EB(ay)

uwe · January 28, 2009, 11:17:11 AM

Even with the headstock repair, the non-banjo-tuners and the non-original pup (even if this was a late fifties mudbucker as used on EB-2s - I'm not sure with the loose frame around it -, I'm not aware that the fifties EB-1s ever came with anything else but the original brown "mudcoiler" which hat the screws at the side rather than the middle) not a bad BIN. Whether this is really a 1953 is another matter, did they really already have serial numbers back then?

http://cgi.ebay.com/RARE-1953-GIBSON-EB-EB-1-ELECTRIC-BASS-1ST-YEAR_W0QQitemZ330303599351QQcmdZViewItemQQptZGuitar?hash=item330303599351&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2%7C65%3A10%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318

eb2 · January 28, 2009, 04:21:11 PM

The Fender rest is bad, and the pup is not original. The very last ones came with the single coil but with the black cover as found on the last EB(1) and the earlier EB2. It is somewhat possible in Gibson-Bizarro world that they let a couple of them out with the late 58/early 59 pup cover like this, but the serial number is a 53 - seems to be for sure. Solid bodies had those leading year numbers in that time frame, like Les Pauls. If the pup were original the thing would have had a 58 serial number at best, as they really didn't make too many.

Ok, possibly ...the Kalamazoo people hung a 53 up in a closet to dry, and they forgot about it and found it in 59, and let it out that way. Welcome to Ebay!

The good thing about the Grover Imperials is that the string post is the same size as the Kluson banjo pegs - you can even interchange the bushings. So no reaming out of the headstock. And they are a better bass string friendly tuner to boot.

Dave W · January 28, 2009, 06:15:57 PM

Definitely not the original pickup, and even the 59 black cover s/c version wouldn't have had a surround. Still, the body and neck are really from 53. You don't see that often.

eb2 · January 29, 2009, 08:22:13 AM

I'm not seeing a surround on this one - just the lip. Why do you guys think there is a surround?

uwe · January 29, 2009, 08:39:04 AM

I think I'm guilty!!! I possibly mistook the brownish line on this pic between lip and cover as the space between pup and surround. But it might be rust or a reflection.

Barklessdog · January 29, 2009, 08:58:27 AM

So what is the pickup then?

Dave W · January 29, 2009, 12:28:19 PM

IMOHO with the black cover it would have to be a late 58 - early 59 pickup. The s/n is definitely from 53 though.

Barklessdog · January 29, 2009, 01:43:07 PM

Everytime I see these basses I thing of the horror character "Leather Face"

Captcolour · January 31, 2009, 11:16:09 AM

Pick-up may be very late '59, but probably '60 or very early '61. Poles were at the end for most of '59, and moved to the center for the '60s. Pick-up looks exactly like the one on my '60 EBO.

Dave W · January 31, 2009, 01:04:04 PM

D'oh! That's right. It's later. If it were late 58 or early 59 the polepieces wouldn't be in the center.

Blazer · January 31, 2009, 01:46:40 PM

Quote from: Barklessdog on January 29, 2009, 01:43:07 PM
Everytime I see these basses I thing of the horror character "Leather Face"

In My case I see and hear THESE guys...

Love that sound Jack Bruce got from his EB through his Hartke stacks, very deep and double bass-like.

eb2 · January 31, 2009, 10:38:54 PM

I always see and hear Little Richard.

Dave W · February 01, 2009, 12:00:10 AM

Felix Pappalardi always comes to mind.

Rhythm N. Bliss · February 04, 2009, 12:45:44 AM

Aye~ Felix & Jack!!

It's a '53 all right~ 7 digits earlier than mine. Mine's 3 2466.
Someone scored!!!

Rhythm N. Bliss · February 04, 2009, 01:03:30 AM

Quote from: eb2 on January 28, 2009, 04:21:11 PM

The good thing about the Grover Imperials is that the string post is the same size as the Kluson banjo pegs - you can even interchange the bushings. So no reaming out of the headstock. And they are a better bass string friendly tuner to boot.

Good to know if my banjos ever wear out. Thanks!

EB(ay)

Blazer