Mojorule Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 I thought he did make a slight return, actually. I remember somebody posting a clip of a J35 and so the punchline ran, 'Is that Goto?' Well despite taking that comment as a joke, I did wonder whether it might not in fact be Goto. The playing and guitar were nice, so I was hoping so, as my view of him was essentially in line with Red's. Perhaps a bit obsessive in his research, but too earnest and up-front to be dodgy, I think. When he popped his head up again, I asked him if we had been privy to a video of him. Sadly not he, but an acquaintance, I believe he said. But still signs of life some time after his initial fade from view. I can see why you might be suspicious given the extent of questioning and relative lack of response, but I never thought he was anything but legit. I just can't imagine frauds spending that much time and effort on their work. There is a point where it is more cost effective to go and work for Gibson or, if you want to produce cheap versions, for Recording King. I can think of a number of alternative strategies open to counterfeiters which might involve considerable research, but I don't think they would be aiming at the Craigslist and ebay audience. i was always friendly with GOTO...and enjoyed some of his input..but after a while i did start thinking it was getting a little suspicious if you looked back on his posts..they were all about technical little details..and the gap in the space between neck and sound hole became amusing to say the least his posted photos where always a lil sus to me too..like he got them from someone maybe.. I think a few asked for a specific photo of one of his main technical details..and we never got one then he kept insisting on members posting photos for him..remember? anyway no matter I didn't run him off.. but he sure left with out a whiff of return i aint accusing anyone.. just giving an opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojorule Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 . @Stein/@Mojorule - good points. As Mojorule pointed out, it's a bit of a dilemma. Now you've both got me thinking - I've reported numerous fakes on fleaBay. I'm wondering if getting an item kicked as a fake has more of an influence and the "improvement" in counterfeits. Your thoughts? . I don't think that the kick-back has an effect on improvements unless it is accompanied by ebay passing on information to the kickee as to why the kicker thinks s/he is peddling a fraud. Rather, I think every kickback forces the counterfeiters to up their game. More research, more effort to get the details right. At some point, I swear, it cannot be worth their while any more. They either can't afford the tools that Bozeman can, or they don't have the skills, or they have to buy parts direct from Bozeman which is risky for them and relatively expensive. It just can't be cost-effective to produce a realistic Gibson knock-off unless you have a full-blown repro factory which imitates Bozeman in full. It's hard to have such a facility without being legit according to the Chinese state. At that point, you're Recording King or the Loar, I'd warrant, you need to sell lots of guitars to justify the cost of the machinery, you can't pass them all off as Gibsons, and you have to lower your price accordingly. What are we saying about the quality of our Gibsons if we really believe that it is financially and temporally viable for a lone conman or even for a more sizeable operation to produce a really convincing copy? Seriously, any self-respecting conman is more likely to resort to flashing pictures of a genuine Gibson all over the web, and then sending either a totally unrelated instrument or no instrument at all. That sort of con has been reported too, and I think it is rather harder to spot in advance than an attempt to recreate the perfect Gibson for cheaper than Bozeman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 i was always friendly with GOTO...and enjoyed some of his input..but after a while i did start thinking it was getting a little suspicious if you looked back on his posts..they were all about technical little details..and the gap in the space between neck and sound hole became amusing to say the least his posted photos where always a lil sus to me too..like he got them from someone maybe.. I think a few asked for a specific photo of one of his main technical details..and we never got one then he kept insisting on members posting photos for him..remember? anyway no matter I didn't run him off.. but he sure left with out a whiff of return i aint accusing anyone.. just giving an opinion I don't think you did run him off. It wasn't my intention to sound as if I were accusing you, so I apologize if you got that impression. goto did ask a lot of questions, and he might have seemed obsessive to some, but not because he was employed in faking guitars-- he was trying to avoid fakes. He lived in China where Gibsons were extremely rare if not nonexistent, had to buy online from overseas, could not audition a guitar before he bought, and had no way to compare what he bought to another Gibson to learn which details were tell-tale signs of a fake. He needed our help to ensure he got his heart's desire--a genuine Gibson. That's the way I always saw it. I thought he was a good guy, and felt ashamed that his treatment here only reinforced the negative impression that many in other parts of the world have of my countrymen. Red 333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest J-Doug Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 To get this back on track, it's a fake. The shoulders are wrong, the logo is wrong, the sunburst is wrong, the back is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markini Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Actually its inconclusive. I compared it to known real J200 photos and it is hard to determine. If its a fake its an excellent copy. I would have to physically have it my hands to determine authenticity. I am leaning towards it being the real deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 So, I ask again: what do you think that back wood is? I would ask the seller for the complete serial number, and run it through the Gibson records to see what guitar matches that serial number. Unless the Gibson records say it's a custom SJ 200 with a lot of funky characteristics, I would run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Nilppeznaf Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 well i am glad at least someone else is not CERTAIN this is fake.. I thought the serial number is given in details above the actual advert description.. A serial number is entered there along with the item Described as Super Jumbo not Southern..where i think he made a mistake alot of things add up for this not shouting fake to me... as you just stated Nick ( in another thread ).expect and accept inconsistancies with Gibson i have seen all kinds of funny logos on genuine Gibsons posted in this very forum... missing dots and wonky letters ect he states this was specially ordered... like Markini..I think this is a VERY good fake if it is..... I have looked at the whole ad a number of times... the wearing on the guitar looks right for its age... I am still not sure regarding the wood.. I have no idea really..it does look like hog,,, special order ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 . Come on guys. Just look at the headstock and first fret: No headstock binding, the Gibson script logo is tilted the wrong way and the fret markers are different. Yes, there's some variance, but that stuff is way off. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Actually its inconclusive. I compared it to known real J200 photos and it is hard to determine. If its a fake its an excellent copy. I would have to physically have it my hands to determine authenticity. I am leaning towards it being the real deal. Take a look at the logo, it is completely crooked, this is a 100% give away its a fake. Logos dont just become crooked unless they have been redesigned. Personally I think this is a pretty crappy fake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Nilppeznaf Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 post removed http://www.c2coffer.com/buy/20419731/Gibson-Sj-200-Jumbo-Acoustic-Guitar-In-Vintage-Sunburst.html hmm Im gonna sign out my head is gettin fried Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 well i am glad at least someone else is not CERTAIN this is fake.. I'm certain. It's a fake. Just look at that bridge. It's crudely cut and finished in comparison to a Gibson (sharp edges), plus the inlays are in the wrong place. The bird's beak at the end of the fretboard is the wrong shape (it doesn't curve upward enough), the fretboard has white filler (like the Asians use), and the rosette is all wrong for a Gibson, but shows all the characteristics of an Asian import (or a Martin. All those rings--what is this, the Olympics?) The burst looks wrong, the Gibson logo inlay wrong, there's no Marquette strip on the back, choice of woods is odd (and as Nick points out, looks like sapele, not mahogany on the back). And what's up with that French heel? It's possible someone special ordered that choice but that shape is too high and pointed for any Gibson I've ever seen. The Alverez J-200 style guitars had the same type of French heel (though other features were different). Maybe the fakers used it or an Asian guitar like it as a template. It also seems odd that one side of the heel is shot with a burst, but the other is not. Gibson's inconsistent, but... Also, I believe a J-200 from 2003 would have fret edge binding. Fakety, fakety, fake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 OK, for Jeremy Morton or someone at the factory to answer. The serial number on this guitar is 00723081, which is a 2003 serial number format, as claimed by the seller. I say it's a fake for about a dozen different reasons, most but not all of which have been mentioned here. What say you, Jeremy? What should Gibson acoustic 00723081 be according to the order book? (Of course, they may have copied a real Gibson with that serial number, which would blow my mind a bit!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Nilppeznaf Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 From the fingerboard inlays and Logo and crown.. I now can see its a pretty obvious copy I actually dont think the burst is that bad...I have looked at many pics on google..and well it aint that bad.... I think lack of PG is a lil deceiving with the burst They are getting closer tho...and the serial number is something that thew me... another Gibson lesson learned for me today anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojorule Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 To get this back on track, it's a fake. The shoulders are wrong, the logo is wrong, the sunburst is wrong, the back is wrong. Yes. Heads, shoulders knees and toes. No need to get into all the details, though Red is on the money in so many places. Markini, Del, I can see that it might pass muster from certain angles, but just look at the overall proportions and shape of this instrument. Then go and compare the same relative dimensions on any real J200 and on any Martin OM/OOO. No need for a ruler. The real deal is a truly fat-bottomed girl. If this were a Queen song, it would be 'Liar'. And Nick knows his wood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Nilppeznaf Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Yes. Heads, shoulders knees and toes. No need to get into all the details, though Red is on the money in so many places. Markini, Del, I can see that it might pass muster from certain angles, but just look at the overall proportions and shape of this instrument. Then go and compare the