Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

1967 Country and Western


JuanCarlosVejar

Recommended Posts

Folks,

 

I noticed this C&W with a serial of :884642 which corresponds with the year 1967 displays a “pantograph”

And strangely a script “SJN” trussrod cover

 

https://reverb.com/item/14219129-gibson-sjn-county-and-western-southern-jumbo-1967-natural

Any thoughts?

 

Any idea what year Gibsonstarted putting on the Script “SJN” and “SJ” trussrods? (i’ve seen other 67’s and 66 models with them)

 

 

 

JC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would call this a 1969er. The heavy back-braces point in that direction too.

The CW is in good shape, , , apart from the panto-logo.

 

As we know the crucial thing is the construction, , , and the nut width - and 67 was narrower than this.

 

A guitar like this ought to be heard before goin' any further. And the tree could fall in both directions here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Looks like a cool guitar with a cool story to me. But its always best to do your homework when buying vintage. I'd ask the seller for more info regarding the neck re-set and how much saddle is left.

 

IMO I think well under $2,000 would be a fair price if everything checks out.

 

BTW - My '63 CW (See below) is the best sounding vintage Gibson I've ever heard. I recently took it to two well know UK Luthiers to get a re-fret quote recently and they were blown away.

 

5464467411-c6b746c13e-b.jpg

 

5465066938-63b0aa36c8-o.jpg

 

Good luck!

 

[thumbup]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My '63 CW (See below) is the best sounding vintage Gibson I've ever heard.

A nice straight Country Western.

Seems not only the saddle, but the whole bridge was replaced at some point.

Wonder if we could hear it.

Btw. which strings do you prefer ?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems not only the saddle, but the whole bridge was replaced at some point.

Wonder if we could hear it.

Btw. which strings do you prefer ?

 

Spot on with the bridge E-minor7! From memory it originally had a plastic bridge which came in the case from the previous owner. Strings wise on generally on Martin 12's

 

Unfortunately, I'm not to handy with recording (...or playing for that matter [woot] ) but I did record her with a Zoom HD seven years ago when I had four seperete Gibsons in the house. I'll try and find the recording and post it. [smile]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spot on with the bridge E-minor7! From memory it originally had a plastic bridge which came in the case from the previous owner. Strings wise on generally on Martin 12's

 

Unfortunately, I'm not to handy with recording (...or playing for that matter [woot] ) but I did record her with a Zoom HD seven years ago when I had four seperete Gibsons in the house. I'll try and find the recording and post it. [smile]

 

Will look forward ^ very interested in these old squares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and Guilds...and Martins, ZW. I just picked up a '63 Guild F30. Another bucket lister. I wake up startled that I've bought another guitar, but with no remorse.

 

A Hoboken-made Guild. That is sweet. I have a real sentimentality when it comes to old Guilds. Back in the 1960s, they occupied that sweet spot in price between a Harmony Sovereign and a Martin D-18 or Gibson J-45. And when you get into the 1970s they were a bright spot in an otherwise pretty dismal guitar landscape. I have about as close a guitar to an F-30 as you are going to get without buying the real deal - a 1955/56 Epiphone FT-79. I always argued this guitar sounded very much like an old Guild F-30. It has the same body shape as the F-30 and you have to remember that Dronge initially had one of the Epi execs as a partner. And when Guild was starting out they took advantage of labor problems Epi was experiencing and snapped up a bunch of the unhappy and, with Epis temporary move to Philly, displaced craftsmen. So basically a number of the hands making NYC and Hoboken Guilds were the same tat had turned out Epiphones in the 1940s and early 1950s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like a cool guitar with a cool story to me. But its always best to do your homework when buying vintage. I'd ask the seller for more info regarding the neck re-set and how much saddle is left.

 

IMO I think well under $2,000 would be a fair price if everything checks out.

 

BTW - My '63 CW (See below) is the best sounding vintage Gibson I've ever heard. I recently took it to two well know UK Luthiers to get a re-fret quote recently and they were blown away.

 

5464467411-c6b746c13e-b.jpg

 

5465066938-63b0aa36c8-o.jpg

 

Good luck!

 

[thumbup]

 

Lovely guitar, out of curiosity, does it have a 43 mm nut? I have the reissue...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Alex, Mine is a skinny neck as per many of the 60's Gibson's but it has the wider nut.

 

Whats yours like?

 

[thumbup]

 

IMG-7876.jpg

 

Basically 1 11/16", 1.68" for the one in this photo. Pretty standard Gibson and Martin nut width post-war until the very skinny necks on some Gibsons in the mid/late 1960's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically 1 11/16", 1.68" for the one in this photo. Pretty standard Gibson and Martin nut width post-war until the very skinny necks on some Gibsons in the mid/late 1960's.

 

Don't forget there's an important difference between 'skinny' and 'narrow'.

