The Gibson ES-335

What the what? A "goof strip"????

What’s the heck is this? Here’s a very original 64 which is complete with all of its original paperwork-including the invoice and it seems to have an extra piece of plastic between the neck pickup and the neck. Now, Gibson has been know to “adapt” partially built guitars to become slightly different guitars. Most of you are probably familiar with the “goof rings” on some 70′s goldtop Les Pauls that fill the gap between the mini humbuckers that were apparently placed in the P90 routs. Waste not, want not, I guess. But, while those aren’t particularly common, they aren’t exactly rare either. But the “goof strip” if that’s what it is on this guitar is a new one on me. It was sent to me by a reader who asked me if it was original and I have almost no doubt that it is. I asked him to pull the neck pick to see what the rout looks like. I’ll update the post as soon as I get it. It would make sense, I suppose that if the router slips on an already completed 335 body, that it wouldn’t automatically hit the trash bin but I would expect maybe a “2″ stamp to indicate a flaw. Not here. We all are aware that weird stuff happened all the time and if any one of you out there has some oddball feature like this, I’d like to see it. The first thing I though was that perhaps they were messing with a new way to do the neck join at the tenon. Gibson did do some unusual things like that-I had a 335 that appeared to have been stained using a rag rather than a spray gun that was authenticated as original. I guess the sprayer got clogged and he needed to hit his quota. It was, perhaps, the darkest cherry 335 I’ve had. Back to the “goof strip”-it occurred to me that it was sort of like the upper cover on an SG which covers part of the tenon. But I really think it’s covering an oversized rout. You can see a little bit of unfinished area at the lower left hand corner as well. On the same subject, some later 60′s 335s have a thin black ring around the 3 way. I had one a few years back and have seen a few since. Of course, I can’t find a photo but I do still have the ring since the guitar was broken and parted out.  No lettering telling you treble or rhythm like a Les Paul or SG, just a plain thin black ring. What would we do without all these silly minutiae that occupy so much of out time and make this all so much fun.

Don't have the guitar but here's the ring. It's much smaller than the "poker chip" on a Les Paul. Go figure. Haven't seen one earlier than 68.

You would think that the nice folks at Gibson wouldn’t do anything to diminish the value of their vintage guitar market but at the same time, their clientele is clamoring for more and more accurate reproductions. The aftermarket parts makers-especially in Japan-have gotten really good at making parts that are nearly indistinguishable from the original vintage parts. Clever aging make it even harder to tell just what the heck is on that 62 you just bought. To make matters worse, Gibson is also doing a pretty good job reproducing their own vintage parts. Recently I bought a 62 ES-335 that, to my eye, looked exactly right. It’s always tough to buy a guitar over the internet or even over the phone depending solely on photos and descriptions. I’ve had original owners swear they never changed a part other than the strings only to find out that it’s got the wrong bridge or the wrong pickups.

Here are four bridges-two repros and two originals. The gold one is easy-no makers mark. But look at the letters. The font is a little too narrow and the letters aren't as flat as they should be in the gold one and the top one which is the other repro. Look also at the crossbar of the "A"

