Marc Bolan's Les Paul resurfaces on MLP forum

GuitarMonkey · November 2015

http://www.mylespaul.com/forums/vintage-les-pauls/352625-possible-58-59-les-paul-no-serial-no.html

thermionic · November 2015

If there ever was a partscaster Les Paul, it's that one.

streethawk · November 2015

Love those threads. Egg on multiple face. They never learn. >:D<

xSkarloey · November 2015

That's a pretty epic thread.

The ending is rather ambiguous, with the mention of certain e-mails....

Some real sleuth types there. I think now we should ask them to reopen the Jack the Ripper case.

TTony · November 2015

Skarloey said:

I think now we should ask them to reopen the Jack the Ripper case.

What guitar did he play?

WezV · November 2015

TTony said:

Skarloey said:

I think now we should ask them to reopen the Jack the Ripper case.

What guitar did he play?

fairly sure he was a bassist

streethawk · November 2015

TTony said:

Skarloey said:

I think now we should ask them to reopen the Jack the Ripper case.

What guitar did he play?

Not sure but he was one hell of an axe man.

Ok, hammer.

xSkarloey · November 2015

Knife.

Hammer was Sutcliffe wasn't it?

martinw · November 2015

Looks like Keith Lemon in that ad.

ICBM · November 2015

It's not the Bolan guitar.

It's one with a superficially similar grain pattern in some areas which has been spotted as looking a bit like it, and then deliberately faked with matching (but not quite closely enough) marks.

There are enough differences in the grain you can see, even in the fairly poor resolution photos of Bolan, to prove it's not the same piece of wood.

streethawk · November 2015

ICBM said:

It's not the Bolan guitar.

It's one with a superficially similar grain pattern in some areas which has been spotted as looking a bit like it, and then deliberately faked with matching (but not quite closely enough) marks.

There are enough differences in the grain you can see, even in the fairly poor resolution photos of Bolan, to prove it's not the same piece of wood.

I thought that too but the grain might not show up in the old pics.

Somebody has gone to an awful lot of trouble if it is a scam, and yet not bothered to put the right neck on?

@skarloey

Can't believe somebody has wisdomed that.

>:D<

You're right though!

ICBM · November 2015

streethawk said:
I thought that too but the grain might not show up in the old pics.

Somebody has gone to an awful lot of trouble if it is a scam, and yet not bothered to put the right neck on?

No, there's enough grain that *does* show up in the old pics, even if not clearly, that is definitely not present on the guitar in the thread - in particular the dark spots on the cutaway horn - and also some on the fake that doesn't appear on the original, like the 'squiggle' above the bridge pickup controls.

It's remarkably obvious when you see the guitar in the sunburst finish that it is conclusively the same piece of wood, but you never do any better than struggling to try reconcile differences when you compare it to any pics of Bolan's. It's also odd how it could go from natural to sunburst and back again with some of the dings apparently in the same places...

The fact that it has dings in *nearly* - but not quite exactly - matching places then proves that a lot of effort has been gone to in order to make it as convincing as possible. Of course it has - there's tens of thousands of pounds, maybe more, in it if you can convince someone it's genuine.

The neck has probably been deliberately crudely re-replaced to try to make it look like another re-neck after Bolan had it, to explain why it does not have the Custom neck. It's also clearly further out of the body than it should be.

Another giveaway is the neck angle - Bolan's original had an extremely low neck angle, so much so that in the famous pic of him in the field (and others) there are no height wheels under the bridge, it's resting directly on the top. In my opinion this is because it was a '52 - as he always said it was - that was converted into a Sunburst, and not a '58-'59. If so, it would have had P90 routs originally and a different top angle where it meets the neck. There is no evidence of a P90 rout in the guitar here, and the neck angle can't have been changed because *more* wood would have to be added to the top of the body - '52s are very flat between the neck and the pickup, later ones have a much steeper angle.

And I am by no means an expert on old Les Pauls, but all that is pretty straightforward.

