Need help with my 1961 ES335TD (really!)

[GBrag]

I have a 1961 Gibson ES335TD (yes, really). I am the original owners (yes, an old guy). I bought it from a music store on Western Avenue in a south Chicago Suburb (Mt Greenwood?)in early 1963. It has a "factory installed" Gibson vibrato ... not a Bigsby. It also has two black blank dots covering the holes where the tailstop would have been. The invoice, which I no longer have (dumb, I know) showed it was a factory item. I have had folks tell me that this combination, the vibrato and the dots, puts the guitar in a slightly different category ... some say it is worth more because it is very unique and some say less because is has taken away from the "standard" look while insisting it was a dealer installed option. I remember inquiring about the dots at the time so I know for a fact it was a factory, not dealer, installed option ... at least for some period of time. I am considering selling it because I am a little reluctant to play it much considering its value. It is in relatively great condition ... some buckle rash, and a couple small nicks. I could easily replace it with a reissue, playability wise, and then buy a boatload of other guitars and amps, which I would like to have (not like I don't too many guitars and amps already.)

 

Can any body provide any more information or thoughts on this? (i.e. the dots, when and for how long did the factory ship like this, value ... anybody, anybody) Thanks.

 

GBrag

 

[JimR56]

A few thoughts...

 

Your black "dots" are not where a "bridge" would have been. They were placed where a stud or stop tailpiece could be installed, if the owner opted to remove a vibrato tailpiece. Sometimes a "custom made" plaque was used to cover the area instead.

 

I don't think your tailpiece (which looks like a "lyre vibrola") could be original on a '61. I believe that the lyre type came along in '63 or '64, after the earlier "sideways" vibrato tailpiece design fell out of favor.

 

In terms of value (generally, to most collectors and enthusiasts), I think these are less valuable and desirable with a vibrato tail than with an original stop tail. In the case of yours, I think the value is hurt even further by the vibrato not being original. Obviously, it's still a great guitar and still very valuable, but it may not be as valuable as one that is all original.

[GBrag]

Yeah, I misspoke regarding the bridge vs. tailstop. Edited the original post, above thanks. I guess you are saying the Lyre Vibrola was made for Gibson, because Gibson is etched on it. And, again, I am the original owner, so nobody could have put one on except for the dealer. I KNOW we talked about it being "factory" because I was not happy with the dots. Eerie, but true, I bought this but had wanted the "newer" rectangular markers instead of the dots but he gave me a lower price on the "older" dot neck model (thank goodness, now ). I had wanted a Bigsby version as well, which he did not have. Paid $235. I am certain he showed me some documentation indicating it came from the factory that way. The charges were part of the order. (a return maybe?, although there is no evidence of that at all ... plus I had all the, new, original, documentation ... which included warranty, manual etc.)I know he had had it for over one year, maybe more. We discussed that as a reason he was giving me such a deal. I guess it is possible the guitar and vibola kit could have been on the same invoice but dealer installed and I could have missed that.) It is POSITIVELY a 1961, late if I recall, and has PAFs. I looked during a string change.

 

Thanks for your thoughts. this helps a little. I had learned something about the Lyre but forgotten. Now I am interested in the dates.

 

Gene

[JimR56]

Gene, the "lyre" name comes from the etched lyre design on the front. Again, I don't think this design existed yet in 1961 (or even in '62, as far as I know). If you got the guitar in '63, I'm guessing that the vibrola was installed shortly before you got it. I see no other explanation. Maybe the dealer didn't tell you the guitar's complete history? Who knows. At any rate, the lyre vibrola was beginning to become prevalent on Gibson models by 1964, but I'm pretty certain that a '61 model would originally have had a Bigsby or an earlier Gibson vibrato tailpiece variation.

 

I'll see if I can find any more details about the evolution of vibratos on Gibsons. In the meantime, maybe someone else here can weigh in.

[stein]

I think as far as monetary value (dollars only) I don't think the rarity is going to help. The truth is, the stop tail is the most desirable. And, if someone wanted a vibrato, they would most likely want a bigsby.

 

Not trying to hurt you, but the truth is that even if original, it would be an undesirable original feature. So, chances are you will get dinged on the price. Even if you were to find someone that desires that feature more than another trem or a stop tail and they want yours, they will be rare and still likely expect the guitar to sell for less.

 

Of corse, the only reason any of that matters is because that guitar is worth a buttload. It is an original dot for heaven's sakes. The only reason anyone could justify any dollar amount and pay you for it is because they do and have sold for buttloads. It is collectable. The PAF's don't hurt one bit-they alone are worth more than a new 335 I think.

 

As far as VALUE, as a piece of history, I think it is extremely valueable. One thing that makes some of these old guitars worth so much is that they have a story to tell. It is sometimes the only way we know how they were actually built. I think your guitar has an important story to tell. It is a shame you do not have the original paperwork, and of corse it would be proof of something that is so hard to believe. But really, it would only serve to cause us to ask questions, and learn about some Gibson history.

[GBrag]

Thanks Stein,

 

Yes ... I am pretty proud about being part of the 335 history. Another couple amazing things is that I was also part of was the Fender Super Reverb phenomenon. Certainly not in the vein of the 335, but very unique and holding a special place in amp history. I also had a Silvertone 1484 amp. I couldn't wait to get rid of it at the time. Compared to the Super it had no balls at all. The transformers were anemic. The power supply was inane ... no grunt. And yet it has become somewhat cultish even appearing in movies ("It might get loud") and on TV on a Grammys telecast. I sold it to a church group in 1980 for $75. Even if I still had it I would hate it.

 

Maybe I could do a reverse mortgage on the 335. I could then have my cake and eat it too. I would buy a reissue 335 that I would not hesitate to play ... and few other favorite guitars. Maybe even a Trini Lopez / Barney Kessel Gibson, my other hopeful obsession. (I know. There is no accounting for taste.) Thanks for your thoughts.

 

Gene

[JimR56]

For what it's worth...

 

Here's a '58 335 with a Bigsby:

 

============================================================

 

a '63 with a "sideways" vibrola (the type that preceded the lyre vibrola):

 

============================================================

 

a '63 SG with a lyre type:

 

============================================================

 

From everything I've read since my last post, it seems that the sideways type was used from 1960-'62/'63, and the lyre design did indeed appear first in 1963.

[stein]

Great photos there. I just had a thought:

 

I am wondering what exactly is under the dots. Clearly, it is set up to take a stop tail, but is it possible to see if it ever actually had one fitted?

 

If it can be proven that a stop tail was never on the guitar, and it never had a bigsby or a sideways vibrato (from lack of holes required by one or the other) then the guitar would have it's own proof.

[JimR56]

Great photos there. I just had a thought:

 

I am wondering what exactly is under the dots. Clearly, it is set up to take a stop tail, but is it possible to see if it ever actually had one fitted?

 

If it can be proven that a stop tail was never on the guitar, and it never had a bigsby or a sideways vibrato (from lack of holes required by one or the other) then the guitar would have it's own proof.

? The point is, the lyre vibrola did not exist until 1963. The guitar was built in 1961. End of argument, unless you can find reliable info on the lyre design originating in 1961. Dealers/sellers are not always correct, and do not always tell the truth about a guitar they're selling, or what may have been done to it. Stories can also get mixed up over time. In this case, I suspect the guitar was sent back to Gibson (according to GBrag's info, it was a "factory" job) before he bought it, and it was fitted with the very latest Gibson vibrato tailpiece. It was likely seen as a nice upgrade (at that time, nobody was thinking in terms of "collectibility" or had any clue that these guitars would become so valuable). Remember also, the sideways vibrola was short-lived, and not seen as a great design in terms of functionality. By contrast, the lyre type lasted from '63 to '71.

[stein]

? The point is, the lyre vibrola did not exist until 1963. The guitar was built in 1961. End of argument, unless you can find reliable info on the lyre design originating in 1961. Dealers/sellers are not always correct, and do not always tell the truth about a guitar they're selling, or what may have been done to it. Stories can also get mixed up over time. In this case, I suspect the guitar was sent back to Gibson (according to GBrag's info, it was a "factory" job) before he bought it, and it was fitted with the very latest Gibson vibrato tailpiece. It was likely seen as a nice upgrade (at that time, nobody was thinking in terms of "collectibility" or had any clue that these guitars would become so valuable). Remember also, the sideways vibrola was short-lived, and not seen as a great design in terms of functionality. By contrast, the lyre type lasted from '63 to '71.