The 60′s were a time of “forgetfulness” it seems and those of us who were there and were old enough to partake remember it well. Or, uh, don’t remember it well. Or maybe remember that there was some illicit stuff going on and maybe you did something to your guitar that seemed pretty cool at the time but that you’ve now conveniently forgotten. OK, you get it. typically, when a “new” guitar arrives at my house or ay my studio in New York, I try to go through it immediately so that if something isn’t what it’s supposed to be, I can get it packed back up and on its way back to the seller. The seller is usually pretty indignant or pretty embarrassed. It’s pretty hard to tell which over the phone. The louder they protest, the more likely it is that they got caught doing something unseemly. Or not. Like I said-it’s tough to tell. The problem was the bridge. This guitar was in great, great shape, so I really couldn’t use wear patterns to distinguish what parts were original and what parts were correct or what parts were repros without some pretty close scrutiny. The bridge looked perfect. The old Historic Gibson ABR-1 didn’t have the mark on the back from the company who did the manufacturing, nor did it have the serif (the little line) on the bottom of the number “1″. Then they added it but the  edges of the rectangular indentation the words “Gibson ABR-1″ sat in were kind of sloped and that gave the repros away. Then, it appears that they fixed that too and I had a bridge that looked awfully good. To make matters worse I have terrible eyesight. I wear contact lenses AND glasses most of the time. I can’t see close up worth a damn unless I take the lenses out and take off the glasses and put on magnifiers. So, I’ve got a bridge that I think is a repro but it looks perfect. Too new looking, but perfect. Then I got real up close and personal and started finding all sorts of little things. First was the font-it was just a little too narrow and the relief of the letters was wrong. On the real ones they are kind of flat. On the repros they are sharper.  You can also note that the “A” in ABR-1 has a lower crossbar in the repro and appears a good bit narrower. When I removed the saddles, I saw something else. In the pockets where the saddles sit, there are no markings in the original. They’re usually full of crud from years of playing but I have a pretty clean one here. The repro has three circular tooling marks in the high E, the G and the low E slots. Then I looked at the notches where the saddle adjustment screws go. On the original the sides are sloped -still “u” shaped but with sides that head slightly outward. the repro had u shaped notches too but the sides were dead straight up and down. So now you know. Look closely and always, always be suspicious of parts that look too new-even on a mint guitar because even if the guitar sits in its case for 45 years unplayed, the nickel will still tarnish and should have a patina. You won’t always have a couple of real ones to use as a comparison, so these photos should help.

Buenos notches. The good ones are on the bottom. The uppers are the repro and are very different from the original

See the little circles on the top one? There not supposed to be there. And yet, they are. It's one thing to forget what you did in the 60's but when a repro bridge made in 2011 shows up on your supposedly all original guitar, something ain't right.

Lucky you. This guitar will cost as much as 25% less than an equal stoptail and all you have to do is take off the Bigs and put on a stop. Same tone and playability for way less money. On the other hand, if the market ever goes back up, then the stoptail will outperform this one everywhere but on the stage. But, hey, are you a player or an investor?

The question I get most from readers is: “What’s it worth if…” You can finish the sentence yourself. The one that seems to vex a lot of people-especially the folks selling Grampa’s old Gibson is why an original Bigsby devalues an all original guitar by that much. Why would an extra cost option do that? And then they might ask, “then why is a hardtail Strat worth less?” I’ve asked that one myself. It all comes down to what folks want. There was a time, back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, when a Bigsby was a desirable option. You couldn’t do a lot of the really self indulgent, feedback laden, psychedelic stuff without a whammy-although they weren’t called whammys back then. But that was then. Now, the Bigsby isn’t so desirable. Whoever it is who decides what options players and collectors really want has decided that a Bigsby or other unit on your ES-335 is a big downer and knocks up to 25% off the value. That seems high but I don’t make the rules. But there is a silver lining. Most early ES-335′s that came with a Bigsby or Maestro were already drilled for the stoptail studs and they were covered by something. You’ve all seen the “Custom Made” plaque. There are also pearl inlays (my favorite), black plastic covers and even nickel covers. The conventional wisdom is that a Bigsby equipped ES is worth 25% less than an original stoptail. That made some sense when these were under $10,000 but is my  1960 ES-345 in blonde worth 25% less than an original stop? On that guitar, that’s a $10,000 reduction which is nuts.  On a ’64 ES-345, that’s a difference of maybe $2500. I don’t think an arbitrary percentage makes sense here. There’s no “official” guide to these kind of things although the Blue Book would like you to stick with the 25% (which is probably where it came from). I propose a separate price scale. I’ve found that on most ES-335 and ES-345 models, the Bigsby/studs option seems to devalue the guitar by around 10-15%. There aren’t very many Bigsby only block necks but there are quite a number of 345s and some 58-61 335s. With no factory stoptail stud holes, the option to convert to the more desirable stoptail is gone unless you want to start drilling holes in your guitar. In this case, the difference seems to be the 25% that is generally accepted. That begs the question: “Which is worth less-a factory Bigsby with studs or an original stoptail with Bigsby holes? I honestly don’t know. It can be tough to tell which came first. You can tell on the red ones by looking at the bushings to see if there’s any red finish on them. If there is, then they are original. You could look for lacquer on a sunburst. But, really, how big a deal is this? It goes back to the value of a hole which I’ve covered a few times. A Bigsby/stud 335 has 4 holes in the top. But a Bigsby only has just two. A stoptail also has two. A 335 with the Bigsby removed has 6 extra holes in it. None of this affects the sound or playability by very much. What about tuner holes or reamed out tuner shaft holes? 10%? 5%? I guess it also depends on what other issues there are. A mint 335 with Grovers would be affected differently than a beater. The question is how? Percentage-wise, the Grovers on the mint one would be less but dollar wise they would affect the value more. There are no rules. For example, we all accept refins and headstock repairs at around half price but why is it when I price a refin that way, it disappears in a day or two? Supply and demand? Maybe, but I think the real truth is that, while the convention is for 50%, the reality is that buying a refin is a great way to get a vintage piece that you otherwise couldn’t afford. If done well and with the proper materials, it will look as good and sound as good as one that is all original. And while I don’t usually go for headstock breaks, the same can apply-if it’s done right, a headstock repair can be almost irrelevant on every front except value. Frankly, it gives me a headache. It’s enough to make you ask the question: “What’s it worth if…?”

