$2000 hot mess local S100

[Guildedagain]

Sounds wonderful - of course - says the ad, but it doesn't even look properly intonated with what looks like an old Leo Quan Badass bridge so badly installed, but why?

Looks maybe like refin to boot, and the tailpiece looks to have spent time on a buffer?

Guaranteed to have serious "Kurt Cobain tone" "Like a drunk old soul trying to get out" these are all sales pluses these days.

To boot, it's intonated for a leftie, maybe that's where the tone comes from?

If you were wondering, the truss rod cover is on upside down, Gibson style, it almost has to be at this point to match the guitar.

To the fella who posted about Guilds in the wild, this is a rare one for me to have one of these in town, like maybe never.

When I saw the ad, I'm fantasizing for a second "a sweet S100 for maybe $1600", but no, of course, this.

This is what happens to a Guild in a Gibson world, and it's beyond saving to me, $2k and you have to hunt down parts.

Nice hardcase, but no feet.

 

[Norrissey]

I don't think the 1970 S-100s had a phase switch so this is almost certainly a later model. My '71 doesn't have one. I think the phase switch came along in 1972. As you note the bridge looks odd. It doesn't appear to be refinished to me but I'll let the experts weigh in on that. Might still be a very nice guitar.

 

[fronobulax]

I don't think the 1970 S-100s had a phase switch so this is almost certainly a later model. My '71 doesn't have one. I think the phase switch came along in 1972. As you note the bridge looks odd. It doesn't appear to be refinished to me but I'll let the experts weigh in on that. Might still be a very nice guitar.

From the '71 catalog. Switch is missing on both instruments in the '70 catalog. With the usual caveats about dating, catalogs and Guild's consistent chronology I'd say there was a time in 1971 after which all S-100's had the phase switch. There may have been some instruments with phase switches before that time.

 

[Norrissey]

From the '71 catalog

Nice! So the phase switch was introduced in '71 at some point. My '71 S-100 must have been assembled before the change was made.
I wonder if the phase switch was optional in '70 so possibly the guitar in the FB ad is a 1970?

 

[GAD]

Pictures in catalogs shouldn’t be used as a reference for dating guitars. Guild often reused the same pics sometimes for years after changes were made.

 

[fronobulax]

Pictures in catalogs shouldn’t be used as a reference for dating guitars. Guild often reused the same pics sometimes for years after changes were made.

Agreed but in this particular case I know enough about the history of the JS basses from sources besides catalogs that I am confident in my ability to correctly use the catalog when it bolsters my claims. This is a special case because the bass was introduced in 1970 but the feature set did not standardize until sometime in 1971. In this case the 1970 and 1971 catalogs use different pictures and the switch is not in the 1970 catalog which is what I expect.

My error here, if there is one, is the degree to which I am willing to extrapolate from the JS bass to the S-100 guitar but as the original owner of a '71 JS bass I have had about half a century of learning (the hard way) when I can and cannot do that.

 

[GAD]

“We've experienced the fact that the perceptions of an expert surpass the precision of measuring instruments.”

~Nakabayashi-san of Canon, Inc.

 

[Guildedagain]

The phase switch was optional before it was standard, so it's not an accurate dating clue.

 

[fronobulax]

The phase switch was optional before it was standard, so it's not an accurate dating clue.

But the absence of a phase switch can be used to date something to the time when it was optional. So my point is that if it doesn't have the switch then it dates between 1970, when the model was introduced, and some time in 1971 when the switch was made a regular feature.

To be clear, I am NOT trying to date the pictured instrument which has a phase switch. It also has an interesting logo on the pickguard which suggests to me 1970 or 71 before everything got standardized or the very end of the model run when (at least with the basses) there were many non catalog variations - almost as if the used parts at hand and called the result a JS bass.

 

[Guildedagain]

Yes, the logo had me intrigued, thx for mentioning it.

Btw, it disappeared off Mktplace, likely sold.

 

[Guildedagain]

And it's back, but that TRC... it doesn't look like a lot of time was wasted on cleaning/polishing. All it needed was the TRC turned around "the other way". Also looks like someone went around the headstock distressing the edges, although it's probably from forgetting that your drummer has these things called cymbals.

 

[SFIV1967]

...it doesn't look like a lot of time was wasted on cleaning/polishing...

Ad reads: "In wonderful condition for its age,..."

 

[Guildedagain]

Maybe a guitar has like dog years, so it's older than we thought.

 

[tonepoet]

Ad reads: "In wonderful condition for its age,..."

Ah, yes, that "for its age" description. I learned to message sellers using the "excellent for its age" or "in great shape for its age" and I'll ask them to give it a number from 0 to 10, 10 being new, 0 being unplayable and suddenly "excellent' becomes a 6 or 7. I would call 6 or 7 "good". Especially if parts have been changed and they don't have the original parts to sell to you with the guitar.