Gibson Brands Forums: 1956 SJ sanded or CW ? - Gibson Brands Forums

Jump to content

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1956 SJ sanded or CW ?

#1 User is offline   Dave F 

  • Plain Old Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 2416
  • Joined: 19-December 11
  • LocationKY

Posted 10 June 2018 - 06:41 PM

https://www.ebay.com...353.m1438.l2649

Posted Image
0

#2 User is offline   scriv58 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 334
  • Joined: 16-December 14
  • Locationsouthern illinois

Posted 10 June 2018 - 07:08 PM

My '57 cw and any other i've ever seen has the label like mine in the pic and always has a natural finish- the W on the neck block of the ebay guitar indicates 1955 right?

Posted Image

This post has been edited by scriv58: 10 June 2018 - 07:10 PM

0

#3 User is offline   Dave F 

  • Plain Old Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 2416
  • Joined: 19-December 11
  • LocationKY

Posted 10 June 2018 - 08:11 PM

Sounds correct.
Crack wise it looks in good shape.
Frets looks shot. Fretboard is fairly worn. Saddle canít go any lower. Bridge looks like itís been shaved down. Needs a neck reset. I would have to do something about itís looks. More than I would want to tackle or invest in
0

#4 User is offline   J-1854Me 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 1110
  • Joined: 17-August 10

Posted 10 June 2018 - 09:40 PM

Yes, the W FON says it's a 1955, as does the small teardrop pickguard. The tuners are later and not original. Bridge is a replacement too.

Too bad about that 'paint-by-numbers' sunburst finish..... yikes.

Fred
0

#5 User is offline   j45nick 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 10441
  • Joined: 05-February 11
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted 11 June 2018 - 05:35 AM

Pickguard shadow is of a batwing, which would be consistent with the 1955 FON. The switch to the batwing was made sometime in 1955, as far as I can tell. It also has a 19-fret neck, which suggests fairly early in '55, so this is a transition piece.

The bridge has been shaved to nothing and the pin holes ramped to try to improve break angle, but the guitar badly needs a neck re-set.

What's interesting is that it has scalloped top bracing, which I thought went away by 1955.

I've seen this guitar, or one similar to it, on the market recently. The asking price was a bit high for the amount of work needed.

You could make a really good guitar out of this, but it might take some money to do it.
0

#6 User is offline   zombywoof 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 7623
  • Joined: 24-January 08

Posted 11 June 2018 - 06:32 AM

View Postj45nick, on 11 June 2018 - 05:35 AM, said:

Pickguard shadow is of a batwing, which would be consistent with the 1955 FON. The switch to the batwing was made sometime in 1955, as far as I can tell. It also has a 19-fret neck, which suggests fairly early in '55, so this is a transition piece.



A transitional guitar may retain the scallop bracing as well. If it stays cheap it would seem to be a worthy project guitar.

This post has been edited by zombywoof: 11 June 2018 - 06:32 AM

__________________________________________________


"I play so rough - I stomp 'em"
Bukka White
0

#7 User is offline   j45nick 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 10441
  • Joined: 05-February 11
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted 11 June 2018 - 06:59 AM

View Postzombywoof, on 11 June 2018 - 06:32 AM, said:

A transitional guitar may retain the scallop bracing as well. If it stays cheap it would seem to be a worthy project guitar.

Agreed, but what constitutes "cheap" remains to be seen. This guitar was on reverb for a while for something like $3500, apparently with no takers.


I'm not sure if any of the finish is original, but back and sides might be, but with overspray. The color of the back seems mottled, like it was stripped and refinished by someone who did not know what they were doing.


Hard to tell what is going on with the bridgeplate, but I'm guessing neck re-set, bridgeplate, and bridge/saddle for starters. Hard to get a feel for fret wear, but the first-position board divots are significant, but not necessarily excessive.That's pushing about $1k(with no re-fret) before you decide what to do about at least the top finish. If you're going to strip and make a CW out of it, the time to do it is when the bridge is off.

It could probably make a really good player, but the price would have to be right.

That could still be an SJN rather than a CW. Not sure when the designation changed, but probably either '55 or '56.