 

The mid/late 60's Gibsons adopted the narrower nut. Both my of Gibsons are from this period but have the wider nut, but different neck shapes. My '63 CW has a 42mm nut but a skinny neck. My '64 J-50 has a wide nut and a slighty chunkier neck. ;)

 

So your issue is square or slope shoulder? What's the neck profile?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget there's an important difference between 'skinny' and 'narrow'.

 

The mid/late 60's Gibsons adopted the narrower nut. Both my of Gibsons are from this period but have the wider nut, but different neck shapes. My '63 CW has a 42mm nut but a skinny neck. My '64 J-50 has a wide nut and a slighty chunkier neck. ;)

 

So your issue is square or slope shoulder? What's the neck profile?

 

Sorry, we're talking at cross-purposes. I was simply translating the metric measurement of 42.57mm in your photo to English units of fractional inches and decimal inches.

 

I do have one narrow-nut Gibson, thanks to a fretboard replacement by Gibson in 1968 on my 1948-'50 J-45, which involved their narrowing the neck slightly to accommodate the narrow fretboards they used at that time. Fortunately, they left the earlier, chunkier neck section pretty much intact, so it is more playable than a lot of necks from the mid/late 1960's that are both skinny at the nut and thin in cross section.

 

I also had (but sold last year) a 1968 ES 335-12 that was both skinny at the nut and very thin in section. I found that one challenging to play, particularly since it was a 12-string.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget there's an important difference between 'skinny' and 'narrow'.

 

Both my of Gibsons are from this period but have the wider nut, but different neck shapes. My '63 CW has a 42mm nut but a skinny neck. My '64 J-50 has a wide nut and a slighty chunkier neck.

The necks on the squares and the slopes are basically different that way.

I believe Kalamazoo introduced the slim C's in 1960 to get closer to the smooth electric guitars. You never find a beefy square.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Alex, Mine is a skinny neck as per many of the 60's Gibson's but it has the wider nut.

 

Whats yours like?

 

[thumbup]

 

IMG-7876.jpg

 

Thank you, you have the narrow nut that I like, my C&W is in reality the Sheryl Crow signature, not an original one, that was the reason why I enquired.

 

Mine has a 44mm nut and a (not so) slim taker profile that is actually quite chunky, to be honest I feel I'd like your neck more...sometimes I think about getting a 60s C&W but the sound of this peculiar guitar is magic, today it appears tha finding an acoustic guitar with a 42.5mm nut is challenging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The necks on the squares and the slopes are basically different that way.

I believe Kalamazoo introduced the slim C's in 1960 to get closer to the smooth electric guitars. You never find a beefy square.

P.S. Talkin' 60s here - must add I never met a 1960s Dove. Still don't think they were fat necked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, you have the narrow nut that I like, my C&W is in reality the Sheryl Crow signature, not an original one, that was the reason why I enquired.

 

Mine has a 44mm nut and a (not so) slim taker profile that is actually quite chunky, to be honest I feel I'd like your neck more...sometimes I think about getting a 60s C&W but the sound of this peculiar guitar is magic, today it appears tha finding an acoustic guitar with a 42.5mm nut is challenging.

Cheers Alex!

 

Hmmmm, that's interesting that you refer to my CW as narrow nut as I always assumed that 42 mm was the more desirable wider nut on many earlier Gibson electrics and acoustics. In my mind the narrow nut was anything under 40 mm, or specifically 39.86 mm (1 9/16 inches) which started appearing in the mid 60's. I don't think I've ever seen, or played a 44 mm Gibson vintage acoustic....

 

:-k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what my notes say -

 

 

Acoustic Gibson nut widths

1 34 (1.75) " = 44.45 mm

1 11⁄16 (1.6875) " = 42.8625 mm

1 58 (1.625) " = 41.275 mm

1 916 (1.5625) " = 39.6875 mm

 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 

I don't think I've ever seen, or played a 44 mm Gibson vintage acoustic....

 

The 1 3/4 broadies are a phenomenon from the new Gibson era - The great renaissance.

Don't know the exact year of introduction, but they was made common during the Ren Ferguson era.

 

Worth noticing the idea/move has established itself to a degree where Nazareth now is following.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheers Alex!

 

Hmmmm, that's interesting that you refer to my CW as narrow nut as I always assumed that 42 mm was the more desirable wider nut on many earlier Gibson electrics and acoustics. In my mind the narrow nut was anything under 40 mm, or specifically 39.86 mm (1 9/16 inches) which started appearing in the mid 60's. I don't think I've ever seen, or played a 44 mm Gibson vintage acoustic....

 

:-k

 

Yes you are correct, but these days guitarists are getting fatter therefore it's almost impossible for instance to find a decent Martin with a 43 mm nut, everybody wants 45 or more.

 

Even Fender CS 1968 reissues now come with 43mm nut, originally they were 39.86 or 1 and 9/16 inches...that was the trend in the late 60s...in order to get one with the right specs I had to buy a CIJ one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...