NGD Japanese Copy= NGD Vintage ReTop?

[Bob A]

I have joined this forum after being a long time lurker and I want to start by thanking everyone for all the great information on here. I finally joined because I finally bought my first and my perfect Les Paul.

The Wife calls this THE CASH BURST!(since it may be put together one piece at a time).





I have be re-directed here after starting a thread on the other les paul forum trying to track down the maker of what I thought, and what was sold as a Japanese copy. NGD/ Is there any way to tell who made this?

After input I have gotten there some think that this guitar maybe a 52-53 retop. There are many good photos on that other thread but I will attach some here that are the main suspects.





P90 mounting holes.



52-53 ground wire hole/router chew mark/ugly top routing marks/small input jack hole.


I will post as many photos as you all would like to help track this down. Again there are many photos in the other thread.

So what do you all think, is 8-1950 a retop? Is there any other info or pics you would like to see?

Thanks for any help you can provide.

[tag2]

Center seam, P-90 screw holes in the bridge PUP cavity, rear PUP placement incorrect. Could be a 50's GT retop. That neck PUP cavity looks funky. Are there P-90 screw holes on the tenon?

[Bob A]

So the folks in the other thread think this is a re-neck/re-top of a 50's Gold top. Here is a photo of the tenon. Note the plug on the treble side. I also think there is a p90 hole here as well.

[tag2]

Here are some front cavity shots of my '57 GT and '59 burst for comparison.

[ezra1]

They have alot in common going by the photos.

[Greco]

Well it certainly looks like the old neck was "cut out" leaving the end of the tenon in place and the new neck glued in. I think you could have a 50's slab of mahogany there.

[GammyBird]

[Bob A]

Originally Posted by Greco

Well it certainly looks like the old neck was "cut out" leaving the end of the tenon in place and the new neck glued in. I think you could have a 50's slab of mahogany there.

That is what I am wondering. There are also some old pots and caps in there that sound great.

Does anyone have any pics of re-necked guitars? Were any guitars re-necked and re-topped by Gibson? Is all this work done after market?

I am guessing all this work was done later as the lacquer does not glow bright. Does anyone know who would have done this work? Are there any other pics you would like me to move to this thread?

[GammyBird]

Bob. Have any pictures of the back? Can I assume that it's a 1 piece body?

[Greco]

Bob, there is really no way to tell who might have done the work. Gibson would be more professional, so discount them. Probably easier to guess who hasn't done it! If you're hoping for a big name like Dave Johnson, Kim or Tom then don't hold your breath either - they're way too talented to do this. Too many backyard bodgers and repair guys out there capable of pulling something like this off, let alone luthiers unknown to this forum or the internet in general. Anyone could've done it. I think perhaps the reneck/conversion could be old and the finish done in the last ten years or so. There really wasn't much of a trend for refinishing or relicing with razor checking before that. If the conversion were done recently I'd expect it to be at least a bit more sypathetic.

[Bob A]

Can I assume that it's a 1 piece body?

I believe so.

Too many backyard bodgers and repair guys out there capable of pulling something like this off, let alone luthiers unknown to this forum or the internet in general. Anyone could've done it. I think perhaps the reneck/conversion could be old and the finish done in the last ten years or so.

That is what I think is going on here. I am sure it is not a big name that did this heavy handed of a job, but I must say who ever did it I am sure happy with the way it plays. And when it comes down to it that is what it is about for me. I am just trying to find out where all of its mojo came from.

[Rox]

You know what though Bob, even if it turns out to be made in a woodshop by Mr. Bodger out of loads of bits and bobs, it's a cracking looking guitar. If it plays well, you've hit on a winner - no matter where it was made.

At worst it's a gorgeous lookalike you can use without the worry you'll damage an heirloom!

Next time you see one, let me know, eh?

[RevWillie]

FWIW I agree that the mahogany of the body appears to be a ground-channel-routed 1952-1953 body (a few of those slipped out in 1954). Given the huge areas around the pots, I wonder if the knobs are in the right place?

As I've stated elsewhere, I know of a '60 LP that has had 3 necks and 2-3 re-fins, the mortise is empty and the tenon is MIA hidden up under the fingerboard somewhere... BUT it plays and sounds fantastic! Some guitars just 'have it' regardless of their 'pedigree' and yours seems to as well.

