Is this a counterfeit L4 CES?

[jzucker]

Looks funny to have the solid inlays, 5ply binding and the serial number doesn't make sense to me...

Attention Required! | Cloudflare

[omphalopsychos]

Yes. That model didn't even exist then. Headstock shape is ridiculous and there are numerous other indicators.

[deacon Mark]

It is not even a good fake cannot believe they think they can get away with this.

[wintermoon]

It is not even a good fake cannot believe they think they can get away with this.

they may not even know much about the model let alone this particular one's history, so may not be trying to get away w/ anything really

[Minor Seven Flat Five]

This was discussed some time ago at the Gibson forum

1968 L4-CES - real or fake? - Gibson ES - Gibson Brands Forums

[Hammertone]

Well, that's an interesting guitar, IMO. It might be a great-playing instrument. The bound f-holes & headstock, multi-bound 22-fret neck, and block inlays are intriguing. A lot of work went into either modifying or putting together this thing. Worth asking the seller to confirm a few things via photography, very easy to do:
-pix of the undersides of the pickups and the bridge;
-pix of the pickup cavities to confirm that the top is solid.

[garybaldy]

This was discussed some time ago at the Gibson forum

1968 L4-CES - real or fake? - Gibson ES - Gibson Brands Forums

One of the posts in this link refers to widening the neck. How does one do that?

[Archie]

The gentlemen on the Gibson forum, commenting on the knob placement being correct, as to why he thinks it's genuine, is not entirely accurate, when he claims, most copies get it wrong.
Japanese companies picked up on that in the early 80's.
The neck and binding also looks very Japanese. Very reminiscent of an early 80's Ibanez FA models. Same inlays and binding.
The old FA Ibanez headstock would also give you enough room to make that headstock, although it would look a little elongated, just like the one we're discussing.

But the work to go through to do that, plus that still doesn't quite solve the body, which looks pretty legit.
It could well be genuine but there are too many red flags.

Struggling to understand the fingerboard extension.

Here is an example.

[Max405]

I realize it is a fake, but in my opinion, I think the real one SHOULD have bound holes and a bound headstock.
JD

[sgosnell]

The hardware is certainly pristine for being 50 years old, shows no sign of ever being touched, other than very light wear on the neck pickup. The tailpiece and tuners show no wear that I can see, and it's difficult to conceive how being tuned for 50 years would leave the gold plating untouched.

[Bobby Timmons]

[sgosnell]

Although I will say that the 1978 Benedetto I bought in the mid teens was absolutely mint. Commissioned by a collector, and probably hadn't been played for more than 10 hours since new, if that. Shiny gold isn't necessarily proof of anything, one way or another.

[Cunamara]

I don't have any expertise in this, so I don't know. Looking around the Internet for Gibson ledger images, I did find one page with 8995XX serial numbers which was marked "custom shop." Unfortunately, the available image was about 100 guitars earlier than this one. Is it an oddball custom order guitar?

I have always thought that if I was going to counterfeit Gibson guitars to try to make a quick buck, I would choose models that are much easier to counterfeit than an archtop guitar. Les Paul Juniors, SG's, even standard Les Pauls would be much easier fake than an archtop. Plus, the potential market would be much, much larger.