Daniel Limoges Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 Hi, I just don't know if this guitar is a real Gibson or even if it's a studio or a standard ect ... the only thing i know is that, she was made in 2005 ... please can you help me about this (look at the images) ..& how is his value ? Thanks a lot Daniel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bill Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 Appears real to me, however that head stock looks like it has been broken off at some point which reduces its value considerably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Limoges Posted April 13, 2018 Author Share Posted April 13, 2018 Appears real to me, however that head stock looks like it has been broken off at some point which reduces its value considerably. Yes the guitar has been broken Big Bill, but this is why i ask which model is this to get the right price ... a studio ? ... if the head stock hve been repair correctly, it should be ok ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelT Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 Yes the guitar has been broken Big Bill, but this is why i ask which model is this to get the right price ... a studio ? ... if the head stock hve been repair correctly, it should be ok ??? It looks to be an 05 Classic, not a Studio. Studios don't have binding. Looks like they're going for around $1500. This one has a break in the neck near the headstock so that'll take off a considerable amount. What are they asking for it? Are you able to see it in person? It's hard to tell from a picture as to how well the neck break was fixed. The fact that it's visible concerns me enough that I wouldn't buy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Limoges Posted April 13, 2018 Author Share Posted April 13, 2018 It looks to be an 05 Classic, not a Studio. Studios don't have binding. Looks like they're going for around $1500. This one has a break in the neck near the headstock so that'll take off a considerable amount. What are they asking for it? Are you able to see it in person? It's hard to tell from a picture as to how well the neck break was fixed. The fact that it's visible concerns me enough that I wouldn't buy it. Hi Micheal, It's 950$ cnd ... yes i will see the seller in person ... the reconstruction of the guitar is visible yes ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Farnsbarns Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 Hi Micheal, It's 950$ cnd ... yes i will see the seller in person ... the reconstruction of the guitar is visible yes ! Don't even bother going to see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bill Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 100% agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Limoges Posted April 13, 2018 Author Share Posted April 13, 2018 Don't even bother going to see it. Outch ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Farnsbarns Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 Outch ! If you're going to buy a guitar with a headstock repair it needs to be all but invisible, and at half the usual value. This one is neither so there's no point going to see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted April 18, 2018 Share Posted April 18, 2018 If you're going to buy a guitar with a headstock repair it needs to be all but invisible, and at half the usual value. This one is neither so there's no point going to see it. This. Pip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.Ustain Posted April 19, 2018 Share Posted April 19, 2018 Oh, for under $1K I would check it out for sure. Visible repairs may be hack jobs, but also may be solid repairs needing finish touch up. I would happily pay $1K for a solid Classic that looks as good as that one, and has a good neck repair. If it's a crappy repair job, I wouldn't buy it at all. I think it depends on what you are willing to accept and what work you can do. I can readily undertake a finish repair, etc., so a guitar like this could be a great deal for someone like me. Someone who doesn't want to do their own repair work would want to avoid it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted April 19, 2018 Share Posted April 19, 2018 ...which model is this to get the right price ... a studio?... Just an afterthought; I think, judging by the finish, that the model in question is actually a Standard Faded. Hard to tell from the snaps posted but it doesn't look to have a glossy finish. It's not a '1960 Classic' as the serial numbering for that model is ink stamped - not impressed - and is of either 4(1989), 5 (1990's) or six (2000's) digits. The Standard Faded (if it is one) is actually quite a sought-after model and are priced accordingly so if the broken headstock isn't too off-putting and the guitar is likely to be a 'keeper' then it might be worthwhile acquiring it. If so, it's probably best to bear in mind that if you decide to sell it at some time in the future you will find yourself having to justify your own asking price for a guitar with a less-than-perfect-headstock-break-and-repair. Pip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mihcmac Posted April 19, 2018 Share Posted April 19, 2018 I agree with pretty much everything that has been said previously, it does appear to be authentic. But the neck repair cuts the value in half, something I just experienced with a 2004 Gibson SG Standard that had a repaired hairline fracture. The tuners look new, to shiny and don't match the patina of the other nickel hardware that make it look older. The big question is what does it play like, not all Les Paul's are equal, it might have a neck like silk, some just play better than others. In its condition a Les Paul Standard Faded Honeyburst or Cherry Sunburst value depends a lot on the year of manufacture. If it turns out to be something rare, it will still be still effected by the neck repair. Guitar Dater Project lists the SN# 00335427 as... Nashville Plant, TN, USA on February 2nd, 2005 Production Number: 127 Reverb price guide shows Good condition sales at $1300 to Excellent at $2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-28 Posted April 19, 2018 Share Posted April 19, 2018 That body is nice. A little flame by the switch and cut away and plain down by the strap button. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roach Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 It looks like a 2000 model and not an '05. Also looks like one of the alternate woods like mahogany. serial number starts 00, it just might be a 2000 model. In 2000 the first 2 numbers on LP's were year. It looks like this to me, http://www.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/2016/USA/Les-Paul-Standard-Mahogany-Top.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolution Six Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 This is a real Les Paul Gibson (Year 2005). The headstock look to be repaired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roach Posted April 22, 2018 Share Posted April 22, 2018 Guitar Dater Project lists the SN# 00335427 as... Nashville Plant, TN, USA on February 2nd, 2005 Production Number: 127 Reverb price guide shows Good condition sales at $1300 to Excellent at $2000 That guitar dater site is unreliable. It just told me that same serial number was: Your guitar was made at the <br style="box-sizing: border-box;">Kalamazoo Or Nashville Plant, USA<br style="box-sizing: border-box;">in 1976<br style="box-sizing: border-box;">Production Number: 335427 It goes on to say that the 00 in the serial is the year. It is a 2000 model for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Zeplin Posted April 22, 2018 Share Posted April 22, 2018 That guitar dater site is unreliable. It just told me that same serial number was: Your guitar was made at the <br style="box-sizing: border-box;">Kalamazoo Or Nashville Plant, USA<br style="box-sizing: border-box;">in 1976<br style="box-sizing: border-box;">Production Number: 335427 It goes on to say that the 00 in the serial is the year. It is a 2000 model for sure. Gibson serial numbers at the time used the first and fifth digit for the year, in this case 2005. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Zeplin Posted April 22, 2018 Share Posted April 22, 2018 It looks to be an 05 Classic, not a Studio. Studios don't have binding. Looks like they're going for around $1500. This one has a break in the neck near the headstock so that'll take off a considerable amount. What are they asking for it? Are you able to see it in person? It's hard to tell from a picture as to how well the neck break was fixed. The fact that it's visible concerns me enough that I wouldn't buy it. I don't think it is a Classic. At that time they were using greenish inlays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mihcmac Posted April 23, 2018 Share Posted April 23, 2018 from Reverb's How to date a Gibson... 1977 to Current Starting in 1977, Gibson adopted the current date-based serial system which codes for the year and day of production. The first number of the sequence indicates the decade of production, followed by the three digit day of the year, and finally the year. For example, the serial number 90237XXX corresponds to a production date of 1/23/97. The last three (or four as of 2005) digits signify the location of production and batch number, respectively, but this information isn't necessary to accurately dating your instrument. SN# 00335427 0 = Decade, XX0X 033 = Day of the year, February 2nd 5 = Year, XXX5 427 = Location of production Nashville and Batch number 127 Looks a lot like this 2005 Les Paul Standard Faded on Reverb notice it doesn't seem to have any telltale holes from removing a pickguard as this model introduced in 2005 didn't have one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roach Posted April 24, 2018 Share Posted April 24, 2018 I stand corrected on the year. My 2000 starts with 00 and I was told by gibson the first two were the year, however the 5th is also a 0, so i was misinformed. The guitar I am referring to 00120428, so please excuse my mistake and thank you for setting me straight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-28 Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 I stand corrected on the year. My 2000 starts with 00 and I was told by gibson the first two were the year, however the 5th is also a 0, so i was misinformed. The guitar I am referring to 00120428, so please excuse my mistake and thank you for setting me straight Yes the 1st and 5th number are the year the 2nd, 3rd and 4th are the Julian Date it was stamped so the 12th of January, 2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roach Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 Yes the 1st and 5th number are the year the 2nd, 3rd and 4th are the Julian Date it was stamped so the 12th of January, 2000. somehow they knew the model too from the serial, but idk how. If the op calls the 800 number maybe they can identify the model of this one. That is if still interested. But the broken neck is good enough reason not to buy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.