Vintage Gretsch Guitars

59 6122 road worn

2

Great top grain! Interesting block inlays...

4

That just oozes cool,imo !

5

That bridge is mounted directly into the body, is it? Not a bridge base in sight.

6

Not all that beat up looking, but too bad about the neck reset. Aside from the block markers presumably hiding evidence of holes where they were probing for the right spot to steam it loose, I would think the Tuna-Matic mounted directly to the top indicates that it was reattached too shallow. There can't be much break angle over that bridge.

7

Okay looked at the actual listing. Yes, pretty well worn.

9

Pretty wood. Too bad about the condition, but it must have seen a lot of action indeed. Tasso Mavris is a new name to me, btw.

Looks to be #31416.

Ed, this one falls in between a few others (31415, 31431) that you had noted as being from the 1960 model year.

10

Pretty wood. Too bad about the condition, but it must have seen a lot of action indeed. Tasso Mavris is a new name to me, btw.

Looks to be #31416.

Ed, this one falls in between a few others (31415, 31431) that you had noted as being from the 1960 model year.

– JimR56

Quoting (myself) from pg. 95 in Ball's Manual of Gretsch Guitars - 1950s...

"A third group of 50 guitars (Gents), produced at #314xx , introduced a significant feature modification, the upgraded V-style Bigsby vibrato unit. This feature, often considered at 1960 model year indicator, occurred so early in 1959 as to force this group of Gents into the 1959 model year attribution."

But it is very possible that I've been guilty of misattributions in the past, as I may have based opinions on the fly and only on the features. It isn't until you see how early that batch falls in the chronology that you come to the conclusion shared above.

11

Thanks, Ed. I was referring to the (1960) notations in one of the folders of Gent pics you sent me.

12

Thanks, Ed. I was referring to the (1960) notations in one of the folders of Gent pics you sent me.

– JimR56

As I've built my database, I've acquired info and photos of guitars grouping them into folders and a spreadsheet, labeled as best I could during the collection period (of almost 10 years). In some cases, like this one, the big picture wasn't totally clear until I assembled the batches together, took a step back and assessed it from a more global perspective. Some of my "working files" are still misattributed, as I didn't go back and re-label every specimen. That's probably how/why I sent you a folder with 1960 labels.

Sometimes when commenting on posts, or responding to email questions, I expound off the top of my head, not always able to take the time to cross reference back to my master database info. That gets me into trouble as well.

13

Have a close look at the neck heel. I'm seeing at least 4 ply laminated neck heel that tapers down to a sliver.

Isn't the necklock/heel dowel supposed to be on the back of the neck for this year?

Ed, you should ask for better details of the neck heel; I'm sure these guys would honor your request as it would boost interest for them and add to Gretsch history for us. I'm pretty sure that's an unusual factory feature/experiment.

Are those adjusting screws on the surrounds?

The block inlays indicate: a) new fretboard b) factory experiment. It isn't a redo of the original as the neo markers would leave evidence of their removal.

Edit: I forgot that neo markers are way thinner than regular. The frets could've been pulled and the entire board planed and recut for the markers.

14

I understand completely, Ed. I still haven't even managed to get all of my Gent files fully organized.

16

lx... I think the post that suggested the block inlays are evidence of a neck removal are the most probably explanation. Also... this Gent is from late in the #304xx batch (last one actually), and it illustrates that the dowel resides in the cutaway during this period. It also has the earliest V-style B6 I've seen on Gents.

17

We need to see that neck heel.

18

The placement of the fingerboard or where the neck attaches appears wrong. The dovetail would end up in between two frets. Looks,like a neck reset gone rouge. Lost most of the heel.

19

I agree Joe that the neck/heel looks completely weird to me!

Usually, call for pricing has two aspects to it. First, it means it's probably priced more than market value which is fine, if the guitar is in exceptional condition and it's a highly sought after model. And exceptional condition means no irreversible [major] mods and no condition issues and this guitar has two huge red flags with the neck! That headstock break is clearly visible and regardless of how strong it is (no way to know for sure) it takes it out of the realm of qualifying for "call for pricing" status and that automatically brings it waaaay under market value for condition issues.

It's pretty to be sure but IMO but unfortunately for the seller, not worth anything near market value.

20

The dowel is always in the cutaway on single cutaway Gents. The multi-ply heel shows up occasionally, and not just in this batch. I owned one in the 351XX batch with it, and currently own one in the same batch without it. And Gents never had dovetail joints, mortise and tenon from the get-go.
I'm not sure what to think of that narrow heel. But I wouldn't be so sure it didn't leave the factory looking more or less that way. They did vary quite a bit.

21

Trying to upload a photo here...

23

I've seen at least two '59 Clippers with radically tapered neck heels: one with a 5-piece maple neck and the other with a one-piece mahogany neck, both with the early inlaid headstock logos (most slim Clippers came with decals). I think with the advent of the mortise/tenon joint Gretsch was doing some experimenting around '59/'60.

24

I've seen reset inlays like that before. At one time it seemed common practice to drill two holes through the board into the tenon part of the dovetail. All it does is destroy the dovetail and makes for a very difficult repair.

25

What’s under that plug is one of these screws.


Register Sign in to join the conversation