Lennon´s Gretsch
-
larrywassgren
- Veteran RRF member
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2000 8:34 pm
Hey Larry, do you still have your secret decoder?
Life, as with music, often requires one to let go of the melody and listen to the rhythm
Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
-
larrywassgren
- Veteran RRF member
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2000 8:34 pm
-
beatlesgear
No commercial Alrry, just pointing out the obvious. Sometimes I think maybe you forget that this is how I spend most of my time, putting this research together. I'm lucky enough to not have to worry about the 9-5 thing any more.
Miguel, Babiuk's book has a lot of great stuff in there and a good place to start, unfortunately (like most books) in just a few years it's already become "dated" when it comes to certain areas.
Miguel, Babiuk's book has a lot of great stuff in there and a good place to start, unfortunately (like most books) in just a few years it's already become "dated" when it comes to certain areas.
-
larrywassgren
- Veteran RRF member
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2000 8:34 pm
-
beatlesgear
OK Larry, I'll put up.
Here is a brief list of some of photo errors found in the first editon Babiuk's book. I've left out the omissions because obviously he would be unable to show everything they used in this type of published format, even though I consider those errors as well because he has full page spreads of things like the Electric Sitar but left out some "more important" stuff to fit those in. This list below is basically for those Beatle fans who bought the book and just decided to skim the pages, going by pics alone without readin whats in there. I don't think I remotely have enough time to list errors found in the text
Page 10, Gallotone (Larry's guitar) with the wrong stuff on the headstock, should have a Gallotone decal, not the mounted plate as shown.
Page 11, shows a pic of the "Lennon" guitar that went to auction, the guitar is a fake, what's the point?
Page 14, Zentih 17 (Larry's guitar) shown is wrong, doesn't have the medalian on the headstock.
Page 15, Zentith promo shows a 17 with the wrong guard, not similar to McCartney's.
Page 19, shows an Egmond promo not showing the right guitar and text on it is too small to read to find out any real importance whatsoever.
Page 23, shows Selmer ads for Hofner club guitars that aren't Beatle specs, what's the point?
Page 26, has Futurama ad showing the wrong spec guitar, what's the point?
Page 30, shows Hofner 333 ad with the wrong specs, what's' the point?
Page 33, shows an ad of a solid 7 with the wrong bridge assembly.
Page 35, shows a Watkins Westminster amp (Larry's amp) that is nothing like the one Stu used.
Page 39, shows an ad for a Gibson Les Paul amp with the wrong control panel, what's the point?
Page 43, shows an internal Rickenbacker doc that was supposed have the serial numbers and values skewed by the publish, it wasn't. This goes for the rest of them found on other pages in the book as well.
Page 55, shows a Bigsby catalogue cover with the wrong tailpiece on it, what's the point?
Page 67, shows a Quad promo with wrong preamp unit displayed, what's the point?
Page 67, shows what is called a repro McCartney's coffin set up, sorry, but not even close by any stretch.
Page 67, shows fawn AC30 twin (wrongly referred to as tan) and the description goes on to say that the Beatles acquired two of them, when in fact the only had one because the other one was an AC15 twin.
Page 68, shows an ad for an ES 335 missing the right tailpiece, what's the point?
Page 71, shows the fake Ringo Premier kit owned by the Hard Rock Cafe, swirls go in the wrong direction on half the drums to be Ringo's. Very misleading.
Page 75, shows an ad with a Gibson J160E with the wrong bridge (no dots), what's the point?
Page 90, shows an example of a dial-up mute Country Gent with the wrong F hole, should be solid black without the white around the edges.
Page 95, shows an ad for the Maton MS 500, wrong spec completely on it, different headstock artwork, etc. what's the point?
Page 99, set list pic put in backwards.
Page 138, shows and AC100 that has '65 specs, unlike those used by the Beatles in '64. It says that the AC100s were especially made for the Beatles, this is BS. Vox had been making the AC100 for at least 6 months before the Beatles received their guitar rigs.
