Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Old acoustics


Flight959

Recommended Posts

I think it's already been established that this guitar has a plastic bridge, not a rosewood bridge.

 

On a related topic, anyone who takes blue book values for vintage guitars at face value also probably believes that their house is worth the same thing it was in 2006. Nothing personal, it's just the reality of the times.

 

Collectible Gibson ES 335's from 1959 and 1960 for example--among the best electric guitars produced by anyone, anywhere-- could sell for $50k or more before the recession. You'd be lucky to get much more than 60% of that today for the same instrument. It may be that $3k guitars are less impacted by this than $50k guitars, but the effect is still there.

 

LOL, thanks so much for clearing that up! It's always nice when someone is anal enough to weigh every last word. Can I assume my speculations on the woods for the rest of guitar withstand your scrutiny? [biggrin]

 

As to the value of this particular guitar, I merely told the original poster what's in the book. That's not always the last word, but it's a start, and the authors of the Vintage Guitar Price Guide have taken the recession in the United States into account. Furthermore, a quick google search shows that the online sellers of this model all want roughly that price, so evidently it's not completely irrelevant.

 

As to the value of real estate, you are, however, very correct. My home isn't worth what it was in 2006. It's worth more. Where I live property values are still going up steadily. What you are failing to realize is that not everyone lives in the US. For example, the owner of the guitar in question doesn't live in the US. He lives in Europe where guitars typically cost more than they do in the States. In fact, sellers in Europe very often get quite a bit more for their guitars than what the Vintage Guitar Price Guide suggests, which is one of the reasons why many Europeans try to buy in the US, if possible. So you're right: It would be foolish for the original poster to take the "blue book values for vintage guitars at face value", but only because there is a reasonable chance that he could get more...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, thanks so much for clearing that up! It's always nice when someone is anal enough to weigh every last word. Can I assume my speculations on the woods for the rest of guitar withstand your scrutiny? [biggrin]

 

As to the value of this particular guitar, I merely told the original poster what's in the book. That's not always the last word, but it's a start, and the authors of the Vintage Guitar Price Guide have taken the recession in the United States into account. Furthermore, a quick google search shows that the online sellers of this model all want roughly that price, so evidently it's not completely irrelevant.

 

As to the value of real estate, you are, however, very correct. My home isn't worth what it was in 2006. It's worth more. Where I live property values are still going up steadily. What you are failing to realize is that not everyone lives in the US. For example, the owner of the guitar in question doesn't live in the US. He lives in Europe where guitars typically cost more than they do in the States. In fact, sellers in Europe very often get quite a bit more for their guitars than what the Vintage Guitar Price Guide suggests, which is one of the reasons why many Europeans try to buy in the US, if possible. So you're right: It would be foolish for the original poster to take the "blue book values for vintage guitars at face value", but only because there is a reasonable chance that he could get more...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As to the value of this particular guitar, I merely told the original poster what's in the book. That's not always the last word, but it's a start, and the authors of the Vintage Guitar Price Guide have taken the recession in the United States into account. Furthermore, a quick google search shows that the online sellers of this model all want roughly that price, so evidently it's not completely irrelevant.

 

 

 

You are correct in pointing out that the owner lives in the UK rather than the US, and that prices outside the US for vintage American guitars are generally higher. I was thinking in terms of the US market, since that's where I live. Your pointing out that eBay sellers frequently ask top dollar fails to recognize that a large percentage of those guitars with high reserves or high starting prices simply don't sell. The correct way of assessing market value is not the asking price or the pricing guide, but the actual selling price.

 

In the US, vintage prices are down from the market highs. Market pricing guides take this into account, but in general, not enough of the more desirable or rare vintage guitars are sold in any year to establish an average vintage market value. You have to take each guitar on a case by case basis, particularly when it comes to less common vintage pieces. Pricing guides are merely that: guides. Any guitar--or any other item for that matter--has a true market value of what anyone is willing to pay for it at the time you decide to sell it.

 

If you place a guitar on the market at a specific price, and nobody buys it, you've priced it too high. It is extremely rare to see an underpriced guitar on one of the auction sites. Generally, sellers have an inflated idea of the value of their guitars. They see a beat-up Gibson LGO from the 70's and decide it's a priceless antique.

 

Although starting prices from reputable vintage dealers are generally higher, they are also more attuned to the realities of the market, and may be willing to negotiate.

 

With a vintage guitar in excellent condition, but with compromised playing characteristics for one reason or another, you may have to make the choice as both a buyer and a seller between originality and playability. At the same time, if you opt for playability over originality as a seller, you should try not to do anything that is irreversible.