I am not really the expert, I just see this as a mystery that I find interesting, and I think would be interesting to others as well.

 

I don't pretend to know more than you, or to argue with what you have found out. He has questions about it, and you have helped him more than anyone on this thread.

 

You have to admit, this guitar does have some mystery to it. Maybe it will never be known for sure how it got that way, but maybe it can be found out. At the very least, I find it an interesting piece of 335 history and Gibson vibrato history.

 

I was merely suggesting that the guitar itself be checked into to find out if anything could be determined on the guitar itself...for instance extra holes or evidence that a stop bar either was or wasn't ever installed at some point.

[JimR56]

I am not really the expert, I just see this as a mystery that I find interesting, and I think would be interesting to others as well.

 

I don't pretend to know more than you, or to argue with what you have found out. He has questions about it, and you have helped him more than anyone on this thread.

 

You have to admit, this guitar does have some mystery to it. Maybe it will never be known for sure how it got that way, but maybe it can be found out. At the very least, I find it an interesting piece of 335 history and Gibson vibrato history.

 

I was merely suggesting that the guitar itself be checked into to find out if anything could be determined on the guitar itself...for instance extra holes or evidence that a stop bar either was or wasn't ever installed at some point.

I see what you're saying, stein, and I didn't mean that we were arguing in the literal sense (sorry if I chose the wrong word there). I'm just trying to focus on facts, and believe me, I'm not an "expert" either. I like mysteries about guitars too, and I like looking into the facts and trying to figure things out. I've learned (and/or refreshed my memory about certain details) something here in the process of investigating further, which is part of the fun of doing it. I just think GBrag's info, as presented, doesn't quite add up. Not GBrag's fault, especially if the dealer intentionally or unintentionally misled him. Anyway, I've been a Gibson enthusiast for several decades, have owned dozens of Gibsons myself, and I spend WAY too much time just surfing websites and looking at guitars almost every day... and I don't think I've ever seen a '61 335 with a lyre tailpiece.

 

It would be great if GBrag could take the guitar to a vintage expert for a hands-on inspection. At least (as you suggest) he might find out more about the possibility that there was another vibrato on there before.

[stein]

I see what you're saying, stein, and I didn't mean that we were arguing in the literal sense (sorry if I chose the wrong word there). I'm just trying to focus on facts, and believe me, I'm not an "expert" either. I like mysteries about guitars too, and I like looking into the facts and trying to figure things out. I've learned (and/or refreshed my memory about certain details) something here in the process of investigating further, which is part of the fun of doing it. I just think GBrag's info, as presented, doesn't quite add up. Not GBrag's fault, especially if the dealer intentionally or unintentionally misled him. Anyway, I've been a Gibson enthusiast for several decades, have owned dozens of Gibsons myself, and I spend WAY too much time just surfing websites and looking at guitars almost every day... and I don't think I've ever seen a '61 335 with a lyre tailpiece.

 

It would be great if GBrag could take the guitar to a vintage expert for a hands-on inspection. At least (as you suggest) he might find out more about the possibility that there was another vibrato on there before.

I agree on nearly all of what you have said and discovered. And, that is mainly the reason this guitar here might be even more interesting.

 

I know at least in my case, I have a hard time remembering exact years and dates. And, the paperwork he had and lost could be different than the way he remembers it or what was discussed with the dealer.

 

But, I doubt he is lying. I think at the very least we can trust he bought it new that way, and I feel pretty confident that what we have here is a dot neck with a lyre vibrato unit. THE GUITAR DOESN'T ADD UP! therefore, we have something to learn.

 

I wonder if Gibson my still have records of this guitar.

[JimR56]

I agree on nearly all of what you have said and discovered. And, that is mainly the reason this guitar here might be even more interesting.

 

I know at least in my case, I have a hard time remembering exact years and dates. And, the paperwork he had and lost could be different than the way he remembers it or what was discussed with the dealer.

 

But, I doubt he is lying.

Just to be clear, when I suggested the possibility (and I mean just that- a possibility) of lies (less likely) or misinformation (more likely) having occurred, I was talking about the dealer/seller of this guitar, not GBrag.

 

I think at the very least we can trust he bought it new that way...

Oh, I completely trust that GBrag got it that way. The word "new" is tricky to use here though, because the guitar was a couple of years old when he got it.

 

and I feel pretty confident that what we have here is a dot neck with a lyre vibrato unit.

I don't understand what you mean by this. Obviously that's what we have, but in my opinion, it is not all original.

 

THE GUITAR DOESN'T ADD UP! therefore, we have something to learn.

I'm not sure we can learn anything now. We may never know when this tailpiece was installed, but unless I'm mistaken, it can't be an original 1961 part.

 

I wonder if Gibson may still have records of this guitar.

Not sure, but I doubt that there would be anything specific listed in the ledgers that would explain why there's a lyre vibrato on there now.

[GBrag]

Wow,

 

Thanks guys for all the discussions! I sincerely appreciate it. And yes, I like the mystery as well, which is why I posed the question in the first place. I have seen lots of guitars with the Lyre Vibrola, live and in photos, younger and older ... obviously aftermarket add-ons in most cases. Many had home-made covers over the tailstop holes. I had often thought of buying a tail stop and cutting it down to live under the strings. I had designed a plastic piece that would cover both holes. Luckily, I never finished those processes. I, actually have seen one picture of a guitar that had the dot/covers and one live on a used axe at GC a few years ago ... neither were 335s though, I think. (I spent an hour and a half trying to find that picture today). That is why I was wondering about a "kit". Somebody, apparently, supplied the dots ... unless those can be purchased separately. I never noticed those being available, but they could exist a an aftermarket item. On the picture of the ~`63 there is a fashioned cover ... are we sure that is aftermarket? Kit? Home brew?

 

As far as me lying. I have no reason to. The dealer may have and BSed me in some way. But, remember the times. Many times gear was shipped to dealers on a consignment basis. I guess it is possible that the guitar was reclaimed by Gibson after a dealer went out of business. They may have added it (the Lyre) or it had already been added by the dealer to "enhance" its value. Then it was shipped, as "factory", with a new invoice stating the Vibrola was an extra cost feature from the factory. I probably, then, would not have noticed the date(s). I DID get the impression that the dealer had had it for a long while hence his desire to get rid of it (again, thank goodness). While, at my age, things are hard to remember occasionally, for some reason I can remember details of some things that happened years ago extremely well (I can draw a Super Reverb schematic without peeking more than a couple times). I am POSITIVE we had the discussion and I was shown documentation. It was part of the negotiation. I was dirt poor. And $235 was a GIGANTIC purchase. (I think part of the reason I don't have the paperwork is that I hid it from my parents and forgot where I put it. They probably would not have understood.) As mentioned, I was not happy with the dot/covers ... nor with the guitar being "older" and having the dots instead of the more modern, sportier (I thought) rectangles. It WAS a matter of money, though, at the time. The dealer was not going to give me what I wanted for what I had. In fact, he wanted $250 and he only relented as I was walking out the door. The $235 actually included the tax. I had nothing more. In fact, I believe I had to get $5 or $10 from my bass player, who had come with me, to even make the $235 work.

 

The actual dating of the release of the Lyre Vibola would be of value, as mentioned, it would be pretty conclusive. Also, one of the dots had fallen off. In fact, I thought I had lost it for a time, but, it had lodged itself on the side of the case's compartment. When I reattached the one I messed with the other and it popped off. I am pretty certain there are no remnants of there being a tailstop ever being mounted, i.e, indentations. But I would have to re-check that. I am a bit hesitant to try and remove the dots however to really check and risk peeling the finish near the dots. I will try using a mirror though an F hole to see if there are indentations on the inside. That could be a good test, I believe.

 

Thanks again for all your thoughts. The mystery makes me want to hold on to it even more. :P

[JimR56]

I, actually have seen one picture of a guitar that had the dot/covers and one live on a used axe at GC a few years ago ... neither were 335s though, I think. (I spent an hour and a half trying to find that picture today). That is why I was wondering about a "kit". Somebody, apparently, supplied the dots ... unless those can be purchased separately. I never noticed those being available, but they could exist a an aftermarket item.

I've read and heard numerous discussions about people's preferences for covering the stop/stud tailpiece holes. It's a controversial thing. There are a variety of variations on the "dots". In fact, yours look a bit larger than what I'm accustomed to seeing (refer to the photo of the '58 335 above, for example). Some people try to match the color of the finish, thus making the dots "disappear". Some people use a "Custom Made" plaque or some variation on that. Others simply leave the studs in.

 

On the picture of the ~`63 there is a fashioned cover ... are we sure that is aftermarket? Kit? Home brew?

Are you referring to the "Custom Made" plaque? If so, those were a pretty common part offered by Gibson as an alternative to individual covers for the holes (i.e., your "dots").

 

As far as me lying. I have no reason to.

Again, nobody is saying that. Let's put that to rest.

 

The dealer may have and BSed me in some way.

I would think it's a possibility, and it may have been intentional, or it could have been unintentional (a blunder on his part). At this point, it doesn't really matter. You definitely made a great "investment" (not your original intention, I know, but that's how it's worked out), regardless of the fact that it's not 100% original.

 

 

The actual dating of the release of the Lyre Vibola would be of value, as mentioned, it would be pretty conclusive.

I've researched this to some extent (online and in books), and it's pretty clear to me- even if no exact date is given for its introduction- that it appeared some time in 1963.

 

There's a searchable copy of Duchossoir's "Gibson Electrics: The Classic Years" available online: here

 

The lyre vibrola is mentioned on a number of different pages, and every reference I've seen points to a 1963 introduction.

 

Considering the value of your guitar, I would recommend getting a formal appraisal from George Gruhn (Gruhn Guitars, Nashville). He might even help to further clarify what occurred with your guitar's alteration. Cheers.

[GBrag]

JimR, et. al.

 

So, I went to look inside the 335 and got slapped with a "well duh" moment. I had forgotten it was a center block machine and there is nothing to see under the bridge and tailstop. So I carefully picked at one of the dot covers and it came off pretty easily. Notice that the dot and hole are actually pretty close to the same size. In fact realigning it to put it back on was not simple. It looked bigger to me also. It is quite an interesting cover. It tapers to a knife edge with no hip at all. Notice the hardwood dowel/plug. I recall now that THAT was not from me. I remember thinking that some thought had actually gone behind putting the dots/covers on, basically insuring a place for the glue to stick. "Part of a/the kit?" ... Dealer, (or whomever) just had some of the right sized dowels lying around?

 

It might be my imagination but there does seem to be the slightest indication that there may have been a tailstop there ... (there seems to be a VERY slight impression of a round base about 1/8" total bigger than the hole one one edge ... top in the picture ... of just ONE of the holes.) It certainly was not anchored there hard or for long, if there was anything.

 

I played the guitar a bit after putting the dot back on. Truly love this thing, and that Vibrola is actually very sweet. Up AND down, with a very nice feel. Pretty simple and not at all adjustable like many others, but I like it a lot. I noticed, also, looking at even more pictures, that there was an Epiphone ethed version of the tailpiece cover, with the Lyre exactly like the Gibson's. And it sat that on a 63 SG. Can't see holes though because it is shorter. BTW ... I have had issues with strings. Some come mighty close to being just long enough seeing where the Vibrola is positioned.

 

I will pay for the appraisal, as soon as I am sure I am wanting to sell it. I was before, but feeling less willing now after thinking about it more.

 

Thanks again for trying to unwrap the puzzle. It has been fun.

[stein]

Well, that is a clue I think that what JIMR56 suggested-that the Lyre was added post production. I was not aware that dowels were ever put into the holes to allow for the covers. If I understand correctly (and I don't know) the idea behind having it drilled for a stop tail was to have the option.

 

It doesn't prove anything, but it leans toward the "likely" scenario-that it was built with a stop tail and modified to take a Lyre.

 

Of corse, now my curiosity is if the way the holes were covered was something Gibson tried for a bit or not.

 

It is mostly a curse I have.