If the guitar is great IYHO then that's all you need to know! Play the heck out of it - your guitar sounds like a keeper!

[gypsyseven]

Very interesting thread....cool!

[eric ernest]

Gibson would be more professional, so discount them.

Not necessarily. I have seen some 70's Gibson restoration work that would make you scratch your head.

[Bob A]

Originally Posted by eric ernest

Not necessarily. I have seen some 70's Gibson restoration work that would make you scratch your head.

Well 6 train rides, 3 miles of walking, and hours in 3 guitar stores today gave me answers. I am having a great time trying to track the history of this guitar down. After everything here and the opinion of many people and some research I believe I have some answers and some people actually guessed at a value.

All plastic parts on this guitar are non-vintage. The pick up rings have the proper number in them but so do the fakes. The pots and caps are vintage. No clue what type of guitar they are from but they are all spec. The Bigsby has also been verified to be vintage. Now to the body.

Without a doubt this is a retop. I am leaning that it is from a 52 GT. Once the Bigsby was removed there is evidence that the body at one point had the trapeze tail. I compared this to a 52 GT with this set up.There is also a plug in the tail.



Photo of the top without Bigsby for fun.



So now it comes down to the neck. This neck is slim and lovely. I never ordered a reissue historic because I don't like how thick the neck is. The neck is one piece with ears and is really a great piece of wood. The head stock shape looked off to some people, but I think I know the answer to this. It took seeing it in the sun light to find some answers.

If this neck is or was a Gibson I think it belonged to an SG. Under the Les Paul logo and the black paint if you look at the head stock in the sun light you see that this headstock at one time had a Gibson Crown inlay in it. I tried for a half hour to get a photo of this but I am trying to take a photo of something black on a black background. So this is the best I can do. So if you look just to the right of the S you will see a dimple in the paint that is from the lower right of the crown.

EDIT: SG neck theory out see post below.



Here are some neck measurements. Nut width= 1.70in so call it 1 and 11/16. Neck at 1st fret= .89in. Neck at 12th fret= 1.01in.

So some questions get answered and others come about. I am going to start looking into a LP vs. SG headstock. There is no evidence of old serial numbers or stamps on the back of the head stock.

What do you all think?

[reborn old]

Neck and top origins are going to be tough without use of an expert (or the guy who did the work).
I guess what's left of the original tenon could be compared to what replaced it, somehow.
Nut width can be significant for late 60's Gibson necks, IIRC.

There were some early 1968 Les Paul necks with crowns, and Les Paul necks with much shorter tenons.
Headstock overlays that include Gibson crown and script are common and readily available.

Without having seen pics of the neck heel of yours, I'm guessing SG neck heels are shallower
than Les Pauls, partially due to slimmer SG mahogany slab and lack of a top cap (pic below).

The easiest approach might be measuring neck mahogany thickness from the heel base to bottom of fret edge binding
right where the neck joins the body. I'm guessing it's a different thickness for SG, Les Paul and hollow body necks.


Reason for edit: - added pic of 1968 1st re-issue Les Paul headstock

[Bob A]

Ok so I think I found Big Foot. I was looking into this 1968 theory and found this posting. Post 51 in this thread.

Want to buy 1968 Les Paul Goldtop

One of the unconfirmed rumors about the early 68s being made from leftover 50s bodies is that the ones that had the crown are the ones that were 50s bodies.

So if some 1968 GT crown inlay were made with 50's bodies could this be a refinished/relic 1968?

Personally I don't know why they would have been using 1950s bodies in 1968. There are glue drips in the control cavity so I know the top was put on after the body was routed.

[atheos]

Originally Posted by Bob A

If this neck is or was a Gibson I think it belonged to an SG. Under the Les Paul logo and the black paint if you look at the head stock in the sun light you see that this headstock at one time had a Gibson Crown inlay in it.

Perhaps it got a new neck in the 60's, like Old Black.

[Bob A]

Originally Posted by reborn old

Neck and top origins are going to be tough without use of an expert (or the guy who did the work).