I love this photo. It was apparently taken during the final British tour in late 65. It shows the guitars we all associate with JP&G but what's that in the upper right? It's a stoptail 345 is what it is and it was George's main stage guitar for that tour

When I watched the Ed Sullivan Show on that February night in 1964, I was actually already very interested in their guitars. I recall getting right up close to the (black and white) screen and trying to read the name on the headstock of John’s guitar. It sure looked like “Rickenbacker” to me but who had ever heard of a Rickenbacker? George’s Gretsch Country Gent was easy to recognize and Paul’s Hofner bass was just plain strange. Being a Beatle would have meant that you could play any guitar you wanted and I’ve always found it interesting to try to get into their heads when it came to their choices. As far as I know, none of them ever owned a 335 but all three of them owned Epiphone Casinos which, frankly, was not a

This photo was taken in Sheffield, England in December of '65

particularly high end guitar. Casinos, like ES-330s, could be fairly problematic at high volume. The feed back easily and I’m guessing if you’re a Beatle, feedback was not something you wanted beyond the opening note of “I Feel Fine.”  I also found it interesting that in the mid to late 60′s I was playing essentially the same guitar that they were. I had a 63 ES-330 for a number of years. But there is an ES that’s much less well known that counts as a Beatle guitar. It’s a sunburst stoptail ES-345 that George bought some time in 1965 and began playing in November of that year. He began using it as his main stage guitar after his second Country Gent fell off the back of their van and was run over by a truck in 1965. The 345 looks to me to be a late 63 or a 64. It was pretty common for higher end guitars to be purchased a year or two or even three years after they were shipped. Especially in the UK.  They toured for much of 1965 (that was Shea Stadium if you’re old enough to remember) but the 345 didn’t hit the stage until very late in the year. The Beatles did their final British tour in December of ’65 and George began it with his beloved second Gretsch Country Gentleman. After the aforementioned incident involving a truck ( or a lorry, if you want to be culturally correct), George brought out the 345 and used it for the rest of the tour along with his Rickenbacker 12 string. After the tour ended around Christmas, the guitar wasn’t seen in public again. I have no idea what happened to it but I like to think that maybe it’s one of the ones that passed through my hands over the years.

There certainly aren't a lot of photos of George's 345 and while George looks unusually absorbed in his playing here, I know exactly what he's thinking. "hey, this Varitone doesn't suck all the tone out of this one."

Wait a second, isn't that George with a long guard dot neck? It is but the guitar belonged to Joe Brown of Joe Brown & the Bruvvers. Apparently, the Beatles were the opening act in sometime in 1963 and Paul's brother Michael snapped this photo. All these guitars have to be somewhere.

