1958 Les Paul Junior??

[Mickzep]

Hey guys

Could someone possibly check out this pic and determine whether the finish is original?

Cheers

 

[Mickzep]

Another pic...

 

[Mickzep]

Another pic..

 

[DANELECTRO]

Its hard to say with certainty based on the photos, but I think it looks too opaque to be original. You should be able to see the grain through the finish. Here's a '56 TV that I no longer own for reference:

The wear on the back appears to have been done with sandpaper. Other non-original parts I see are the frets, tailpiece, studs, and pickguard.

 

[Mickzep]

Is this a better image?

 

[guitplayer]

Probably a 70s refin. Kinda blonde color

 

[Mickzep]

Does this logo look right for a 58?

I’m not convinced!

 

[Tollywood]

It looks like someone “aged” a newer guitar. That buckle rash is highly suspect because it looks sanded rather than worn to me.

 

[Mickzep]

The ‘s’ on the logo does not look right to me.

The seller swears it’s an original 1958.

The electronics look ok though.

 

[thin sissy]

If it's a 1958 I'd expect the pickup to be further from the bridge. But maybe they weren't all like that?

 

[guitplayer]

Looks like a refinned 1955-56. date the pots. Is that a grey tiger cap?

 

[boogieongtr]

The cap should be a Bumble Bee on a 58.

 

[DANELECTRO]

The pickup indicates that it is 1954-1956. The pickup was moved 1/4" north in 1957:

The truss rod cover appears to be a replica part. The profile around the screw is not correct.

The pickguard should have a square edge with no bevel.

I believe that the guitar is probably a 1955-1956 Junior with a refin and at least some if not all parts changed out.

Do you have a photo of the serial number?

 

[Mickzep]

Here’s what the seller sent me...

 

[guitplayer]

Here is a 58 single cut for comparison.

 

[guitplayer]

A 56 I used to own.

 

[Frutiger]

I agree with guitplayer that it's probably a refinish. The shot of the back with the wear would suggest a refinish - it looks like the guitar was pore filled before the white coat which isn't correct. It should be misted in white first, then pore filled. I reckon that's why it looks more opaque than it should.

EDIT: This is the neck of my '56. You can see how the pore filler sits above the white layer and how there's white in the exposed pores, whereas on the guitar in question there's dark filler in the pores and the white is sat on top.

 

[Joe Desperado]

I would think it is a 54-56 based on the bridge locations too. Not sure if all single cuts had that small wire hole from the jack, but in 1958 the double cuts got a larger 1" hole from the jack to the cavity. Not sure if that was on Double Cuts only, or the last of the single cuts too.

 

[Joe Desperado]

..

 

[DANELECTRO]

I dunno. The serial number looks right for a '58, but the pickup position indicates 1954-1956. The photos all look like they were taken in a fog. Better pics would help.