MI_Canuck Posted August 20, 2008 Share Posted August 20, 2008 There's a used '98 Gibson SG Standard at a local guitar shop... It plays real nice, however the headstock inlay (both the Gibson logo and the "crown") have a very obviously seam line around them. Like the inlay job was done poorly - and the seam line isn't even along the edges of the inlay material, making it look even more sloppy. Is that normal for that era of Gibsons? The S/N seems to check out so I don't think it's a fake or anything like that. Just seems like poor worksmanship. I don't know if it's enough to keep me from getting it (I'm contemplating it) - but I'm more worried if it will get worse and if it will kill the value of it down the road. [EDIT]: This isn't the actual one I'm talking about, but very similar to this... thnx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deelaz Posted August 20, 2008 Share Posted August 20, 2008 i think my old standard (i sold it) had almost the same condition as yours. but it didnt matter to me well i dont think it is clearly seen though, but its there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lous1952 Posted August 20, 2008 Share Posted August 20, 2008 Very common on all Gibsons. As long as you're sure that it's not a fake don't worry about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuitarJunkie Posted August 20, 2008 Share Posted August 20, 2008 As Lou said, very common. Here's my 2001 Classic Plus that I picked up last january. I'm pretty meticulous about my guitars, but this didn't really bother me much. One thing that I like about this guitar was the fact that it already had some "mojo". Sometimes with my brand new guitars, I'm a little reluctant to take them to a jam or rehearsal because they're just so damn shiny. With this one, I didn't have to worry about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted August 21, 2008 Share Posted August 21, 2008 I've seen that, a LOT...on the newer (last 5 years) Gibsons. Not so much on "Vintage," or even just older ones. I suppose it may depend on conditions they "live" in, and how they're treated, but...yeah, it seems a lot more "common" than it SHOULD be! Don't know what they're doing different, at the factories, but it would be nice, if they'd correct it! :>b CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveinspain Posted August 22, 2008 Share Posted August 22, 2008 Its very common... I recently I could have bought a used 2005 black Les Paul Custom in perfect condition except for it had what you describe on the SG.... I could have saved $650 but instead I opted for a new 2008 in perfect condition.... It bothered me enough to spend the extra cash and get the new one. I figure why spend all that money and have something thats going to bug you every time you look at it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MI_Canuck Posted September 2, 2008 Author Share Posted September 2, 2008 As Lou said' date=' very common. Here's my 2001 Classic Plus that I picked up last january. I'm pretty meticulous about my guitars, but this didn't really bother me much. One thing that I like about this guitar was the fact that it already had some "mojo". Sometimes with my brand new guitars, I'm a little reluctant to take them to a jam or rehearsal because they're just so damn shiny. With this one, I didn't have to worry about it. [img']http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/2manyGuitars/misc/logo.jpg[/img] Here's my (the one I posted about prior to buying it) SG's headstock (however a poor quality pic) - the guitar itself just felt and sounded right to my hands and ears, so I ended up getting it anyways. The headstock wasn't enough of a detractor I guess... Must be that 'mojo' you speak of :) cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hbomb76 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Even my Historic one-off has a little bit of the outlining like that. It is VERY common now, and I think it's a result of that ever-increasingly thin laquer finish curing. It's a little more noticable on my Angus signature SG, and very noticable on my '61 RI w/Maestro. Just one of those things I guess...if it ever gets so bad I can't stand it I'll just get it redone by my favorite luthier. Till then it's okay. If Gibson isn't putting enough pride in those finishes to sustain their own logo, I'm certainly not going to lose sleep over it...lol H-Bomb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dickey Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Yea,my '61 RI is similar to the first one you posted, not quite as bad as the one you bought,but what the hell,if it sounds and plays OK, then if it still bothers you, just play it in dim lighting so you don't see it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MI_Canuck Posted September 3, 2008 Author Share Posted September 3, 2008 Yea' date='my '61 RI is similar to the first one you posted, not quite as bad as the one you bought,but what the hell,if it sounds and plays OK, then if it still bothers you, just play it in dim lighting so you don't see it![/quote'] It is what it is... I looked up a bunch of pics from late 90's SGs on ebay and they seem to all be like that to some extent or another... And guys like yourself posting about their own SGs being like that too... So it doesn't really bother me that much... I can certainly live with it. Here's a pic I found of a 2008 - looks a lot cleaner, although note the rounder edges all around the headstock... Seems like the veneer and inlay is an entirely different process... Obviously the inlay looks good... cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.