For those wishing to skip to the heart of the matter, just jump to the end of this article.  However, as it took me quite a while to get there, you may find the provenance, and my eventual analysis worth reading first.  What started out as just an interesting little blog - from something I unearthed in my harp guitar “To Do” folders - ended up as an extensive and pretty exhaustive 6000+ word research project, so I published it here on the more permanent site – even though it has virtually nothing to do with actual harp guitars.

As this site is of course harp guitar-specific, first note that I am going decidedly “off topic” and referring to what nearly everyone today considers the standard 12-String Guitar.  In other words, the regular steel string guitar with 6 double courses (the 4 lowest strung in octaves, the top 2 in unison) – not a 12 string harp guitar such as a Dyer with 6 on the neck and 6 subs.

So what does the 12-string guitar, popularized by dozens of memorable players from Leadbelly to Leo Kottke, have to do with harp guitars? 

Only that it is my belief that the ubiquitous instrument largely evolved from an instrument called the “harp-guitar.” 

Current theories are that the 12-string was inspired by double-course guitars from south of the border, like the baja sexto, or developed in the workshop of some American factory like Oscar Schmidt.  Michael Simmons has written a couple articles over the years on the 12-string, which are worth noting.  There may be other 12-string historical expertise in print or on the web that I haven’t seen or remembered, as well.  Probably the latest in 12-string circles is the increasing awareness by esoteric collectors and players of the little-known early (very early) Holzapfel 12-strings (which I’ll touch on as well).

There is some mention (Simmons, again), though little follow-up discussion, of my candidate – specifically an instrument by Rene Grunewald, which is the key to our puzzle.  Michael shows a c.1904 ad for this 12-string instrument.  But we have to go back a little further.  Feb 8, 1896, to be precise.

That’s when one Carl E. Brown, of Columbus, Ohio, filed his patent application for his own “harp-guitar” (you’ll remember from my Organology thesis that anyone is free to call their invention a “harp guitar” – it needn’t be a version of the harp guitar with floating strings, as classified today).

Brown’s curious patent (#568,108) has been on this site from the beginning, on the Patents page and in the “Harp Guitars in Name Only” Gallery.  It consists of not 12, but 10 strings, which I believe is an important observation and distinction for our purposes of “12-string guitar evolution” and provenance.  In other words, this particular 12-string would not have existed without there being a 10-string first, and this instrument was invented for a very specific use and effect – and very much “of its time.”

The Grunewald instruments (at least the 10-string version) list Brown’s patent number on the label, and thus these labels would seem to point to a possible obscure beginning to the 12-string guitar story.  So I’m surprised more attention hasn’t been paid to this.  But the real evidence comes from reading the weekly Music Trade Review of the period and understanding the context of the prose, and also that of the related BMG world (“Banjo, Mandolin and Guitar” community), as focused through The Cadenza, and later, Crescendo, magazines.

Before I delve into these magazine appearances, let me present our cast of characters:

And now, with access to the recent Music Trade Review (TMTR) online archives and still-growing Chronicling America online archives (please have it, I’m sure I haven’t found every relevant entry), we can see a better timeline of the Brown invention and subsequent manufacture. 

Equally important, we can see the reasoning behind the instrument, and visualize its intended audience.

April 11, 1896: TMTR: “The Harp-Guitar”  

This is the first news of Brown’s 10-string invention, which has been on display in a local store “for the past week.”   The necessity to describe in detail the new stringing and tuning makes clear that it is considered a “novel” concept for a guitar.  Mention is made of the tone, which “resembles two instruments…the mandolin and guitar” (not a harp and guitar, as Brown’s patent pronounces).  Though cryptically stated, the writer alludes to a “simple arrangement” (a device to be explained in a later issue) via which the effect of either a guitar or mandolin “can be produced.”  They mention the patent application, which had occurred 2 months prior (Feb 8).  The primary purpose of the patent invention is clearly stated at the outset: “…to combine the features of a harp and a guitar.”  

August 22, 1896: TMTR: “A New Musical Novelty”

This article announces that Brown’s patent (at left) has now been granted.  The pear-shaped body is described as having “the general form of guitars of ‘ye olden time…’ (whatever that’s supposed to mean) – which was probably intended to add to its “novel” aspect.  It then repeats the details of the stringing and tuning.   

Next is the claim that this arrangement makes it “much more simple than on the guitar, (due to) the air being picked with the thumb on the double strings, while the accompaniment is played with the fingers, and thumb when unoccupied, upon all the available strings.”  This verbiage is taken from Brown’s own patent, though the phrase must be looked at in context – for the amateur guitar style was then much as described; the thumb played a simple melody, with fingers playing a (generally higher) simple accompaniment.  In other words, the point is not that Brown’s new instrument was the first to utilize this style, but that it was created to better take advantage of the basic style.  As this somewhat confusing point occurs throughout several years of advertising (Grunewald still using it in 1904), and to confirm that this was indeed the playing practice of amateur guitarists at the time (I am no expert), I went to the source: Jeffrey Noonan, author of The Guitar in America.  No one has studied the early literature and music more than Noonan.  He summed it up for me thusly: “The ‘bass solo’ style was very common for amateur players - even as late as the 1920s The Cadenza (or maybe Crescendo) published some solo arrangements by Sophocles Papas (as close to Segovia as you could get) - and every one of his arrangements was in the ‘bass solo’ style.  Lots of the late 19th-century solos in the magazines were in this style and were clearly aimed at the amateur player.”  

Though Brown did not pass up the opportunity to tout the “increased” tone and volume of “nearly double that of the guitar” (after all, every new builder and inventor did this routinely), the crux of his invention was the added octave strings on the 4 low courses.  But again, this was not to create a novel means of introducing a strange new playing style – the thumb melody – but to expand the musical range of what was already the common amateur playing style (the “bass solo” style).

This is made clearer in the next sentence, when the writer explains that “the fingering is much more simple than upon the guitar, for by means of the four extra treble strings, one is enabled to render almost any ordinary piece of music with the left hand in the first position, there being two and one-half octaves under the hand in this position” (italics mine).  Get it?  They’re describing the characteristic well known to 12-string players – that either the low or high octave of the 4 lowest courses can be accented (naturally occurring depending on whether a down-stroke or up-stroke is used on the pair of octave strings); or they can even be separately plucked.  Brown’s idea then is to just leave the left hand in first position, period, and let the high octave string in those 4 low courses extend the melody upwards.  This is assuming the amateur player can get the hang of this tricky transposition!  Brown seems quite confident, as the article claims “On the guitar there are eighteen frets, while only four or five are needed upon the harp-guitar.”  There you have it!  It goes on for a couple more paragraphs about how much easier it will be to play all the popular airs and such.

The tone is given additional press (“autoharp or mandolin” plus guitar), with “volume…being nearly double that of the guitar.”  Strange that there is still no allusion to a “harp” tone, as that is the name of the new instrument, and the only term used by Brown in his patent.  With nary a mention of mandolin or autoharp effects in Brown’s patent, I would propose that the TMTR writer perhaps saw and heard an actual instrument, and drew their own conclusion (and a more accurate one).  Next, the “double instrument” feature is explained a bit more, describing how by “throwing a small lever it can instantly be converted into an ordinary guitar, this being accomplished by silencing the extra treble strings.”  The patent clearly shows and explains this device: 4 hooks on a bar mounted across the soundhole are positioned over the high strings (the ones that make it sound “mandolin-like” or as Brown states, “harp effect”).  The lever linkage pulls them down out of the way, leaving just the standard 6 strings accessible…in theory.

Finally, we learn that “two prominent manufacturers will place the instrument on the market this coming fall.”

Before continuing, note that we’re still talking about Brown’s 10-string.  There are two simple reasons why Brown didn’t include twelve.  Just like today’s 12-strings, the physics of string technology don’t allow a 24-25”-scale steel string that can be tuned to a high b’ – so the octave effect must stop at the 3^rd G string.  Modern 12-strings of course double the E & B for balance and to better approximate the “jangle” of the octave courses.  Brown was only interested in extending the range in first position – so he saw no point in just adding another unison string.

At the “Gordon musical merchandise warerooms” (in New York), the first of Brown’s “two prominent manufacturers” places the instrument on the market.  I don’t know who built Gordon’s instruments; it probably could have been any number of East Coast shops or factories.  Whoever it was copied Brown’s patent drawing (and likely the prototype(s) pretty closely, except for the headstock, which is instead a more interesting and attractive asymmetrical shape.  We may never know whose design this actually was.

The woodcut shows the same pear-shaped, “‘ye olden time” body and distinctive bridge shape.  However, the whole reason for the bridge shape is the extension for the lever for lowering the high strings.  This is not included, nor the device itself in the soundhole (as in the patent drawing, above) - though its effect is mentioned in the text.  This is the first time that the tone of a “harp” is brought up; specifically, with all ten strings engaged, it is a “harp”; with the 4 extras silenced, it is “converted to guitar” – exactly that of Brown’s original premise.

All things considered, the vibe is still more of a “novelty” instrument.

October 2, 1897: TMTR: “Harp-Guitar – A New Invention”

The second of the prominent manufacturers, Rene Grunewald, unveils his harp-guitar (under the same patent).  It is not yet pictured.  While many TMTR “articles” reek of favoritism (quid pro quo if not payola), evident in the obvious advertising hyperbole, the level is amped up here, perhaps by Grunewald, himself?  Essentially describing the same playing advantages as the previous notices, the copy is well worth reading, as you guitar players will discover that you may very well have wasted “years of tedious practicing” learning how to run “up and down the fingerboard” for nothing.

Before we ridicule Grunewald too strongly, it should be noted that the claim of being “famous in musical circles all over the country” was not without some merit.  The Louisiana Grunewald firm was then large and well established, and Rene’s mandolin factory had been mentioned several times by this point, with notices of success exporting vast quantities of (bowl-back) mandolins, and later guitars, to other countries.

Still, the true newsworthiness of The Music Trade Review must fall under some suspicion.  Certainly they were much more impartial than the Cadenza, and later Crescendo, magazines, which rarely included a single glad-handing sentence about any manufacturer or brand name who was not one of that issue’s advertisers – yet TMTR’s “stories” and notices – intended for the trade rather than the final customers - seem intended to hype the topic, first and foremost.

January 22, 1898: TMTR: “The Grunewald Harp-Guitar”

Grunewald’s instrument is now shown, and we see that his company wisely chose to use a normal guitar-shaped body.  All other particulars seem to match Gordon’s – the asymmetrical 10-string headstock and the distinctive bridge, though once again, the required (and alluded-to) lever and hook assembly are mysteriously absent.

The write-up is similar to the last one, and even longer.  Grunewald and/or the writer revert back to tone comparison to a “concert autoharp” or “mandolin and guitar.”  They are now even more strongly advertising this as something for a beginner or amateur, an instrument that can be “mastered…with a few days practice” unlike the standard guitar.  Though still “novel,” someone at TMTR seems to be pushing this as a practical, useful instrument.

Later on, while still a 10-string model (at right), Grunewald appears to have switched to a standard bridge, with the same 2 strings under one bridge pin, and separated on the saddle by a tiny pin.  The headstock appears to be the same asymmetrical design.  Note the same label as in the previous instrument.

Back to our story:  

February 12, 1898: TMTR: “The Grunewald Harp-Guitar”

What’s going on?  Not a month later, the trade journal again highlights the new instrument, with the same woodcut and 2 columns of hype, claiming that it is “attracting considerable attention in trade and musical circles.”  In fact, “all who have examined it are unanimous in proclaiming it to be a radical and practical improvement upon the time-honored guitar.”  True?  There doesn’t seem to be reason to totally discount the report, yet where are all the surviving instruments?  Perhaps all south of the border, as the company’s activity there is again specifically mentioned? 

This time, in the tone department, they’re having their cake and eating it too, describing the “quality of tone (that) resembles that of the mandolin and guitar, or more particularly that of the harp…”  Personally, I consider a mandolin and harp very different (!) - the mandolin being steel strung, high and bright, while available harps were all gut strung.  Note that the “autoharp or mandolin” clues have informed us from the beginning that Brown’s original instrument and the two manufacturer’s were almost certainly all strung in steel (or silk & steel), which at the time was intended for amateurs and not “serious” guitar players.

This piece ends with another reminder that the “ordinary guitar…is an instrument upon which…comparatively few can play.”  It sounds like the Grunewald harp-guitar may indeed soon supersede it!

April 16, 1898: TMTR: A short blurb tells of a Grunewald agent’s success in Mexico and soon South America with the harp-guitar.

September 10, 1898: TMTR: “Rene Grunewald Forging Ahead”

Now things are getting serious.  First, they’re already talking about the “now famous harp-guitar.”  We then learn that Grunewald is planning to aggressively market the instrument (along with his mandolins) throughout the United States, but also in Cuba and Puerto Rico (America’s “new possessions”). Further acclaim of the still-10-string instrument and much name-dropping regarding Grunewald mandolin testimonials follows.

October 15, 1898: TMTR: “The Harp-Guitar”

A month later and TMTR is really taking this seriously, insisting that “The new American harp-guitar…is considered by experts, soloists and amateurs as the acme of perfection.”  For the first time, we are told exactly how the melody will be played in first position via the paired octave strings: “The air will sound in a clear treble, bass, or plainly in octaves, with great volume, by simply engaging the treble of the parallel strings with the thumb and its larger companion with the first finger.”  Man, can you imagine a beginner doing that with a few days practice?  They’re telling me I can pluck just the skinny string of the pair and get a melody with “great volume”?  How many modern 12-string players can do that?

December 3, 1898: The Houston Daily Post: Display Ad

A separate C. Grunewald store in Houston, Texas at 310 Main St. lists “Harp-Guitars” among its inventory.  "C" must be Clifford, brother of Rene.

April 8, 1899: TMTR: “The Harp-o-chord the Latest”

This tells of Carl Brown’s second invention, the “Harp-o-chord.”  Clearly, the TMTR editor is a Brown fan!

September 10, 1899: The Sacramento Record-Union: News Announcement

A short entry announces Brown’s new Harp-o-chord invention, and includes “who made such a success of a ten-stringed harp guitar, which he brought out some two years ago…”

December 23, 1899: TMTR: “A New Guitar”

An interesting little press release (with a typo of “1889” in the heading, so don’t get confused) from Brown’s firm in Columbus, Ohio, that mentions the “new 10-string guitar recently invented…manufactured by the “New Orleans branch of the Columbus Harpochord Co.”

Curiously, the address given (West Bond St.) is different than the Grunewald’s factory (Conti St.), so the question is: Is this a new facility unrelated to Grunewald, or simply a department of, or new location of, Grunewald’s original factory?  It’s curious that Grunewald – surely the bigger “name” – isn’t mentioned, nor have we heard anything of him in TMTR for over a year.

If Grunewald was indeed still the manufacturer, this would indicate that at the very end of 1899, Grunewald still had not come up with the 12-string version.  However, if Grunewald was out of the picture, could he have been now creating his 12-string?  And if he broke off from Brown, could he still call his 12-string version “the Harp-Guitar”?  What’s missing is a 12-string specimen showing the label, which would presumably be under the original Brown patent.  Or would it?  None of the next Grunewald ads mention a patent. WANTED: Any images and/or information of a surviving Grunewald 12-string “harp-guitar.”

Irrespective of this puzzle, note the key sentence of this notice: the claim that “The New Orleans house is sending them out by the hundreds, and the sales are enormous.”   Again, if true, where are the surviving instruments?!  

August 19, 1900: The Houston Daily Post: Display Ad

The Houston C. Grunewald store announces “Have just received new lot Harp Guitars of…$10.50.” There is no way to know whether these were 10-strings or 12-strings.

1901-1902: Here is where our trail grows cold, as nothing further on the 10- or 12-string Brown or Grunewald (to say nothing of Gordon) harp-guitar appears in The Music Trade Review (that I have found through searching.  Someone next needs to carefully read all pages of all weekly issues).

