• 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!

Gold Top greening gallery

Tom Wittrock

Les Paul Forum Co-Owner
Joined
Aug 2, 2001
Messages
42,567
I am not sure what exactly changed in their process to make this happen. The pic below is an excellent example. I tried to replicate it on a '69 refin I did, and it was a bitch.

IMGP5120_zps8d9e6ca1.jpg

But, the finish is clearly "broken" or open along the binding. This allows moisture to enter the gold[bronze], just like on 5os era guitars.
I suspect the clear coat on the late 60s models was different.
 

T.Allen

Moderator
Joined
Sep 11, 2014
Messages
2,662
Some have suspected possibly some bronze in the clear. I don't know, but it does look and feel different from the 50's greening.
 

jimmi

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2012
Messages
2,077
This many days later, I'm not sure.

It seems like they should be using the same type of gold finish they used in the 50s.
If it does what it has always done, where is it improved?
This part of this thread is now too confusing for me.
I thought we were in the Vintage area. My Goldtops will turn green when it is time, as they are all 50s models. What Gibson does today would seem to be a topic for a different Forum area. :ganz
improved because at some point they moved away from the formula that allowed it to green in the same way. Ie, the improvement is a return to the 50s paint or as close as they can.

the thread is about greening 50s goldtops. This, while a bit tangential, is relevant I think.
 

Rud Bobbins

New member
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
4
This is my 1984 Standard. I got it in '91 and it had a little greening around the edges. The rest is mine ;-) Does anyone have any insight into these early 80's gold tops? Interesting how it has a layer of gold at the very bottom that never greened. I've always wondered about the origins of this guitar, was it an early attempt at a reissue?

 
Last edited:

GuitBro

New member
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
1
This is my 1984 Standard. I got it in '91 and it had a little greening around the edges. The rest is mine ;-) Does anyone have any insight into these early 80's gold tops? Interesting how it has a layer of gold at the very bottom that never greened. I've always wondered about the origins of this guitar, was it an early attempt at a reissue?


Nobody is gonna say it? I mean, this one is an embarrassingly obvious amateur relic attempt gone wrong. No offence to the poster; genuinely curious why the others are being picked apart and nobody pointed this one out!
 

Rud Bobbins

New member
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
4
Nobody is gonna say it? I mean, this one is an embarrassingly obvious amateur relic attempt gone wrong. No offence to the poster; genuinely curious why the others are being picked apart and nobody pointed this one out!

Sorry, but 100% not true. I purchased this in 91 at Guitar Exchange in Austin, TX. It already had a little greening especially around the control knobs. It just got worse. I was a touring guitar player during the early 90s and this was my workhorse. It really got eaten up where I put my wrist. And I will be the first to admit it is flat out ugly. Did not age gracefully unfortunately, but its all mine. I asked the question if anyone knows anything about it because I suspect it was Gibson's early rather-poor attempt at recreating the classic gold top finish but used the wrong ingredients. I've toyed with the idea of getting it refinished, but it just has too much history.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSVBgVDYneo
 

Tom Wittrock

Les Paul Forum Co-Owner
Joined
Aug 2, 2001
Messages
42,567
This is my 1984 Standard. I got it in '91 and it had a little greening around the edges. The rest is mine ;-) Does anyone have any insight into these early 80's gold tops? Interesting how it has a layer of gold at the very bottom that never greened. I've always wondered about the origins of this guitar, was it an early attempt at a reissue?


They have used the double coat of gold since the 50s. It wears differently for a variety of reasons.
It is also possible that there was a difference in how the two coats of gold were applied? :hmm

All of these photos are my 56 conversion, G.I.Paul:

917_p43060.jpg


917_p41271.jpg


917_p51491.jpg


917_p51492.jpg


This one shows how the aging of the gold changes from full exposure to being up against the pickguard. :ganz

917_p51455.jpg
 

Rud Bobbins

New member
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
4
Sorry, but 100% not true. I purchased this in 91 at Guitar Exchange in Austin, TX. It already had a little greening especially around the control knobs. It just got worse. I was a touring guitar player during the early 90s and this was my workhorse. It really got eaten up where I put my wrist. And I will be the first to admit it is flat out ugly. Did not age gracefully unfortunately, but its all mine. I asked the question if anyone knows anything about it because I suspect it was Gibson's early rather-poor attempt at recreating the classic gold top finish but used the wrong ingredients. I've toyed with the idea of getting it refinished, but it just has too much history.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSVBgVDYneo


The smeary green where my palm rested is green because I tried to clean it with some lacquer thinner to get it to be just gold. And yes, I totally made it worse. I stopped there...
 

mistersnappy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 20, 2006
Messages
7,321
Sorry, but 100% not true. I purchased this in 91 at Guitar Exchange in Austin, TX. It already had a little greening especially around the control knobs. It just got worse. I was a touring guitar player during the early 90s and this was my workhorse. It really got eaten up where I put my wrist. And I will be the first to admit it is flat out ugly. Did not age gracefully unfortunately, but its all mine. I asked the question if anyone knows anything about it because I suspect it was Gibson's early rather-poor attempt at recreating the classic gold top finish but used the wrong ingredients. I've toyed with the idea of getting it refinished, but it just has too much history.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSVBgVDYneo

I say leave it be. I don't think its ugy, FWIW. My Les Paul has a pretty deep gouge around the bridge pup that is all me and wouldn't change it for anything. You have your version of "Trigger", not some Murphy'd bullshit.
 

Patek

Active member
Joined
Dec 4, 2015
Messages
415
Joining the club with my recent 1953 purchase. not much greening but plenty of wrinkles at the ripe old age of 66









IMG_E7383.jpg




IMG_E7384.jpg




IMG_E7385.jpg




IMG_E7386.jpg




IMG_E7387.jpg




IMG_E7392.jpg




IMG_E7393.jpg




IMG_E7388.jpg




IMG_E7389.jpg
 

tooold

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2006
Messages
2,071
Nobody is gonna say it? I mean, this one is an embarrassingly obvious amateur relic attempt gone wrong. No offence to the poster; genuinely curious why the others are being picked apart and nobody pointed this one out!

Excellent first (and probably last) post: self-righteous AND ill-informed. Daily double.:dude:
 
Top