Out of the freaking lue!

p90fool

Brio said:

Agreed. Probably in the £7K range BUT he is insistant about getting it in '63 and he's no fool and it was when he turned 21. Kind of date you'd remember. I'm confused, but its not mine I just get to play it now and then. And it does sound incredible,

I had a friend who insisted she'd seen Jimi Hendrix at the Isle of Wight in 1971, it must have been then because that was the year her sister went to uni. 

I was only five when Hendrix died in September 1970 so got shouted down with "How would you know, you weren't there?"

Same issue with this Telecaster, and something which often makes me pause when historians interview elderly people for the "facts" from eye witnesses. 

merlin

He's old and may have created the memory from bits of memory. Apparently the mind recreates every time we remember something. We're actually remembering the memory, not the thing happening itself. So I think there's some room for manoeuvre. 

The guitar according to the Fender serial database was made in 1966. He could have remembered something else about his birthday and fused the two together. Either that or he "swapped" it with a mate's and this isn't actually the guitar he bought when he was 21. 

Either way, there must be some great stories. And I'm sure it's a lovely guitar! 

Voxman

Looks lovely but as already said,  its a1966 from that serial number. Pots and neck numbers should corroborate but whilst the neck number can possibly be up to a year out either way, it can't be a '63. 

Sync

You see, that is properly and legitimately roadworn.

Despite age and likely use, the level of wear and is nothing like often portrayed on 'roadworn' not just lightly aged/reliced guitars.

So many pre-reliced guitars are not reflective of musician's use rather just damage and abuse.

Be great if you could take the neck off.

Looks stunning though and a tele I would love to own. 

jdgm

Sync said:

You see, that is properly and legitimately roadworn.

Despite age and likely use, the level of wear and is nothing like often portrayed on 'roadworn' not just lightly aged/reliced guitars.

So many pre-reliced guitars are not reflective of musician's use rather just damage and abuse.

Couldn't agree more. Wis'd.

Voxman

jdgm said:

Sync said:

You see, that is properly and legitimately roadworn.

Despite age and likely use, the level of wear and is nothing like often portrayed on 'roadworn' not just lightly aged/reliced guitars.

So many pre-reliced guitars are not reflective of musician's use rather just damage and abuse.

Couldn't agree more. Wis'd.

Which is exactly why I hate heavy relics that look like a beat up abused guitar, and never will understand why people go for these. 

Wazmeister

Voxman said:

jdgm said:

Sync said:

You see, that is properly and legitimately roadworn.

Despite age and likely use, the level of wear and is nothing like often portrayed on 'roadworn' not just lightly aged/reliced guitars.

So many pre-reliced guitars are not reflective of musician's use rather just damage and abuse.

Couldn't agree more. Wis'd.

Which is exactly why I hate heavy relics that look like a beat up abused guitar, and never will understand why people go for these. 

Imho, this is a bit of a myth too...

Lots of olders guitars have this slight wear, but a look into real used and played guitar show they are indeed heavy relics. A good look in the Blackguard Tele book, for example, reveals this.

i often think that mint, unplayed old vintage guitars are unplayed for a reason; maybe they didnt play that well. I remember talking with @octatonic about this.

Anyway, back to this story... early or late 60s, it is still a great story and find.

Sync

@Wazmeister ;;

Most musicians look after their instruments. Even with regular use over a long period, guitar wear is typically a per this tele. 

No different to orchestral instruments, eg string & woodwind where you just don't see the level of wear despite often being played every day for hours, carted all over the place and having relatively limited surface treatments for protection. 

When you find heavy roadworn and reliced guitars from touring/gigging this is more relective of how they have been treated not how they would naturally wear.

Those beat up old guitars covered in cigarette burns, used as a shield to fend off flying bottles and glasses or even to persuade the unruly stage invaders back down; come with great legacy, history and backstory. Whilst they do exist and you can replicate the look, you can't replicate the journey. 

joetele

You...are going to give it back to him, right? 

Brio

Sadly yes. And I don't really like Teles but this does feel OK (different to what I usually play) and has one really killer sound. 

RonnieHotdogs

Could it be a 61 or 63 and he changed the neck later and forgot? 

PhilKing

If he did he had to change the neckplate too.  The F plates didn't come in until the mid-60's.