Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

trapdoorspider

Members
  • Content Count

    47
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by trapdoorspider


  1. Thanks! I didn't think Gibson would still have a spec page for this guitar. But even though those official specs say "13-60 gauge" nobody makes that exact size for electric guitars. I finally located some D'Addarios that are 13-62, so I guess that's close enough (surely that top string will fit in the nut properly). The previous owner said he used regular gauge (10-46) but I guess he was mistaken. It IS a "very unusual Beast," as you say.


  2. Sorry for such a dumb question, but thanks to eBay I'm the new owner of a 2013 SG Baritone -- and I don't have a clue what gauge strings this guitar requires. It currently seems to have regular-gauge strings (10-46, maybe?) but I've seen special "baritone" strings that are much heavier, like 13-72. The problem is, I don't think the slots in the nut will hold strings that large. Does anybody know the "correct" strings that should go on this nice guitar? As you can tell, I've never had a  baritone guitar before.


  3. The serial number looks about the same as my 2017 LP Standard. Mine says made in USA and there are no periods between the letters. Mine does say 2017 Model below the USA, but that is the only difference.

     

    I think you're fine.

     

    Well, I hope mine doesn't say "MADE IN USA" -- because it WASN'T made in the USA. That's what I'm concerned about. I know all about the Chinese fakes, but I wonder if there's another type of "fake" where all the parts are correct, but the assembly, finish, etc. are completed in another country?

     

    The other mystery is that I read this LP Voodoo was a limited run, with only a few hundred made in 2016. And yet, here is (according to the serial number) a 2017 model.

     

    Perhaps I'm simply obsessing over nothing. But I contacted Gibson Customer Support (by email, with photos) to see what they have to say.

     

    Thanks for your help! - michael


  4. There are conflicting things there...

     

    On the whole and just from that one image I'd say it probably IS legit but there are a few things which are pretty odd and the positioning of the Grovers is pretty shocking. The angle of the 'G' tuner in particular should be reported to the Criminal Courts...

     

    Without seeing the rest of the guitar I can't say much more. Certainly the stamp is finer than we are used to seeing but if all the hardware/logo/PCB seem correct then its unlikely to be fake. Counterfeiters don't usually install Gibson-style PCBs AFAIK.

     

    Pip.

     

    I've attached a few more photos. Yeah, one of the tuners seems a bit crooked. But all the major components -- especially the pots and wiring and bridge -- seem legit. If you're going to make a fake Gibson, it doesn't make sense to build it with Gibson parts, but what do I know. Thanks for your help.

     

    I have several Les Paul BFGs, and I noticed on the back some of the say "MADE IN USA" (no periods) and another one says "MADE IN U.S.A." (with periods). It seems Gibson isn't consistent with a lot of things. post-5327-025613600 1500996069_thumb.jpg

    post-5327-008051000 1500996085_thumb.jpg

    post-5327-001673200 1500996152_thumb.jpg


  5. I just bought a new Gibson Les Paul Voodoo, and I noticed that the serial number, stamped on the back of the headstock, looks funny. The numbers are slightly narrower than what I've seen on other Gibsons. Also, it just says "Made in USA" without any date.

    Everything else on this guitar looks genuine -- the headstock logo, Gibson name on the pots and printed circuitboard, bridge, construction (maple neck and crazy "ju ju" finish on the ash body. I haven't pulled the pickups to check what they say, but everything else looks like a Gibson should -- except for the back of the headstock.

    So I don't THINK this is a fake, but what do you think? Did Gibson go with a different style of numbering in 2017?

    Thanks.


  6. Eh? Where does it say that?

     

    Rule #13 is;

     

    "Do not post images that exceed the width of the page."

     

    Pictures can easily be around the 500kb file-size. For ease of use just don't make them wider than, say, 27cm @ 72 pixels per inch and you'll be fine.

     

    Pip.

     

    EDIT : Just ou of curiosity I've just done an experiment. A reasonably 'busy' JPEG measuring 27cm x 18cm @72 ppi works out at around 420kb.

     

    I just attached a larger file. It seems I had reached my maximum file capacity with other photos I uploaded months ago. Thanks.


  7. I just bought a new Gibson Les Paul Voodoo, and I noticed that the serial number, stamped on the back of the headstock, looks funny. The numbers are slightly narrower than what I've seen on other Gibsons. Also, it just says "Made in USA" without any date.

    Everything else on this guitar looks genuine -- the headstock logo, Gibson name on the pots and printed circuitboard, bridge, construction (maple neck and crazy "ju ju" finish on the ash body. I haven't pulled the pickups to check what they say, but everything else looks like a Gibson should -- except for the back of the headstock.

    So I don't THINK this is a fake, but what do you think? Did Gibson go with a different style of numbering in 2017?

    Thanks.

    post-5327-085838100 1500967084_thumb.png


  8. Everyone's been saying such great things about the "SG Original" model that I bought one. I got it online, so I didn't get a chance to inspect the guitar beforehand (I know, I know).

