Collectors Choice aging

andersozzy

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2008
Messages
93
Reaction score
110
Is the aging of the Collectors Choice gibson aged by Tom Murphy?

Anders
 

Torshalla

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
154
Reaction score
299
I guess not all models do... but some do. Which ones are you after?
 

andersozzy

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2008
Messages
93
Reaction score
110
It is this one I Bought:
 

andersozzy

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2008
Messages
93
Reaction score
110
Thanks, for the pictures,
No I can´t se any TM "mark" there
So I guess it is not aged by him
 

Torshalla

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
154
Reaction score
299
I am not sure it means he did not age it himself... (not sure he marks them all) but i understood that if the mark is there it is a sign that he did it...
 

framos

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
1,036
Reaction score
887
... however its the absence is not an indication that he did not. I've had ones with and without the "mark".
 

Clint

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2013
Messages
174
Reaction score
176
I was not aware that any of the CC series were aged by TM. If they were, it would have been indicated on the COA and priced accordingly.
 

strat1701

El Diablo Cazador De Hombres
Joined
Sep 26, 2011
Messages
6,417
Reaction score
8,027
They said CC2 was supposedly aged by TM, as was CC1 IIRC. There was no 'TM' mark on my CC2, but there was the' 'TM' on my S/A JP 59. The only other known Murhy aged artist guitar I owned which did NOT have the 'TM' was Page #1, and I don't think the aged PG had it either, but I never owned that one, but id play an aged one once.

Wether or not Murphy did indeed age CC2, I dunno, it's aging 'feels' different than the latter CC aged guitars so maybe he did, or maybe the CS actually took more care with the aging process, but then when HJ made em crank out aged CC models ever month, something was bound to suffer......

I seem to recall Ed King saying his CC16 model at the time woul dbe agd by TM, but that was pretty much misinformation. CC7, 8, 15, 16 were all aged models that I've had and probably the second best aging job was CC8 and CC7, those felt 'legit' 15, 16 those felt very contrived. YMMV
 

moreles

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2011
Messages
4,430
Reaction score
3,140
The "aged by Tom Murphy" phrasing is commonplace, so no offense intended, but the more accurate verbiage is either "fake aged by Tom Murphy" or "age faked by Tom Murphy" becuase what is being done is absolutely not an aging process. Age is the passage of time. Cosmetic and other effects are not aging. I'm not arguing whether the approach is good or not, as that's totally free personal preference, but the lingo creates a phenomenally wrong false equivalence.
 

strat1701

El Diablo Cazador De Hombres
Joined
Sep 26, 2011
Messages
6,417
Reaction score
8,027
well that's really nitpicking it isn't it :rolleyes: we all know it's contrived no matter what but we can all agree the FAKE aging by Murphy is better than the FAKE aging that is done in-house.
 

mudface

Boo Bee
Premium Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2016
Messages
9,687
Reaction score
29,756
well that's really nitpicking it isn't it :rolleyes: we all know it's contrived no matter what but we can all agree the FAKE aging by Murphy is better than the FAKE aging that is done in-house.
I wouldn’t entirely agree that Murphy is better in all cases..... the in house process can be really good. Though as with all things Gibson there are a few that don’t meet the mark. In particular with the CC models, there are a large number of them,.... as few as a 150 aged models of each run.... out of 50 more or less models.... there are gonna be more than a few less than great that were done in house.

Murphy has not produced that many himself..... therefore more artistic attention can be given to each one.

Just my observation.
 

mudface

Boo Bee
Premium Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2016
Messages
9,687
Reaction score
29,756
My CC28 a 2014 R8 Montrose STP burst.
8E45B4A4-DA3D-4926-B47A-895D5C137E40.jpeg

4B6C03D3-E9B4-4D36-B95E-C4A2E1927A90.jpeg

83FFE8E4-D587-4E20-BA45-89ED3E8C7761.jpeg

A9AAD907-A8B8-4238-AE8F-264CD9FBA292.jpeg
CA0977C0-A695-4D59-8BDD-342AEFB72D5D.jpeg

45D82F5C-A975-48EB-9CF8-0C06E949DB8D.jpeg

F2CEA9E4-956F-481D-8462-0FE4EAE14021.jpeg

FF6FB8C4-7558-455A-ACE2-0BAEF6660461.jpeg

83114DD3-C163-4D6D-A7C7-A0B782B22764.jpeg

Outside of the chips,dings,buckle rash,.. and neck wear.... all the “checking” is subtle and is only really visible at certain angles and lighting.

It may not be truly convincing to the expert vintage guitar handler and it’s not supposed to,.... it does pull off the replica look of a real existing instrument. Which is the point of the CC models.
 
Last edited:

L96A1

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2012
Messages
582
Reaction score
659
I hate the way those headstocks are aged.
 


Latest Threads



Top