Clive Brown refin '52 Tele

fretfinder

I sent him a message via eBay asking if there was any provenance for the CB refin. No reply yet...

guitars4you

fretfinder said:

I sent him a message via eBay asking if there was any provenance for the CB refin. No reply yet...

I probably need to get another e-mail address - I can't go on factor finding messages as Guitars4You - need an alias - Update us accordingly

Bucket

I've played one of Clive Brown's new Dwight guitars and BLOODY HELL it was good. He's one hell of a talented dude.

danny_777

Haha, I was about to start a thread on this exact guitar! I did a bit of sleuthing and it appears that it was actually sold three months ago on Gretsch Pages for about 1800 quid: http://gretschpages.com/forum/garage-sale/fender-1952-telecaster-relic-by-clive-brown/55501/page1/

There's a lot more info on it there which the seller is leaving out, presumably intentionally to conjur up the "mystique" and unknowns about this guitar in order to dupe someone into overbidding for it. I'm sure a lot of people would be put off by the fact, for example, that it's got a slim C-shape neck and Fender Custom Shop pickups (which he fails to mention).

Frankly if I'm right on the above listing then the seller is rather dishonest, and is being intentionally misleading.

danny_777

In fact if you look at the wear/"rash" on the back of the guitar it's identical between the two - 95% sure it's the same guitar.

ICBM

Same guitar.

A slim C neck would fit with an early 52RI as well.

fretfinder

He seems reasonable straight from the two replies I've had:

"The guitar weighs 7.2lbs and the fingerboard radius is 7.25". I would describe the neck as a comfortable medium C shape. I have email correspondence from Clive Brown saying that the body and pickguard are his work, he's not sure if he did the neck and that he didn't wire in the pickups! 
I hope that helps!"

"Please be sure it's not my intention to suggest this is an original 50's guitar. I can't see where I've suggested that but I've updated the listing to reiterate this!
Sadly there's no Clive Brown stamp, which is why I contacted him to authenticate it. I've been told by a vintage dealer that in the past Clive didn't stamp all his refinishes. 
The USA reissue theory sounds like like a good shout but it would be an older one as I know it's at least twenty years old. 
I will continue to update the listing with any more info as it comes in."

fretfinder

And a third reply from the seller:

"No I didn't buy it from a Gretsch Forum but it looks like it could be the same guitar. I would point out that the information in that listing is incorrect. The pick ups are not Custom Shop they are Seymour Duncans, the guitar is not a 1984 Clive Brown build. Clive Brown told me he was not making them then so it can't be. Clive Brown told me that it's most likely to be a work by him in the early 1990's.
As I explained in my listing I was sold it as a Clive Brown build but latter found it not to be. So I am being completely honest. It is a CB refinish and relic job on a guitar that he has no paper trail therefore can't state exactly what the original guitar was.
I am aware of talk on some forums suggesting that I have in someway jazzed this up to be an original 1952 guitar. This is absolutely not the case. I have not listed this an an original vintage 1952 guitar.
I hope that by reading this and any other questions and going back over the text in my original listing you can see that I have aimed to be completelty transparent. I also welcome any inspection of the guitar."

Gagaryn

I don't really see the issue here. Why the pitchforks?

WezV

Gagaryn said:

I don't really see the issue here. Why the pitchforks?

miserneil said:

this will be passed off as a genuine '52 somewhere down the line.

That's why,  It does seem the seller is mostly being totally genuine, but there are a few areas of vagueness

fields5069

That could happen to any reliced 52 re-issue, couldn't it?

ICBM

The pitchforks were because of the way it was initially described before he updated the listing. In my opinion the title is still potentially misleading - whatever it started as, it is *not* a 1952 Telecaster.

It would be much better to either remove that, or put it in inverted commas, and make clear that the date on the neck is fake.

It could possibly be a *'52 Tele* - which is a Fender model name. That's not splitting hairs, it's an important difference.

IvisonGuitars

fields5069 said:

That could happen to any reliced 52 re-issue, couldn't it?

Possibly, however all Fender relics are stamped relic and, to be honest, if you compared a CS Relic to a genuine vintage guitar, it's pretty obvious which is the real deal.

The whole point of having Clive Brown refinish a guitar is that he is essentially restoring it back to original, his aged finishes are pretty much indistinguishable from a genuine vintage guitar, hence why he charges a premium and why he's regarded as the best in the world. They really are scarily accurate. 

I think some of his refinishes were passed off as originals (stand up Mr Harrison) so he then started stamping the cavities. 

IvisonGuitars

For what it's worth I'm pretty interested in this guitar and the seller does seem to be open to discussion on why it might be, if I was him, as @ICBM said, I'd pull it and/or reword the ad properly so there's no ifs and buts and save myself a load of emails from @fretfinder! ;-) The listing looks even more dodgy now as he seems to be getting called out on it from all sides.

IvisonGuitars

This link is worth checking out, CB turns a new Allparts Body and neck into a 1950 Fender Broadcaster. Pic heavy but awesome!

https://www.photobox.co.uk/album/22112373?channel=2423&utm_source=affiliate_window&utm_medium=affiliation&utm_campaign=_awin_textlink&utm_term=Skimlinks&awc=1137_1475165258_962d11b299985ecd36a12783cb308fa3&ectrans=1

fretfinder

miserneil said: I'd pull it and/or reword the ad properly so there's no ifs and buts and save myself a load of emails from @fretfinder! ;-) 

Duly lol'd!

IvisonGuitars

fretfinder said:

miserneil said: I'd pull it and/or reword the ad properly so there's no ifs and buts and save myself a load of emails from @fretfinder! ;-) 

Duly lol'd!

All meant in Jest of course! :-)

Gagaryn

WezV said:

Gagaryn said:

I don't really see the issue here. Why the pitchforks?

miserneil said:

this will be passed off as a genuine '52 somewhere down the line.

That's why,  It does seem the seller is mostly being totally genuine, but there are a few areas of vagueness

True, somebody down the line could pass this off as a genuine '52 somewhere down the line, but the seller seems to be being pretty straight up. No matter how he worded the ad - this could still happen by an unscrupulous future owner. Still don't understand the pitchforks? Are you suggesting he should stamp the body since Clive Brown failed to?

IvisonGuitars

Gagaryn said:

WezV said:

Gagaryn said:

I don't really see the issue here. Why the pitchforks?

miserneil said:

this will be passed off as a genuine '52 somewhere down the line.

That's why,  It does seem the seller is mostly being totally genuine, but there are a few areas of vagueness

True, somebody down the line could pass this off as a genuine '52 somewhere down the line, but the seller seems to be being pretty straight up. No matter how he worded the ad - this could still happen by an unscrupulous future owner. Still don't understand the pitchforks? Are you suggesting he should stamp the body since Clive Brown failed to?

The, ahem, 'pitchforks' - I've seen far worse on here to be honest - came about form the originally worded ad. What it was suggesting it might be. After @fretfinder did some digging via email, the seller then afforded the listing more information. 

Hey, If this is a pre-stamp Clive Brown, perhaps it's worth more money?! ;-)

Sassafras

My pitchfork's at the ready because I'm really, really bored.