Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum

Forum Ringside => Guitars, Amps and Effects => Topic started by: The amazing Phil on November 14, 2005, 06:08:03 AM

Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: The amazing Phil on November 14, 2005, 06:08:03 AM: Good? Bad? The beginning of the end? Any real dogs I should watch out for? I've sniffed out a 67 SG and I might just buy it, but I don't wanna buy something that's a duffun, it all depends on wether or not I can play it first I guess, but it'd be good to know what sort of money for them is fair.

Any help is greatly appreciated!
Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: Tellboy on November 14, 2005, 06:20:33 PM: Phil - I've got an original '64 and a reissue '61. Around 67 they made some design changes and fitted the larger scratchplate and mounted the pickups directly into the plate (Type 2) instead of in rings on the body (Type 1 -a la Les Paul). Some people claim that the original pickup mounting (rings on body) is better. Many '60s SGs (including mine) had problems with neck joints as the neck joins the thin mohogany body on the last fret - I think they improved the joint on the neck for type 2 models although I believe some SGs were sent out of the factory with 335 necks with quite a big 'heel' - check for repairs. Also some had headstock breaks.
Are you looking at a humbucker (Standard/Custom) or P90 models (Special/Junior)? I think they are all great but I would want to try before I buy.
Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: The amazing Phil on November 14, 2005, 07:20:51 PM: Thanks, it's one with a single bridge P-90 and the large scratchplate. Headstock repairs were one thing I was gonna be checking for, I should get to play it tomorrow with any luck, I hope I'm not too knackered after work tonight.
Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: The amazing Phil on November 16, 2005, 08:15:09 AM: (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v157/PhilSDMF/1967junior.jpg)

...sounds great, feels great, looks great, and the deposit is down! :twisted: All original except the tuners, no neck damage, and the vibrola is absent. Payday's gonna be extra-needed this month.

It really is cool...it's nice to finally play an SG with a chunky neck too.
Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: Ratrod on November 16, 2005, 10:38:15 AM: That guitar is begging for a pig-90. :twisted:
Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: Shag101 on November 16, 2005, 01:46:21 PM: Very nice!!! Great Find
Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: Tellboy on November 16, 2005, 05:23:20 PM: Looks great! Always wanted to try a P90 SG.
Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: aisuru on November 16, 2005, 10:54:52 PM: my lack of god, that's beautiful 8)

an SG Junior with a batwing, why didn't i think of that?
Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: indysmith on November 16, 2005, 11:15:36 PM: Do those three holes in the body mean that it used to have a tailpiece?
Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: aisuru on November 16, 2005, 11:38:34 PM: Quote from: indysmith
Do those three holes in the body mean that it used to have a tailpiece?
yep. most likely a Lyre trem, removed in favour of a top-wrapped tuno--matic stop tailpice. i don't think the pickguard is original either, nor the truss rod cover. it looks lovely though.
Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: PhilKing on November 17, 2005, 12:00:31 AM: Quote from: indysmith
Do those three holes in the body mean that it used to have a tailpiece?

It had the cheap version of the lyre, just the anchor and bent metal to the tailpiece (without the back cover).
Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: HTH AMPS on November 17, 2005, 09:36:24 PM: thats basically the same as my own '67 SG jr - I've done the same 'wrap' thing and removed the Lyre tailpiece as there's not much neck angle and the high E sounds a bit sitar'ish otherwise.

fwiw, the Pig90 will not fit in that guitar - I had two seperate pickups from Tim and the way the P90 mounts on the scratchplate means that the mounting holes on the pickups need to be threaded. The second Pig90 I got didn't fit through the hole in the scratchplate either.

If Tim could get something sorted for scratchplate-mounted P90s then a Pig90 would certainly be on the cards again.

:twisted:
Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: Ratrod on November 18, 2005, 11:42:30 AM: Do you mean these?

(http://bareknucklepickups.co.uk/forum/files/pig-90_set_140.jpg)
Title: How good a year was 1967 for Gibson?
Post by: PhilKing on November 18, 2005, 12:22:15 PM: I think the problem is that this has a unique mounting. The standard tab P-90 mounts with wood screws through the triangular side pieces (see pic), and the soapbars (in pic above), use woodscrews through the holes between the A & D and G & B polepieces. You could mount these but will need to screw the pickup into the guitar and add springs or something for height adjustment. I know the Pig-90 is a tight fit, I had to do a little routing to fit mine.