Thanks all for having a look at those pics, much appreciated and your info very insightful.
Fills in several gaps in my understanding of what this guitar will have faced in its life.
It's definitely a gorgeous playing guitar, so I'm 'neutrally feeling' about learning that there might have been replaced more than initially assumed.
For sure interesting!
OK, so if I understand it all correctly then:
> i've seen these dark spots on water-damaged guitars(flooded basements, etc.)
The dark spots on the neck & headstock by water damage... so originally the lacquer not totally sealing the neck?
The missing last position marker, so that definitely makes it a replacement fretboard.
In case the neck itself was replaced as well, and given a fake neck stamp, then they should have done their homework better and have stamped an earlier date.
So for now I guess it's most likely still the original neck. In addition, assuming all severe damage had come at once (requiring that fretboard replacement), they'd probably swapped the full neck, and be getting rid of the dark spots on the neck at the same time.
(Just guessing, it'd be cool if any old guitar came with a diary ...)
> closer pictures of decal could help determine whether it's a refin
The decal is 'harmed' (see upper pic of
https://imgur.com/yrD2zX6 ), no idea if it is the original one with damage, or a sloppily applied replacement.
I can post a bigger picture.
> if that' s the case i kind of think it makes it a cooler piece but that's just my take.
I feel what you mean and feel alike. New guitars can be 'sterile', and this one, well, definitely has seen enough life
The greenish re-fin colour (I doubt it's actually a 'right' colour) and the ehh, 'character' (dark spots, & other signs of a long used & abused life) makes it definitely a love it or hate it guitar.
Back then arriving at the seller, and after having survived the shock of all this green and the spotted neck & headstock, then having to choose between this 60s JM, or a 70s JM (in sunburst, neckbinding, blocks) was not too difficult.
> Everything is wrong with that neck, ...stamps wrong,
If it's indeed a new fretboard (which we can conclude by the missing last dot) then the original fretboard can have been veneer, now flatted for a slab fretboard (thanks FrankRay) and the DEC62B stamp can still be correct, right?
> truss rod nut is wrong,
Curious to the truss rod, how should it have looked like?
>I'd guess the frets are jumbo, and the radius might be flatter than 7 1/4, possibly.
Feels indeed like it, but need to get me a measuring-template
> Either way, a well done restoration. It's 57 years old, after all.
Thanks again all for the observations and provided details, way more than I might have wished for. As said, it'd be great if its full history could be traced back, but all this here and derived conclusions tell already quite a lot.
Thanks!
And I'd gladly post more pics. From memory, the body (apart from the re-fin) seems all fine inside: has the metal 'cups' (shielding), the pickguard shield, the pickguard itself is pulling the screws & shrinking like an old tort is expected to do etc
(BTW, have been told it'd be wise to have it flattened again, to prevent breaking, but that's another topic of its own)
Bye