same relative dimensions on any real J200 and on any Martin OM/OOO. No need for a ruler. The real deal is a truly fat-bottomed girl. If this were a Queen song, it would be 'Liar'. And Nick knows his wood. Aha.. YES but thats another thing that was throwing me.... some of those pics on Ebay are distorted for some reason... click on a pic and go into large view and look at the pics where gut' is in its case,,it looks alot more correct proportion then... doesn't it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojorule Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Aha.. YES but thats another thing that was throwing me.... some of those pics on Ebay are distorted for some reason... click on a pic and go into large view and look at the pics where gut' is in its case,,it looks alot more correct proportion then... doesn't it ? Well I agree that ebay photos don't always have the sharpest focus or straightest angles. I swear that in person, my other Gibson (the electric) is only asymmetrical in that it is single cutaway. But if you look at photos of comparable Howard Roberts Fusions, then they often look more asymmetrical than that. Like somebody moved the bridge, neck and everything else closer to the upper edge of the guitar. And I also agree that case shots can be especially distorting. May be that it makes the lower bout look bigger here. But I found that the case exaggerates the shoulders and made that element look even fishier to me. So I found myself returning to the first photo and the full-guitar photos to give this one a fair chance. She really has the waist and hips of a Wal-Martin. If anything, the burst covers the disproportion up, even if it's not really on the money either. Thing is though, it really is difficult for fakers to pull everything off right at a cost that makes their margins meaningful. I can't imagine what sort of operation can afford the hours, knowledge, know-how, parts and machinery needed to make a truly winning Gibson fake for the general market. Much easier to fake a Martin given the millions of clones out there on which to refinish the headstock. A considerably bigger market as well. Put it this way. Over many years, Pfox has apparently accrued more knowledge about vintage Gibsons than I have and a lot more experience of working with wood. That doesn't mean that he can produce a Gibson-like burst. We have spent ages dissecting his capacity for turning a genuine Gibson into a guitar which looks like a fake. Why would a bloke in China with a handful of Arias and Epiphones to doctor or copy be capable of making an instrument of lesser pedigree look any more real? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Aha.. YES but thats another thing that was throwing me.... some of those pics on Ebay are distorted for some reason... click on a pic and go into large view and look at the pics where gut' is in its case,,it looks alot more correct proportion then... doesn't it ? Yeah, the shoulders look much too wide in some of the shots, but OK in the shot in the case. The close up is a relatively high shot (you can see downwards into the soundhole), so you'd expect the shoulders to seem a little bigger (as they'd be closer to the camera than the lower body), but the perspective still seems way off. Maybe photos became squashed when uploaded. This is the difficulty of authenticating a guitar on just photos: lens distortion, perspective, and unintended manipulation of the digital image (squishing or lengthening the height without adjusting the width by the same amount, etc.)the can produce all kinds of weird problems. Fortunately, that guitar is so obviously fake for so many other reasons (as noted by others, I jut scratched the surface) that the shape is almost inconsequential. Red 333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merseybeat1963 Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 The Mustache Bridge looks like it was made in a Kindergarden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted September 26, 2012 Share Posted September 26, 2012 The REAL give-away, is the saddle....rough, square edges, un-sanded, and if you look at the top of the bridge, the straight edge where it meets the curve is square cut, not rounded. This is a total fake. I sent the guy a not telling him it is a knock-off...but, of course, he is still trying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jannusguy2 Posted September 26, 2012 Share Posted September 26, 2012 I dismissed it as a fake when I saw it on Ebay. Was gonna post it here as fodder for ridicule but didn't get around to it. I thought it might be a doctored Epiphone. Whatever it is, it doesn't come close to looking like my J200 TV. Put 1 in the fake column for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Nilppeznaf Posted September 26, 2012 Share Posted September 26, 2012 yea, well i feel a little foolish for believing it could be genuine now.. I don't usually pay that much attention to the fakes ... but I'm glad I stuck my head up because i have learnt more. It quite obvious to me now.esp' after actually looking at some of the Asian copies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jannusguy2 Posted September 26, 2012 Share Posted September 26, 2012 yea, well i feel a little foolish for believing it could be genuine now.. I don't usually pay that much attention to the fakes ... but I'm glad I stuck my head up because i have learnt more. It quite obvious to me now.esp' after actually looking at some of the Asian copies. no reason at all to feel foolish. i had the advantage of being to compare images of mine and that one side by side. something just felt wrong about it but it was still a hunch and I could've been wrong. may still be for that matter! it's always nice to be able to bounce questions off of other folks. i've gotten quite an education hanging around here for a few years doing just that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.