Norman Finds And Opens One Of The Rarest Fender Broadcasters | Serial:# 1803 | 1950 | Refinished
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 окт 2024
- Norman is back with a rare 1950 Player Grade Fender Broadcaster with a serial number of 1803, 1963 pot dates, new neck pickup, refinished, some parts are original however. Broadcasters are normally seen with earlier serial numbers but some have been known to have serial numbers in the thousands. Norman had the boys in the back open up the guitar to confirm if this is a broadcaster.
Visit Norm's on Reverb.com:
reverb.grsm.io...
Shop Guitars:
www.amazon.com...
Confessions of a Vintage Guitar Dealer: The Memoirs of Norman Harris:
amzn.to/3dQ16dJ
Norman's Rare Guitars: Softcover Book:
amzn.to/3mul7dL
Subscribe To All Guitar Network:
/ @allguitarnetwork
Official All Guitar Network Store:
all-guitar-net...
Of the 250 broadcasters sold only 500 have ever been found…
Lol
Wow someone has found 250 more than was produced. Just shows be careful what you buy lol
100 out of 70 people are bad at math
Like Navy SEALS.
Ok, that was clever.
Seems like an early "Partscaster"
Your post seems like the most accurate in the whole post.
Lol
I love how both techs vacillate between suspect and non-committal while Norm is eternally hopeful
So true. Norm was just in the way, probably panicking because he paid top dollar for some kind of partscaster that can't even be verified as a genuine Fender, let alone a Broadcaster. Reminds me of Mike Campbell's "Broadcaster". The only thing on that guitar that may be a Broadcaster is the body and its been refinished. Bridge pickup has staggered poles, decal is in the wrong place, string tree is wrong style and in the wrong place, just an aftermarket neck someone slapped a fake decal on. Everything is wrong about that guitar
@@faheykj But if Mike Campbell played it it would sound amazing. The Gilmour partscaster went for big money.
@@nicko6710 very true, campbell is great player with great tone.
Yeah Norms 💵💵💵💵…come on joe bonamassa…I got something for you..yeah techs ..are thinking hybrid…
@@glennevans5824 Not a hybrid at all. This is an early 60s fake.
Norm seems intent on making it more valuable than in probably is
Everyone makes these old guitars out to be worth more than they really are. The prices have gotten ridiculous because people with more money than sense are are paying those prices in hopes that some famous rock star and an unknown groupie jizzed on it back in the 60's and 70's
Of course, Captain Obvious. His business is selling used guitars.
@@richsackett3423 I've been around a lot of people in the guitar selling business who are honest and don't try to make everything into a holy grail.
@@Ironworthstriking Without a doubt. Me too. I've been some really cool stuff from guys like that. The hype is part of the vintage instrument game and it's easy to see how you might get caught up in it, making some objectively questionable decisions.
You're new to Norm, right?
See also those who forever mythologise 59 bursts. The guitar that's valuable only because it's so rare, and so rare only because when it first came out it was a huge flop that Gibson couldn't give away and ended up dropping from the catalogue. Yours today for the price of a house.
Broadcasters are the 427 Corvette of guitars, more exist now than when they were actually manufactured.
LOL
Many guitar trolls out there for a long time now.
@@denboe2894 What does that mean? I don’t know what a “guitar troll” is? A furry critter who wildly overpays for fake vintage guitars?
Yes...yes indeed
@@richsackett3423 guitar trolls are people who buy a vintage fender, then build and sell three different guitars by parting out the neck, body, and neck-plate. The trolls destroyed the market and now that collectors are hurting for money, a lot of people are starting to learn they bought fakes. Lots of people won’t admit that they’re just parts guitars.
There was no 54th week in 1963!
When was that mentioned ? Date stamp to save me the time to find it ?
@@blindtoby8967 9:25
54th week of 1963 was the leap week.
@@OdinHammersmith No such thing as a "leap week" - and any way you slice it, 1963 had 52 weeks.
cdn.generalblue.com/calendar/1963-calendar-portrait-1020x1320.png
@@chuckschillingvideos Every year has 52 weeks.
