Changing your "STOCK' Gibson???

[onewilyfool]

I've seen in this forum lots of folks who get their brand new Gibson…..only to change the pick guard, the tuners, the nut, the saddle, the pins, and the stock pickup!! I applaud their initiative and in most cases, i think they have even improved the look and to their ear, the sound of their guitar. Most changes are reversible, and non-intrusive for the most part. I often see ads on CL, where the seller may say, "Tuners changed, but will include originals"…stuff like that. So my question is this, if yu were buying a used guitar, would you prefer that it was stock, or if various changes were made, would that turn you off the sale, or make you think "lower price"? I've seen some used guitars where the replacement pick guard was not placed exactly, other where you could see the "ghost" image of the old tuners, or even filled screw holes where the stock tuners were originally, and it turned me off the sale..lol….I know, I know…picky but I walked away from the sale. I also walked from a relatively new Gibby that had been "voiced" by a local luthier, a process where the luthier, scrapers or sands down the top braces to add more base, or to change the sound as it came from the factory? On the other hand, if a guitar had fossilized ivory nut and saddle, end pin and bridge pins…that wouldn't bother me if the job was clean, and intonation wasn't affected!! So in general, how do you feel about "hot rodded" Gibson acoustics, with respect to the after market sales of same? While we are at it, how would you feel about say, a 4 year old Gibby that had a repaired top crack or side crack?

[bobouz]

Most of that stuff would be a turn off for me.

I greatly prefer original condition instruments,

but will still assess on a case by case basis.

[Jayyj]

Nut, saddle and pin switched out doesn't bother me in the slightest, although it's not something I make a habit of doing myself on a newish guitar. If the tuners have been changed for identical style replacements that's fine, but extra holes drilled is an issue, especially reamed out holes for the posts. A repaired crack or headstock break would be ok depending on the quality of the repair, and would need to be reflected in the price. With a relatively new instrument it's relatively easy to make a distinction between 'regularly used but well cared for' and 'treated without respect' and that distinction would affect the appeal of an instrument.

 

With a revoiced guitar it would depend who did it, but unless it was a well known, well respected name I would consider the resale value trashed. I doubt many people would buy a revoiced guitar sight unseen unless it was extremely cheap, just too many hacks out there who don't know enough about what they're doing. My experience of revoiced guitars is they might be louder and bassier than the guitar left the factory but they rarely sound particularly well balanced, so whilst I don't doubt there are luthiers deserving of the name who can improve a production line Gibson the word revoiced would generally be a big red flag. If it were done by someone with a reputation for high end, hand made replicas that would put a diferent slant on it.

[Kaiser Bill]

I recently sold my original '59 Strat. The first dealer that looked at it had a hissy fit because the volume pot had been changed by the previous owner. So I asked this moron if he wanted a guitar that was original or one that worked. I got that deer in the headlights look. I sold it to the second dealer... The second dealer also bought my original '69 Thinline Tele, the '64 Bassman amp and my mint condition '84 Super Champ.

 

I also replaced the tuners on my '49 Supro lap steel because the tuner "buttons" had crumbled. I found exact replacements from STEWMAC, and now its a functional instrument in my arsenal. Before I did that it was a useless slab of wood. Should I ever sell it I would hope the prospective buyer will understand it had to be done in order to use it.

 

Worn out or replaced parts don't bother me. I can always restore the instrument if I want it bad enough. ESPECIALLY something as simple as a nut or a pot or tuners.

[fortyearspickn]

OWF, I agree. I think the examples you gave are valid - for me. Of course, if I were looking for a 'beater' I would be less 'picky'.

Sort of like car collectors. Some want the serial numbers of the car, engine and transmission to be those listed in the original documents.

Some want every part to be as close to 'original' or OEM as possible, and are willing to pay the price. Some just want a car that looks more or less like a '55 Chevy but goes faster and gets better mileage and handles better. But, there's more wear and tear on a car than a guitar normally, and many more parts. So - it makes sense to me to expect either the original tuners or an exact replacement. Sadly, I make that judgement because I am not at the level of most here who can evaluate what will soup up their guitar vis a vis tuners and brace scraping, so I conservatively opt for 'all original'.

