Dire Straits star Mark Knopfler to auction Brothers In Arms guitars - BBC NEWS

[Jules]

If Mark wanted these to be played he could do so.

It is up to him.

I think he gave away more guitars than I played in my entire life, so he has the right to sell some as well. The collectors nature of it is what always makes me sad.

Obviously, you won't give a 1959 Les Paul or Pensa-Suhr MK-1 to some random kid learning to play, but the prospect of a guitar hanging on a wall in some kind of Hard Rock Cafe or ending up a lot #1,000,000 in some weird collector's possession is worse than destruction or theft in my book. No way Mark is not aware about all this.

He is aware (I'm quite sure he is) that most of them would end like that, actually if what he wants is make sure he makes money for himself and for the charities that get the 20% of the money, that's the ideal, going to collectors hands.

From a musical point of view, is a sad end for an instrument made to be played, but, those weren't being played much anyway.

[ds1984]

In classical music there is an organization that is lending very valuable instruments (six figure such as for some stradivarius) to musicians in their 20's or so.

But some instrument have historic value. I have no problem that the 1983 LP is ending displayed on a wall to the public.
The 59 LP has no real historic value but financial value and well imho it would be better in the hand of a real musician than in a private collection.

[quizzaciously]

In classical music there is an organization that is lending very valuable instruments (six figure such as for some stradivarius) to musicians in their 20's or so.

But some instrument have historic value. I have no problem that the 1983 LP is ending displayed on a wall to the public.
The 59 LP has no real historic value but financial value and well imho it would be better in the hand of a real musician than in a private collection.

The 59 is the only guitar that realistically can end up in a musician's hands. Kirk Hammett's and Joe Bonamassa's of this world can buy it, but the question is are they willing to pay the huuuuge Knopfler tax just to get an instrument that is already incredibly overly priced? I don't think so. So I bet that the 1959 LP will get to a collector too. Let alone MK-1 and other gems out of the bunch. After ALL MK signature Gibsons (150+75+50) went this way I can't see why it will change this time round.

The 1959 is so expensive simply because they made too few of them. With all due respect, I can't accept a high price on an item only because there were few of them made, it's an artificially created demand to solve the problem that should've not existed in the first place. I mean they made only 643 Les Pauls in 1959 in a whole year. They probably produce the same number of guitars in a day now.

I for one will never understand all this guitars and gear hype, to me it IS a slab of wood with strings, and collecting guitars to me is as pointless as collecting hammers or screwdrivers, or musician's pants. You just don't do it. So as much as Mark dreams about MK-1 having another song in it, truthfully, I think it already sang all the songs that were in store for this guitar. Now, it will go to the pile of overpriced collector's items.

[ds1984]

Excuse me but I am wrong if I say that in 1959 the Les Paul wasn't a commercial success ?

If they were so few produced it was because there were very limited interest for them.

[quizzaciously]

Excuse me but I am wrong if I say that in 1959 the Les Paul wasn't a commercial success ?

If they were so few produced it was because there were very limited interest for them.

Exactly! Les Paul is an atrociously designed guitar anyway. It won't stay in tune, it's too heavy, it's too fragile, too expensive, and not repair-friendly, but hey it looks beautiful, at least I can give it credit for in this department. It wasn't successful in 1958-1959, there were too few produced, and now it's seemingly a "holy grail" just because it's rare and expensive. Go figure... People are people and things like this will work 10,000 years from now. Something is produced too early, does not get enough attention for whatever reason, fails in sales, and then years later comes back as a holy grail. And yet, rest assured any decent LP will sound exactly the same as the 1959.

[kempston_joystick]

Exactly! Les Paul is an atrociously designed guitar anyway. It won't stay in tune, it's too heavy, it's too fragile, too expensive, and not repair-friendly, but hey it looks beautiful, at least I can give it credit for in this department. It wasn't successful in 1958-1959, there were too few produced, and now it's seemingly a "holy grail" just because it's rare and expensive. Go figure... People are people and things like this will work 10,000 years from now. Something is produced too early, does not get enough attention for whatever reason, fails in sales, and then years later comes back as a holy grail. And yet, rest assured any decent LP will sound exactly the same as the 1959.

I know what you're coming from. I thought it was largely hype, until I got to spend some time with the Peter Green/Gary Moore/Kirk Hammett '59. It was incomparable to any other LP I've played, *especially* in terms of how it sounded. In MK's words "these guitars will spoil you". I'm sure some bursts are better then others, but a good one is not the same thing as "any decent Les Paul."

[JF]

pics from the NY exhibition :

https://www.facebook.com/groups/mark.knopfler.fans/posts/7027159730662910

[Pottel]

Exactly! Les Paul is an atrociously designed guitar anyway. It won't stay in tune, it's too heavy, it's too fragile, too expensive, and not repair-friendly, but hey it looks beautiful, at least I can give it credit for in this department. It wasn't successful in 1958-1959, there were too few produced, and now it's seemingly a "holy grail" just because it's rare and expensive. Go figure... People are people and things like this will work 10,000 years from now. Something is produced too early, does not get enough attention for whatever reason, fails in sales, and then years later comes back as a holy grail. And yet, rest assured any decent LP will sound exactly the same as the 1959.

I know what you're coming from. I thought it was largely hype, until I got to spend some time with the Peter Green/Gary Moore/Kirk Hammett '59. It was incomparable to any other LP I've played, *especially* in terms of how it sounded. In MK's words "these guitars will spoil you". I'm sure some bursts are better then others, but a good one is not the same thing as "any decent Les Paul."

ahem, sorry, what??? pls tell us more!

[qjamesfloyd]

It's interesting to read Lot 60 and find out Mark could have had a signature Gibson ES-335.

[dustyvalentino]

It's interesting to read Lot 60 and find out Mark could have had a signature Gibson ES-335.

That would have been quite odd to me - he's not really "known" as a 335 player. But then I guess he wasn't known for Martins either.

[quizzaciously]

It's interesting to read Lot 60 and find out Mark could have had a signature Gibson ES-335.

That would have been quite odd to me - he's not really "known" as a 335 player. But then I guess he wasn't known for Martins either.

Agree, it would be strange to see that. What I am surprised the most is with the absence of a signature National guitar. It's such a good opportunity to charge double of already painfully overpriced guitar. But signature guitars, like knighthoods, are sometimes given too often, which cheapens the whole experience I think. Rick Beato recently got his signature Gibson guitar. Cool, what's next, Squier Pavel Fomenkov Signature Mini Stratocaster?

[dustyvalentino]

Whatever the perceived value by people who have never played one, in terms of cold hard facts, this one sold recently for $585,000.

https://www.julienslive.com/lot-details/index/catalog/500/lot/219662/GIBSON-1959-GIBSON-LES-PAUL-STANDARD-SUNBURST-ELECTRIC-GUITAR

[quizzaciously]

Whatever the perceived value by people who have never played one, in terms of cold hard facts, this one sold recently for $585,000.

https://www.julienslive.com/lot-details/index/catalog/500/lot/219662/GIBSON-1959-GIBSON-LES-PAUL-STANDARD-SUNBURST-ELECTRIC-GUITAR

Wow, what a lucky guitar. A simple vintage Gibson, not owned by a famous musician, not owned by a famous guitar collector, with a plain top and...
Wait a minute, it looks like a new old stock guitar. So nobody played it in 60-odd years? I stand corrected, it's the unluckiest guitar on Earth

[dustyvalentino]

This guy made the BiA/MFN Les Paul:

https://www.lespaulforum.com/index.php?threads/mark-knopfler-christies-auction.221896/post-2937349

[quizzaciously]

This guy made the BiA/MFN Les Paul:

https://www.lespaulforum.com/index.php?threads/mark-knopfler-christies-auction.221896/post-2937349

Wow, what a great find! Thank you for this. The world is a small place. And poor ol' Mark, due to poverty had to buy a Custom Shop Les Paul instead of the 1959!

I think this is a perfect illustration of how ridiculous this whole thing is. A 1959 les Paul would be only 24 years old in 1983, for all intents and purposes just a slightly vintage guitar, and yet Mark already could not afford it after years of touring, recording and buying custom Schecters and whatnot.

Just make do with whatever you have on hand, and forget about these overpriced, overrated slabs of wood with strings.