I"m in Australia and owned the guitar in the video and sold it here in the mid 2000s. It was in my possession for around 15 years and had been in Australia longer than that. It was without doubt the best sounding guitar I have ever owned. I never believed it to be a mint condition Broadcaster and accordingly paid a very reasonable price for it. I bought it fully understanding its questionable authenticity. The reason I bought it was because of the way it played and sounded and because it was affordable for me. I was lucky enough to be able to use it at gigs 3 to 4 nights a week during that time and in retrospect wished I had never sold it. Here is a video that was made after I sold it. ruclips.net/video/XIBIvbA9c9M/видео.html 🙂
Previous owner says "questionable authenticity," techs keep saying the doubt it, serial number is WAY out of line, Norm just keeps a used car salesman attitude.
Without any identifiable marks makes it hard to prove anything.
I don't know. The sales guy is trying too hard to convince that this is a rare guitar. I ain't buyin'.
It looks like the experts are skeptical but Norm keeps trying to talk them into it.
I've seen ones that.
And relic popularity makes him want to strip and buff the finish wtf
LMAO!
Looks like an old player grade partscaster to me 🤷♂️
Definitely
😅😅😅
After watching the video, I'm getting that vibe too.
It would still be awesome to rock it though😅
@@wesleyalan9179 for sure
@@wesleyalan9179 absolutely 💯
Don't get me wrong - I love this stuff. Guitar forensics. But to me this is a total parts guitar. I am suspect, that any of the parts on this guitar are from 1950-51. The body, even though it does not have the additional cavity seems a little too rounded at the edges and hacked up. Nothing on neck or in pickup cavities. Plus the refin? Hmmm. I think Norm might have a case of wishful thinking.
The body looks a little thin to me
Is it just me, or does the body look much thinner than on the usual telecasters?
IF..keyword IF, it was a real broadcaster..it would be thinner than a standard tele with early ones made of pine...but everything that was seen here (flathead screws, the refinish etc..) that can all be reproduced!
2.37 - 2.40
20 to 25 years...a really long time ? To me that's like yesterday. No wonder I don't fit in anymore.
Don't feel like the Lone Ranger.
(For you young-uns out there, the Lone Ranger was a television cowboy who had an indian (native-American) friend named Tonto, and they stopped the bad guys together. In the old days it was okay to imprison and even execute bad people who desperately needed it, in order to make the actual law-abiding citizens safe).
@@jimmyparris9892 😉👍Thanks Boomer!🤣😂
Funny. I have a 1993 Fender American ‘52 Reissue Tele that I bought new. It’s been in the case, most of its life. 28 years makes it “vintage,”right?
Yep... I know that feeling all too well!
Well said , Sir . But tomorrow will be a long time !
There’s a guy in Las Vegas called Rick who’ll give you 1200 bucks for it…but he’s really taking a chance
😆😆😆!!!
🤣😂🤣😂
Yer, Ricks rip offs !!
I might go two grand on this excellent early 60s fake No Caster.
I do not want to cast in the aspersions against Norm. He’s a brilliant guy and has seen more than anybody else but every now and then you have to figure out what is really going on.
Tbh that’s what’s always rubbed me wrong about Norm and a lot of other shop owners (but not all)
They just act arrogant and overhype what they’re selling, which I understand, they’re in the business of selling guitars and all but a lot of them act like what they’re selling is worth more than it actually is
it's one of the rarest until the next video
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Come in guys, its got slotted head screws! Has to be a rare, vintage Nocaster. Sheesh.
This vintage madness is prettig, euh… mad!
Hey i have this chunk of wood in my backyard, i think it might be a early 50's no caster 🤷♂️🤔
Hahaha
This one started feeling wrong right away. It’s a skillful fake done a very long time ago.
OK, so you have a rare guitar with NATURAL WEAR (relicing). But you then have it refinished, and then have someone do a relic job on it? Any one else find this fucking crazy?
I have refins with wear
You see them all the time. Some folks obviously have a taste for then.
I don't understand this relicking crap. I want my guitar mint when I buy it and I'll do my own Reliking to it at shows & on the road!!! I'll be damned if I pay someone extra money to destroy my brand new $5000 Gibson or Fender Guitar!
Isn't ever Norm guitar the rarest guitar known to mankind?
Yes. Just like every well known guitar player is ‘my buddy’.
I’d go buy a reissue and be sure it is what it says it is rather than pay 💰 for a possible ?
Just my opinion.
Just proves that Pros get their fingers burnt
Good on Norm to show this though
*their fingers
@@larryn2682 😂😂 English Teacher, correction made , thanks 🙏
If you think every vintage guitar you see is legit…you’re probably wrong…and most have replacement parts that make it worthless ( or not of any value except what someone will pay for it) - it’s happened to me…can happen to anyone when you want to believe so bad you have a piece of history ( when you really have a old guitar with valueless replacement parts ) …as Kurt V. said
“so it goes”
I like old player grade guitars. I don't mind if some of the parts have been changed as long as those "useless" parts improve the instrument (or actually make it playable in some cases). Otherwise it's just an overpriced wall ornament.