The easiest approach might be measuring neck mahogany

I agree I will most likely never find out but I sure am having fun looking into it. SG neck theory is out because as you pointed out the heel to binding is to thick. It measures at 1.45 in.






Tonight while working the graveyard I also found some cool stuff out about the old owner and I will post more about this tomorrow.

But for now I did finally manage to get a photo of the crown.

[RyanC]

cool thread.

[Sharky]

Could that be an ES neck? They should have kept the flowerpot though, I love it

[JimmyAce2006]

Originally Posted by Bob A

Ok so I think I found Big Foot. I was looking into this 1968 theory and found this posting. Post 51 in this thread.

Want to buy 1968 Les Paul Goldtop


So if some 1968 GT crown inlay were made with 50's bodies could this be a refinished/relic 1968?

Personally I don't know why they would have been using 1950s bodies in 1968. There are glue drips in the control cavity so I know the top was put on after the body was routed.

As I stated in the thread where you quoted me, there is no proof of the rumor that they used leftover 50s bodies when they reintroduced the Les Paul single cut after an 8 year period where they were discontinued. It is a nice theory. But there is zero proof. I had one of the first 1968 LP Customs. It was a one owner guitar and was all original, excellent+ condition. It had pots dated to 1960. That could lend support to the fact that they could have also had bodies from 1960. But there is just no proof.

[nwobhm]

Damn cool thread! Congrats OP.

[mapleflame]

It wouldn't have been unusual to reneck a 50's LP or even replace the board from factory. Also a guitar repairman could have replaced the board due to having too many divots. The inlays could have been replaced as well and we all know what happens to 50's inalys after several refrets. Lots of things could have been done. The heel looks like a 52-53 to me. If it was renecked in the 60's it would have a 60's type heel. The guitars that I have seen, even burst that were renecked all had the 60's heel features.

[tag2]

Do you have a picture of the truss rod cover looking straight down on top of it showing the distance between the nut and bottom of the cover?

[Blackdog]

Originally Posted by Sharky

Could that be an ES neck? They should have kept the flowerpot though, I love it

I have very little to add to this most interesting thread, but I can say that the neck can only be a Les Paul neck and not an ES or SG neck.
This is simply because the neck-body joint at the 16th fret is unique to the singlecut Les Pauls.

An ES neck joins the body at the 19th fret, so do many later SG necks. An early SG neck would join the body even further up.

The neck-body joint dictates the position of the heel with respect to the nut.

You can't rework an ES or SG neck for use in a LP because you need wood for the LP heel where it has already been removed.

The painted over crown inlay could indicate an ES or SG headstock overlay replacement (but never a complete neck), or one of those rare 68 LP necks.

[maaadtrip]

Super cool thread! What an interesting guitar!

[Bob A]

Originally Posted by maaadtrip

Super cool thread! What an interesting guitar!

MYSTERY SOLVED!!!!!

With a few pieces of information about the original owner and going back to ask about some of the known work done to his guitars I have just gotten off the phone with the maker.

The original owner had a couple guitars repainted and converted by Lays Guitar Shop

Dan Shinn of Lays in Akron did this conversion from a 1952 Gold Top. By his best guess this was done 6-7 years ago. I am planning on flying down to see him in the next couple of weeks so he can get it in his hands and start a paperwork trail on it again.

The neck is original with the body(from what he can remember, will know more once he looks at it). Only the top is new. I also hope to have him shed some light on the other parts.

He is also thinking it might be best to replace the inlays with something more period correct as you have pointed out the ones currently are a little to "alive". I am not to sure how much I want to change it, but I sure would like to get a paperwork trail stared on the guitar again. I don't know how much this would improve value maybe you all could shed some light on if that would be worth it.

To see more of his work check out this 57 special he turned into a 59 burst now for sale at Cowtown. 1957 Gibson Les Paul 57/59 Conversion Burst ( of Course) > Guitars : Electric Solid Body - Cowtown Guitars | Gbase.com

I really thank everyone for their help and knowledge and I will post more once I get this in the hands of the converter.

[nwobhm]

OMG, You traded a SG faded for that!!!!! I hear ya, on it ringing like a bell. My 53' is like that, congrats!