Best fake Gibson I've ever seen.

GomezAddams

Wandering and wondering
Staff member
My friend is standing in a pawn shop looking at what is purported to be a Les Paul Supreme for less than $800. He's asking if it is legit. It's fake, but it took me a while to confirm it. One of the best fakes I've ever seen.


1737141841963.png


First impression was looks pretty good. Cutout horn seems a bit off, but might just be the camera angle. Floyd Rose, locking nut and pickups obviously not stock.

1737142315367.png


Frets and fret nibs look good. Inlays are correct for a Supreme. Joint where body binding meets neck looks a bit sloppy, but not outside what might have left a Gibson factory.

1737142457133.png


"Supreme" and truss rod cover engraving looks bad. First clue something is amiss.

1737142569305.png


Ok, my first big "must be fake": no wings on the side of the headstock. I have never seen a Gibson electric with a mahogany neck that didn't have thin glue on wings on the outside of the headstock. The neck to headstock transition looked off as well. And I've never seen a Gibson stamp in that location.

Also, no Gibson ever left the factory with Grover tuners that I know of. Given the customization work done, seeing Grovers isn't surprising, but there should be screw holes showing since all Gibson tuners use two mounting screws (I think...)

1737142790174.png


Next oddity - the neck to body relief carving. Not like anything I've seen on a Gibson.

1737142864442.png


Control cavity doesn't look stock, but has good components. I thought Gibson always used a metal plate in the cavity, but further research shows examples of pots mounted directly in wood. Also, I *think* Gibson only sells replacement pots with the Gibson logo. I don't think they put them in new guitars. I could very well be wrong about that, though.

1737143002932.png


Final kicker: Googling the serial number shows lots of other fakes with the same number.


I find this guitar surprising. Whoever built it put a hell of a lot of work into getting things right, but then used that awful "Supreme" inlay and truss rod cover.
 
They also put paint into the stamping on the back of the headstock, Gibson never does that. I’m not sure why the Chinese factories always do that; all it does is add labor costs.

As for the Grovers, Gibson puts Grovers on guitars all the time when the model doesn’t use tulip tuners. My Les Paul Traditional Pro V has Grover locking tuners.
 
They also put paint into the stamping on the back of the headstock, Gibson never does that. I’m not sure why the Chinese factories always do that; all it does is add labor costs.

As for the Grovers, Gibson puts Grovers on guitars all the time when the model doesn’t use tulip tuners. My Les Paul Traditional Pro V has Grover locking tuners.
my 1959 ES355SVTD had stock grovers on it. Gruhn even said so.
i got in a small pawn shop outside Biloxi MS, in 1975, for $150.
it was all correct, so Gibson DID use Grovers on the really high end stuff, sometimes.
 
I'm no expert on LPs or Supremes but the two big tells for me are the neck heel and one piece headstock. These days, that level of butchery/modification on what would be a blingy expensive guitar often seems to be more frequent on the knockoffs since the investment is so low....even then, the shop price is still way low for a heavy modded legit Supreme.
 
The 'Supreme' writing in the inlay is not correct, either. This one is sloppily done compared to the ones I googled.

How does it play?
 
The 'Supreme' writing in the inlay is not correct, either. This one is sloppily done compared to the ones I googled.

How does it play?
The guy that was there is an ex bass player and AFAIK never played guitar. I don't think he even tried to play it.
 
Back
Top