Please help me figure this Gibson out, it's not rare or anything

[Nebakanezer]

I know this guys description is way off but just by the pics, I doubt it's a studio:
http://norfolk.craigslist.org/msg/5452010768.html
Thanks

 

[sa1126]

Looks like a run of the mill studio to me outside of the body binding. On second look it could be counterfeit but I'm not the authority on that stuff. Logo seems a tad off...

 

[Mpcoluv]

There was a studio plus or something that looked like that guitar.
In my experience, they were good guitars that just lacked the bling of the regular Lew Pauls.

 

[Nebakanezer]

The binding is a what made me scratch my head and think could they have just replaced the truss Rod cover with a studio cover? I feel like back in the day, Gibson made some studios with binding and dot markers. Thought someone up here has one. But by 2008, they had well established that the studio line didn't come with binding. The guitar is a ways away from me and I just wanted to see what everyone thinks before I were to get up with the guy.

 

[sa1126]

I think I am wrong about it being a fake, I found another studio lp with a similar looking logo. No idea how to explain the binding but the whole deal seems suspect simply judging by the title.

 

[eclecticsynergy]

Odd looking thing with the gold hardware, and binding around the top but not the fretboard.
Doesn't scream "fake!" to me, just seems... unfamiliar.
Gybson, though? Really?

 

[Starshine]

Well, for one thing it's backwards.

 

[mesa/kramer]

The add title itself says that it is fake

"Gybson"

 

[sliberty]

According to a thread I saw on the LP Forum, it's likely a Les Paul Studio Standard from the 80's

 

[Johnny Alien]

The Studio Standard had dot fretboard markings and this one doesn't. This guitar also have binding on the top and bottom of the body.

 

[JPIndustrie]

Yea I'm suspicious. Plenty of legit lefty studios for around that price....

 

[SinglecutGuy]

Everything looks correct with the exception of the binding. Odd that it's on the top and back.

Headstock looks right, as does the logo. The lighting threw me off on the headstock at first but I'm pretty sure that's legit.

 

[Stev0Griffin]

Looks like your run-of-the-mill Wine Red Studio. They offered certain Studio models with gold hardware.

I can't really tell from the photos, but the binding could very well me "faux" binding.

 

[696]

It's a gYbson. I've heard the QC isn't that great, differs from model to model.
I'd buy something else

 

[strumnhum]

I'm no expert, but I checked Gibson's site: http://www.gibson.com/Products/Elec...bson-USA/2008-Les-Paul-Standard/Features.aspx What I notice is that the neck also had binding, does not appear the body had the back bound, and the R in the logo on the Gibson site is not butted up against the G, as it appears on the Craigslist. And Gybson (intentional or ?). Like I said, not a Gibson expert (far from it)-but enough to cause me to have suspicion.

 

[lemonpaul59]

I know this guys description is way off but just by the pics, I doubt it's a studio:
http://norfolk.craigslist.org/msg/5452010768.html
Thanks

I think the "Y" might be a clue. You see, Orville didn't have a "Y" in his last name.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...Gibson&usg=AFQjCNEHQlLpCsAHl-XYDOwEANBmbcvuTg

 

[custom53]

I would stay away from that "Gybson"..

 

[megawzrd]

Dude is selling it as a "Gybson Star Fire 4". Stay away.

 

[Nebakanezer]

The funny thing is, this is the other guitar that interests me: a Guild Star Fire, isn't to far away from the "Gybson." The bridge looks awkwardly cocked though.
http://norfolk.craigslist.org/msg/5500324760.html

 

[strumnhum]

That bridge does look odd, and both guitars are leftys. Maybe contact the seller about the GYbson and have a friend contact about the Guild. See if the same person replies. Also, appears to have been listed, then pulled from Craigslist in Feb. https://www.google.com/search?q=1992+guild+SF+4&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8