Page 5 of 5

Re: Ed Romans response to the lawsuit

Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:19 am
by Veenture
dorkrockrecords wrote:To be honest, I think we're dealing with a faked '63 assembled from the Canadian parts cache. As recently as four or five years ago there were still many Semie Moseley signed and dated (and unfinished/seconded) necks in the remnants, and they also displayed the same yet-to-be contoured heels and misaligned tuning peg holes...

Good for you Adam; most enjoyable also and with all this conclusive 'forensic evidence' having been brought to light…we may well say that the Ed Roman guitar [edit: as portrayed by him] does not deserve any praise from the jury.

Re: Ed Romans response to the lawsuit

Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 2:53 pm
by zarfnober
I saw probably hundreds of the bodies , necks, etc when I visited Loretta. Most necks were signed and to my then very untrained eye, there were plenty of "seconds" amongst all the parts.

As usual, buyer beware.

Rocco

Re: Ed Romans response to the lawsuit

Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 7:59 pm
by dubtrub
Did anyone notice the size of the position markers? ;)

Re: Ed Romans response to the lawsuit

Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:42 am
by oipunkguy
Thanks for expounding Adam; always appreciate your expertise, guitar- as well as language wise ;)

Aaron, I’m sure you’ve made us curious now as to whether or not any of the tuners on your Mo’s are indeed lopsided –not that it will make any difference to playing... :geek:


i see it now, yeah it is way off. this isn't like any of my mosrites, or any other I've seen for that matter. again i hate to try to slam anyone when they aren’t here to defend themselves, but from what i've heard (i have no idea if this is truth or fiction) but as the story goes, Ed roman use to be a dealer with PRS and lost his deal with them by forging copy guitars.
Also danny in all fairness, the dot inlays are larger on most 70’s mosrites so this could be a possible custom feature I would think, but also due to all the other sub par work, I think dorkrock is right, that it’s really just a parts-rite guitar.

Re: Ed Romans response to the lawsuit

Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:06 am
by dorkrockrecords
dubtrub wrote:Did anyone notice the size of the position markers? ;)

Yep. Those are the standard '80s dots (not the '70s dots, oipunkguy).

Re: Ed Romans response to the lawsuit

Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:50 pm
by oipunkguy
Yep. Those are the standard '80s dots (not the '70s dots, oipunkguy).

I really can't tell from the pictures. And what do you mean by 80's dots?????? :?: :?: :?: :?:

Re: Ed Romans response to the lawsuit

Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 10:06 pm
by dorkrockrecords
oipunkguy wrote:Yep. Those are the standard '80s dots (not the '70s dots, oipunkguy).

I really can't tell from the pictures. And what do you mean by 80's dots?????? :?: :?: :?: :?:

Uhm, '80s (as in the 1980s) not "80's" (as in a possessive of the number 80).

To generalize, Mosrite dots were in the '60s tiny, in the '70s large (like on your V-IIs), and in the '80s small but noticeably larger than the '60s tiny stock. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but the neck on the Roman "'63" is definitively 1980s at the earliest.

Re: Ed Romans response to the lawsuit

Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:32 am
by MWaldorf
dorkrockrecords wrote:
oipunkguy wrote:Yep. Those are the standard '80s dots (not the '70s dots, oipunkguy).

I really can't tell from the pictures. And what do you mean by 80's dots?????? :?: :?: :?: :?:

Uhm, '80s (as in the 1980s) not "80's" (as in a possessive of the number 80).

To generalize, Mosrite dots were in the '60s tiny, in the '70s large (like on your V-IIs), and in the '80s small but noticeably larger than the '60s tiny stock. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but the neck on the Roman "'63" is definitively 1980s at the earliest.


Beyond the size of the dots is the number of dots. On '60s Mosrites, there is only one dot per fret marker above the 12th fret, placed in the center of the fretboard. This guitar has two dots in these positions, placed on the treble and bass sides of the fretboard. As far as I know, Mosrite didn't start the double dots above the 12th fret until the '80s.

Re: Ed Romans response to the lawsuit

Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:47 am
by oipunkguy
Uhm, '80s (as in the 1980s) not "80's" (as in a possessive of the number 80).

To generalize, Mosrite dots were in the '60s tiny, in the '70s large (like on your V-IIs), and in the '80s small but noticeably larger than the '60s tiny stock. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but the neck on the Roman "'63" is definitively 1980s at the earliest.


i know what you meant by 80's dorkrock, jeez..... lol. I just didnt know there was dot inlays that were a different size on mosrites in the 80's.
I wonder if this guitar was a 63 reissue that semie made in the 80's, and was scrapped before finishing it.

Re: Ed Romans response to the lawsuit

Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 9:19 am
by Haole Jim
'Purchased a real Mk I from Ed Roman a couple years ago when he had the big store, and could not be happier.

'Was in LV for business and went there several nights to play and maybe choose. Excellent selection, great staff. They provided the amp of choice and a private space and tuner. For several hours.

'Bought one and they shipped in excellent packing a long distance.

More than fair price, excellent setup, positive gem of an instrument and case.

NO issues with Ed, in fact, 'highly recommend him, based on this experience.