1800s? PARLOR GUITAR.... REVIVAL!

[sunbgroove]

I took measurements of the guitar this morning:

Length - 36-1/4"
Lower bout - 11 1/4"
Upper Bout - 8 1/4"
back of neck to end of body - 13 1/2"

It is incredible how much information is available by searching this forum and I have learned a lot! The Ice Cream Cone heel, reverse tuners, 10th fret marker etc have me leaning towards the 1800s but as Ed-in-Ohio points out, nailing down the manufacturer might be next to impossible!

I appreciate everyone's input and will update with pictures and video when I have it back in playing condition. :-)

[sunbgroove]

Work on the guitar commenced yesterday. With a hot knife in hand and a little patience, I removed the back to make repairs to the top easier.

[guitargeak99]

This is very interesting.
I'm not a very good guitar player, and what I do know I've learned from this forum.
I restore muscle cars as a hobby, and I really try to keep them with as much of an original appearance as possible - using as many of the original parts as possible.
So seeing the survival of this old relic, and it's pending restoration, just intrigues the heck out of me.

Thanks for posting, I've definitely subscribed to this thread.

[roylor4]

Originally Posted by guitargeak99

This is very interesting.
I'm not a very good guitar player, and what I do know I've learned from this forum.
I restore muscle cars as a hobby, and I really try to keep them with as much of an original appearance as possible - using as many of the original parts as possible.
So seeing the survival of this old relic, and it's pending restoration, just intrigues the heck out of me.

Thanks for posting, I've definitely subscribed to this thread.

Yeah, I never subscribe to threads but this one just strikes me as being cool.

OP, are you going to totally replace the top or attempt to repair the existing one? This guitar didn't have a bridge plate? I have no knowledge of vintage guitars. Keep us apprised and good luck with this project.

[frances50]

This is an interesting thread. I recently acquired a c. 1870 Martin 0-28. Gryphon Strings restored this guitar back in 2012. I'm sure they went through a similar process and it's amazing how mine looks.

Keep us up to date on your restoration.

[mc1]

would this originally have been strung with gut strings?

[frances50]

Originally Posted by mc1

would this originally have been strung with gut strings?

I'm sure back in the day, yes, it would have had gut strings. I have nylagut strings on my c.1870.

[Wade Hampton]

You know, I have doubts that this guitar originally came with a pin bridge. I think that was added later. If you look at this photo of the underside of the top, there's no evidence that there was ever a bridgeplate of any kind, unless that smear of glue over the pinholes is an indication of some sort of improvised bridgeplate that's since disappeared:

˙˙˙

But I doubt that was where a bridgeplate sat, because there's no impact on the wood where there should be had there been one.

If you look at this photo here, there's a dark patch on the top between where the bridge was located and the tailblock that's shaped like the sort of tailpiece found on cheap guitars from the era when this guitar was built:

˙˙˙

Here's a similar guitar with the sort of tailpiece I'm talking about:

˙˙˙

I think this guitar was somebody else's hobby project a long time ago, and was converted to a pin bridge at that point. Converting it back to a tailpiece design would probably be the safest way to proceed.

Hope that makes sense.


Wade Hampton Miller

[devellis]

Good catch, Wade. I think you're exactly right.

[sunbgroove]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

You know, I have doubts that this guitar originally came with a pin bridge. I think that was added later. If you look at this photo of the underside of the top, there's no evidence that there was ever a bridgeplate of any kind, unless that smear of glue over the pinholes is an indication of some sort of improvised bridgeplate that's since disappeared:

˙˙˙

But I doubt that was where a bridgeplate sat, because there's no impact on the wood where there should be had there been one.

If you look at this photo here, there's a dark patch on the top between where the bridge was located and the tailblock that's shaped like the sort of tailpiece found on cheap guitars from the era when this guitar was built:

˙˙˙

Here's a similar guitar with the sort of tailpiece I'm talking about:

˙˙˙

I think this guitar was somebody else's hobby project a long time ago, and was converted to a pin bridge at that point. Converting it back to a tailpiece design would probably be the safest way to proceed.

Hope that makes sense.


Wade Hampton Miller

Good eye, Wade! Yes, it did have a tailpiece installed, but according to the elderly gentleman I purchased it from, was added long after the guitar was built. It was his father's guitar and at the time wanted to switch to steel strings. He said that it worked for a while but the top began to buckle.