WezV · November 2015

Bridge height means nothing with a re-re-re neck. Doesn't take much difference at the join to change the angle significantly. If any of the re-neck jobs is done badly its likely it would need redoing....

It also doesn't take much sanding on a flat sawn carved top to change the look of the grain significantly. Certainly not much sanding to move features 1/2" either way

I am not saying it is or isn't without better pics of the original... But if it is its been stripped and renecked and will be a very different guitar to the one Bolan played

ICBM · November 2015

WezV said:

Bridge height means nothing with a re-re-re neck. Doesn't take much difference at the join to change the angle significantly.

I would agree, except that to turn the Bolan guitar into one with a high bridge would mean adding wood to the top around the neck pickup area to increase the angle. It can't be done by taking it away from the outer edge because that would mean reducing the binding height and it would be very obvious.

WezV said:
It also doesn't take much sanding on a flat sawn carved top to change the look of the grain significantly. Certainly not much sanding to move features 1/2" either way

I know, but there are some that aren't present at all on one guitar or the other - and yet there are shallow dings which appear to match. But which actually don't quite when you overlay the photos...

I'm really confident it is not the same guitar. I think it's a careful fake that's been done with the intention of getting an over-enthusiastic buyer to convince themselves it's real.

WezV · November 2015

If I wanted to increase the neck angle I would be removing wood closer to the body edge of the join rather than adding wood wood to the pickup edge. Its the same wood removal that would happen from excessive sanding with the neck removed.

Excessive sanding would also cover all grain changes, some things move, some appear, some disappear.

Excessive sanding would be done by someone wanting to remove a bad dye job in order to try and convert this to burst specs. It would explain a lot.

I think there is a good chance the body is genuine, someone undervalued the Bolan significance and tried to convert it to a burst. Did a bad job and realised the only value left was the Bolan connection. Etc....

WezV · November 2015

A careful fake would be better. If I was faking it I would have at least gone with a custom neck

ICBM · November 2015

WezV said:

If I wanted to increase the neck angle I would be removing wood closer to the body edge of the join rather than adding wood wood to the pickup edge. Its the same wood removal that would happen from excessive sanding with the neck removed.

But then the binding would end up too thin, or you'd have to re-bind it… which would leave the body looking too thin.

WezV said:
I think there is a good chance the body is genuine, someone undervalued the Bolan significance and tried to convert it to a burst. Did a bad job and realised the only value left was the Bolan connection. Etc....

Except that I think Bolan's was a converted '52 (there's really no other explanation for the extremely low bridge in the pics of him with it), and there's no evidence of a P90 rout in this one - the front corners of the hole would be missing and fitted with blocks.

I'll bet you a pint it's not Bolan's guitar

.

Aidanspaghetti · November 2015

Those apes on MLP don't know their arse from their elbow. Anyone can see its Yngwie from his infamous "Glam" phase...... http://i819.photobucket.com/albums/zz111/Aidanspaghetti/image.jpg1_zps9bcdvvcw.jpg

WezV · November 2015

Fwiw I do think the p90 route is a lot more convincing that any wood grain or neck angle argument on a renecked refinished guitar.

Body or binding dimensions would be largely inconclusive without accurate dimensions and pics from this guitar and other matching ones from the era it came from. My experience tells me you can usually blend stuff like that in so it looks about right.

The main question. If you were renecking a guitar because it had similar grain to Bolan's and you decided it was a good candidate for a fake, why would you not stick a custom neck on? Arguments of careful fakery fall done when you look at how bad the reneck has been done

WezV · November 2015

ICBM;856123" said:
I'll bet you a pint it's not Bolan's guitar .

Its about as much as I think its worth. Wouldn't stake anything serious on it.... But you're on

koss59 · November 2015

I didn't have time to read the whole thread but weren't they saying that it wasn't the custom neck guitar but a different one that he owned? There is at least one very highly regarded figure in the vintage guitar market on that thread saying it IS the guitar so we'll see I guess.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

Marc Bolan's Les Paul resurfaces on MLP forum

Comments