Transition Firebird,

[GuitarAttack Forum]

I went to a guitar show last weekend looking for an old Firebird.

I found this example - a very rare transition ‘bird from 1964/65. I walked past it several times and finally asked to hold it.

I flipped it over and saw the headstock had been broken off and the repair was pretty bad. I stared thinking…maybe this isn’t a transition Bird at all. Maybe somebody grafted another headstock on it years ago.

I passed on it even though it wasn’t a bad price for a player grade guitar. Kind of lost interest after seeing the headstock.

Have you ever bought a player grade guitar with a bad repair?

John

[antares]

That is a thing of beauty and a joy forever John. I would prefer to see a Lyre Vibrola (which is something I miss on mine) but that's just a cosmetic preference. I fully understand why you passed on it and I would have done the same, I don't think I would buy a guitar with a poor repair job anyway.

OTOH, if the price was acceptable factoring in a professional rework by someone with demonstrable talents in that arena ;<D I may have adopted a different point of view.

Given the nature of headstock breaks, it seems unlikely on the face of it that it was a fraudulent graft. Such a scenario would imply two donor instruments and I think there's too much money involved to make it worthwhile?

Every now and then I consider screwing on a decorative Lyre plate on mine. Derek Trucks has done that on one of his SGs.

でつ e&oe ...

[dnic]

To bad about the break. Of course without it, it would likely be completely out range price wise. I'm not referring to myself, John, I'm sure you know people that are capable of doing that repair.

[antares]

I share your apparent liking for a Firebird John, but I'm not so keen on the so-called "non reverse" 'birds. I'm sure they're great but it's a cosmetic thing again for me. What sold me on a Firebird was that iconic image of Phil Manzanera on the inside of the gatefold sleeve of Roxy Music's "For Your Pleasure" album. Again it's cosmetics!

That said, with the neck through construction it's as stiff as a plank, yet acoustically it has that Stratocaster springy sound, a kind of natural reverb if you will that comes from the "tremolo" bridge assembly,and by rights it has no right to sound like that. Also, being a 2007 Guitar Centre G.O.T.M. the pickups are ceramics and as usual the cork sniffers have an opinion, but I find the pickups seem to play their part in delivering a great sound and sound is 9/10 of the battle isn't it? Everything else can be tweaked. In addition to replacing all the chrome parts for nickel plated, I have improved mine's playability over several attempts and it's sort of OK, although it needs for someone like Dane to take it in hand but the tax takes and logistics costs would be ruinous. I think it needs a reprofile of the frets TBH. You have to get a Firebird John, you just have to, but make certain it comes with the correct Gibson case.



でつ e&oe ...

[Deleted]

Yes I have bought guitars with bad repairs. One I bought for the parts.
2 other ones were neck repairs that where not done well but fixable.
One was a LP EPI that had a peg head fix done with JB weld. I was able to fix it and when done no one could tell that I had done anything to it. I bought that one to see if I could save it. It came out super nice.

For me buying guitars with issues is one of them things. One is it something I can fix and two is it worth fixing?

Like I said. I will sometimes buy them for the parts depending on what kind of parts are on them and of course price.
I do not over pay for a broken or repaired guitar.

I see to many broken or repaired so called vintage guitars going for a lot of stupid prices.

I know I can fix most guitars out there and know that they will be as good as new if not better and no one would ever have to worry about it.
But that’s not the case in most repairs I have seen.

I fixed one guitar that had a broken head stock that had been repaired by a shop when I was in AZ.
Well let’s say I would have been embarrassed to have let that guitar out of my shop. Bad sloppy work all the way around.
I was able to make it better and looked like new again.

The only reason I worked on that guitar was because it was a guitar that had been given to the customer from his grandpa. It was not a high end guitar but worth saving.

Like anything we buy, it really comes down to how much and do I want to deal with any issues like buying guitars that need repairs.
Is it worth it to me to repair something that has already been repaired?
EB

[antares]

I'm going upstairs to the music/guitar/radio room to find my book on the Gibson "pointy" guitars because I obviously wasn't paying attention sufficiently to register the "Transition" 'birds. I suppose I'm correct in observing the non-reverse Firebird headstock on a reverse body?

As Eddie would say- Hum ...

Edit: does that have any effect on the sounds? I rather suspect that the extra length of bass strings over the headstock on a reverse cannot be discounted, after all that was a bit of Jimi's mojo.

でつ e&oe ...

[GuitarAttack Forum]

Steve - it may have an effect on the sound…good point.

Yes, your observation on the non-reverse/reverse mashup is correct.

Your Firebird is very cool…love the look.

John

[GuitarAttack Forum]

Apr 7, 2022 16:19:26 GMT -6 antares said:

I'm going upstairs to the music/guitar/radio room to find my book on the Gibson "pointy" guitars because I obviously wasn't paying attention sufficiently to register the "Transition" 'birds. I suppose I'm correct in observing the non-reverse Firebird headstock on a reverse body?

でつ e&oe ...

Did you find your book? Not a lot of photos of these around.

I have seen a few old Gibson headstocks grafted on to newer guitars....no kidding. I can't imagine the chain of events that would lead someone to do that.

John

[GuitarAttack Forum]

Ok - wish I had bought it…I’ve said that before!

John

[antares]

Flippin' heck, my head's in another space. This is the second time I've forgotten to dig out that book. Laters John.

でつ e&oe ...

[antares]

OK John, I found it! It was exactly where I thought it would be, but a bit awkward to grab.

The book is called "Flying V Explorer Firebird" written by Tony Bacon who has been churning out books of this nature since forever. Whilst not exactly a labour of love like Nacho Baños' "The Blackguard" or "Palm Trees, Rocket Shops and Señoritas" by Mark Makin (about resonators) it is still a comprehensive history of Gibson's pointy designs. The only reference that I stumbled upon whilst flicking through was on page 45- " ... some transitional models mix reverse and non-reverse features ..." and there wasn't a picture that I could see. I soon found reference to it on t'interweb though.

The way I see it is that since the non-reverse Firebirds were basically an attempt to lower manufacturing costs vis-a-vis the set neck and to try and ramp up the unspectacular sales figures, then it's only possible for the one you saw to have a graft by sacrificing a non-reverse 'bird's headstock which seems rather unlikely? It seems inconceivable that someone would take reverse and a non reverse Firebirds with similar headstock fractures and swap them- two repairs would make much better sense even if there is a premium for transitional models due to rarity?

As much as I really do like my Firebird (despite that I would still have preferred a sunburst with a Lyre Vibrola) I have to admit that the transitional one which is the subject of this thread does kind of tick an awful lot of boxes for me. In the final analysis you were probably correct to walk away, but what a guitar!

I reckon Mount Shasta would have been beckoning ... ;<D

でつ e&oe ...