Strange EB0

[the mojo hobo]

I think it's just a trick of the light.

[dadagoboi]

Judging by the size of the screws in the jack plate and cavity cover alone, the work was NOT done by Gibson

[amptech]

Judging by the size of the screws in the jack plate and cavity cover alone, the work was NOT done by Gibson

True, but the jack plate was listed as the only modification done (!)

Are we by the way sure this instrument was not made for just one purpose, to screw up the minds of people
on this forum?

[Basvarken]

Judging by the size of the screws in the jack plate and cavity cover alone, the work was NOT done by Gibson

So?

As if screws can't be replaced over a period of four decades 

[dadagoboi]

So?

As if screws can't be replaced over a period of four decades 

Gibson uses #3 screws and those aren't them.  It's a typical mistake made by those who don't know the difference between Fender and Gibson spec, or don't care...BaCH for one.

All I was saying is the work wasn't done by Gibson IMO.  Picking nits is what's done around here, sorry I offended you by pointing out the obvious.

[lowend1]

Guess I'm too stupid, but I just don't see it Dave...


Nor can I... That ´line´you see, is it not just the grain?

...and I thought I was missing something.

[Dave W]

You young guys with your blurry vision! 

What can I say? On my monitor I can see a what looks like lamination lines, top and back. Feel free to disagree, but I'm standing my ground.

Whatever. This bass did not come from the factory in anything like its current condition, for a number of reasons.

[Lightyear]

You young guys with your blurry vision! 

What can I say? On my monitor I can see a what looks like lamination lines, top and back. Feel free to disagree, but I'm standing my ground.

Whatever. This bass did not come from the factory in anything like its current condition, for a number of reasons.

Sorry, this was the first thing I saw.  To me the lamination job sticks out like a hooker in church

[Basvarken]

Gibson uses #3 screws and those aren't them.  It's a typical mistake made by those who don't know the difference between Fender and Gibson spec, or don't care...BaCH for one.

All I was saying is the work wasn't done by Gibson IMO.  Picking nits is what's done around here, sorry I offended you by pointing out the obvious.

I'm not offended.    It's just that I think that replacing small screws for slightly larger ones does not make this bass less legit.
It's a practical or pragmatic solution when screws lose their grip (after being removed and put back too often) over a period of four decades.

About BaCH: at least they know the difference between a bolt on and a set neck...   

[Stjofön Big]

Rob, aren't we talking about five decades?

[Basvarken]

  oops, yes.

[dadagoboi]

It's a practical or pragmatic solution when screws lose their grip (after being removed and put back too often) over a period of four decades.

It's a solution used by amateurs.   A pro fills and redrills the original holes, especially on an instrument of significant value...which this one isn't IMO.  So I guess it doesn't matter.

[lowend1]

It's a solution used by amateurs.   A pro fills and redrills the original holes, especially on an instrument of significant value...which this one isn't IMO.  So I guess it doesn't matter.

No, it doesn't. A pro may do things that way now, but decades ago a player wouldn't be inclined to seek out a skilled repairman just because a couple of screws stripped out. He'd run bigger ones in and get back to the gig. Ultimately, it becomes a question of economics and utility. When Billy Sheehan modded his P-Bass over the years (using a plethora of ill-fitting fasteners, BTW ), he was trying to achieve an end result: to make the bass functional in the manner he needed it to be, and on a limited budget. Is he a pro? Certainly not in the world of guitar repair and modification. However, I would submit that it is those amateur repairs that gives that particular instrument its current significant value.
Also, we know better now. I just had to secure the pickguard on an old Japanese P-bass copy that I was modding. I filled the original holes with plastic wood and re-used the original rusty screws.

[dadagoboi]

No, it doesn't. A pro may do things that way now, but decades ago a player wouldn't be inclined to seek out a skilled repairman just because a couple of screws stripped out. He'd run bigger ones in and get back to the gig. Ultimately, it becomes a question of economics and utility. When Billy Sheehan modded his P-Bass over the years (using a plethora of ill-fitting fasteners, BTW ), he was trying to achieve an end result: to make the bass functional in the manner he needed it to be, and on a limited budget. Is he a pro? Certainly not in the world of guitar repair and modification.

If you look at my original post you'll note my comment was in regard to whether Gibson did the work.  Sheehan's bass has value because he did it.  An unmodded P of that vintage would be of more value than a Joe Schmo hack job or even a pro modded one.

 However, I would submit that it is those amateur repairs that gives that particular instrument its current significant value.

Using your logic that would make this bass more valuable today because I installed Schallers in '65, took a chisel to it in '73 to put in the tele pup and refinned it with Preval rattlecans.  Maybe in your view but not in the marketplace.

[Dave W]

I have to agree with Carlo here. Whatever was done to this bass, it wasn't done by Gibson, either at the time it was manufactured or later.