'59 Les Paul Jr or is it?

christopherJ

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2011
Messages
563
Reaction score
758
Does the asking price of an item negate the validity of my comment?

You've indicated that you're willing to dismiss an item solely on the basis of "out of focus and badly composed images" I indicated that I'm not so quick to do so, and as a result, have gotten some deals over the years.

As far as the guitar in question. No I'm not willing to pay their current asking price as it obviously has issues, however "if" it could be confirmed AND if the price was right I might consider it. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
OK professor.

But your statement sorta makes my case. Sure, if "it could be confirmed". It can't be confirmed with blurry and poorly composed images. My statement is still valid. Yes, I will dismiss an item based on crappy images alone, and so would you.
 

none2low

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
557
Reaction score
569
But your statement sorta makes my case. Sure, if "it could be confirmed". It can't be confirmed with blurry and poorly composed images. My statement is still valid. Yes, I will dismiss an item based on crappy images alone, and so would you.
I'm not sure how my comments make your case, but if it makes you feel better...

At the end of the day you are free to continue to pass on items based upon crappy images, and I'll continue to inquire on them until I'm satisfied to either buy or pass.

But please don't assume to know what I would or would not do.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
67
Reaction score
206
It's hard to tell from the pictures. At first glance the cavity looks OK but the pots look too new. The p/up definitely doesn't look like a 50's P-90. If it is it's had some work done to it - the heatshrink rubber around the solder joint is wrong (should be very old looking masking tape) and the baseplate screws are wrong too (should be Phillips head). Also the baseplate itself looks way too new.
 

Steven

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
1,237
Reaction score
968
I see nothing about that guitar that indicates it is 60 years old. Unless of course they kept it stored under a bed or in a closet.
 

none2low

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
557
Reaction score
569
Thanks to everyone that's responded. It helped confirm what I already believed to be the case.

Unfortunately, I didn't make it over there yesterday for an in-hand inspection so I can't add any additional insight.

On a positive note, I did finally sell a Marshall head that I've I had listed for months now, so all's well that ends well.
 

judson

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2016
Messages
5,667
Reaction score
8,320
i would have made the effort to go look in person as sometimes you do stumble on a deal, photos can make anything look querky but i would be attracted to it if i could put my hands on it after a 20 min drive

at the current bid of $3,150 ...that isnt close to what real prices are....sold prices are well north of that, i have been looking for awhile at them...probably too long as jr prices like all the others have jumped no doubt...

i agree the base of that bridge post looks suspicious but that is an obvious replacememnt and the pickup looks like it was cleaned or is just too dam clean but the screws look rusted....i would not dismiss any used guitar based on a truss rod cover....but i got no clue really :dunno:

go look at it if you got the time...and if your confident it is what is represented, try to make a deal direct with cash...just a thought...i have bought many guitars online and you do take a chance but on the otherside , if you can touch it, you should able to make a good call.....so far i have been lucky
,,,(knocking on wood)

here is reverb pricing

 
Last edited:

none2low

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
557
Reaction score
569
Great post Judson!!

I had every intention of running over to do an in person inspection, but was contacted regarding a Marshall head I was selling and had to chose between money in my pocket or driving out to the pawnshop.

I did speak with the owner of the shop and asked about a cash offer, but he feels he can do better with Ebay, so unless I put 5k on the counter I doubt he'd move. And to be fair at that price point we'd be getting into played and loved, but original examples.

I still kick myself for passing on an early 60's example for 3k at the OC guitar show. That was about 3 years back before prices went crazy. It belonged to one of the guys at Drew Berlin's booth, but accoring to Drew he thought it was refinished, so I passed.

Still think about that guitar. It played and sounded great, but figured I could do better if I was patient. Yup, still looking... :facepalm:
 

judson

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2016
Messages
5,667
Reaction score
8,320
understandable.....

most vintage have taken noticable leaps upward and people think times are tough?

sadly I am sure for some but dam prices sure as hell are no indication

early 50's goldtops were running $12k-$15k not too long ago, and now turned up to $20k to $30k....crazy

hope philly show is back in 2021...im saving my cash :fingersx:

keep hunting , you will find one
 
Last edited:

none2low

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
557
Reaction score
569
^^^^ This ^^^^ Woke up this morning to the idler pulley on my 4Runner whining like a cat in heat!! Apparently the universe agrees with you.
 