As l get older my guitars are becoming relics and vintage type- honestly- l prefer new instruments! I just bought three after having one acoustic and one electric for three years- both are worn out - and wished l did it sooner
As for Kurt V. - nothing beats the “breakfast of champions” !
Come on guys this is a Partscaster..someone did a restoration on this one with a bit knowledge but not enough..he find him a bridge finally with a low serial..offcourse he could’t find a lower serial it’s to rare.
Great guitar however
Got to agree, you can put 50's parts that were laying around on a 60's guitar but how would he use 60's parts on a 50's guitar?
@@thomasz4981 you can put it on visa versa why not?
Actually the owner can buy all parts seperatly on Ebay or else and put it together and have him a nice guitar. In my opinion some one part it out for instance incase he had a total refin and realise he has money dropt this one...oh no let’s part it out and make some money, so the new owner has to find him crazyness of searching to get close to original. We see this over and over. Try to find a bridge with matching serial of a broadcaster period is almost impossible. So he grab his chance on a early Tele one..so no hard deal on playability..also on the pots etc. I love to see the pu’s in close up
@@Retro.Studio I realize that, I was refering to originality. When I went back to rewatch @ 9:25 he said pots date 54th week of 1963 which doesn't make sense.
These forensic episodes could be awesome for you
Very Exciting!
Bonamassa said “don’t pop the neck, you know if it’s the real deal”
My 52 Tele looks a lot like this one. I purchased it from Ed King almost 20 years ago, he had bought it from Gruhn Guitars. It isn't 100% original, it does have repop tuners, and one of the pickups was rewound. And the body has a not-great refin.
Most good vintage Fenders have some replacement parts, and they are all "parts casters" in my opinion, that's literally how they were made. The ones that look like museum pieces often don't sound as good as the ones that were played and played. The best sounding ones tended to get played and beat up over time.
Guitars break... especially when used professionally on a nightly basis. When someone is using the guitar to earn a living, the last thing the owner would be worried about is replacing any worn parts with originals. They would likely have used whatever was available at the local repair shop in order to have it 'up and running' for that night's gig. I had a collection of 50s & 60's guitars that are likely driving... or, have driven... curators totally crazy over the years.
Unless, a guitar has sat unused in a closet the past 70 years, it is not likely to have 100% original parts in it. Guitars like that are a really rare find!
All true, but at the end of the day, Washington's hatchet is still just a collection of replacement parts, no?
@@chuckschillingvideos A point well made and well taken. All that is really important with a guitar is how well it plays and how it sounds. Doctor's have given me my 'walking papers'. So, I have gathered all the guitars that I had set aside because they had broken in some way and I replaced them in order to be 'back in business' that night. I couldn't believe the number of guitars and parts that I had tucked away in cases and cardboard boxes; because, I needed one to throw over my shoulder to be on stage that next evening.
I rarely returned to make the necessary repairs to the damaged guitar. It was easier to just replace it (such was the sad result of having good credit with area music stores).
I wish I knew in the 60s what I know about the value of older "all-original" guitars today... the same goes for the value of muscle cars I let go for little or nothing over the years. Grrrrrr.
Speaking of sitting in a closet, my step dad had a Broadcaster that he got from his mother when she passed away. To the best of my knowledge it was all original, the case, small amp and guitar, maybe less the strings. It looked new except for a few light wear marks. She played in country band and use to give lessons with it but mostly stayed in its case for the better part of 4 decades. My step dad sold it for $25,000 back in early 2000's if I remember correctly.
He also inherited from his mom's sister an all original 1950 Willy's CJ3A jeep with 28,000ish original miles. I have it today and it runs great!!! It's been some what restored and electrical has been updated to 12V but the engine and running gear is all original even the rear main rope seal that's been leaking forever.
@@justaskmeiknow5584 👍
Tbh that’s what’s always rubbed me wrong about Norm and a lot of other shop owners (but not all)
They just like cocky and overhype what they’re selling, which I understand, they’re in the business of selling guitars and all but a lot of them act like what they’re selling is worth more than it actually is
Techs are like this is a shady partscaster or fake and norm is like this is an amazingly rare broadcaster haha
He says..... "54th week of 1963"........ Think about it! 🥴🥴🥴🥴🥴
Anyone else hear the THEME SONGS FROM THE THREE STOOGES 3 BLIND MICE PLAYING IN THE BACKGROUND?
Serial numbers on the early Fender guitars are all over the place. There is no numerical order. They stamped these bridges, a bunch of them at the same time, and used them first come, first serve, no strict serialization. The highest number recorded on a Broadcaster is #2955, owned by Mike Campbell from Tom Petty's band. For a Nocaster #2790 is recorded. For instance the lowest number found on a Telecaster is #0067 which shows a huge difference. If you want to know more about blackguard Fender serialnumers go to: blackguardlogs.com/
Campbells guitar is a partscaster, look at it closely, all kinds of changes on that guitar, no way #2955 is original.
I love this. Broadcaster? Partscaster? Don't matter. It's two slabs of wood & electronics with enough hardware to hold six strings in tune made as cheap as Leo could. It's like a disposable lighter. And we act like it's The Book of Kells. Lololol. 😁
Except an original is worth 50k+ and that ain't bic lighter turf, kid. Not in the least.
@@jomamma1750 Lololol. Just because I don't genuflect at the alter of Dentist Grade Guitars doesn't mean I'm a "kid." Broadcaster's got maybe 10 years on me. Except for the pots on this example. I'm older than the pots.
Which, while we're on the subject puts a big dent in your $50K+ price tag. Along with wiring harness. And the finish that has to be stripped and redone by a 1st class restorer. *And*, if the condition of that bridge is any indication, the chances are better than good that the magnets and windings in those pickups are so degraded they couldn't put together enough Henrys to sound like ass.
So I have a feeling that this really is a Dentist Grade Guitar. $30 - 35K and all you can do with it is hang it on a wall. Unless you redo the pickups. In which case, what's the point? You just spent *all* that $$$ on some old wood and hardware & 1962 pots and brand new pups. Brilliant.
Old guitars aren't valuable because they are old. But because they have a sound, like a sonic patina. And lots of old guitars sound like shit.
But I'm just some dumb kid, so what do I know, really? 🤣🤩🤔👍
@@dank8865 I'm 100% right, you are a kid! Mentally at any rate. I'm over here talking about an actual original broadcaster being worth 50+, and they are, all day long. Even beat to death. This is a partscaster not an original. Duhhh......
@@dank8865 How could anyone mistake your Old Man Yells At Cloud vintage guitar rant for a kid’s remarks? That’s a lot of typing about a fake guitar on the internet which no kid has the patience for.
@@richsackett3423 Thank you. Old Man Yelling At Clouds has been my stock in trade since I was 15 yo. I like to flatter myself that I have raised it to an art form. Thanks for recognizing my schtick for what it is - bluster & bullshit to help pass the time. Now get off my lawn. Lololol. 🤣
Once again, Norm and his staff are unable to convince me of anything. He’s just trying to sell a guitar. Date the pots.
they did date the pot they could read. did you watch the video? a 1963 pot, which means the refin happened after 63 i,m figuring. its a refinned broadcaster, i think it looks killer, i would leave it and play it, maybe tidy up the neck pocket just a tad
.there are a couple other tell tale signs of a broadcaster but i,m not sharing. if this ever comes back up for sale cheap because everyone trashed it, i,m interested
@@johnsmith-bk4ps go for it! But it’s rarely about the guitar and it’s all about the fingers.
@@jfredknobloch that's an old worn out cliche. Let's see how your fingers do on a 12 dollar walmart guitar
@@johnsmith-bk4ps My fingers would do fine… I started on a Stella. Can you play a B-flat cord in the first position? Then it’s good enough…
@@jfredknobloch except it's going to sound terrible. It's not all about the fingers . I bet the lead pickup in this broadcaster sounds righteous
Come On Norm. You have a broadcaster body with a Tele Neck, refinished at some point with whatever for parts. Cool as hell? Yes! Original Broadcaster? No!!
Slotted trusted. It's a broadcaster
@@johnsmith-bk4ps It's called a truss rod, and no not necessarily. That neck pocket was sloppy as all hell and it was the first thing Norm's tech checked when he pulled the bolts. Those parts did NOT come together out of Leo's factory in 1950. They're not even from the same era, they were cut to different templates bub. As far as the rod goes, truss rods break from time to time and are replaceable, if somebody put the part there, somebody can take it out and replace it. Pain in the A$$ job, granted, but plenty do-able. You take the neck apart with a flat iron. They used hide glue back then since tite-bond hadn't been invented yet. Anybody can build a truss rod out of whatever. It's a cool ax, but not an original.