On the other hand, switching out transducers and pre-amp stuff certainly can be appealing. And I've seen some tuners here that would definitely appeal. If they were a perfect fit. So, I guess I'm a "Yes, but..." (Which is certainly better than a No Butt.)

[zombywoof]

Personally I don' give a fig what the saddle, nut, pins and such are made of. Tuners, well some of them just do need to go. No money in keeping on original tuners that do not work well. I do prefer that the replacements fit in the original footprint.

 

Re-voicing a guitar though? So why would I even have bought a Gibson if I did not like its voice. Seems to me it would have been smarter to have gone out and bought a guitar that was voiced the way I like 'em to begin with.

[fortyearspickn]

ZW, agree. I think pins are eye candy that only a dog could hear the tonal change in. But if you want a guitar that sounds like a Taylor, why buy a Gibson and shave the braces?

That'd be like marrying an 18 year old super model and spending tens of thousands on plastic surgery and potatoes to turn her into a 200 pound Russian peasant.

[Pittgibson45]

I swear that I have heard people mention that they still have the original strings on their guitar, like it is a good thing.

[JuanCarlosVejar]

For me I'd prefer it as it came out of montana

 

 

 

 

 

 

JC

[dchristo]

if it plays good, sounds good and is the right price,,,,,I dont care what has been done to it

[Lars68]

Good topic!

 

I more often than not modify my guitars to get a more visually appealling and better functioning instrument. On Gibson I remove the interior labels, change pichguatds to firestripe from www.firistripepickguards.com, and slot the bridges to fit unslotted pins. That's just the way I like it. I would be glad if a used instrument already had these mods carried out.

 

Lars

[MorrisrownSal]

Aside from a saddle change, and POSSIBLY a tuner change, I would not want a modded guitar.

[kidblast]

I recently sold my original '59 Strat. The first dealer that looked at it had a hissy fit because the volume pot had been changed by the previous owner. So I asked this moron if he wanted a guitar that was original or one that worked. I got that deer in the headlights look. I sold it to the second dealer... The second dealer also bought my original '69 Thinline Tele, the '64 Bassman amp and my mint condition '84 Super Champ.

 

Wow Bill,, must have been a bit of a struggle to part with some of that stuff.

 

but, I hope they all did right by you.

 

and the hissy fit, Love the response, right down the middle of the strike zone with that reply.

[kidblast]

I will keep them stock until something needs to be swapped out. (like pickups in an electric I just can't abide with)

 

the only change I made to one of my acosutics was to add a pickup in my Taylor GS which did not come with any electronics.

 

which is good, cuz I'm not a fan of the Taylor ES pickups.

 

My 95 LP Standard needed new machine heads about 2 or 3 years ago. I ordered exact kluson style replacements

[BluesKing777]

We read stuff here and we think we better get that plastic changed to bone in the next week or....what??

 

I personally prefer bone pieces to plastic...I'm probably a 'things of stone and wood' type person, but I do have a few guitars with Tusq Saddles and a Graphtech Nuts. I have intended to change them to bone, but they are sounding good, so I have left them - enough other things to do.

 

 

So I was thinking how the people at Gibson and Martin would possible look at these plastic bits - are they an economy measure? 20c each instead of 30c? I wouldn't know, but there must be a point at the factory where someone designing the guitar must say it sounds great with those parts, or no-one would want to buy them. One anomaly with the Gibsons I see is the Legend L-00 specs say it has a Graphteq Nut, a fairly recent plasticky invention and not of the 1930s...... Head guitar man incharge of sounding good must say he wants the Graphteq Nut or it will....what??? Why not the bone nut?

 

 

How does all this work at the factory? Surely the Design Department talks to the Production Department and the Quality Control/Management/and yes even the ...accountants...must all want something that sounds good to sell them?

 

 

BluesKing777.

[onewilyfool]

Well, I have swapped out plastic for bone….didn't like the change….and went back to plastic…..I may do that on my CF-100…the bone pins make it a little "chimey"….if you know what I mean…...

[Slinky1]

I don't like to change things either. But, I kind of have a thing for vintage style tuners. Got a J-15 recently, it plays fine and I love it. I bought a new truss rod cover, one with the white border, I did not like the solid black one. I also would like to change the tuners to white oval vintage type. No real big deal either way.