• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

Advice on early 1969 LP

KingsleyMac

New member
Joined
Jan 23, 2015
Messages
86
Guys, I need to come up with a fair offer on a mid-1969 LP. No photos, but here are some details:

repaired neck break
stripped finish and what appear to be straight line cracks on the top
mini-buckers
one-piece body
three-piece neck
pots have 1968 dates
original tuners, bridge, Tail piece, pickguard, poker chip & TRC
non-original speed knobs
non-original early 70s gibson case

I know she sounds like a dog, but the neck was lovely and the guitar had a great tone.

I was thinking somewhere around +/- 2K , but do you guys think?

Please advise.
 

Red Baron

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
6,774
If it plays and sounds as well as you say then I don't think you can go wrong spending around $2k on that guitar. I'd say go for it :jim
 

kerryboy

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 20, 2002
Messages
1,199
Did early 69 LP's have mini humbuckers. I thought they would be full size.
 

blueguitar

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2005
Messages
173
quote: "Did early 69 LP's have mini humbuckers. I thought they would be full size."

It depends on the definition of "early" and "LP", that is: first quarter/half (?) of ´69 and what model: Goldtop or Custom. A "true early"
(1.st quarter ´69) Goldtop would have 2x P 90, switching to Mini-Buckers around mid-year - an that is NOT early. A Custom would have
regular ("Maxi") humbuckers from the start.
and btw: "68" pots are used up to around mid-69. In general pot dates do not pinpoint a specific date of completion. They sit in a box
waiting to be installed - at some time after their manufacturing (date) and installation might be delayed up to 1 (or even 2?) year(s).
In any case - they are easily exchanged, so I wouldn´t rely on these numbers too much. In that context I often read the term "intact"
solderjoints which makes me giggle a bit - now how would you prove that? Just by "inspection", by "material science analysis", or is it
merely wishful thinking?

Peter

in any case: check Stephens website: http://www.latesixtieslespauls.com/serial.asp
 
Last edited:
Top