Clive Brown refin '52 Tele

fretfinder

Just saw this on eBay. Could it actually be a '52 Tele, or is that over-optimistic salesmanship?

Fender 1952 Telecaster Blackguard Clive Brown Refinish (Relic, Cunetto, Nacho)

RandallFlagg

I don't know enough to make an assessment about authenticity but the frets are larger than an original 52 Tele and larger than an American Vintage reissue but it sure does look good.

Iamnobody

I wouldn't pay much for it - it needs a good clean and is fairly dinged and scratched. In fact it could do with a refin...

ICBM

It's a '52 Tele (®), not a 1952 Tele. Important difference.

They've been made for well over 20 years now.

There is a giveaway - I'll be interested to see if anyone else knows what it is . The Custom Shop Relics are correct to the originals, so it isn't one of those either. Clue: it's a part of the guitar which is not often photographed, but there are a couple of examples online which you can find.

proggy

ICBM said:

It's a '52 Tele (®), not a 1952 Tele. Important difference.

They've been made for well over 20 years now.

There is a giveaway - I'll be interested to see if anyone else knows what it is . The Custom Shop Relics are correct to the originals, so it isn't one of those either. Clue: it's a part of the guitar which is not often photographed, but there are a couple of examples online which you can find.

Is it something to do with the inlay dots?

CloudNine

Is it anything to with the neck pocket lip, or lack thereof? I know the Nocasters have that lip where it looks as though it does not fit very well. Not sure of that was specific to Nocasters or present on other 50's Tele's.

monoamine

I think it's either the routing channel in the body between the control and pickup cavities, or the end plug of mahognay in the skunk stripe on the neck. Neither look right to me but can't pin it down to why.

RandallFlagg

Router hump? original have it as do AVs and some Custom Shop

Sassafras

Isn't the date normally rubber stamped on the heel?

stickyfiddle

It doesn't look to have the slight flattening of the body curve at the output jack that the original 50's Teles had and most modern, non-CS ones don't, or at least don't as much as old ones.

This one shows it well (a '53 Heavy Relic Nocaster, apparently)

http://www.rainbowguitars.com/imagesproduct/fe/fe1505302899742-xl-07.jpg

guitars4you

ICBM said:

It's a '52 Tele (®), not a 1952 Tele. Important difference.

They've been made for well over 20 years now.

There is a giveaway - I'll be interested to see if anyone else knows what it is . The Custom Shop Relics are correct to the originals, so it isn't one of those either. Clue: it's a part of the guitar which is not often photographed, but there are a couple of examples online which you can find.

is it an extra hole under the tuners (between D&G) on the peghead, but not a tuner mounting hole

Strat_a_tat_tat

Router pin location hole?

ICBM

monoamine said:

I think it's either the routing channel in the body between the control and pickup cavities, or the end plug of mahognay in the skunk stripe on the neck. Neither look right to me but can't pin it down to why.

Right. It's the heel end of the skunk stripe. Originals have it the full length with a rounded end - this one has it cut short and square like later Fenders and RIs, although the CS Relics seem to have it to the original design. (I think the infill is glue, not mahogany.) It's quite hard to find photos of originals online, but all the ones from the mid 50s and earlier appear to have the full-length stripe.

Now it's mentioned I'm not sure about the dots either - the 12th-fret ones look slightly too close together.

IvisonGuitars

And the description is so vague as to what it is (the seller knows what it is, it's obvious) but some unsupecting buyer is going to bid this up and think they are getting a genuine '52....OR this will be passed off as a genuine '52 somewhere down the line.

IMO the pencil date on the neck heel is a deliberate attempt to pass that guitar off as the real deal. Let's hope CB stamped the cavity and he wasn't involved in that dating...

Gassage

Also- no serial number on bridge plate. Also the neck heel is too square when fitted.

ICBM

miserneil said:

And the description is so vague as to what it is (the seller knows what it is, it's obvious) but some unsupecting buyer is going to bid this up and think they are getting a genuine '52....OR this will be passed off as a genuine '52 somewhere down the line.

IMO the pencil date on the neck heel is a deliberate attempt to pass that guitar off as the real deal.

Agreed. Another indication that it's not original is that the handwriting doesn't look right, and there are no initials (usually TG) which are on most early 50s necks. Possibly not all, but every one I can remember seeing in pics has.

IvisonGuitars

I would genuinely be interested in that as I honestly believe Clive Brown to be an artist when it comes to aged finishes. But that description has just pissed me off. The seller is knowledgeable enough to include Cunetto and Nacho in his title but still doesn't know what the guitar might be? Pull the other one....

guitars4you

miserneil said:

I would genuinely be interested in that as I honestly believe Clive Brown to be an artist when it comes to aged finishes. But that description has just pissed me off. The seller is knowledgeable enough to include Cunetto and Nacho in his title but still doesn't know what the guitar might be? Pull the other one....

I think you are about right on this - If it was any genuine pre-CBs or even early CBS model and sold as such with a Clive Brown refin then we now were we stand - Same applies if it was stated as an AVRi or even a C/Shop with a Clive refin - In no way should any negatives be attached towards Clive Brown from this blog and I believe that is currently the case - Yet it is almost as though Clive Brown is the only credibility we can attach to this guitar and even that probably needs to be verified

musicman100

So has anyone reported it to ebay then?

IvisonGuitars

guitars4you said:

miserneil said:

I would genuinely be interested in that as I honestly believe Clive Brown to be an artist when it comes to aged finishes. But that description has just pissed me off. The seller is knowledgeable enough to include Cunetto and Nacho in his title but still doesn't know what the guitar might be? Pull the other one....

I think you are about right on this - If it was any genuine pre-CBs or even early CBS model and sold as such with a Clive Brown refin then we now were we stand - Same applies if it was stated as an AVRi or even a C/Shop with a Clive refin - In no way should any negatives be attached towards Clive Brown from this blog and I believe that is currently the case - Yet it is almost as though Clive Brown is the only credibility we can attach to this guitar and even that probably needs to be verified

Clive usually or always did stamp the cavity of any refin he did so it couldn't be passed off as a genuine, original finish. This guitar probably has the stamp which would authenticate the finish but the rhetoric about the body is very well worded and suggests that it's the genuine article underneath, it's down to the buyer to decide. Then, in a few years time, when it reappears for ££££ as a '1952 Blackguard refinished by Clive Brown' another fake vintage guitar enters the market.

guitars4you

miserneil said:

guitars4you said:

miserneil said:

I would genuinely be interested in that as I honestly believe Clive Brown to be an artist when it comes to aged finishes. But that description has just pissed me off. The seller is knowledgeable enough to include Cunetto and Nacho in his title but still doesn't know what the guitar might be? Pull the other one....

I think you are about right on this - If it was any genuine pre-CBs or even early CBS model and sold as such with a Clive Brown refin then we now were we stand - Same applies if it was stated as an AVRi or even a C/Shop with a Clive refin - In no way should any negatives be attached towards Clive Brown from this blog and I believe that is currently the case - Yet it is almost as though Clive Brown is the only credibility we can attach to this guitar and even that probably needs to be verified

Clive usually or always did stamp the cavity of any refin he did so it couldn't be passed off as a genuine, original finish. This guitar probably has the stamp which would authenticate the finish but the rhetoric about the body is very well worded and suggests that it's the genuine article underneath, it's down to the buyer to decide. Then, in a few years time, when it reappears for ££££ as a '1952 Blackguard refinished by Clive Brown' another fake vintage guitar enters the market.

that is part of my thoughts and comments, why has he not shown any relevant pics to authenticate a CB paint job