Feedback/thoughts on newly acquired vintage J45

[techrecruit]

Can anyone offer any input to if this is truly a 1955 or not. Everything I can find says it is but wanted the community opinion. Also open to any feedback on the guitar. J45 on the inside which is tough to see and the actual serial # is very tough to read due to fading. No surface cracks anywhere on the front or back or sides and no lifting of the bridge or neck work done that I can tell. I did notice that there's a tiny crack or gap where the binding is (about 2inches) but not really splitting apart that much. if you press on it you can see it close up. Will a luthier just put some glue in there to seal it or should I just leave it as is. This will be a player and not a collectors piece.

The tuners function but the buttons are falling apart.

 

I just bought this guitar and am going to take it to a luthier to get it cleaned up and checked over so any tips or advice is welcomed as this is my first vintage. Any ideas on the value of it?

 

Plenty of beautiful patina (checking) :)

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ryanfender]

It looks correct. The saddle doesn't appear to full up the slot in the bridge which is strange but easily fixed. The burst looks a little odd to me. Maybe its a refin. If its a 1955 model, the FON should start with a "W". Looks like a nice guitar.

[62burst]

I like it. Agree w/ Ryan on the questionable bridge. Not necessarily a Gibson bridge; the amount of "real estate" in the belly-up portion is a bit

more than normally seen. The above mentioned saddle is not as wide, and the bottom of the bridge is usually fairly straight across. Guess they put

the fancy pins in while they were at it. I'd take a mirror inside & see what the bridge plate looks like.

 

Imhop the 'burst looks correct for early/mid '50's, quite possibly with an overspray. The deeper scratches in the lower bout seem to have soaked up

some clear, & not have a raw appearance, no biggie. Since you're not saying what you'd paid, considering the deteriorated but original tuners, & bridge questions, I'd guess around 2.7 to $3K. Maybe 18 months ago, before the bottom fell out of the vintage market, you'd have been a bit closer to 4K(?).

[rar]

I agree that, as far as one can tell from the pictures, it could be a '55. But also that it's had a little work done that make the dating a bit problematic. Look hard for that 'W'!

 

-- Bob R

[techrecruit]

It's definitely got a W as the first of the serial #. Wife thinks it says w3952.

 

The finish is heavily checking throughout and i can't see any overspray so im hoping it's original finish. I've got to get new tuner buttons bc 3 crumbled. Should I just replace the buttons or just replace entire tuning machines and keep the originals? Also if I just replace buttons can I get yellowed or browned instead of bright white? I heard a rumor u can soak them in tea to get discoloration.

[techrecruit]

Paid $2500

[fp]

The finish and the bridge look correct. I'm comparing the bridge to my 59 SJ and they are exactly alike. Of course the saddle is too short.

If the bridge is not original then it is a correct size and shape replacement. I'm a stickler about bridges on Gibsons and that one looks correct to me. I think you got yourself a nice guitar there.

If it were mine I'd buy new Kluson tuners and in the meantime put new buttons on those old ones and keep them if you decide to sell it later.

There are different methods for ageing new white buttons. Stewart McDonald has a tutorial on it. I've found brown shoe polish works much better then tea, when I've done it.

 

Frank.

[nid2007]

Lovely guitar. Congrats! Very "Crazy Heart."

[BigKahune]

Welcome

 

Sorry, no help on your questions.

 

But hey, you've got very nice find there. Congrats. B)

[62burst]

 

The finish is heavily checking throughout and i can't see any overspray so im hoping it's original finish

 

There's a difference between "overspray", where a coating gets where you don't want it, and an Overspray, where a clear coat of lacquer is sprayed over a minimally prepared original finish to seal it, or to blend in an area of repair (crack repair, bridge work, etc). That's why the wear on the top(lower bout) looks like it's more in the finish than the wear on, say, this '53 guitar, for example.

Perhaps: the up-angle lighting on your bridge shots can be a bit tricky to compare,but zoom the Vintage

Instruments, Inc shot to 150% to compare bridges

 

http://www.vintage-instruments.com/photos/28207z.jpg

 

It's a Gibson. Consistency is not necessarily Priority-One.

 

Enjoy it, just don't buff it out when you're "cleaning it up"

[ryanfender]

If you want to replace the white buttons, Willi Henkes in Germany sells the best replacements that are already off-white in color and match the vintage specs. They are available through Elderly Instruments. Heres the link:

 

http://www.elderly.com/accessories/items/AAB1-CREAM.htm

 

Direct replacement tuners if you want to go the route:

http://www.elderly.com/accessories/items/WD90NPP.htm

 

They are easy to replace too. Willi offer this video is well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcXZ8Q5Cij8&p=7F17F0B9F9B606E3&playnext=1&index=60

 

I used them on my 1957 LG-1 and love them. Heres a pic of the results:

[zombywoof]

There's a difference between "overspray", where a coating gets where you don't want it, and an

 

Although you used to see it all the time back in the good old days (when folks did not want to see checking and crazing on a guitar), overspraying a guitar for anything other than a touch up over repairs is not a great idea.

 

But as long as the guitar is not intended to be a museuum piece in the long run it does not matter. The real issue with these guitars is that finding two that are identical sonic twins is next to impossble do. You give them a whack on the side with your thumb and you will hear a different sound from each. Or look at the grain in the top wood which is all over the place in quality. As I said before, years I ago I got the chance to take home three 1950s SJs for a test drive within the period of a few moths - all made the same year and all were in roughly the same condition. All were nice sounding and playing guitars but one really stood out of the crowd. It was a bit louder and punchier than the others with a more defined or tight sound to it.

[techrecruit]

I noticed a "2" on the rear of the headstock. Any thoughts on that? Did one of the guys who was initially building this axe have too much to drink and did something that didn't meet gibson specs during QA but they sold it anyways and stamped it as a "second"?

[rar]

... did something that didn't meet gibson specs during QA but they sold it anyways and stamped it as a "second"?

 

That's it. No big deal, since this was generally due to a minor cosmetic issue that became irrelevant decades ago.

 

-- Bob R

[Guest WiseAxe]

... of course, that would be quite cool if over the course of your getting to know this guitar a little better, you resolve

the mystery of why it was marked as a second. A little detective work, some research, some learning, and some day you'll be

just staring at the thing in the right light, & it'll dawn on you. Maybe. But that's part of the mystery- one may never know the answer to many questions when owning a vintage guitar (i.e., "how (when {what kind of night was it[what song just got played]?}) did that come to get there?)

[zombywoof]

It looks like the 2 is stamped into the back of the headstock. As far as I know Gibson did not stamp anything on the headstocks until 1961 (although inked serial numbers were placed on the backs of the electric headstocks). But I have never even seen a pre-1960s Gibson factory second so who knows.

[techrecruit]

First of all thanks to everyone for your input and valuable info. I love this forum.

 

I dropped the guitar off at the luthier's this wknd so I'm going off memory and a picture of the back of the headstock and i'm pretty sure it's stamped into the wood and not ink marked with a 2

[ryanfender]

Yeah, the stamped "2" indicates a factory second. These guitars were stamped this way because of a minor finish problems or other cosmetic issue. After 50 years, of dings and what not, the factory second guitar is no different than regular production and it does not typically hurt the value of the instrument. Gibson had another stamp for guitars that had other more major issues but I can't remember what it is. It seems pretty rare to find this guitars but they can have structural problems and are worth less.

 

Yours is a great guitar and the "2" is the back does nothing to harm that.