The Clapton 'Beano' Les Paul

bbill335

statue of limitations?

TeleMaster

tony99 said:

TeleMaster said:

tony99 said:

soma1975 said:

Grumpyrocker said:

soma1975 said:

Bonamassa clearly knows where it is and has seen it and spoke about it on a forum, and then was reminded it was a stolen guitar and massively backtracked and deleted posts...

Odd. Why wouldn't he inform Clapton where it was so he could get it back?

Because I assume it was one of his rich investment banker friends who owns it. 

Can one "own" stolen goods??

Statute of limitations. 

I don't know what that is and even if I did I wouldn't be confirming to its agenda.

Agenda? I don't know what you mean.

 crunchman said:

soma1975 said:

TeleMaster said:

soma1975 said:

Bonamassa clearly knows where it is and has seen it and spoke about it on a forum, and then was reminded it was a stolen guitar and massively backtracked and deleted posts...

I'm not sure if it would matter due to the statute of limitations. Him knowing where it is 50 years later, when the statute has passed, isn't a crime. If he knew who had stolen it and was associating with them then yea, there's a moral issue there for sure but I wouldn't put much blame on his shoulders. 

Like when Marc Bolans stolen 50's reneck/refin was found a couple of years ago. It's been through so many owners that no one really said anything about where it came from. And the current owners seemed to buy it in somewhat good faith. Interesting in any case. 

More an issue that whoever bought it clearly bought (and so also the person who sold it) did so knowing what it was which is a slightly different thing. And if it's your mate who owns it, and you are also on speaking terms with the original owner, maybe you actually want to stay the fudge out of it. 

That guitar would be the most expensive electric of all time if it is was sold at auction and with all the proper certification. 

The Red Special would probably fetch more if it was ever sold.

By the way, there is no official statute of limitations in the UK.

Yea, but it's in the States though right? 

tony99

TeleMaster said:

tony99 said:

TeleMaster said:

tony99 said:

soma1975 said:

Grumpyrocker said:

soma1975 said:

Bonamassa clearly knows where it is and has seen it and spoke about it on a forum, and then was reminded it was a stolen guitar and massively backtracked and deleted posts...

Odd. Why wouldn't he inform Clapton where it was so he could get it back?

Because I assume it was one of his rich investment banker friends who owns it. 

Can one "own" stolen goods??

Statute of limitations. 

I don't know what that is and even if I did I wouldn't be confirming to its agenda.

Agenda? I don't know what you mean.

 crunchman said:

soma1975 said:

TeleMaster said:

soma1975 said:

Bonamassa clearly knows where it is and has seen it and spoke about it on a forum, and then was reminded it was a stolen guitar and massively backtracked and deleted posts...

I'm not sure if it would matter due to the statute of limitations. Him knowing where it is 50 years later, when the statute has passed, isn't a crime. If he knew who had stolen it and was associating with them then yea, there's a moral issue there for sure but I wouldn't put much blame on his shoulders. 

Like when Marc Bolans stolen 50's reneck/refin was found a couple of years ago. It's been through so many owners that no one really said anything about where it came from. And the current owners seemed to buy it in somewhat good faith. Interesting in any case. 

More an issue that whoever bought it clearly bought (and so also the person who sold it) did so knowing what it was which is a slightly different thing. And if it's your mate who owns it, and you are also on speaking terms with the original owner, maybe you actually want to stay the fudge out of it. 

That guitar would be the most expensive electric of all time if it is was sold at auction and with all the proper certification. 

The Red Special would probably fetch more if it was ever sold.

By the way, there is no official statute of limitations in the UK.

Yea, but it's in the States though right? 

Sorry mate, I was characteristically being a plum. I didn't think SOL applied on these shores of blighty. I stand corrected if so.

TeleMaster

tony99 said:

TeleMaster said:

tony99 said:

TeleMaster said:

tony99 said:

soma1975 said:

Grumpyrocker said:

soma1975 said:

Bonamassa clearly knows where it is and has seen it and spoke about it on a forum, and then was reminded it was a stolen guitar and massively backtracked and deleted posts...

Odd. Why wouldn't he inform Clapton where it was so he could get it back?

Because I assume it was one of his rich investment banker friends who owns it. 

Can one "own" stolen goods??

Statute of limitations. 

