- Aug 17, 2002
I’m surprised you even asked for opinions here judging from the guitars you’ve owned in the past.
Thanks. I can't remember what I paid for them but I think you're right! This was from the Eighties and Nineties. I do remember buying my first Burst for £975 in the Seventies! I bought the NBT Burst for $12,500 in 1987. I do have pictures of nearly all of them but it seems Reverb capacity is 1Mb and I'd have to scan some from photos.Nice pictures! I'm guessing you didn't pay $35K for any (or all) of them. I remember the early 90's, I was offered a '58 Burst for $12.5K which was about what I was earning a year at the tender age of 20. Those were the days!
As I said previously, I'm not sure of the Conversion market. I know the parts values but the "husk" seems to be debatable for a lot of reasons, some stated here in these threads. From my own experience of "having owned a few Bursts" I can vouch that this "Mutilated" "Butchered" "Remnant" of a vintage guitar sounds like a Burst, it's not "smoke and mirrors" causing that, it's old wood and a luthier who knew what he was doing. Its history shows, that yes, it had been "Mutilated" and "Butchered" and refinished red (maybe by a George Harrison fan?) but now restored to whatever specification (and WTFC!) to make sweet woody burst tones, which at the end of the day isn't that the point and we discuss it here?I’m surprised you even asked for opinions here judging from the guitars you’ve owned in the past.
I'm not so sure, the parts have added a lot of value to this guitar. That's why I was trying to value just the "husk" but I take your point, thanks for thatPersonally I would pick my Goldtop conversion over a re-topped conversion any day. Yeah it's nice to have a flame top but I'd rather have the original top. Plus this guitar is way over priced IMO. I bought a conversion last year for way less than that I'm based only a few miles from Oxford where this conversion is located.
I feel a retop is near the bottom of the pile when it comes to the hierarchy of conversions, Personally I'd hold out for something better. Im based in the UK, feel free to reach out.
There are a few threads here at the Les Paul Forum on 9 2318.As you wish......... '58 and '60. Then '59 with '59 TV Junior. Last one is a '58 V with Tweed Bassman. Someone had to be the custodians in the past, they're not a myth.
There's a lot, lot more but they'd need resizing for this platform. View attachment 18916View attachment 18917View attachment 18918
The functioning core of the guitar is changed with a retop. It's not a "rule" but it's a significant change to the sound/feel of the instrument. Even the top carve is now different.Who makes these rules?
One can hog out pickup holes, fill in bridge and tailpiece holes, strip off original paint, reset a neck at a different angle...but putting on a different top is a no-no.
If you're butchering up a '56 Chevy to make a '57, you might as well glue some fins on it.
A guitar that can change colour? In one picture it's washed out ,another it looks like it's got a sun tan!Did you see the pics on the seller's website or only the OP pic?
I am perfectly aware that color may change depending on the camera, as well as other parameters, like lightning, use of flash, but also exposure to UV. As you pointed out, there are different sets of pics of the guitar. There is no infos about what time elapsed between the different moments when these pictures were taken. I made my opinion based on the pictures the seller juged good enough to represent the guitar in a satisfying manner.A guitar that can change colour? In one picture it's washed out ,another it looks like it's got a sun tan!
Did you not stop to think the camera might have something to do with that?
I've seen it in the flesh...... it looks like a faded original Burst. A great job!
Thank you for your opinion........The main factor that establishes and secures the value of a vintage '50s Les Paul is the originality. It's pretty simple....the more a given example (say a '52 LP Goldtop) deviates from it's original factory condition, the less it's worth. Removing/replacing significant amounts of original wood on a vintage '50s Les Paul (e.g., complete re-top) is probably the most damaging modification I can think of which will immediately diminish the guitar's vintage value.