Possible fake ‘1958’ Les Paul Goldtop on eBay?

WezV

idiotwindow said:

WezV said:

I really don't think I understand this idea that you have to supply less information on more expensive items.  Surely the vagueness doesn't help when originality is in question???

Probably not – and I agree with your other point that the chequered history is the interesting aspect of guitars like this – but my take on the eBay listing is that it it not meant to be the means by which the sale is actually going to be made but more a listing to flush out potential interested parties. These people will almost certainly be very experienced buyers of vintage guitars and questions of originality and other details will be part of any future discussion.

one things clear, given limited information, we will speculate

riffpowers

I have a friend who has a 1952 gold top that was converted to a TOM and paf’s by Gibson in 1960.
it didn’t look like this one , the wear looks totally different 

PhilKing

There are a couple of things that make me think it could be a conversion from an older model.  The back has very square shoulders, which was more typical on the earlier models, and also it's unusual for a 58 goldtop not to have a dark back.

fretfinder

CMW335 said: Looks like he may have been banned under another username Superguitariobros but could be a different user jonny vs johnny??

https://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/comment/2662117/#Comment_2662117

The forum user jonnysixstring has been banned but not the user xjonnysixstring. Hence why I couldn’t find the original thread initially - I was searching for the wrong jonny!

idiotwindow said:

Interesting how enthusiastic everyone was in the original thread but now that the guitar is up for sale on eBay, everyone is piling in with doubts about authenticity and mocking the "relic" job.

Not quite everyone, I thought at the time that the thread was an April Fool posted a day early and commented accordingly. 

Seziertisch

WezV said:

I really don't think I understand this idea that you have to supply less information on more expensive items.  Surely the vagueness doesn't help when originality is in question???

What we do know from the original thread is that most parts have been replaced, so that's not really in question.  Johnny did say the finish was original, but its possible he has learned differently since as there is no mention of this in the listing

I would have presumed that the EBay listing was just a way of generally advertising that it was for sale,

It is extremely unlikely that anyone buying an instrument at that price point wouldn’t go to view/play it in person and/or have it evaluated by an independent expert.

WezV

Seziertisch said:

WezV said:

I really don't think I understand this idea that you have to supply less information on more expensive items.  Surely the vagueness doesn't help when originality is in question???

What we do know from the original thread is that most parts have been replaced, so that's not really in question.  Johnny did say the finish was original, but its possible he has learned differently since as there is no mention of this in the listing

I would have presumed that the EBay listing was just a way of generally advertising that it was for sale,

It is extremely unlikely that anyone buying an instrument at that price point wouldn’t go to view/play it in person and/or have it evaluated by an independent expert.

apparently a lot of you think that's a reasonable way to sell a vintage guitar with "issues".   Fair enough.  

In most other walks of life you would expect the info given in an ad to increase with the sale price... most would expect a lot more pics and info for a £10M house sale than a £100k one.

stonevibe

Let's hope he listed it on £1 fees deal, or eBay will butt rape him if it sells!

jimmyguitar

I think most people were being polite on the NGD thread, I saw it when it was for sale from the guy he bought it from and was initially interested but passed when I discovered who he was (dodgy history of fake and mis-advertised guitars) and after seeing better pics. I wish Johnny all the best selling it as it looks like he is being forthcoming to interested bidders albeit behind closed doors. 

DrCornelius

Isn’t Johnnyixstring the guitar depot bloke or am I slandering him massively there ?

fretfinder

The seller has now said on Facebook that it’s a 1958 guitar in wood alone, but with lots of period correct parts that were probably not on the original guitar.
Quite how he’ll prove that it’s a 1958 husk underneath all that paint, dirt and crud that’s been deliberately applied to make it look old, I’m not sure.
But detailed pics are only available to prospective buyers...

Hattigol

I wonder why he didn't list it on here.

HarrySeven

Hattigol said:

I wonder why he didn't list it on here.

FYI

October 31 Flag

Roland said:

There are a number of people who treat the forum as a cheap version of ebay, and don’t contribute much else. A subset of these break the Classified rules. The first time they get a written reminder. The second time Classified access is removed until they acknowledge they they’ll play by the rules. Patience runs out if they do it repeatedly, and access is removed permanently. We don’t have to ban them because they don’t come back. Johnnysixstring threw his toys out of the pram at step two.

Generally there are three toys:
1. I’m an important member of this forum.
2. The moderators are power crazed Nazis.
3. The forum is going to the dogs.

Johnnysixstring scored 3 out of 3. 

... and now banned for trying to set up duplicate accounts.

Sassafras

Sounds to me like he's trying to make a deal outside of ebay.

ICBM

fretfinder said:

Quite how he’ll prove that it’s a 1958 husk underneath all that paint, dirt and crud that’s been deliberately applied to make it look old, I’m not sure.
But detailed pics are only available to prospective buyers...

If the pickup routs are definitely original for humbuckers and it's a 4-piece top or with an offset centre seam, then it's a '57 or '58 - assuming it is actually original.

The pictures also seem to have mysteriously disappeared from the original thread.

CMW335

HarrySeven said:

Hattigol said:

I wonder why he didn't list it on here.

FYI

October 31 Flag

Roland said:

There are a number of people who treat the forum as a cheap version of ebay, and don’t contribute much else. A subset of these break the Classified rules. The first time they get a written reminder. The second time Classified access is removed until they acknowledge they they’ll play by the rules. Patience runs out if they do it repeatedly, and access is removed permanently. We don’t have to ban them because they don’t come back. Johnnysixstring threw his toys out of the pram at step two.

Generally there are three toys:
1. I’m an important member of this forum.
2. The moderators are power crazed Nazis.
3. The forum is going to the dogs.

Johnnysixstring scored 3 out of 3. 

... and now banned for trying to set up duplicate accounts.

Think it’s same guy but maybe admin can clarify as there is a johnnysixstring and a jonnysixstring the latter of which had the NGD thread. I think Roland meant jonnysixstring in the above. 

MikeS

Just from the first photo alone, there are too many razor sharp edges on the headstock and the fretboard is too flat and crisp.

The guitar is meant to be 62 years old. I own a '58 LPJ and couldn't to save my life show a razor sharp edge or any part of the rosewood fretboard that's not dimpled and bumpy.

fretfinder

More pics. 

https://i.imgur.com/UWr9skf.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/tmN3kqA.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/cjQLgq6.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/gdLG4LT.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/CnXCFVv.jpg

Note the small holes round the underside of the pickups. Don’t think PAFs have that feature. 

https://i.imgur.com/Vyzxxqu.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/bH6DEn8.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/4LrGb42.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/T2GJWlq.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/mkrMLtB.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/XYzU4Bt.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/y5l37Q0.jpg

Adey

WezV said:

Seziertisch said:

WezV said:

I really don't think I understand this idea that you have to supply less information on more expensive items.  Surely the vagueness doesn't help when originality is in question???

What we do know from the original thread is that most parts have been replaced, so that's not really in question.  Johnny did say the finish was original, but its possible he has learned differently since as there is no mention of this in the listing

I would have presumed that the EBay listing was just a way of generally advertising that it was for sale,

It is extremely unlikely that anyone buying an instrument at that price point wouldn’t go to view/play it in person and/or have it evaluated by an independent expert.

apparently a lot of you think that's a reasonable way to sell a vintage guitar with "issues".   Fair enough.  

In most other walks of life you would expect the info given in an ad to increase with the sale price... most would expect a lot more pics and info for a £10M house sale than a £100k one.

If you were buying a house you'd probably pay an expert to have a proper look at it and not rely on the Estaye Agent's Pics,no matter how many there were.

Joey2014

Seller's 'other items' include a p90 from a late-'68 GT conversion. hmm...

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1960s-Gibson-Les-Paul-P90-Soapbar-Original-Vintage/184277417859?hash=item2ae7ca3f83:g:y~4AAOSwBpterry0

TeleMaster

The NGD thread was all wow great congrats. This thread is ‘it’s iffy’. Lol.