One either bonds with an instrument or one doesn't... I don't think Keith did.

Well, thats my take on it.

smile: yes, so it would seem - i guess what i'm wondering is why he didn't.
one of those imponderables maybe ... but i wonder. have some ... hm, some candied ginger, how's that :E



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-19 00:34 by with sssoul.

with sssoul Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> this Sherlock Holmes routine can be fun -
> but can't we just ask Keith? :E

Sure, if he can he can remember 40 plus years on! I think we are more interested in this guitar then Keith ever was!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-19 00:08 by ChrisM.

Interesting...


John Bowen - 1961/62? - Courtesy of John and Dick Bowen/We Sell Guitars





Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-19 17:52 by His Majesty.

hey, now that guy looks pretty sharp... what a head of hair.

are those all factory-standard parts then? what is the name of the non-Bigsby tailpiece?

About the dates: the main sources for the claim that Keith bought it in new York on the first tour is Keith and Andrew Look Oldham.Keith stated that once in the US he got a first taste of 'really good guitars' and that h bought his first Gibson, and Loog ldham mentiones that he, Keith and Brian went guitar and clothes shopping. But of course, as with anything, it's 45 years ago, and I can imagine you can forget whether it was on your first or second visit. I always wondered how Keith could buy such an expensive guitar on the first visit when they were broke in early '64.

Taylor claimed he bought the guitar after his first one got stolen, and he distincty remembers that the Stones were all working at Olympic Studio's and he remembers it being really nice weather. July '67 is a date which could fit both desciptions. He also mentions that he bought his SG and a 50 watt Marshall specifically for the upcoming Bluesbreakers tour, so that't either late '67 or early '68.

Again according to Taylor, the guitar was stolen at Nellcote, and not on the '71 tour. But I have always wondered why I haven't seen this guitar on any pictures from Nellcote, while all other guitars from the late '60's are there on various shots.

Last, both Keith and Taylor apperently weren't big fans of this guitar as they hardly played it. It has always been a spare, or used for open G on the '69 tour. I spoke wit a collector who playd the guitar, and he said that the guitar had a 'neck like tree trunk'.

Mathijs

>> and that he bought his first Gibson <<

... when did he first turn up with an acoustic Gibson?

>> I can imagine you can forget whether it was on your first or second visit. <<

true, especially since they were so close in time (june and october 1964).
but it sure does look like it really was in London that he got this 59 LP -
thanks for that photo from wesellguitars, HM! fascinating :E
have they said anything about finetuning the date Keith actually bought it?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-19 11:17 by with sssoul.

smile: i see wesellguitars is now borrowing photos from this thread: [www.gbase.com]
the Department of Credit Where Credit Is Due would like to note that the shot of Keith
playing HTW at MSG in 69 that they're now using is courtesy of Erik_Snow.

>> I always wondered how Keith could buy such an expensive guitar <<

do any of you patient learned generous & good-lookin Guitar Connoisseurs have any information
on what kind of price a secondhand five-year-old sunburst LP with a Bigsby would sell for in 1964?
it's strangely difficult to bear in mind that at the time it wasn't such an obviously desireable model -
probably because it immediately looked/sounded so good with Keith behind it :E



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-19 16:49 by with sssoul.

Mathijs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Taylor claimed he bought the guitar after his
> first one got stolen, and he distincty remembers
> that the Stones were all working at Olympic
> Studio's and he remembers it being really nice
> weather. July '67 is a date which could fit both
> desciptions.
>
> Mathijs

I'm sure you said before that it was cold and raining when he bought the guitar.

Anyway, Taylor has apparently said he bought the guitar in September 1967 during an interview with Jas Obtrecht(?). My source for this is from...

I believe sunbursts were $125 new in 1959, & they hadn't really taken off yet on the second hand market so it wouldn't have been a great amount, particularly in the States, so I'd guess around $100.

I don't see a guitar like this lasting more than 5 minutes in the window of a shop such as Selmers.

There was some sort of trade embargo on American guitars in England in the early 60's that's why we didn't see any of them around. This led to everyone playing the european guitars such as Hofner & Goya, & English guitars such as Burns & Vox (even tho they were made in Italy later on). I recall seeing a Burns for about 100 pounds sterling in about 1965, I remember that figure cos I was 15 @ the time & no way could I afford that sort of money.

Whenever an American guitar showed up being played on TV, we noticed. Jeff Beck with his Telecaster, The Beatles with their Rickenbackers, Keith with his Epiphone & Les Paul, they were all very scarce in England in the early 60's.

American guitars were scarce & so I suspect were spare parts. Selmers was a BIG shop in those days, I had a catalogue & used to drool over it constanly, but big as they were I don't see that they would have had a spare Bigsby tremolo to put on a guitar.

I have a Bigsby on my Martin GT-75 & it can be a bitch to tune, maybe that's why he didn't play it that much. There was only one guage of strings available back then - heavy -(anyone remember Cathedral strings?). What the rock-n-rollers used to do was use a light banjo string on the top & then use the top 5 strings from a regular guitar set, ditching the bottom fat string altogether. This gave you a light guage set but with that you'd have even more tuning probs particularly with a tremolo.

with sssoul Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> smile: i see wesellguitars is now borrowing photos
> from this thread: [www.gbase.com]
> the Department of Credit Where Credit Is Due would
> like to note that the shot of Keith
> playing HTW at MSG in 69 that they're now using is
> courtesy of Erik_Snow.

Hey thanks for the link with Sssoul. Hrmf!

Joe Brown tells the tale of picking that trick up from James Burton.
A fascinating period for all guitar players over here in the UK/Europe.

>> I believe sunbursts were $125 new in 1959, & they hadn't really taken off yet on the second hand market
so it wouldn't have been a great amount, particularly in the States, so I'd guess around $100. <<

hm - but weren't Gibsons considerably more expensive even then than Harmony guitars?
i thought Harmony's main "claim to fame" was that they offered more affordable instruments.
here's a page with a 1962 catalogue description of a Harmony Meteor with a price of $174.50: [harmony.demont.net]
i know i've seen an old UK catalogue listing the Harmony Meteor H70, which is what Keith had, for around 80 GBP.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-19 16:59 by with sssoul.

I recall that $125 from an article in Guitar Player, I also recall the guy who bought it saying the shop couldn't get rid of it that's why it was so cheap, maybe RRP was higher...

The bit in the guitarist article mentioning John Bowen being influenced enough by The Beatles to trade in his les paul for a Gretsch Country Gentleman further suggests to me they may be getting their years mixed up.

I don't think George had one till 1963, he made some alterations to the guitar in May or so. I believe he used it for the recording session for She Loves You - onwards to With The Beatles. He also played it for The Beatles debut on Ed Sullivan.

He had two, but the original got trashed at some point when it fell off the roof of a car or something.

EDIT:

I just got this reply from here: [www.beatgearcavern.com]

>According to Andy Babiuk's research Harrison's first Country Gentleman was probably bought in the first week of May 1963 at 'Sound City' in London<



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-19 17:00 by His Majesty.

Thanks for that confirmation HM. Curiouser and curiouser. By the way, the list price for a new Subnburst Les Paul in 1959 was $259.00, give or take a dollar or two. So far the evidence presented here suggests that the story that Keith bought the guitar in 1962 is apochryphal. Hard to say what a used one would have cost but as they had not yet taken off in 1962 (or 1964) I would have to guess a bit less that the original list price.

Also Mathijs brings up a good point in that there appears to be no photos of this guitar at Nellcote and I have not seen a photo of it any later that after the 1970 tour. I seem to recall in a 1980 Guitar Player interview Taylor mentioned removing the Bigsby at some point and I remember when I first saw him play in January 1982 looking at the Les Paul he was using to see if I could see the Bigsby mounting holes. Holy crap, it seems to me that the story behind this guitar is getting murkier and murkier!

can someone back away from the details for a moment and explain what justifies the fame of this guitar? is it that it is the first Les Paul that made an impression on the British rock scene -- granting that the well-groomed original owner did not reach a wide audience with it? because otherwise, it appears that no one famous played it for very long, or ever really relied on it, possibly because it's not that great a guitar. probably no one here is considering laying out the $$$ for it now, but this hype is really helping the sellers' retirement fund.

i've thought about that too, cc, but i guess collectors of rock & roll memorabilia
may not care as much about whether it's a dream to play as they care who can be proven to have played it.
it's a bit weird, i agree, but ... who am i to judge?

well, I'm not really judging either, just wondering if I've missed something... then I'll judge! just kidding (to an extent -- I don't (can't, but also wouldn't) pay $400 for concert tickets either).

what I don't hesitate to insist is that the guitar be _played_. one of the aspects of the "collector boom" that boils my blood is the thought of all the best-made guitars in the world hanging on walls.

>> one of the aspects of the "collector boom" that boils my blood
is the thought of all the best-made guitars in the world hanging on walls. <<

smile: well, if this one isn't actually such a red-hot guitar to play, maybe that's where it belongs?
i *would* like to see the poor thing go to a loving home that wants to keep it -
it can't help having a neck like a tree-trunk, and it can't be fun to be sold down the river every few years :E

ps: not to add to any hype, but just for the record:

>> it appears that no one famous played it for very long, or ever really relied on it <<

judging from photos and footage, Keith does seem to have relied on it pretty heavily
in late 64 and throughout 65. he still used the Epiphone in 65 as well,
but this LP seems to have gotten a fairly good workout, even if it wasn't for very long.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-19 21:51 by with sssoul.

cc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> can someone back away from the details for a
> moment and explain what justifies the fame of this
> guitar?

From my perspective it was the first Les Paul I heard that made me sit up and take notice. I first heard it, though I did not know it at the time, on "Love In Vain" from Ya Yas. Later I heard it on the track "The Bear" and other tracks from John Mayall's Blues From Laurel Canyon" LP as well as on the Bare Wires LP. The tone was absolutely killer in all cases and ever since that time it has been my favorite Les Paul and guitar of all time. The fact that it has been owned and played by Mick Taylor, Keith Richards, Jimmy Page and possibly Eric Clapton at Cream's debut gig as well as Hendrix (though I can't substantiate the latter) only adds to its aura.

