bettiol Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 Hi folks! I've recently bought a 1981 Gibson Les Paul Standard, everything seems to be ok, but when I saw its serial number on the back of the headstock it seemd a bit rare to me since the numbers are a bit bigger than the ones I used to see in my other Gibsons. The guitar looks original to me (right logo with the upper "o tail", right strap pins, right hard case, right in general...) but I hope you could give me a hand with this. Maybe some serials are printed in this way and I just dindn't know that... I attach some photos of the guitar so you can see ir, thanks a lot! This is the serial number: This kind of serials are the ones I'm more familiar with: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackie Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 Comes back as an 81 from guitar dater Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brundaddy Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 Case looks right for an 81. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 Case looks right, so does neck binding, what about the bridge? Could you post closer pics of it? I think it's a normal 81 LP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L5Larry Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 Just throwing this out for discussion, since my knowlege is more from the vintage years. Was the Kalamazoo plant still operating in '81, and could this be a difference in the serial number stamping machinery between Kalamazoo and Nashville. Doesn't the third to last digit of the serial number have something to do with the plant for which it was built. OK, discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PP_CS336 Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 bettiol, I had one of those cases with my 1987 Alpine White Les Paul Custom that I bought at Sam Ash in Paramus, NJ back at that time. I loved the guitar, but I hated the case. I always felt like I was lugging around a chain saw. I don't remember my serial# being that high on the headstock, but then again, as one of the other guys mentioned, it depends on where it was built and the stamp that they use at that factory. The case is legit, so I hope for your sake that the guitar is too. Let us know. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RRIDER Posted July 14, 2010 Share Posted July 14, 2010 Just throwing this out for discussion' date=' since my knowlege is more from the vintage years. Was the Kalamazoo plant still operating in '81, and could this be a difference in the serial number stamping machinery between Kalamazoo and Nashville. Doesn't the third to last digit of the serial number have something to do with the plant for which it was built. OK, discuss.[/quote'] Larry might be right! According to guitar dater,...(I know it isn't always accurate), and I read the serial number right as 80211465 It was made in Kalamazoo. Guitar Info Your guitar was made at the Kalamazoo Plant, USA January 21st, 1981 Production Number: 465 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettiol Posted July 15, 2010 Author Share Posted July 15, 2010 Thakns to ebreybody for your replies! As I said, there are many facts that make me think the guitar ins't fake... Maybe it sounds stupid, but if "fells" like a original one (generally, fake guitars have grtoesque fails, this one donesn't, and all the specs are correct and matching the year of fabrication: the logo, the case, etc...) Also, the serial number scheme (YDDDYNNN) is respected. I checked the guitar info according to the serial nunber in guitar dater, as RRIDER did in the las post of this topic. So, this might happen because a difference in the serial number stamping machinery? The back of the headstock donesn't seem to have any fix of a broken part or anything... Any more help on this issue will be extremely appreciated, thanks again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre S Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 It looks fine, except for the bridge...I'm not sure but it almost looks as the bridges on Epiphones.....can you post any close ups of the bridge? and of the fretboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laaz Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 That bridge looks metric. Get better photos of the bridge and nibs if it has them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettiol Posted July 15, 2010 Author Share Posted July 15, 2010 Sadly I haven't got my camera here, otherwise i'd took some pics of the bridge... Anyway the bridge seems ok to me, the ONLY rare thing in the guitar is the serial number stamp... Should I send an E-Mail to Gibson Support and ask them what they think about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre S Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 Sadly I haven't got my camera here' date=' otherwise i'd took some pics of the bridge... Anyway the bridge seems ok to me, the ONLY rare thing in the guitar is the serial number stamp... Should I send an E-Mail to Gibson Support and ask them what they think about it?[/quote'] I dunno if it makes sense....the bridge is metric (from what I can see in the pics.) That means its fake..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre S Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 Thakns to ebreybody for your replies! As I said' date=' there are many facts that make me think the guitar ins't fake... Maybe it sounds stupid, but if "fells" like a original one (generally, fake guitars have grtoesque fails, this one donesn't, and all the specs are correct and matching the year of fabrication: the logo, the case, etc...) Also, the serial number scheme (YDDDYNNN) is respected. I checked the guitar info according to the serial nunber in guitar dater, as RRIDER did in the las post of this topic. So, this might happen because a difference in the serial number stamping machinery? The back of the headstock donesn't seem to have any fix of a broken part or anything... Any more help on this issue will be extremely appreciated, thanks again![/quote'] Its not that hard for them to copy the serial number order or even copy a serial number so that it matches up.. What are the other facts that make you think it isn't fake?