-
Hey all: I've considered a 1950s 175 with a P90 in the past. This one appeared on Reverb again recently and wondered what the collective reaction/opinion was on buying a restored instrument, other than the significant price difference and potential depreciation.
Your insights appreciated as always.
1951 Gibson ES-175 (Restored) - Sunburst 1951 Gibson ES-175 (Restored) - Sunburst | Reverb
-
08-15-2023 08:26 AM
-
The idea is that you are buying an older guitar who's problems have been allegedly taken care of.
- Did it need a fingerboard leveling?
- Did it need a refret?
- Did it need a neck refret?
- Was the top sinking?
- Did it need braces reglued?
- Are the pickups all replaced?
What I find is that most of the restored guitars are not truly restored. They are instruments that were parted out for the pickup and vintage parts value and then roughly put back together with whatever parts they happened to have laying around. And then to add insult to injury, many of the restorers are still selling them for prices as if they were all original.
This has happened to me a number of times including a recent '63 kessel that was "all original" except the PAF pickups had been replaced with counterfeit and the bracing had come unglued. I was fortunate enough that the seller gave me a partial refund but it was not quite commensurate with what I would have offered if I had bought it - knowing it was parted out and needed major repairs...
-
I would ask about smell. It looks like mold inside to me. It's a really tough job to get rid of it. Other than that depreciation is the only downside. To a guy like me it wouldn't matter much at the right price. I would enjoy something that age, relatively clean. Wonder why they didn't change that last piece of binding??
-
on the guitar on reverb, it looks like the bracing is not quite tightly glued. Someone sprayed some glue in, after-the-fact but did not clamp it. I'd stay away.
-
Depends on who did the work and how good they are/were.
Are you a player or a collector?
What was done?
If you're asking in general, there are many answers and it's definitely a case by case question.
If you're asking about this guitar specifically, and the work was done in house by Gibson where they have the craft, materials and finishes of the actual Gibson shop, I'd say it looks really good. Try it and see if you feel a connection. Take into account that with all that work and a refinish, there'll be a period of 'green-ness' that you'll need to break in, but that won't be more than a year of playing before it feels like an older guitar. I think the re-binding is a plus. It'll give you many more years.
If you're a player, and it feels good, it looks like a worthy instrument. They don't make them that way anymore, and I have no feeling about authentic collectors' mystique so I think if it felt like a good fit, it'd be appealing.
In the end, nobody can tell you what's a good match. Nobody can tell you if it'll make you a better player.
-
I would take Jack’s advice. He probably has the most experience buying vintage here on this forum.
-
Agree w/ most of this though I know some people that refinished their personal guitars and felt they never sounded as good as before no matter how much it was played afterwards.
Originally Posted by Jimmy blue note
I don't buy refins for the simple fact they're a tough sell down the road. It would have to be a very very special instrument for me to even consider it, I'd rather spend more for an original example. there's a lot of guitars out there and there's always going to be another. A 175 isn't a particularly rare guitar so it would have to be a great instrument and priced accordingly low for me to consider it.
-
Two of my three vintage D'Angelicos had some restoration work before I got them. Prior to my purchase, I vetted the guitars by talking to the excellent luthiers who did the work. I could not be more pleased with both guitars.
Old guitars often need work. If the right luthier does the work, the guitar is improved. If the wrong luthier does the work, the guitar's problems can be made worse. Do your due diligence before buying.
-
That's right! Especially 175s. Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
-
Here's a minority viewpoint, at least among gearheads if not over here at JG.be:
P90s are P90s are P90s. The P90 is an incredibly robust design. An A5 / 7800 Ohm P90 sounds the same to me no matter who wound it, or when, or what color the insulation is. IME you won't hear any difference whether Jason Lollar personally licked the stamp on the package, or it's a used Gibson unit, or it's a $35 Chinese special from Guitar Fetish. And double that for jazz, where you're aiming straight for a clean sound.
(And don't even get me started on ancient capacitors.)
All the best with your quest!
-
I wonder why the work order says “new switch” on a single p/u guitar?
Keith
-
If the seller can produce documentation showing gibson did the work and they will accept a return if not as described and its what you want I wouldnt hesitate. Resale value may be effected but youd be getting a properly restored instrument and (im gonna get lynched for this) its unlikely youll hear a difference in a properly refinished laminate constructed guitar. How long do you think a finish needs to age before you can "hear" it. If it was an old carved D'ang or L5 or equivalent it would be a legitimate concern. If gibson restored it youve still got a fine vintage instrument with no issues! A string or pick change will make a bigger difference in tone on that guitar than a refinish.