I don't know what that is and even if I did I wouldn't be confirming to its agenda.

Agenda? I don't know what you mean.

 crunchman said:

soma1975 said:

TeleMaster said:

soma1975 said:

Bonamassa clearly knows where it is and has seen it and spoke about it on a forum, and then was reminded it was a stolen guitar and massively backtracked and deleted posts...

I'm not sure if it would matter due to the statute of limitations. Him knowing where it is 50 years later, when the statute has passed, isn't a crime. If he knew who had stolen it and was associating with them then yea, there's a moral issue there for sure but I wouldn't put much blame on his shoulders. 

Like when Marc Bolans stolen 50's reneck/refin was found a couple of years ago. It's been through so many owners that no one really said anything about where it came from. And the current owners seemed to buy it in somewhat good faith. Interesting in any case. 

More an issue that whoever bought it clearly bought (and so also the person who sold it) did so knowing what it was which is a slightly different thing. And if it's your mate who owns it, and you are also on speaking terms with the original owner, maybe you actually want to stay the fudge out of it. 

That guitar would be the most expensive electric of all time if it is was sold at auction and with all the proper certification. 

The Red Special would probably fetch more if it was ever sold.

By the way, there is no official statute of limitations in the UK.

Yea, but it's in the States though right? 

Sorry mate, I was characteristically being a plum. I didn't think SOL applied on these shores of blighty. I stand corrected if so.

No you're right, but I don't know how they would retrieve it from the States because they definitely do have a statute of limitations on theft, depending on the State. Some even have it on rape, which seems absolutely mental to me. 

soma1975

Unless you're a guitar-stealing rapist from the 60s. In which case you are quids in. 

tony99

people who rape guitars make me sick

string them up I say!!




the perpetrators I mean...



....and the guitars I suppose

diap

soma1975 said:

That guitar would be the most expensive electric of all time if it is was sold at auction and with all the proper certification. 

Interested to know where you think proper certification would come from? Clapton wouldn't have a scooby if it was the same guitar or not, but given the time frame, and the drugs consumed in the intervening period that's no great surprise. Not sure anyone else could verify it. Does anyone know the serial number from that time period?
Remember back then people played these guitars, not sniffed them!

matone

bbill335 said:

shugz said:

i hadn't heard this before, thanks for sharing. does anyone else hear a fuzzbox in there? 

...think it`s just `loudness`  !!!

soma1975

diap said:

soma1975 said:

That guitar would be the most expensive electric of all time if it is was sold at auction and with all the proper certification. 

Interested to know where you think proper certification would come from? Clapton wouldn't have a scooby if it was the same guitar or not, but given the time frame, and the drugs consumed in the intervening period that's no great surprise. Not sure anyone else could verify it. Does anyone know the serial number from that time period?
Remember back then people played these guitars, not sniffed them!

I mean, if Clapton said it was Beano it would clearly add a couple of million to the price. 

diap

soma1975 said:

diap said:

soma1975 said:

That guitar would be the most expensive electric of all time if it is was sold at auction and with all the proper certification. 

Interested to know where you think proper certification would come from? Clapton wouldn't have a scooby if it was the same guitar or not, but given the time frame, and the drugs consumed in the intervening period that's no great surprise. Not sure anyone else could verify it. Does anyone know the serial number from that time period?
Remember back then people played these guitars, not sniffed them!

I mean, if Clapton said it was Beano it would clearly add a couple of million to the price. 

Until someone asked him 'Are you sure?'.

soma1975

Pretty certain between Clapton and the people at Gibson that did the CC version and the forensic guitar police they could confirm it with a reasonable degree of certainty. Unless it has been refinished or heavily modded or similar. If there were only around 1500 bursts made between the end of '58 and '60, and presumably only half of those at most made in 1960, and then all the ones that can be accounted for and with a full history taken out of the running there's not the biggest pool of Les Pauls to choose from that could be it. 

EDIT: 635 made in 1960. 213 of which are logged. However many hundreds of which are destroyed. 

http://www.burstserial.com/index.php?/category/1437

TeleMaster

I would reply to messages that were aimed at me but I don't feel like I want to quote those messages anymore. The crazy single character per line business is just getting out of hand.

tony99

here is now, on Yesterday channel

shooting sheriffs all over the show

cgumtree

soma1975 said:

Pretty certain between Clapton and the people at Gibson that did the CC version and the forensic guitar police they could confirm it with a reasonable degree of certainty. Unless it has been refinished or heavily modded or similar. If there were only around 1500 bursts made between the end of '58 and '60, and presumably only half of those at most made in 1960, and then all the ones that can be accounted for and with a full history taken out of the running there's not the biggest pool of Les Pauls to choose from that could be it. 

