Holy Grail Guitars for Sale, does anyone still really fall for that? (Rant Warning)

[Louis Cypher]

This is kinda the opposite to the Fake Chinese ESP Ouija Hammett thread

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/standard-guitars/254202-yellow-kirk-hammet-esp-signature.html

That thread, based on the OP comments, is clearly a guitar selling for exactly what it is, a really rather nice fake, for very much cheapness....

This though came up as a new sale on eBay when I signed in

1992 Ibanez Jem Steve Vai Rare Prototype | eBay

Apparently it is a Rare, 1992 Vai owned Hardtail Jem Prototype.... now I quote:
"The previous owner said it was owned by Steve Vai- but there's no documentation to prove this."

Now it does have Proto stamped on the headstock reverse and the body pocket has "Maho AANJ Jem Proto 3/16/92 MG" in pencil.... Seller wants just shy of $4000.... no documentation, no proof, no nothing to merit even claiming that the guitar is a genuine Ibanez LAC's let alone previously owned by Mr Vai.... on Vai.com the only guitar on there that's the same hard tail prototype has green vine inlays, but no date of build or what happened to it.

Granted I have beef here coz of eBay pulling my listings for my custom Van Halen Frankenstein build, so as that the case surely people like this who cannot prove or justify their claims cannot be allowed to advertise the item so?

But surely no one will fall for this? Right.........? Think the most frustrating bit is its actually a lovely guitar and priced much more sensibly would be a fantastic purchase.....

 

[Default_M]

If it's real or not I want it. That looks awesome.

 

[RV350ALSCYTHE]

Looks cheap and rushed.
Looks like it wasn't completed.
Frets look like they've been given a rough dressing.

If the seller didn't have such great feedback I'd assume this was a terrible Chinese clone.

Anyone can pencil in and stamp proto on a chinese clone.
If it really is legit couldn't the owner do a little work and get documentation or ask the company about it?

The price would seem a little more reasonable for a one-off collector piece.

 

[Louis Cypher]

^
I totally agree if you can prove it was one of Vai's prototypes then of course $4000 is a decent amount for a historically valued piece, but as you say anyone can pencil what they want on to a neck joint and so many places now do excellent quality Ibanez replacement parts you can build your own Jem or Universe for as little as $500....

Took me 30 secs to go on the the Vai site and to scroll through the guitars he has up there and to see that the only one he had as an unfinished hard tail has a green inlay. now Vai may have orders a couple of them true but without any paper work or photographic proof how can you charge that amount or even have the balls to claim its a genuine Vai/Ibanez Prototype.....

Edit:
I appreciate that Ibanez and Vai don't give a fcuk about eBay Jem copies and more power to them for that, BUT a listing like this, surely lawyers for either side should be picking up on these in the same way Van Halen LTD cracks down? I know I wouldn't want my name associated to a $4000 guitar that is actually a $400 dollar self build

 

[MaxOfMetal]

The Vai camp is actually really good about responding to stuff like this. The majority of guitars that Steve has sold/given away have been to either very good friends or for charity so they tend to track the movement of them. They're also really good at keeping records of what was what and when, better than Ibanez in fact.

As for the guitar itself, those LACS Protos were not meant to be players, just test beds for new ideal, so they are in a sense rush jobs and somewhat incomplete instruments, hence the lack of an opaque finish and sometimes mismatched hardware you see on them. No one should buy this guitar if they want something that plays great. I've gotten my hands on some LACS Protos and they range from decent to pretty good, never great.

Anyone interested in this should know it's a collectible, not a player. They should also reach out to Vai's party and see what's up.

 

[jl-austin]

I would have to say no. The neck pickup is not in the normal position. It also looks like they did not know what they were doing when they routed it. Something that I am sure would not happen on a real Ibanez, even a custom model.

If it is a fake, then the Chinese have finally figured out a way around the "thats not a real edge" tremolo. Put a hard tail on it, and call it a "custom" or "prototype".

 

[InAbsentia_]

Inlay work is too good to be a fake IMO.

Also, that is some awesome rosewood. None of that anemic low grade crap you see on guitars today.

 

[technomancer]

Inlay work is too good to be a fake IMO.

Also, that is some awesome rosewood. None of that anemic low grade crap you see on guitars today.

Not sure if this is sarcasm or you just don't know a lot about inlay work

The black is filler around the actual inlay, that is pretty terrible work...

 

[MaxOfMetal]

That terrible filler makes me think it's somewhat legit, as Ibanez only recently has gotten better at that.

 

[technomancer]

That terrible filler makes me think it's somewhat legit, as Ibanez only recently has gotten better at that.

Sadly true

 

[Drew]

Yeah, nothing about that immediately screams "this is not an Ibanez" and a lot of the weird bits - the REALLY coarse space between the neck pickup and the neck heel, the not-fully-dressed fretwork, J Custom style AANJ, well-shaped but unfinished or oil finished body, nut glued into what's clearly a shelf for a locking nut, even the well-cut inlay material in a poorly routed board, all seems pretty consistent with this being what it claims to be. The PROTO stamp on the headstock could have been added afterwards or could have been done in the factory (anyone know if this is normal for Ibanez?) and without knowing more about the names/handwriting of guys in the Ibanez custom shop, that signature could prove nothing or prove everything.

Nothing wrong with the guitar, it's just if you're charging collectible pricing the burden of proof is on you to justify it. Either way, nothing worth getting too upset about.

 

[InAbsentia_]

Not sure if this is sarcasm or you just don't know a lot about inlay work

The black is filler around the actual inlay, that is pretty terrible work...

I'm not saying it's the best work in the world but I know that a Chinese make wouldn't be even half decent, especially at this magnification. The woods would suck and it would be more than rough around the edges. While you can't really say with certainty that this is an Ibanez prototype, it isn't a stretch to think it might be.

 

[MBMoreno]

How is the neck joint? Old Jems had the large square one, which doesn't appear to be on this one.

 

[fastmerc]

This one has been discussed at Jemsite at length. There are several highly respected members there that feel this is a real one. I was skeptical, but I have to differ to some more in the know than myself. If I was the one trying to sell it, I would do whatever it took to track down Mace Bailey and make sure he made it.

 

[wilch]

+1 the consensus on Jemsite is that it's real.

But yeah, a guitar is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. If someone buys it, they could probably take it to an EVO Experience, and ask the man himself if he remembers it...and could get him to sign a piece of paper to attest to that. lol.