@@jomamma1750 so they were clever enough to change the truss rod but couldnt get the decal or body thickness or pots right? Your theory is out in left field. This is an Old broadcaster that's been around the block
@@johnsmith-bk4ps No my theory is solid. If it were an original the neck would fit like a glove. That neck pocket looks like some of the crap coming out of the Mexican Plant after the fire in '94. Neck pockets don't magically expand over time. What you have here is a broadcaster with a smashed neck basket case guitar siamesed with a plain jane '62 tele, and probably one with a busted truss rod to save coin, which explains the truss rod swap. That thing was built in the late 80's, early 90's, back when that old fender stuff was still pretty cheap. The amateur resto is just that. This thing was built to play not to look at. Whoever did this put the project together for $15-18 hundred and not a single dime more. Then they played it for 20 or 30 years and just played dumb when they sold it, this year, for 20 grand(or more).
@@jomamma1750 Would you change your opinion if it transpires that both pickups are from from 1950?
Easily identified as not an untouched original. However, I thought Mr Fender's vision was to mass-produce a guitar with consistent specs, thus enabling easy parts replacement. This could be seen as a great embodiment of his vision.
To me, "partscaster" is a tribute, not a derogatory term.
Except the prices for complete instruments varies so greatly.
I'll give ya one hundred American dollars for it right now today...
I wuz 1 year old when this uck wuz screwed together... still young
enuf to be pre-defects. (That fun stuff comes later on 🤩)
Star-eyed Stella, how're ya doin' sweet chunks?
I'm calling B.S. here.............. surely they know that a Broadcaster would have no tone control except for the tone knob being a blend in the neck PUP knob when in the bridge position on the switch.... They never checked for that......... Also a broadcaster pickup should have a much higher D/C resistance than a later Telecaster or Nocaster.... Like 10 k or more........ It seems like the techs are afraid to say anything because Norm is hoping to entice a buyer to pay more than it is actually worth if they are not fully knowledgeable and think it is a genuine broadcaster...... I know it doesn't have the channel but they should have checked out the circuit and the resistance for more clues...........
"make it look more original " are you kidding ?
IT IS THE ORIGINAL PASRTSCASTER !
you can't really think you can get away swindlingsomebody by "refinishing and relicing" it
So if I understand what all this means, a person who collects and pays an enormous amount of money in a "vintage" guitar, may not be getting what he expects. I don't buy into the vintage thing really.if you do, does that mean that all guitars made after the 50's and sixty's are no good? Rubbish I say, rubbish.
Lol that bench needs a magnifier light!
Is it just me or would these videos be waaay better without that old dude even in the video?
The tech is interesting to listen to and is the real expert anyway…
The old dude should go back to his office
CALL YOUR NEPHEW JOE BONNAMASSA
One person has a mask on somewhat properly, another with their nose uncovered and one with a mask pulled down. That's a very sloppy look if you're trying to "look" concerned, why even bother continuing the charade?.
Guitars....the topic of this video is GUITARS......not your shitty opinions on Covid safety...
Is your mom's name Karen??
@Dre' Her name is actually Patti, Patti LeCompte.
Well that's 13 minutes I'll never get back....
Ignorance was bliss, back in the day! Because it was "an old guitar" I bought my Rickenbacker 330 (from 1964) for $75 from GC Hollywood (before their Walk of Fame days)! Also in the early '80's, I got my 1967 sunburst Telecaster Custom, for $125 (because it was a refinish). Oh for the return of days gone by!
I think a magnifying glass would be a good tool to have on hand.
These videos make me question the authenticity of every guitar norm has ever sold. Not a good look for him.
Pots dated the 54th week of 1963??? There are only 52 weeks in a year.
Nice chin guard Norm. Love you but the mask charade is ridiculous
I always hope an old guitar turns out to be “less-collectible” just so people keep playing it rather than it ending up on display behind glass and never getting played again.
What possible difference could that make? You act like you dont want to hurt the guitar's feelings. Collectible guitars should be preserved for the future. There are countless playable guitars that can be played
@@greg7656 There is some amount of truth to your opinion about my statement. I suppose I do believe an inanimate thing can become almost alive. By learning its quirks and playing it to the point that it becoming a conduit for emotion it shares some qualities to a sacred object. It’s a very old way of looking at things. Maybe you’ve never had an emotional connection with an instrument, maybe you named your guitar and talk to it at the breakfast table. I have no idea. I make no assumption.
