-
Not a jazz guitar, but figured I could possibly gather some Intel from the group. This was found under the bed, after my father passed. He never mentioned it or played it, to my knowledge. We think it belonged to my grandmother who played mandolin and sang bluegrass in the 60's and 70's. I have only this pic and from what I can tell, it's most likely a late 60s C&W. The bridge is what throws me. It's facing down instead of towards the sound hole which I don't see very often in pics of other C&W models. I understand that this single image makes for a tough ID but I won't have the guitar in my possession for a little while to take a closer look.
-
03-16-2019 01:13 PM
-
Those bridges are no good and notorious for needing replacement. The thing is held in with bolts at the ends hidden under pearl dot. I had one a customer brought me pulling up and I could have glued back down and I suggested get a new bridge so did that.
-
Aside from the neck being too skinny for me, it plays fine.
-
sort of looks like a 70s era J-40/45, but the inlays and headstock combination are puzzling for that time frame. Hummingbird with a replacement pickguard?
-
It also looks like a Super Jumbo but without the truss rod cover. I've found a few pics of C&W with the bridge flipped upside-down but it's far from the norm.
Originally Posted by ugarte
-
Nah, I'm going with a 60's Hummingbird, on the 2 screw truss rod cover, inlays, square shoulders plus a replacement pickguard. Something is a little fishy with that bridge though, (I can't see from the photo if those are pearl dots or screws at each end of the saddle).
If its the real deal its worth a silly chunk of change.
-
Interesting. Well, I should be going to get it soon and I'll have the chance to take a lot more pics to help identify just what it is.
Originally Posted by ugarte
-
Hummingbirds seem to have different tuners and a white outline around the truss cover. This late 50s CW looks more like mine.
Originally Posted by ugarte
-
My J45ADJ has that bridge. The ADJ means adjustable. For awhile, Gibson used adjustable bridges on some flat-tops. The saddle is wooden, and adjusts up and down with the screws at the ends. It's a good idea in theory, but in practice it sucks. The wooden saddle doesn't allow much tone, and the whole contraption is heavier than a standard bridge, which also hurts it. I didn't know any better when I bought mine, but I've seriously considered having someone put a standard bridge on it. I just don't play it enough to justify the cost, though.
-
Nope. Those aren't pearl dots. They're bolts for adjusting the saddle height. I have the same bridge on my '69 Blue Ridge. It's a rosewood, glued-on bridge, not the notorious bolted on plastic bridge with ceramic saddle that's on low-end 60s Gibson acoustics. The saddle is also rosewood. I replaced mine with a Tusq saddle, which makes it a little louder and brighter.
Originally Posted by deacon Mark
To the OP, Gibson went back and forth between "belly-up" and "belly-down" bridges. I think most of the square shoulder dreads (68-ish and later) are belly-down like yours and mine.
Anyway, nice find.
John
-
Thanks for the info, John.
Originally Posted by John A.
-
Seems like the combination of the square shoulders and the bridge should nail it down. . .or a label. I haven't seen a CW with that combination, be nice to see the back.
Originally Posted by John A.
-
To the question of what model that is, based on pickguard shape and fretboard markings, could be either a CW or SJ Natural, depending on the year (they used both names for the same guitar). It's not a hummingbird. Based on the OP saying it has a skinny neck, I'd guess the year is no later than 68, or early '69. Gibson went back to 1 11/16" nuts in '69 (which is what my '69 Blue Ridge has).
John
-
Looks great to me!
I hope it plays well and you get to enjoy it !!!
-
It does sound great....I just HATE the skinny neck.
Originally Posted by Longways to Go



Reply With Quote

Recommandations for Hollowbodies for $600 and under?
Today, 05:20 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos