NVGD: 1965 Gibson SG Standard (issues project)

[kharrison]

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

I have heard from others that as you get into the later 60's, the depth of the neck gets chunkier thus making the narrow nut a little more comfortable. My 65 fits very nicely in my hands and to me very comfortable, but I have small hands. Again, IMHO I think the narrow nut is blown out of proportion and is not as big of deal as some say.

 

[Kevin James]

Sweet! Just scored a correct input jack for it for $19.00.

It came out of a 67 SG and looks exactly like what I have in pics of 65 cavity's. Also happens to look exactly like the one in my 67 Special.

 

[trevorus]

IMHO get some nylon saddles for the bridge. Pretty sure it came that way and they look cool

I've only seen those on Asian built copies like Hohners. In fact, I have a metric bridge/tailpiece in the parts bin with nylon saddles.

 

[kharrison]

I've only seen those on Asian built copies like Hohners. In fact, I have a metric bridge/tailpiece in the parts bin with nylon saddles.

Look harder, they were on most ABR's from late '62 through '66

Vintage Guitars Info - Gibson collecting vintage gibson guitars

 

[Kevin James]

Well, this is kind of strange but I restrung her tonight and set her up for 9's (what I always use) and it kinda changed the whole feel of the guitar.... but for the better! Don't know how thats even possible but I swear its just more comfortable now and the narrow nut isn't bothering me at all now.

Oh... and I have officially named her Ruby

 

[Lyle Caldwell]

Kevin,

Congrats!

BTW I used to work at a vintage guitar store on and off from '88 to '92 (back when more '50s and '60s guitars came through) and the whole concept of a "neck pickup" and a "bridge pickup" didn't seem to be in Gibson's vocabulary back then. I've played a lot of guitars with original PAFs and patent #s where the neck was much hotter than the bridge.

I've also come across a few PAFs and early patent #s that were MUCH hotter than what we consider "PAF" output today. A '61 ES-335 I got a chance to play had more output than just about any guitar I've ever encountered - but only in the neck position.

 

[mapleflame]

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.

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

I agree, not enough to warrant any fixing. Thanks for posting the pics.

 

[hexfactor]

this is a question for the OP, is there any way you could take some details of the bridge and the under side? maybe on your next string change? I just picked up a 65 sg I am trying to resture, it has a number of issues, no pickups, tuners are not original, its been refinished, no bridge, the the vibrola tailpiece cover is missing, but the wood itself is excellent for what it is. picked it up for 1400, this will be a long term project so your help will mean a lot! And to anyone else, are there any differences in the bridges used on these or was it just one?

 

[Kevin James]

this is a question for the OP, is there any way you could take some details of the bridge and the under side? maybe on your next string change? I just picked up a 65 sg I am trying to resture, it has a number of issues, no pickups, tuners are not original, its been refinished, no bridge, the the vibrola tailpiece cover is missing, but the wood itself is excellent for what it is. picked it up for 1400, this will be a long term project so your help will mean a lot! And to anyone else, are there any differences in the bridges used on these or was it just one?

I generally like to change strings one at a time to keep tension on the neck. I'm not a fan of removing all the strings at once. Thats going to make it impossible to get a picture of the under side of the bridge though.

But 65 is a transitional year so I would really need more info on YOUR guitar to say with certainty what parts should be on it. Can you send me a PM with some pictures of your guitar? If you can then it will give me a better idea and I'd be more than happy to help you.

 

[Core]

Beautiful man!

 

[KRaZeE]

Bought too many guitars in the last 4 months... this is it for a while. NO MORE LOL

So...how'd that work out for you?

 

[Kevin James]

So...how'd that work out for you?

Depends how you look at it. Clearly I was wrong and that was NOT it because I still bought 2 more. But all's well that ends well

 

[Dolebludger]

Back to the initial post, the OP expresses concern that his 65 SG has non-stock Grover tuners instead of the stock Klusons. First, Klusons for this guitar can be ordered from RS Guitar Works. They can be had in either new or "worn" finishes. I ordered the worn models when the original tuning tuning keys crystalized, shrunk, and started breaking on my 62 SG. They were so "worn" that I had to polish off the gunk to make them look like the rest of the hardware on my guitar.

I put replacement original tuners on my guitar due to it being vintage. But from a playing perspective, 'gotta tell you that I greatly prefer Grovers. To me they tune smoother. And if they start to slip, there is a little screw at the end of each key that can be tightened to solve the problem. One reason I don't play the 62 SG more than I do is that I just don't like the tuners. So the OP may want to play his guitar a while before getting the repro vintage tuners, and maybe get them only when he wants to sell.

 

[guitarbob123]

What happened to that DiMarzio SuperD?
Did you figure out how old it is?

 

[Kevin James]

Back to the initial post, the OP expresses concern that his 65 SG has non-stock Grover tuners instead of the stock Klusons. First, Klusons for this guitar can be ordered from RS Guitar Works. They can be had in either new or "worn" finishes. I ordered the worn models when the original tuning tuning keys crystalized, shrunk, and started breaking on my 62 SG. They were so "worn" that I had to polish off the gunk to make them look like the rest of the hardware on my guitar.

I put replacement original tuners on my guitar due to it being vintage. But from a playing perspective, 'gotta tell you that I greatly prefer Grovers. To me they tune smoother. And if they start to slip, there is a little screw at the end of each key that can be tightened to solve the problem. One reason I don't play the 62 SG more than I do is that I just don't like the tuners. So the OP may want to play his guitar a while before getting the repro vintage tuners, and maybe get them only when he wants to sell.

I wouldn't say I'm "concerned" about the Grovers. Quite the contrary. I prefer them and since the damage was already done I have no intention on puting Kluson's back on.

Put it this way, on a 100% original no issues vintage SG I would not switch the original tuners to Grovers, but if someone else already switched them and the price of the guitar took that in to consideration then why switch back? The damage to the value can never be reversed and the Grovers are much better functionaly anyways so it would be foolish to switch back IMO.

 

[Kevin James]

What happened to that DiMarzio SuperD?
Did you figure out how old it is?

The DiMarzio Super Distortion was pulled out and a stock Patent Number (T-top) was put back in.

I still have the DiMarzio laying around. It old.... I'd guess one of the first Super D's but I can't say that with 100% certainty.

Some day I plan to build a early 80's Charvel style super strat with 1 HB, a volume control and a Floyd and NOTHING else. I'll probably put it in that.

 

[blues_man_zep]

Nice one