     

    Well, it IS a great guitar, with beautiful woodgrain, a very dark fretboard, and those wonderfully sharp cutaways. Just one little thing. What's with the ugly gap between the end of the fretboard and that little black plastic tenon cover? [confused]

     

    I have a bunch of 61 Reissues, from different years and in different colors, so I tried other tenon covers. Nope, they're all exactly the same size, so they don't cover the gap either. Apparently the neck on my "SG Original" just isn't inserted quite as far into the body as my other guitars. Maybe that's part of the "original" specs, ha ha. And it wouldn't be so obvious on this one, if the tenon itself was stained the same dark cherry as the body. (I check my other Gibsons, and they're the same way. How, and when, do they stain these things?)

     

    Anyway, just wanted to share (and yes, gripe a little). Any suggestions for improving how this looks? (I know, it's just a little thing, but for the relatively high price of this model, I really expected better workmanship than this).

     

    Original-tenoncovergap2_zpsbeec8ec3.jpg


  9. Try using a good polish. I used to use Meguier's or Mother's on mine. It would make them shine like crazy. I've also heard some to the guys here mention other polishes. I'm surprised nobody else has volunteered anything up to this point as some of these polishes are very good at getting small marks out.

    Thanks. I was expecting a much more complicated solution; I guess I was worried that the plastic had somehow ruined the finish. I'll give it a shot. Thanks again, michael


  10. I bought a pretty cool-looking 1998 SG-Z on eBay, and the guy used plastic bubblewrap to pad the guitar so it wouldn't slip around in the case during shipping.

     

    Well, it left behind rows of little round marks across the finish on the back of the guitar. You can't feel them, so it's not like they "etched" in the surface very deeply, and you can only really see them if you tilt the guitar into the light, but they're an aggravation, to say the least.

     

    Does anyone know of a good and SAFE way to remove these marks without harming the nitro finish?

     

    I know you'd like to see a picture, but they are so faint (and I'm not a good enough photographer) to get them to show up.

     

    Could have been worse. He could have used the BIG bubbles, and he could have wrapped them around the entire guitar. These are the little 3/8" bubbles, and only on the back.

     

    Thanks for any advice you can offer. - Michael


  11. I just bought a gently used 2006 Gibson SG-3 with a rosewood fretboard. It's a beautiful guitar (cherry with gold hardware), but the fretboard is ugly — it looks faded and washed out. It's much lighter than on any of my other SGs.

     

    Is there any good and safe (for the guitar, I mean) product that will bring back (or add) the rich dark brown color to the rosewood?

     

    I'm nervous about using a regular stain, because I don't want to also stain the binding and the nut. And I don't want to apply anything that might soak into the the wood and make it swell and ruin/crack the binding.

     

    Any suggestions (besides just leaving it alone)? Many thanks! - michael

     

    SG3-Fretboard.png


  12. I definitely confirmed that the pearloid pickguard was "outgassing" and causing the rust problem, by simply removing the pickguard. I replaced the rusty screws and strings, and used steelwool to remove the rust from the polepieces and frets — and after 3 months now, I've had no rust anywhere with the pickguard off. I even put the pickguard screws back in the holes in the body — no rust.

     

    Meanwhile, however, to test my theory, I put the old pickguard in a bag with some strings and screws, and within two weeks, they were covered with rust!

     

    I even taped a 10-inch length of guitar string across the old pickguard, with half the string pressing on the pickguard and half of it hanging off. The part pressing against the pickguard was solid rust.

     

    Other Double 90 owners on the everythingsg.com website have reported the same problem, but only with the white pickguards on this model, not the black pearl ones. There's obviously something wrong with the plastic used in those pickguards.

     

    At any rate, a place called Pickguard Heaven (part of Chandler Music) sells replacement pickguards for this model, as well as the SG-Z, in your choice of white pearl or black pearl, so I've ordered a new one. In black.


  13. Does anybody have any idea where I can find a replacement bridge block for the Floyd Rose-style tremolo that was factory-installed on my 1991 Epiphone 635?

     

    As you can see, the block just broke off. It's like it was made from cheap pot metal, and it finally just crumbled.

     

    Three problems:

    1) This is an old-style Floyd Rose system without locking string saddles, so the strings thread through the block, just like a Stratocaster, and the block itself holds the ball ends. In other words, a pretty important part. So the guitar is absolutely worthless without it.

    2) The tremolo is actually stamped "MFG FLOYD ROSE PATENTS" so I'm not sure it's even a genuine Floyd Rose tremolo. I've read that Kahler made these, or even Steinberger. But if they did, theirs don't look like this.

    3) The spacing for the two mounting posts is 70-72mm. Every newer Floyd Rose tremolo (and others) has post spacing of 74 mm. So a new replacement won't fit.

     

    I have to find this same-style block — somehow, somewhere. Any suggestions? Gosh, I hate to just throw the guitar away ...

    FloydRose1.jpg


  14. I didn't know about the crack. I bought it online from a certain auction site that starts with e. The seller didn't bother to mention that it was cracked, and the pictures he posted didn't show it. The picture posted here is one that I took after I got the guitar.

