Joe B's latest score...a KILLER 64 SG!!!

[blewsbreaker]

I'm hoping that Joe B. can give us a few additional details, since I'm totally fascinated by the Clapton/Harrison era SGs.

In the meantime, speaking of the Harrison SG (serial number 227666, shipped October 9, 1964), here is a pretty good photo of that guitar I just found on the web:

Interesting...chrome PU covers on this one...

 

[JBLPplayer]

Ok part one of the mystery G...

The serial 184698

Im sorry I don't have much experience with these guitars. I should know nickel from chrome though. Lol
Joe B

 

[CDaughtry]

Send me the pics Joe...I'll post 'em!:yah

 

[CDaughtry]

Here you go boys....:jim

And at his recent Beth Hart recording session!:dude:

 

[JBLPplayer]

Thanks CD! I brought the guitar to the Beth Hart session last week. Really worked out well. Test drove the new burst as well. The real star was the Fender prototype high power twin... I used the amp for 90 percent of the album along with a 1958 3x10 Fender Bandmaster ( or Slubifier as I call it. ) and a 66 non Music Ground Bluesbreaker aka a Marshall. :salude

She nailed Black Coffee in the original key! That's all I will say.
Joe B

PS... Curious to see what you SG guys think of the photos. Thank in advance for the information. :dude:

 

[MikeSlub]

Thanks CD! I brought the guitar to the Beth Hart session last week. Really worked out well. Test drove the new burst as well. The real star was the Fender prototype high power twin... I used the amp for 90 percent of the album along with a 1958 3x10 Fender Bandmaster ( or Slubifier as I call it. ) and a 66 non Music Ground Bluesbreaker aka a Marshall. :salude

She nailed Black Coffee in the original key! That's all I will say.
Joe B

PS... Curious to see what you SG guys think of the photos. Thank in advance for the information. :dude:

Joe, the photos are great.

And I believe the Slubifier is a 1956.

 

[Kris Ford]

This SG guy says that is the cleanest '64 I've ever seen...:salude
The 18XXXX SN# is smack dab in the middle of the '64 range.

Just a quick observence..
Pickup covers DO seem rather square, and SHOULD have a flathead adjusting screw...:hmm

 

[garywright]

Just a quick observence..
SHOULD have a flathead adjusting screw...:hmm

yeah .. don't mean to some pessimistic ..but why would those screws be swapped along with what appears to be a handmade spacer above the neck pup ....minor things though as this SG looks and sounds beautiful

 

[JBLPplayer]

Good points... I didn't notice the screws... Ok just give me a minute ... I will retake the pictures and delete the other ones. Lol

Joe B.
Thanks for the info guys. Again I know little about SGs

 

[T.Allen]

There is nothing that a belt sander won't fix.

Beautiful SG Joe! :salude

 

[kharrison]

Not dissing guitar, but looks like chrome or the cleanest nickle I have ever seen. The adjustment screws are wrong. Not a big deal bit the truss rod cover has been replaced. It's possible the hardware has been changed but who knows. Again, could be the cleanest SG on the planet but nickle does age even when not used. Hell the pickup screws are crisp.

 

[JBLPplayer]

In person the truss rod looks fine to me. PU mounting screws are definitely changed. As far as the covers.... They match the bridge and I suspect them to be chrome as is the bridge. It's a strange guitar that I didn't pay a lot of money for. It is a cool guitar of this nature to play. Sounds great thru the tweed amps. :salude
Joe B

 

[CDaughtry]

For the brief time I had it, it seemed totally straight to me. Also, the backstory supports its originality. The lady who I picked it up from, was misty eyed at the thought of giving up her dead husband's guitar. The strings (all 5 of them) had been on it for decades.:hee
It just doesn't make since that 30 some odd years ago, the guy would have changed all of the major parts on it.
It didn't look like ANYTHING had been touched in forever.:jim

 

[blewsbreaker]

For the brief time I had it, it seemed totally straight to me. Also, the backstory supports its originality. The lady who I picked it up from, was misty eyed at the thought of giving up her dead husband's guitar. The strings (all 5 of them) had been on it for decades.:hee
It just doesn't make since that 30 some odd years ago, the guy would have changed all of the major parts on it.
It didn't look like ANYTHING had been touched in forever.:jim

I can hear the chrome in those PU's.... bummer
:laugh2:

 

[marshall1987]

Serendipity..........it was meant to be........so let it be.....

 

[kharrison]

Probably a transition guitar, 64 with Chrome hardware. No big deal.

 

[spidey]

Would love to hear Joe play some Cream on this SG.

 

[AlienVintage]

If it does turn out to be chrome:

Here's one possible explanation: '64 SG Standard that was sent back to the Gibson factory for a factory refin sometime after mid-1965 (so, maybe this would have been sometime in the later '60s, etc.).

I have a reasonably similar, parallel situation that caused me to scratch my head a little bit until I finally figured out exactly *why* I was seeing what I was seeing.

I've got a '52 Les Paul that was sent to Kalamazoo for a factory refin in 1968. This story was actually corroborated by the family of the original owner from the '60s. The owner wanted to fix some of the "blemishes" on the original finish. So, the guitar got the full goldtop refin, but doing more of what was typical for 1968 (as opposed to aiming for '52 specs).

-no silkscreen Les Paul on the headstock (blank, like the early '68s)
-has a 1968 "Les Paul" engraved TRC (like the early '68s).
-they converted it to a shaved ABR-1 with trapeze tailpiece.
-most relevant to this post: many of the original parts were replaced with chrome parts. *Even the pole screws* in the P90s were replaced with chrome pole screws.

The chrome pole P90 screws really had me wondering about what was original on my '52, but when I opened it up and studied it (including under the pickups, under the pickup covers), there was zero doubt of its originality (of course, minus the parts that were replaced with chrome parts).

What I came to hypothesize was: after mid-1965, even when a guitar was being refinished in the factory, Gibson seems to have preemptively (and probably unilaterally) switched a lot of the original nickel parts to newer chrome.

At that time, it wasn't about preserving originality - they were just aiming to make the guitar as pretty and shiny as possible, hopefully to last.

Gibson must have had a policy, around the late '60s, where they felt chrome was less likely the cause the owner to come back at a future point, complaining about how the metal parts looked tarnished or whatever.

Obviously makes sense, since in mid 1965, there was a reason they decided to switch to chrome, across the board - they were probably getting a lot of customer/dealer complains about worn-out looking nickel.

So, even on factory refins, I think they chromed everything out, probably as a warantee-type policy where they were hoping to avoid situations where the customer came back and complained that the guitar looked worn-out.

So... again, *if* there is chrome... a factory refin (maybe in the later '60s) is a theory that would completely fit with what we know: the original owner's history, the guitar's hardware we see today.

 

[marshall1987]

Chrome hubcaps, chrome trim, and chrome car bumpers were very popular in the '60s (and of course the '50s). I recall Turtle Wax even sold a separate product for polishing the chrome on your car as your were waxing the paint job. Chrome was all the rage.

 

[AlienVintage]

Here are some photos of the goldtop I was talking about: my 52-refinished-and-chromed-out-in-68 (check out the pole screws!):

Original owner in the '60s. I like to think that he was playing some sort of Slayer riff when this photo was taken: