NVGD: 1965 Gibson SG Standard (issues project)

Kevin James

V.I.P. Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
1,516
Reaction score
1,170
Scored a 65 SG Standard this week that has a couple issues. Bought too many guitars in the last 4 months... this is it for a while. NO MORE LOL

Bought it from Elderly Instruments this last Tuesday. Recieved it Thursday night but was instructed by them not to open it for 24 Hours in order to let it acclimate to the warmer climate here. I actually waited till Saturday morning just to be safe. I decided to wait on posting the NVGD thread until after the guitar had been checked out and also after I had purchased the needed parts to make her whole again (which I did tonight).

The main issues are it had grovers installed and the bridge pickup was changed out to a DiMarzio Super Distortion many years ago (this DiMarzio is OLD). The pickup rings are also not correct. Tonight I purchased a gibson patent sticker pickup that was pulled straight out of another 65 SG standard, and it includes the neck ring. I bought a mint condition late 60's black flat bottom M8 bridge ring yesterday so the pickup and mounting ring issues are solved already.

I brought the guitar to 4 seperate luthiers yesterday to have it checked. The concensus was that the body has no cracks breaks or repairs and is excellent condition as advertised. The finish was also determined by all to be original with no overspray or touch ups anywhere (it black light tested PERFECTLY). All hardware and electronics were found to be original other than the Grovers and DiMarzio. One of the 4 luthiers had an issue with the input jack (as did I) and while he wasn't totally sure he said that MIGHT not be original, another of his employees who he asked thought it was original so its 4 against 1 on that but who knows lol.

The minor issues are that neck binding on the treble side shrunk about 1 cm and has a little seperation in that area as well. One of the luthiers suspected the binding on that side had come completely off and was re-attached. Also one of the inlays has been damaged. neither of these have any effect on playability and all 4 thought the effect on the value was minor. They all also recomended leaving both issues alone so I will. The only other minor issue was the solder joint to the neck pickup appears to have been re-done which one luthier didn't even catch. The other 3 did.

We tested the neck pickup and found it to be a little hotter then expected at 7.8K. It led all to believe that the neck pickup probably blew out (or was pulled for no reason) and the replacement (the DiMarzio) was better suited for the bridge position and the stock pickup was moved to the neck position.

The only other thing isn't an issue, it just wasn't described correctly. The nut width was advertised as 1 11/16". Its not, which sucks cuz thats my preference. Its the narrower 1 9/16". That I have to admit I am disapointed in but it's still a beautiful guitar and a keeper for sure.

Once the patent sticker pickup and ring and the bridge ring I just bought are installed the guitar will be back to 100% stock parts with the exception of only the Grovers and the solder joints themselves.

And now for some pics! Some are from the Elderly ad itself cuz they did such a nice job on them, and some are from me.

30U-16662_front.jpg

30U-16662_body-front.jpg

30U-16662_back-detail-2.jpg

30U-16662_back-detail.jpg

30U-16662_heel.jpg

30U-16662_front-detail-3.jpg

30U-16662_front-detail.jpg

30U-16662_front-detail-2.jpg

30U-16662_headstock-front.jpg

30U-16662_headstock-back.jpg

P1220451.jpg

P1230452.jpg

P1230453.jpg

P1230454.jpg
 

diceman

V.I.P. Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
29,924
Reaction score
5,245
:applause: Looks great! I got myself a '67 ES335 from Elderly once upon a time - it was a nice transaction. Good people. It looks like you did very well, congrats! I'd love to see more pictures of the finish checking.
 

Kevin James

V.I.P. Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
1,516
Reaction score
1,170
:applause: Looks great! I got myself a '67 ES335 from Elderly once upon a time - it was a nice transaction. Good people. It looks like you did very well, congrats! I'd love to see more pictures of the finish checking.

That could be difficult. The checking doesn't show up very well in the photos and there isn't a ton of checking to begin with, it's pretty light.

Id say the area where the controls are has the most checking on the guitar but as you see it just doesn't show very well in the pics.

30U-16662_front-detail-2.jpg
 

Alvinfan

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
3,035
Reaction score
4,002
Congrats Kevin !! Beautiful guitar !!! You are on a roll at the moment :thumb: !
I like your elborate posts ! I have had 2 ´65 myself and actually liked the slim necks, since I have got small hands. Love those vintage SG´s !!!! Still got a ´68 standard to keep me happy.

Rock on and SGreetings from Denmark !!!
 

Kevin James

V.I.P. Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
1,516
Reaction score
1,170
Congrats Kevin !! Beautiful guitar !!! You are on a roll at the moment :thumb: !
I like your elborate posts ! I have had 2 ´65 myself and actually liked the slim necks, since I have got small hands. Love those vintage SG´s !!!! Still got a ´68 standard to keep me happy.

Rock on and SGreetings from Denmark !!!

Thanks man. Yeah its strange that all of a sudden I've had 3 vintage SG's come up in less than 4 months that were priced right. That roll is ending with this one though... We haven't even broke through January and I've spent my alotmemt for the year. I was going to buy a Phaez SIBLY amp and was just waiting on sound clips but thats going to have to wait now.

This neck is not bad, but it's definitely going to take some time to get used to it. It's obviously pretty narrow compared to the 1 11/16 but it also has a pretty aggressive taper in front to back thickness from the bottom up to the nut. Much diifferent then the 67 Special I have thats also 1 9/16. With time I will get used to it though, its worth it as she's a beauty.

Now I gott a come up with a name for her :)
 

nwobhm

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
3,242
Reaction score
362
Yeah, Nice one! I was expecting to see something with more issues and probably beat, by the title but, that's a nice one!!
 

Kevin James

V.I.P. Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
1,516
Reaction score
1,170
Yeah, Nice one! I was expecting to see something with more issues and probably beat, by the title but, that's a nice one!!

I hear ya. I list it as an issues guitar in the interest of full disclosure, because it can be put back to stock, but it can never again be considered an "unmolested" guitar. You can't unbreak original solder joints and the evidnece of Grovers will always be there etc.

That said though, the guitar is in beautiful shape and I am thrilled with it. Especially once the stock pickup goes back in. As luck would have it I found one that was originally in the exact same model/year guitar, a 65 SG standard AND its local in my city. Providing our schedules match up I should have it tonight, or tomorrow at the latest.
 

mapleflame

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2007
Messages
2,668
Reaction score
1,325
I hear ya. I list it as an issues guitar in the interest of full disclosure, because it can be put back to stock, but it can never again be considered an "unmolested" guitar. You can't unbreak original solder joints and the evidnece of Grovers will always be there etc.

That said though, the guitar is in beautiful shape and I am thrilled with it. Especially once the stock pickup goes back in. As luck would have it I found one that was originally in the exact same model/year guitar, a 65 SG standard AND its local in my city. Providing our schedules match up I should have it tonight, or tomorrow at the latest.

Do you have any pics of the binding area and the inlay. Great score as all else looks fantastic.
 

trevorus

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2010
Messages
157
Reaction score
3
That jack doesn't look original to me. I don't know what they were doing in 65, but those plastic box jacks look like the cheap ones you get at RadioHack. And the solder joint on it looks a bit sloppy for OEM.
 

Kevin James

V.I.P. Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
1,516
Reaction score
1,170
Do you have any pics of the binding area and the inlay. Great score as all else looks fantastic.

Neither of these issues afect playability at all, just asthetics. All 4 luthiers recomended leaving them as is.

Here is a shot of the inlay.
30U-16662_fretboard-1.jpg


Here are a couple of the binding. My camera sucks and its just really really hard to get a clean shot.
Bindingissuepic1.jpg

Bindingissuepic2.jpg
 

Kevin James

V.I.P. Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
1,516
Reaction score
1,170
That jack doesn't look original to me. I don't know what they were doing in 65, but those plastic box jacks look like the cheap ones you get at RadioHack. And the solder joint on it looks a bit sloppy for OEM.

I agree with you 100%. They did use a black plastic jack in 65 on the later cavity style like this one and my 67 has one as well however it does not look exactly like this one. The 67 does look exactly like the others I have seen. I also agree the solder job looks to sloppy on it as well.

Either way, the input jack isn't a big deal IMO, especially with the other issues the guitar already has.
 

kharrison

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
106
Reaction score
44
Congrats on a great guitar! However the narrow nut is no small issue to some. The narrow nut on these is considerably less price wise that the 1 11/16th nut. I hope Elderly gave you some money back or you paid the going rate for the narrow nut SG. I personally do not mind the narrow nut, my 65 330 has one, but some do. I'm actually surprised a dealer of this calibre made such a mistake representing a guitar. :cool:
 

BurstOrBust

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
323
Reaction score
111
Kevin . . you and I are riding the same boat. This past December through now, I've come to own a '64 SG Special, a '71 SG Standard, a '68 SG Standard and a '61 LP/SG with original PAFs. All but the '64 Special were at relative bargains, especially the '61 LP/SG. No more guitars for me this year. (Yeah, right).

Thanks man. Yeah its strange that all of a sudden I've had 3 vintage SG's come up in less than 4 months that were priced right. That roll is ending with this one though... We haven't even broke through January and I've spent my alotmemt for the year. I was going to buy a Phaez SIBLY amp and was just waiting on sound clips but thats going to have to wait now.
 

kharrison

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
106
Reaction score
44
I hear ya. I list it as an issues guitar in the interest of full disclosure, because it can be put back to stock, but it can never again be considered an "unmolested" guitar. You can't unbreak original solder joints and the evidnece of Grovers will always be there etc.

