Author Topic: Calling Gibson EB-0 Experts.... (Read 15054 times)

Pilgrim · « **on:** June 18, 2010, 05:47:04 PM »

Here's the story: a co-worker of mine defended her dissertation yesterday to complete her PhD. Her family attended the dissertation and her husband (nice guy, and you'll understand why) and I got talking. Turns out he had this old Gibson bass in his basement that a friend gave him years ago because he owed him a few bucks.

He said it's been modified some with a different pickup and bridge. His son thought he wanted to play bass for about a month, after which he just parked it in the basement and walked away...so it has been sitting for maybe 20 years.

He said - "Why don't I ask Debi to bring it up so you can play around with it for a bit? Someone ought to play it."

Of course, I enthusiastically took him up on his kind offer...I was interested in finding out what it was, and I told him that I belonged to a forum with a lot of Gibson knowledge, and I'd see if I could get him a rough value. That's what I intend to do...and who knows, if I really like it he might make me some interesting offer???

Here's the status report:

Based on serial number, it's a 1964 EB-0.
It has a normal, partial headstock crack that needs repaired.
Mudbucker has been removed and is missing.
Thumb rest has been re-located from pickguard to the side of the mudbucker cavity.
Body has been routed for a second pickup and there's a Dimarzio Model One installed there.
BadAss bridge has been installed - the original two-point bar bridge is gone.
One pot has been removed and a toggle switch installed - probably intended to be a pickup selector.
Body finish has some cracking from age, but overall the body is in very good shape aside from the second pickup rout.
When connected, I can hear sound but barely - I mainly get massive hum, probably from a combination of oxidized output jack and screwed up electronics.
Neck is nice and true, action is good even with the headstock crack.

But - overall, with a headstock repair and living with the second pickup rout and the need to refresh the electronics, it's a 1964 EB-0. The original case is with it, including some nice period travel stickers from when the previous owner was a traveling musician. I'll bet a vintage case manufacturer would LOVE to copy this case...it looks pretty cool.

My question to you: What in the world would be a current market value on this thing?

[/list]

Denis · « **Reply #1 on:** June 18, 2010, 05:57:47 PM »

Dang, other than the cracked headstock and the extra holes from the aftermarket stuff, that thing is really, really nice looking! No buckle rash, not wear on the finish, etc. Bet it wasn't used long before someone knocked it over and broke that neck and decided it should be a project. I hope you get it!

chromium · « **Reply #2 on:** June 18, 2010, 09:08:40 PM »

I'm not an expert on the values, but I had a '69 EB-0 (pre-slothead - real similar to this one) that had repaired body break at the neck, filled p-bass route, pro body refin, the original neck finish, original mud/tuners/bridge, and new wiring. I bought it for about $650 shipped, and I later sold it in that same price range IIRC (only because it was redundant with my EB-3, and I needed the money for other gear).

This one needs some repair, but its also older vintage - so maybe it would fall in that same range?

I like it - bet it'd be fun to play. Reminds me of Mike Watt's bass in some ways.

Dave W · « **Reply #3 on:** June 18, 2010, 11:04:19 PM »

I would put it in the $500-600 range even though it's a 64, due to the mods. The neck repair should be easy, the missing bridge and mudbucker can be found at a price.

eb2 · « **Reply #4 on:** June 18, 2010, 11:37:02 PM »

Well, a 64 EB-2 with simillar damage was deemed not worth $300, and I thought that was not a bad deal. The damage done to this is not so easy to fix up though, and the parts missing are fairly expensive. It is an ok project bass. If the damage had been limited to either just the neck or just the body, then it would be more desireable to a lot of people. Some people like to see the original finish looking mostly nice even it there is no hope of ever cleaning it up. I think the $500 ballpark is good for that.

godofthunder · « **Reply #5 on:** June 19, 2010, 06:06:03 AM »

I agree with the above around $500.00 would be a OK price but I doubt I would pay it. $300-$400 would get me to break out the wallet.

Pilgrim · « **Reply #6 on:** June 19, 2010, 08:08:45 AM »

This is all very helpful. I noticed that when mounting the Dimarzio pickup the pickguard was notched for the corner of the pickup. But I imagine a pickguard would be the easiest and least expensive item to replace.

Random musings........

I think it's pretty clear that the future of this bass is as a player, not as a collector piece. I don't really know that I'd want to put a mudbucker back into it, as I probably want a bit more clarity...and a period pickup would be fairly expensive. The BadAss bridge has probably left a footprint from being there - aside from the screw holes - but a Hipshot SuperTone replacement for the 2-point bridge would look better to me. I doubt it would cover the screw holes.

This weekend I'll pull the plate off the back and try cleaning up the jack contacts - there's a chance it might yield a signal instead of hum. I can hear notes behind the hum, but it's a hum-to-signal ratio of about 9:1. Pulling the back plate will also give me a look at the electronics - no telling what kind of hack job was done there. If that's all messed up, I can call the owner and see if he minds my coming up with a workable connection to at least make it playable. Since the original wiring has been hacked, I can't see that moving a few wires and creating new solder joints is a "value" issue - and after all, it's destined to be either a player or, if he keeps, it, a wall-hanger.

The good news is that if the top market value is in the $500 range, that might make it more practical for me to take a shot at it. I am a bit of a sucker for the EB-0 and SG-series...and I strongly suspect that the bass can be acquired at less than market price. However, I do not intend to do any lowballing to my friends - if I tell them I'd like to have it, I'll give them the best info I have about market and practical values, and let them take it from there.

I have that pair of T-bird pickups I planned to put in an Epi EB-0...but I haven't done any routing on the Epi. I held one of the T-bird pickups up next to the open hole for the neck pickup...the body of the pickup would fit but the mounting ears/tabs would require a slight hole enlargement on each side. Custom trim rings would be needed to cover the open rout space at top and bottom, since the T-bird pickup is not as square as the original. (I frankly think that Dimarzio is one uuuuugly pickup, and if I keep it, that pickup leaves.) I know that having a '64 EB-0 with a pair of modern T-bird pickups might be heresy, but it would be less esthetically offensive than what's in there now. Any comments about whether T-bird pickups would be a good or bad idea?

Highlander · « **Reply #7 on:** June 19, 2010, 08:13:32 AM »

Good luck...

patman · « **Reply #8 on:** June 19, 2010, 09:19:05 AM »

get a pair of the artecs and drop them in. At 19.99 apiece, the risk is low.

The Dimarzio is ugly...never understood why they didn't make it more of a direct mudbucker replacement visually.

Pilgrim · « **Reply #9 on:** June 19, 2010, 09:31:13 AM »

Quote from: patman on June 19, 2010, 09:19:05 AM

get a pair of the artecs and drop them in. At 19.99 apiece, the risk is low.

The Dimarzio is ugly...never understood why they didn't make it more of a direct mudbucker replacement visually.

THAT's not a bad idea! Avoiding further routing in the original pickup spot wouldn't be a bad idea. Anyone here actually used the Artecs? They certainly look correct. I think I've read some discussion indicating that they're not as muddy as the originals (?)

I got the T-bird pickups on a whim...not really sure how they would differ from the Artecs.

nofi · « **Reply #10 on:** June 19, 2010, 09:36:13 AM »

screw a pu cover over the hole and be done with it. the rear pu seems to be in an ok position tone wise. i know you don't like 'messy' basses but...

Dave W · « **Reply #11 on:** June 19, 2010, 10:39:54 AM »

Quote from: patman on June 19, 2010, 09:19:05 AM

The Dimarzio is ugly...never understood why they didn't make it more of a direct mudbucker replacement visually.

Dimarzio is noted for not copying the traditional look, from their exposed twin blade white cover Split P to their two tone guitar humbuckers in combinations like green and pink.

Pilgrim · « **Reply #12 on:** June 19, 2010, 01:23:41 PM »

Quote from: nofi on June 19, 2010, 09:36:13 AM

screw a pu cover over the hole and be done with it. the rear pu seems to be in an ok position tone wise. i know you don't like 'messy' basses but...

May be a good idea there! That would be an easy way to start, wouldn't it??

lowend1 · « **Reply #13 on:** June 19, 2010, 02:41:58 PM »

Frankly, the Model One's aesthetics don't bother me - and it was a reasonably good effort in getting some variety out of the EBs, tonally, without having to hack away at the body.

dadagoboi · « **Reply #14 on:** June 19, 2010, 04:21:46 PM »

Pilgrim, I do not think that bass is worth more than $400 max. These things reduce the real world value: No original pup -$200, bridge -150, hand rest -100, broken headstock -150, DiMarzio hole -100. BTW, I like the fact DiMarzio has made himself a good biz by doing things his way, not making clones.

I bought this '65 on Ebay in '07, close to top of the market, it cost me a grand. All original. I've got a '67, again all original but in rougher shape I bought around the same time on the Bay. No neck crack, paid $600. I'm EB3-ing it.

Just my 2 cents but there might be a better place to start a project.