Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Is this one a fake?


Blueblooded

Recommended Posts

I have a 73 deluxe, and I compared the Gibson logo in the pic to mine, they look pretty much them same. There is a glare right in the middle of the logo that might be throwing you off. I can even see the line in the body for the "pancake" layer. I doubt that anyone is going out of their way to fake that.

 

$1800 is a pretty good price. If I had the cash, I might have bought that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... The logo just looks off to me, but it's not a real good pic. It is a great looking guitar.

I know what you mean.

 

The headstock inlay changed quite a few times from the late '60s to the '80s as far as the 'i', 'b', 'o' and 'n' are concerned.

 

Sometimes the 'i' wasn't dotted, sometimes it was. Sometimes the 'b' and 'o' were 'open', sometimes they were 'closed'. Sometimes the 'o' and 'n' were joined at the top, sometimes they were joined at the bottom.

 

Depending on which logo is used - and depending on which logo is most familiar to you - some versions will certainly look unfamiliar.

 

P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, and accurate...

The tuners on mine have been replace (in 1982) with those Grover's. I still have the "double ring"

Kluson tuners, that came with it. They have the push in bushings, too, instead of the more modern

bolt bushings, with the Grovers...which has a larger "washer," which in turn is closer to the edge,

of the headstock.

 

I replaced the (broken) plastic plate, around the input jack, with a chrome metal version.

 

[biggrin]

 

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The '73, pictured at the beginning, does have an interesting headstock shape...but,

in all honesty, it could be lens distortion, on the camera. I've never really seen

a Gibson headstock, with the lower bout "wider" than the upper bout. But, I tend to

think it's an optical distortion, as opposed to a "fake."

 

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pippy is right on about the Logo.

 

As for the headstock shape, it's hard to explain what is "proper" for that year, because in the whole production run for that model, headstock shapes AND body shapes are funky, and they change quite a bit. In other words, they are not only "off" from what we might consider the standard, but there isn't one shape that's consistant.

 

Personally, while there is a lot "wrong" with Norlin guitars like this and this era, I do have an affinity for them, like a lot of poeple.

 

I honestly don't know what current prices are, so, I don't pretend to know what I am talking about. But 1800 seems like it is getting past what you can buy other models used for, and even up to a new one. I didn't know they were up to that much money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Blueblooded,

 

I think it could be a fake, after all Gibson would never allow the bottom of a headstock to be wider than the top, it's not aesthetically pleasing to the eye.

 

On the other hand, it could be genuine because it's not always easy to take photographs without affecting the viewing angle. I know, because I've had some interesting comments about my photographic skills on this site.

 

If it is genuine it seems to me to be a decent price. Then again, I'm not sure what a decent price is for a Gibson, having recently purchased an old would be LP that appears to be fake.

 

What does surprise me is the lack of vitriole towards you and your post, probably because you haven't bought it and because you're asking the question before doing anything.

 

I have been placed in the stocks as a fake, a fraud and a counterfeiter when all I was looking for was some friendly advice.

 

Ah well......rant over. It seems a good deal to me, and if it plays well and sounds good and you can afford it, go for it!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...