NVGD: My First Vintage Guitar! 1969 Gibson SG Standard!

Sp8ctre

Sp8ctre

Ambassador of Steel
Country flag
Well...you all know about this one already, but it must be formally introduced!

The only thing wrong is the tuners were swapped out when with Grover's because they were popular at the time.

I have a set of 1969 Gibson Deluxe Double Line Double Ring Tuners on the way!

Here are some of the things I've verified to prove it's provenance;

Fat Heel Joint with little to no ledge
Pot Codes are CTS 1968 Week 52
Swimming Pool Route with Neck Tenon showing dates to Very Early 1969 and possibly 1968
No Dot Over the i in Gibson
Patent Number Pickups
Nylon Saddles on the Bridge
And Finally the Serial Number verifies as Early 1969.

I think this is a January or February 1969 guitar...

On to the pics!

1969 Gibson SG - Cherry - 004.jpg1969 Gibson SG - Cherry - 007.jpg1969 Gibson SG - Cherry - 016.jpg1969 Gibson SG - Cherry - 017.jpg1969 Gibson SG - Cherry - 059.jpg1969 Gibson SG - Cherry - 145.jpgIMG_1825.jpgIMG_20200628_092623918_HDR.jpg1969 Gibson SG - Cherry - 002.jpgw5pufl8wnpaqyqpy1lxx.jpg
 
It's miraculously pristine. Congrats - if it plays half as good as it looks you have a winner.

You might have trouble with the tuners. The holes would have had to have been reamed out for the Grovers, so you will need reduction bushings to put the old-style ones in, and the Grover bushings are also larger diameter and will have likely left indents on the face of the headstock. The Grovers are a huge improvement and a period-correct upgrade - you might consider leaving well enough alone...
 
gball said:
It's miraculously pristine. Congrats - if it plays half as good as it looks you have a winner.

You might have trouble with the tuners. The holes would have had to have been reamed out for the Grovers, so you will need reduction bushings to put the old-style ones in, and the Grover bushings are also larger diameter and will have likely left indents on the face of the headstock. The Grovers are a huge improvement and a period-correct upgrade - you might consider leaving well enough alone...
Click to expand...
Yup G. I seem to remember seeing a number of SG and ES guitars with Grover's from back then.
 
Sp8ctre said:
Well...you all know about this one already, but it must be formally introduced!

The only thing wrong is the tuners were swapped out when with Grover's because they were popular at the time.

I have a set of 1969 Gibson Deluxe Double Line Double Ring Tuners on the way!

Here are some of the things I've verified to prove it's provenance;

Fat Heel Joint with little to no ledge
Pot Codes are CTS 1968 Week 52
Swimming Pool Route with Neck Tenon showing dates to Very Early 1969 and possibly 1968
No Dot Over the i in Gibson
Patent Number Pickups
Nylon Saddles on the Bridge
And Finally the Serial Number verifies as Early 1969.

I think this is a January or February 1969 guitar...

On to the pics!

View attachment 47566View attachment 47568View attachment 47569View attachment 47570View attachment 47571View attachment 47572View attachment 47573View attachment 47574View attachment 47565View attachment 47575
Click to expand...
The Grover tuners are far better than Gibson tuners.
And remain popular world wide despite the date.
Which is why I put Grovers on my SG, of course I did. The Gibson tuners are primitive compared to Grovers.
Besides which the holes have been enlarged to install the Grovers....
The higher end Gibson and Epiphone guitars have Grovers installed at the factory as stock equipment. There is nothing out-dated about Grover Tuners.
There is Gibson style Grovers...and nothing wrong with those either.

Gibson and Schaller have always been recognized as superior tuners. And still are.

If there is a need to install Gibson style hardware ---- then use the Gibson Grovers.
But certainly not stock Gibson tuners which are pretty inadequate for a professional musician.

The next step down are Gotoh Tuners, but still a lot better than stock Gibson.

This idea that Grovers should be removed - is a very silly idea. There is no logical reason to do so. Replacing Grovers with stock Gibson tuners is a big downgrade. Besides which the holes are the wrong size.

Gibson Grovers - the holes are enlarged when these are installed.
1597927629698.png

Stock Gibson tuners (cheap /inferior)
1597927742695.png

I'm not sure who keeps telling you guys to replace the Grover tuners with stock tuners, but it's really bad advice.
No, don't do that.
 
Last edited:
Very cool SG... very cool guitar, period! Congrats again, Sp8ctre... :cheers:

I'm very curious now:
1: I'm surprised there isn't a lot of finish checking!
2: No nibs!!
3: Bridge pup looks very molested. The cover might have been removed then reattached improperly: Gaps in the solder joints!!!

And yes... I too would stick with the Grover tuners.
 
Amp Mad Scientist said:
This idea that Grovers should be removed - is a very silly idea. There is no logical reason to do so. Replacing Grovers with stock Gibson tuners is a big downgrade. Besides which the holes are

I'm not sure who keeps telling you guys to replace the Grover tuners with stock tuners, but it's really bad advice.
No, don't do that.
Click to expand...
Agreed, except if you are experiencing neck dive. Kluson style tuner are much lighter and swapping Grovers for Klusons solved the problem on three of my guitars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top