There is one ad in the S. S. Stewart Journal in April, 1901 for Grunewald’s new “Special Guitar” (per Noonan’s extensive The Guitar in American Banjo, Mandolin and Guitar Periodicals, 1882-1933), but this is only a 6-string guitar with an added metal tailpiece.  I haven’t seen the ad, but suspect that if a 12-string “harp-guitar” also appeared in it, it would have been referenced by Noonan.

Meanwhile, what of Holzapfel & Beitel, whom I introduced way back at the start?  I am already seeing in several places on the Internet an “1898” date for the period that Holzapfel started building his 12-strings.  This date comes directly from Neil Harpe’s Stella book, and coincides with the date of the Holzapfel & Beitel partnership, before Beitel left.  Specifically, Neil states, “The earliest (12-string) examples were made between 1898 and 1905…”  Do we take this to mean that they built their first one in 1898, or that this is merely the inclusive range of years that such an instrument was known to have been introduced in?  A small point of semantics, but important for provenance, and I believe Harpe intended only the latter generality.

February 3, 1902: Holzapfel & Beitel private contract

Still - here was a smoking gun worth tracking down!  I noticed that all the early Holzapfel specimens are “circa” dated – apparently none are dated inside.  Asking Neil for provenance to hopefully put this matter to rest, he graciously sent me a scan of the rare document at left, allowing me to share it with you.  This is indeed evidence that shows that on February 3^rd, 1902, Holzapfel & Beitel rented to a customer (with “option to buy”) a new or used 12-string guitar.  As of this writing, this would appear to be the earliest proven date for an American “12-string guitar,” would it not?  So, armed with this data, I would be careful of claiming “1898-1905” for Holzapfel & Beitel 12-strings, but 1901 would appear to be plausible, and, if need be, “c.1900” a reasonable and generic “round number” for circa dating this important instrument.

Holzapfel 12-strings (at left) are important today, not from just an historical perspective, but because they are amazing instruments years ahead of their time, and - a hundred years later - perfectly suitable for contemporary players.  Like Knutsen did with his harp guitars, in the 12-string world, Holzapfel introduced larger, louder, steel-string instruments that must have blown away players with “progressive ears.”

Grunewald 12-strings were perhaps strung with identical steel-strings, and may or may not sound great, but due to their “parlor” size (and rarity) don’t even register a blip with today’s 12-string players and collectors.  But what about back in the day?

I have yet to come across any specific ad or mention of a Holzapfel or H & Beitel 12-string guitar, but Grunewald - after the TMTR 10-string write-ups – came back blazing with full page ads in The Cadenza for a couple years running.  These were seen by most every “serious” guitar player in America, and also all levels of amateurs.  While TMTR catered to the trade, The Cadenza catered to the customers – the players.

December, 1902: The Cadenza: Grunewald advertisement

Grunewald takes out a full-page ad highlighting his 12-string Harp-Guitar in the December, 1902 issue.  The “new invention” claim in this case was simply that the old Brown invention is now a full 12-string guitar.  I think Grunewald is “starting over” – trying to “re-set” the double-stringing concept in the public’s imagination.  There is no reference to the earlier 10-string or Brown’s patent, though later on, his brochure text clearly mentions the same first-position playing technique as the “point” of the extra strings.  There is no reference to the Grunewald ad in this issue’s “Trade Department” as normally occurred.

But when did the actual instrument first appear?  Note that ad copy such as “A New Invention!” was often used for years (in this case, at least 2 or 3), so it doesn’t necessarily mean that the instrument was brand new this very month.  Yet as of this writing, this is the earliest Grunewald 12-string date I am aware of, so until more evidence turns up, we can’t say with certainty who built the official “first 12-string guitar.”

Did one copy the other?  As both Grunewald and Holzapfel & Beitel advertised or were featured in both The Music Trade Review and The Cadenza, I imagine that the two firms would be aware of each other, but who knows?  There was likely a much better chance that Holzapfel was familiar with Grunewald’s 10-string than Grunewald being aware of Holzapfel’s first “custom” 12-string.  Speculation aside, this may be irrelevant, as there’s no reason not to believe that two builders (and probably more) could come up with the same idea at the same time.  In any event, I think Grunewald acted on his own.  To me, it is perfectly reasonable to assume that Grunewald (and/or his customers) observed the 10-string’s problem – that the 2 high strings were unevenly balanced, so he simply doubled those to approximate the octave-doubling “jangle” effect of his 4 low courses.  The result?  Grunewald has (astutely) doubled the two remaining high strings, creating the first production 12-string guitar, still called the “Harp-Guitar,” and possibly still under the original Brown patent.  

January, 1903: The Cadenza: Grunewald advertisement

Grunewald’s second full page ad concerns his other main business: supplying heads for banjos and drums.  This time the editors included him in the “Trade Department,” proudly explaining how they designed the artwork for his ad themselves.  

I have to admit that I prefer the cuddly “instrument heads-on-the-hoof” to the creepier catch phrase alluded to at the top of this article.  

February, 1903: The Cadenza: Grunewald advertisement

Grunewald’s new ad announces “The Grunewald Harp-Guitar” as “The King of Guitars” with similar hyperbole.  The Cadenza writer (either Editor C. L. Partee himself, or assistant Charles Adams) apparently paid zero attention to Grunewald’s first illustrated full-page ad 2 issues prior, and finally wakes up.  Here, in the “Trade Department,” where he pays lip service to his paying advertisers by parroting the advertiser’s own text and catch phrases, he makes the mistake of not bothering to learn about (or remember from two issues ago!) Grunewald’s instrument.  Instead, “knowing” what an actual harp guitar is, and reading “12 strings,” he makes the obvious assumption and tells the readers that the new guitar has 6 sub-basses.  Ooops!

This amusing error nevertheless illustrates how familiar the BMG community (“serious” players of banjo, mandolin and guitar) was with true harp guitars, but completely unfamiliar with the concept of a double-strung guitar.

I am missing the March Cadenza issue, which would have been interesting in light of the above – a perfect example of the useless, uninvolved “lip service” Partee gave to both his advertisers and his readers in his “Trade Department.”

Obviously, the Cadenza editor has been informed (probably by Grunewald himself, who I hope got a free ad out of it!) that he screwed up on his helpful description in the last issue.  This time, he takes pains to explain the instrument (with nary an apology).  Again, this helps demonstrates that, in Partee’s world, the 12-string was then completely unknown.  He includes text that is clearly taken directly from advertising material supplied by Grunewald.  This, in fact, matches exactly that of the brochure found recently (shown next).  Specifically: “Every guitar player knows how easy it is to play a bass solo on the guitar and at the same time to carry an accompaniment.  This same principle is applied upon the Harp-Guitar, the air being picked by the thumb…”  This would be the last Cadenza ad by Grunewald.

The infamous envelope (left) obtained by Fretboard Journal’s Michael Simmons contained the full brochure on Grunewald’s 12-string.  Postmarked Feb 17, 1904, the earlier Cadenza listings suggest that this brochure had been out for a year or more.

Again, there is no mention of the original Brown patent, which may or may not have covered Grunewald’s slightly-altered instrument.  Regardless, for better or worse, Grunewald retained Brown’s name.

Conclusions: I’m not sure if we can be positive of Holzapfel’s stringing and tuning system for his first 12-strings, and we may never know precisely when, how or why he (or he and Beitel) came up with it.  On the other hand, we do know the tuning of Grunewald’s – and it is exactly that of the modern 12-string.  Not only that, but we have the direct trail back to its beginning, and it is clearly the “novel” 10-string “harp-guitar” that Brown invented – not to make a louder guitar, or to make a double-strung guitar with whatever stringing arrangement that happened to work – but to specifically add octave strings (precisely and only as many as technically feasible) for a new way for amateur guitarists to play without learning the fretboard up the neck.

That, I believe, may be closest to the real, if ironic, birth of the American 12-string guitar.  

To re-cap:  

Evolution and Rise of the American 12-String Guitar
(as proposed by Gregg Miner)  

·         Feb 8, 1896: Carl E. Brown, a musical instrument inventor, submits a patent for a new 10-string guitar he dubs “the Harp-Guitar.”  It has a pear-shaped body; the 4 low courses are strung in octaves, while the 2 high strings are single.  There is a lever to grab the 4 high extra strings and move them out of playing position.  He already has a prototype hanging in a local music store.

·         Sep 22, 1896: The patent is granted.

·         Fall of 1896: He engages two different firms to build it – the Hamilton Gordon Company and the Rene Grunewald Company.  Gordon will make theirs in the shape of the patent design; Grunewald will make the body with a traditional guitar shape.  Each is called “The Harp-Guitar,” licensed and protected under Brown’s patent.

·         1896-to-1899: In The Music Trade Review, Brown’s invention is mentioned 3 times, the Gordon version is shown once, and the Grunewald is featured at least 6 times.

·         c.1900: Sometime between late 1898 and late 1902, Grunewald has doubled the two remaining high strings, creating the first production 12-string guitar, still called “The Harp-Guitar, and possibly still under the original Brown patent (this remains unanswered).  During this same period, Holzapfel & Beitel begins building similar (though larger-bodied) 12-string guitars.

·         The 12-string Grunewald harp guitar continues to be advertised and marketed through at least 1904.

·         This continual visibility of the Grunewald instrument (first 10-, then 12-string version), through both The Music Trade Review and The Cadenza (the main “business” and “consumer” periodicals, respectively) feeds the awareness and interest of both musicians/customers and other manufacturers.

·         Holzapfel’s instruments may have inspired the eventual Oscar Schmidt 12-strings, while Lyon & Healy (and others) made instruments like the parlor-size Grunewald, eschewing the old “harp-guitar” naming gimmick, and taking it into the mainstream.  The American 12-string guitar is established!

Additional Observations:

What about 12-strings south of the border?

I haven’t addressed the influence of Mexican or Latin American double-strung guitars of various types on the 12-string because, A) I’m not familiar with much of the provenance on the subject, and B) have a gut feeling that they weren’t as a big part of the story as has sometimes been implied. But I really don’t know.  As I have mentioned a couple times above: from the provenance we have in hand – the editorial text of all the periodicals – it seems clear to me that the general musical instrument wholesale/retail industry – and their customers – were all but completely ignorant about any Mexican or Latin American double-strung guitars; nor was anyone among them interested in, or familiar with, the history of double-strung Baroque, and other early, gut-strung guitars.  A “double-strung”guitar was a “completely new novelty” in 1900.  However, I do find it curious that Lyon & Healy’s first catalog 12-string was lumped in with an unusual 11-string, both as “Mexican style” guitars.  I find it hard to believe that the firm was unfamiliar with the Grunewald instrument…perhaps they realized that it was silly to call it “the harp-guitar” and were initially unsure how to market it.  

Update Note: Michael Holmes strongly disagrees with my above statement regarding the lack of recognition of Mexican double-strung instruments.  He suggests to "Check the records of imports in the Commerce Dept's annual reports.  To get a feel for cross-border influence you need to go to a folklorist from the Tex-Mex area.  That's not my area of expertise, but 40 years of presenting multi-cultural folk festivals have left me with a clear impression that players exchanged information back and forth, constantly."   I have no doubt Michael's observation is correct (and would be anxious to receive clear information from other researchers on this).  I just don't see any direct evidence that this exchange of musical instruments across the border influenced any of the major or minor North American manufacturers to create 12-string guitars, though it may have subtly helped increase the customer base for such instruments.  Judging by the evidence above, especially things like the Sears catalog lack of instruments, I would guess that this customer demand for 12-strings (or other "south of the border" instruments) was close to zero for quite some; a novelty, if that. For instance, I haven't seen any American reproductions of this obviously well-built 12-string guitar by M. Fernandez of Mexico, c.1890 according to the seller Christies (labeled "M. FERNANDEZ FTE GUITARRAS MEXICO CALLE DE CHICONAUTLA JUNTO AL NUMERO 25," and sold Oct 14, 2011).   Still, if that date is accurate, then it would appear correct that Mexican builders "beat us to the punch" on modern steel-strung 12-string guitars.   Again, I would appreciate images and information on other early 12-string guitars.

Regarding the write-ups of the Brown and Grunewald 10-strings: Ironically, after doing everything they possibly can to distance their “superior” instrument from the lowly 6-string, they mention the patented device that hooks all 4 octave strings and lowers them out of the way, so that the player can just go back to playing their standard guitar (“from harp to guitar”).  Apparently, they felt they could have their cake and eat it too!  But it does illustrate that they truly considered the “normal guitar” and their 10-string “harp-guitar” two distinctly different instruments (as do many modern 6 & 12-string guitarists today – I know I do).

We’re still left with two nagging questions, though important perhaps only to diehard American guitar historians or 12-string geeks: 
A) Who built America’s first true 12-string? 
And, B) Who/what popularized the instrument? 

Until we find more date provenance on both Grunewald and Holzapfel, I’d say the first is a coin toss, though leaning toward Holzapfel & Beitel.  So for now, I’d go with saying “both of them built their slightly different versions c. 1900.”  As to the latter, I would argue that Grunewald’s was far more visible to a wider audience, but that Holzapfel’s was (and instigated) a more “modern” instrument.  In other words, both are key figures – with Brown>Grunewald getting points for the earlier invention and evolution, while Holzapfel can claim an instrument worthy of today’s collectors and players.

Red Herrings:

 Michael Holmes’ answer to a reader in an August, 2005 Acoustic Guitar magazine column (which comes up in Google searches) states that Grunewald was selling his 12-string in 1898.  The included ad is the same as that of the 1904-postmark.  For the record, it was the 10-string harp-guitar available in 1898, not yet the 12- (Michael confirmed to me the understandable error in assumption as well).  

NOTE:  I have recently found dates of 1888 and 1891 in the Chronicling America online archives of what are likely these instruments, including some built by Bruno. 

Popularity:

Just how popular was the 12-string guitar?  Scanning a run of Sears catalogs from 1896 to 1918, I found exactly zero.  In 1914 they finally added a double-neck harp guitar for a couple of years; they even offered the unusual “Portuguese Guitar” and “Italian Guitar (Chitarra Battente)” in late 1914 for 2 seasons – but never a simple 12-string, though I’m sure they eventually did (I haven’t gotten to the ‘20s and ‘30s catalogs yet).

It would be interesting to look for 12-string players in the issues of Cadenza, but normally, that’s the abode of 6-string, gut-strung guitars (though plenty of harp guitars appear).

Of the “hundreds” of instruments, specifically 10-strings, that Brown and Grunewald claim to have shipped, almost none are (so far) to be found.  I thought for sure I had an image or two of a Grunewald 12-string harp-guitar in my files, but apparently not.  Has anyone seen one?  Of surviving Grunewald 10-strings, I know of the two shown above.  I’m betting that more Grunewalds, and perhaps even a Gordon, will turn up once this article is posted online.   

Besides the early 12-strings presented in Neil Harpe’s book, I’m sure there are many others.  And as Harpguitars.net readers know, there are many harp guitars known beginning in the early ‘teens with 12 strings on the neck: Knutsen, Bruno, Favilla, Coulter, and many others by unidentified makers.

These are just my thoughts, observations and theories after a couple short months of research.  I’m sure the story of America’s 12-string Guitar will evolve. 

If you enjoyed this article, or found it useful for research, please consider making a donation to The Harp Guitar Foundation, which supports Harpguitars.net so that this information will be available for others like you and to future generations. Thank you for your support!

Harpguitars.net Home

The Harp Guitar Foundation            The Harp Guitar Gathering®

History          Players         Music         Luthiers         Iconography         Articles 

 Forum                 About                Links                Site Map                Search               Contact

All Site Contents Copyright © Gregg Miner, 2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010,2011. All Rights Reserved.

Copyright and Fair Use of material and use of images: See Copyright and Fair Use policy.