Why doesn't this cost more? (1950 Gibson L48)

[jhumber]

http://wildwoodguitars.com/acoustics/misc/8740/8740.php

I understand that the L48 was seen as a 'student' model back in the 40s-50s, but so was the LP Jnr, and a 50s version of one of those will easily get $4-5k these days.

Was the L48 just a bit of a hit-and-miss guitar? Or is there another reason that the 50s acoustic models haven't kept up with their equivalent electric cousins?

[musicofanatic5]

Mahogany back and sides instead of the industry standard, maple, and I believe this model has the f.b. glued to the top instead of the elevated f.b. extension, a common feature on desirable archtop gtrs. Lower level of trim as well.

[Jef Bardsley]

It's all about supply and demand.

Acoustic players don't want it because it has an arched top.

Electric players don't want it because it doesn't have a pickup, and even if it did, it has no cutaway.

Sounds like a good deal on the fingerboard, though.

[Bryan T]

Originally Posted by jhumber

Or is there another reason that the 50s acoustic models haven't kept up with their equivalent electric cousins?

Well . . . they don't sound like a lot of people expect them to and I can't think of any players that play/played them. A lot of the old acoustic Gibsons aren't valued very highly (there are several exceptions, of course). For example, you can find 1930s L4s that are quite affordable.

[ComanchePlayer]

It's a big bodied guitar too. I love me ES 300 but I don't play it a lot just because it's so big and awkward. It's a bit uncomfortable, if I play it it's only for a half hour tops.

[Sweetfinger]

Originally Posted by jhumber

I understand that the L48 was seen as a 'student' model back in the 40s-50s, but so was the LP Jnr, and a 50s version of one of those will easily get $4-5k these days.

Name a famous rockstar who played a LP Jr. Now name a famous rockstar, country star, jazzer, or folk hero who played an L-48.

.... exactly!

[musicofanatic5]

It is simply a non-cutaway. lower end, acoustic arch top gtr. Non-cut, acoustic L-5's, L-7's, Epi Emperors and Deluxe's, and certainly D'Angelicos and Strombergs will always be in demand, but the market for an L-48 is slim.

[scmavl]

I'm sure if you offered them more, they would take it.

Agreed though, that's a cool vintage guitar for the price.

[Whiskeyrebel]

I was checking for youtube demos of this model to hear what it sounds like and the sound reminded me of a Harmony archtop acoustic I have. Flame away for me saying it, but I also listened to other Harmony demos to confirm. So even thought that is a fairly sensible price compared to Gibson flat tops and electrics of the same age, if you do a fair amount of hunting you could get the same sound for much less.

That's not a bad thing, because it's a good sound. The knock on Harmony isn't tone, it's that they spat out gazillions of them without much consistency in action and playability, and over the years a lot have had their necks shift or their tops go out of shape.

[RadackGuitars]

I have a 40's L-48 that was literally in pieces when I got it.
I added the cutaway and electronics.
Personally, I really dig having the fingerboard right on the top, opposed to the elevated fingerboard on most archtops, keeps the strings closer to the body and and is an easier transition from playing solid body electrics and acoustic flattops.
I think there are a lot of sleeper vintage Gibsons.

[Sweetfinger]

^^^ Very nice! ^^^

[dewey decibel]

Those guitars had pressed tops, a big reason they're not as valuable as their carved top cousins.

[alexanderplatz]

Very nice, RadackGuitars.

[440gtx6pak]

This is a great webpage about vintage Gibson acoustic archtops, model by model.

http://home.provide.net/~cfh/gibson2.html

[Baxtercat]

Gets only a humorous yet disappointing 'collectability rating of D-' on that page for these and L-50s.
I like my '43 L-50. Gets a great response from folks at practices and acoustic jams. Solid spruce top, and these old Gibson sunburst finishes are classy.