I expect to be shunned for these remarks
-
Not by me Originally Posted by Rickco
-
I agree. Restoration can be done very well in the hands of a great luthier. I currently have 5 D’Angelicos. Of the five, the early 16” “snakehead” with no restoration at all (but does have a John D’A installed stairstep tailpiece) is the best sounding to pretty much everyone who has played them. My next favorite is my 1940 Style B which was completely refinished, fretboard planed, and refretted. The restoration was done by a meticulous luthier I have complete trust in. The results are an incredible sounding archtop which plays as smoothly and easily as any acoustic archtop I’ve ever handled. It sounds amazing with fairly fresh lacquer, so I assume it will likely continue to improve over the years. Originally Posted by Stringswinger
That said, this ES-175 may be a nice playing and sounding guitar, but the work shown looks kind of sloppy. The work order shown is from 15 years ago also. What may have happened in the intervening time?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
good point and why did the pickup hole route needed to be modified for a P-90 since that's what it came w/ originally [unless someone modified it for something else in it's life] Originally Posted by floatingpickup
-
The rarer the guitar, the more likely it is that I would accept restoration work, so long as the price reflects that. In the case of D'Angelicos, these were expensive guitars purchased primarily by professional players, and then played hard. It is fairly common to find them with some degree of restoration, just as it is to find prewar Martins with some restoration. Sunburst Les Pauls still sell for big money with minor restoration. Again, this is usually reflected in the price. Originally Posted by ThatRhythmMan
However, I'm not sure that I would put a 175 in that category, they are by no means rare, and I would be concerned about resale on those and indeed many other vintage guitars with restoration. When I have purchased vintage guitars I have always tried to find ones that are fairly clean, with "normal playing wear". No one seems to mind a bit of aging, and you can usually get back out with your money or even a small profit. But you should approach refins etc with a big caution flag. And with a bunch of changed parts, what are you really buying? And contrary to what someone else said, I would never buy a vintage electric with changed pickups. That's kind o f why you are buying vintage, to me. YMMV etc.
-
I agree up until never buying a vintage electric with changed pickups. Sometimes, such as in ES-175s, the build of a ‘50s guitar is much lighter than later examples. They have a different sound to me no matter what pickups are in them. In the case of those that came from the factory with PAFs, perhaps the majority no longer have their original pickups. I wouldn’t advise anyone against buying them, and they can of course be had for far less than all original examples. Originally Posted by bluejaybill
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
For that matter, why would Gibson rebind the entire body except for the point on the cutaway? Since the serial number is gone from the label, it's impossible to know if that repair order is from this guitar. Originally Posted by floatingpickup
It also looks to me like there was a fairly long crack through the jack hole that was repaired with a rectangular wood patch that serves as a big cleat and reinforces the jack hole. If that work sheet is from this guitar, I assume that's part of what's described as "repair". If this one plays and sounds great, it should make a working musician happy. But it's had a hard life and its price should reflect that.
-
Good points. I'm also kind of free to be more lenient on the status because of the repairs because I know if I loved the feel of it and it developed a problem structurally, it's just another weekend project for me to put it right, which, to be honest, if I'd had that guitar and I was in the Gibson shop on their dime, I'd have popped the back and done a proper and improved brace job, especially knowing that the thing was being rebound anyway. Originally Posted by wintermoon
So I'll admit, I'm a bit cavalier about giving it a nod cuz everything is a project and a platform for improvement for me. I definitely see the point of those who say err on the side of caution. And maybe I'm giving Gibson shop more mojo than they actually wield.
I could live with that fish myself, but yeah, there a lot more in the sea.
Maybe it'd be a real conflict if they came down a grand on the tag.
-
judging from the inside that thing looks like it might have been one of the guitars that went for a swim in the Nashville flood of 2010. but if the repair invoice is indeed from this guitar that would rule that out.
regardless, someone put a lot of money into restoring a guitar that at the time was likely worth less than the current asking price
-
I sold a great-playing single pickup '50s ES-175 a few years back that had been modified to accommodate a humbucking pickup, then restored back to accommodate a P-90. Originally Posted by wintermoon
-
I'm a fan of '50's 175s.
I am surprised at the amount of dirt covering the label and inside. Looks nasty and moldy. Too bad you can't get a sniff test in the description, but if you could it might read like "...smells like a 1954 gym shoe with the foot still in it", or "... smells like a corked bottle of Mad Dog 20 20"!
That shot of the inside does look like it's been through the war.
-
It looks like you're potentially going to scrape the bottom of someone else's barrel.
Enjoy the GAS and move on.
You'll look back in time when you have a good example and count your lucky stars, you didn't delve into whatever fresh hell that is.
Don't forget, the 4k you put into this, is the 4 you don't have to put into a much better one that comes up on a quick sale.Last edited by Archie; 08-16-2023 at 03:29 AM.
-
The ticket seems to say the neck was replaced. As someone else noticed, it refers to a switch that the guitar doesn't have.
The thing that bothers me the most is the messy look of the interior.
So, the ticket might not be for this guitar which makes that messy look even more concerning.
-
Pretty sure it means neck reset and nut replaced. Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
Reply With Quote
Recommandations for Hollowbodies for $600 and under?
Today, 05:20 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos