20watt Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 Not sure if the attachments are correctly posted, trial and error. The dilemma - headstock replaced no serial number; pups replaced with mini's and wiring harness. Is there any other alternative dating possibilities I've missed trying to figure out what year this guitar might be? The gent I bought it from in NC suggested it was a '72 but there are no markings suggesting that or any year. Will it remain ageless? Thanks for any and all pointers, suggestions, etc. Cheers, Eric
20watt Posted February 22, 2012 Author Posted February 22, 2012 take a larger picture of the front of the headstock and the side of the fret board Here is the front of the headstock. Does this help? I don't have a side shot of the neck, but will get one. Is there a verdict? Am I over amping? Thanks
20watt Posted February 22, 2012 Author Posted February 22, 2012 Here is the front of the headstock. Does this help? I don't have a side shot of the neck, but will get one. Is there a verdict? Am I over amping? Thanks BTW, the attached pics expand in size when you click on them. That's a great feature on this forum. Never seen that before, nice touch guys!
Bender 4 Life Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 is the headstock a different color than the neck? or is the entire headstock a repaint? where is(was) the break, looks like maybe straight across the top of the neck?
pippy Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 May I ask; what makes you think the p-ups are non-original? The body doesn't appear to have been routed for anything but Mini-buckers as far as I can see from the snap. When the G-T was re-introduced (in '68) it came with cream P-90s (the mini's came in '69 AFAIK) so I suppose might it have had these? When you say the wiring harness has been swapped did this include the Vol/Tone pots? as L5Larry says, the pot codes can be a very good indicator of a rough date of production. I know it's asking a lot but could you get a bigger snap of the front of the peghead? It looks very narrow. Was it re-shaped during the h/stock repair? P.
mosquito3 Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 Also the bridge has been replaced i guess, couse thumbwheels have the screwdriver slot on top, like the Epi bridges.
DestructorsKillMusic1982 Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 I hate to say this, but the lack of a serial number, the Epi-type bridge thumbwheels, the odd headstock shape (it seems to taper more at the end than it should) and the silscreened logo (haven't seen a 70s Deluxe with anything but an inlaid MOP logo myself) makes me worry about the authenticity, no offense. Nice goldtop though (love the goldtops, hope to get a 60s tribute GT soon)
BigKahune Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 I hate to say this, but the lack of a serial number, the Epi-type bridge thumbwheels, the odd headstock shape (it seems to taper more at the end than it should) and the silscreened logo (haven't seen a 70s Deluxe with anything but an inlaid MOP logo myself) makes me worry about the authenticity, no offense. .... +1 A straight overhead shots (no angles) makes it easier to see the placement of the controls, inlays, screw heads, etc. The guitar also doesn't appear to have nibs. .
pippy Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 ...I hate to say this...... Which was precisely why I would like to have seen a bigger snap of the front of the peghead before saying much more... P.
cjmwrx Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 +1 A straight overhead shots (no angles) makes it easier to see the placement of the controls, inlays, screw heads, etc. The guitar also doesn't appear to have nibs. . I am inclined to agree with you here. The entire shape of the guitar looks off.
20watt Posted February 23, 2012 Author Posted February 23, 2012 Thanks all, I'm digging into your suggested identification features and will provide as much as possible. The pictures posted are restricted by size when I post. Is there a trick to make them larger? I'm not too savvy on that. With the descriptions you've stated sounds like it might very well be an Epi with an overlay. I was told the headstock was a complete replacement and that the original break was just north of the nut. I can find no indications of where it was joined. I'll relook the pots and attempt a picture of them if I can get the camera to focus. Back to you shortly and thanks for all the tips again. Cheers.
BigKahune Posted February 23, 2012 Posted February 23, 2012 . Get a free photo hosting account - like on Photobucket. Upload your pics there and then copy the "direct link" into the "Insert image" tool here in the 'Post editor' window. Help here - http://forum.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/11005-sticky-how-to-post-photos/ .
20watt Posted February 29, 2012 Author Posted February 29, 2012 . Get a free photo hosting account - like on Photobucket. Upload your pics there and then copy the "direct link" into the "Insert image" tool here in the 'Post editor' window. Help here - http://forum.gibson....to-post-photos/ . Thanks for all of your help folks, it's an Epi. Took it apart after talking with all of you and took it to a store with tape over the logo. Set it against an Epiphone, the body and headstock matched perfectly. There's not really an emoticon so I'll say it, DUUUUH! I didn't pay very much for it which is now very understandable. Now that I have authentic pups and wiring, anyone have a Deluxe project they want to get rid of? BigKahune, thanks for the posting tips for posting pics. I have to redeem myself after this thread. I'm setting out to read the forum. Cheers, Eric
Bender 4 Life Posted March 1, 2012 Posted March 1, 2012 no redeem needed Eric....that's what this forum's for if it plays & sounds good, you've made a darned interesting score! play the fuzz off it!!!
magicaxeman Posted March 5, 2012 Posted March 5, 2012 Sorry but I think its a ringer... wrong headstock, wrong logo, wrong hardware, wrong knobs, klusons not correctly aligned on the headstock.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.