Here's a 66 with very rounded Mickey Mouse )almost ears. One of the big variables in 66 is the shape of the ears. Compare these to the one at the bottom which has what some call "fox" ears

OK, so Gibson made some big changes necessitated by the huge runup in guitar sales that occurred in early 64. Interestingly, these changes are largely responsible for the end of what we call “The Golden Era”. How do you otherwise explain the fact that a December 1964 ES-335 will cost you somewhere between $10,000 and $20,000 and a January 66, made just 13 months later will cost between $3000 and $5000? I’m purposely skipping 65 because the transition makes it impossible to generalize. What I mean is a big neck 65 with nickel parts is worth more than a big neck with chrome which is worth more than a skinny neck and so on. The 66′s are mostly the same both in features and value. Back to the question at hand. Let’s take a close look at the 66 ES-335. The biggest change is the neck profile. It’s a full 1/8″ narrower at the nut-and that’s a lot- and the profile is quite a bit shallower. It is still round rather than flat – the laws of geometry tell us that even with a depth equal to the depth of, say, a 62. it will feel more rounded because the neck is narrower. The other big change is the trapeze tailpiece replacing the stoptail. There were other changes worth noting: The fingerboard changed from Brazilian to Indian rosewood, the pickups, while still pre T-tops (and I know I’ll get an argument from someone) were the later type with poly coated wire. Tuners are double line Kluson rather than single and the truss rod cover has a narrow bevel. That seems like a lot but is it enough to justify the huge price discrepancy. There were some big changes by ’68 too but they aren’t really worth much (if any) less than a 66. Let’s look at what’s good about a 66 and why it’s a relative bargain. I don’t believe the trapeze really affects tone much and I don’t believe it affects sustain that much either. It looks kind of wrong and that isn’t inconsequential. The pickups and the construction of the guitar are more important in that regard and those things didn’t change much. The pickups are generally considered to be very good but not as “good” as the earlier ones which were identical to later PAFs. I agree with that assessment but they can still sound truly great. The only thing that changed, besides the covers, is the wire they wrapped the coil with. It went from enamel coated to poly coated and that changed the tone a bit. I think the big thing is the current trend toward larger necks. In some ways it’s like a “mine’s bigger than yours” thing. You hear folks actually bragging about how big the neck is on their guitars (“It’s a freakin’ baseball bat, dude”). That’s just sophomoric silliness. In other ways, it goes to playability. I like a wider nut on my guitars. The depth of the neck is of lesser importance to me but the extra space for “cowboy” chords is really appreciated. However, if you have no problem with the narrower nut-and Fender players probably have less of a problem than Gibson players, then the 66 is an awesome choice for a first foray into vintage. If you can’t play the narrow nut, then, by all means, don’t buy a 66. Most players will get used to it fairly quickly and if it was the only way I could get myself a vintage 335, then I would try to adapt. In fact, the first one I bought when I returned to the vintage fold in the 90′s was a 66 ES-345. I didn’t want to spend too much and I loved the guitar. It led me back to all this (blog, business and collection) and it was an excellent and not too expensive starting point. If you really hate the trapeze, look for one that’s been converted to a stop-especially one where they put the stop in the right place. It will diminish the collector value, to be sure, but it will look cooler and that’s worth something, isn’t it?

The ears on this one are short and pointy. There's a third type in 66 and a 4th.

"The Mexican" One of the last Golden Era Gibson ES-335s. It's an early 65 with an original stoptail and a big 64 sized neck. I found this in Guadalajara, Mexico.