Keep in mind, I’m not trying to convince you of anything, I’m merely providing a different perspective than the super common collector’s practice.
I also believe an instrument is tool made to be used. If every old guitar is preserved for the future by means of it never being used again, then they are by definition useless. Just a stuffed tiger at a museum. That just seems like a waste to me.
Some people see the countless guitar collections as a respectful tribute to the past. Many musicians, including myself, see it as ending the future use of whatever instrument was collected and disrespect to the mojo that has gone into it.
Again, I’m not trying to convince you of anything. It’s one of those things where either you get it or you can’t grasp it.
@@greg7656 There is some amount of truth to your opinion about my statement. I suppose I do believe an inanimate thing can become almost alive. By learning its quirks and playing it to the point that it becoming a conduit for emotion it shares some qualities to a sacred object. It’s a very old way of looking at things. Maybe you’ve never had an emotional connection with an instrument, maybe you named your guitar and talk to it at the breakfast table. I have no idea. I make no assumption.
Keep in mind, I’m not trying to convince you of anything, I’m merely providing a different perspective than the super common collector’s practice.
I also believe an instrument is tool made to be used. If every old guitar is preserved for the future by means of it never being used again, then they are by definition useless. Just a stuffed tiger at a museum. That just seems like a waste to me.
Some people see the countless guitar collections as a respectful tribute to the past. Many musicians, including myself, see it as ending the future use of whatever instrument was collected and disrespect to the mojo that has gone into it.
Again, I’m not trying to convince you of anything. It’s one of those things where either you get it or you can’t grasp it.
Doesn't the body seem thinner than most Teles?
In the 1980's Stewart McDonald made some quality ash bodies with no channel route and had a more radiused edge. I own one.
I’m getting tired of these rarest Fender guitar finds . It’s getting a bit tiresome
This is the type of content I love. The hunt for rare guitars never stops
This is the second of these videos I've watched. Both times Norm is in the way and talking the guitar up beyond what the techs are saying.
LOL
All of Norms Guitars Are Holy Grails of Guitars.... 😂
Interesting video but they need to invest in a good camera and decent production.
The jumbled pile of neck plates has to be Leo's Revenge on all of us Fenderites 😉
some other things to check; the kluson keys should say kluson and patent pending and have no shaft hole on the side.
the switch tip should say patent applied for on the bottom side. the crl 3 way switch should only have 2 patent numbers. also the knobs might be taller than a regular tele . is the wood truss plug on the headstock maple? walnut? this thing reeks of being a real broadcaster
My observations. The body looks a bit thinner than the 1,75 inch standard size, but every early 1950 Fenders do exist with a 1,69 inch body. What I do miss in this video is that they did not pull the neck pickup so that we can see the drill hole through to the bridge pickup cavity from there. The cavity for the truss rod access looks rather odd at 12:17 as if it was hand chiselled. But that is not uncommon, that was also found on Broadcaster #0032, 0033 and 0081. I am still in doubt about the originality as the video is not very good in showing the nitty gritty. The best possible thing is that this was an older (pre-production) body laying around which they used in the end to make it into a complete guitar. However every Esquire, Broadcaser, Nocaster and Telecaster remains an assembly kit from the start.
I mean to say 'very early 1950 Fenders"
I think ole Norm bought an expensive reproduction.😆 They sure can relic the $hit outta guitars these days.🤣🤣
The thing with Fender’s is it’s easy to make a partscaster….A lot easier to identify a vintage Gibson.
We don't like Gibsons. Period. Go away.
Put it under a black light to see if the cavity was possibly filled.
you are killing me banging that thing around with no towel or something under it
Parts guitar refinished…Norm there’s no channel…20 times pushing the…value.lol…💵💵💵💵💵🤣🤣🤣🤣
Did he say the "54th week of 1963"?
Maybe the plug was for a string tree? So how did the neck pick up get connection hole from the bridge? Was it a layered construction? Very little information on the tuning pegs which I thought would be crucial to determining the history of this guitar.
After routing gap for truss rod access they drilled hole between neck and bridge pockets...
The rape of the telecaster or broadcaster , There should be a law -
Its a "bitza" Tele! Notice the bridge has a hole for the "B" string (B Bender) and no B bender fitted. Replacement decal, pots etc etc. Mmmmmmmm
Back in the 70's this axe would have sold for 200 bucks tops
Exactly! And in the 60’s I would have passed on it and purchased one that was in near-to-new condition.
If you double it and adjust for inflation, you’ll have the actual value of this guitar.
I miss those days, don't you?
@@yrulooknatme I sure do!
Ok Norm we get it there is no channel
nobody sees anything, just 3 guys talking and some shaky shots of the guitar. Great Norman's video.
Norm being careful not to say anything that would reduce the value $1.00.
Pot dated to 54th week of 1963??? They had more weeks of the year back then??
I had to rewind that 3 times to make sure I heard that correctly! "The 54th week of 1963"...and Norm agrees "so they're later pots for sure."...I was still chuckling at slotted head screws being called "flat screws" and almost missed it. Funny stuff.
Probably a Chinese knock off
How can you let a flat screw convince you of the vintage of a guitar
Another telltale sign of pre 52
Leo Fender is up there with Whitworth and Ford when it comes to revolutionising production.
This guitar has been around for a long time! Maybe the bridge. Notice the hole drilled in the back of the bridge where the saddle screws are.Ive seen it in Vintage Guitar Magazine and other publications.At 8:40 you can see it
Better title “norm tries desperately to convince you that a parts caster is from a non existent run of mystical teles that were never made, while ignoring the fact that anyone could put flat screw on it to fool him”
The fact that it has flat screws makes Norm say so easily that it is original ? Doesn’t he know that you can find any of this crap everywhere now ? They reproduce everything today. It is scary that this is how Norm thinks about this things!
Well, I'm sure he knows a guy, in China, that can get you any "original" part you need for any guitar.
Nothing to see here folks , move along. Just another expensive old piece of shaped wood.
That round mark under the pickguard is a sign it’s original; it’s the mark of the lacquer overspray around the round supports used to hold the pickguards while spraying. I also notice some wood missing in front of the neck pickup adjacent to the neck pocket. Changed volume pot.
Yeah I was surprised they didn’t mention the coffee can silhouette. Love these vids though.
I have a whole stack of reproduction pick guards that looked just like that
@@chrisharvey5162 You can even make them yourself. Nowadays forgeries are better than ever; used to be that Fenders were the easiest to fake; now it’s across the board.
@@chrisharvey5162 where can I get one in bakelite (not being sarcastic)?
It would have been great to see it blacklighted and also if you'd have put a meter on the pickups.
Even mint guitars blacklight inconsistently, weird spots etc. As far as finish even refins glow correct after 10 or 20 years.
Why don’t they protect the body?
Actually, it's a 2017 squier classic vibe tele with a few modifications.
Bonamassa will buy it !
Unless John 5 gets there first
When Norm mentioned brass screws, I remembered the fake fender guitars made in the philippines, that I would come across at pawnshops in the 1970's. The pickguard screws on those guitars were slotted and looked like brass.
I quit watching when I saw the face diapers.....
Glad you did.
Well he was talking shit!
Didn't Springsteen buy his Broadcaster from a music shop for something like $185.00 but was a mix/ match of both Tele & Broadcaster parts with an interesting history ?
Yep! He bought it in 1973. It’s a composite assembled from parts from at least two other Fender guitars. The bolt-on neck seems to date from 1957, according to David Eichelbaum, a California luthier and Fender expert who has studied the guitar for decades. The Esquire decal on the headstock indicates that the neck came from the single-pickup variant of Fender’s more-popular two-pickup Telecaster.
Here’s a quote from The Boss - “I strapped on my new guitar, a 1950s mutt with a Telecaster body and an Esquire neck, I’d purchased at Phil Petillo’s guitar shop for one hundred and eighty five dollars. With its wood body worn in like the piece of the cross that it was, it became the guitar that I’d play for the next 40 years. It was the best deal of my life.”
@@czedicartist8955 you're absolutely right and apologies, forgotten it was an Esquire and not a Broadcaster. It's been years since recalling the story. Looked it up again and just adding to you're already accurate description.Oh, by the way! I'm sure you've looked at the cover of " Born to Run" many, many times but did you ever notice he had a decal/sticker between the bridge & headstock pickup? You'll have to look very close but it's of a guy leaning up against a lit light post..
