1969 Gibson SG Neck oddity

[superaxe63]

Hi all, I wonder if any of you might have some input on this guitar of mine. I have had a 68-70 sg before, 68 serial no. 1970 pot date no volute guitar and it had a very different neck to this one. It has no serial no! and it never had one. Pots are 1969 with one bumble bee capacitor looks original. But most confusing is the neck joint as there is no lip where it joins the body plus the profile of the neck is very even as you go up, not like my 70 guitar which seemed to fill out. Also the headstock over lay flashes white /cream on the edges. Re Neck? I have black lighted the guitar and can find no evidence of any refinish or repairs other than the added grovers and the odd changed screw! What do you think? BTW the guitar plays and sounds fantastic. I cant seem to post the pictures into the board so i hope the links work ok. Thanks for any input in advance

 

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x88/superaxe_photos/DSCF0001-9.jpg

 

 

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x88/superaxe_photos/DSCF0008-2.jpg

 

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x88/superaxe_photos/DSCF0006-1.jpg

 

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x88/superaxe_photos/DSCF0007.jpg

 

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x88/superaxe_photos/DSCF0004-2.jpg

[BigKahune]

Very strange.

 

Looking at the rear of the headstock, it doesn't appear to have wings. With the body routes, I'm guessing it's not a factory Gibson, but some kind of parted up Frankenstein, possibly with a headstock overlay taken from a broken neck.

[superaxe63]

Yes its a weird one alright, you saying the body routes look correct? I first thought it was re neck, but the fret board and inlays look correct, the neck joint looks un disturbed from the inside. could it be a proto type, or an employee guitar? Would someone go to all the bother of re necking a guitar like this back then? changed tuners? Im guessing vintage values did not exsist when or if the work was done.

[kevoT]

@superaxe, didn't the employe guitar have a two on it?

Overall i think that the guitar had a really bad accident and the owner had to get the neck replaced. Hey, I'm still young a foolish so i'm probably wrong :D

[BigKahune]

... you saying the body routes look correct?

 

I first thought it was re neck' date=' but the fret board and inlays look correct, the neck joint looks un disturbed from the inside. could it be a proto type, or an employee guitar? [/quote']

 

No, the routes are strange. Maybe at one time it had 3 pup setup?

 

Yes, the fretboard looks okay. But the neck joint, (what looks like) no wings and the headstock overlay that reveals the underlying wood around the edges is all strange.

 

Maybe like you say, an employee guitar, or a special run.

 

I hope somebody can answer.

 

Interesting.

[Dub-T-123]

Hmm. This really is strange.

 

I think I can see wings on the headstock but there's obviously nothing stamped on there.

 

The body and hardware look legit to me but then that routing has me confused too. There is a seamless finish over the routing which indicates that it was either refinished after it was routed or done as an employee guitar at the factory.

 

My guess is that it was modded and refinished and when the guy sanded it down for the refinishing job he sanded off the serial number and everything.

 

I'm not exactly sure what a neck joint from this year should look like so I can't say it looks wrong but it looks a little suspicious. I can't be sure.

 

It looks like a cool guitar though.

[duane v]

interesting....

 

My 72 SG200 doesn't have a volute.... Always thought that was kind of strange

[superaxe63]

I think the body routes for this era are correct. The SG special had 2 pup cavitys whilst the Standard had a bath route. i can confirm its a 3 piece neck, it has the wings quite narrow though. I dont think its a refinish it black lights too good and there is no sign of any sanding in the contours. I dont think its ever had a switch ring on it or a Lyre cover as the finish is uniform in colour but then again it could have i guess if kept out of the light.

Some more pictures, the last one i got of ebay for comparison on the bath route.

 

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x88/superaxe_photos/DSCF0001-10.jpg

 

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x88/superaxe_photos/DSCF0010-1.jpg

 

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x88/superaxe_photos/DSCF0005-3.jpg

 

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x88/superaxe_photos/BrMBCE2kKGrHqYOKiQEu4ucKdmLBLyrp5KS.jpg

 

Thanks again

[superaxe63]

KevoT

 

A "2" by the serial no. indicated a "second" guitar ie one with some flaw or cosmetic issue and was sold off at discount.

[Dub-T-123]

Well the frets look like they aren't original because there aren't "nibs".

