• 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!

Les Paul DC Jr Identification help

Teejs

New member
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
14
This LPJR has had much help of the wrong type....Someone tried to drill out the tuner holes and popped off the corner and side of the peghead...I could deal with that but when they went to reattach the edge the edge sat proud of the face and it appears this was the beginning of woes...the sn is now gone and it is making restoration and dating a bit frustrating.
The finish is Lacquer, there is red mahogany lacquer in the control cavity, The Les Paul logo is there but no "Junior" is there. The nut appears original. The neck is reasonably wide: @nut: 1 3/4 / 1st fret: 1 23/32 / 12th: 2 1/16.
The pots are not original...they are a matched pair from DiMarzio and the pickup was not original.
But I do feel that it is 'for real'
There is no reason why these actions would be taken to do a fake. The face of the headstock, while there are issues, is mostly intact decal wise
Most of the sanding and leveling was done on the back of the headstock and no attempt was made to fake a number.
I'm sure that there are other ways to help date the guitar i.e. the heel shape the headstock nuances etc...There are no blends...yet!
Also...The reissues(custom shop etc)differences are obvious...the transition from the neck to the head and the heel have sharp, defined lines, the heels are 'D' shaped and , again, sharp lines.
I will blend the black on the headstock but will maintain the existing decals. I may have to re-do the 'G'.
Any help will be appreciated.

LPJr 2.jpgLPJr 6.jpgLPJr 5.jpgLPJr 7.jpgLPJr 8.jpg
 
Last edited:

Teejs

New member
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
14
Reading comprehension: I stated that I had not removed the nut yet!
So I stand corrected, Thank you.... and will change the main statement.
I removed the nut, cleaned off the glue on the fretboard end side and it doesn't look or smell like bone.

Just a note: The nut like the controls and pickups and strap buttons, etc are in the "Most likely to not be original" list. They may substantially impact the value and collectability but they do not disqualify the guitar from being authentic.
 
Last edited:

sws1

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2001
Messages
2,848
Reading comprehension: I stated that I had not removed the nut yet!.

No shit. I CAN read. I also know you don't have to take the nut off to determine that it's bone or nylon.

Good luck on your quest.
 

Teejs

New member
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
14
I apologize if that sounded argumentative. Actually, I did have to remove it to tell,...that's my problem....one of em
 
Last edited:

Aloha_Ark

Active member
Joined
Apr 2, 2020
Messages
154
The OP's guitar looks like a fake, based predominantly on the shape of the headstock.

junk_headstock.jpg

There is nothing tricky about the image. The left image was resized so that the Gibson logo matched in size. Once this is done, the eyes can easily see the misplacement of the logo relative to the tuners, and the inaccurate carving of the mustache.

The pickup cavity also bothers me as it has a notch that is not present in a vintage guitar.
 

Tom Wittrock

Les Paul Forum Co-Owner
Joined
Aug 2, 2001
Messages
42,567
The OP's guitar looks like a fake, based predominantly on the shape of the headstock.

View attachment 11389

There is nothing tricky about the image. The left image was resized so that the Gibson logo matched in size. Once this is done, the eyes can easily see the misplacement of the logo relative to the tuners, and the inaccurate carving of the mustache.

The pickup cavity also bothers me as it has a notch that is not present in a vintage guitar.

It's common to see those changes on a refin. :hmm
 

Teejs

New member
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
14
Thanks Tom.
If one is to compare then at least compare it to the 'before' image. It was hared enough t get a 'G' that was similar in color..and it wasn't a lacquer based and that was even more frustrating as I had to build the lacquer to finish it. The 'LesPaul' is a lacquer base BUT I wanted to leave the original one (there wasn't much left of it ...really fragile, every time I cleaned or wiped it more left.), so I moved it to the right probably .030 to 'keep it for verification' purposes, it doesen't show on a pic but is very faint in person. As far as the upper edge, it may be off a bit on the one side as there have been several pairs of hands messing with the poor thing. The cavity...well that is my botch. Trying to be as careful as I could I still managed to go too far on the bottom piece,so it looks a bit funny. The main purpose was to get a bit more wood on the sides, which worked.
 
Top