Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Odd looking standard cherry sunburst?


Recommended Posts

Hello,

im just wondering. I found this gibson online which the owner says its finish is in cherry sunburst. Does it seem abit darker than usual? Or is this normal? Also apart from the finish, would you say this is a genuine gibson or not?

 

He also claims its 'customized'

 

Thanks alot.

 

P7080013.jpg

 

P7080014.jpg

 

P7080017.jpg

 

Photo1101.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
The frets don't have the little edge bits from the binding either.

 

I agree, although it could have had a re-fret?

I've heard that Gibson has done frets over bindings, but I don't know if they've done it on Standards?

There is a debate on this subject but I prefer my bindings over frets like my Standard has.

Apparently some don't?

 

 

Also, the nut is the same color as the binding! Thought they were generally white?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm certainly not going to say the OP is a counterfeiter.

 

However;

 

Whilst the guitar is clearly a fake it shows the fakers have corrected some of the usual errors. There are at least three areas which are accurate when compared with the usual stuff we see.

 

I suggest we all start to excercise a considerable degree of prudence when pointing out those signs to a first-time poster from a region known to be manufacturing fakes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm certainly not going to say the OP is a counterfeiter.

 

However;

 

Whilst the guitar is clearly a fake it shows the fakers have corrected some of the usual errors. There are at least three areas which are accurate when compared with the usual stuff we see.

 

I suggest we all start to excercise a considerable degree of prudence when pointing out those signs to a first-time poster from a region known to be manufacturing fakes.

I agree' date=' but I knew it was fake as soon as the pic loaded. And, as I said a million times before, no matter how "good" a fake seems to look, they will NEVER be 100% accurate.[cool
Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree' date=' but I knew it was fake as soon as the pic loaded. And, as I said a million times before, no matter how "good" a fake seems to look, they will NEVER be 100% accurate.[cool']

 

Well, not to get into a bunfight or anything...LOL!

 

I, like you, knew it to be a fake immediately, but that's only because we both know what to look for. Even in the few replies so far we've collectively pointed out six areas where the counterfeiters need to amend their production techniques - and only one of those would need much in the way of financial outlay!

 

As to fakes 'NEVER' being 100% accurate;

 

1) It wouldn't have to be 100% accurate to fool even knowledgeable people just from some photographs on a computer screen. If you think of all the ways we can tell a fake from the real deal how difficult do you think it would be to correct almost all of those faults? There's one thing, and I'm certain you know the one I'm referring to, which would be very costly to put into production. Other than that it's mostly down to a few perimiter/hardware alterations.

 

2) If 'Max' and Chris Derrig can produce replicas that are undetectible from the real deal then so can others. I wouldn't bet on someone, somewhere, with the correct time, equipment and labour costs to do much the same thing on a much larger scale for a fraction of the cost.

 

Whilst I'm sceptical about this forum being the place where counterfeiters are 'lab-testing' their handiwork I, for one, am going to be very sparing with my advice.

 

[cool]

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well' date=' not to get into a bunfight or anything...LOL!

 

I, like you, knew it to be a fake immediately, but that's only because we both know what to look for. Even in the few replies so far we've collectively pointed out [u']six[/u] areas where the counterfeiters need to amend their production techniques - and only one of those would need much in the way of financial outlay!

 

As to fakes 'NEVER' being 100% accurate;

 

1) It wouldn't have to be 100% accurate to fool even knowledgeable people just from some photographs on a computer screen. If you think of all the ways we can tell a fake from the real deal how difficult do you think it would be to correct almost all of those faults? There's one thing, and I'm certain you know the one I'm referring to, which would be very costly to put into production. Other than that it's mostly down to a few perimiter/hardware alterations.

 

2) If 'Max' and Chris Derrig can produce replicas that are undetectible from the real deal then so can others. I wouldn't bet on someone, somewhere, with the correct time, equipment and labour costs to do much the same on a much larger scale for a fraction of the cost.

 

Whilst I'm sceptical about this forum being the place where counterfeiters are 'lab-testing' their handiwork I, for one, am going to be very sparing with my advice.

 

[biggrin]

:-

 

But you CAN'T compare a "Max" or a "Derrig" Replica (a TRUE replica) to a Chinese POS fake! There's a HUGE difference.[cool]

 

Real is better than Replica, Replica is better than Copy, and Copy is better than Fake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
...But you CAN'T compare a "Max" or a "Derrig" Replica (a TRUE replica) to a Chinese POS fake! There's a HUGE difference.[cool]

 

Yes' date=' well; my tongue was firmly in my cheek when I added that bit!

 

Anyhow...so-far they've cottoned-on to the TRC screws and, recently, the general outline shapes have been getting more accurate..........

 

I'm still going to keep schtum!

 

:-

 

LOL!

 

[biggrin

Link to post
Share on other sites
I suggest we all start to excercise a considerable degree of prudence when pointing out those signs to a first-time poster from a region known to be manufacturing fakes.

