Got the guitar... New D&B Custom Color Jazzmaster incoming

Discussion of vintage Jazzmasters, Jaguars, Bass VIs, Electric XIIs and any other offset-waist instruments.
kracdown
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 9:40 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Got the guitar... New D&B Custom Color Jazzmaster incoming

Post by kracdown » Fri Aug 04, 2017 3:12 pm

Well... I pulled the trigger. First shot

Image
Last edited by kracdown on Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:16 pm, edited 5 times in total.

User avatar
jansenjazzman
PAT PEND
PAT PEND
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 7:40 am

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65?

Post by jansenjazzman » Fri Aug 04, 2017 3:54 pm

The headstock decal is wrong for a 1965. A correct decal would be Gold Fender not black like the late 60's also a 65 would have the italicized scroll in front of Fender and after Jazzmaster. The neck date is correct. It's possible the neck was sent back to in late 60's for finish work on the neck and put that decal on when they refinished the neck.

User avatar
marqueemoon
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 7344
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65?

Post by marqueemoon » Fri Aug 04, 2017 6:05 pm

Yes. Wrong decal.

User avatar
marqueemoon
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 7344
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65?

Post by marqueemoon » Fri Aug 04, 2017 6:12 pm

If that's the body that goes with the guitar my guess is body and neck were stripped at the same time as the natural finish look started becoming popular late 60's early 70's.

User avatar
zip73
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 809
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 4:10 pm
Location: Monterey County, CA

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65?

Post by zip73 » Fri Aug 04, 2017 7:16 pm

Decal is correct. Notice the absence of the circle-R registered mark after the Fender script. They selectively started experimenting with this early black-logo + an all-gold version of it in late '65. Late '67+ black logos include the registered mark. Below is a FEB '66:

Image

User avatar
marqueemoon
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 7344
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65?

Post by marqueemoon » Fri Aug 04, 2017 7:39 pm

I stand corrected. I didn't know they were still doing dots and binding into 66 either.

User avatar
zhivago
Mods
Mods
Posts: 21926
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 6:18 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65?

Post by zhivago » Fri Aug 04, 2017 11:33 pm

marqueemoon wrote:I stand corrected. I didn't know they were still doing dots and binding into 66 either.
There's lots of B&D guitars...blocks came in later in '66.
Resident Spartan.

User avatar
sookwinder
Mods
Mods
Posts: 11179
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:47 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65?

Post by sookwinder » Fri Aug 04, 2017 11:34 pm

I have seen dots and binding jag necks as late at April 66
Image

I used it on a partscaster build
http://www.offsetguitars.com/forums/vie ... 29&t=36678
relaxing alternative to doing actual work ...

kracdown
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 9:40 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65?

Post by kracdown » Sat Aug 05, 2017 10:28 am

How much should I be paying for an all original 65 in Olympic white?

User avatar
bencrit
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 7:25 am

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65?

Post by bencrit » Sat Aug 05, 2017 4:18 pm

kracdown wrote:How much should I be paying for an all original 65 in Olympic white?
For me, that would depend on whether it's a pre-CBS dots only neck, CBS-era dots and binding neck, or a CVS-era inlays and binding neck. Each one would be progressively lower in value.

For Olympic white, I think that would realistically top out around $7000 for 65. Maybe a hair more if it's in very nice shape and has case candy. I see a few sellers trying to get 10 K + for an Olympic white 65, but that is simply not realistic, in my opinion. Olympic white is a very common custom color, much like candy apple red.

I think The other examples should only go for around 5000-5500. Might be able to get more for dots and binding neck if it's in very good shape.

That's just my opinion. Of course, if I were shopping, I try to find them in the lower range. But if you want it, you'll have to pay market for it :-)

kracdown
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 9:40 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65?

Post by kracdown » Sat Aug 05, 2017 4:30 pm

bencrit wrote:
kracdown wrote:How much should I be paying for an all original 65 in Olympic white?
For me, that would depend on whether it's a pre-CBS dots only neck, CBS-era dots and binding neck, or a CVS-era inlays and binding neck. Each one would be progressively lower in value.

For Olympic white, I think that would realistically top out around $7000 for 65. Maybe a hair more if it's in very nice shape and has case candy. I see a few sellers trying to get 10 K + for an Olympic white 65, but that is simply not realistic, in my opinion. Olympic white is a very common custom color, much like candy apple red.

I think The other examples should only go for around 5000-5500. Might be able to get more for dots and binding neck if it's in very good shape.

That's just my opinion. Of course, if I were shopping, I try to find them in the lower range. But if you want it, you'll have to pay market for it :-)
It's got binding and dots, a big neck (supposedly .91 at the nut), and is all original with the case. Asking less for it than most normal '66 guitars. I'm thinking I've got to try it...

kracdown
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 9:40 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65?

Post by kracdown » Sat Aug 05, 2017 4:58 pm

zip73 wrote:Decal is correct. Notice the absence of the circle-R registered mark after the Fender script. They selectively started experimenting with this early black-logo + an all-gold version of it in late '65. Late '67+ black logos include the registered mark. Below is a FEB '66:

Image
Ah - I knew I had heard about this before. You can see this cleaner guitar at Norms that also has the all black headstock logo. I dig it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-6bAt60JnU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
mcatano
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 324
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:01 pm

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65? - price check

Post by mcatano » Sun Aug 06, 2017 1:11 pm

That guitar has been sitting on SF CL for 4 or 5 months at least at $4500, so I imagine there's something up with it.

kracdown
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 9:40 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65? - price check

Post by kracdown » Sun Aug 06, 2017 3:42 pm

mcatano wrote:That guitar has been sitting on SF CL for 4 or 5 months at least at $4500, so I imagine there's something up with it.
I've been looking at it and talking to the guy who's willing to ship (its at $4,900, but I talked him down). I think that people either aren't down for the big neck or something...
Last edited by kracdown on Wed Aug 09, 2017 12:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

kracdown
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 9:40 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Does this headstock look off for a '65? - price check

Post by kracdown » Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:27 am

pulled the trigger....

Post Reply