Buying a Les Paul with a broken headstock

ICBM

WezV said:

one of my recent repairs broke because it left the factory wrong, with far too much wood removed from behind the truss rod.  I corrected the factory error by backstrapping and adding much needed thickness to the weak area

I had to go a little darker to get a finish blend I was happy with, but I would argue this is a lot more "correct" than the stupidly carved transition it left the factory with

the owner accepts its worth less than a pristine example, but happy he has a guitar he can reliably gig with

That one is just ridiculously thin behind the truss rod cavity. I’ve seen many like it - clearly due to over-enthusiastic use of the belt-sander. Gibsons like this are just an accident waiting to happen - sometimes they pick the grain direction incorrectly too, so it actually curves *forwards* there. If you get both together the headstock can literally just snap off for no reason other than its own inertia and the string tension.

Most 50s ones had a significant ‘flare’ there, like the result after your backstrapping - I had a ‘57 Junior like that, where the grain direction also followed the carve, and despite the end of the head looking like it had been used to dig roads with, it had never broken. I gigged it with no fear.

WezV

ICBM said:

Most 50s ones had a significant ‘flare’ there, like the result after your backstrapping - I had a ‘57 Junior like that, where the grain direction also followed the carve, and despite the end of the head looking like it had been used to dig roads with, it had never broken. I gigged it with no fear.

yeah, the owner was worried he would feel the difference or it would look like a volute. I had to show him some vintage examples to see the different carving style. 

The extra thickness is mostly behind the nut and gone by halfway to the 1st fret.  Makes a massive difference but can't be felt at all when playing

DrumBob

If a broken headstock is properly repaired by a qualified luthier, I wouldn't hesitate, as long as the final price you pay is commensurate with the fact that it's been repaired. Usually, a headstock break devalues a guitar by 40-50%.

My favorite Rickenbacker 330-12 took a dive off its stand on a gig a few years ago and sustained a 3" crack on the left side of the headstock. I played it during the second set and it was OK. In the dim light of the bar, I couldn't tell if it was cracked or not, but on close inspection at home, I saw it was. I took it to the best luthier I know, who was able to open the crack up and got it fixed. I realize though that if I ever sell the guitar, it'll be worth less than the going rate. No plans to sell it though. 

robdynamite

ICBM said:

matone said:

Agreed,but it is still a badly damaged guitar that has been repaired ! You can dress it up anyway people like but it can`t be totally correct...ever.

Yes it can.

https://felineguitars.com/pages/judas-priest-les-paul-rebuild

Admittedly that's a lot more work than anyone would do to repair a first headstock break, but still... absolutely correct and better than it ever was when it left Gibson.

That is incredible!

matone

Excellent yes,but still a repair of a broken guitar and don`t let anyone kid you otherwise ! As a previous poster said ..40-50 % of original value !

warhead

I've bought myself an LP with a repaired headstock around 8 years ago. It plays like butter and sounds absolutely huge and monstrous. I've played countless gigs and full tours around European continent with it, the thing never went out of tune. It killed it in the studio too. 
So I'd say it is not just "right", it is excelling in performance and reliability.

ICBM

matone said:

Excellent yes,but still a repair of a broken guitar and don`t let anyone kid you otherwise ! As a previous poster said ..40-50 % of original value !

That’s really a bit excessive, even if you mean 40% off rather than 40% of the value.

There are plenty of people who aren’t scared of a properly done repair and will happily buy it with a much smaller discount. OK the market is slightly smaller and you have to take that into account, but the market for Gibsons in general is huge and you don’t have to sell to the first buyer. Breaks are so common on them and the proper repair method well known, that you can often even choose one on purpose.

More difficult with something where breaks are much rarer or most buyers want pristine examples, eg PRS.

SteveRobinson

robdynamite said:

So I've been hunting for a custom for some time now and I've noticed one for sale that is brand new that had it's headstock broken (i'm guessing on it's journey to the retailers) and then repaired professionally with a hefty discount. Question is, would you pull the trigger and buy it or would you try and find a mint second hand example and pay a bit more?

Well, have you bought it yet? 

AlbertC

ICBM said:

matone said:

Agreed,but it is still a badly damaged guitar that has been repaired ! You can dress it up anyway people like but it can`t be totally correct...ever.

Yes it can.

https://felineguitars.com/pages/judas-priest-les-paul-rebuild

Impressive stuff.
I love the photo and commentary too

"Richie was pleased as punch to have his faithful old LP back..."

If that's him "as pleased as punch", I wonder what he looks like when he's grumpy?

therealting

I think it was a Tim Pierce video (not sure, could be Tone Talk) where he said Les Pauls, if repaired correctly, always seem to sound better after a headstock repair. 

tony99

therealting said:

I think it was a Tim Pierce video (not sure, could be Tone Talk) where he said Les Pauls, if repaired correctly, always seem to sound better after a headstock repair. 

how long before the murphy lab treatment starts including a repaired borken headstock as part of the package?