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 Like everyone else who has expressed reservations I don't like the bridge fixings; I've never seen a Gibson with screw-in stud posts. Everything else seems to be fine, though. Even though there is camera shake I think I can see 'nibs' on the neck. Is there any evidence of the bridge being a replacement? :- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettiol Posted July 15, 2010 Author Share Posted July 15, 2010 Thanks again for your answers, they are bringing light to me. Excuse my weak English too, English is not my main language (can anybody give me a synonim of "nibs", I don't understand that word) I've noticed what many of you told me about the bridge. Now it seems rare... can anybody tell me the differences between the "metric" and the "imperial" bridge? In case the bridge is not the original... having this metric bridge suppposes a different kind of "invasion" of the body? (different perforations, etc) Or is there a possibility that the original (let's suppose imperial bridge) could have been replaced for this metric bridge? To do that, does the body need any modification for the screws or sotmehing? The rest of the guitar seems preety fine to me. I know that if there is someone who wants to replicate a guitar, having sufficient knowledge about the specs of that era and enough hand abilities to construct the instrument is all he/she needs. But the rest of the guitar specs seem to be correct... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 ...Or is there a possibility that the original...could have been replaced for this metric bridge? To do that' date=' does the body need any modification for the screws or something?...[/quote'] It is, of course, possible that the bridge has been replaced - but why would someone replace the bridge? The instrument doesn't look so well-used that it could have worn out. We need to see better, sharp, close-up images of the bridge, the bridge-posts and the fret-ends, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdntac Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 I use to have an '81 LP Custom. Same case (certainly is well protected while in it!) and I'm positive the bridge is the same. A friend of mine now owns it and it's been a couple of months since I've seen it....but I'm sure the bridge is the same as yours. The bridge posts look familiar to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 I use to have an '81 LP Custom... and I'm positive the bridge is the same. A friend of mine now owns it and it's been a couple of months since I've seen it....but I'm sure the bridge is the same as yours. The bridge posts look familiar to me. That's very interesting to hear. I'm going to keep an open mind on this one. I've just looked up Kalamazoo-built LP's from '79 - '80 and' date=' of those fitted with 'Nashville' style bridges, none of them had screw-in posts. These, however, were all Standards - not Customs. I suppose it is possible that different bridges were used on different models? cdntac : Any chance of you finding out from your friend? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettiol Posted July 15, 2010 Author Share Posted July 15, 2010 I use to have an '81 LP Custom. Same case (certainly is well protected while in it!) and I'm positive the bridge is the same. A friend of mine now owns it and it's been a couple of months since I've seen it....but I'm sure the bridge is the same as yours. The bridge posts look familiar to me. Wow, this is interesting man... Do you have any picture of your ex-guitar for me to see it? If you are really sure that your LP Custom (same year as my LP Standard) had this kind of bridge, it means there is a posibility that this kind of metric bridges were the ones implemented in LP's at the plants (usually or exceptionally, I don't konw... probably exceptionally). I'll try to get you guys some pictures of the bridge. As far as I could see, the body shows no signs of modifications in the bridge area. I've learned more of Gibson hardware in these hours since I opened this topic than in all these years hahaha... I'm thinking if the guitars made in the Kalamazoo factory by those years (late 70's - early 80's) had different hardware than the ones built in the Nashville factory: By the way, I also have an '81 Les Paul Deluxe Goldtop... it has the more "habitual" stamped serial number, "tulip" style Grovers (not "kidney" style, like this LP Standard), and it has the "imperial" bridge... but it was made in the Nashville plant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettiol Posted July 15, 2010 Author Share Posted July 15, 2010 Sorry for the double post, I took more detailed pictures of my LP bridge, headstock and neck binding. Here they are, hope you can help me to determine its authenticty, thanks again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laaz Posted July 16, 2010 Share Posted July 16, 2010 I'm calling it a fake. With the metric bridge & the font size of the serial #. They didn't use that large font serial until the 2000 models. Do a Ebay search for 1981 Les Paul. Not a single one has that large font. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pohatu771 Posted July 16, 2010 Share Posted July 16, 2010 This guitar, from this auction has the larger serial number, and is from Kalamazoo. The others I looked at, with smaller stamps, were from Nashville. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettiol Posted July 16, 2010 Author Share Posted July 16, 2010 Thanks again for your answers... Don't you think it's a bit much to state that the guitar is fake because of the non-traditional bridge. I know is not the one that should be there, but maybe it was replaced... i'll try to investigate that. The rare thing here (to me) is the serial number with the big font size. The last post on this topic shows another 1981 LP Standard... despite the serial is not as big as the one in my guitar, is a bit bigger than the other that I've seen... so, could this happen because of the usage of different serial number stamping machinery? Could the custome service at Gibson answer this question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre S Posted July 16, 2010 Share Posted July 16, 2010 Is it me or are there no wings on that headstock? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laaz Posted July 16, 2010 Share Posted July 16, 2010 First, 648 would be Nashville not Kalamazoo. Second, that serial is not the same as from the OP This guitar' date=' from this auction has the larger serial number, and is from Kalamazoo. The others I looked at, with smaller stamps, were from Nashville. Don't you think it's a bit much to state that the guitar is fake because of the non-traditional bridge. I know is not the one that should be there, but maybe it was replaced... i'll try to investigate that. The rare thing here (to me) is the serial number with the big font size. Best I can tell you is to contact Gibson with the serial, color & description. They should be able to help you out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.