ShortScale.org

Thanks to everyone for your help.

Gibson repeated serial numbers - they're practically useless.

It's probably late 60s or maybe 1970. Going rate retail seems to be $5,500-$6,500 for good condition. The neck repair probably knocks that in half.

It might be worth having the neck repair touched up so it at least looks better.

edit: what numbers are on the back of the pots?

That doesn't look at like 70's model at all. It looks more liek a 60's model.

http://everythingsg.com/

This is good refrence for Sg's you'll probably find a quick answer here.

Does it have PAF pickups?

Judging by the smaller scratch plate and the maestro Tremolo, it looks more like a 60's model. Maybe a 70's reissue of some sort?

`63 SG Les Paul w/ vibrato seems likely...

Thanks for the help so far, everyone.

I'm having some difficulty seeing reading the text, but from what I can see with my reading glasses: C-BA-811-1053, 500K AT 13763

1963 SG Std specs:
"Patent Number" humbucking pickups, Maestro vibrato with lyre and logo on coverplate (but occassionally the sideways vibrato is still seen on a few 1963 Gibson SG Standard models). "Les Paul" is now removed from the truss rod cover and model officially known as the "SG Standard", neck shape get slightly larger. Neck tenon size is increased, so the necks on 1963 and later SGs are more stable. 1963 to 1964 SG Standards (without the sideways vibrato, and slightly larger, more stable necks) are the best of the SG Standards.

The Gibson serial number system puts it at 1964 but take that with a grain of salt.

Wow, thanks.

Where did you find that information at? At the everythingsg site?

Narco Martenot wrote:Wow, thanks.

Where did you find that information at? At the everythingsg site?

http://www.provide.net/~cfh/gibson5.html#sgstd

Oh, nevermind. I even see it on the official Gibson site. Somehow, I missed that if it were a 70s model, it would have an "S" at the end of the serial.

Okay, it appears as if the pots are from 1963, and the guitar was actually made in 1964 judging by the serial number.

Thank you to everyone for your help.

this is an ace guitar, with ace photography.

Nom nom nom. Do want. I seem to have acquired something similar, but nothing that nice. Why are you selling? Whom did you kill or get pregnant?

I would think regardless of the neck you could still get a cool couple grand or better. But that is a shitty fix. Did they use mortar or dinosaur poo? How is the angle? It looks almost like the filler creates a spread between the wood that would jack up the angle. Not sure. If the neck is straight and stable, you need cosmetic fix. If not, it may have to come off again and be properly fixed. You might have to chip away or strip that gunk off.

For a cosmetic fix, you could get a mahogany veneer strip and glue it over the patch. If that's too elaborate, get a small hunk of mahogany and sand it down so that you have a pile of dust. Mix it with super glue and spread it onto the patch. Let dry and sand. Cover with thin coats of cherry stain/urethane and let dry for a few days. Sand lightly and wet sand with baby oil. This may sound barbaric, but if it is structurally sound, it just needs plastic surgery. This isn't to fool anyone. It's just like patching dents in a car. You admit that they are there, but meanwhile there is no hideous disfigurement to distract the buyer. People can move beyond a sordid past if she's pretty enough.

A '64 SG standard is very valuable. It would be well worth it to put a few hundred into getting that repair improved on.

ill fix it for free

you live near niagara falls at all ?

ill meet you there and pick it up

No, I live near Columbus, OH.

I'll see what I can do with it. I'm generally pretty good at fixing cosmetic things like this.

The structure of it seems to be fine.

If you're gonna sell it anyways i'd have it repaired expertly. There are ton of guys out there who do this stuff for vintage Gibsons. On reranch there is this guy I think his name is SGLou who is amazing at restoring old battered SGs.

I would like to have it professionally repaired, but I don't have the money to do so. I definitely do not want the guitar -- I really dislike playing these types of guitars.

I feel confident enough that I can make it look a lot better than it does right now. Although, could it be any worse?

First: Do no harm.

A perfect restoration is 100% reversible. Whoever is considering buying it will take into account how expensive a professional "touch up" will be.

A botched restoration will always be worth less than a broken guitar.

Narco Martenot wrote:I would like to have it professionally repaired, but I don't have the money to do so. I definitely do not want the guitar -- I really dislike playing these types of guitars.

I feel confident enough that I can make it look a lot better than it does right now. Although, could it be any worse?

The thing is I'm suggesting this so you can get max value. A good restoration done in correct way will end up netting you more money than a cosmetic fix that somebody might look at and actually devalues the guitar.