Stoopalini Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 At 1st glance, this looks like a Les Paul gold top, but as I started to inspect it, I'm wondering if it's a standard Les Paul which was painted at some point? Or maybe it is a gold top, but was repainted entirely in gold .... I think genuine gold tops are only gold on the front, with natural wood on the back, correct? The slope of the carved top body appears to be a different pitch than a normal carved top les paul? This is almost impossible to capture with a pic though ... There also doesn't appear to be a serial # anywhere on it. Not sure if Gibson neglected to place serial #'s on certain years of Les Pauls, or maybe this is another Mark Erlewine custom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvguit Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 I'm not an LP expert but I do know that some early 50s pauls were painted all gold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoopalini Posted April 19, 2013 Author Share Posted April 19, 2013 Thanks ... from what I can gather, 1952 Gold LPs were painted front, back and neck ... but they didn't have the Les Paul logo on the peg head. Then in 1953, they only painted the fronts and added the LP logo to the peg head. Also finding info which says 1952's didn't have serial numbers. Not sure what that means for this one, considering it has the Les Paul logo on the peg head, doesn't have a serial #, and is painted all in gold. When I look closely at the back of the neck, where the gold has been worn through from playing, it looks like there is a natural wood finish underneath, and by natural finish, I mean the natural wood appears to have a clear coat finish on it. This makes me wonder if someone painted it all gold at some point without stripping it first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam in alberta Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 First run of 52's had no binding on the neck. No 52's had a serial#'s. 53's all had serial#'s I believe that all gold was available all the way up to 57, but wasn't common, was usually done to hide imperfections. That I believe is an all gold later 52. But I am not an expert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam in alberta Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 Pics do look funny on back of neck and headstock. Not having it in hand hard to say. Clearly a 52. Much more pronounced belly carve on early Les Pauls. I think the Les Paul logo was on 52's. Otherwise what made it a Les Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoopalini Posted April 20, 2013 Author Share Posted April 20, 2013 The tail piece also has me wondering. I can't seem to find any images of 1952 LPs with hat style tail piece. Maybe it's a replacement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam in alberta Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 The tail piece also has me wondering. I can't seem to find any images of 1952 LPs with hat style tail piece. Maybe it's a replacement? Not original to the guitar. I don't think. Some others with some experise will chime in with more accurate info. If you're trying to find a place to get rid of that old thing, Send it to me, I'll hardly charge you anything to store or dispose of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoopalini Posted April 20, 2013 Author Share Posted April 20, 2013 If you're trying to find a place to get rid of that old thing, Send it to me, I'll hardly charge you anything to store or dispose of it. LOL, it's one of the guitars in this collection of 34 I am cataloging for a couple of friends. Their intent is most definitely to sell most of the collection after we've got them all documented though :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjsinla Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 Not original to the guitar. I don't think. Some others with some experise will chime in with more accurate info. If you're trying to find a place to get rid of that old thing, Send it to me, I'll hardly charge you anything to store or dispose of it. I don't think they made any with ABR1's and trapeze tailpieces, did they? And, obviously a few other things are changed as well. But, that gold, if it's the same consistency all over the guitar, seems to at least be factory original if not a factory refin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjsinla Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 At 1st glance, this looks like a Les Paul gold top, but as I started to inspect it, I'm wondering if it's a standard Les Paul which was painted at some point? Or maybe it is a gold top, but was repainted entirely in gold .... I think genuine gold tops are only gold on the front, with natural wood on the back, correct? The slope of the carved top body appears to be a different pitch than a normal carved top les paul? This is almost impossible to capture with a pic though ... There also doesn't appear to be a serial # anywhere on it. Not sure if Gibson neglected to place serial #'s on certain years of Les Pauls, or maybe this is another Mark Erlewine custom? What are the dates on the pots? That might be a better clue as to age and rule out an Erlewine custom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoopalini Posted April 20, 2013 Author Share Posted April 20, 2013 What are the dates on the pots? That might be a better clue as to age and rule out an Erlewine custom. Good question, unfortunately I didn't get the POT codes when I snapped the pictures, and the guitar isn't here right now. The owner took it with him to bring by Mark's, to see if he could shed some light on it. When it comes back, I'll certainly pop the cover and inspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam in alberta Posted April 20, 2013 Share Posted April 20, 2013 I don't think they made any with ABR1's and trapeze tailpieces, did they? And, obviously a few other things are changed as well. But, that gold, if it's the same consistency all over the guitar, seems to at least be factory original if not a factory refin. ABR1's came out in 57 I beleive. So that was added. The guitar is a later 52 or a refined 53 with the serial # covered in gold. EDit* ABR1 came out on 54 Customs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoopalini Posted April 25, 2013 Author Share Posted April 25, 2013 I had a chance to look over this guitar again yesterday, and the POT code on all 4 potentiometers is 6150688 ... although the Guitar Dater Project website doesn't resolve this # into a year. Are there any other resource for decoding the #s? Another thing I noticed is, the body appears to have 2 shades of gold paint, one on top of the other. And the back of the neck most certainly has a natural finish clearcoat under the gold paint. This makes me think it was a factory gold top, and someone repainted the whole guitar gold sometime during its life. Here's a look at the control and switch cavities: And here's a closer look at the neck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjsinla Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 It's also possible that the bridge pickup was replaced at some point as the pole pieces seem quite shiny compared to those on the neck pickup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twang Gang Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Just another of the Stoop mystery guitars from this collection. Looks like it was a player though to me. Original tuners swapped out for Grovers, the ABR added. The big problem with the early 50s LPs with the tailpieces was tuning and intonation so someone added tuners and the bridge to help with that. Also from a few layers of paint being worn off the neck it shows it was played a lot, but then again any 60 year old hopefully has been played. It will be interesting what you are able to find out about this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoopalini Posted April 27, 2013 Author Share Posted April 27, 2013 Good call on the bridge pickup, it certainly does look newer. And ya Twang, another mystery! I don't think we'll ever get to the bottom of this one though, too many years and unknowns ... I really wish the POT codes would resolve to a date though, so we could at least call it a 1952 with some sense of certainty ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrorod Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 Just curious again Are you doing any cleanup, re-stinging, and auditioning of this collection to determine sound and playability? What is Marks' opinion on this one (gold top) ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoopalini Posted April 28, 2013 Author Share Posted April 28, 2013 Just curious again Are you doing any cleanup, re-stinging, and auditioning of this collection to determine sound and playability? What is Marks' opinion on this one (gold top) ? Yes, I'm doing a light cleanup on every guitar and then plugging them in to ensure they work. Not all of them are getting new strings, but most are. If for some reason the guitar doesn't play after cleaning the switches and potentiometers out, I send the guitar to a tech to have it worked just enough to made playable. Having a 1961 Junior is great, but if it won't play, it'll be hard to sell. So far, most have only needed cleaning up of the switches to remove corrosion, but a few have needed small items like re-soldering of the output jack, etc ... Mark hasn't seen the Gold Top yet, so not sure on that. I'm hoping he'll be able to check it out before the collection is ready for the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.