[sunbgroove]

Originally Posted by guitargeak99

This is very interesting.
I'm not a very good guitar player, and what I do know I've learned from this forum.
I restore muscle cars as a hobby, and I really try to keep them with as much of an original appearance as possible - using as many of the original parts as possible.
So seeing the survival of this old relic, and it's pending restoration, just intrigues the heck out of me.

Thanks for posting, I've definitely subscribed to this thread.

Thanks, GuitarGeak99! You've got a fellow classic car resto guy here! I just got into acoustics myself about a year ago.. Primarily an electric player prior. Jumped right in and have spent the past year building an acoustic with the help of a luthier friend. This parlor guitar will be my first rescue and I plan to keep it as original as possible.

[sunbgroove]

Originally Posted by roylor4

Yeah, I never subscribe to threads but this one just strikes me as being cool.

OP, are you going to totally replace the top or attempt to repair the existing one? This guitar didn't have a bridge plate? I have no knowledge of vintage guitars. Keep us apprised and good luck with this project.

Thanks Roy,

Yes I definitely plan to save the spruce top. As you can see in the pictures it is split in several places... What's harder to see is that it is bowed the wrong way, or caved in. I'm enjoying this so far.. The neck is straight which is a plus. It did have a bridge plate. Perhaps hard to see the glue spot in the picture. The brass frets are in overall good condition with the 10th and 11th curling up slightly on the ends. There's so much finger wear on the fretboard where the wood is worn from playing so its easy to imagine at least one re-fret..

I do see evidence of the guitar having been opened up at least once before during its history, maybe more. The bracing might have been moved as well. Hot Hide glue everywhere, which I found very easy to release with a hot blade.

[sunbgroove]

Originally Posted by frances50

This is an interesting thread. I recently acquired a c. 1870 Martin 0-28. Gryphon Strings restored this guitar back in 2012. I'm sure they went through a similar process and it's amazing how mine looks.

Keep us up to date on your restoration.

Thank you Frances,

Trying to pickup pointers and learn as I go.. Is there a thread here of your restoration?

[frances50]

Originally Posted by sunbgroove

Thank you Frances,

Trying to pickup pointers and learn as I go.. Is there a thread here of your restoration?

My guitar was restored by Gryphon Strings (Palo Alto, CA) in 2012. It was sold and ended up at the Music Emporium on consignment this past spring. I had posted my interest in purchasing a civil war era guitar on the UMGF and the fellow who had purchased the guitar from Gryphon contacted me via e-mail. I negotiated with him directly and through the Music Emporium and eventually got a good deal.

I did e-mail Richard Johnston at Gryphon after I got the guitar and he forwarded me the description of the guitar and what was done to it at their shop. I won't bore you with all the details but Johnston told me the guitar was not playable when they got it into their shop, the neck had been damaged from a capo and it needed a lot of work. It had a complete neck reset, with original bar stock frets by Michi Matsuda. It has its original tuners and buttons, original bridge with original bridge pins, original finish with touch-up done to the back of the neck (from the capo damage). Frank Ford added some French polish but the contours of the neck were not altered. Two hairline cracks were repaired and cleated (I can't even tell where they were). The ivory endpin was replaced with an ebony one. They dated the guitar to the 1870's but because Martin didn't start using serial numbers until 1898, they had to use their experience with dating old Martins. The tuner plates are "teddy bear" design associated with Martins made around the time the stamp on the center back strip was changed from "C.F. Martin" to "C.F. Martin & Co." in October 1867. There is no penciling on the underside of the top, it has a Cuban mahogany bridge, and the first back brace is close to the neck block. So, Johnston believes this guitar is dated between 1867 and early 1870's. This actual guitar is depicted (with photoshopping of some dings) on page 234 and 235 of "Inventing the American Guitar" which Johnston contributed to. This guitar was just at his shop at the right time when he was looking for a suitable guitar for the book.

Sorry I can't be of more help but you may want to check out the UMGF vintage forum. I know David LaPlante, a vintage Martin expert, frequents that forum and while your guitar may not be a Martin, it's still a very old guitar. There are plenty of experts out there who would love to help you.

[Cameleye]

Save the tuners!