Steve Howe's 1950 Fender Broadcaster for sale

[Supersonic Scientist]

I just saw this posted......yeah, if I only had an extra 12,500 laying around...

http://www.philsvintageguitars.com/fender.html



1950 Fender Broadcaster Ex Steve Howe of YES and ASIA

Just released from a private collection is this 1950 Fender Broadcaster which was previously owned and used by guitarist Steve Howe. As you can see it has had many changes, we have full details charting these changes that Steve made through the years, and its recorded use with the progressive rock band YES, which of course Steve Howe is a member. Along with the guitar are many of the original parts that are not currently installed on the guitar including the early black guard in superb un cracked condition. The guitar plays beautifully and the original pickups give strong resistance readings of 4.98 ohms at the neck and 5.74 at the bridge. It comes in a slightly later 1950's Fender tweed case with YES and Asia Stickers attached! We have full provenance and photographs of Steve with the guitar that will be included with the sale.


Please call or mail for all details-
phil@philsvintageguitars.com
0044 1844 261447 £12,500.00

[Frumious B]

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/10/19/d51bc4b35f68aba39df4312f11bfa35c.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[2steves]

Beautiful guitar----does Steve need money or just wants to thin his herd of guitars.

[Sputnik]

Interesting, he had it painted black. It was natural in his book.

He's never really liked this guitar very much, thus all the mods, which he later came to regret to some extent. I think he's just thinning the herd.

Bill

[Supersonic Scientist]

I'm waiting for the day he sells his hollow-body Gibson EMS-1265 mando/6string double-neck.

[Joe F.]

Beautiful guitar----does Steve need money or just wants to thin his herd of guitars.

It says it was previously owned by Steve.

[GuitarGeek]

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/10/19/d51bc4b35f68aba39df4312f11bfa35c.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No it doesn't. It belongs in the hands of a musician who can will music with it. I remember seeing an interview with Bonnie Raitt once where she was talking about the whole vintage guitar phenomenon. She made the point that you're talking about something that used to be a tree and you should therefore honor that life and actually use the instrument, not put in a glass case where it will never be played again.

[GuitarGeek]

Interesting, he had it painted black. It was natural in his book.



I don't think that's the guitar that was pictured in the book. He had changed the bridge on the guitar that was in the book. Typically, you'd be able to see the damage to the body still if he had changed it back to the original (see David Gilmour's black Strat, where a block of wood had to be inserted to cover up the hole that had been cut into the guitar when Gilmour installed a Kahler tremolo system back circa 83).

[Sputnik]

I don't think that's the guitar that was pictured in the book. He had changed the bridge on the guitar that was in the book. Typically, you'd be able to see the damage to the body still if he had changed it back to the original (see David Gilmour's black Strat, where a block of wood had to be inserted to cover up the hole that had been cut into the guitar when Gilmour installed a Kahler tremolo system back circa 83).That is without doubt the guitar pictured in his Guitar Collection book. First off, I don't think he owned more than one 50s Broadcaster. Second, if you look at the neck, it has exactly the same wear pattern around the 15th fret and on the headstock. I just looked at both pictures to confirm it. Also, the cream binding that he preserved points to it being the same body.

You're right, he returned the guitar to it's original bridge configuration, and that means the rout he made for the other bridge got filled. This is probably why he had the guitar painted, to cover that work. But I have no doubt this is the 50s Broadcaster pictured in his book.

As far as museum versus player piece, I don't think many players will shell out 12,500 GBP on a guitar. And if they do, I doubt it will get much time other than studio use or practice. The reality is that pieces priced like this will will tend to wind up with collectors and get little playing time. The market determines this, not much you can do about it. The good news is that there are tons of nice instruments at very reasonable prices out there. You don't need to pay that kind of money to get something you can make music on.

Bill

[Supersonic Scientist]

That is without doubt the guitar pictured in his Guitar Collection book. First off, I don't think he owned more than one 50s Broadcaster. Second, if you look at the neck, it has exactly the same wear pattern around the 15th fret and on the headstock. I just looked at both pictures to confirm it. Also, the cream binding that he preserved points to it being the same body.

You're right, he returned the guitar to it's original bridge configuration, and that means the rout he made for the other bridge got filled. This is probably why he had the guitar painted, to cover that work. But I have no doubt this is the 50s Broadcaster pictured in his book.

As far as museum versus player piece, I don't think many players will shell out 12,500 GBP on a guitar. And if they do, I doubt it will get much time other than studio use or practice. The reality is that pieces priced like this will will tend to wind up with collectors and get little playing time. The market determines this, not much you can do about it. The good news is that there are tons of nice instruments at very reasonable prices out there. You don't need to pay that kind of money to get something you can make music on.

Bill

I too compared the pic in the ad to the pic in the Steve Howe Collection book....it is the same GTR for the reasons stated above.....as to the GTRs true value. I believe the value mostly rests on it being previously owned by SH. the balance of the value resting on the fact that it IS a Broadcaster (albeit, modified beyond the ability to restore it to its original configuration...added binding, routing, etc.)....is it worth the asking price?...my opinion is no. If there weren't so many mods to the GTR, I might say yes.....(as I stated in an earlier post, I'd LOVE to own a Steve Howe GTR...most-likely NOT gonna happen)

[Sputnik]

....as to the GTRs true value. I believe the value mostly rests on it being previously owned by SH. the balance of the value resting on the fact that it IS a Broadcaster (albeit, modified beyond the ability to restore it to its original configuration...added binding, routing, etc.)....is it worth the asking price?...my opinion is no. If there weren't so many mods to the GTR, I might say yes.....(as I stated in an earlier post, I'd LOVE to own a Steve Howe GTR...most-likely NOT gonna happen)It's hard to get a really accurate feel for what instruments like this can fetch in the marketplace. Fender Broadcasters can go for $40,000 - $60,000 USD. One sold on Reverb for $55,000 in 2012. Yes, crazy money, but it is what it is. Now that one was probably much closer to stock, with fewer if any mods, and probably in pretty good shape. But it does sort of set the bar.

Even with the mods, this guitar is still a Broadcaster, and there aren't many of them kicking around in any condition. $20,000 seems not unreasonable, given that is half of what some of these can fetch. Of course, reasonable is all relative. I'd never pay that kind of money, but it doesn't seem out of line for a guitar of this make, year, and provenance. If someone offered $17,500, I'll bet he'd take it. :D

Bill

[Supersonic Scientist]

It's hard to get a really accurate feel for what instruments like this can fetch in the marketplace. Fender Broadcasters can go for $40,000 - $60,000 USD. One sold on Reverb for $55,000 in 2012. Yes, crazy money, but it is what it is. Now that one was probably much closer to stock, with fewer if any mods, and probably in pretty good shape. But it does sort of set the bar.

Even with the mods, this guitar is still a Broadcaster, and there aren't many of them kicking around in any condition. $20,000 seems not unreasonable, given that is half of what some of these can fetch. Of course, reasonable is all relative. I'd never pay that kind of money, but it doesn't seem out of line for a guitar of this make, year, and provenance. If someone offered $17,500, I'll bet he'd take it. :D

Bill

I believe that one sold for $55,000 in 2012...the market has softened quite a bit since then. Case-in-point....Around that time, a Rick lightshow GTR was fetching btw 18-20k....now, I've seen some advertised for as low as 14k (all in or around the same condition)......still....WAY beyond my working budget !

[Sputnik]

I believe that one sold for $55,000 in 2012...the market has softened quite a bit since then. Case-in-point....Around that time, a Rick lightshow GTR was fetching btw 18-20k....now, I've seen some advertised for as low as 14k (all in or around the same condition)......still....WAY beyond my working budget !Yeah, the $55,000 sale was 2012, as I said.

Maybe the market is pulling back a bit since then, though it's still utterly insane and has little to nothing to do with the value of these items as musical instruments. If there's been a ~25% pullback (based on your Ricky Lightshow example), then a formerly $40,000 Broadcaster would now be about $30,000. That puts this one at about 2/3rds of that valuation. Given the givens, I'm still not sure that is too high, especially as a "starting" price that may be negotiated downward from there.

If the guy is successfully running an independent music shop in this day and age, he probably knows what he's doing. Or maybe he's hoping for a sucker with more money than sense to pay a bit too much. But if it's too much, I can't say it's too much by that much based on what these guitars can sell for.

It would be interesting to know what the 52 Tele he sold went for. The one I like is that 55 Stat with the matching Dakota red headstock. That is a cool guitar!

Bill

[Supersonic Scientist]

Speaking of insane.....Norman's Rare Guitar's has a 1960 Les Paul for the paltry sum of $325,000

[GuitarGeek]

That is without doubt the guitar pictured in his Guitar Collection book. First off, I don't think he owned more than one 50s Broadcaster. Second, if you look at the neck, it has exactly the same wear pattern around the 15th fret and on the headstock. I just looked at both pictures to confirm it. Also, the cream binding that he preserved points to it being the same body.

You're right, he returned the guitar to it's original bridge configuration, and that means the rout he made for the other bridge got filled. This is probably why he had the guitar painted, to cover that work. But I have no doubt this is the 50s Broadcaster pictured in his book.

As far as museum versus player piece, I don't think many players will shell out 12,500 GBP on a guitar. And if they do, I doubt it will get much time other than studio use or practice. The reality is that pieces priced like this will will tend to wind up with collectors and get little playing time. The market determines this, not much you can do about it. The good news is that there are tons of nice instruments at very reasonable prices out there. You don't need to pay that kind of money to get something you can make music on.

Bill

I still say it's wrong to treat a good musical instrument as a museum piece, I don't care how much you paid for it. Now if you're talking about one of Jerry Garcia's Doug Irwin guitars, which I hear were extremely heavy (Rosebud reportedly weighed in at 13 lbs and caused Jerry severe back problems), yeah I could see not playing thta one too often. But something like a regular Strat, Tele, or Les Paul should be played. Period. Like I said, trees were killed so this guitar should exist. You should honor that sacrifice by using the instrument the way it was intended.

I'll take your word as far as it being the same guitar as in the book. I just would have though one would be able to see where the route for the new bridge was, but maybe not. Maybe he did a better job of covering it than David Gilmour did on his black Strat. (shrug)

[GuitarGeek]

Speaking of insane.....Norman's Rare Guitar's has a 1960 Les Paul for the paltry sum of $325,000

And it's not just guitars either. I think it was Elderly Instruments that was selling an old Gibson mandolin, from the 40's, I believe, for something like a hundred grand.

I dunno if I'd pay a hundred grand for a mandolin, but I remember the local guitar store (which doesn't exist anymore, alas) had a $3,000 Gibson mandolin. I might be willing to pay that kind of cash. I think the one in question was again from the 40's.

Reputedly, Pete Townshend bought a boat with the money he got from selling his D'Angelico.

I'm kinda less into the vintage guitar thing when it comes to things like Strats, Teles, Les Pauls, etc simply because they've been reissued so many times, and often times, you can get a newer model that "fixes" the problems the old guitars had. I'd rather buy one of the reissues, that way if there's something I don't like about it, if I want to change out the pickups or the neck or whatever, I don't have to feel bad about defacing a classic guitar.

But I do still kinda have a thing for things like the old Gretsches, Rickenbackers. hollowbody Gibsons (can you say ES-5 Switchmaster?), etc. I think something like an old ES-355 or a Rick 360/12 would be nice to have

I once told by someone I had "good, but expensive" tastes in guitars, which I guess is true.

[Sputnik]

Speaking of insane.....Norman's Rare Guitar's has a 1960 Les Paul for the paltry sum of $325,000That really is nuts.


I still say it's wrong to treat a good musical instrument as a museum piece, I don't care how much you paid for it. Now if you're talking about one of Jerry Garcia's Doug Irwin guitars, which I hear were extremely heavy (Rosebud reportedly weighed in at 13 lbs and caused Jerry severe back problems), yeah I could see not playing thta one too often. But something like a regular Strat, Tele, or Les Paul should be played. Period. Like I said, trees were killed so this guitar should exist. You should honor that sacrifice by using the instrument the way it was intended.Well, that's a fair position, but unfortunately this kind of morality rarely fares well against the forces of the market. The root problem (no pun intended :p) is the prices people are willing to pay, which force the guitars out of range of most musicians, and make them so valuable that playing them is too risky anyway. If someone stands to make $325K, I doubt any consideration of the "soul of the tree" will change their minds.

