Show your latest guitar

  • Moinmoin,

    my regular pub, one of the very last oldschool Rock

    dives right next to the Reeperbahn succumbed to the cov sanctions and finally a fire in a flat above. Firemen hacked the floor apart which led to a waterfall into the bar... long story, nobody injured, but a lost cultural institution if I may say so.


    The owner gratuitiously gave me a piece that adorned the walls for probably longer than I exist.

    The wood is good, the neck straight, although the strings pass jigsaw blades, touching them is like nails on chalkboard.

    Looking forward to make her sing again, there are some promising elements of double bass and dobro

    showing through the patina.


    Bur what is it? Any ideas? There is no name tags at all.

    Just remarkable craftmanship on the binding. Beautiful mother of pearl (is it?).

    Any ideas?


    Cheers

  • Its an early 50’s German jazz model.


    The control panel is identical to that found on a Framus acoustic electric series titled faraelle in their catalogue. (Not the later caravelle).


    The fretboard and body are identical to that of other Framus Models. The pickups are I believe are from Framus, but stripped of their covers.


    Curiously, the headstock shape is absolutely identical to that found on at least three other German models of the period, a couple of them far lesser-known.


    Hoya, Astro Meistergitarre and Migma Meister come to mind, but a great many Framus models also featured precisely that same headstock shape too.


    Framus had at least nine different headstock shapes, so perhaps the necks and fretboards were actually made by a third-party supplier.


    Until it was economically viable, to make their own. Hoya is a good guess. If I had to hazard a guess it would be Framus.



    My hunch is that it was built by a Luthier who over a period of several years worked for three or four different German manufacturers. It was not uncommon for itinerant workers in a particular field to move from factory to factory in an era of difficult economic circumstance.


    Also, for manufacturers to have left over parts that remain unused, long after a model has been discontinued. They would outsource certain parts which required specialised tooling to fabricate, from third party suppliers. So many different brands models were actually fitted with particular parts that were identical. If a model did not sell well, some parts would become obsolete.


    Its natural to presume that Guitar factories made X number of instruments per day. In fact, many of the better manufacturers would plan thus: This week we are going to make X number of bodies, next week we are going to make X number of necks. All that would be required to fulfil the orders that were on the build schedule. When they had all the major parts required, they could assemble them and add the parts peculiar to specific models in a given production model series.


    Even Gibson worked like that when they were a limited number of skilled workers available in that era. If the necks were made by an outside supplier, then that made things easy. Lots of necks from that period on different brands appear to have been made by the same maker.


    For example, what today we would consider to be typical Hofner tailpieces, are to found on a large number of different manufacturers instruments of that era.


    If someone has access to surplus or the necessary parts, they could be assembled by someone with the necessary skills at their own home.


    Most major manufacturers would at times allow favoured workers limited access to surplus material. Gibson and Martin did that.



    My hunch is that the instrument was fabricated by worker who moved around, utilising unused or parts available to him, to sell on the side to make a better living, which is why there is no branding or makers identification on the instrument.


    You will note that the truss rod cover is completely missing. Certain small German manufacturers of the period would put their brand name on the truss rod cover. An easy way to brand a third party supplied neck. But it is missing.


    It might be that the truss rod was adjusted and simply not put back in place, but it may be more that a coincidence that the one thing that could identify the brand, has been removed. Is that indicative?


    The bridge is reminiscent of a singular Framus model, but it and the vibrato unit appear rather utilitarian compared to other models. They made me wonder if those instrument parts were actually fabricated somewhere in eastern Germany?

  • That's a good explanation, albeit speculative.

    At first I thought it was a Framus. The body spoke for it. But not the headstock.

    I suspect that the pickups were installed later. In this early period, jazz guitars were usually built without pickups. In the photo it looks like other pickups have been installed before.

  • Quote: “At first I thought it was a Framus. The body spoke for it. But not the headstock.”



    I understand this point well, as I immediately thought precisely the same.


    The headstock differs from that headstock most commonly seen on Framus instruments. So, a very sensible conclusion to draw.


    The problem is that as stated earlier, Framus actually used at least nine different headstock shapes during this era, before settling on the most commonly experienced headstock.


    Additionally, the headstock in question here is absolutely identical to those used on a number of German manufactured instruments, from completely different brands during that specific period.


    This leads me to the view that the necks were supplied to different manufacturers by a third-party supplier for reasons of economic viability and also due to the lack of availability of skilled Luthiers and tooling at that time.


    If I had to hazard a well-informed guess, I would not be at all surprised if the identical necks that graced so many different German manufacturers instruments actually originated from an industrial region in northern Italy.


    The region concerned was a Mecca for instrument manufacture and later the supply of parts for export. They fabricated accordions, electronic accordions, electric organs, guitars etc. et al. Lots of pearloid was always a feature.



    I have a lot of links to manufacturing industries that go back many, many decades, and its common for makers involved in a number of related fields to find synergy between them, wherever its possible.


    Looking at headstocks and fingerboards on instruments from Germany during that era there’s an awful lot of pearloid utilised that is identical to that found on many Italian instruments of different types emanating from that region.


    It could be argued that Germany had its own fine accordion and bandoneon manufacturers at the time such as Hohner, and sourced pearloid within its boundaries. However, anyone familiar with the different instruments of that period will be aware of the differences in quality and colour that often distinguished them.


    By the way, if anyone has ever wondered why early Fender amplifiers had the controls at the back of the amp, it was because at that time accordions and electronic accordions were more popular than electric guitars and the amps were placed in front rather than behind the player. They accessed the controls from the rear. Later, electric guitar players also placed them out in front due to their low output as well as access to the controls.


    Back on topic, many Hofner instrument designs that featured lots of pearloid often had an identical Italian manufactured instrument equivalent to it in every way but brand name. That to my mind is too much of a coincidence to be accidental, and persuades me to the view that there was in all probability a fair deal of third-party sourcing activity from Italy was going on, during a period of economic recovery for Germany where retooling was necessary.



    In reference to my earlier comments about worker being allowed to take obsolete and B standard parts by various manufacturers during that era, the proviso they had to agree to was to make sure that there were no brand identification labelling that could mean a warrantee claim could be made. Martin for example offered a lifetime warrantee. But they also wanted to distance themselves from any quirky builds.



    There is one more factor I neglected to mention last night, that leads me to conclude the instrument to be a Framus and that is its finish and colouring.


    If we consider a Hofner finish such as brown sunburst, and examine it properly it absolutely distinguishes the brand from any other. Its colouring and quality of finish are part of the brands identity.


    Hofner Presidents available in natural finish are similar in colour to Hoyas in natural finish it is true, but they had almost no colouring whatever. During that era the available colours and finishes were rather limited.


    That was true even for Fenders in their early years. By and large then the colour and quality of a finish is and important indicator of who fabricated the instrument If the necks were supplied by a third party, then co-operation would be required regarding that.


    But it is far more likely the necks were supplied unfinished and the headstock plate and fingerboard masked prior to finish in the brands colouring in Germany at the same time as the body. Colour matching, and batch colouring is an extremely complex matter from a manufacturing point of view, this approach would avoid that and ensure the parts were supplied as economically as possible.


    If you have any doubt about this, consider when car bumpers started to be manufactured in plastic. Manufacturers used black bumpers, as the parts came from third party suppliers and there were difficulties involved in providing an exact colour match to the factory finish.


    Framus had its own brown sunburst but also had a special black and red sunburst. Generally, the essential thing to consider is that these instruments had their sunburst sprayed on by hand, and that is a unique type of fingerprint providing a clue to the actual plant that fabricated the instrument.


    The instruments quality, features and appointments (like bindings) can be similarly indicative, but these are best tested, being viewed in person.



    Quote: “I suspect that the pickups were installed later.”



    Another good point.


    I wondered if a lot of the actual hardware were post manufacture addons?


    Following your comments, I enlarged the photo, something I should have done, and it certainly looks to be the case.


    Probably more evidence to support the previous notion above that some aftermarket modification has been undertaken by a previous owner.


    That might explain the tailpiece and bridge assembly too as vibrato arms came gradually more into vogue for guitarists around the world and plenty of instruments were retro fitted, usually with Bigsbys. But they were rarely seen as a retailed aftermarket part and expensive in European countries in that era, and for many years later.


    It the lack of branding and probable modifications that make this instrument difficult to identify. Under such circumstances, the body neck, headstock and fingerboard with their in bedded appointments, give the best possible leads to identifying who actually manufactured it. Once one strips away everything that could be fitted later and look at the instrument and ask what is it, in and of itself? This I feel gives the best path to the most reliable and trustworthy answer.

  • This forum I feel gives the best path to the most reliable and trustworthy answer.

    FTFY :P


    Thanks a lot for that stash of history.

    Pity that the guitar has been ravaged so badly.

    The electronics were obviously retrofitted as is the tremolo abomination.

    The fretwork was done by a beaver on cr*ck.

    The bridge is just plain dangerous, palm muting mutes the palm.

    If anything, this guitar is reason to brush up my slide-fu 8)

  • Many Framus models used identical electronics .


    https://www.framus-vintage.de/en/Guitars/Thinline/


    5/114-52 Fret Jet (framus-vintage.de)


    5/116-52 New Sound (framus-vintage.de)


    5/116-52 New Sound (framus-vintage.de)




    Thank you for the great pictures above.


    For sure the metal plate holding the electronics, is reminiscent of a Hoyer.


    Faravelle, New Sound and Fret Jet were all Framus models sporting the identical electronic layout on a chrome metal plate.


    But the Framus models utilised an oval shaped plate and the Hoyer the slightly angular plate. So, it is indeed probable that the electronics were from Hoyer.


    The problem lies in the body and neck. Hoyer during this period utilised a rather larger headstock than on the poster’s model in question. This was because Hoyer branded his headstocks with the logo “Arnold Hoyer” in large letters.


    The full makers name displayed in this manner, being large enough to observe from a distance, demanded the oversized headstock to accommodate it, which is characteristic of the period. Later models such as one of those helpfully pictured above by Kahuna59 featured the brand “Arnold Hoyer” but with Arnold in small lettering and Hoyer in large lettering along with what appears to be a variant of Gibson’s split diamond.


    All this still required a larger headstock, but somewhat smaller than the earlier headstock. Some later Hoyer models were built without any branding whatever on the headstock. Unfortunately, before getting excited about the possibilities afforded by that fact its worth considering that Hoyer placed the brand name Hoyer on a logo in gold lettering on the instrument body on the lower rear bout so it would not be obstructed by the player’s arm. So there should be logo somewhere if its a Hoyer or a Framus.


    It may be recalled that Hofner also did the same, with particular models, using a logo with the brand name on the body in addition to the brand logo on the headstock. I believe the motive for this this was that TV cameramen would focus in close up upon the player, including their instruments body but exclude the headstock in doing so. Therefore they responded by adding an additional body logo to benefit from the free advertising when players were filmed.



    Happily, thanks to the excellent Hoyer pictures Kahuna59 posted above, we can see as in the earlier case, a determinative factor.


    The Hoya name and logo is printed in gold on the lower bout of the instrument. Its situated right between the control plate and the tailpiece.


    The essential salient point to consider, the remaining question requiring an answer is, given that Hoyer (along with other well regarded German brands) so proudly displayed their makers logo on their instruments.


    If it was a Hoyer, why does no such logo exist on the instrument?


    Clearly it has not been refinished, the finish is original, so why isn’t there a logo at all?


    Framus also used a brand name logo on the upper front bout of the instrument in addition to the brand name logo on the headstock on some models. So again we can equally ask, why does no such logo Framus exist on the instrument?


    As far as I can tell the pickups were designed by guitar builder and pickup designed Bill Lawrence, whose real name was Willi Lorenz Stich and started out as a jazz guitarist. He worked for Framus before going on to work for Fender, Gibson, Peavey and starting his own company.



    All the above leads me to conclude that the instrument was fabricated as outlined in an earlier post. It appears to be made from parts derived from different sources.


    The best we could probably determine is what actual factory the instrument came from, but demands tremendous familiarity with those old models to do so.


    What the body and neck is in and off itself is perhaps a matter for Marcus Aurelius.


    “This thing, what is it in itself, in its own constitution?


    What is its substance and material?”


    Marcus Aurelius

  • Kahuna59

    Your links are outstanding! I like this old "Dioden-Stecker" ^^

    In Germany at that time these guitars were named "Schlaggitarre". :)

    Maybe the guitar had those white pickups before.

    This 1960s could be an evolution of OldShredderhand 's guitar. A more coherent picture is slowly emerging thanks to input from Crispy Panther.

    For example, I'm also a friend of the MiJ guitars, especially from the 70s and 80s. The high-quality rated series then come from the manufactories of Terada, Nagano, or Matsumoto. They temporarily changed factories every 2 years. It doesn't matter whether they were built for Burny/Fernandes, Tokai, ESP/Navigator or Greco. Often they were all identical in construction. Only the electronics differed. They're all great when they come from the right factory and are fitted with the good PUs. For example the first VH1 or the Maxon U3000. Especially those from Terada and from Nagano are highly valued. No matter what brand and for what price they were originally sold. Especially the Burny Custom surprise for the low price!

    Then, over time, you get an eye for good historical guitars.

  • Wow. Looks like they had Pete Townshend cut that hole! It's a Frankenstein for sure. But.... I've seen people do wonders with abused guitars. I'm sure it could be salvaged if someone was inclined to invest the time. Look's like it's been played a fair bit so she must have had some good mojo at some point in her journey.


    Or..... at worst it can just be an interesting wall hanger.


    If it were mine I'd limit myself to about $200, use my own labor and see what it turns into. But that's what I like to do, it's not for everybody.

  • OldShredderhand

    I'm becoming more and more convinced that the guitar was originally built without electronics.

    The electronics could have been upgraded in the late 50's or early 60's.

    Your last picture in particular brings me to this conviction.


    Unfortunately, I never had an acceptable example of a guitar from that time that could reaches the most minimal requirements in terms of string height, clean scale and fret tuning.

    Either you take the guitar as a wall decoration to get your visitors smile, or you take the matter seriously and ask your trusted guitar luthier (or Kellerblues link) to fix the problems with the fretboard and string height.

    The latter would be worth of 400€ to me on your position. ;)

    Such a guitar on stage with this pickup would be worth the entrance fee alone. ^^

  • Quote: “Wow. Looks like they had Pete Townshend cut that hole! It's a Frankenstein.” for sure.



    Quote: “I'm becoming more and more convinced that the guitar was originally built without electronics.


    The electronics could have been upgraded in the late 50's or early 60's.


    Your last picture in particular brings me to this conviction.”




    It’s entirely outside all realms of probability that any guitar manufacturer would so savagely create such a travesty.


    In any case, such major hole cutting would have been processed long before the finish was applied, not afterward, as is the clear case in this instance.


    To be frank. To me at least, it confirms earlier views expressed, along with comments from Marcus Aurelius. That the best way to determine who originally manufactured this instrument, is to discount and ignore all the hardware completely.


    To exclusively use the body, neck, finish and their concomitant accoutrements (bindings etc.) alone, directly comparing them by experience to other contemporaneous instrument examples from the period. A task only someone with acquaintance of such instruments, practical experience of them is likely to be able to accomplish, ideally by handling them.


    However, it confirms the notion that the instrument is fabricated from disparate parts sourced from a number of various manufacturers. There seems no doubt of that.


    I would like to thank everyone who has contributed with such excellence and politeness to this interesting voyage of discovery.