why do collectors pay so much for an original Les Paul burst ? - Reverb article

What's Hot
24

Comments

  • IvisonGuitarsIvisonGuitars Frets: 6838
    tFB Trader
    Gagaryn said:
    impmann said:
    DanR said:
    impmann said:




    I prefer Les Paul's over other guitars, that's merely a fact.  an opinion.


    FTFY
    I'd rather you leave my narrative alone. Fact.
    It is a a fact though not an opinion.

    Opinion would be he believes the LP is the best guitar.
    Humour is wasted here. Clearly...

    In your opinion...
    The irony here is when an R9 Tom Murphy aged Les Paul owned by @ourmaninthenorth was played side by side with a well know 1959 Burst in a room full of Les Paul geeks, it was the overall opinion of that room that the 2 guitars were almost indistinguishable from each other. That’s a fact.

    My ‘57 Special also stood shoulder to shoulder with the Burst and I was more than happy to be taking it home ather than the Burst.
    http://www.ivisonguitars.com
    (formerly miserneil)
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • peteripeteri Frets: 1283

    I absolutely believe that 50s and 60s Gibsons have something about them, old wood, great pickups etc. All the ones I have, they have a different (I'm not saying better, but different) tone and compression which some people (me included) really like.

    That justifies up to (let's say) £10k

    Then you have the rarity factor (supply and demand) and let's say that justifies up to £30k

    (bad maths I know).

    After that you're into (for me) investments, and I feel there are any number of reasons for this - and this closely mirrors the art world.

    1. They are lovely things to own, they look great and iconic

    2. They are old and rare - therefore supply and demand emphasises the fact you're investing in something which is hard to source and buy and only a few dealers have

    3. There is a perceived (correct or otherwise) benefit/value in investing in something real, physical, tangible - that's even more of the case since 2008 with the credit derivatives driven crash. Investors like the idea that it's physical, you see this with asset managers and real estate too for example.

    4. Historically (even now) vintage instruments have performed very well as investments, they have had classic growth and stagnation but always with an upward trend. This against a back-drop of poor interest rates, lack of market depth in equities etc makes them look interesting


    There are obviously people willing and able to spend £100,000+ on a guitar, because these keep selling - I just suspect they don't hang out much on here.

    Even if we take the lower end stuff as an investment, as a non car owner - if on here I talked about buying a new 3 series BMW, people would be ok with that - yet I'd lose money like a stone on that. I could buy a P90 Les Paul for the same money, and the money is as good as safe based on previous performance.

    Works the same at the upper end, if you can spend £250,000 on a guitar you can buy a Ferrari - I know which is the better investment (and easier to insure!)


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 3reaction image Wisdom
  • impmannimpmann Frets: 12641
    peteri said:


    There are obviously people willing and able to spend £100,000+ on a guitar, because these keep selling - I just suspect they don't hang out much on here.



    I'm not sure I totally accept this - bearing in mind a lot of the late 50s Bursts that are currently available have been for some time... its a perception that they 'sell' because they transfer to the next vintage dealer, usually on a commission sale. Ergo, same seller.

    The other thing is, I'm not convinced about this perception of "value" thing... y'see, the baby boomers who actually care about these things won't be around in 25-30 years time (or rather won't be buying these things... too busy worrying about how they will be financing someone wiping their arse for them) and the generation that follows really doesn't care *as much* about these things, and the one following that couldn't give a rats arse (in general). Therefore, I forsee that without bullshit pieces like this written in the popular press and on the internet, the value could *fall*.
    I'd also like to see some independent sales figures for these - everything I've seen has been produced by those with axes to grind (pardon the pun) with regards to keeping the prices "up". AFAIK, the perception of what a burst is valued at has not altered significantly for about 12-15 years (unlike the classic car analogy people trot out) - and I'd be interested to see what the actual growth rate genuinely is. I doubt its as good as a Ferrari Daytona, or a 350 Shelby Mustang or even a Mini 1275GT in percentage terms.

    Point is - we keep reading stuff telling us that this is aspirational. We keep being told that this is "the way it is". However, the very people that keep telling us this are the very people that stand to loose the most if the bubble bursts (sorry, another pun). And as I said in my first posting on this thread - the clue to the reason why this was written is in the last line of the article.
    As Tony Wilson said - keep telling people something is that way, it *becomes* the truth.


