Lost Rhoads Found

[LastInLine]

So let me see if I understand this.

• This guy has a rare guitar everyone wants. Several people said they'd pay the big bucks if they had it and darn near everyone else here wants it.
• He's hyped it quite a bit, presumably to make some money. Oh gee, that never happens on the JCF.
• He has some CDs out there with ads over hyping him. Wow, that's new. I've never seen such a thing. If you actually go to the site and listen to the samples, they're actually very good.
• He posed with the guitar for ads and the magazine article. So some photographers told him to sit, act, look certain ways and he did it.

So add that all up and that makes him ghey? I don't get it.

And the whole Grover "...I don't want to help him make money..." thing is a bunch of pure bullshit. Remember, this is the guy that just came back to be a poseur so they can ask $10k for $2k guitars with his blessing.

Well said. It's probably a no win situation. I would think that anyone who ended up owning that guitar, save for Grover Jackson or Randy's estate, would be labeled a "tool" by everyone who didn't own it.

[Venomboy]

Thanks Hoss!

I don't think Fat Albert is a tool for owning the guitar. He's a tool because he says they guitar sounds a certain way due to things that are either innacurate not measureable. And he says it with such conviction that it makes me laugh.

[Chasbo]

If you read what was posted by Hoss on the reciept for the third guitar, the missing NAMM guitar was definitely supposed to be Randy's. It was the 2nd of three that were supposed to be for him.

I did and FWIW, I think it was supposed to be Randy's guitar too. I was refering more to the fact that even if it wasn't intended for Randy, it is still a super desirable collectors guitar. Despite the way Grover has downplayed it.

chuck

[LastInLine]

I don't think Fat Albert is a tool for owning the guitar. He's a tool because he says they guitar sounds a certain way due to things that are either innacurate not measureable. And he says it with such conviction that it makes me laugh.

I wasn't singleing you out. I just used the word "tool" to describe what seems to be the general feeling toward this guy based on the posts in this thread.

[Chad]

Thanks Hoss!

I don't think Fat Albert is a tool for owning the guitar. He's a tool because he says they guitar sounds a certain way due to things that are either innacurate not measureable. And he says it with such conviction that it makes me laugh.

+1

[diego_inc]

Price

I have a feeling that this guitar will not be sold if the offer is only $5500. But, I also doubt that the highest offer will only be $5500.

I'd pay more than $5500 for this guitar, but not $30k.

D

[z1n]

I have questions.. The black RR that you see in all the pics with Randy, who has it now? Also, if Randys white one (concord) is serial#0000 (mrs. Rhoads) does this make the black one #0001?

[diego_inc]

Price

From what im reading here, it seems that $11K or 12K would be more in line as a price?

I'd pay over $10k for this guitar. If another early jackson (not even a prototype) went for this much....

D

[diego_inc]

Price

oh hell yeah, i'd pay over 20 for it if i had disposable cash like that; it's arguably one of the first rhoads models made that wasn't randy's. then again, i love old rhoads models, especially white ones. i'm also a little nuts.

as far as grover downplaying it, i dunno; he's sung the same tune for the past 5 years. i know we're talkin over 20 years here, but grover hasn't really commented much after the mid/late 80s about it.

besides, grover's not the only in-the-know person who says it wasn't for randy. just sayin.

sully

I guess if i had the cash i MIGHT pay this much for it, but i dont (without selling off a car or something...

About Grover... like I said before... it's hard to guage him because he seems to contradict himself (age?). But the interviews with Randy I do not think that one can argue where he states (in August 1981) that he ordered 3 more Guitars from Grover.

d

[diego_inc]

Article

That was my first thought after getting the magazine in the mail a couple days ago and reading the article.

After I was done reading, I was wondering how this article even came about in the first place. I don't think Guitar World did the detective homework, he probably approached them...for his own adjenda.

I have not read the article yet, but from Talking to Sean I could already tell that it was going to be pretty innacurate. I have been trying to contact Guitar World about my guitar and they will not call be or email me back. I think they do not like the fact that I have a letter from Grover STATING that there were 2 guitars being made for Randy at the time of his death. Oh well. I even sent them a picture of Grover with my guitar and a picture of him signing MY letter (that he gave to Rob Lane)



D

[diego_inc]

Correction

Here is the original bill of sale text from Grover to Rob Lane - I also have many photos of these guitars under construction and with Grover and Mike working on them. I was given all these documents and photos when I aquired jacksoncharvelworld.

" Sunday, November 01,1998

To Whom It May Concern:

This Letter will serve as a Bill of Sale and information related to one Randy Rhoads tremolo guitar. After I made the original instrument for Randy he played it for quite some time before returning with changes that he felt would make the instrument more distinctive. We met and discussed the changes and agreed to make three (3) additional instruments, all with the updated body style tremolo on it, the only to my knowledge that has ever been made. At this time the Floyd Rose bridge was basically unknown. We completed the first of the three and that is the black guitar widely seen in pictures of Randy. The additional two guitars were held back to see if Randy had additional changes to make before delivery. Sadly Randy died less than ninety (90) days after receiving the first updated guitar. The additional two instruments were held in an incomplete state for about one (1) year as we all dealt with the loss. At that point we entered into discussions with Mrs. Rhoads regarding the possibility of continuing to make the instrument with a portion of the proceeds going to the Rhoads estate. It was trade show time when we finally made the agreement and we didn’t a sample so we put the second of the three guitars, which was a non-trem in crème, and took it to the NAMM show. During the course of the show this instrument was accidentally sold. The third instrument is the black, vintage tremolo guitar that was also the first to have reverse inlays. That instrument I have kept all these years and just recently sold to Rob Lane.

Grover Jackson”

CORRECTION:
Hossman, i have the letter and there is a sentence in my letter that you are missing. Basically the missing sentenct says that of the other 3 guitars 2 were string-thru's and one was a vtrem.

Now I find this strange because Randy states in a 1981 interview that one of these new guitars (1 of 3 new ones) was supposed to have a FLoyd.

D

[diego_inc]

Pics

Always happy to share -
I'll keep digging through the photos see what else I can find.. Cheers

Yeah, Rob sent me these also with the guitar.. If i find any other ones I will post them. I am still unpacking from my move.

Hossman,
Can you give me more details about the neck angle... the story from Grover was pretty fuzzy as he did not remember it all.

D

[diego_inc]

Fan?

Wow. This thread has been a good read!! Since I live under a rock and just found out about the discovery of the lost NAMM Rhoads (I know, I know...), this is all like a dream to me. Well, a dream come true, actually! I remember back in the mid 80's reading the story about how it was accidentally sold and thinking "man, I wonder if they will ever find it?" or "I gotta find that!". I would have delusions about finding it in a pawn shop or spotting someone playing it live. Unbelievable how things you imagine happening coming true. It's like finding the needle in the haystack....

I noticed one thing about the axe though - and I know there are two sides of the coin on this issue - but, if YOU were the one who owned this guitar, and you knew what is was in a historical sense, would you have been gigging with it, as evidenced by the dings and chips that this axe shows? What a shame. I simply cannot understand someone knowingly treating it so poorly.

And another thing that drives me mad - how in the hell was this guy able to keep it hidden from public knowledge for all these years?? Every Charvel/Jackson fan, fanatic and collector on the planet has been on high alert lookout for this thing for nearly 24 years!! Even if people didn't know what it was by sight, you would think that he would have at least TOLD someone what it was, and the story would have been leaked. Unreal!

Concerning the value of this piece, as Sully said, and I agree, that if money was no object, I would pay whatever it takes to land this. And as for Randy's actual guitars, I would probably pay into the 100's of thousands for one of those just because of the significance of owning a guitar from my musical idol growing up. I really believe that this axe, if it does go up for sale at all, will approach $30,000 and up - that's just because of the historical significance, not because it "could have been" Randy's had he not perished. It is an integral piece of Jackson history - probably the second Rhoads ever built (discounting the white prototype)!! Who wouldn't hold something like that in the highest regard? What would someone pay for the third Fender ever built? It's the same thing, only a much younger company. You must be crazy if you don't think that it's worth $20-30K on that basis alone.

I talked to the guy, he's did not seem to know much about JAcksons other than his. He did not even know about the boards or anything. But he seemed very nice though and his music is very good.

d

[diego_inc]

Sn 0000

I have questions.. The black RR that you see in all the pics with Randy, who has it now? Also, if Randys white one (concord) is serial#0000 (mrs. Rhoads) does this make the black one #0001?

There is no serial number on the white one (I assume this because there are no serial numbers on any of the prototypes that I have seen.

D

[diego_inc]

Here is an interesting quote from a Randy Interview from August 1981 http://randy-rhoads.com/index2.php?id=articles/art26 :

"... Charvel just made me three new guitars. One is my own design plus Charvel's, which hopefully might urn out to be one of my main guitars. There's no tremolo on that one. He's making one as an experiment with Floyd Rose..."