Most of us place the beginning of the Great Guitar Boom precisely on Feb 9th, 1964 at around 8:45 PM EST. Why so exact? That’s about the time the Beatles appeared on Ed Sullivan for the first time. I’m not totally sure of the exact time-I remember having to slog through the usual dog acts and ventriloquists to get to JPG&R. I was 12. I was impressionable. I was hooked. I bugged my Dad to buy me a guitar and he came home with a Kay flat top with terrible action that was just about impossible to learn on but I started lessons within a few months. Most of us Gibson types feel that the Golden Era ended in 1964 with a little slopover into 65. Fender folks fall in line to around that time as well. Is the fact that so many kids wanted electric guitars the reason that the perceived quality of the instruments started its long  decline? Is it true that Gibson couldn’t keep up with the demand? The simple answer is yes. But there’s more to it than that. Fender was giving Gibson fits because they were mass producing guitars cheaper and faster than they could and with the sales going through the roof, Gibson had to do something. It’s a little like New Coke, if you remember that. Consider this: Gibson sold 1241 ES-335′s in 1964. In 1967, they sold 5718 and these were not “starter” guitars either. So, the guitar boom was on and all the guitar makers benefitted (and they sprung up like mushrooms).  Suddenly Gibson was trying to appeal to a younger, hipper and less discerning buying public who was inundated with rock groups appearing on TV with their oh so cool guitars. There were no less than 4 TV shows that emerged that put the spotlight on the rock groups of the day. Shindig! showed up on ABC in September of 64, Hullabaloo was NBC’s entry in 1965. Where the Action is was created by Dick Clark and aired after school on ABC (House band Paul Revere and the Raiders). Finally, there was a show that had actually been on the air since 1961 which was sort of a LA based American Bandstand called The Lloyd Thaxton Show which went national in late 64. That’s a lot of programming showing a

Hermie's in Schenectady where retail rules. Still there with the same sign out front. I'm pretty sure Hermie himself is no longer with us, however.

lot of guitars. Beatles aside, most of them were Fenders, if memory serves and Gibsons were a rarity. Sure, there were Guilds and Voxes and Gretsches but Fender seemed to rule the roost. I bugged my father to take me to the local Fender dealer-the estimable Hermies Music Store in Schenectady, NY-our motto “we will sell no guitar below retail” to get an electric. Gibson wasn’t even on the radar.  I ended up with a white Duo Sonic and a Princeton Amp. So Gibson saw that even though their sales were climbing exponentially, they had to do something to compete with Fender. I assume they took a look at Fender guitars and tried to figure out what the attraction was. Apparently it wasn’t the bolt on neck. Apparently it wasn’t the contoured body. It must have been the skinny neck because that was Gibson’s response. The common perception was that a slim neck played “faster” and fast was what a lot of kids were about on their guitars. The perception was that the best lead player was the guy who could play the fastest and Fenders were known as fast. Gibson had to compete and so they narrowed the nut  to 1 9/16″ which was about 1/16″ narrower than most Fenders of the day. The addition of the trapeze tail was related as well but only because it eliminated a step or two from the manufacturing process. And what are the elements that separate the Golden Era from the years that followed? Of course, the trap tail and the skinny neck. Next up, we’ll take a close look at the 66 model year.

This is a fairly typical 66. Smaller pointy ears, chrome hardware, trapeze tail and, of course, the 1 9/16" nut width

ES-345s were the hot seller this year. I think I sold close to 30 of them. They are still my favorite with the Varitone connected or without.