I'll add, and you even point to this yourself, that not all these old guitars are such super players. I've handled quite a few at Gruhn back in the 90s when I lived in Nashville. Only a few vintage guitars I played really had the "mojo" to me. Most of them were just old. Modern guitars often have a lot of features which make them more playable and dependable. I particularly like vintage reissues which capture most of the vibe of those old guitars, but have some features and workmanship that make them easy to set up and play. Maybe the value of these old instruments is not as much about being instruments, much like the value of old furniture isn't really about needing a dining room table. Howe never cared much for how that Broadcaster played, maybe it does belong in a museum if it's not such a great player.


I'll take your word as far as it being the same guitar as in the book. I just would have though one would be able to see where the route for the new bridge was, but maybe not. Maybe he did a better job of covering it than David Gilmour did on his black Strat. (shrug)The pictures aren't detailed enough to see. It may be that if you looked close you could see some ridges near the back of the bridge where the rout was filled. But my guess is someone did a damn good job on that fill and paint job.

Bill

[Supersonic Scientist]

But I do still kinda have a thing for things like the old Gretsches, Rickenbackers. hollowbody Gibsons (can you say ES-5 Switchmaster?), etc. I think something like an old ES-355 or a Rick 360/12 would be nice to have

An ES-5 Switchmaster is my ultimate Gibson "bucket list" GTR.

On the topic of "vintage -vs - playable, For 30+ years, my 1966 ES-335 was my main GTR. Now, maybe it's just me, but when I pick that baby up, it just drips "Tone mojo". Reluctantly, I decided to "retire" it as it was in need of it's 3rd refretting and I just thought that it needed a rest....now, my main GTR is a 2011 Les Paul Traditional and I love it. Do they sound different?...yeah, But I'm getting as much enjoyment out of the newer LP as I did with the vintage 335. (I also have a MIM tele that sounds great too...no need for a $20k Broadcaster to get "that sound")

[kid_runningfox]

I'll add, and you even point to this yourself, that not all these old guitars are such super players. I've handled quite a few at Gruhn back in the 90s when I lived in Nashville. Only a few vintage guitars I played really had the "mojo" to me. Most of them were just old. Modern guitars often have a lot of features which make them more playable and dependable. I particularly like vintage reissues which capture most of the vibe of those old guitars, but have some features and workmanship that make them easy to set up and play. Maybe the value of these old instruments is not as much about being instruments, much like the value of old furniture isn't really about needing a dining room table. Howe never cared much for how that Broadcaster played, maybe it does belong in a museum if it's not such a great player.


I have this problem with vintage Martins especially - there used to be shop called JC's Vintage Guitars in Newcastle, UK in the 90s that specialized in American guitars from the 'classic era,' and charged top dollar for the privilege of being able to buy them. I knew the proprietor and spent quite a lot of time in there footling around on the various instruments he had in stock. Played many a vintage Martin that so many people drool over, and personally, I thought 90% of them were unplayable junk with truly horrible necks, indifferent sound, and actions best suited to grating cheese. About 5% were reasonable players, but would simply be left in the dust by the average 500 GBP Yamaha and the like, whilst the remaining 5% undoubtedly had some mojo to a greater or lesser extent, but nothing like enough to justify the outrageous prices the accountants/lawyers/hedge fund managers who are the only people who could afford to buy them were prepared to pay. And to be honest, when compared to a custom-made Fylde, Brook, Collings, etc. that would cost similar money they were absolutely hopeless. YMMV, of course, but I can't help viewing such instruments as a triumph of hype over substance.

[GuitarGeek]

I have this problem with vintage Martins especially - there used to be shop called JC's Vintage Guitars in Newcastle, UK in the 90s that specialized in American guitars from the 'classic era,' and charged top dollar for the privilege of being able to buy them. I knew the proprietor and spent quite a lot of time in there footling around on the various instruments he had in stock. Played many a vintage Martin that so many people drool over, and personally, I thought 90% of them were unplayable junk with truly horrible necks, indifferent sound, and actions best suited to grating cheese.

I thought I read once that Martin guitars are in general "difficult" to play.

But yea, there's certain things on certain guitars that are difficult to deal with, eg three saddle bridge on the Tele, dumbass pickup switching on both the Tele and the Strat, those "floating" bridges on the Gretsches (the only thing holding the bridge in place is the string tension), the six saddle bridge on virtually every electric 12 string other than the Fender XII, non-adjustable bridges on too many other makes of guitars, etc. I mean, how the frell are you supposed to play a guitar if you can't adjust the intonation?!