Jump to content

One of HENDRIX MARSHALLS up for sale on EBAY !!!!


Dr. Tweedbucket

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 158
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

>>"fortunately Marshall got involved early on (this is why it was pulled from the auction) to find the evidence we needed. They asked us to pull it so they could research and inspect the Amp to date it and try and identify it. Between us we found many identifying details and all the component dating matches up without doubt. many photo's of jimi using the amp have also been found..."
So why has Marshall been silent about this? It's been what--6 months--since they first contacted you?

And more photos, while nice, still don't prove that the amp you own is the same as the one in the photo. How many reproductions (or outright fakes) of famous guitars are there? How difficult would it be to take a stock guitar from whatever date, make up a fake neckplate, and relic it to exactly match the readily available photos of a guitar that Hendrix or Clapton or EVH or anyone else is known to have played? That is exactly what forgers do, you know. They take whatever information they can find, and they build their creation around it.

There was a famous painter in 17th century Holland named Johannes Vermeer. There are literally hundreds of paintings that have been attributed to him by various people--among them, many famous curators, dealers, etc. The problem is that less than 35 paintings can be definitively attributed to him (such as those which were sold by Vermeer's widow to Britain's royal family). But the market is so strong for his work, that forgers are willing to spend literally years to produce one work that can be passed off as his. The most recent sale of a "genuine" Vermeer was last year. A tiny painting (9" x 10"), it still sold for $30 million.

I'm not accusing you of forgery. What I'm saying is that a million photos of Hendrix playing an amp that looks identical to yours still don't PROVE that the two amps are one and the same; merely that they now look very similar.

As Carl Sagan once famously said--"extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". While the evidence you've provided is interesting, it stops well short of proving your claims. Good luck to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Marshall had a statement on thier website for about 2 months after they 1st looked at the Amp, they had the Amp while it was still on ebay which is why we removed it from the auction.

The Amp could not have been forged unless it was Marshall themselves who did it because they had it safely stored away while all the research was carried out, we had pictures of it and looked for old pictures with the same damage, there are at least 6 definite points of interest just on the front of it. Back in 1971 when the Amp was purchased the possibility of somone bothering to falsely 'dress it up' would have been stupid because it was actually worth less in the shop than one which had not been abused by Jimi. we have a picture of the Amp being played in about 1973 by my father (Rich Dickinson) which shows some of the damage which proves it.

in reply to psycodave: yes we still own it but are looking to sell it earlyish next year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

for the 1st time tonight i had the chance to read through this entire thread...... Loghead, you are just that!

it has been one hell of a time for us in the Dickinson home for the last 6 months or so......

as i mentioned a while ago, the Amp must be sold. due to the fact's we now have the Amp cost's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...