• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

My 52 (convert or to convert 2)

BSeneca

Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2011
Messages
125
Hope this worked. I posted about possibly converting (leaning against it) guys asked for pictures. Here you go hope you enjoy! Thanks for the interest, Brian
 

Attachments

  • 58790A07-6D40-4C6D-8499-05E9E2DBC8AC.jpeg
    58790A07-6D40-4C6D-8499-05E9E2DBC8AC.jpeg
    349.2 KB · Views: 68
  • E3729DDF-A01E-466F-832A-3DF3359D6D29.jpeg
    E3729DDF-A01E-466F-832A-3DF3359D6D29.jpeg
    457.8 KB · Views: 65
  • 2DCF0D6B-A59F-428A-956D-4E041CB7E73E.jpeg
    2DCF0D6B-A59F-428A-956D-4E041CB7E73E.jpeg
    305.1 KB · Views: 61
  • 5311B52D-DF3D-4B46-8059-1903ECD8D033.jpeg
    5311B52D-DF3D-4B46-8059-1903ECD8D033.jpeg
    280.9 KB · Views: 69
  • 9A582DF1-791E-42CE-8ADD-C23409D596B4.jpeg
    9A582DF1-791E-42CE-8ADD-C23409D596B4.jpeg
    604.1 KB · Views: 66

brandtkronholm

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
2,217
Call me crazy...
I think converting to 1956 or 1954 specs would be just fine.
If you do it, send it to Historic Makeovers. I like their work. The stop-tailpiece and tune-o-matic (or just stop tailpiece for '54) will be put in the correct place.
Don't touch the gold! Keep the P-90s.

(Nearly all violins made by Stradivarius have newer necks. If that's OK, then resetting the neck on a '52 to make it play better and play in tune has to be OK. Likewise with old Martin and Gibson acoustics. A neck re-set is expected for these instruments.)
 

deytookerjaabs

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2016
Messages
1,482
If you hang around a bit....

You'll notice conversions come and go pretty often. They're always the "greatest thing ever" but I'd say they attract a hardcore GAS crowd like nothing else...chasing the 'burstness. I've seen a fair number come up online + local shops along with resto-modders putting one out there every so often. Folks freaking out over one this week will be selling it next week, play the long game.

Point is, you could find the right buyer for that guitar and fetch a conversion if you're semi-patient, let someone else have all the work done and parts sourcing for you while knowing you left a gem alone.
 

Jeggz

Active member
Joined
Jul 29, 2017
Messages
108
If you hang around a bit....

You'll notice conversions come and go pretty often. They're always the "greatest thing ever" but I'd say they attract a hardcore GAS crowd like nothing else...chasing the 'burstness. I've seen a fair number come up online + local shops along with resto-modders putting one out there every so often. Folks freaking out over one this week will be selling it next week, play the long game.

Point is, you could find the right buyer for that guitar and fetch a conversion if you're semi-patient, let someone else have all the work done and parts sourcing for you while knowing you left a gem alone.
Thats what I did.

I had two 54s, and one at a time moved them along for two conversions. Got the first one because I figured “I got two, may as well get something different“, well a year or so later I sold the other 54 and got another conversion from the same builder. That’s another thing too is “who did it?”, that’s real important.

But selling a 52 no matter the condition, isnt going to put you into a well done conversion with all the “important“ parts, maybe the body and some repro, but you’d have a long way to go.

But then again, part hunting is alotta fun, and you can get it a lil at a time as cash flow permits.
 

bern1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Messages
1,157
It went like this for me: yes, I want something as close to a real sunburst as possible for less $. I got it. Yes, it was sound and feel wise indistinguishable from a 59. But after a while it became, I don’t really like having this modified pretend guitar. I came to regret not leaving it the way it was originally made and eventually sold it. Seems to be not an uncommon occurrence. It’s good advice to buy one already done, that way at least you can verify that you get on with it as it is.
 

Big Al

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
14,294
Call me crazy...
I think converting to 1956 or 1954 specs would be just fine.
If you do it, send it to Historic Makeovers. I like their work. The stop-tailpiece and tune-o-matic (or just stop tailpiece for '54) will be put in the correct place.
Don't touch the gold! Keep the P-90s.