Boasting a Telecaster body and Esquire neck, the guitar had already undergone significant modifications by the time it landed in Springsteen’s hands (for $180!).as the story goes, it was originally owned by a record company and rigged with four pickups that could all be plugged into the sound board-giving session players the ability to earn four times what they typically would with four different versions of a guitar track.As such, there was a generous amount of wood routed out from under the pickguard, which made the guitar much lighter and perfect for “The Boss’” epic concerts.
After the Springsteen bought it, Petillo added hot-wound single-coil pickups and his patented Petillo Precision Frets, which were triangular, in addition to a titanium six-saddle bridge.
Eric Clapton bought the 50s Strats that became “Blackie” from George Gruhn for $100 each.
no hotdog route for neck pup wiring….airplane bit through neck routes some blind tricks under the hood….. made both to know how much easier with hotdog route for neck pup wires….
simple to make these very crude design..carson had the right ideas ergonomic for ribcage and elbow….still can set these up and built the amps also...
Y'know Early Warmoth necks used a flat head truss rod not as well.. this guitar screams BullShtien...... like one of those NAMM frauds that's still floating around. As in one of those screwy, convoluted stories.. "oh my uncle bought this in 1949 with paper route money, yeah he had it repainted in 1985 or something.. blah blah blah... it's nothing special. I've seen guitars like this before... very sketchy. There was a flood of frauds that appeared out of nowhere in the 80's to fill Japanese collector demand, this is exactly the scenario that drove the used market into the frenzy filled "vintage and rare" market.. no legit dates, bogus pots, strange finish colors, the appearance of an original finish somewhere inside...funky neck shapes....bizarre decals... just bogus from head to toe.
Maybe it’s early Esquire body. And someone put neck pickup in the late 60s
'Can I go out and make a living with it?' i.e., does it sound good and play right? That's the only real criteria for me. That whole 'vintage' nonsense makes dealers like this guy happy, but that's about it. Does it sound any better than a brand new tele? Remember, we're talking about MUSIC-you only HEAR it. All o' this BS about 'original pots' and 'original finish' means nothing.
If i was going to buy a vintage guitar I would only buy one from George Gruhn.
George knows what he's talking about and when he sells a vintage guitar, there's no guess work p when it comes to the authenticity of the guitar.
Doesn’t look like a Fender body, to me. Too thin, the edge radius doesn’t look right, and the edges don’t look quite straight/perpendicular.
I remember when guitars were either new or used. Calling an instrument “vintage” would have been a joke. You could purchase any new guitar for a few hundred dollars. The used ones were half of new in the daily newspaper. And you took care of your instrument. The idea of “relic-ing” a nice guitar was sacrilege. With so many great new guitars at reasonable prices, no one needs to pay exorbitant prices for “vintage”. Buy a new one, take care of it, and leave it to your kids. The bubble will eventually burst on the vintage market.
If you can take a vintage guitar and put it up against a new custom shop model, in a blind test have it consistently win, I'll start to believe in the mystique. Until that's been demonstrated I'll take a custom shop any day
The “vintage” electric guitar industry celebrated its 50th anniversary last year. Values will fluctuate as they always have, but the “vintage” guitar market will never burst. Especially, since the majority of the industry applies the term “vintage” to any instrument over 25 years old. I don’t agree with that concept myself, but it is a big win for the industry because it appeals to the nostalgia of middle aged people who usually have both (some level of) disposable income and a desire to own something from their youth that they couldn’t have at the time.
The entire “vintage” industry is a product of perception. 50s and early 60s Fender and Gibson electric guitars started becoming popular in the early 70s because people perceived (and in some case were right) that the new ones were not as good as the older ones. This perception was also influenced by the fact that many of the guitar legends from the 50s and 60s who didn’t die young were playing older guitars that they bought because they were affordable used guitars and they sounded good. This had already happened a decade earlier with acoustic guitars due to the perception that Martin guitars were not as good after they resumed production following the end of WWII. Gibson started dealing with this perception during the late 40s and 50s with their mandolins (and other instruments) from the Lloyd Loar era of the mid 20s largely due to the fact that Bill Monroe played a Lloyd Loar signed mandolin. The
I’m in complete agreement that a new (or used) Custom Shop guitar (or well made guitar from a small independent builder) is categorically a better playing instrument. However, there is also something very special about owning a piece of history that can still be used for its intended purpose. As someone who is fortunate enough to own both “vintage” instruments and amps I feel that I have a responsibility to preserve them for the younger generations to enjoy.
A Squier bought a month ago, left out in the rain, and put in the freezer for a week