zombywoof Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 Did any of you guys see this one? If I was reasonably sure it were only true it would be a be still my beating heart thing. Not many of these hanging around the planet. It is at times like this I wish I had the eye and knowledge of Tom or JT. While I guess it could be a '43 LG-3, I just can't shake the feeling that I might be looking at something like a refinished 1944 LG-2. And I do give the seller credit as he provides a photo of the FON. https://www.ebay.com/itm/Rare-1942-Gibson-LG-3-Blond-Acoustic-Guitar-Vintage-W-Hard-Case-100-made/123014502054?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedzep Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 Obviously well thought of by the bidders, but I'd avoid that myself. Don't like the crack in that critical spot off the bridge dot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 It's more likely to be a re-finished LG-2 or even LG-1. You wouldn't know without an in-hand analysis. It looks to me like it has been brushed over with some kind of clear, gloppy finish. I've seen that done more than once. If it really is an LG-3, there would be no signs of dark overspray inside the soundhole. A forensic exam would tell you, but it sounds like the guy is making no guarantees and just wants to unload it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyearspickn Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 Sold for $2,326. A fool and his money ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duluthdan Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 Not enough rings in the rosette. Not an LG3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedzep Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 Ouch! If it's an LG1 Nick, I'd be shocked if there wouldn't be at least one educated bidder making sure that it wasn't before bidding at that level. I thought it was gloppy too. Guess we'll never know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 Ouch! If it's an LG1 Nick, I'd be shocked if there wouldn't be at least one educated bidder making sure that it wasn't before bidding at that level. I thought it was gloppy too. Guess we'll never know. It's tricky. The listing says 1942, but that FON--which appears to be a clear 284, maybe followed by a very faint 7, plus the red pencil rank--is consistent with 1944 (if it's 2847-xx). This is from the banner Gibson registry for 1944, which contains the known FON's 2848-xx and 2849-xx. They've made possibly erroneous assumptions about the year made on the presumption of the model, so who's to say they've got the model right? It took me all of about 10 minutes to do that research, so who knows what assumptions the seller has made, and what they are based on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted March 19, 2018 Author Share Posted March 19, 2018 It's tricky. The listing says 1942, but that FON--which appears to be a clear 284, maybe followed by a very faint 7, plus the red pencil rank--is consistent with 1944 (if it's 2847-xx). This is from the banner Gibson registry for 1944, which contains the known FON's 2848-xx and 2849-xx. They've made possibly erroneous assumptions about the year made on the presumption of the model, so who's to say they've got the model right? It took me all of about 10 minutes to do that research, so who knows what assumptions the seller has made, and what they are based on? To me, the easiest way to identify a 1942 Gibson is an FON ending with an "H". The FON stamped on my J-50, as example, is 7116H. If it had the original tuners you could have looked to see if the two circular manufacturer stamps were present. I also agree the finish looked inky appearing like what I would describe as a an amateurish attempt. Bottom line for me was, even if you bid believing it was a refinished LG-2, the selling price was not much of a bargain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 Bottom line for me was, even if you bid believing it was a refinished LG-2, the selling price was not much of a bargain. Agree 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted March 19, 2018 Author Share Posted March 19, 2018 As the guitar has the center back strip, at least it was not a refinished LG-1. That really would have added insult to injury. Not a terrible price just not what I would call a bargain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedzep Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 Now what? It's back up relisted with a thousand bucks and hefty ship fee added. You have to wonder where it fell apart. Thought it was sold. Maybe someone was reading this discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.