AleScholz Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 font="Arial"]Hello! I am from Brasil. I bought a guitar (Gibson USA Joe Perry Les Paul model, blackburst) from my bandmate, and it had a repair on the headstock. Unfortunately, the repair was poorly executed, and behind the neck appeared an amendment differing in the color of the ink (the original was black with a tone that seemed a bit green, and ink used in the repair was completely black). The serial number was also hidden. Recently I took the guitar to a luthier in my town to try to restore the original painting and the neck serial number, and he unfortunately failed. He finished painting the whole neck, to the junction with the body, dark black. I would try to leave it original again, but unfortunately it seems unfeasible and very expensive send it to Gibson in USA. I'll have to try to redo the painting here in Brasil. But to do it, I need to know: what was the exact specification of the color of the paint (and its manufacturer) and varnish used for painting the back of the body and the neck of this guitar? I need this information to buy appropriate materials and to guide the luthier in new attempt at restoration. Does anybody know the answers? Since now, thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Well theres a few ways to do it.. What I would do is stain the wood rather than used coloured paint.. So sand it all back down to the wood using no lower than 240 grit sand paper (any lower and you will risk re=shaping the wood too much).. Buy some wood stains (simple water based ones) in green and black colours (translucent stains will show the wood underneath if that's what you want).. Then mix some of the green and black stains and test the stains on some spare wood until you are happy with the colour. One you have that right.. stain the neck to the desired colour and then when that is dry spray several coats of clear nitrocellulose lacquer (you can get spray cans over here, not sure about your part of the world though).. And then you will have to wait a few weeks for the lacquer to cure and then buff.. Check out Youtube... there LOADs of video son this subject Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleScholz Posted March 9, 2014 Author Share Posted March 9, 2014 Thanks, Rabs!! I'll try to find some professional able to do this repair, because I'm not! Think this will be the most difficult! But your tip confirmed what I thought about the painting process. Thank you again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capmaster Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 font="Arial"]Hello! I am from Brasil. I bought a guitar (Gibson USA Joe Perry Les Paul model, blackburst) from my bandmate, and it had a repair on the headstock. Unfortunately, the repair was poorly executed, and behind the neck appeared an amendment differing in the color of the ink (the original was black with a tone that seemed a bit green, and ink used in the repair was completely black). The serial number was also hidden. Recently I took the guitar to a luthier in my town to try to restore the original painting and the neck serial number, and he unfortunately failed. He finished painting the whole neck, to the junction with the body, dark black. I would try to leave it original again, but unfortunately it seems unfeasible and very expensive send it to Gibson in USA. I'll have to try to redo the painting here in Brasil. But to do it, I need to know: what was the exact specification of the color of the paint (and its manufacturer) and varnish used for painting the back of the body and the neck of this guitar? I need this information to buy appropriate materials and to guide the luthier in new attempt at restoration. Does anybody know the answers? Since now, thanks! The last picture obviously shows a different guitar. It has a different serial number and looks like a fake. How's that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrorod Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 The last picture obviously shows a different guitar. It has a different serial number and looks like a fake. How's that? Hey Cap, I think that the last pic is of the same guitar before it was damaged and repaired? I think that the heavy coating of paint obscuring the serial # is bugging him as well? Can,t add much to the color mismatch but the splined repair looks pretty well done in the pics! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capmaster Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Hey Cap, I think that the last pic is of the same guitar before it was damaged and repaired? I think that the heavy coating of paint obscuring the serial # is bugging him as well? Can,t add much to the color mismatch but the splined repair looks pretty well done in the pics! The guitar body shown in the first picture seems legit - maybe that of a different instrument? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleScholz Posted March 10, 2014 Author Share Posted March 10, 2014 The guitar body shown in the first picture seems legit - maybe that of a different instrument? The photos are all from the same guitar. The first pictures of the guitar are in the state in which I bought it. The last one is the last restoration attempt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capmaster Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 The photos are all from the same guitar. The first pictures of the guitar are in the state in which I bought it. The last one is the last restoration attempt. The original serial number shown is 93077387 whereas the restoration attempt says 93077397. This looks odd to me, same as the fact that the latest picture looks like showing a faked Gibson guitar. I am not a restoration expert though, have never seen a restored Gibson serial number before and can't tell how a luthier would restore a damaged serial number imprint. In any case, it should say the same as the original one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrorod Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 It really does not matter anyway! It is a NON-collectable 'modern day' inferior-build LP with a headstock repair....?? What is the BIG DEAL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 The original serial number shown is 93077387 whereas the restoration attempt says 93077397. This looks odd to me, same as the fact that the latest picture looks like showing a faked Gibson guitar. I am not a restoration expert though, have never seen a restored Gibson serial number before and can't tell how a luthier would restore a damaged serial number imprint. In any case, it should say the same as the original one. No I think that its just the paint is so thick on the first re-spray and the angle of the picture that its making the 9 look like an 8.. I can clearly see that... Heres the pics in an easier to view way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capmaster Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 It really does not matter anyway! It is a NON-collectable 'modern day' inferior-build LP with a headstock repair....?? What is the BIG DEAL From here I wouldn't dare saying it was built inferior. The collectability point is subject to changing with time, so it only can be determined for just now. No I think that its just the paint is so thick on the first re-spray and the angle of the picture that its making the 9 look like an 8.. I can clearly see that... Heres the pics in an easier to view way To my eyes the second to last digit shown on the first picture could be a 3 but looks more like an 8. Comparison to the first digit doubtlessly saying 9 would be easier with different lighting and viewing angles. However, when comparing to the digits on my Gibson USA guitars, the digit in question must have been an 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleScholz Posted March 11, 2014 Author Share Posted March 11, 2014 From here I wouldn't dare saying it was built inferior. The collectability point is subject to changing with time, so it only can be determined for just now. To my eyes the second to last digit shown on the first picture could be a 3 but looks more like an 8. Comparison to the first digit doubtlessly saying 9 would be easier with different lighting and viewing angles. However, when comparing to the digits on my Gibson USA guitars, the digit in question must have been an 8. The serial number is correct. As the Rabs said, the angle of the photo makes it appear that it was an 8, but the correct numeral is really 9. About its quality, the repair on the structure and stability of the neck was very well done, although paint. This guitar has a solid mahogany body, not chambered. As a musician who appraised it says, it is an "ax with strings". I have other Gibsons and I can say that the playability of it, compared with the others, is perfect and assure that the sound of this Les Paul is fabulous. It was a pity that who did not have the ability to redo the painting, and unfortunately I don't have how to send the guitar to USA just for this. And that's why I asked for help to see if anyone knew the color of ink used to paint it, because I intend to restore it. But I appreciate everyone's help, and as soon as possible I will post photos of it restored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capmaster Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 No I think that its just the paint is so thick on the first re-spray and the angle of the picture that its making the 9 look like an 8.. I can clearly see that... The serial number is correct. As the Rabs said, the angle of the photo makes it appear that it was an 8, but the correct numeral is really 9. About its quality, the repair on the structure and stability of the neck was very well done, although paint. This guitar has a solid mahogany body, not chambered. As a musician who appraised it says, it is an "ax with strings". I have other Gibsons and I can say that the playability of it, compared with the others, is perfect and assure that the sound of this Les Paul is fabulous. It was a pity that who did not have the ability to redo the painting, and unfortunately I don't have how to send the guitar to USA just for this. And that's why I asked for help to see if anyone knew the color of ink used to paint it, because I intend to restore it. But I appreciate everyone's help, and as soon as possible I will post photos of it restored. Thank you, Ale, for your clarification, and sorry, Rabs, for me having insisted on it - I am a both sensitive and sceptical kind of guy and was in need of relief because of that... Loving the feel and tone of a guitar is the very part I think. Sadly a mishap with it may hit us the more, far beyond the estimated loss of value. Anyway, I am curious about the forthcoming pics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjsinla Posted March 13, 2014 Share Posted March 13, 2014 The last picture obviously shows a different guitar. It has a different serial number and looks like a fake. How's that? If they are the same guitar... What's with the white serial number? That's usually a bad sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrorod Posted March 15, 2014 Share Posted March 15, 2014 Did you even read the original post????. It was BROKEN, REPAIRED and RE-FINIISHED.....POORLY (I might add).....with the WRONG COLOR PAINT..... He likes the way it plays and feels but wants it to look like it used to (Example is the last photo) ....which was taken before the damage and repair took place (Examples are the previous pics)..... Do they NOT teach comprehension in school these days????? Okay, I feel better now... ...and by the way. If you want some 'real' conspiracy and intrigue?....look to the US Gov't and politicians and not some poor sap from Brazil with a "broke-neck" Joe-friggin-Perry Les Paul who wants to spend even MORE money on 'originality'....ain't that special??? Now, I feel WAY better! peace out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjsinla Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Yup, I did read the entire post, have good comprehension, too. I'm not doubting that they are the same guitar, that's what the guy says. I also saw the posts debating the serial number, etc. I'm just wondering about the photo that was taken before the repair showing a serial number in white. Having a white serial number is unusual. Is that the way that the way that Gibson was doing the serial numbers on that model? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrorod Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 I REALLY hope that You enjoy this.... http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=shoot+me+video&FORM=VIRE6#view=detail&mid=BFE4D1F6CA5FFCDE662ABFE4D1F6CA5FFCDE662A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.