Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

L5 on Ebay

gnappi

By gnappi
in Gibson Custom

Recommended Posts

L5Larry

L5Larry

Posted
Posted

You need to educate yourself and do a whole bunch of more research on what a "Gibson L-5CES" should look like, especially one from this era.

 

I see no less than four RED FLAGS from the e-bay listing you have linked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest EastEnder

Guest EastEnder

Posted
Posted

Two of the items you mentioned are "suspect". Which two and why, and why not the others?

 

I'm looking at a bridge base without inlay and an overly long stinger indicating, perhaps, an older refinish.

 

The truss rod cover looks like a standard replacement because of the seemingly thin laminates.

 

Some pickup ring screws replaced with the wrong type.

 

I don't see genuine gibson control knobs here, but I might be wrong for that era.

 

All in all, though, It appears to be an L-5.

 

On with the investigation, since I'm only going by the commonality between this guitar and my same-year Byrdland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jabberwocky

Jabberwocky

Posted
Posted

Knobs, bridge, truss rod cover, elongated stinger, pickup ring screws.

 

Am I close, L5Larry?

 

EE

 

Errr, no. Not even remotely.

 

Witch Hat knobs are correct for the 73 Norlin era. Witch Hats started appearing in the late 60s to late 70s, I think. Floating bridges are commonly changed and I won't fault an archtop with a replaced bridge. It is a "consumable". Pickguards rot and are also commonly changed. So while the choice of new pickguard material may be subjective, it is not a red flag to me.

 

The Cherry Sunburst is correct for that 69 to 74-75 Norlin era. Truss rod cover looks correct; not all are 3-ply. Some Norlin era archtops have their serial number and model designation PRINTED on the back of the headstock, right below the open-book styling. I saw a 76 L5CES Sunburst with that. You could just make out the stamped serial number and Made in USA stamp in the back of the headstock in this 73. The back of the headstock could have been re-finished. Some early Norlin era archtops came without a label stuck inside the guitar. I could just make out one in the photo. It has had a re-fret because the nibs are gone. The Kluson Sealfasts are original.

 

It looks genuine to me. I don't see any red flags except for the back of the headstock which looks re-finished with a longer stinger. Early 70s L5CESs do show stingers and NO VOLUTES. Volutes started appearing in 1975 or so, I cannot be sure.

 

Pickup mounting rings and its screws are commonly changed without affecting value. There is nothing special about them unlike pickups themselves. Most screws would have rusted by now so if an owner changes them, I won't fault the guitar for it.

 

I feel that $6750 is high for a 1973 Gibson L-5CES. I would take a $1000 or more off it.

 

But I feel that it is a genuine Gibson and may be worth checking out to see if it is a fine player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jabberwocky

Jabberwocky

Posted
Posted

I have a 1954 Super 300 and it has its original single ply truss rod cover. OK, 54 to 73 spans nearly two decades and it is a Super 300 but truss rod covers could be changed and it does not really call into question the provenance of the L5. All I am saying is that genuine Gibson truss rod covers are sometimes single-ply.

 

Now, I would be very concerned if it did not come with Kluson Sealfasts. Check out the prices of those babies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest EastEnder

Guest EastEnder

Posted
Posted

Not even remotely.

 

??

 

Right about the possibility of a refinish and the stinger, which, incidentally might be elongated to conceal a headstock break (although uncommon on those laminated necks). And I'm right about the bridge.

 

With remote respect,

 

EE

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jabberwocky

Jabberwocky

Posted
Posted

??

 

Right about the possibility of a refinish and the stinger, which, incidentally might be elongated to conceal a headstock break (although uncommon on those laminated necks). And I'm right about the bridge.

 

With remote respect,

 

EE

 

You miss my point. A replaced bridge does not by itself invalidate the provenance of a Gibson archtop. So, it is NOT a red flag.

 

As for the bowtie inlays in the bridge base, I have a 1969 Super 400CES; the original bridge is Brazilian rosewood and it has no inlays in the ends. The bridges of L5s and Super 400s of this era are commonly made of Brazilian Rosewood with no MOP inlays.

 

I have over 14 Gibson archtops and I have changed the bridges on most of them. I still have the originals in the case compartments but my Gibsons do not become fakes just because of a bridge change.

 

You are stretching it with the elongated stinger concealing a headstock break. Gibson headstocks break in a characteristic way which cannot be concealed by a stinger. When it breaks, it shows. Even the best repair person cannot conceal it, especially not with a stinger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest EastEnder

Guest EastEnder

Posted
Posted

You miss my point. A replaced bridge does not by itself invalidate the provenance of a Gibson archtop.

 

I have over 14 Gibson archtops and I have changed the bridges on most of them. I still have the originals in the case compartments but my Gibsons do not become fakes just because of a bridge change.

 

You are stretching it with the elongated stinger concealing a headstock break. Gibson headstocks break in a characteristic way which cannot be concealed by a stinger. When it breaks, it shows. Even the best repair person cannot conceal it, especially not with a stinger.

 

Jabberwocky:

 

Never said it was a fake. In fact, I stated that it appears to be genuine (although I wouldn't suggest a purchase based on my assumption).

 

L5Larry was testing. I made observations rather than providing proof that the guitar is a fake. And thanks for clearing up the matter of the bridge; gosh, I had no idea you could change the bridge on an arch top -- which is an embarrassing admission for someone who has owned so many.

 

Cheers,

 

EE

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jabberwocky

Jabberwocky

Posted
Posted

... gosh, I had no idea you could change the bridge on an arch top -- which is an embarrassing admission for someone who has owned so many.

 

Cheers,

 

EE

 

You're Sh##tting me......You've never changed strings on your archies? Please do not read this as a challenge but I am a little incredulous and feel quite sure you're yanking my chain.

 

It was suggested by L5Larry that there were Red Flags and I read Red Flags as pointing out to issues, one of them the possibility of it being a fake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest EastEnder

Guest EastEnder

Posted
Posted

You're Sh##tting me......You've never changed strings on your archies?

 

Good old English sarcasm.

 

Back to the guitar...

 

I wouldn't buy it. Too many red flags -- although I can't for the life of me imagine what they are.

 

The ever-playful EE

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stein

stein

Posted
Posted

I'm confused myself.

 

I admit, I don't know what is different about this particular year, and what to look for really. A couple things that look odd might very well be because Gibson was odd during '73.

 

Personally, red flags for me: It's a pawn shop. Doesn't mean they are bad, but it sure doesn't mean they are good either.

 

There are a number of replaced parts. Or perhaps, non-origonal parts.

 

The stinger does NOT look right. Maybe it is, but that's a big question.

 

Of all the pics, there isn't one of the seriel#.

 

NOW...the price already seems high for what it should be (I think), but if any of these prove to show repairs/damage/ or added or missing parts, it likely decreases the "cash" value much, much lower than the asking price.

 

On the face of it, it isn't an "origonal" L-5ces, and what isn't origonal isn't disclosed in the ad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jabberwocky

Jabberwocky

Posted
Posted

To be fair to the ebayer, one can just make out the stamped serial number under the paint.

 

Yes, the biggest red flag is that it is being sold by a pawn shop.

 

EastEnder, they understand English sarcasm in Los Angeles? I lived in Westwood CA 90024 for a number of years and I swear to you, sarcasm is lost on these folks.

 

Yo queiro Taco Bell?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest EastEnder

Guest EastEnder

Posted
Posted

EastEnder, they understand English sarcasm in Los Angeles? I lived in Westwood CA 90024 for a number of years and I swear to you, sarcasm is lost on these folks.

 

Surprising, since Westwood is so close to that great outpost of modern English colonialism, Santa Monica.

 

In any event, forgive the sarcasm; it's a poor substitute for our legendary dry wit ("...and I didn't even eat the salmon mousse.")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...