Regarding the large neck profile that Mathijs and Ms Sssoul mentioned, this was not uncommon on '50s Les Pauls, especially before 1959, and even though this gutiar has an atypical '59 serial number, 9 3182, it sounds like it may have been built in early 1959 since most '59's have slimmer neck profiles and '60s slimmer still.

thanks for the clarifications... so if keith used it in '65, is there a good chance it's the guitar on "Satisfaction," or is it already known that that was a different guitar? I'm no ad man, that would seem like a better hook than something like "the guitar once sold by keith richards to mick taylor, maybe."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-19 22:04 by cc.

>> is there a good chance it's the guitar on Satisfaction <<

Mathijs has said he believes Keith used an LP Goldtop on Satisfaction (see page 1 of this thread);
i know other people feel it was probably this guitar, but the hook "maybe the guitar used to record Satisfaction"
doesn't sound real strong compared to all the photos and footage of Keith, Mick Taylor, et al, with this guitar,
which of course just document the main thing: all the amazing music they played on it.
besides, the Taylor/Page/possibly-Clapton angle lends appeal for folks who aren't totally Stoned yet.
at least that's how i understand it. have some candied ginger - it's all i've got.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-20 00:21 by with sssoul.

yes. well, I suppose with that combined lineage, beyond the guitar's playability, it certainly is a powerful token from the heady days of the British rock scene, as ChrisM recalls, before the music split into subgenres, and before they were all living in Los Angeles or Caribbean tax shelters (or the state of Connecticut -- also something of a tax shelter!). (should I copyright this post, in case WeSellGuitars or whatever the name is wants to use my line? ;-) ).

cc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
(should I copyright this post, in
> case WeSellGuitars or whatever the name is wants
> to use my line? ;-) ).

To be fair, they have posted some great pics of the actual guitar upon request, answered many emails and supplied us with the groovin' pic of John Bowen. The historical record is being aided here.

Plus, there's maybe another very cool... ah nevermind!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-19 22:55 by His Majesty.

His Majesty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mathijs Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > Taylor claimed he bought the guitar after his
> > first one got stolen, and he distincty
> remembers
> > that the Stones were all working at Olympic
> > Studio's and he remembers it being really nice
> > weather. July '67 is a date which could fit
> both
> > desciptions.
> >
> > Mathijs
>
> I'm sure you said before that it was cold and
> raining when he bought the guitar.
>
> Anyway, Taylor has apparently said he bought the
> guitar in September 1967 during an interview with
> Jas Obtrecht(?). My source for this is from...
>
> [ec1.images-amazon.com].
> _AA240_.jpg

Yes you're right! I just checked an article I wrote when I still had my website, and I wrote this article a couple of days after I spoke with Taylor about this guitar. His words were "dreadful weather". I don't know where I got the 'nice weather' from.

Mathijs

Hi everyone and thanks for such an interesting thread!

I appreciate the help I have received in 'correcting' the history we put together about this fantastic instrument and for the great images that some of you have posted.

I would especially like to thank Soul and Philip for their personal input.

Just to set the record straight, I admit there were some major mistakes in our first draft. This was mainly because the research wasn't thorough and it was rushed in an attempt to get the guitar 'out there' and you will have seen the description on our website 'morph' as the information and history became clearer.

I can confirm the guitar is actually a fantastic sounding and playing guitar and why Keith originally sold the guitar is more likely that he favored a different guitar at the time. I know he started playing a Les Paul Custom which seemed to be favorite for a few years.

I first came into contact with the guitar around a year ago and it had the Bigsby that was fitted by Mike Jopp and incorrect pickup covers, no switch tip and no pickguard. One pickup had been changed and it had Grover tuners. All other parts were original including the finish.

We were lucky enough to be able to retrieve the original Bigsby that was fitted by Selmers from Cosmo and the current owner fitted correct style pickup covers and a correct handmade repro pickguard just to complete the look.

As you can imagine in advertising this guitar on our website we have created a mini ‘controversy’ in the guitar world so the accuracy of our description and history is important as we do not want to mislead or misrepresent such an important guitar.

What is interesting is that when Christies offered the guitar back in late 2004 they advertised it only as a guitar that was owned and played by Keith Richards and did no research at all in regards to it being used by other major rock stars.

What we are currently trying to find at the moment are good high quality photographs of Clapton playing the guitar at the Windsor Jazz & Blues Festival in 1966. If anyone can help in this area it would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks again to everyone.

Sincerely,

Richard

www.wesellguitars.com

smile: nice to see your typeface in this thread, Rich!
the description of the guitar and its illustrious history is lookin good now: [www.gbase.com]
thanks for digging up documentation of the Selmer's story - if any fine-tuning of the date
of Keith's historic purchase of this guitar can be found, that would be brilliant.

meanwhile, here's a page about Selmer's, which i suspect i've posted before: [www.vintagehofner.co.uk]

I've just sent an email to the original owners brother in an effort to pin down the dates of the trade at Selmers.

I'll let you know what he says in regard to the accuracy of the dates suggested.