 

Which is worth more? A 1946 J-45 that is totally untouched, but has an unplayable neck set and frets that are worn to nothing? Or the same guitar with a perfectly done neck re-set and a good fret job? That's a tricky question. Are you a player, or a collector? If you are a collector, the unmolested orginal has more value. If you are primarily a player, the same guitar, made more playable without changing its appearance, is the better choice.

 

Not many of us have the luxury of having our cake and eating it too; for example, having a vintage J-45 as a poorly-playing collectible, and also having a modern J-45, which may sound almost as good and play better.

 

The good thing is that Gibson acoustics built now are probably as good as anything the company has ever produced. If you want a player, a recent Bozeman guitar may be a better choice than a Gibson from the dark days of Norlin in the 70's and 80's, no matter what the vintage appeal may be. Ironically, the quality of the newer guitars could have a negative impact on the value of those older Gibsons.

 

Having said that, you never know what is going to become a priceless collectible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with everything in your post.

 

My only comment would be that I had written "online seller" and not "eBay seller". In the wake of our discussion I had actually looked up this guitar on gbase.com and google. These were a few of the sellers I meant:

 

http://www.mandoweb.com/Instruments/Epiphone-FT-79+Texan+slope+shouldered+'D'-1959/194.aspx

 

http://www.gbase.com/gear/epiphone-ft79n-texan-1967

 

I may not always read every thread exactly [blush], but even I know that the asking prices on eBay are often crazy! [biggrin]

 

To the original poster: Sorry for all of the off-topic rambling! Great guitar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

My oh my that guitar is in great shape and the finish is gorgeous.

 

The top has so much cross grain lines it looks like it's figured.

 

Beautiful old girl. B)

 

+1 On what BigKahune says.

 

 

What a fine looking Texan you have. WOW msp_thumbup.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always loved the acoustic sound on the Yesterday. So glad glad it wasn't played on one of the J-160E's – (Paul you clever young lad).

 

It's in my book to ask the following. Does anyone know if Maccas 64 Texan had the plastic bridge ? Don't think so -

 

If your guitar is vague, never mind the collectors. Get the replacement fixed and enjoy the wood'n'bone tone. You'll find buyers the minute you want it. . .

 

 

I'll say it again : The old slope is a HIT !

Hard to see, but it looks a lot like the ceramic saddle -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW - Years ago I changed out the plastic bridge (& ten tons of ceramic & metal) on my '65 B25n for a very nicely crafted ebony bridge & bone saddle. Although I loved the original sound of the guitar, I was very concerned about structural stability, as a finish crack behind the slightly pulled up bridge was turning into a specifically lifting area on the top. The ebony bridge did indeed stabilize the entire area, but much to my amazement, the tone did not improve! If anything, there was now a slight decrease bass response, but otherwise, it's tonal characteristics remained the same. Moral of the story: installing a wood bridge may not result in the gains one would expect to see. That said, changing out the plastic bridge is generally considered to be an overall improvement, and WILL NOT decrease your guitar's value (one of the few serious mods on a vintage piece that's truly acceptable). If you decide to have it done, check references & spend the money to have it done by a pro. Btw, although the B25 became trade bait ten years ago (after twenty years of playing), I still have all the old plastic bridge pieces in a bag. Especially from a structural integrity standpoint, what an incredibly silly idea!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure this is an all solid wood guitar. Very very beautiful. If it hasn't been played much and is in this shape, it is very desireable and probably worth upwards of $3000US. McCartney's was a '64 (the "Yesterday" guitar). Lovely guitar mate! Play it. If you don't want to ... send it to me and I'll play it in for you! [thumbup]

 

All solid - my bad!

 

Looks like you've struck gold here Flight. Enjoy, that's a very cool guitar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

following Retrosurfer's suggestion, I'm wondering how important it is to you that the guitar be louder when it is played without amplification. Personally, I don't especially seek out or like really loud acoustics. It all depends on what kind of music you play and what sound you are after. If you are accompanying yourself singing, then be sure you don't overpower your voice. Of course a louder guitar can be played softer, but I strive for a balance between the guitar's volume and my voice. Of course bluegrassers put a lot of emphasis on volume because they want to be heard through the fiddles, banjos, and mandos.

 

Anyway, if you like the guitar's tone, is it really important to make it louder? Certainly, don't do so just because some people are telling you that it isn't very loud. If louder is important to the music you want to play, then you've gotten a few suggestions that may help. Trying different strings is the cheapest, least destructive (to the originality) approach possible. I'm not sure how much volume (objectively measured) actually changes with different strings, but I think the differences in strings can certainly make a guitar seem louder by emphasizing certain tonal ranges. Regardless of the science, if you find the sound you want with a particular string set, then it really doesn't matter if it is actually louder or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...