[JimR56]

Well, that is a clue I think that what JIMR56 suggested-that the Lyre was added post production. I was not aware that dowels were ever put into the holes to allow for the covers. If I understand correctly (and I don't know) the idea behind having it drilled for a stop tail was to have the option.

I think this is correct- an option was often presented by adding stud holes, even when a vibrato was installed as an original part at the factory.

 

It doesn't prove anything, but it leans toward the "likely" scenario-that it was built with a stop tail and modified to take a Lyre.

It could have come originally with a Bigsby, and just the stud holes with covers. If there were extra screw holes left from an original Bigsby, they could have been filled (possibly), or they could still exist under that lyre vibrato... right?

 

I've owned several 335's, 345's and 355's, but I never owned one that had the stud holes covered (they all had either stop tails or trapezes or vibratos with no stud holes drilled). So, this is slightly new territory for me, but I find your photo (the doweled holes) to be a bit odd, and I would have to say that I don't think this can be a good thing in terms of the impact on the guitar's value. I hope I'm wrong about that, but I've never seen this before, and if it was an alteration somebody did, I don't think it bodes well. As always, I'm hoping that someone else who knows more than I do will come along and add some knowledge for us.

 

If you have the guitar appraised, and especially if someone experienced like Mr. Gruhn provides you with more info, please come back and give us an update.

[GBrag]

Again, thanks for the interest.

 

I don't totally understand why the thoughts that there may have been a Bigsby on it. Why would someone swap that out to add the Lyre?. If I thought it would matter I would take it off and look for extra holes ... which I don't believe I would find. The fact there are more mounting holes for the Lyre near the tail edge, I would then have to deal with, I wouldn't change it out anyway. So, it appears there may have been a tailstop previously ... it seems more and more likely that there was and someone added the Lyre at some point. I feel it was not my dealer because of our discussion and paperwork he showed me at the time. SO, I had surmised factory, but, after our discussions it is possible it could have been a return from another dealer, which is certainly possible. The timing is the only thing that gets in the way there. Some folks seem adamant the Lyre didn't appear until later. Then, I would like to know is how it got there. I have a Kodak slide showing it was on the guitar in October of 1963 just after I purchased it. (Well the slide was developed in early `64 but the picture was a publicity shot taken with leaves on the trees in 63.)

 

Also, I would just like to know how the Lyre was supplied ... with the dots and the hardwood dowels? It seems there was some thought behind the conversion and that it was not just an "Oh yeah". And also, not only when was it introduced, but how and where? That could be interesting. Was there overlap with the Maestro? Was it trialed?

 

Regarding value, it is what it is ... I am happy either way. That is really not the fascination to me. The Lyre is a Gibson add-on piece. How bad is that anyway? This isn't some brainless add-on, modification or pickup swap out. I am sure it would affect a few potential buyers though.

 

Thanks again for all the thoughts ...

 

Gene

[JimR56]

Again, thanks for the interest.

 

I don't totally understand why the thoughts that there may have been a Bigsby on it. Why would someone swap that out to add the Lyre?.

All I'm saying is that it's possible. It's not necessarily true (or even probable) that your guitar originally had a stop tailpiece and no vibrato. That's all.

 

If I thought it would matter I would take it off and look for extra holes ... which I don't believe I would find.

You might, and you might not. It's entirely possible, though.

 

The fact there are more mounting holes for the Lyre near the tail edge, I would then have to deal with, I wouldn't change it out anyway.

I'm not saying that you should, necessarily. The underlying point here is that when a vintage enthusiast, or collector, or potential buyer looks at your guitar, they're going to immediately recognize that it has a non-original vibrato on it. Even if you changed it to a Bigsby, you would be morally obligated to indicate that to a buyer, but it might ease the sale process for some people (purists). It's an aesthetic thing Your guitar wouldn't "look right" to a purist's eye. Hope that makes sense, because obviously not everyone is a purist or collector, and not everybody would see this the same way.

 

Some folks seem adamant the Lyre didn't appear until later. Then, I would like to know is how it got there. I have a Kodak slide showing it was on the guitar in October of 1963 just after I purchased it. (Well the slide was developed in early `64 but the picture was a publicity shot taken with leaves on the trees in 63.)

