Dating Super 400 CESN

[Mike F]

Hi everyone,

I'm a new member and I posted the following on the 'introduce yourself' board. Had some helpful friendly replies (thanks Rabs for the photo tips) Thought I'd post again here to home in on the archtop experts.

 

Hello to everyone from the UK,,

My name's Mike and have recently bought a Super 400 CESN which I think dates from the early 1970's (unlike me, who dates from even earlier). SN#640173 , no volute , no made in usa. stamp, has varitone tailpiece. Can anyone date it from that info?

Been in contact with Mr Van Hoose, , nice fellow . Bought his book as well, it's amazing. Awaiting his assessment, but if any experts out there can narrow it down I'd appreciate it.

Never thought I'd ever own one of these, but this came up at a great price so I bit the bullet without any hesitation.

Thanks, Mike

 

I've added (hopefully) a couple of photos, more to follow if needed

Hope someone can throw some light. The shop thought it was sixties but i thought maybe a bit later???

Thanks in advance

 

[kidblast]

Hi Mike..

 

I posted this in your original post (Introductions)

 

When I plugged the SN in here http://www.guitardat...org/gibson.aspx

 

it says:

Your guitar was made at the

Kalamazoo or Nashville Plant , USA

approximately in: 1970, 1971 or 1972

 

The data however on this site is not always accurate but it gives you a starting point.

I would check with Gibson Customer Service if all else fails.

 

Good luck!

[Mike F]

Hi Mike..

 

I posted this in your original post (Introductions)

 

When I plugged the SN in here http://www.guitardat...org/gibson.aspx

 

it says:

Your guitar was made at the

Kalamazoo or Nashville Plant , USA

approximately in: 1970, 1971 or 1972

 

The data however on this site is not always accurate but it gives you a starting point.

I would check with Gibson Customer Service if all else fails.

 

Good luck!

Thank you for your reply. I think it would have been made in Kalamzoo because The Nashville plant started in '74 I think. And the high end stuff was still made in Kalamazoo even after Nashville was up n running.

Tried Gibson customer service but in the uk they refer you to gibson Europe and they came up with zilch.

Thanks again. Mike

[L5Larry]

What do the paper label(s) inside the guitar look like and have printed/written on them? AND... can you get a mirror through the f-hole and read any of the the potentiometer codes. As I always say (and you're probably tired of hearing it from me), the pot codes will add a lot of information to this inquiry, and is one of the main verification points of 6-digit Gibsons!

 

Without the "Made In USA", I'm leaning toward early 1970.

 

 

And by the way, great looking guitar. As I play an L-5 on a daily basis, it's been MANY years since I got my hands on an Super 400.

[kidblast]

Thank you for your reply. I think it would have been made in Kalamzoo because The Nashville plant started in '74 I think. And the high end stuff was still made in Kalamazoo even after Nashville was up n running.

Tried Gibson customer service but in the uk they refer you to gibson Europe and they came up with zilch.

Thanks again. Mike

 

 

ya I didn't quite get that "nashville" thing either.

 

as I said, the data you pull out of there is sometimes rather in question - but if you're looking at least for a ball park, it can most often at least get you there.

[JimR56]

I tend to agree with Larry. Something that may have misled the shop people regarding the date of manufacture are the vol./tone knobs, which have probably been changed. The bridge appears to be a replacement as well. Still, a very nice example.

[kleinman]

Congrats Mike....great looking S400 !

 

Show us a pic of the Gibson logo on the headstock.....also a pic of the trussrod cover so that one can get an idea of the nut width...and a pic of the insides of the cutaway please.

 

If the logo has an open b and o with a dot on the i then it's most certainly pre-'70.

[Mike F]

What do the paper label(s) inside the guitar look like and have printed/written on them? AND... can you get a mirror through the f-hole and read any of the the potentiometer codes. As I always say (and you're probably tired of hearing it from me), the pot codes will add a lot of information to this inquiry, and is one of the main verification points of 6-digit Gibsons!

 

Without the "Made In USA", I'm leaning toward early 1970.

 

 

And by the way, great looking guitar. As I play an L-5 on a daily basis, it's been MANY years since I got my hands on an Super 400.

Hi L5Larry,

There doesn't appear to be a label inside the body and also I can't see any factory order number. ???

 

According to Gruhns the 1969 serial numbers ran from 600000 to 606090 for high end models, so, I'm thinking that maybe #640173 is a little high for early 1970. ?

Which brings me on to the pickups. One of the reasons the guitar was such a bargain was the seller wasn't sure about the pickups . It played, looked and sounded great ,so I wasn't too bothered. We haggled a great price so it's all mine.

The pickups looked correct to me ; gold plating wear on the covers was in keeping with the other plated parts and all the bezel screws look aged naturally.

