Why Did Lennon Refinish His 1958 Rickenbacker?

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Sun Nov 12, 2000 12:37 pm

Sorry Peter, I just found a photo of the Capri after it was stripped down on you JL Museum page. Forgive my oversight.

larrywassgren · Post by **larrywassgren** » Sun Nov 12, 2000 2:19 pm

I don't think the guitar was as hammered as a lot of people think. It had honest playing wear and
a crack in the pickgaurd. If you look at the photos from September of '62 at Abbey Road, the guitar looks great to me. The finish has some
wear and dings but nothing is broken. I don't think leather is a match for wood, it may wear the
clear finish but it won't wear away wood. That '58 325 looks beautiful in those late '62 Dezo Hoffman photos. A week or two later John had it refinished black to go with the new image. But,
maybe there is too much emphasis put on this new image as John and George had both just acquired
new sunburst J-160E guitars and they certainly wouldn't paint them black. It may have been just
Lennon looking for a change.

Tim_Fletcher · Post by **Tim_Fletcher** » Mon Nov 13, 2000 7:55 am

I suspect Brian Epstein might have had a lot to do with the re-finish, he probably told them to smarten up themselves and their instruments ! The 325 looked nice natural, but it made a more striking impact in black in pictures and on TV, which is probably what Epstein had in mind at that stage.

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon Nov 13, 2000 7:02 pm

I agree with your view Tim. I believe that this change was due largely to Epstein's desire for The Beatles to have that "clean professional look."

markthemd · Post by **markthemd** » Tue Nov 21, 2000 9:52 pm

one more reason that it was done;

as it was made 100% of alder ,and it had been damaged ,I guess the headstock was fixed?
then to give it a more professional look and to hide the repair ,then tuxedo black would have been a great choice.
It also was a tough guy color and it was in line with the new look that Brian wanted .

Thanks to the info from J Hall on the alder .Great reading on Voxtalks about the subject.

anon · Post by **anon** » Wed Nov 22, 2000 8:38 am

A few things: I thought the Rick was made of maple?
When did a repair take place? Was the headstock broken off?

markthemd · Post by **markthemd** » Wed Nov 22, 2000 9:52 am

Your answer can be found in complete at

http://www.voxtalks.com

go to the topic ;Ric 2-inch thick-Tuck

Lennon's '58 325
11-04-2000 10:00:18

That has an in depth look at the guitar .
As I am a computer neophyte and don't have a clue as to how to do what Tomcat does with his tricky underlined info ...this is all I can give .This will definately be of interest to you.
I learned a lot from it and it sure opened a view that I did not even dream of !

admin · Post by **admin** » Wed Nov 22, 2000 5:16 pm

Mark: It has been the 1964 325 that has had the headstock crack and not the 1958 325 that was refinished black. This finding with regard to the 1964 model would, of course, not explain why Lennon's 1958 325 was refinished. Most interesting, however, to learn of the 1958 instrument being 100 percent alder as opposed to maple.

Tim_Fletcher · Post by **Tim_Fletcher** » Thu Nov 23, 2000 12:39 pm

I recently re-read the "Instrumental Break" in Anthology, and I note that George says this of Johns 325 : "the famous blonde one with the short-scale neck which he later had painted black". Which effectively destroys my pet theory that John did it himself - thanks George! - but doesn't give any more clues about who actually did the job.

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Nov 23, 2000 12:53 pm

Tim: I am continuing to search for Derek Adams who I believe did the work. I have connections outside of London working on this who themselves are confident Derek Adams did the work. This is slow and frustrating research when the key persons don't have email. I am hopeful we will learn of this soon. Your quote from George is much appreciated.

Tim_Fletcher · Post by **Tim_Fletcher** » Thu Nov 23, 2000 4:35 pm

I'm coming round to the opinion that he probably had it professionally re-finished : they were spending a lot of money on new gear at that time (J160E's, Vox amps etc.) and it would have been inconsistent to skimp on the 325.

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Nov 23, 2000 6:20 pm

It must also be remembered that at the time the instrument was refinished The Beatles were playing almost every night with precious little time off. I can't imagine when he would have had the time to refinish the 325 himself. John was too interested in socializing and working on original material in those days.

larrywassgren · Post by **larrywassgren** » Thu Nov 23, 2000 10:39 pm

Good point Peter, about the lack of time for Lennon to do the job. They were even playing twice a day at times, so they were really busy.
On page 119 in the Anthology book, there is a good
shot of Lennon's black '58 which shows the wear
around the front edge. I don't think it had much wear on the face of the guitar, but you can see
the finish wore off the edge. Or is some of that
glare from the lights? It is tough to tell for sure, as on the Sullivan show you cannot see this
wear and the guitar looks great. This was near the end of John using the '58, and it would have
had about a year and four months of hard use after
refinishing black so I guess some wear would be expected on a guitar that never really had the appropriate time to dry before being put back into service. Man, what a cool guitar!

frankn · Post by **frankn** » Fri Nov 24, 2000 9:03 am

I know the headstock was broken on the second 325. I've never heard mention that the same thing happened to the 58. I think the 58 looked better on the Sullivan show because they probably had one of the stagehands touch it up with black paint. that's probably where the 'brushmarks' that DeMarino mentions came from.

Tim_Fletcher · Post by **Tim_Fletcher** » Fri Nov 24, 2000 9:16 am

Peter's research on "Bay's in Black" is sound. If Lennon used the 325 all through September then the only free day for re-finishing it was 18 Sept. In that case it must have been done locally in Liverpool, as there wouldn't have been time to get it to London and back.

If on the other hand Lennon used another guitar (J160E ?) instead of the 325 for several days then it could well have been sent to Derek Adams in London for re-finishing. I'm absolutely sure Derek wouldn't have travelled to Liverpool to re-finish a guitar for a then-unknown band, aside from the time and cost of the journey he'd have needed the facilities of his workshop in London to do the job.