Official Luthiers Forum!

This are quite a rare finding - the circa 1938/39 Washburn Model 5249 Solo Deluxe built in Kalamazoo by Gibson. And here we can compare 2!
The 5249 was at the time, Washburn's top-of-the-line offering and although these two only differ in Serial # by 15 digits; construction wise they are apples and oranges.
The instrument on the left unfortunately had the top thinned excessively and refinished (and due to the former, I'll likely re-top it) as well as an inaccurate reproduction bridge. It is the younger of the two. Probably most noticable internally is the double-x bracing (which is missing one of the lower braces)
The instrument on the right is in an original state with only required work done to it (neck reset, a very light over spray on the top in one localized area). It features a much more common standard X bracing with 2 tone bars and finger braces.

Doc

Way cool.

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince

That is a rare find, very cool and thanks for posting this.

Super nice, I am hoping to stumble across one of those in need of repair myself someday. I have '30's Radio Tone which was the same as the Regal version of the 5249/5257. The braces look like Martin style X-bracing. It is my favorite player. I'm curious to know how different those two sound. I think Gibson may have given the Double X a bad name, but I heard an old Recording King that was Double X and it sounded great. I have heard of people taking part of the lower X out to get the top to move more, maybe it was done intentionally (It doesn't seem like a great idea).

Thanks for the post.
GS

quote="Ol'burns"]This are quite a rare finding - the circa 1938/39 Washburn Model 5249 Solo Deluxe built in Kalamazoo by Gibson. And here we can compare 2!
The 5249 was at the time, Washburn's top-of-the-line offering and although these two only differ in Serial # by 15 digits; construction wise they are apples and oranges.
The instrument on the left unfortunately had the top thinned excessively and refinished (and due to the former, I'll likely re-top it) as well as an inaccurate reproduction bridge. It is the younger of the two. Probably most noticeable internally is the double-x bracing (which is missing one of the lower braces)
The instrument on the right is in an original state with only required work done to it (neck reset, a very light over spray on the top in one localized area). It features a much more common standard X bracing with 2 tone bars and finger braces.

Doc[/quote]