When I put new flat wounds on I had a look at the pickups,hoping to see the jolly old patent number , but no, these pickups look like the Bill Lawrence Super Humbuckers, sometimes called Tarbacks. I know Gibson used these in Les Paul's, SG's, 335's, 345's and Switchmasters etc. I've been wondering, if the serial does indeed mean the guitar is '72 ish , then would anyone say that it's possible that Gibson may have used these in S400's also. Bill Lawrence had already designed these in those days and Gibson was installing them. ? Just a thought.

I might add that I only ever buy a guitar because I like to play it and never because I think I might make a few shillings. As I said , it looks ,plays and sounds right on the money so even if it does turn out to have things that would make the purists hair curl, it's alright with me.

I'd just kinda like to know when it was made.if more photos are needed by anyone I can do that

Interested to hear any comments. Cheers. Mike

[Mike F]

I tend to agree with Larry. Something that may have misled the shop people regarding the date of manufacture are the vol./tone knobs, which have probably been changed. The bridge appears to be a replacement as well. Still, a very nice example.

Hi,

Yes I agree about the bridge,it has an MOP inlay that I've not seen. Works a treat though. And yes, it is a lovely guitar. Thanks. Mike

[Mike F]

Congrats Mike....great looking S400 !

 

Show us a pic of the Gibson logo on the headstock.....also a pic of the trussrod cover so that one can get an idea of the nut width...and a pic of the insides of the cutaway please.

 

If the logo has an open b and o with a dot on the i then it's most certainly pre-'70.

Hi,

I'll try to get a headstock and cutaway photo on for you. I can tell you the logo is closed b, closed o and no dot. The truss rod cover has the word custom on it and the nut width is 1. 11/16ths

Inside the cutaway the binding widens towards the bottom of the cutaway.

Cheers. Mike

[Mike F]

Congrats Mike....great looking S400 !

 

Show us a pic of the Gibson logo on the headstock.....also a pic of the trussrod cover so that one can get an idea of the nut width...and a pic of the insides of the cutaway please.

 

If the logo has an open b and o with a dot on the i then it's most certainly pre-'70.

Thank you Kleinman,

Here's a few more photos for you perusal,

And thanks to everyone helping to date this lovely guitar. Cheers .Mike

 

[Mike F]

What do the paper label(s) inside the guitar look like and have printed/written on them? AND... can you get a mirror through the f-hole and read any of the the potentiometer codes. As I always say (and you're probably tired of hearing it from me), the pot codes will add a lot of information to this inquiry, and is one of the main verification points of 6-digit Gibsons!

 

Without the "Made In USA", I'm leaning toward early 1970.

 

 

And by the way, great looking guitar. As I play an L-5 on a daily basis, it's been MANY years since I got my hands on an Super 400.

Thanks larry,

I guess you are used to a larger guitar playing an L5. I know the S400 is a little larger but I find it surprisingly comfortable and versatile. If its been many years since you had your hands on one I have to say until now I'd NEVER had my hands on one, there's just not many about. I was amazed how few blonde examples they made between 1951 and 1980'si think its less than 200,, probably less than one afternoons telecaster production. That's not a criticism, I like teles as well.

Anyway I've put up some more photos elsewhere in the post if you want to look. All the best. Mike

[JimR56]

I was amazed how few blonde examples they made between 1951 and 1980'si think its less than 200,, probably less than one afternoons telecaster production.

Yes, blondes were always made in fewer numbers. They generally featured higher-quality wood (nothing could be hidden by the dark stain of a sunburst finish), and always commanded higher prices than their sunburst counterparts.

 

I've owned three- a '58 CESN; a '61 CN (with a McCarty assembly); and a '64 CES. I always found them comfortable enough, but I'm 6' 1" with fairly long arms.

 

I'm looking again at your photos, and the detail I'm trying to focus on carefully is the shape of the cutaway (frontal aspect). I think there was a very subtle change from '69 to '70 in that regard. The cutaway was slightly shallower (and slightly more graceful, in my opinion) on the earlier guitars. Yours appears to my eyes to have more of a '70 shape to it.

 

Your pickguard appears to be slightly longer (at the top) than what's normal for '69 and later 400's. With your bridge and vol/tone knobs being replaced, I'm guessing that the pickguard might also be non-original (not important, just pointing that out).

 

I still think we're probably looking at a 1970 model here.

 

The Van Hoose book mentions a change in headstock overlay (the black surface) in 1970-71. He refers to it as "blackened holly" up to that time, and "a course-grained overlay of fiber veneer" being introduced as a replacement. Not sure that info will be of use or not.

[JimR56]

Gibson made 409 Super 400CESN (blonde electric) guitars between 1952 and 1979.

[Mike F]

Yes, blondes were always made in fewer numbers. They generally featured higher-quality wood (nothing could be hidden by the dark stain of a sunburst finish), and always commanded higher prices than their sunburst counterparts.

 

I've owned three- a '58 CESN; a '61 CN (with a McCarty assembly); and a '64 CES. I always found them comfortable enough, but I'm 6' 1" with fairly long arms.

 

I'm looking again at your photos, and the detail I'm trying to focus on carefully is the shape of the cutaway (frontal aspect). I think there was a very subtle change from '69 to '70 in that regard. The cutaway was slightly shallower (and slightly more graceful, in my opinion) on the earlier guitars. Yours appears to my eyes to have more of a '70 shape to it.

 

Your pickguard appears to be slightly longer (at the top) than what's normal for '69 and later 400's. With your bridge and vol/tone knobs being replaced, I'm guessing that the pickguard might also be non-original (not important, just pointing that out).

 

I still think we're probably looking at a 1970 model here.

 

The Van Hoose book mentions a change in headstock overlay (the black surface) in 1970-71. He refers to it as "blackened holly" up to that time, and "a course-grained overlay of fiber veneer" being introduced as a replacement. Not sure that info will be of use or not.

Hello JimR56 ,

I do have the Van Hoose book but I don't have the experience of seeing both types of headstock veneer so I don't know which I have.

Did you read my reply to Larry about the serial numbers and the pickups ? I'd appreciate your views on those aspects of this conundrum.

It's funny isn't it , why would anyone want to change bits on what is a Rolls Royce of a guitar. If something gets damaged or wears out that's a different story and replacements are needed, must always bear that in mind.

It is a lovely playing guitar and I feel quite privileged to own one after regarding them as out of reach. Was a long time coming. Cheers Mike

[Mike F]

Gibson made 409 Super 400CESN (blonde electric) guitars between 1952 and 1979.

Oops, my mistake. Still not many though is it.

[JimR56]

Oops, my mistake. Still not many though is it.

Didn't mean to scold you or anything, Mike, I just happened to have the numbers handy. :) And no, that's not many over nearly 30 years.

 

I did read everything you've mentioned above, but I don't have any knowledge concerning those Lawrence pickups (or much about pickups in general, to be honest). Considering the changes that have been made to your guitar, I wouldn't be shocked it the pickups are not original, but who knows. As far as why people make alterations to guitars, that's something of a mystery to me sometimes. I never liked the vol/tone knobs that Gibson used after about 1967, so I can at least understand that particular change to your guitar, but some players seem to be all about making changes to their instruments for reasons unknown.

 

So far, the weight of the evidence seems to point to 1970, but perhaps some further fine detail or analysis will help to nail things down more precisely. The important thing is, enjoy that beauty!

[L5Larry]

... can you get a mirror through the f-hole and read any of the the potentiometer codes. As I always say (and you're probably tired of hearing it from me), the pot codes will add a lot of information to this inquiry, and is one of the main verification points of 6-digit Gibsons!

[Mike F]

Didn't mean to scold you or anything, Mike, I just happened to have the numbers handy. :) And no, that's not many over nearly 30 years.

 

I did read everything you've mentioned above, but I don't have any knowledge concerning those Lawrence pickups (or much about pickups in general, to be honest). Considering the changes that have been made to your guitar, I wouldn't be shocked it the pickups are not original, but who knows. As far as why people make alterations to guitars, that's something of a mystery to me sometimes. I never liked the vol/tone knobs that Gibson used after about 1967, so I can at least understand that particular change to your guitar, but some players seem to be all about making changes to their instruments for reasons unknown.

 

So far, the weight of the evidence seems to point to 1970, but perhaps some further fine detail or analysis will help to nail things down more precisely. The important thing is, enjoy that beauty!

You are right , it was made to be played and I'm doin a lot of that. It's just up in my mind at the moment that makes me want to research it, like a kid with a new toy. I agree that it 70's I reckon somewhere between '70 and late ,72.

Be interesting to see if any pickup experts see the post and throw some light. Take care. Mike

[Mike F]

I'll try to get a look inside it . Keep you posted with any findings. Cheers. Mike

[kleinman]

I'll try to get a look inside it . Keep you posted with any findings. Cheers. Mike

 

Hi Mike..'70 or very early '70's ....volutes appeared in '73/4.

 

Fantastic looking instrument.

 

Congrats again !!

[Mike F]

Hi Mike..'70 or very early '70's ....volutes appeared in '73/4.

 

Fantastic looking instrument.

 

Congrats again !!

Hi Kleinman,

Yes, I agree , early seventies. Don't think we'll get closer because Gibson's records from the time are ,to say the least,, misty.

Thanks to everyone for being so friendly and helpful.

I'm very happy with this guitar regardless of any little changes it has,, I suppose they're part of its story too.

I have sent a few questions to Gibson . If they throw more light I'll post it on the forum.

Thanks again.....now...what to play?

[haza5150]

Mike congrats on the Super 400, it's on my must have list. I have wanted one ever since I saw Elvis play Scotty Moore's sunburst on the 68 Comeback Special. One day I will get my dream guitar. Regards, Hassan.