Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

1964 Hummingbird with Thin neck


Seabolt

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

I'm brand new to the forum and just trying to figure out a question or perhaps a theory about a 1964 Hummingbird I just picked up. It's absolutely a 1964 249XXX serial number. Everything is bone stock and unchanged. The original owner purchased the guitar new and barely played it. However is has the smaller 1 9/16th" nut on it. When it should be the wider 1 11/16th" nut. Neck is original and unchanged, but I'm perplexed how this happened. This is at the very tail end of 1964, but I've also seen where early 65s had the wider neck. This is also a much more scarce natural finish so maybe it was some "custom" type of deal for a store? Early prototype potentially? Any and all help is appreciated! Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Seabolt said:

Neck is original and unchanged, but I'm perplexed how this happened. This is at the very tail end of 1964, but I've also seen u!

Easy to see why you would be desorientated - I've never met a 64er (or pre-65 for that matter) with the narrow width.  Some very  slim necks, but not 9/16s.

Did you long-distance-buy under the impression this was 11/16 or how did it happen. And are you now in spot of regret.

Welcome aBoard, Seabolt - please post some pics of the old flier and let us hear more. 

Your tales, experiences and Qs will be received with curiosity and joy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, E-minor7 said:

Did you long-distance-buy under the impression this was 11/16 or how did it happen. And are you now in spot of regret.

Actually not, purchased at a local estate auction in the middle of nowhere, and I'm not familiar enough with Hummingbirds be that specific. Between looking at reverb + eBay for a price guide, I got it for a fantastic deal. This guitar with the "correct" neck in this finish is a very expensive guitar so Im glad I didn't get myself in to deep here. But when the tech said this wasn't correct, I'm just flabbergasted at how this is possible. Guitar tech is extremely reputable (in fact is doing some repairs on a Bass from the band Weezer) and he says everything is original to the guitar, but he couldn't explain the neck! Which is why I'm hoping someone more in the know could help! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Seabolt said:

Actually not, , , , 

Be sure this is extraordinary and the only explanation I can think of is that Kalamazoo must have had some early examples of the coming narrower necks ready.

Others may chime with comments about Gibson bein' inconsistent and they'll be right. This however is an extremely rare incident. 

But 1964 was before the new machines, which I believe entered the plant the year after (someone correct if wrong), so human touch might have played a role. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also would be curious as to the value if anyone has any idea on the flying unicorn apparently LOL. I just want to make sure I didn't get myself to far in. In my mind it's still a natural finish '64, but by measurements it's more of a 65-68. It was easy to justify to the wife when I figured the guitar was $7,000 or so and was an investment! Again I appreciate all the help!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dater has 1965 models starting at 250336, which is very close to your guitar's number. The would place your serial number at the very end of December 1964, in all probability.

It is entirely possible that Gibson started using narrower necks before January 1, 1965. I have seen necks with a nut width of 1 5/8" on guitars dated to 1964, so Gibson was definitely experimenting with narrower nuts prior to January 1, 1965.

It's good to check the nut width on any Gibson acoustic from after around 1960, when Gibson necks started to get skinny in general.

It's not like all the characteristics of Gibsons changed at the turn of the new year. They aren't like cars, with distinctive model year characteristics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...