    Never Ever Bloody Anything Ever.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 7reaction image Wisdom
  • meltedbuzzboxmeltedbuzzbox Frets: 10337
    @impmann well said mate. 
    The Bigsby was the first successful design of what is now called a whammy bar or tremolo arm, although vibrato is the technically correct term for the musical effect it produces. In standard usage, tremolo is a rapid fluctuation of the volume of a note, while vibrato is a fluctuation in pitch. The origin of this nonstandard usage of the term by electric guitarists is attributed to Leo Fender, who also used the term “vibrato” to refer to what is really a tremolo effect.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • JezWyndJezWynd Frets: 6021
    edited August 2018
    @impmann. Factor in also that just because two internet billionaires fight over something in an auction room, doesn't mean that it's value will hold up over the long term (or that it's actually worth anything near what they're prepared to pay on that sunny day).

    Some of the stuff Reverb does gives me a bad taste. Their fetishisation of gear, all based around taking a cut of the profits is pretty naff however they want to dress it up as historical interest.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 3reaction image Wisdom
  • BridgehouseBridgehouse Frets: 24578
    I spent a lot of cash on my 64 Precision. I wanted one, I’d sold enough other stuff to get one, and it makes me happy. Is it the best bass in the world? No. Doubtful. 

    However, it’s price was comparable to a decent Wal or a top-end custom builder, or a limited run custom shop (plus a bit more for a bass!)

    And as such there’s the rub. If a 64 Precision was £100k then I’d go no where near it. In relative terms, that is too much for what it actually is. For me, Bursts are the same - too much for what they actually are, what they actually give you over any other guitar, and what their heritage suggests they did. 

    £10k would be more than reasonable and understandable, and that’s it
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom
  •  I’m perfectly prepared to believe that a ‘good’ late ‘50s Les Paul is better than newer iterations - but not to a point where it matters to a listener. 

    I know where you're coming from---I agree with the second part of your sentence but not the first. It has always struck me as bizarre that people are willing to accept that with the best part of 70 years knowledge and experience electric guitar makers haven't got better at it and have in fact somehow got worse.

    Old instruments are cool. They have "mojo" and they're collectible. But they're not better instruments than top class modern ones. That's a nonsense, IMO.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 5reaction image Wisdom
  • OilCityPickupsOilCityPickups Frets: 9980
    tFB Trader
    peteri said:

    I absolutely believe that 50s and 60s Gibsons have something about them, old wood, great pickups etc. All the ones I have, they have a different (I'm not saying better, but different) tone and compression which some people (me included) really like.

    That justifies up to (let's say) £10k

    Then you have the rarity factor (supply and demand) and let's say that justifies up to £30k

    (bad maths I know).

    After that you're into (for me) investments, and I feel there are any number of reasons for this - and this closely mirrors the art world.

    1. They are lovely things to own, they look great and iconic

    2. They are old and rare - therefore supply and demand emphasises the fact you're investing in something which is hard to source and buy and only a few dealers have

    3. There is a perceived (correct or otherwise) benefit/value in investing in something real, physical, tangible - that's even more of the case since 2008 with the credit derivatives driven crash. Investors like the idea that it's physical, you see this with asset managers and real estate too for example.

    4. Historically (even now) vintage instruments have performed very well as investments, they have had classic growth and stagnation but always with an upward trend. This against a back-drop of poor interest rates, lack of market depth in equities etc makes them look interesting


    There are obviously people willing and able to spend £100,000+ on a guitar, because these keep selling - I just suspect they don't hang out much on here.

    Even if we take the lower end stuff as an investment, as a non car owner - if on here I talked about buying a new 3 series BMW, people would be ok with that - yet I'd lose money like a stone on that. I could buy a P90 Les Paul for the same money, and the money is as good as safe based on previous performance.

    Works the same at the upper end, if you can spend £250,000 on a guitar you can buy a Ferrari - I know which is the better investment (and easier to insure!)


    In musical instrument terms they are not old ... 60 yeas is nothing compared to many regularly used orchestral instruments worth similar, or a hell of a lot more. It's simply a matter of nostalgia: most of us (except perhaps a few goths) don't get nostalgic about the eighteenth century ... yet us children of the rock and roll and electric blues era can be persuaded that that was both a golden age for instruments ... and in some folks opinion, for many other things too.

    Professional pickup winder, horse-testpilot and recovering Chocolate Hobnob addict.
    Formerly TheGuitarWeasel ... Oil City Pickups  ... Oil City Blog 7 String.org profile and message  

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom
  • miserneil said:
    Gagaryn said:
    impmann said:
    DanR said:
    impmann said:




    I prefer Les Paul's over other guitars, that's merely a fact.  an opinion.


    FTFY
    I'd rather you leave my narrative alone. Fact.
    It is a a fact though not an opinion.

    Opinion would be he believes the LP is the best guitar.
    Humour is wasted here. Clearly...

    In your opinion...
    The irony here is when an R9 Tom Murphy aged Les Paul owned by @ourmaninthenorth was played side by side with a well know 1959 Burst in a room full of Les Paul geeks, it was the overall opinion of that room that the 2 guitars were almost indistinguishable from each other. That’s a fact.

    My ‘57 Special also stood shoulder to shoulder with the Burst and I was more than happy to be taking it home ather than the Burst.
    I had that very 57 on loan for a few months from our mutual friend Neil, and can say with my hand on my heart that I can barely remember playing a guitar that I enjoyed more.  It's price is an irrelevance to me, it's value as a player..immeasurable. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom
  • SporkySporky Frets: 27571

    Old instruments are cool. They have "mojo" and they're collectible. But they're not better instruments than top class modern ones. That's a nonsense, IMO.

    I'm not strongly disagreeing with you, but I think there is the possibility that any guitar from the 50s that's still around now is probably one of the good ones, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to me to think that the ones that are still around are probably very good instruments or they'd have been thrown in a skip by now.

    I don't think that justifies their price (which is down to collectability and speculation and investment and so on).
    "[Sporky] brings a certain vibe and dignity to the forum."
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • WezVWezV Frets: 16543
    Bigsby said:


    How long before someone claims the tone is in the flame?
    I have actually seen it said before, and there is a grain of truth in it.... bare with me before you hit the lol button...

    wood figuring is is caused by erratic grain which directly affects stiffness.  If all other variables are equal plain maple with be stiffer than flamed, which will be stiffer than quilted.   The stiffness of the guitar will affect the way the string energy is used/filtered , which will affect tone.

    the problem is it’s just one of about 5-7 variables with that component (the top) and they all vary so much you can’t say anything definite about a single variable.   It’s probably about 150th is the list of things that can make a difference to string vibration on a guitar. So there is a tiny grain of truth in it.  Just not one that is in any way usable

    however take a violin, where the back is directly coupled to the top as an acoustic system, and that variable moves up to the top 20.  Figuring will have a bigger impact on the stiffness of a violin plate than a guitar top because it’s a much thinner bit of wood. that change stiffness will have a more direct impact on the way the string vibrations energy is used/filtered.

    i still don’t believe those old violins chose figured wood for tone.  They chose it because the flaws made it cheap and because it looked pretty.  The choice became part of the tonal recipe once it was an established style.
    0reaction image LOL 2reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • BigsbyBigsby Frets: 2913
    WezV said:
    Bigsby said:


    How long before someone claims the tone is in the flame?
    I have actually seen it said before, and there is a grain of truth in it.... bare with me before you hit the lol button...

    wood figuring is is caused by erratic grain which directly affects stiffness.  If all other variables are equal plain maple with be stiffer than flamed, which will be stiffer than quilted.   The stiffness of the guitar will affect the way the string energy is used/filtered , which will affect tone.

    the problem is it’s just one of about 5-7 variables with that component (the top) and they all vary so much you can’t say anything definite about a single variable.   It’s probably about 150th is the list of things that can make a difference to string vibration on a guitar. So there is a tiny grain of truth in it.  Just not one that is in any way usable

    however take a violin, where the back is directly coupled to the top as an acoustic system, and that variable moves up to the top 20.  Figuring will have a bigger impact on the stiffness of a violin plate than a guitar top because it’s a much thinner bit of wood. that change stiffness will have a more direct impact on the way the string vibrations energy is used/filtered.

    i still don’t believe those old violins chose figured wood for tone.  They chose it because the flaws made it cheap and because it looked pretty.  The choice became part of the tonal recipe once it was an established style.
    :) Nice try (no, really...) 

    But there's a world of difference between something like "theoretically, flame could have a tiny influence on tone, but to a degree that's imperceptible and not in any way usable" and "tone is in the flame". 

    And note that the article was saying that prices vary hugely between the attractiveness of the flame. Now, how do we check for a correlation between the attractiveness of the flame, and it's imperceptible impact on tone? I'm not sure we can. ;) 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • WezVWezV Frets: 16543
    I agree.  

    At best you can talk about averages.  These can be applied to a factory output as a generalisation.  They can be useful in that context, but fall down when talking about an individual guitar.


    Just wanted to add some context to your quip because the people who say “tone is in the flame” will argue it down to the ridiculous level.  That’s not what I was trying to do (except for violins)

    on your second point, most would assume “attractiveness of flame” and “depth of figure” are related in some way, even though many prefer a more subtle flame.  

    You see all sorts on old Gibson’s, but generally it’s mefium and often  inconstant figure from the source of wood and the way it was sawn (another two variables) that gives a 50’s look.  I’m not going to say it gives a 50’s tone, it’s too hard a variable to control for too little impact.


