Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Vintage SG' started by KNAC, Jan 11, 2017.
Same here on my early '61.
I like the '62, looks like a player. Someone loved that thing!
Some outdoor shots
There it is!
Can you post a sunlight pic of the headstock?
This pic looked to have small rings around the Kluson bushing..if it was Grovered, it was well undone.
Even if so, the original tuners on it now and it looks killer!
here we go
Looks like conversion bushings... Still seeing a faint ring around them.
Slightly larger diameter, thicker lip, more squared off looking...Compare to these:
VERY well done..a complete non issue in my book..I would have not even blinked if the Grovers were still there!
Anytime you have to get a magnifier and micrometer out..it's a GOOD resto!!
I don't know about the pups, as I just don't know when Gibson changed them from PAFs. But I do know that this guitar looks genuine for a late 62 , which the serial number shows it is. Those 61 and 62 SGs are notoriously prone to neck problems at the heel and the headstock. So the quality of the repair should be of more concern than the fact that a repair was needed. Also, a well played SG of this era may have worn off on the back of the neck over the last 55 years, so as to need a respray. I've seen some like this, with the finish worn "clean off" of the neck back.
I really like the bigger neck on the '63. People can get confused by the actual paint "style" Gibson did on the back of the neck of these SG's, in Robb Lawrence 's book he describes the back as being "sunburst" painted. Many think the neck has been worn and then oversprayed. Not true.
I know that's true about 70's sunburst Les Pauls.
So what about the tons of solid red painted ones?