Really fantastic ax. Older, but do not know year.

I found the serial number incised into the heel block. Something like 11101. Rosewood binding with two stripes on side, two stripes in top. Sort of a Navajo pattern rosette. A headstock plate of rosewood instead of the black Lexan or some plastic with MOP brand name  on headstock. Neck was WIDE at the nut---unlike my LC-09. Brian Trepanier would know...The sound? Awesome. Even with the oxidized old strings on it. Wow!

I told the guy dealing it to eBay to get new ones on so I can really assess its tone. Now, if I have a way to raise $1200, I WANT THIS GUITAR!!! Case?? Deluxe. Not even a scuff on the archtop case.

I have a master guitar repairman who we will take this guitar to soon, and have him render a full and bona fide assessment. The neck obviously needs readjusted, since this poor guitar has sat in a closet for like a decade or so, and it needs trussed back. Fret wear minimal--it just was not played much. A local high-end guitar store (nameless here...you know these guys!) offered $850 for it, which means they will sell it for double that, around $1700.

When this goes onto eBay, I will let all of you know. It will go to someone who loves it, I am sure.

This was a special day for me, since I'd never actually gotten my fingers on a real older C-09 until this walked into Norm's Music in Mountain View, California. Someone is going to end up with a classic. Today I will A/B test this nice old C-09 against my LC-09, and maybe get to photograph it. It's up to the dealer who is selling this for a non-guitar playing owner.

Can anyone inform me if the necks really were wider when they first made C's? The body seemed a little heftier than the L model, too. Could be just imagination....seldom have I seen prettier rosewood back and sides, though! IF ever. Maybe on a Goodall Jumbo...I gotta stop gushing like this!


DJ

You probably mean the serial number is around 11,000 which, along with the mosaic soundhole ring, puts it in early 1990s.

E. Shoaf

the neck should not be wider, unless it was a custom neck...

fitness1 will want this one I know, if the neck is wider.

Actually, the necks around serial 11,000 were somewhat thinner than they are now. At least on my C-19's from that period they are thinner (but same width).

My '93 C-09 measures exactly 1.75 inch nut width, same as the '03 L-03, but the neck is thicker by about 0.05 inches.  Overall I would agree that it is more heavily built than the newer one.  They are very nice guitars, so gush away.

Quote from: sixpickn on April 12, 2006, 10:52:50 PM
My '93 C-09 measures exactly 1.75 inch nut width, same as the '03 L-03, but the neck is thicker by about 0.05 inches.  Overall I would agree that it is more heavily built than the newer one.  They are very nice guitars, so gush away.

I guess we can say then that there was more variation than there is now.  I've definitely got a couple with thinner necks from that time frame.

I would suggest contacting Larrivee CS to get the exact age. My 1984 (confirmed age by Larrivee) L has the serial number 103191.

Right-ho. Larrivee will provide the real scoop on this. The man acting as dealer for the owner needs to get the real data from Larrivee, and I will pass it on. I  know this is a fine guitar, that suits me well. My LC-09 is prettier, and I think the neck is a bit thinner and not as wide as the early '90's C-09.

Next time I will have a steel rule and spec it out.

DJ