stein

Pippy Pippy. Or Mr. Pippy.

Discrimination? You want a free pass to "say things like I see them" and not be held accountable like everyone else? That's not discrimination my friend. If you are actually being serious on here, if you are wanting to be in any part of the "music industry", you might LEARN how to be a diplomat if you want a job or a call-back.

Friends call him Farns. Or FB. Or just Farnsbarns. Everyone else, its MR. Farnsbarns. Why? Reckon because he earned it.

I think if there is going to be a fight, the one with the most LP's wins. Then again, I feel maybe entitled to be upset you all, ya'll have more than I do. I should protest. I don't think it's fair. Back to reality, I think one thing about "collectability" or "desirability" for a lot of the inexpensive models IS the fact they are inexpensive. Who DOESN'T want an LP that only cost 650? Sometimes, these that can be had on the cheap get so popular, they get hard to find for sale, and some take this to mean the value is greater. But prices will always be limited by the fact that the more expensive models will still always be, well, more expensive. They aren't ever going to get to the value of a Standard or Traditional or reissue. What we are REALLY talking about here, and what makes these so "cool", is that it is a genuine LP in every way that matters. Sound. Feel. Everything except looks or cost. Anyone who remembers these remembers them fondly.

MR. DADDY: This isn't the first time I have seem you act the forgiving type. I wish more men were like you. In my opinion, stuff like this is really the definition of being a REAL man. I have the greatest of respect for you. I think there is some real wisdom on some of these post. The young woman needs help. Regardless of if she would choose it. Sometimes getting "busted" is the only way it happens. I think it's possible that in her case, putting her in the can would not hurt her. If she already has a rap sheet, it doesn't alter her future to have one more. If this is her life on the "outs", she is already in a prison. I mean to say that if she is on a downward spiral and there seems little hope, it might be the most compassionate thing to do as opposed to being unforgiving or harsh. Just thoughts to share on my part. I don't really know her. You know more than me.

I might check the pots, the pups, see if they might give a clue of something. The seriel# DOES match and make sense for 73-75, no? It seems the features match that number, don't they? So, therefore, the only thing I see "odd" about the guitar is the label. But hearing the story of it being sold in '88 for 2k, I see no reason why a person might want to pass a '64 for a '73- not for 2k. I think the dealer, if he thought it was a '73, he would have said it was. He would have no reason to lie for 2k. Basically, I see no funny business involving the label, and trying to pass a '73-'75 for a 60's model. Not for the TYPE of label, anyway. I think whoever added the label chose whatever label, and it happened to be that one. So, why ADD a label? Just a guess, but maybe it was origonally an S-400, or S-400C, and the pups were added. It might explain a new label, if different info wanted to be on it. It might explain why the PG is missing, if it wasn't worked over to accept the pups, or was messed up doing so. As for the orange label instead of the Norlin label, an easy explanation was it was easier to get. I don't know how that could be proven, unless some evidence is found on the guitar that shows they weren't added at the factory, or added later. Pot codes or pups made later than the seriel# would suggest, they could have been replaced, but it might suggest they were added to an accoustic. If the holes for the pups were done without a jig, or look slightly butchered, that might prove they were added by someone other than Gibby (who for sure would have templates and jigs). I suppose it wouldn't hurt to try and take the label off, as we might know it isn't origonal anyway, but being able to read something off the label underneath seems doubtful.

From the photo of the label you provided, I can definitely see the printing/texture of a Norlin label. I can't really link all that well, but google "Gibson label" images and you'll see it. What little I know (and it ain't all that much), is that around that time, ('88), labels weren't all that big of a deal. You could buy one if you knew where to go, a label just like that. If you needed a label from Gibson, I don't know what they would have sent, and I don't know that they would have minded, or anyone would have cried out, if a so-called "nos" or whatever Gibson label was used that seemed to be floating around everywhere. $2000 bucks in '88? That sounds like a good price for a 70's Super-4hundy for about that time. Also sounds like a good price for an altered, "non-collectable" 60's. It sounds like the dealer had no need, nor any reason, to concern himself too much with getting down to exactly what year it was. Sounds like you got a good price on it, and he didn't have the time nor desire or need to be certain of the year.