     

    So yes, I'm very dismayed that it has a crack, and that's why I'm trying to determine if it's just a finish crack (which I can live with) or a wood/structural crack, which means I'll a rather serious and probably unpleasant discussion with the seller. I'm taking it to a luthier on Monday to get an expert opinion.

     

    And sure, you can buy brand-new guitars for this price (I have quite a few), but I wanted one of the older ones. As long as they're not broken, that is.

     

    Thanks for everyone's advice. I realize it's hard to give a definite answer by just looking at a photo.


  15. I just bought a nice old 1977 Gibson SG Standard online. Beautiful guitar, 100% original in every way.

     

    Except for one: It has a jagged-looking 1" crack just below the neck volute at the headstock. The previous owner said it's been there a long time, and he thinks it's just a crack in the finish, from where he bumped the guitar years ago. Maybe he's right, maybe he's not. What do you think? Is this just a cosmetic thing, or could this be a major structural problem?

     

    I know it's hard to judge from a photo, but it's all I can show you. Thanks for your opinions. - Michael

     

    PS - I paid $1200 for this guitar with the original case. Was that a good price, or does the crack render it worthless?

     

    SG77-neckcrack.jpg


  16. Weird, look at hole on the body...bigsby? Nah, hole is to small...or is that a ding? Also the sticker inside was ripped, looks like someone meant to do that.

    I like it...might wanna raise that bridge pup a bit though.

    Yeah, I'm kind of suspicious about the way the decal is torn. But you still have the serial number on the headstock.

     

    It's not a ding; it's a filled hole. The current owner said the previous owner told him it originally had a Bigsby. At the same time, just lying in the case was one of those black metal "CUSTOM" plates, that are apparently screwed to the body right below the tailpiece, so that might explain the hole, too. For some reason, he forgot to send me a good closeup shot of the entire body.

     

    But the main question is: HOW OLD IS IT?


  17. I didn't just go to the Guitar Dater Project and stop there.

     

    I also checked the 11th edition of "The Blue Book of Electric Guitars," which seems to indicate that the "A" prefix that was used in the 1950s was only printed or written on the orange paper labels inside these guitars, or was stamped somewhere inside the body:

    "Serial numbers are on the label and FON [factory order numbers] numbers are ink-stamped inside the guitar."

     

    There is no mention of any ID marking on the headstock. And most of the 1950s ES models I've seen for sale don't have a serial number pressed into the headstock.

     

    Then you have this sentence:

    "In 1961, Gibson started a new serial number system that covered all instrument lines. It consisted of numbers that were pressed into the wood." This is the first suggestion in the "Blue Book" of Gibson's typical headstock numbering system.

     

    So I don't know what to make of this guitar. Again, it's frustrating that the paper label is missing.

     

    It's not my guitar. I'll see if I can get some pictures.


  18. My friend has an older ES335 that he's trying to research. The serial number stamped into the back of the headstock begins with "A" and is then followed by five numbers. The Guitar Dater Project turns up nothing when I enter the complete serial number, and nothing when I leave off the "A" either.

     

    The top portion of the orange paper label inside the guitar (the part that would list the model/serial number) has been torn away, so that's no help. That's frustrating — and maybe just a little bit fishy.

     

    What does the "A" mean? Is there any other way to date this guitar?

     

    Many thanks, Michael


  19. Is anybody familiar with the SG Specials that Gibson produced in 2002-2003 with the cool crescent-moon inlays and ebony fretboards? My question is: Do you know if Gibson produced any of these "faded" crescent-moon models with a type of rosewood fretboard?

     

    I'm asking because I have several of these SG Specials, which supposedly have ebony fretboards, but I've noticed the wood isn't as deep black as the ebony fretboards on some of my other Gibsons (SG Standard in Classic White, SG Reissue bass in Classic White, SG Special Limited Edition, etc). And it's not quite as slick-as-slate feeling as the wood on those guitars, either.

     

    At the same time, it's not as brown, or as grainy, as the "typical" rosewood on my other Gibsons.

     

    I know this seems unlikely, but it almost seems to be something in between. Just wondering if Gibson threw some other wood in there from time to time. Thanks, Michael

     

     

    (No, I don't have a picture. I'm sorry, but I guess I'm too stupid to figure out how to attach pictures here. It tells me the maximum single-file size can be only 17K, and I can't get any of my images down that small, even on the lowest resolution possible.)


  20. I have a 1976 Gibson S-1 with a five-piece headstock, and it's split apart at one of the seams.

     

    What is the best kind of glue for this kind of repair? It needs to be very thin so the pieces will mesh back together tightly without a gap, but it also needs to be very strong since the low-E string tuner (and bushing) run right through the seam.

     

    I know Titebond is good stuff, but it's fairly thick, isn't it?

     

    Would regular Superglue work just as well?

     

    Thanks,

    Michael


  21. You can also replace the pick guard screws with stainless steel.

     

    Yes, but that wouldn't prevent the rust from forming on the strings or the pickups, or tarnish from forming on the frets. Some folks on the everything.sg forum agree that it's a problem with the plastic used in the "pearloid" pickguards, but so far I haven't found a source for a replacement.

×
×
  • Create New...