| Author |
Topic: What's a 1930 National Style O steel body worth? |
Mike Perlowin
From:
Los Angeles CA
|
Posted 18 Jun 2004 7:57 pm |
|
| I have a bead on one that's been sitting in a closet of years. I have no need for this myself, but am think about buying it as an investment. |
|
|
 |
John Bushouse
|
Posted 18 Jun 2004 9:25 pm
|
|
| I'm guessing $2500, maybe $3K -ish, give or take, depending on what might need to be done to it. |
|
|
|
Paul Arntson
From:
Washington, USA
|
Posted 18 Jun 2004 9:55 pm
|
|
Isn't there some deal with those as to whether they had a truss rod in some necks and not in others? I heard that a friendly xray technician can help this out. (Used to be you could take it to the airport...)
I bet Russ Young knows. |
|
|
|
Russ Young
From:
Seattle, Washington, USA
|
Posted 19 Jun 2004 7:00 am
|
|
Mike, I assume that you're speaking literally about the "steel" body. The majority of the 1930 Style O's had steel bodies, before National switched over to brass, which was easier to plate with nickel.
According to Bob Brozman's book -- the "Bible" on Nationals -- most style O's below serial #S1000 are steel, with some mixed steel and brass guitars up to about S1750. I have seen posts on other forum posts claiming that there are some early Style O's with German Silver bodies, but Brozman hasn't documented any of them.
Depending on its condition, John B's estimate is probably a good ballpark figure. If it is a steel body, much of its value may be in its collectability; as a player, it will sound much more like steel-bodied Duolians and Triolians than the more common brass Style O's.
If you want the opinion(s) of real experts on Nationals -- including Brozman -- check out the IGS Guitar Forum.
Mike, you've stated some pretty strong views in the past about people who collect guitars as investments. Is this change of heart, or have I misinterpreted your comments? (I'm not trying to flame you, I'm just curious!)[This message was edited by Russ Young on 19 June 2004 at 08:04 AM.] |
|
|
|
Mike Perlowin
From:
Los Angeles CA
|
Posted 19 Jun 2004 7:41 am
|
|
Ross, my feelings about people who don't play but hoard fine guitars and keep them out of the hands of players were based on the fact that this practice has driven up the price of certain instruments to the point where musicians cannot afford them. Since the introduction of low priced Asian imports, this is no longer a problem for the average working guitarist.
Regardless of whatever this particular guitar may be worth as a collecter's item, there are lots of reproductions available at affordable prices for somebody who wants to play one. Only yesterday I saw one by Fender.
If I get this guitar, which is pretty much falling into my lap, I will not keep it, but turn around and sell it immediately.
BTW, the serial # on this one is 502.[This message was edited by Mike Perlowin on 19 June 2004 at 08:48 AM.] |
|
|
|
Russ Young
From:
Seattle, Washington, USA
|
Posted 19 Jun 2004 7:47 am
|
|
Fair enough, Mike!
By the way, when you say it's "falling into your lap," you don't mean literally, do you? I'm assuming it has a round neck. As Paul Warnik, Mike Neer and I will attest to, squareneck single-cone Nationals don't sell for nearly as much as their roundneck brethren, regardless of their condition. |
|
|
|
Paul Warnik
From:
Illinois,USA
|
Posted 19 Jun 2004 4:11 pm
|
|
| The style "O" with steel body is the earliest example-they will have the twelve fret neck/body joint and "F" holes that are not rolled in-I have never encountered one with square neck which Gruhn says was not available until 1933-Russ Y is correct about the plating-I myself have never seen one of these early ones with much plating left for the reason Russ mentioned-Hence they do not bring as much (in my opinion) as compared to the later ones which maintain the Hawaiian lagoon scene stenciling and nickle plating better because of their brass body [This message was edited by PAUL WARNIK on 19 June 2004 at 05:45 PM.] |
|
|
|