I'm thinking that considering the label wasn't used nafariously, that if it wasn't, the REAL seriel number would have been tranfered from the old label to the new one. Still wondering how and why the label got here- an attepmt to get more money making a 70's into a 60's? Or, was the guitar restored/fixed/worked on at some point? I can see either possibility. One thing I have a little trouble with, is that as EASY as it might have been to get an orange label to make a guitar that seems like a legitimate '64, who would be STUPID enough to leave the old label underneath visible? That would practically give it away. On the other hand, if there is a legitimate reason to "re-label" it, be from fading numbers, or torn label, or whatever, what would be the "proper" way to do it in, say, '88? Perhaps a re-fin made it nessesary to preserve the seriel#? I just guessing, of corse, but what it LOOKS like to me is a label stuck on top of another label not to hide, but to preserve info.

According to one book (a Les Paul book- it's close), the seriel number here that indicates 64-65 could also indicate 73-75. I still kinda wonder about the label- if someone wanted to "forge", why leave a corner to see? Anyway, if you REALLY want to know more, I think getting to the pot codes would tell something. At least you have the decade. But also, if they read anything different than the seriel number might indicate, it could tell a little more of the history of this particular guitar as well.

That is what I call an AMAZING eye- I like to think I have one, but I had to really study the photo's to tell the differences, and even then, I don't think I would be able to be sure if I seen another on it's own. The label is a mystery. How and why is it there? I'm trying to remember, '88, I think that was a time when archtops were kinda high in price, and a '64 would have brought more money than a 70's. So I could see someone sticking a new label on it for that purpose. But why not hide the one under it? I would think if someone wanted to fool someone on purpose, they would definitely be more careful. So, I wonder if the new label came about perhaps by Gibson? I don't know if it matters, but perhaps this guitar has a little more history to it.

Great thread. Want to express my appreciation for the effort, and the look into the Lawrence Gibson pups. It looks like the one pup was wound with aluminum wire? I wonder what that might sound like. Gotta say, this bass here is looking great. All the way around. Would even say it looks more Rippery than before. If you ever get the time to do comparisms, or assesments of the sound, would be interested in hearing about it. I don't mean a vid nessesarily, I mean your assesments, your descrip[tion/observations.

So..definitely a '76. Or at least, what we might CALL a '76. I'm starting to wonder though, that even though it has a '76 seriel number, if it still wasn't at the factory getting '77 pots. Doesn't seem an outragious claim. I wonder if we don't have a similer situation as with Fenders had with the headstock decal numbers...such as the '79 numbers being used into '81. Or, maybe I just got my pot dating all mixed up again.

For some reason, the shadows in the pic make it a little hard to see the complete shape of the Goldtop, but to me, it looks like the "sister" '73 posted in the thread. I think the '79 here, the body outline resembles what CB is referring too...notice the horn is a little more pointy at the end, and also notice the cutaway seems like it has a softer radius, and the horn seems to point out and away a little more. SOME I have seen, though, it's a lot more obvious. Of corse, another thing that makes it harder to see in person is you really have to bend down and see them, because you can't hold these guitars up with your arms long enough to get a good look. I like these, I have a thing for Gibby's of this era. Mostly, because when I was younger and getting out and discovering the world, these were what was in shops and what everyone had. I have a real soft spot for a Pancake bodied Goldtop, that soft gold paint topping all those pieces of hogony, and the way the strings seem to flaot right on the frets. It's really a dream that I never fullfilled. That must be a really stiff couch, because I can still see the bottoms of them.

That's interesting you bring up the horn shape and the headstock shape. I don't know if it has anything to do with it, but the Deluxe model (and a buttload of others) were made at two different factories- both Kalimazoo and Nashville. My understanding is that the Deluxe was made from almost the beginning of the Nashville coming in, but still made in 'Kalimazzo as well at the same time. So, to me, you would think that maybe where it was made would have something to do with the 'radically' different shapes, but I have seen some models that I KNOW were Kalimazzo made with the point and big headstock, and the other way around. If there is a way to tell where it was made looking at it, I don't know what it is. Another thing: I am pretty sure the funky shape differences go all the way back to the beginning of the model, or at least some of them. Again I can't put any rhyme or reason to it. And BTW...you mention the pots you took out as 137761. Doesn't that make them '77?

