Originally posted by David Schwab
View Post
Originally posted by David Schwab
View Post
Lemme put it like this. If I claimed that I had a gold-top Les Paul with dog-ear pickups, would that be incorrect? Certainly the guts are essentially the same, but the guitar actually has 'soap-bar' pickups. If I claimed all the old gold-tops had P-90's, or Fender never made Squiers in Mexico, would anyone disagree? They should. These are the fine distinctions that I am arguing about. I'm just trying to clarify misleading or incorrect information so that somewhere down the line it doesn't get referenced as gospel truth....like Dave's fave link:
http://www.zen-pharaohs.com/guitars/Gibson/es347.htm
Another example-read this and find the totally glaringly WRONG statement:
http://www.epinions.com/inst-review-...397869C0-prod1
I don't know where this text came from originally, but I have seen it in at least one other article which was printed in a music trade magazine. It shows that misleading, incomplete or just plain wrong information can seep out anywhere. Just to be safe, however, let it be known that I will pay REALLY BIG BUCK$ for any authentic mid 60's Les Pauls!
There's certainly a lot of holes in the information about Gibson during its nadir; I'm just trying to point out inaccuracies when I see them- I can't help it, its part of my job. I would really be interested in a deconstruction of one of the "covered encapsulated" DF's (or I suspect, more properly called Series 7's). Heck, I'd like to see as much detail on the Super Humbuckers, True Blues, and other weirdo Gibson pups as has been seen on old PAF's. Well...gotta go finish a touch-up on a headstock repair on a Les Paul 55.
Comment