This post has been edited by j45nick: 11 June 2018 - 08:08 AM

0

#8 User is offline   zombywoof 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 7623
  • Joined: 24-January 08

Posted 11 June 2018 - 08:22 AM

I don't know, from what I can see of it, the X brace does look scalloped to me. If not it has the lonest taper I have ever run across. I cannot make head or tails out of the bridge plate though. Given my history, I obviously have no problem with project guitars and will buy them without seeing them assuming I can get the guitar on the cheap. Asking $3500 for this guitar on Reverb though was just obscene.
__________________________________________________


"I play so rough - I stomp 'em"
Bukka White
0

#9 User is offline   j45nick 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 10441
  • Joined: 05-February 11
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted 11 June 2018 - 09:01 AM

View Postzombywoof, on 11 June 2018 - 08:22 AM, said:

I don't know, from what I can see of it, the X brace does look scalloped to me. If not it has the lonest taper I have ever run across. I cannot make head or tails out of the bridge plate though. Given my history, I obviously have no problem with project guitars and will buy them without seeing them assuming I can get the guitar on the cheap. Asking $3500 for this guitar on Reverb though was just obscene.



Definitely scalloped. Almost certainly not the original bridgeplate, as this one appears to be rosewood. Starting repairs are bridge, bridgeplate, and neck re-set.
0

#10 User is offline   fp 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 725
  • Joined: 02-January 08

Posted 11 June 2018 - 09:13 AM

That's a candidate for a re-top ! If I owned it that's what I'd do to it !
0

#11 User is offline   zombywoof 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 7623
  • Joined: 24-January 08

Posted 11 June 2018 - 11:05 AM

View Postj45nick, on 11 June 2018 - 09:01 AM, said:

Definitely scalloped. Almost certainly not the original bridgeplate, as this one appears to be rosewood. Starting repairs are bridge, bridgeplate, and neck re-set.


Rosewood was my thought as well. Martin used rosewood plates for a bit in the later 1960s but I have never known Gibson to. Why anybody would have gone that route is beyond me. This guitar is getting scarier by the minute in terms of just what may have been done to it. Still, if the price stays down, I would say it is worth the risk.

This post has been edited by zombywoof: 11 June 2018 - 11:10 AM

__________________________________________________


"I play so rough - I stomp 'em"
Bukka White
0

#12 User is offline   zombywoof 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 7623
  • Joined: 24-January 08

Posted 11 June 2018 - 11:18 AM

View Postfp, on 11 June 2018 - 09:13 AM, said:

That's a candidate for a re-top ! If I owned it that's what I'd do to it !


Why?
__________________________________________________


"I play so rough - I stomp 'em"
Bukka White
0

#13 User is offline   j45nick 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 10441
  • Joined: 05-February 11
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted 11 June 2018 - 12:07 PM

View Postfp, on 11 June 2018 - 09:13 AM, said:

That's a candidate for a re-top ! If I owned it that's what I'd do to it !


Why on earth would you do that? Other than the bad 'burst, the top looks good, and you've got 60+ years of aging on that spruce. You know it's original, because you can see the faint outline of the original batwing. Likewise, you've got scalloped braces, the last year Gibson used these until modern times.

The guitar is a bit of a dog's breakfast, but with patience, care, and a fair amount of money, this could be a nice player. I suspect it was an export model due to the "made in the USA" stamp.
0

#14 User is offline   QuestionMark 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 1594
  • Joined: 27-December 07

Posted 11 June 2018 - 05:30 PM

Have been watching/reading this posting string. Still canít figure out why anyone would even consider buying this obviously poorly refinished C&W, missing its signature batwing pickguard to boot. Better to spend the same $ on ANY other non-ruined/non-defaced/non-disrespected Gibson guitar. Someone ruined this guitar is kind of a saying no to it showstopper. This one isnít in the range of poor to excellent condition. Itís in the category of defaced.

Also, one can only imagine how the refinish and/or paint-over took away from this guutarís original sound. Even if a new refinisher purchased this guitar and refinished it decently for free now, itís still a refinished guitar significantly lowering its resale value from what it once was before the defacing. That puts its defaced state in perspective.

If it was simply a worn out looking guitar from tons of playing and years of great service to its prior owner, Iíd have no reservations about it. Itís be a cool looking long played old Gibson. But, thing is just a ruined guitar.

Just my perspective.

QM aka Jazzman Jeff

This post has been edited by QuestionMark: 11 June 2018 - 05:53 PM

0

#15 User is offline   zombywoof 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 7623
  • Joined: 24-January 08

Posted 12 June 2018 - 06:47 AM

View PostQuestionMark, on 11 June 2018 - 05:30 PM, said:

Have been watching/reading this posting string. Still canít figure out why anyone would even consider buying this obviously poorly refinished C&W, missing its signature batwing pickguard to boot. Better to spend the same $ on ANY other non-ruined/non-defaced/non-disrespected Gibson guitar. Someone ruined this guitar is kind of a saying no to it showstopper. This one isnít in the range of poor to excellent condition. Itís in the category of defaced.

Also, one can only imagine how the refinish and/or paint-over took away from this guutarís original sound. Even if a new refinisher purchased this guitar and refinished it decently for free now, itís still a refinished guitar significantly lowering its resale value from what it once was before the defacing. That puts its defaced state in perspective.

If it was simply a worn out looking guitar from tons of playing and years of great service to its prior owner, Iíd have no reservations about it. Itís be a cool looking long played old Gibson. But, thing is just a ruined guitar.

Just my perspective.

QM aka Jazzman Jeff



I guess I do not see it as a "ruined" guitar. I see it as a project guitar. And I have never shied away from those. You answered your own question when you mentioned reduced value. The value is already gone. The key obviously is to have a good idea of what is afflicting that guitar and how much it will run you to put things right. I have been keeping a tab in my head of what the repairs and refinish would cost me just out of habit. It gives me the limit as to just how much I would pay for that instrument.
__________________________________________________


"I play so rough - I stomp 'em"
Bukka White
0

#16 User is offline   QuestionMark 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 1594
  • Joined: 27-December 07

Posted 12 June 2018 - 07:31 AM

What is your limit on what youíd pay for it? Am curious?

QM aka Jazzman Jeff
0

#17 User is offline   zombywoof 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 7623
  • Joined: 24-January 08

Posted 12 June 2018 - 11:55 AM

View PostQuestionMark, on 12 June 2018 - 07:31 AM, said:

What is your limit on what youíd pay for it? Am curious?

QM aka Jazzman Jeff


What I will pay for a guitar sight unseen and what I will pay for the same guitar hanging in my friend's store where I could play it and give it a good going over are two different things. Based on what I have spent in the past with the repair guy I relied on for 15 years (they would total around $600 minus the refin) and assuming everything about the guitar checked out, I would feel comfortable paying my friend $1150 or so for it with a good case thrown in. Off of eBay, I might bid $800. I am guessing it will go for more than that but I am not really looking for a 1950s Gibson at the moment. But it is a moot point as my next project guitar is en route - that Harmony I bought last week which in all honesty I did overpay for a bit. The owner and I both know it but it is what I offered because it is a hard guitar to find and I just wanted the stupid thing.
__________________________________________________


"I play so rough - I stomp 'em"
Bukka White
0

#18 User is offline   Dave F 

  • Plain Old Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 2416
  • Joined: 19-December 11
  • LocationKY

Posted 12 June 2018 - 08:04 PM

Currently at $618 + $85 shipping = $703 with a little over 24 hours to go.
If I were interested -
Buy it, string it up and see if I want to fix it up or resale it and try to break even.
Expect the worse,

I'm using this one at $5400 as a baseline for a close to unaltered sample (the bridge looks too nice), I would estimate the EBay one at 50% ($2700) if fixed up.
There are a few in good shape with some issues around this price.
-
Not having it in hand, I'm guessing -
Neck reset $350
Fret job, Fill divots, plane board - $280
New bridge, bridge plate, saddle, nut ,pins, strings- $260
New pickguard - $60
Touch up back, refin top - $350
Reglue loose braces - $50

Total $2,055, if it goes for around $1000, you'd be around $2400.

Like I said, if it doesn't go too high, you can get it and check it out before you makeup your mind. If you get it for less than a $1000, I think you could always bail out and break even.



https://reverb.com/i...-southern-jumbo

Posted Image

This post has been edited by Dave F: 12 June 2018 - 08:10 PM

0

#19 User is offline   QuestionMark 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 1594
  • Joined: 27-December 07

Posted 13 June 2018 - 02:01 PM

On the Ď55 SJ, Iíd leave the finish as is. It looks cool like that...a nice worn and definitely played guitar.

Just my two cents.

QM aka Jazzman Jeff
0

#20 User is offline   J-1854Me 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: All Access
  • Posts: 1110
  • Joined: 17-August 10

Posted 13 June 2018 - 02:46 PM

I think it looks like turd on a stick, and in desperate need of stickers and decals. Fortunately, I don't feel any need at all to rescue it. .

Presumably somebody will get this guitar and for hopefully not an exorbitant amount of money. Then if they have any Martin sunbursts, they can put this one in with the Martins and they will instantly look great.

[laugh]
0

Share this topic:


  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users