Here is a brief list of some of photo errors found in the first editon Babiuk's book. I've left out the omissions because obviously he would be unable to show everything they used in this type of published format, even though I consider those errors as well because he has full page spreads of things like the Electric Sitar but left out some "more important" stuff to fit those in. This list below is basically for those Beatle fans who bought the book and just decided to skim the pages, going by pics alone without readin whats in there. I don't think I remotely have enough time to list errors found in the text
Page 10, Gallotone (Larry's guitar) with the wrong stuff on the headstock, should have a Gallotone decal, not the mounted plate as shown.
Page 11, shows a pic of the "Lennon" guitar that went to auction, the guitar is a fake, what's the point?
Page 14, Zentih 17 (Larry's guitar) shown is wrong, doesn't have the medalian on the headstock.
Page 15, Zentith promo shows a 17 with the wrong guard, not similar to McCartney's.
Page 19, shows an Egmond promo not showing the right guitar and text on it is too small to read to find out any real importance whatsoever.
Page 23, shows Selmer ads for Hofner club guitars that aren't Beatle specs, what's the point?
Page 26, has Futurama ad showing the wrong spec guitar, what's the point?
Page 30, shows Hofner 333 ad with the wrong specs, what's' the point?
Page 33, shows an ad of a solid 7 with the wrong bridge assembly.
Page 35, shows a Watkins Westminster amp (Larry's amp) that is nothing like the one Stu used.
Page 39, shows an ad for a Gibson Les Paul amp with the wrong control panel, what's the point?
Page 43, shows an internal Rickenbacker doc that was supposed have the serial numbers and values skewed by the publish, it wasn't. This goes for the rest of them found on other pages in the book as well.
Page 55, shows a Bigsby catalogue cover with the wrong tailpiece on it, what's the point?
Page 67, shows a Quad promo with wrong preamp unit displayed, what's the point?
Page 67, shows what is called a repro McCartney's coffin set up, sorry, but not even close by any stretch.
Page 67, shows fawn AC30 twin (wrongly referred to as tan) and the description goes on to say that the Beatles acquired two of them, when in fact the only had one because the other one was an AC15 twin.
Page 68, shows an ad for an ES 335 missing the right tailpiece, what's the point?
Page 71, shows the fake Ringo Premier kit owned by the Hard Rock Cafe, swirls go in the wrong direction on half the drums to be Ringo's. Very misleading.
Page 75, shows an ad with a Gibson J160E with the wrong bridge (no dots), what's the point?
Page 90, shows an example of a dial-up mute Country Gent with the wrong F hole, should be solid black without the white around the edges.
Page 95, shows an ad for the Maton MS 500, wrong spec completely on it, different headstock artwork, etc. what's the point?
Page 99, set list pic put in backwards.
Page 138, shows and AC100 that has '65 specs, unlike those used by the Beatles in '64. It says that the AC100s were especially made for the Beatles, this is BS. Vox had been making the AC100 for at least 6 months before the Beatles received their guitar rigs.
-
beatlesgear
second half....
Page 138, shows a pic dated August 9th 1964, this is supposed to be the day that beatles received their first AC100 guitar rigs, when in fact they had been using them the month before in Sweden.
Page 145, shows a pic of the Rockin Roadrunners with their prized "Beatles" AC100 amp that they won in a battle of the bands. Only problem is, it never happened, the story was made up by one of the former members of the band in order to sell an amp for an inflated price on e-bay. He even used Andy's book as proof in the auction, very sad. The amp in the pic is from '65, completely unlike those that were used in '64 by the Beatles.
Page 146, shows an ad for an Epi Texan that has the wrong sides, what's the point?
Page 148, has an Epi Casino (Gibson headstock) ad showing a guitar with the wrong tailpiece, what's the point?
Page 152, shows an ad for the Vox organ guitar, the guitar in the ad is completely unlike the one that went to auction, what's the point?
Page 158, shows a Fender Strat with the wrong pickguard.