MW110

Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2016
Messages
34
Reaction score
30
The pots and soldering looks brandnew. Definitely not 60 years old.
 

greens

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2015
Messages
303
Reaction score
172
As others have commented, I don't think this is any kind of Gibson at all, let alone an authentic 59.
 

13dead

Junior Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Saw it. Got a 59 boner. Looked close. Everything wrong, but especially the straight bridge, lack of wear, and odd body shape made me back off. I emailed the seller to ask how he authenticated, and he replied "I have been in the pawn business for 30 years." Nope. Still an hour left on the auction and there will be a sucker looks like. https://www.ebay.com/itm/363145260076?ul_noapp=true
 

vintageguitarz

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
275
Reaction score
268
1) color is wrong. It's some sort of plumb.

2) checking is too "uniform" as if done in a freezer.

3) bridge has modern angle to it. Not vintage angle.

4) bridge awfully damn shiny new for a vintage instrument.

5) nut is bone. Supposed to be Nylon 4/6. That ain't nylon.

6) round over on edges is very severe. Too big a round over.

7 headstock to "crisp" as you say. No dings, no wear from 60 years of use.

* IF* this were an original 1959, it's been severely reworked and refinished. very little is original and the bridge studs have been plugged and relocated for modern strings.

*mod edit*

I'm not going to take harassment and insults from you.

Not one bit.

Enjoy your ban.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

none2low

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
557
Reaction score
569
So which one of you miscreants ponied up and paid $3938? Haha... j/k

Let's see if it shows up here in a week or two with some better pictures asking for authentication.

Then we can really dissect it and see everything thats wrong with it.

you have no idea what you are talking about!
You have some absolutely great Jr's there, but your guitars and the one at auction only bear a resemblance in general appearance.

Everything Dave said is spot on, along with some other things that he didn't mention (thick made in Japan style jack plate, cts pots instead of centralab, dots IMO look questionable in type and size, finish in general looks thick, etc, etc)

None of this means for certain that it didn't start out life as a '59 Jr, but as it sits today it's a far cry from being how it left the factory.
 

Frutiger

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2008
Messages
170
Reaction score
118
I'd say that because I own one! Here's what I see (with the huge caveat of the pictures aren't great):

• It has the same dark finish as mine, I think the checking is probably done with a razor.
• The serial number is exactly how Greco used to do it - it mimics Gibson's serial but the font is slightly different and the placement is a bit too low (of the five vintage juniors/specials I've owned, none of them are quite as low as the one here).
• The bass stud is too far forwards, as Greco did them. Also the bridge and studs are chrome by the look of things - yes they might be swapped - but I'd put money on that bridge saying Japan under it and the studs being metric.
• I don't think for a second the fretboard is Braz as it should be.
• Pickguard is very dark and not the same material as vintage Juniors.
• Pickup isn't vintage, neither are the pots, or the jack plate - again they could be swapped out but at this point how many red flags does a person need?
• EDIT: and the body is very rounded over (although mine is much less, more like a '58).

My own one has been 'Gibson'd' (before i bought it) and since then I've put some vintage parts on it that I had lying around. It's a killer guitar - lightweight, resonant and sounds great, it holds its own against my 1959 Les Paul Special although it obviously feels very different due to the poly finish.

You could easily mistake it for a refinished vintage Gibson if you didn't really know what you were looking at. Especially if you thought you were getting a great deal...
 
Last edited:

none2low

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
557
Reaction score
569
Great input and very possibly true. For the sake of the buyer, I really hope we are all wrong and that it actually is a highly modified '59 Jr.

I will say my old Burny rock n roll Jr was a killer guitar and easily held it's own against my 50's Jr. I imagine it would have been even closer had I dropped a vintage P90 in there.
 


Latest Threads



Top