I don’t actually have a topic that is New Years related but I thought this might be a good time to take a look at the vintage market with regard to ES 335, 345 and 355s. I really can’t look ahead since I don’t have a crystal ball so, assuming the Mayans are wrong and the world doesn’t end in 2012, we’ll all have to be content to look at the market over the past year. You sure can’t tell anything from the majority of the dealers. When I go through the 335s on Gbase, I have to laugh. If you looked at the guitars that were listed at this time last year and the ones that are listed today, I would guess that at least half of them are still for sale. In the fourth quarter, the market for stop tail 335s got very strong. The market for Bigsbys? Not so much. But the term strong is relative. When I see 62-64 block necks both on Gbase and Ebay north of $30,000, I understand why none of them sell. Unless the guitar is dead mint, that’s not a reasonable price.  Dot necks have held their value better with 59′s leading the way, of course. But, the average dot neck has crept below $20,000. The one’s that are fetching the lower prices are usually 60, 61 and 62′s. The 58 and 59′s are doing somewhat better.  My sales range this year for 1958-1964 ES-335s (excluding refins, repairs and exotic colors) is $9000 to $25,000.  Average no issue stoptail block was around $16K. Average Bigsby/studs version was around $12,000. I only sold perhaps 6 or 7 dot necks this year and no 58s and only one 59, so my average will be skewed downward. But I can tell you this, the stoptail dot necks, while not flying out of the dealers are still a very desirable guitar. I believe the only reason they are sitting unsold is that the owners are asking 2007 prices. The old cliche that says an item is worth what someone will pay still holds true and I’m sure some very high dollar 335′s changed hands this year. But I think we have a face a basic truth about the economics of 2011: The 1% with all the money is going to spend whatever it takes to get whatever they want. The players and the small collectors are going to look for the deals. That’s pretty much how it went for me.  On the ES-345 front, the market was softer and the bargains have been fast and furious.  A PAF equipped ’60 for under $9K? A stoptail near mint 64 for under $9500? These are reasonable post bubble prices that I got for 345s.  I prefer not to name names but c’mon $29,999 for a red ’63 ES-345?  Go check Gbase.  This years crop of 1959-1964 ES-345s ranged from $6500 for a Bigsby/stud ’64 to $18,000 for a near mint ’60 stop.  We’ll leave the red 59 and the blondie out of the equation. I didn’t sell a whole lot of 355s this year-maybe 8? The mono 355s are very strong-they are out the door sometimes before I even get them. The foreign market is nuts for 355′s. I had one go to Japan, another to Australia, one to the UK and another to Germany. This is probably a good thing since I don’t have to worry that the US Government is going to confiscate them due to the use of Brazilian rosewood. The range for 355′s this year was $6500 to $15,000. The top seller was a mono 59 in excellent condition. My intent here is to keep you from spending more than you have to in order to get the guitar you want. be patient and when the right one comes along at the right price, don’t give it too much thought because someone else is going to snag it from under you. Whether you buy from me or from someone else, you will be a lot happier knowing the price you paid is what the guitar is worth not someones idea of what it was worth 5 years ago. Oh, and Happy New Year and thanks to all 35,624 of you for reading what I write and helping me to enjoy another year of guitar buying, selling, playing and just yakking about them.

Here's a whole load of 61's. They seem to come in bunches. All sold.

This is a 62 set up with a stop but is a Bigsby/studs version. Note the brown case-last year for those too.

I thought I had done this already and went through the old posts and somehow I never did a post looking specifically at the 62 model year for the ES-335. And it’s a pretty interesting one because it was the year that Gibson switched from dot neck to block neck. Most folks assume that 61′s are dots and 62′s are blocks. Au contraire. Gibson made the transition to the block neck during 1962 probably in the Spring. I’ve never seen a stat that says how many dot necks and how many block necks were shipped but based on what I’ve seen in the real world, it’s got to be perhaps 8 blocks to every dot. They made nearly 900 335s that year and it was the first year that cherry was the more popular color (by more than 2:1). What’s really odd is that I’ve only had one red 62 block and I’ve had a least 8 or 9 62 block necks. I have two more I’m buying and they are both sunburst as well.  I have no explanation. Of course, 62 is also the year Gibson started phasing in the patent number pickup. Most of you know that the early patent and the late PAF are identical. Only the sticker is different but that doesn’t stop folks (including me) from charging a $1000 to $2000 premium for that sticker. Nobody ever said that collectors were sensible. A couple of other things occurred during 62 as well-although I’m going to get an argument from someone on this because it isn’t entirely clear. The saddles changed to nylon. “Hold it”, you say…”the saddles changed in 61-I know because my SG has them”. And you would be right but they didn’t change on 335′s until 62. In fact of the 8 or 9 62′s I’ve had and quite a number of others I’ve seen, most of them still show metal saddles. The other change during 62 was from the no wire ABR-1 to the wire version. This is trickier to figure out because alot of people swapped out their no wire bridge for the wire type for the simple reason that they got tired of chasing their saddles around the bandstand every time they broke a string. It seems to me that most are no wire and that the transition occurred late in the year. Lastly, 62 was pretty much the last year for the brown case. Although I’ve had a 63 SG in a brown case, I haven’t had a 63 335 in one. That doesn’t mean they aren’t out there. As I’ve mentioned aboout 100 times, the cases were often supplied by the music store and if they had a brown one kicking around the back room in 63, they wouldn’t hesitate to put a 63 335 in it. The 1962 is a fairly popular year for players and collectors because it is usually the least expensive “Golden Era” 335. Surprised? It has to do with the neck profile more than anything. While it is the same (more or less) as a 60 (except the earliest ones) and a 61, the 62 block isn’t a dot neck so it isn’t worth as much. OK, why is it worth less than a 63…after all it’s more likely to have 2 PAFs, right? That’s true but many 63′s have the big 64 size neck which to many buyers trumps a PAF. I would say a 62 and an early 63 are the “bargains” of the era. Stop tails in great shape should be from $15K-$18K depending on the condition. Don’t go looking on Ebay-the dreamers have them as high as $32,000 and be careful on Gbase as well. There are 62/63s for as high as $25K.  The average among the dealers in still over $20K but those guitars aren’t flying out the door-some have been listed for 3 years now. A Bigsby or Maestro version will be thousands less. You should be able to find one for as little as $10,000 but it’ll probably be a Maestro. Make sure the string break angle isn’t too shallow. It will cause big string benders all kinds of problems because the strings will fly right out of the saddles. From a tone standpoint, most are excellent. These are extremely consistent and well built. If you can deal with the slim (front to back) neck, you can save a lot of money and have a guitar that be the equal of almost anything out there. The best guitar I owned this year from a tone standpoint was a 62 (but it was a dot neck).

