Burns GB66 guitar

[marcomadeira]

This is the bridge for my gb66 mounted on the same wood as the guitar neck

[marcomadeira]

This is behind the plate

[marcomadeira]

More pictures of inSide the guitar

[JimN]

It's fairly clear that the guitars belonging to marcomadeira and Alfons Lahaye are early examples, without binding on the neck, which makes them Burns-Baldwin transition era (c. 1966) and possibly prototypes.

The fully-evolved Baldwin model, exceptionally, was actually an improvement on those Burns-era examples - certainly in appearance.

First, the neck was bound (all Baldwin necks were bound) and secondly, that unsightly* black plastic escutcheon between the pickups is not present on the final model - and that looks a heck of a lot better, without a doubt. It's a mystery as to why it was there; it isn't necessary unless it's there to cover holes or other apertures.

Even more puzzlingly, the escutcheon and pickup-mounting arrangements on the two guitars are different. This leads me to being less uncertain about their being prototypes.

JN

[* Sorry to have to put it that way, but IMHO, it's true. There are other known Burns semi-acoustic prototypes with black plastic - Trafolite? - plates between the neck and bridge with the pickups mounted to it like a solid. One of them used to be pictured on the packets for Monopole strings. ]

[marcomadeira]

Thanks for your reply much appreciated . Now I am even more confused about my guitar as it does not match other gb66 I have seen ...... People tell me it's been modified but if it was modified there would be screw holes by the top pick up but there is not ...........CoNfUsEd.CoM ggrrrr lol

[ErikMAMS]

Thanks for the pics Mark

If it is a prototype (and I'm inclined to go with Jim on this) it doesn't make it any less nice/desireable IMO.

Isn't that a metal bar/plate between the pickups. Are the PU just mounted to the metal strip from the underside (maybe another pic)?
I recall something about a bass prototype which was said to have had two Bar-O-Matic PU's connected by a "magnetic" plate or conductor - as another Jim Burns idea. I don't have/remember details (JimN?), but I wonder if there's a connection.

The pics I've seen of GB66's did show any bridges (regardless of type) with a wooden base, but it's there for a reason obviously.

If it was my guitar I think I'd get rid of the tortoise bit and have a trafolyte plate made for the PU's, like Alfons' (might need to be a little different to cover existing holes in the deck), and also find or have custom made a black lower scratchplate - preferably with the "Handcrafted by Burns engraving. Also I would consider the wooden bridge base - depending on how it looks on the guitar - and maybe see if it was possible to get rid of it.
Would turn out a special and very nice guitar IMO

Erik

[mgeek]

It's fairly clear that the guitars belonging to marcomadeira and Alfons Lahaye are early examples, without binding on the neck, which makes them Burns-Baldwin transition era (c. 1966) and possibly prototypes.

The fully-evolved Baldwin model, exceptionally, was actually an improvement on those Burns-era examples - certainly in appearance.

First, the neck was bound (all Baldwin necks were bound) and secondly, that unsightly* black plastic escutcheon between the pickups is not present on the final model - and that looks a heck of a lot better, without a doubt. It's a mystery as to why it was there; it isn't necessary unless it's there to cover holes or other apertures.

Even more puzzlingly, the escutcheon and pickup-mounting arrangements on the two guitars are different. This leads me to being less uncertain about their being prototypes.

JN

[* Sorry to have to put it that way, but IMHO, it's true. There are other known Burns semi-acoustic prototypes with black plastic - Trafolite? - plates between the neck and bridge with the pickups mounted to it like a solid. One of them used to be pictured on the packets for Monopole strings. ]

Not sure I agree Jim

surely the black plate between the pickups is a signifier of the 'De Luxe' version (and this has the deeper body than the regular model, so pretty sure that's what it is), rather than being a prototype of the regular model? I'm guessing it's there for a reason too. Is that a magnet connecting the two pickups? Some form of Burns electronic innovation perhaps?

I guess it could be possible that this is a prototype of the De Luxe version though, given the unusual pickup surrounds

Also, and this is totally a matter of personal taste, but I HATE binding on necks, and Burns Baldwin never even did it particularly well...you can feel a ridge on every model I've played, whereas the unbound necks feel nice and smooth.

[JimN]

Not sure I agree Jim

surely the black plate between the pickups is a signifier of the 'De Luxe' version (and this has the deeper body than the regular model, so pretty sure that's what it is), rather than being a prototype of the regular model?

No, I don't think so. The Deluxe model was the Baldwin version as seen in the 1967 catalogue (see the illustration in message 3 in the thread).

Being realistic, what would be better about having a rectangular hole in the top of the guitar, partly filled by the pickups and partly covered by a cosmetic plastic plate? What guitar maker has ever done that and described it as an improvement or improved facility?

There were lots of guitars in Les Paul's collection which were shot through with holes (including some with large rectangular holes in the back). I saw many of them at the auction of his musical estate. They indicated prototypes or experimental work, not luxury.

[marcomadeira]

Here is a picture of pickup mount even more confused than ever !!!!! Is it deluxe is it not lol hahahah

[mgeek]

No, I don't think so. The Deluxe model was the Baldwin version as seen in the 1967 catalogue (see the illustration in message 3 in the thread).

Being realistic, what would be better about having a rectangular hole in the top of the guitar, partly filled by the pickups and partly covered by a cosmetic plastic plate? What guitar maker has ever done that and described it as an improvement or improved facility?

Burns, clearly!

I do understand where you're coming from, but it's pretty well documented that there were two versions of this model, at least at the start- regular, and 'deluxe'. My guess is that when Baldwin took over, they rationalised it into one model (which then 'gained' binding, as did the rest of the range) and in the case of your cat. image 'Deluxe' is just marketing hype of the type they chucked around willy nilly in those days. It wouldn't be the first time a guitar catalogue wasn't 100% factually accurate or consistent.

Here are three different "De Luxe's"

http://chtiburnsman.e-monsite.com/album ... luxe-1965/

http://www.burnsguitarmuseum.com/the-guitars/#6

http://www.burns-guitars.nl/P6260023.JPG (note lack of neck binding)

These aren't all prototypes. I'd say that perhaps the original poster's is though.