 

Replaced frets are common on an old guitar. But this thing is weird.

 

I bet those humbuckers sound absolutely amazing.

[BigKahune]

Nice dig on the comparison shot Superaxe.

 

Yeah. The route now looks like it's legit. And looking closer I do see the thinner than usual wings.

 

Man, I've never seen anything like that (my guitar buying started in the late 60s).

 

What a puzzler.

 

But as Dub said - it's a cool looking SG.

 

I'd sure like to know more on this one.

[Jantha]

I ain't got nuthin' to add... but I'd like to say that's a cool SG :-

[superaxe63]

Thanks! yeah it sounds the mutts nuts too! if i get time ill do a youtube sound demo tomorrow.

Anyone know where to get a lyre cover?

[SG dude]

ITS A FAKE!!!!!!!!! And i believe its on all of our best interests that you give it to me, ill get rid of it for you :-

 

 

Just kidding man, who cares, regardless, how does it play? how does it sound? are you happy with it? and btw ive seen a few pics of late '60's SG's that are routed for 3 pups, so dont worry there either, you see em on ebay all the time. It is a beautiful looking SG and y'know, if you ever want to pass it on, y'know, incase theres too many doubts... :-

Ryan.

[80LPC]

superaxe, although the neck joint might appear to be untouched, 'something' is odd about the neck because it is a different tint to the body - it is quite a bit lighter. Also, the lacquer appears to be thicker on the neck than body.

 

I am pretty sure the headstock has been sanded to slim it down at the upper part. The 'waist' is almost non-existent, and the edge is close to the 3rd /4th machine head posts.

 

Certainly unusual, but it's the sound that matters...

[duane v]

I just looked at another 69 SG, and yours looks just like it.... same neck joint and small headstock.

[80LPC]

No SG Standard had the small headstock. Although headstock dimensions always varied slightly, this one has been altered.

[duane v]

To me the headstock looks untouched[confused] .... What makes it look strange is the large tuner washers

[hagstrom71]

My 69' SG has the same neck joint. Not that strange

[drizzt]

It might be one of those ghost builder guitars, but like the others said - if it suits you and you are happy with the feel and the sound of it - who cares. It's a unique guitar and you own it - what's better than that!

[superaxe63]

I hear what your saying about the headstock thickness, i just measured it against my 57 es 175 and my 57 special and its about the same so i guess it is a visual with the grover rings. However the edges dont look sharp like my other guitars almost a slight bevel on the leading edge exposing a very thin flash of white, could even be the underside of the overlay flashing through. I dont read too much into different colours of timber between neck and body as its 2 seperate pieces of wood. The finish matches between them. I would love to see pictures of you guys with matching neck joints! that would be interesting. Also i get confused with the Gibson logo and the various years, is this one right? Dot above the i and open b and o. It looks identical to the logo on my 57 Special? Thanks again everyone but i think this one is a keeper! I prefer the neck profile to my other 68-70 SG, its a more even profile.

[Calgary Flametop]

Large pickguard definitely puts that part into the 66-70 period. Neck and body are definitely mismatched. The headstock has had the sides sanded down, hence the smaller looking wings. Probably had a large chunk chipped off of one of the corners and was narrowed to make it look better. Employees of Gibson sometimes bought 2nd guitars as they got a discount on them so that could be what you were thinking there. Gibson currently produces the SG reissues with the lyre so if you contact them maybe you can get a cover from them.

[Calgary Flametop]

There are some good pics of a 69 on ebay right now. It is auction number 220598668458. You will be able to see what I am talking about regarding the headstock.

[Calgary Flametop]

Amazingly enough, if you look at the front headstock pic of the listing I mentioned in the enlarged mode they are identical in size to your front headstock pic. If you A/B the pics you can see that your headstock has been narrowed. You can also tell from just looking at your pic alone. The botton tuners should be the same distance from the edge as the top tuners.

[superaxe63]

Yes i see that! it also looks like more was taken from one side of mine th " GI " side than the other. So maybe thats it, headstock reshaped to hide a large chip, serial no lost in the process!? but Kluson footprint remains? Black light shows nothing, (ill check again tonight) But how do we explain the neck to body joint? BTW that SG on Ebay looks like it has its share of problems too!