Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 107

Thread: Fake S-100 keeps getting faker?

  1. #61
    Senior Member Qvart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Cincitucky
    Posts
    4,257
    Quote Originally Posted by mavuser View Post
    yes there was a change in 1972/1973, those are both correct/factory cavities, before and after the change. no question about it. lots of questions, however, about the rest of it
    Yeah, I thought there might have been. Didn't have one earlier than '73 to reference.
    Guildless. :(

  2. #62
    Super Moderator fronobulax's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Northern Virginia, USA
    Posts
    13,533
    Blog Entries
    9
    Curiouser and curiouser.




    My 1971 JS II



    In addition to me just being flat out wrong I see two possibilities:

    The cavity shape did change over the life of the S-100.
    The JS and S-100 bodies are not as close to identical as people claim.

    Perhaps this was a JS body mated to a guitar neck?

    62452 seems to be the serial which puts the neck circa 1972 but unless Hans has something, we will not be able to identify which model.
    Quote Originally Posted by mgod View Post
    What he said.

    '67 Starfire I Bass (Cherry)
    '71 JS II Bass (Walnut)
    '82 B-50 Acoustic Bass (Natural)
    '87 Pilot (Black)
    '13 Newark Street Starfire Bass (Cherry)
    '16 Betts Bass "Walnut Bottom"

    LMG I, II, III

    This space available.

  3. #63
    Senior Member Qvart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Cincitucky
    Posts
    4,257
    Quote Originally Posted by fronobulax View Post
    Curiouser and curiouser.

    The cavity shape did change over the life of the S-100.
    The JS and S-100 bodies are not as close to identical as people claim.

    Perhaps this was a JS body mated to a guitar neck?

    62452 seems to be the serial which puts the neck circa 1972 but unless Hans has something, we will not be able to identify which model.
    Two others have said the cavity shape changed in the early '70's. I wasn't sure.

    A JS body? That would be curiouser. And perhaps give a reason for the maple center (convert from bass p'ups to git p'ups).

    The first digit of the serial looks like a 5 to me (?).
    Guildless. :(

  4. #64
    Super Moderator fronobulax's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Northern Virginia, USA
    Posts
    13,533
    Blog Entries
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by kakerlak View Post
    It really boils down to the presence of wood where it should be absent. There seems to be no evidence of screw holes where they should be for a pickguard, no evidence of holes from knobs, indicator tacks, and jack in their factory-correct locations and not enough round-over/bevel at the edges of the body. I suppose it's possible the mahogany wings were part of a factory body blank in its roughest form, having only been band-sawed out of the plank, but, at that point, I don't think you can really consider it a "Guild" part.
    OK. I go back and forth on whether the bevel is correct. I could also argue that the control locations are close enough to those of a JS II that there is no need for "plugs". But the absence of pickguard screw holes means something.




    I should stop clinging to my hypothesis that an original, intact body is an ancestor but there might still be a case that it was a JS.
    Quote Originally Posted by mgod View Post
    What he said.

    '67 Starfire I Bass (Cherry)
    '71 JS II Bass (Walnut)
    '82 B-50 Acoustic Bass (Natural)
    '87 Pilot (Black)
    '13 Newark Street Starfire Bass (Cherry)
    '16 Betts Bass "Walnut Bottom"

    LMG I, II, III

    This space available.

  5. #65
    Super Moderator fronobulax's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Northern Virginia, USA
    Posts
    13,533
    Blog Entries
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Qvart View Post

    The first digit of the serial looks like a 5 to me (?).
    52452 makes it a 71. My JS is about 3000 higher.
    Quote Originally Posted by mgod View Post
    What he said.

    '67 Starfire I Bass (Cherry)
    '71 JS II Bass (Walnut)
    '82 B-50 Acoustic Bass (Natural)
    '87 Pilot (Black)
    '13 Newark Street Starfire Bass (Cherry)
    '16 Betts Bass "Walnut Bottom"

    LMG I, II, III

    This space available.

  6. #66
    Senior Member Qvart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Cincitucky
    Posts
    4,257
    Quote Originally Posted by fronobulax View Post
    I should stop clinging to my hypothesis that an original, intact body is an ancestor but there might still be a case that it was a JS.
    The layout of the knobs, switch, and input jack location on your JS look as different from this frankenguild as an S-100 does. Curioser.
    Guildless. :(

  7. #67
    Super Moderator fronobulax's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Northern Virginia, USA
    Posts
    13,533
    Blog Entries
    9
    And as I review the pictures I withdraw my claim that the controls could be positioned properly. I'm not sure what I was thinking.

    But the PU toggle could be the same. The P1 volume and suck switch could be the top two knobs. The P2 volume and P1 tone could be the bottom two knobs and the jack and P2 tone could be the toggles.

    However without measurements or side by side comparisons that sounds more like a last ditch attempt to avoid admitting I'm wrong :-)
    Quote Originally Posted by mgod View Post
    What he said.

    '67 Starfire I Bass (Cherry)
    '71 JS II Bass (Walnut)
    '82 B-50 Acoustic Bass (Natural)
    '87 Pilot (Black)
    '13 Newark Street Starfire Bass (Cherry)
    '16 Betts Bass "Walnut Bottom"

    LMG I, II, III

    This space available.

  8. #68
    Yeah, like I was saying earlier, the rough shape of the control cavity is correct (that's how my old '71 S-100 was shaped), but the actual execution of the route looks like something hand-done with a chisel -- it's way too crude for factory. But it looks exactly like what you'd get if you took your old S-100 control cover, laid it on your homemade body and traced its outline, then carved out a cavity inside that outline, using hand tools. I really think somebody either wrecked their S-100 and made a new body, or just had the itch to make one that had that '70s "multi-wood" look and used the old neck and some of the old parts. Worth noting for the heck of it is that the bezel the HB-1 is mounted to looks homemade -- it's too thick around the edges and a little irregularly shaped.

    '66 Starfire XII (sunburst) SOLD
    '71 S-100 (natural) SOLD
    '74 Starfire VI (walnut/mahogany body)
    '94 X-700 (natural)

  9. #69
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by kakerlak View Post
    Worth noting for the heck of it is that the bezel the HB-1 is mounted to looks homemade -- it's too thick around the edges and a little irregularly shaped.
    The pickup bezel is identical to another HB-1 I own. Just saying because, even though it's hard to tell in pictures, I wouldn't want anyone to be thrown of course by that. There are so many things that are certainly wrong already.

    Everyone has gotten me thinking. Originally, once I found out the neck just can't be properly adjusted, I thought I'd part this thing out to get some money back. However, after all of this debate, I realize I have a pretty unique guitar. Even if it's part homemade/ part factory, and regardless of who made it, it may be way cooler to make it playable. Reset the neck, maybe add wood under the fretboard at the joint in order to correct it? Perhaps that's why fate landed it in my hands? I also feel like this ugly duckling has gone on for decades - who am I to end its life? Yes, it's an anamorphic fallacy but I think we all look at our guitars as living beings. It's like I've adopted some stray mutt that can either be euthanized or washed up, shaved, dewormed, given love and played with.

    So my next question for all of you Guild masters is what would you do to fix the neck. I've never even replaced any hardware other than pickups. I'm certainly no luther.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Qvart View Post
    It keeps getting weirder. The body shape looks right and the two "wings" seem like they could have been cut from an original S-100 body, but they are flush with the maple center which appears to be a little to wide for the neck so perhaps the two "wings" are too wide as well.

    Also - unless there was a change between '71 and '73 - the control cavity routing shape looks completely wrong.

    Actually, early S-100's had that more angular control cavity shape, which just makes this more mysterious.

    Here's an example from 1971:
    Last edited by Los Angeles; 01-06-2017 at 07:17 PM.
    57 M-20
    59 M-30
    81 D-40-CE
    74 S-100 SB (3-Eye)
    77 S-100-C NB
    77 S-100 SB
    77 S-100 BLK
    77 S-100 WHT
    77 SF-4 BLK
    77 SF-6 BLK
    01 Bajo-Jet Bari
    15 Hagstrom Viking 12
    55 X-150 (SB) FOR SALE
    69 M-75 BLK
    79 X-500 BLK
    87 X-170 BLK
    88 X-500 WHT
    98 SF2 Bass BLK Hog
    AMPS: Dr. Z, Guild, Sovtek, Fender, Egnater, Fryette
    PEDALS: AMT, Arion, Boss, Chicago Iron, EQD, Ernie Ball, Digitech, JHS, Lovepedal, Menatone, Moog, Pigtronix, Sovtek, TC Elec, Xotic

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •