Minibucker
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2003
- Messages
- 6,372
Ah....sweet.
if i had a goldtop/darkback. this is what i would want it to look like, maybe slightly lighter brown. but basically this.I agree with the sentiment expressed by the original poster, i.e., that a lot of recent darkbacks are too dark-looking or opaque-looking. Below are two photos of a 2009 darkback that I own (not a goldtop, though), shown next to a 2010 sunburst reissue that has the typical cherry-colored back. The first photo was taken with flash, whereas the lower photo is without flash. I'm generally OK with the darkback color on this guitar because it does actually have some degree of transparency to it:
.
.
.
Yes, the Dave's run that I'm referring to was probably separate from the one to which your guitar belongs. But the run I'm referring to was also limited to only maybe ten or fifteen guitars. But, as I recall, they were all R-7 goldtops and they were not intended to be darkbacks, IIRC. Rather, they were supposed to be a more accurate-looking version of the natural-back goldtop color. And I do think that Gibson was successful in satisfying that criterion, as these guitars' backs were noticeably darker than the (IMO) too-light natural backs that Gibson has been offering in recent Historic Collection years. But not dark enough to be mistaken for a darkback. The serial numbers, too, were stamped in dark ink (as opposed to light-colored ink), so I don't think the guitars were 'supposed' to be darkbacks.
Anyway, since the last of these guitars sold, I've never seen them come up in any discussion threads, and I haven't seen a single one come up for sale used, nor does it appear that any further examples were ever produced. I would guess that Dave Rogers would remember them, though. I thought they were a great idea.
.
.