EDIT: 635 made in 1960. 213 of which are logged. However many hundreds of which are destroyed. 

http://www.burstserial.com/index.php?/category/1437

"many hundreds of which are destroyed"

More were destroyed than are logged? How can you be certain of this? I'm sure some have been destroyed, but I can't believe it's a large proportion of those produced. 

springhead

Plenty of owners and collectors out there who don't register their guitars on Burstserial. 

soma1975

cgumtree said:

soma1975 said:

Pretty certain between Clapton and the people at Gibson that did the CC version and the forensic guitar police they could confirm it with a reasonable degree of certainty. Unless it has been refinished or heavily modded or similar. If there were only around 1500 bursts made between the end of '58 and '60, and presumably only half of those at most made in 1960, and then all the ones that can be accounted for and with a full history taken out of the running there's not the biggest pool of Les Pauls to choose from that could be it. 

EDIT: 635 made in 1960. 213 of which are logged. However many hundreds of which are destroyed. 

http://www.burstserial.com/index.php?/category/1437

"many hundreds of which are destroyed"

More were destroyed than are logged? How can you be certain of this? I'm sure some have been destroyed, but I can't believe it's a large proportion of those produced. 

Well it's just the nature of guitars innit? They were tools and not revered valuables....  They broke, got broken. Got poorly stored. It's like 60s years on now. 

Many hundreds is a guess of course but a fair old few are no longer with us. 

@springhead I'm sure you are correct. So that would mean loads more ARE accounted for but not listed on that site. So even fewer that could possibly be Beano. 

springhead

soma1975 said:
@springhead I'm sure you are correct. So that would mean loads more ARE accounted for but not listed on that site. So even fewer that could possibly be Beano. 

Not sure I follow your logic.  The rumour is Beano is accounted for, in the sense of being owned by someone.  Joe's statement was pretty strong as to Beano being found/owned by an east coast US collector.  IIRC he subsequently back-pedaled and said he wished he hadn't said anything.

soma1975

We were talking about should it be presented publicly whether it could be verified or not. 

cgumtree

soma1975 said:

cgumtree said:

soma1975 said:

Pretty certain between Clapton and the people at Gibson that did the CC version and the forensic guitar police they could confirm it with a reasonable degree of certainty. Unless it has been refinished or heavily modded or similar. If there were only around 1500 bursts made between the end of '58 and '60, and presumably only half of those at most made in 1960, and then all the ones that can be accounted for and with a full history taken out of the running there's not the biggest pool of Les Pauls to choose from that could be it. 

EDIT: 635 made in 1960. 213 of which are logged. However many hundreds of which are destroyed. 

http://www.burstserial.com/index.php?/category/1437

"many hundreds of which are destroyed"

More were destroyed than are logged? How can you be certain of this? I'm sure some have been destroyed, but I can't believe it's a large proportion of those produced. 

Well it's just the nature of guitars innit? They were tools and not revered valuables....  They broke, got broken. Got poorly stored. It's like 60s years on now. 

Many hundreds is a guess of course but a fair old few are no longer with us. 

@springhead I'm sure you are correct. So that would mean loads more ARE accounted for but not listed on that site. So even fewer that could possibly be Beano. 

I agree, they were tools, but still expensive tools even back then. I'd like to think people took care of them for that reason. As we do today. I've gigged guitars, but have never had one destroyed beyond repair. Sure, some get stolen, but they still survive.

My guess would be the number destroyed is in the dozens, rather than hundreds. It's just not everyone posts theirs on LPF or burstserial.

I find it hard to believe those that own them don't know what they have these days, it's just not everyone wants to tell the world what they have. They would rather keep them for their own enjoyment and to pass on to the next generation. 

cgumtree

There's a great 3 part documentary of Eric's guitars on The Guitar Show on youtube. More info on all the Les Paul's Eric played there.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6elWtg_UVNuCZiFrYxG5Yg/featured