OK, it's the wrong red and it's refinished but it's still a 62 dot neck and it's still the best one I had all year.

OK, it's an SG but it's easier to see because of all that hardware. This is new looking nickel-even though this is a real 64. Looks a lot like chrome.

This is what nickel looks like after 45 years of wear and tear on a real player. Chrome won't do that.

Yes, another Steely Dan (Aja) reference. Can you actually tell chrome hardware from nickel? It’s easy when it’s old but not so easy when it’s new. And why do folks today like nickel on their guitars so much better when the world was all but demanding chrome back in the early 60′s? It’s a pretty interesting story and illustrates how tastes change and how people perceived their guitars. For reasons known only to Gibson, the first humbuckers had stainless steel covers but by 1958 they had switched to nickel plated covers. In fact, all of the brightwork on the first 335s was nickel plated (which probably isn’t really nickel, by the way, but nickel-silver which, by the way has no silver in it, it’s copper, nickel and zinc). Pure nickel is pretty corrosion and tarnish resistant and, whatever it was Gibson was using, wasn’t. So, I’m guessing nickel-silver (or German silver). And the tarnish and corrosion was the problem. Within a couple of years, especially among performers who tend to sweat a lot, the pickup covers, stoptails, bridges and anything else that got sweated on or came in contact with the players hands, started looking pretty crappy. From 58 until 64, every ES-335 had a nickel plated bridge, stoptail (if it had one), pickup covers, pickguard bracket and tuners. You can see on most vintage pieces from this era that they get pretty dull. Back before the days of “relics” and “VOS” and all the other trendy fake worn guitars, people wanted their brightwork to look bright and they took care of their guitars usually getting visibly upset when they smacked the headstock into a cymbal or dinged up the body. Gibson was getting lots of complaints. Somehow it took 6 years for someone to listen but eventually (by 1965) Gibson started a slow transition to chrome plating. The pickup covers seemed to be the first component probably because the covers showed the most discoloration. By early 65, the stoptail was history and the trapeze was substituted and they were often the next item to go chrome followed by the bridge and even later, the pickguard bracket. The tuners stayed nickel throughout the 60′s. It interesting that you can still find nickel pickguard brackets into 1967 (I guess they had a lot of them on hand). The transitions were not consistent nor were they short in duration. It seems that they even used one nickel pickup cover and one chrome cover on occasion which probably looked OK when new but would shortly take on a mismatched appearance. The chrome plated parts stayed bright and shiny pretty much forever or until the plating wore off. But chrome is pretty durable so most of the 65 and later 335s you see still have shiny brightwork. It pits and corrodes eventually but it doesn’t tarnish. It’s sort of surprising that most of us now prefer the look of tarnished nickel. I’m guessing because most vintage players like their “naturally aged” vintage pieces and nickel allows that to happen. I, on the other hand, really like the way nickel looks-especially when it’s still shiny. Most people have chrome plated bathroom fixtures. Mine are all nickel. It can be pretty hard to tell chrome from nickel until you put them next to each other. The nickel will have a greenish warmer cast while the chrome will be bluish (funny you don’t look bluish) and cool looking. Cool as in not warm, not as in “what a cool looking pickup cover”. Gibson has long since listened to their consumers and gone back to nickel plated parts but I suspect that it might be a slightly cheaper process. they probably would have used chrome from the beginning if it saved them a buck or two. Cost consciousness has always been a somewhat unfortunate part of the Gibson credo, after all. Still is.