Page 162, in the description of Ringo's 20" drum kit he mentions the Rogers mount but fails to point out the Premier cymbol stand???? It's right there.
Page 164, shows an ad for Framus 12 strings with the wrong finish on them, what's the point?
Page 182, shows an ad for the Burns Nu Sonic bass, this one has the wrong headtstock finish, what's the point?
Page 187, shows the Beatles in Germany on the '66 tour, has the bass rig described as a Vox 4120, when in fact it's a 7120 bass rig, McCartney never had a 4120.
Page 194, shows a Mellotron that was supposed to Lennon's, not even close, Lennon's was black.
Page 198, describes the piano on the pic as the "tack" piano, this is not the tack piano.
Page 203, the Clavioline shown in the ad is unlike the one used by the beatles, what's the point?
Page 204 shows an ad for a Selmer Zodiac amp, wrong amp, it was a Thunderbird 50.
Page 205, same thing as above, wrong amp.
Page 209, the guitar shown in the ad is wrongly called the Kensington and is shown before it was modified and given to the Beatles, what's the point?
Page 211, pic from MMT Hello Goodbye sequence, amps are described as a Vox 4120 and two Vox Defiants. The Beatles never used Defiants or the 4120. The amps in the pic are really two Conquerors on top of 730 speaker cabs, with a 430 bass rig.
Page 223, an ad showing a J200 with the wrong finish, what's the point?
Page 227, an ad for a Fender Bass XI showing the wrong colored plate hardware on for the knobs and switches, what's the point?
Page 234, an add for Ludwig showing the kit with the wrong snare, what's the point?
Page 235, pics are put in backwards.
Page 250, pic is described a Moog lllp, not even close.
Now, is this brief summation really far? Would it be impossible for somebody to find correct pics for everything that the Fabs used? Yes, because I have (front and back), in about a 5th of the time and it was done with fairly minimal effort.
Page 138, shows a pic dated August 9th 1964, this is supposed to be the day that beatles received their first AC100 guitar rigs, when in fact they had been using them the month before in Sweden.
Page 145, shows a pic of the Rockin Roadrunners with their prized "Beatles" AC100 amp that they won in a battle of the bands. Only problem is, it never happened, the story was made up by one of the former members of the band in order to sell an amp for an inflated price on e-bay. He even used Andy's book as proof in the auction, very sad. The amp in the pic is from '65, completely unlike those that were used in '64 by the Beatles.
Page 146, shows an ad for an Epi Texan that has the wrong sides, what's the point?
Page 148, has an Epi Casino (Gibson headstock) ad showing a guitar with the wrong tailpiece, what's the point?
Page 152, shows an ad for the Vox organ guitar, the guitar in the ad is completely unlike the one that went to auction, what's the point?
Page 158, shows a Fender Strat with the wrong pickguard.
Page 162, in the description of Ringo's 20" drum kit he mentions the Rogers mount but fails to point out the Premier cymbol stand???? It's right there.
Page 164, shows an ad for Framus 12 strings with the wrong finish on them, what's the point?
Page 182, shows an ad for the Burns Nu Sonic bass, this one has the wrong headtstock finish, what's the point?
Page 187, shows the Beatles in Germany on the '66 tour, has the bass rig described as a Vox 4120, when in fact it's a 7120 bass rig, McCartney never had a 4120.
Page 194, shows a Mellotron that was supposed to Lennon's, not even close, Lennon's was black.
Page 198, describes the piano on the pic as the "tack" piano, this is not the tack piano.
Page 203, the Clavioline shown in the ad is unlike the one used by the beatles, what's the point?
Page 204 shows an ad for a Selmer Zodiac amp, wrong amp, it was a Thunderbird 50.
Page 205, same thing as above, wrong amp.
Page 209, the guitar shown in the ad is wrongly called the Kensington and is shown before it was modified and given to the Beatles, what's the point?