 

Fair enough' date=' I did not realize this board was being used as a testing lab for counterfeiters. In the future i will settle for a straight 'yes' or 'no'. [biggrin

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fair enough' date=' I did not realize this board was being used as a testing lab for counterfeiters. In the future i will settle for a straight 'yes' or 'no'. [wink']

 

Thanks

 

Hi there, burger175.

 

I'm not saying that the forum is being used by counterfeiters. But in the last two years the fakes have been 'improving' in terms of coming closer to what the real things look like and, for those two years, we (myself included) have been pointing out exactly how we spot those fakes. I have decided to stop detailing those errors.

 

In all likelihood this is all just a coincidence.

 

Probably.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pippy.. why wouldn’t a counterfeiter just buy a lousy $3000 real guitar; measure it and put the measurements on their computer and they could CnC as many as they liked.

 

I doesn’t take much thinking that they could do that in a flash so all the secrecy of what’s fake about X guitar would be gone in a flash.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pippy.. why wouldn’t a counterfeiter just buy a lousy $3000 real guitar; measure it and put the measurements on their computer and they could CnC as many as they liked.

 

I doesn’t take much thinking that they could do that in a flash so all the secrecy of what’s fake about X guitar would be gone in a flash.

 

I've absolutely no idea why they don't buy a guitar and copy it exactly. No idea. It's what I'd do!

 

We've talked all along about how easy it would be to buy a real one and just copy it. It's not rocket science!

 

Perhaps they don't have top-end CnC machines? I simply don't know.

 

I'm baffled' date=' frankly. They are obviously trying to improve the look of their product but are taking an age in doing so when, as you say, for $3,000 they could have the best 'blueprint' imaginable!

 

Perhaps exports to 'The West' only accounts for a fraction of one percent of their total sales and it's not worth the bother? Think of the population/captive market of China and compare it with us here.

 

When I joined the forum two years ago I was one of the ones pointing out all the mistakes hoping to alert unsuspecting people to the existence of said fakes. There were people here saying I was letting out too much info in pointing out counterfeit guitars and, inwardly, I pretty much pooh-poohed the idea. It seemed total nonsense for the exact reason you mention.

 

I never used to believe all that conspiracy theory stuff for a second.

 

Then, however, they started to change the small things we happened to be talking about - hence my reference to the TRCs. The instrument in the OP is one of the very few nowadays to have a 3-screw TRC. Almost every one has now got a 2-screw one. Sometimes poorly fitted; sometimes the wrong plastic; sometimes the wrong script etc...etc...but usually, nowadays, only 2 screws.

 

I'm not saying this is the place to "...find out how to improve your products, guys!"...but I'm certainly less bullish than I was 24 months ago.

 

Have you spotted the three areas in the op's pictures which [u']were[/u] wrong and are now right?

 

If so; Don't Tell Me!

 

LOL!

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've absolutely no idea why they don't buy a guitar and copy it exactly.

 

Why? Because they don't have to!

There's plenty of Information on building a Gibson LP if thats what you want to do, and you

don't have to spend 3k to get that information.

 

Hey, it costs money to make a real Gibson LP whether Gibson does it or not. These fakers are in the business

of making as much money as they can. If they were to fully replicate a Les Paul to the exact specs then they

would be over invested in their scam to make much of a profit. To assume that this, or any forum, is somehow giving away Gibson secrets by analyzing crappy photos is a little absurd. IMHO.

 

There are many videos & blueprints all over the internet. Just search How to build a Gibson Les Paul and you will be humbled.

 

As for the people here pointing out flaws, I'm 100% sure those reply's have saved many potiential

buyers some serious headaches. Education and information puts the power in the hands of the people trying not to be

screwed. Greed and laziness are the faults of the counterfeiters.

 

So if there is a post asking if its a fake and I know why, I'm going to point it out and hope it saved someone

from being screwed. I KNOW it won't change how greedy the counterfeiters are!

 

And ultimately, thats what a forum is for right? To educate, not Spoon feed.

 

Thats my 2 cents.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why? Because they don't have to!

There's plenty of Information on building a Gibson LP if thats what you want to do' date=' and you

don't have to spend 3k to get that information.[/quote']

 

I agree. To make a saleable fake it doesn't have to be 100% perfect. I said as much in my second post - #14 (although Gibson, trying their best, do get real '58-'60 bursts to CnC scan because it does matter to them).

 

As for the people here pointing out flaws' date=' I'm 100% sure those reply's have saved many potiential

buyers some serious headaches. Education and information puts the power in the hands of the people trying not to be

screwed.

 

And ultimately, thats what a forum is for right? To educate, not Spoon feed. [/quote']

 

Again; I agree. In fact I couldn't agree more.

 

Although nowadays, as plenty of folk who have logged on here can attest, I do it by sending PM's.

Link to post
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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...