I think I found Beano

Black58 · Aug 9, 2018

"I'll bet she had snappin gyro!" - Howard Stern

JJ Blair · Aug 10, 2018

I started this thread when I was stuck on a boat in Russia, which just goes to prove one thing: Nothing good starts in Russia.

jhmp · Aug 10, 2018

Although it has improved with age

renderit · Aug 10, 2018

JJ Blair said:
I started this thread when I was stuck on a boat in Russia, which just goes to prove one thing: Nothing good starts in Russia.

Would you be willing to TESTIFY to that?

Cogswell · Aug 10, 2018

lol! JJ, I still think you were right on the money

J.D. · Aug 10, 2018

Cogswell said:
lol! JJ, I still think you were right on the money

+1

eace2

NYCBURST · Aug 16, 2018

JJ Blair said:
Look at a couple things that are similar here. First, over all, look at the way the grain runs into the center seam below the bridge on both guitars. The angle and the location is the same. I can't rule out the inlays either. Beyond that, there are a couple identifying marks I find similar. First, this little blister circle in between the knobs.

And the dark grain line under the tone knob.

Squiggle grain by the pickup ring.

It's 0 2183.

Thoughts?

You would need a much better picture than the black and white one that's here to prove anything.. Although that little flat spot on the poker chip is intriguing on both guitars, but my god, to look at an old black and white picture and try to match grain lines, that is very thin evidence.

houndog31 · Aug 17, 2018

The National Portrait Gallery site now has a zoom feature , "+" on top left and can click and mouse around ...

https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portraitZoom/mw125166/Eric-Clapton

fakejake · Aug 17, 2018

houndog31 said:
The National Portrait Gallery site now has a zoom feature , "+" on top left and can click and mouse around ...

https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portraitZoom/mw125166/Eric-Clapton

Where did those 3 flecks behind the tailpiece on the current image come from??? They are not visible on the previous versions I've seen... :wah

2002standardmat · Aug 17, 2018

houndog31 said:
The National Portrait Gallery site now has a zoom feature , "+" on top left and can click and mouse around ...

https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portraitZoom/mw125166/Eric-Clapton

Not sure if this has been mentioned before but just a thought, I am no expert but what about the bridge saddle positions?

Even taking into account the difference between string gauges, type and the accuracy of setting it, the intonation on the EC photograph shows the visible saddles moved way forward toward the bridge pickup ring and the modern photograph of the suspect has them fairly centred.

I have to say, from the discernable grain patterns there appear to be some strong similarities but I ain't as convinced by the inlay patterns.

But we really are working with very little hard evidence and there is a lot of room for error.

houndog31 · Aug 17, 2018

fakejake said:
Where did those 3 flecks behind the tailpiece on the current image come from??? They are not visible on the previous versions I've seen... :wah

That scanned version and the one attached here are the highest resolution available (online), the spot is also visible from this alternate angle below. Most other versions out there are pixelated from small files that have been upsized so that causes detail and grain to blur or soften. If it wasn't on both photos I'd say it could be a blemish on the negative or print but that's unlikely.

http://www.snapgalleries.com/product/david-wedgbury-eric-clapton-recording/

MAD 69 · Aug 17, 2018

This guitar is more likely than not in the collection of the NYC billionaire collector and will never see the light of day again. Even though the statue of limitations has run out - he doesn't want to have to give it back(as he has done on a previous occasion)

Arch D. Bunker · Aug 17, 2018

MAD 69 said:
This guitar is more likely than not in the collection of the NYC billionaire collector and will never see the light of day again. Even though the statue of limitations has run out - he doesn't want to have to give it back(as he has done on a previous occasion)

What kind of proof do you have to validate this public mudslinging exercise? The only thing we know for sure is that the 'billionaire collector' returned Redeye to a previous owner, much to his credit.

And tell me sir - what would YOU do if you owned that guitar now. Give it back I assume?

goldtop0 · Aug 17, 2018

Arch D. Bunker said:
What kind of proof do you have to validate this public mudslinging exercise? The only thing we know for sure is that the 'billionaire collector' returned Redeye to a previous owner, much to his credit.

And tell me sir - what would YOU do if you owned that guitar now. Give it back I assume?

Can't see any 'mud slinging' with what's written there Arch.......merely hypothesis on his part......could be on the money... who knows:wah

Black58 · Aug 17, 2018

That 15th fret inlay, with the upper right corner "triangle" has me wondering. :hmm

Tim · Aug 18, 2018

Tom Wittrock · Aug 18, 2018

Arch D. Bunker said:
What kind of proof do you have to validate this public mudslinging exercise? The only thing we know for sure is that the 'billionaire collector' returned Redeye to a previous owner, much to his credit.

And tell me sir - what would YOU do if you owned that guitar now. Give it back I assume?

I'd like to know this also. :hmm

Tom Wittrock · Aug 18, 2018

goldtop0 said:
Can't see any 'mud slinging' with what's written there Arch.......merely hypothesis on his part......could be on the money... who knows:wah

Sounds unfriendly to me. I don't think 'mud slinging" is out of line.

sws1 · Aug 18, 2018

goldtop0 said:
Can't see any 'mud slinging' with what's written there Arch.......merely hypothesis on his part......could be on the money... who knows:wah

To be honest, I didn’t read it that way either.

But of course, we all know, tone and intent often doesn’t come across accurately on the internet.

NYCBURST · Aug 18, 2018

MAD 69 said:
This guitar is more likely than not in the collection of the NYC billionaire collector and will never see the light of day again. Even though the statue of limitations has run out - he doesn't want to have to give it back(as he has done on a previous occasion)

That's a pretty libelous statement.

I think I found Beano

New member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

The Duke of Dumbassery

Well-known member

Active member

Member

Well-known member

Active member

Member

New member

Active member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Les Paul Forum Co-Owner

Les Paul Forum Co-Owner

Well-known member

Active member