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • prowlaprowla Frets: 4896
    I think the '59 got its status because Gibson stopped making them for a while, so they were the most recent ones available.

    One of the nicest guitars I've played is a 50s Les Paul, though.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • Strat54Strat54 Frets: 2329
    I think one of the factors that is always overlooked and one that these wealthy guys don't like to admit to is that by owing one you are joining an exclusive ownership club where rock stars, guitar historians and very average players can come together, converse and socialise. 

    Here's the quote from the article...

     'That's a shame—but unlike my friend Joe Bonamassa'

    Joe isn't the only 'friend' you gain too. There are a number of other Burst loving pro guys who if you live in L.A or the like who you can become 'buddies' with. Its currency, its kudos, it is credibility for the ordinary but wealthy guys who quite often aren't so great players. This is reason enough for them to buy.
    Kris Blakely owner of Dixie Roofing is a typical example. Super wealthy nice guy who owns Paul Kossoff's Burst, you'll find him on all forums and social media platforms as Fried Okra, where he shares his collection and pics of him at home with his buddies. There's nothing wrong with this of course but I think its a contributing factor to why people keep paying so much for them.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 7reaction image Wisdom
  • GassageGassage Frets: 30826
    If I were the editor of that piece I could sum it up in 3 words:

    Aspiration; Supply; Demand.

    No need for 1000 words on it.

    *An Official Foo-Approved guitarist since Sept 2023.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 5reaction image Wisdom
  • darthed1981darthed1981 Frets: 11670
    I refuse to be convinced that Clapton's sound on the Beano album would have been any less iconic if someone could pop back in a time machine and substitute his burst for a good Epiphone Les Paul. The magic was in his fingers and in the production, not the instrument.
    Wisdom, that's what I was thinking as well.
    We have to be so very careful, what we believe in...
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • HattigolHattigol Frets: 8175
    Gassage said:
    If I were the editor of that piece I could sum it up in 3 words:

    Aspiration; Supply; Demand.

    No need for 1000 words on it.
    I'd probably go further and restrict it to two words:

    Wealth, foolishness.
    "Anybody can play. The note is only 20%. The attitude of the motherf*cker who plays it is  80%" - Miles Davis
    2reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • impmannimpmann Frets: 12641
    Gassage said:
    If I were the editor of that piece I could sum it up in 3 words:

    Aspiration; Supply; Demand.

    No need for 1000 words on it.
    You can also add the word "consume" to that too...
    Never Ever Bloody Anything Ever.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • Strat54 said:
    I think one of the factors that is always overlooked and one that these wealthy guys don't like to admit to is that by owing one you are joining an exclusive ownership club where rock stars, guitar historians and very average players can come together, converse and socialise. 

    Here's the quote from the article...

     'That's a shame—but unlike my friend Joe Bonamassa'

    Joe isn't the only 'friend' you gain too. There are a number of other Burst loving pro guys who if you live in L.A or the like who you can become 'buddies' with. Its currency, its kudos, it is credibility for the ordinary but wealthy guys who quite often aren't so great players. This is reason enough for them to buy.
    Kris Blakely owner of Dixie Roofing is a typical example. Super wealthy nice guy who owns Paul Kossoff's Burst, you'll find him on all forums and social media platforms as Fried Okra, where he shares his collection and pics of him at home with his buddies. There's nothing wrong with this of course but I think its a contributing factor to why people keep paying so much for them.
    Kris is indeed a gentleman.

    However, super rich? The super rich don't have to divest themselves of an accumulated collection of prized non-vintage guitars to be able to afford a 'Burst.

     This is exactly what Kris both publicly and painfully ( for him...) did. There is a well known picture of a huge number of his Historics and Limited runs lined up in boxes waiting for UPS...along with some rather rueful postings from the man himself. 

    He sweated for his dream guitar, and I for one am as pleased as punch that he got it. I believe both Kris and Arthur were very happy with how it all went when he came over to get it. 

    Then there is the geezer who owns the Mick Taylor 'Burst, he carts it around in a padded gig bag, props it up on the nearest convenient chair, and walks away while the great unwashed play his guitar, and dine out on the fact for bloody years. 

    Then there's another Pal of mine in Londinium, not only will you get an invite to play probably the best collection of guitars and amps in the country, the geezer also feeds and waters you in fine dining places. Rarely does any of this hit the public airways....some of these collectors are very discrete, and rather grounded, humble people. 

    There are similar things going on in the USA, great generosity and grace.

    There are of course also the brash and loud, those that just love showing off...I love their guitars, but am frankly bored to death with the same old, same old pictures of false smiles, and new "acquisitions...." 




    2reaction image LOL 1reaction image Wow! 5reaction image Wisdom
Sign In or Register to comment.