That said though, the guitar is in beautiful shape and I am thrilled with it. Especially once the stock pickup goes back in. As luck would have it I found one that was originally in the exact same model/year guitar, a 65 SG standard AND its local in my city. Providing our schedules match up I should have it tonight, or tomorrow at the latest.

There is really no way to date a pickup exactly, especially a transition year like 65..... UNLESS the seller bought the guitar new and pulled the pup out himself (and if so I would question why it was pulled) A chrome covered Pat# with phillips screws could go up to the late 60's and could also be a t top. Not a bad thing but again, the price for a non t top Pat# would be more than a t top. Just FYI. Also there really is no difference tone wise IMHO from a late Pat# and and early t top, they both have the poly wire.
 

Kevin James

V.I.P. Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
1,516
Reaction score
1,170
Congrats on a great guitar! However the narrow nut is no small issue to some. The narrow nut on these is considerably less price wise that the 1 11/16th nut. I hope Elderly gave you some money back or you paid the going rate for the narrow nut SG. I personally do not mind the narrow nut, my 65 330 has one, but some do. I'm actually surprised a dealer of this calibre made such a mistake representing a guitar. :cool:

I will just say this, the price was definitely right on this. Based on what I paid, the nut width doesn't really change that. However, I did contact them today and worked out a deal for a small price reduction.
 

Kevin James

V.I.P. Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
1,516
Reaction score
1,170
There is really no way to date a pickup exactly, especially a transition year like 65..... UNLESS the seller bought the guitar new and pulled the pup out himself (and if so I would question why it was pulled) A chrome covered Pat# with phillips screws could go up to the late 60's and could also be a t top. Not a bad thing but again, the price for a non t top Pat# would be more than a t top. Just FYI. Also there really is no difference tone wise IMHO from a late Pat# and and early t top, they both have the poly wire.

True, but the features look correct, the cover has never been off and the price was right on the pickup as well. The seller had a 65 SG that according to him the solder joints had never been touched. The guitar suffered some damage that he felt was not repairable and he decided to part it out.

To be honest, while both version 1 and version 2 patent sticker pickups were used in 65 I have gone into this from the get go with the asumption that the original in the guitar is a version 2 and the puckup I just bought is also a version 2, so both T buckers. The price paid for the pickup was in line with a T bucker,not a version 1 pat sticker.

Also, is there a possibility its not a 65 pickup? Sure. Is it the correct spec? Yes. And, the bottom line is I am satisfied with the price paid on both the guitar and the pickup and I have no plans on selling the guitar any time soon if at all. So..... all is good :D
 

kharrison

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
106
Reaction score
44
True, but the features look correct, the cover has never been off and the price was right on the pickup as well. The seller had a 65 SG that according to him the solder joints had never been touched. The guitar suffered some damage that he felt was not repairable and he decided to part it out.

To be honest, while both version 1 and version 2 patent sticker pickups were used in 65 I have gone into this from the get go with the asumption that the original in the guitar is a version 2 and the puckup I just bought is also a version 2, so both T buckers. The price paid for the pickup was in line with a T bucker,not a version 1 pat sticker.

Also, is there a possibility its not a 65 pickup? Sure. Is it the correct spec? Yes. And, the bottom line is I am satisfied with the price paid on both the guitar and the pickup and I have no plans on selling the guitar any time soon if at all. So..... all is good :D

That is great Kevin....enjoy. I have been burned many times on misrepresented guitars and parts so I have spent way too much time on the minutia of this stuff. I unfortunately don't trust anyone in dealing with vintage guitars, thus my suspicion.

I do not mind the narrow nut width. It does take time getting use to if you play the wider variety for a long time, but I have been able to get use to it and like it fairly quickly. It also provides an opportunity to get a great vintage Gibson at a reasonable price.
 

Kevin James

V.I.P. Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
1,516
Reaction score
1,170
That is great Kevin....enjoy. I have been burned many times on misrepresented guitars and parts so I have spent way too much time on the minutia of this stuff. I unfortunately don't trust anyone in dealing with vintage guitars, thus my suspicion.

I do not mind the narrow nut width. It does take time getting use to if you play the wider variety for a long time, but I have been able to get use to it and like it fairly quickly. It also provides an opportunity to get a great vintage Gibson at a reasonable price.

I hear ya, and I'm the same way. When I buy something like this, I make sure prices are in line with the worst case scenerio at MOST. If they aren't I don't buy. Simple as that. This was the same case.

I have a couple other guitars with the 1 9/16 nut, a 67 SG Special and a 75 Flying V. It's not bad, just not what I expected on this one.
 

kharrison

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
106
Reaction score
44
IMHO get some nylon saddles for the bridge. Pretty sure it came that way and they look cool :dude:
 

Latest Threads



Top