Gene, it most likely "got there" in 1963! Your 1963 Kodak slide doesn't really add anything at all in this case, and would not unless the photo was taken in 1961 when the guitar was built (and I'm saying that would be impossible, because the lyre design did not exist then). Not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.

 

Also, I would just like to know how the Lyre was supplied ... with the dots and the hardwood dowels?

If the work was done at the Gibson factory as you suspect, then they would have had a supply of all kinds of parts to use for the job. As I already told you, I've never seen or heard of wood dowels being used to fill the stud holes. And as I already told you, I think this could be a bad thing (a non-professional alteration). I'm not at all certain of this, but in general (as already mentioned), stud holes were usually covered with caps or a "Custom Made" plaque, but left intact, so that a player would have the option of choosing to install (or replace, if the guitar had one previously) a stop tailpiece. Doweling the holes takes away that option, and cosmetically does not change anything (you still have to look at the caps/"dots"). Make sense?

 

It seems there was some thought behind the conversion and that it was not just an "Oh yeah". And also, not only when was it introduced, but how and where? That could be interesting. Was there overlap with the Maestro? Was it trialed?

I'm not sure I understand all of this. There was likely some "overlap" in terms of the vibratos being used by Gibson (using up available parts, etc), but it wouldn't have likelly gone on for long. Of course the units were all "trialed" and tested by engineers before they even became standard parts.

 

Regarding value, it is what it is ... I am happy either way. That is really not the fascination to me.

Understandably. It's worth a lot of money, and it's a great instrument. But you did ask us about value.

 

The Lyre is a Gibson add-on piece. How bad is that anyway?

It's a Gibson part, but it doesn't "match" the vintage of your guitar, which brings the value down somewhat. Because we're talking about a 1961 ES-335, that's kind of a big deal (as compared to if we were talking about a 1971 ES-335, or a 1981 ES-335). The amount that your guitar is devalued could be a significant amount of money.

[stein]

The reason for even considering the possibility of a Bigsby is because that is what the guitar of that particular year would most likely have. So, if there was NOT ever a Bigsby on that guitar, and there was paperwork indicating a tremolo installed from Gibson, it MIGHT mean the Lyre was something Gibson used earlier than thought. (same thoughts concerning a Maestro).

 

It is just plain interesting. I don't think guitar nuts tend to think about things as unlikely unless there is a guitar that has such an unlikely thing about it.

 

Personally, I think it is a great guitar. I think the fact you bought it in '63 gives the Lyre a degree of "original" even if it was added by a dealer.

[JimR56]

The reason for even considering the possibility of a Bigsby is because that is what the guitar of that particular year would most likely have. So, if there was NOT ever a Bigsby on that guitar, and there was paperwork indicating a tremolo installed from Gibson, it MIGHT mean the Lyre was something Gibson used earlier than thought. (same thoughts concerning a Maestro).

Realistically, there's almost literally no chance that this is true. If somebody finds evidence that the lyre vibrola was available in 1961, then you'd have a real scoop. By now, there aren't going to be a lot of new discoveries about things like this. We're talking about Gibson history that dates back almost 50 years. Like I said, I've been an enthusiast for decades myself, and I don't recall ever seeing a lyre vibrola on a pre-'63 335.

 

I think the fact you bought it in '63 gives the Lyre a degree of "original" even if it was added by a dealer.

I'd have to disagree with that. Although it's probably better that it has a '63 Gibson vibrato, as opposed to a non-Gibson part, the bottom line is that it's still not original, and the value will be affected to some extent.

 

Still wondering about the use of dowels in stud holes... how unusual that is, etc...

[GBrag]

I believe the dowels in the holes were only to provide a glue spot for the center of the dots. There is VERY little "edge" available to put glue on. If for some reason they needed to be removed it would not be hard at all. The center hole does not have to look particularly pretty if one wanted top put a tailstop or something else in there. Taking the Lyre off does not seem to make sense in that you would have to deal with the mounting holes. And, the 335 being longer than the SGs, et. al. I don't think a "standard" anything would fit without needing the dots or a way to cover the mounting holes. Alas, I feel doomed with an non-standard axe.

 

Thanks again for the thoughts.

