Banner L-50 string gauge

[nomey]

Hello, first time posting here.

I recently picked up a early 40's banner L-50. I've been looking for one for awhile. I wanted a vintage 16" fully carved gibson and obviously couldn't afford a 20's L-5 (who can?) So this was the next best thing.

However it does not have a truss rod, and I cannot seem to see any hint of a V or maple rod inside it, though I could be mistaken. There has been some minor top drop in the past but it has been checked by a luthier and the braces are secure and tight.

I wonder if any of you could help me determine if I should baby it or not with string gauge. I prefer to use mediums on my archtops most of the time. I have also quite enjoyed thomastik plectrum 12-59's despite how pricey they are.

I don't want to hurt it any more than I have to though. Any advice from banner experts out there as to the strength of their necks (and tops) would be much appreciated. Pics for reference.

[sunra]

Tough question. I use light (52-12s) on several 30s and 40 archtops without truss rods. I use mediums on archtops from the 40s and 50s with truss rods (adjustable or not). You might consider mediums and tune the guitar down half a step.

[nomey]

Thanks for the reply, maybe I will just stick with the plectrums for now. Their total tension is about 170 which isn't far off lights anyway. I do like their sound but I'd really like a 13/17 on the E/B.

[Steve DeRosa]

Not a banner expert, but I have a fair share of experience with archtops from this era:

• First off, this is a wartime-issue instrument and, given the combination of rosewood crossbar and thin struts on the tailpiece as well as the lack of a truss rod, I'd date it to mid-1943 - late 1945 (I've seen a couple earlier wartime instruments with all-metal tailpieces as well as an Epiphone Zenith from early '46 that still had an OEM wooden crossbar, and TMK wartime restrictions that would have made a trussrod problematic only kicked in in earnest in early 1943);
• I've played a couple wartime L-7's, one with a similar tailpiece and one with the all-metal "triple-diamond" (both of which had trussrods BTW), and the one with the wooden crossbar exhibited significant top drop (which, interestingly enough, had no detrimental effect on the tone - I'm thinking they used thinner stock, which also made the guitar physically lighter and gave the bass a pleasant boost more typical of an 18" body);
• Since your tech doesn't seem to have an issue with the top and I assume the dovetail joint is OK, I'd consider having him/her install a non-adjustable (square-tube, T-bar, H-bar) reinforcing rod in the neck - or, if you're not a stickler for complete originality, a New York Epiphone-style hex-wrench adjustable (from the body end and almost invisible) trussrod - which will allow you a greater choice of string gauges/types;
• IMO a modern 13-56 medium-gauge set probably wouldn't cause any difficulties - in their day archtoops were routinely fitted with 14-60 and 15-62/64 sets, with wound-B strings - but I'd definitely check back with your tech first...

[nomey]

Originally Posted by Steve DeRosa

Not a banner expert, but I have a fair share of experience with archtops from this era:

• First off, this is a wartime-issue instrument and, given the combination of rosewood crossbar and thin struts on the tailpiece as well as the lack of a truss rod, I'd date it to mid-1943 - late 1945 (I've seen a couple earlier wartime instruments with all-metal tailpieces as well as an Epiphone Zenith from early '46 that still had an OEM wooden crossbar, and TMK wartime restrictions that would have made a trussrod problematic only kicked in in earnest in early 1943);
• I've played a couple wartime L-7's, one with a similar tailpiece and one with the all-metal "triple-diamond" (both of which had trussrods BTW), and the one with the wooden crossbar exhibited significant top drop (which, interestingly enough, had no detrimental effect on the tone - I'm thinking they used thinner stock, which also made the guitar physically lighter and gave the bass a pleasant boost more typical of an 18" body);
• Since your tech doesn't seem to have an issue with the top and I assume the dovetail joint is OK, I'd consider having him/her install a non-adjustable (square-tube, T-bar, H-bar) reinforcing rod in the neck - or, if you're not a stickler for complete originality, a New York Epiphone-style hex-wrench adjustable (from the body end and almost invisible) trussrod - which will allow you a greater choice of string gauges/types;
• IMO a modern 13-56 medium-gauge set probably wouldn't cause any difficulties - in their day archtoops were routinely fitted with 14-60 and 15-62/64 sets, with wound-B strings - but I'd definitely check back with your tech first...

Thanks for your thoughts. I think you're correct with the age. The FON is one that fits late 43/early44 but also 38-41. I knew that there were metal shortages etc during the war but wasn't aware there was a specific year that the truss rods disappeared. Makes sense with war productions peaking.

The rosewood crossbar definitely adds a different dynamic with some lovely harmonics and sustain that fade a bit if you wrap a mute around the strings behind the bridge, and like the l7 you mentioned it seems to have very nice overall bass to it.

It does seem quite lightly built, with exception of the neck which is pleasantly heavy. There was some talk with the person I got it from about correcting the top and they had been in contact with the people at archtop.com who recommended to ensure bracing is secure and crack free and then to leave it alone. I'm glad it was left alone because like the L7 you mentioned I don't think it has done anything bad at all to the tone.

The neck joint is fine and the neck block is clean and solid. I'm going to have to sit and think about installing a truss rod. The thought terrifies me to be honest! I'll have a talk with the tech about it though.

Any thoughts on the heel itself? Were these thinner rounder heels common at the time compared to the flatter wide one?

[Steve DeRosa]

Originally Posted by nomey

Thanks for your thoughts. I think you're correct with the age. The FON is one that fits late 43/early 44 but also 38-41...

...I'm going to have to sit and think about installing a truss rod. The thought terrifies me to be honest! I'll have a talk with the tech about it though...

Any thoughts on the heel itself? Were these thinner rounder heels common at the time compared to the flatter wide one?

In order:

• There's no question that this is a wartime instrument based on your photos and description, and the fact that the FON is traceable to late-43/early-44 only serves to confirm that fact;
• A good tech can install/replace a trussrod with no visible evidence whatsoever - my last band's bass player had it done on his '69 Gibson EB-0 bass (if you're in the NY/NJ/PA I-95 corridor I'll give you the name of the tech who did the job) - and if you want to keep the visuals intact a non-adjustable rod of the type I suggested above will provide adequate strength for a modern medium-gauge set;
• Inasmuch as the L-50 used the same 24.75" scale as the J-45, it's more than likely that a batch of necks would be made to a single specification (there was not only a shortage of materials but of qualified workers, as a consequence of either the draft or defense work) and fitted to bodies in response to the few dealer orders that came in - note that the L-7 used the 25.5" "Advanced" scale length and would have been fitted with a dedicated neck until supplies ran out (hence the presence of trussrods on both examples I've personally played, as well as the wider heel that was also present on my former script-logo '47 L-7)...

Hope this helps...

[nomey]

Thanks for some great info!