1962 jazzmaster dodgy or?

[Davey1234]

Hi guys,
What do we think of this jazzmaster? The guitar shop selling insists that it’s all original and the finish is original but I’ve had it from very good authority that it’s 100% a re finish with a replacement decal. Thoughts?

[Davey1234]

https://badlandsguitars.co.uk/products/ ... cbs-fender

[interceptör]

I know nothing and even I think the finish and decal look dodgy.

[BoringPostcards]

It definitely doesn’t look like any burst I’ve seen from 62. It’s a really nice looking Jazzmaster though.
I wonder what they’re selling it for..

[Davey1234]

When I questioned it, this was his reply


Pete Jackson Hi Pete. We know the entire history of this guitar, detailed on the website. It does look unusual for a sunburst if you do not know and understand its journey. Having inspected it, listed to its history and have an in depth knowledge of spraying in Nitro-cellulose myself I know this is the original gun finish. The black faded to brown and the red bled out completely due to reaction with an over coat of gold that was added in 1963, plus many years in the South African climate. The wear on the back is from the owner we bought it from, who had this one from 1965.
Since its removal of the gold the guitar has had very little use and the original wear on the back remains.

[Davey1234]

It definitely doesn’t look like any burst I’ve seen from 62. It’s a really nice looking Jazzmaster though.
I wonder what they’re selling it for..

When I contacted him about it he said he wanted atleast 8k for it

[interceptör]

When I questioned it, this was his reply


Pete Jackson Hi Pete. We know the entire history of this guitar, detailed on the website. It does look unusual for a sunburst if you do not know and understand its journey. Having inspected it, listed to its history and have an in depth knowledge of spraying in Nitro-cellulose myself I know this is the original gun finish. The black faded to brown and the red bled out completely due to reaction with an over coat of gold that was added in 1963, plus many years in the South African climate. The wear on the back is from the owner we bought it from, who had this one from 1965.
Since its removal of the gold the guitar has had very little use and the original wear on the back remains.

It doesn't exactly fill me with confidence that he gives two contradicting reasons for the weird burst (reaction to overspray above; and reaction to SA climate on website). I don't much appreciate his passive-aggressive tone, either.

[Soiouz]

Refin, 100%.

Decal is a really bad and obvious repro, 100%.

Wiring has been messed with.. a lot. 100%

Dodgy as fudge.

[ryandennis]

I've seen more attention to detail on partscasters before, this one definitely looks off

[Davey1234]

Refin, 100%.

Decal is a really bad and obvious repro, 100%.

Wiring has been messed with.. a lot. 100%

Dodgy as fudge.

This is almost word for word the same info I got from a vintage fender collector. This guitar shop will not have it though.

[mr bungle]

What other reason for the additional holes in the neck pocket if not for a refinish?

[Highnumbers]

Blatantly refinished (and not well done). Poor quality decal replacement.

At the right price I’m sure it’s a fine guitar but don’t pay anywhere near the typical price of original JMs.

The fact that the seller is doubling down on the originality either tells me he’s clueless and stubborn or just totally crooked. Either way, it’s a turnoff.

[copacetic]

Oooo i love detective work lol...

Definitely fake decal. Font didnt even try to look correct. String tree is also not correct "bent" style, definite replacement.

Also definitely a refin, but maybe an old one given the look of it. Extra screw holes with no paint within them in the neck pocket give it away, as does the general "off" look of the colors. Black will basically never fade to brown like that, not in the context of guitar paint like this at least.. Clear coat will yellow over black, but it still looks like black thru a yellow "lens" not brown. The red is really the only pigment that was prone to fading out back then (this is the reason for Candy Apple Red being done differently than their other metallic colors), but any example ive seen with the red completely faded out has also been very yellow in the center from aged clear coat, this one looks way too orange. You can also see lots of overspray from the brown on the body in the up close pics under the guard. Not to mention theres absolutely no difference in hue under the guard as you would have when a guitar naturally ages/fades "that much." There would at least be a visible line where the pickguard has sat on it for 60 years. Even if the guitar was indeed oversprayed gold at one point and meticulously stripped back to reveal this finish, weve seen that before and it still looks like a correct vintage sunburst underneath. Gold paint going over a clear coated finish isnt going to magically change the color of the paints underneath it, thats not how lacquer works. I could go on, but i think we get the picture here.

Also the wiring under the guard doesnt look correct, the types of wire are wrong in a lot of places and you can tell things have been swapped/changed around a lot over its life. Not a huge deal functionally but definitely makes a big difference when talking prices of a guitar of this vintage.

Blatant, obvious refin and the seller's responses make me lean more towards him being sleazy than just completely and totally clueless on where to look. Nobody that has "in depth knowledge of spraying nitrocellulose" and is a dealer of vintage guitars would be that clueless and really try to pass this off as all original

[Skeet-1969]

As others have said, refin. Obvious is obvious. No doubt. That decal is enough to have me walk out of the shop, especially with the vendor insulting me as to the originality.
Mike B

[Cousin Joe]

The advertisement states "Being a non slab board shows it as after 1960."

But this looks like a rosewood slab fretboard to me. Or does this refer to something else?