Whoa Charlie! Now I'm confused! And I have to know: Is this a Pancake body with a Maple neck? If so, I might be leaning something (or re-learning something, because really, who can remember all this stuff?) Sinse we are heavy on the 007 type mystery investigating, do you have other details handy as in what type of pots, date codes, and seriel for that?

304-7309 is a Stackpole pot, and that was one of the 'origonal equipment" pots used by Gibby. I think this means 9th week or '73, or 309th day of '77. I'm a little rusty, but if I remember right, most pot codes date on the week rather than the day. The 304, by the way, is Stackpole. Or Centralab. I think Stackpole. 137 is the code for CTS, also used by Gibby. Now here, I am going to guess that the REST of the numbers are under solder on this one, because 13772X makes sense, and 13772XX would also make sense. CTS codes almost always read 137 (meaning CTS) followed by the year followed by week. In some cases, one digit for year, and in some cases, 2 digits for year. Now, it isn't all that uncommon for guitars to be made with different brand pots in the same guitar. How common for that period, I don't know. And also, there isn't anything that says one didn't fail and get replaced, and if replaced, date codes are more meaningless because a pot could sit for a long time before being used in a shop. So, like a guy could replace a pot in 1980 with a 1975 pot pretty commonly. Another thing you might do is look at the pots carefully, and note differences, to see if 3 LOOK the same and one different, or 2 pairs, etc. If you have 3 here that look the same, and there are numbers you can't read, you might be able to read some off one pot and other numbers off another. That can put you close. I think Pippy has it right as well, that's it's at least '74 and before, and the seriel works for '74. But, with a Pancake body, I think that means it could also be as early as the earliest date for the seriel number, which I think is '70. Getting closer, eh?

Still curious. I'm afraid as CB says, the best way for that guitar is going to be to hope there is a date code on the pots. A couple things obvious, however, is the seriel, while IMPOSSIBLE for that guitar, put's it definitely in the range of about 70 to 75. Also, the neck being mahaogony...Deluxes LOOKED very much like this after, but in around '74 would have been Maple until like '79 or something. In other words more clearly, Hog 3 piece neck also means 70-74. (or maybe '69?) Also, from '69 to about '73, it will have a "Pancake" body. Does it have that? A Pancake body is easy to tell, as it would have a thin maple stripe all the way around, being made from two thinner layers sandwhiching a thim maple sheet between them. If it doesn't, it's at least as new as '73, and still before '75. Just for fun, I'd also like to guess the weight: I'm gonna go with 9.9 pounds.

Date it? Hell, that's marriage materiel. What's the reason? you selling or insuring or just curious? There are ways to tell for sure...but just for fun, I'm gonna guess '74 just to see if I am right.

....this. The particular pick I was looking for was a "standard" pick with a metal bracket riveted to it. I tried these particular herco's as well...didn't really exite me either. I have taken to finding some particular thick thumbpickes that feel good strapped on the thumb, and sanding down the tips to resemble a more traditional pick. I might add that I ain't all that good at "fingerpicking", but I do play with my nails, and mostly, the nail on my index finger. It don't last long, either. I use the occasional 'modified' thumbpick both as an alternative, and a back-up. I hold it as PM suggest in his post, and slide it up and down the thumb as I prefer. The idea, (sorta) is I can use either my fingernail, or the pick.

This, or...

Where do you get those? I had one and used it a lot, but it's long gone. Thing is, with the metal strap-thingy, it adjust to the shape of your thumb, and it's way more comfortable than that tight plastic.

Looking forward to details of the Lawrence pup...just sayin'. Like the thread a lot, AND the detail. It's read. Just want to make sure fatigue doesn't set in when the best part comes up.