history of the guitar, why get a vintage guitar if you try to make it look new?

I work mostly on a really old guitars, back to James Ashborns made in the 1850's (coincidently, they have butt neck joints.) I don't do much in the way of cosmetics, because I like the fact that they've been banging around for over a hundred years.

I'll see if I can post a link to the auction.

Goatherd

See if this link does the trick. As I said the label is definitely bogus, but this is a handmade guitar and could well be French made.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Gypsy-J ... true&rt=nc

Shawn

Ok, I've seen that same guitar somewhere, but just can't remember where or who the luthier was. It almost reminds me of some old Italian style Selmer guitars or even a Henri Miller (although I know that is not correct). There is an old luthier who made a guitar that looks exactly like this one, but again, I can't for the life of me remember the name, but it's right on the tip of my tongue. You might just have a guitar worth a little more than you think...now if only I could remember the name...

Maybe someone else might be able to pinpoint this one. There's nothing like a good mystery!

Goatherd

Thanks, Shawn. It is a pretty nice guitar. The peghead is delicate and distinctive and the fretboard ran all the way to the rosette with no gap. So those might be clues. The shape is also distinctive, rounder with a sense of a Spanish guitar with a very round cutaway. The braces are very nicely finished too. It also has solid lining.

I haven't taken the neck off yet, but, I am pretty sure I can do a 100% reversible mend. I always use hide glue for that reason.

I have been looking at some old Favinos and other vintage guitars at Django books and other sources. It appears that the makers of many older guitars were pretty casual about the number of frets to the body, some appear to be closer to 13 frets than 12 or 14. That is, the neck and body meet between frets rather than precisely under a fret. I saw a Shelley Park with a very short scale (920 mm) and it was the same way. As usual with old guitars, I find I need to do a lot more research and thinking. But, that's the fun of it and it keeps me out of trouble.

Thanks for the insights.