 

Gene

[JimR56]

Gene, as mentioned previously by both stein and myself, it's not at all unusual to find vibrato-equipped semi-hollow guitars that have either the "dots" or a "Custom Made" plaque covering the holes. And also as mentioned previously, it is a common practice to leave the holes intact (without doweling them) when installing the dots or the plaque, so that a player will have the option of reverting back to a stop tailpiece set-up. You will sometimes see guitars that are set up with a stop tail, but the vibrato has been left in place (again, giving the player the option of removing the stop tail and going back to using the vibrato. With these things in mind, it seems ill-advised for dowels to have ever been installed, especially since (in the case of your guitar, for example) the dots are still there to look at regardless of the fact that the holes were doweled. Gluing dowels in there takes away (or at least makes it more difficult to return to) the option of installing a stop tail. As I said, I've never owned a semi-hollow that had the dots/caps or a plaque, but knowing how many people have described the idea of maintaining the "option" of using either tailpiece, I would have to assume that there are many, many guitars out there with dots or plaques which are fastened in place securely without having to be glued to a dowel. I have no personal experience with how they're fastened on, but suffice it to say they're not all designed to be glued to dowels.

 

Regarding the removal of the lyre vibrato, I commented on that above. I'm not trying to tell you what to do, but I can tell you that it's very, very common to see guitars with stop tailpieces where the screw holes from a vibrato tailpiece have been filled (matching the color of the finish as best as possible), OR, where the little screw holes have simply been left alone. In the latter case, that could be seen as leaving another "option" (the option of re-installing the vibrato that was removed, or another one of the same design). To some people, I think the little screw holes left over from the removal of a vibrato are less obtrusive than the stud-hole dots and plaques. I see guitars with both filled and unfilled screw holes all the time. This is a result of the fact that (as mentioned here previously) stop tailpieces are the most popular and generally the most desired tailpiece on semi-hollow guitars. This is largely due to the perceived benefits both in terms of tone, and intonation (vibratos tend to make it harder to stay in tune, generally speaking).

 

I suppose you could almost look at your situation as being similar to a homeowner who wants to sell his house. Let's say the house has a kitchen that was poorly re-modeled. Does the seller spend the money to upgrade the kitchen before selling the house, or does he sell it "as is", and allow the buyer to pick their own kitchen appliances? I don't know if this is a good analogy or not. :) At any rate, you could have a professional put a vintage Bigsby on your guitar (and fill any excess holes from the lyre vibrato); or you could remove the lyre (and either fill the screw holes, or not) and have a stop tail installed; or you could sell it with the lyre intact. Or, you could keep it, and make us all continue to feel envious!

[GBrag]

Thanks JimR,

 

I don't have an issue with the dowels at all. Simple removal. That is really a non issue. I do find it a bit odd to have issues with the dowels, that cannot be seen either way (and would take minutes to remove)and not care about screw holes on the guitar face. But hey, there are stranger things in life and I am not the expert.

 

Regarding removing the Lyre ... I will never do it. No need at all. If it were a value issue and I could make the holes disappear completely then maybe, but that would never be a reality. If there were some sort of "other" standard way to cover the holes ... a Gibson option, I might consider it. As mentioned, I was going to do that myself and still could. A reduced height tailstop under the strings or just a machined plate would probably work with no new damage at all. Of course I would save the dots. The dots DO seem to draw attention. Lots of people mention them. Only a couple seem to think it matters much. But they certainly seem to draw attention. Hence, I will consider something other than them ... or not. If saw something that looked good and was less noticeable pops up I will probably try it. Suggestions would be appreciated.

 

And you certainly do seem to have lots of experience here. I have seen a fair amount of dots/covers etc., but certainly not as many as you. I have seen TONS of ghastly mods on great guitars (and amps as well ... in fact I did one for a client. He had a Blackface Super Reverb that had gotten water damaged, as in submerged for a long time. I took on remaking a cabinet for him, speakers and all and redoing the electonics. After putting in many hours on the chassis/pots etc., he asked to make it a 2x10. I was unhappy and argued. But, eventually I relented and built it. It came out really well ... pictures on request, I am proud of the finished product ... but, I struggled with doing that to a classic. I figured that I didn't mod the chassis and the cab was ruined anyway, so maybe someday someone could make it right )