Gibson SG - Matching Its Pars to Its Original Era

The other day—well, actually about a month ago—I went to Mount Haruna to see the autumn leaves. I happened to visit at the perfect time. Depending on the tree species and location, I was able to see everything from still-green leaves to deep red ones, each with its own beauty. The roadside scenery while driving up the mountain pass was beautiful, but the illuminated autumn leaves against the night sky were also incredible. It’s the same with cherry blossoms at night. They look completely different when the night sky becomes the backdrop.

So here’s a little glimpse of Lake Haruna and the autumn leaves at night.
By the way, the day after I visited Lake Haruna, a car sank into the lake and it made the news.

Putting aside my recent updates, I’m going to talk about guitars again this time.
It’s a common story, but in this world it’s not unusual for something’s image and its actual content not to match. Something that looks insanely spicy can actually be fairly mild once you eat it, or a car that looks like a current model but turns out to be 20 years old!? For reference, the first-generation Prius is 28 years old now.
Well, something similar is happening with my guitar.

Pretty cool, right? It’s a Gibson SG Standard ’61 Maestro Vibrola.
This model is a reissue based on the 1961 SG. However, as those who know the details are surely aware, there’s a major mismatch between the name and the specs, which creates a strong sense of inconsistency. The biggest point—something I briefly mentioned in a previous blog—is:
“The Maestro Vibrola did not exist in 1961!!”
In other words, the guitar is “reissuing” a past that never existed.
The actual unit used during that period was the Sideways Vibrola, which looks very different.
So, the idea this time is to tweak a few parts to bring the guitar’s specs into a more unified, consistent period-correct feel.
When choosing replacement parts, I selected them based on the standards of the Maestro Vibrola era—specifically aiming for the specs seen in late 1962 and onward, when the arm unit was properly changed over.

If I start listing every little detail, there would be quite a lot, but when it comes to replaceable parts that can create a sense of inconsistency, they would be:

• Bridge (including posts)
• Nut
• Tuners
• Truss-rod cover

It’s more or less these parts. The overall vibe, particularly the knobs, pickguard, pickup rings, actually isn’t bad at all, so with just a few changes, it seems possible to eliminate that feeling of mismatch quite a bit.

This time, I’ll be replacing the nut and the truss-rod cover. The reason I’m not replacing the bridge and tuners is simply because making the nut completely drains my energy. Delrin just does not file down!! It really surprised me.

By the way, this is the nut I used.
And this truss-rod cover seemed like the closest match.

Here’s what it looks like after changing them out.

The translucent nut looks really cool. The truss-rod cover also looks much sharper with the lettering. Now the front-mounting nuts on the tuners are starting to bother me even more…
Next time, all that’s left is to casually swap the bridge, so once that’s done I’ll write the continuation.

That’s all for now!