Page 211, pic from MMT Hello Goodbye sequence, amps are described as a Vox 4120 and two Vox Defiants. The Beatles never used Defiants or the 4120. The amps in the pic are really two Conquerors on top of 730 speaker cabs, with a 430 bass rig.
Page 223, an ad showing a J200 with the wrong finish, what's the point?
Page 227, an ad for a Fender Bass XI showing the wrong colored plate hardware on for the knobs and switches, what's the point?
Page 234, an add for Ludwig showing the kit with the wrong snare, what's the point?
Page 235, pics are put in backwards.
Page 250, pic is described a Moog lllp, not even close.
Now, is this brief summation really far? Would it be impossible for somebody to find correct pics for everything that the Fabs used? Yes, because I have (front and back), in about a 5th of the time and it was done with fairly minimal effort.
Nick: it´s obvious that you know a lot about The Beatles´gear. So hats off to you, honest. Don´t know if this is the correct place to ask, but... Do you have a website? Have you published any books? I would like to visit your site (if any) and certainly I would like to buy any book written by you. Your long post was great, good job.
-
beatlesgear
Miguel, the book is coming, the problem is that the website needs to get finished first, working on both at the same time has its drawbacks. Keyboards will be going up any minute, just waiting for one little hole to be filled. There are over 70 guitars going in and then all of the drum kits as well.
As far as my post above goes, this took only few minutes of just flipping through the book, very basic stuff by my standards in there and not exactly extreme by any measure.
As far as my post above goes, this took only few minutes of just flipping through the book, very basic stuff by my standards in there and not exactly extreme by any measure.
Nick, thrilled to hear you're going to have a book out on this subject! Andy's book is good, but I can only imagine how awesome your's is going to be! Can't wait to see when your website is officially done. It's pretty incredible so far!
By the way Nick, is there anything that you don't have yet gear-wise (said with much ENVY!)? That's one museum I'd go and visit!!!
By the way Nick, is there anything that you don't have yet gear-wise (said with much ENVY!)? That's one museum I'd go and visit!!!
-
larrywassgren
- Veteran RRF member
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2000 8:34 pm
-
beatlesgear
Wow Larry, you sound very frustrated, lol.
You have missed my point as well, Andy's book IS good to some degree when it comes to photos, but a lot of what I pointed out in my post about the photos (that I think is wrong in the book) is based on the fact that a lot of those pics are confusing to people. Look at pages 18-19, great pic of your Hofner President (sans pickguard) and then down below that, an ad with a President in it too, but it has the wrong headtsock layout. Things like that ARE confusing, people just aren't going to know what to go with because if the basic specs aren't posted plain as day in the text, and no photo of George with it is put in there either, which one is right?
People are counting on a resource like this to be accurate to some degree. To Andy's credit, there are some ads in there that show examples of the right thing like on pages 171 and 195. But in my opinion, showing something wrong only adds to the confusion and misinformation that is already out there. Look at the Quad ad on page 67, it shows something misleading and incorrect, it would have been better to show an ad similar to the one I've posted below, that shows the right pre-amp and amp. It's not rocket science, the resources ARE out there.
You have missed my point as well, Andy's book IS good to some degree when it comes to photos, but a lot of what I pointed out in my post about the photos (that I think is wrong in the book) is based on the fact that a lot of those pics are confusing to people. Look at pages 18-19, great pic of your Hofner President (sans pickguard) and then down below that, an ad with a President in it too, but it has the wrong headtsock layout. Things like that ARE confusing, people just aren't going to know what to go with because if the basic specs aren't posted plain as day in the text, and no photo of George with it is put in there either, which one is right?
People are counting on a resource like this to be accurate to some degree. To Andy's credit, there are some ads in there that show examples of the right thing like on pages 171 and 195. But in my opinion, showing something wrong only adds to the confusion and misinformation that is already out there. Look at the Quad ad on page 67, it shows something misleading and incorrect, it would have been better to show an ad similar to the one I've posted below, that shows the right pre-amp and amp. It's not rocket science, the resources ARE out there.