JohnMac Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 Hi Folks, I'm new here and anxious to get involved. I recently acquired this Gibson from my my brother-in-law. He's owned it for about 35 years and hasn't used it much for the past 20 years. I'm trying to determine the date of manufacture and thought I might get some help from some of the knowledgeable on this forum. According to the serial #, 544355, it is was made in '69 but I understand that Gibson's serial #s weren't always consistent. There is a 2 stamped under the number. Someone told me that that indicates a factory second. I'm also wondering if there is a way to identify the rosewood. Any help here would be greatly appreciated. I tried to attach more pics with no luck. I'll figure it out and post some later. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 This appears to be a 1969 or 1970 Heritage. The headstock, pickguard, and bridge designs, as well as the serial number, are reasonably definitive. The Heritage was conceived as a folk/country/bluegrass guitar, to compete with the Martin D-28. According to "Gibson's Fabulous Flat-Tops", the back and sides by this time were Indian Rosewood, replacing the Brazilian rosewood that had been used earlier. This is a highly-figured back, which is a bit unusual for Indian. Ironically, it might be the reason the the guitar got a "2nd" designation, as it does not follow the "conventional" expected grain pattern for that wood. The "2nd" designation is based purely on cosmetic issues, which could be almost anything. It has some impact on value, but does not reflect on the musical quality of the instrument in any way. These were transition years for Gibson, as under Norlin ownership, the guitars began a slide away from their original high quality into the era of mass-produced, lower-quality instruments. There are still, however, many fine Gibson acoustics from this period. If the guitar hasn't been played for years, it would be worth taking it to a reputable technician for a proper setup, including the correct choice of strings.. That's the only way you can be sure if it's a keeper. By the way, it looks to be in really nice condition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnMac Posted December 23, 2011 Author Share Posted December 23, 2011 This appears to be a 1969 or 1970 Heritage. The headstock, pickguard, and bridge designs, as well as the serial number, are reasonably definitive. The Heritage was conceived as a folk/country/bluegrass guitar, to compete with the Martin D-28. According to "Gibson's Fabulous Flat-Tops", the back and sides by this time were Indian Rosewood, replacing the Brazilian rosewood that had been used earlier. This is a highly-figured back, which is a bit unusual for Indian. Ironically, it might be the reason the the guitar got a "2nd" designation, as it does not follow the "conventional" expected grain pattern for that wood. The "2nd" designation is based purely on cosmetic issues, which could be almost anything. It has some impact on value, but does not reflect on the musical quality of the instrument in any way. These were transition years for Gibson, as under Norlin ownership, the guitars began a slide away from their original high quality into the era of mass-produced, lower-quality instruments. There are still, however, many fine Gibson acoustics from this period. If the guitar hasn't been played for years, it would be worth taking it to a reputable technician for a proper setup, including the correct choice of strings.. That's the only way you can be sure if it's a keeper. By the way, it looks to be in really nice condition. Thanks for the reply. I did take it to tech. He cleaned it up a bit and put new strings on it. He was of the opinion that no set-up adjustments were necessary. I tend to agree as it plays very nicely. It is in pretty good condition although there are two cracks on the front of the body. They may be noticeable on the left side near the edge. They have been there for 35 years and haven't changed so I'm not too concerned. The pics don't show it well but there is very consistent checking over the entire body. I know little about old guitars but I find it quite attractive. After years of on and off playing I all but gave it up, This instrument has inspired me to give it another try! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 Thanks for the reply. I did take it to tech. He cleaned it up a bit and put new strings on it. He was of the opinion that no set-up adjustments were necessary. I tend to agree as it plays very nicely. It is in pretty good condition although there are two cracks on the front of the body. They may be noticeable on the left side near the edge. They have been there for 35 years and haven't changed so I'm not too concerned. The pics don't show it well but there is very consistent checking over the entire body. I know little about old guitars but I find it quite attractive. After years of on and off playing I all but gave it up, This instrument has inspired me to give it another try! The checking is part of the normal aging process for nitrocellulose lacquer, and it doesn't detract from the guitar in any way. It really does look like a nice guitar that has not been abused. If the top cracks are stable (they do not yield irregularly under slight finger pressure), I would not worry about them. They are not unusual for a guitar of this age. You are lucky to have it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfox14 Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 That is some wild looking wood on the back. Are we sure it's rosewood? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnMac Posted December 24, 2011 Author Share Posted December 24, 2011 That is some wild looking wood on the back. Are we sure it's rosewood? I'm curious about that too. I googled Brazilian and Indian rosewood and clicked images. The Indian more often, but not always, has a more straight grain and the Brazillian is generally more patterned. A guy at a guitar shop thinks it's Brazilian based more on the color. Looking on the inside I can see that it's not laminated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrorod Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 Great looking guitar! The back just blows me away.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted December 25, 2011 Share Posted December 25, 2011 That is some wild looking wood on the back. Are we sure it's rosewood? I was going straight with the information in "Gibson's Fabulous Flat-Tops", including the chronology of when the switch was made from Brazilian to Indian. If it is Brazilian, I would be astounded that a guitar with a Brazilian body and back would end up with a 2nd stamp. You would think it might be worth fixing whatever the cosmetic issue was, unless the inspector just didn't like the guitar for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnMac Posted December 26, 2011 Author Share Posted December 26, 2011 I was going straight with the information in "Gibson's Fabulous Flat-Tops", including the chronology of when the switch was made from Brazilian to Indian. If it is Brazilian, I would be astounded that a guitar with a Brazilian body and back would end up with a 2nd stamp. You would think it might be worth fixing whatever the cosmetic issue was, unless the inspector just didn't like the guitar for some reason. The cracks in the body have been there for as long as I can remember, maybe 35 years, but I can't imagine that Gibson would have sold it that way, even as a 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Chance Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Here's a '68 for sale ... asking price might be on the "aggressive" side, but it's all there My link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnMac Posted December 27, 2011 Author Share Posted December 27, 2011 Here's a '68 for sale ... asking price might be on the "aggressive" side, but it's all there My link That's a beauty! I must say that I like the "vintage" look of mine with the yellowed binding and checking in the finish. Certainly not worth as much but I like the vibe. Although I'm finding discrepancies in the info that I've found I think it's a '69. '68 still had the tortoise pick guard and in '70 they went to the curley bridge and blocky inlays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnMac Posted December 27, 2011 Author Share Posted December 27, 2011 That's a beauty! I must say that I like the "vintage" look of mine with the yellowed binding and checking in the finish. Certainly not worth as much but I like the vibe. Although I'm finding discrepancies in the info that I've found I think it's a '69. '68 still had the tortoise pick guard and in '70 they went to the curley bridge and blocky inlays. Interesting that in the link for the '68 it states that some see an angel in the pattern on the back. On mine I see a skull and cross bones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Chance Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 The sides are straight-grained while the back is wildly figured ... Gibson was pulling out the stops. The headstock inlay on your "Heritage" Gibson is the same as those found on pre-war L-10 archtop models (but fretboard inlays are different) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 The cracks in the body have been there for as long as I can remember, maybe 35 years, but I can't imagine that Gibson would have sold it that way, even as a 2nd. To the best of my knowledge, only structurally-sound guitars with cosmetic flaws were ever sold as "seconds". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Here's a '68 for sale ... asking price might be on the "aggressive" side, but it's all there "Aggressive" would be a bit kind. The word that came to my mind was "delusional". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrorod Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 "Aggressive" would be a bit kind. The word that came to my mind was "delusional". I,m with ya' Nick, When I hit a Dealer Site with a nice guitar, But a price like that....I don,t look no further He lost "this fish".... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.