(Nearly all violins made by Stradivarius have newer necks. If that's OK, then resetting the neck on a '52 to make it play better and play in tune has to be OK. Likewise with old Martin and Gibson acoustics. A neck re-set is expected for these instruments.)
Crazy, and one of the dumbest things I've read. A good non invasive simple bridge swap to any low profile wrap over replacement will do the trick, boyo!
 

irishbog

Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
Messages
31
I just traded this one for a 59 Esquire - don't hate me !
Its a 52 that was converted to 56 specs - I got a Mojoaxe bridge and tailpiece but the new owner is getting the more authentic parts to make it a 56.

mo38SdFl.jpg

eqEdeHPl.jpg

wTI30Tul.jpg

rV0JD0Kl.jpg
 

brandtkronholm

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
2,217
Crazy, and one of the dumbest things I've read. A good non invasive simple bridge swap to any low profile wrap over replacement will do the trick, boyo!

My experience tells me that a '52 Les Paul doesn't have all the expected "Les Pauliness" of the later, '54 - '56 versions.

I've owned a few stop-tail ('54) P-90 Goldtops but I don't have any ownership experience of the '52 style. However, of the few '52s that I've been invited to play, I felt like the tailpiece wiggled (just a teeny-tiny bit) when I played it - killing some of the "Les Pauliness" of the guitar. The sustain was lacking. The snap and attack was less than expected. They were 'almost' proper Les Pauls, but not quite.

Like the original '52 bridge, the replacement bridges float, connected only to the butt of the guitar. I imagine that sustain would improve with a conversion to '54 or '56 specs with a bridge + tailpiece secured to the top of the guitar. I also imagine that the tone might improve/change with a sharper string break after the bridge. In short, a neck reset and conversion to '54 or '56 specs would bring out more of the "Les Pauliness" from a '52.

An arch top jazz box has a floating bridge and requires loads of downward force from the strings+bridge to move the spruce top. A '52 Les Paul is not a jazz box. Also, how much downward force can one get from the '52 tailpiece?

Final thoughts: If it was a mint '52, then leave it alone. This one is far from mint with loads of mojo and no breaks. I'd rather convert one with breaks, but...them's the breaks. It might not add resale value, but I think a neck reset will enhance the guitar.
 

Jeggz

Active member
Joined
Jul 29, 2017
Messages
108
Actually the more I think about it, I think you should do the neck reset, and ABR it.

That’s my vote.

You can keep the original finish, you’ll just have the small shim under where the fretboard comes over the body.

Leave the P90s.

Put repro hardware, and piece by piece replace it with vintage.

That’s what I’d do.
 

Ed A

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2001
Messages
4,613
Beautiful!!!... if you love it, then leave it as is!!!.... Im sure the P90s sound great..... but if youre dying for a '50s Les Paul with PAFs, etc, and cant afford a '57, then consider converting it.... your choice, nobody else's
 

Jeggz

Active member
Joined
Jul 29, 2017
Messages
108
Beautiful!!!... if you love it, then leave it as is!!!.... Im sure the P90s sound great..... but if youre dying for a '50s Les Paul with PAFs, etc, and cant afford a '57, then consider converting it.... your choice, nobody else's
Ed,
Does yours have the shim under the fretboard?

If it does, post a pic of it when you get the chance?
 

Ed A

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2001
Messages
4,613
Ed,
Does yours have the shim under the fretboard?

If it does, post a pic of it when you get the chance?
Yes it does.... you cant quite tell by the photo, but I asked that the neck be slightly buried into the body at where it meets the body at the 16th fret so that the shim didnt have to be too large, plus I wanted the neck angle to be within late '50s spec but more shallow than deep, again keeping the shim small....
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1368.jpg
    IMG_1368.jpg
    662.2 KB · Views: 40
  • IMG_1360.jpg
    IMG_1360.jpg
    621.1 KB · Views: 41
  • IMG_1315.jpg
    IMG_1315.jpg
    431.9 KB · Views: 37
  • Reduced.jpg
    Reduced.jpg
    532.3 KB · Views: 40
Top