It's tough to photograph shiny things without the reflections causing the metal to look different than it does. The nickel looks a little gold but the chrome has a cold blue look. The nickel will dull out and tarnish but the chrome will look the same in 40 years as it looks now. In fact, that chrome cover is 44 years old.

It sure looks like Eric's but all red 64s look like Erics-it's a mass produced guitar not a handmade luthier piece. It was shipped two weeks later so it isn't even that close in serial number but the seller still wants $100,000 for it. Do you think he'll get it? I don't think so.

Wow. Check this out on Ebay! I had already written today’s blog entry but I put it aside for this bit of news. It’s a very nice 64 stoptail that’s in wonderful condition and all original too. I would sell you this guitar for around $16,000 or $17,000 but this seller wants…wait for it…A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS!! Why do you suppose it would command that kind of money? Was it played by a very, very famous musician? Nope. Is it a custom made for somebody famous? Maybe it’s NOS-never left its case in 47 years? Nope. It’s…it’s (gasp) 92 serial numbers away from the Clapton 335. Seller says it’s EXACTLY like Eric’s. But then, so is just about every other 64. OK, if it was one number away on either side, then maybe a premium. But I can tell you from experience that close don’t count. I had the 64 23 numbers from Claptons and that one was shipped the very same day as Clapton’s. Did I get a premium when I sold it? Not even close. I mentioned it but didn’t tack on a $84,000 extra just because it’s within 2 weeks of the Clapton 335. The truth is that any 64 commands a small premium precisely because EC played one. That’s why they run slightly more than big neck 63s.  They are great guitars, make no mistake about it. Most of my regular readers know that my all time favorite is a red 64. And just to be accurate, the guitar being sold isn’t exactly like the Clapton 335 because the Clapton 335 had some changed parts. Do you suppose if the seller put a patent number bridge on his and a “custom” truss rod cover that he might get $125,000? Still a relative bargain when you consider what Eric’s sold for. But it didn’t sell for $800K+ because it was a 64 335. It sold for that because it was THE guitar that he performed with on stage for many years-even if it isn’t the “Crossroads” guitar. Noteworthy provenance works like this: If an item was owned by someone notable or famous, the item will accrue additional value. But look at it this way, if I paid $772,500 for President Kennedy’s golf clubs (Arnold Schwartzenegger owns them) and you wanted to sell the golf clubs that belonged to his dog walker, you’d get about the same premium that this guitar deserves. Maybe even more because JFKs dog might have peed on them. OK, I’m being pretty cynical here (which shouldn’t surprise anyone) but really, $100K because it was made 2 weeks after a guitar that’s famous? I don’t understand what some people are thinking sometimes. I know Ebay is full of dreamers and nutcases but here’s a guitar that I would actually buy if he put a sane price on it. And I’m not necessarily calling the seller a nutcase. I’ll just call him a dreamer. There has been an alarming trend in the past 10 years that seems to say that it is OK to dream as big as you want because dreams can and do come true. The truth is they come true for someone else.