Crucianelli or Eko Vox Super Lynx?

[erikzen]

I recently won an auction for a Vox Super Lynx and I'm trying to find out as much as possible about the guitar. See the auction here:



According to another thread on this site, I read that all Super Lynx guitars were built by Eko. However, I also read on another site that both Crucianelli and Eko produced the Super Lynx and that the Crucianelli guitars had a more subdued finish. Based on that statement I would judge the guitar I bought to be from Crucianelli, but if Crucianelli never produced the Super Lynx than it must be an Eko guitar.



I have read that Vox used both plants to make their guitars. What are the differences, besides the finish as noted above, between the guitars made at these two facilities?

[VintAxe]

Hey erikzen.

The history of these two companies is so tangled even the Italian guitar historians have difficulty sorting it out. They clearly bought parts from the same suppliers and even supplied parts to each other. Word is EKO was planning to purchase Crucianelli when Olivieri Pigini died suddenly and the deal didn't go through.

I'm sure your research has already led you to the wealth of information on the Fetish Guitar site, but others interested in this topic might find this link useful.

[erikzen]

Thanks for your response. Yes, I've read through a lot of material, but it isn't consistent. I understand why. I guess I won't worry about it too much and just enjoy the guitar!

[erikzen]

My guitar arrived today!




by , on Flickr

I have to say I am both pleased and disappointed in this purchase. I probably acted too hastily and paid too much. Let's start with the good news. I like the guitar very much. I definitely identify with it and once it's cleaned and set up properly, new strings and all, it will be a very playable and musical guitar. I am sure it's going to be a great compliment to my other guitars. I really haven't played anything quite like it.

Now for the disappointment. First, I must say that the seller did tell me the guitar neck had been repaired but that it had not been a good job but the guitar was still playable. Half of that statement was correct. The neck is playable, very playable in fact. However, I'm no expert, but it seems to me that the neck was broken but never repaired. There is a 1 inch v-shaped crack about 2 inches below the start of the headstock. It looks like the guitar must have taken a digger right on the neck.


by , on Flickr

For the most part the heavy lacquer finish is without checking. There are about 4 or 5 fairly big vertical cracks in the finish in the back and one in the front that is barely noticeable. There are various other cracks in the finish but they are minimal. However because of the damage to the neck the finish is badly cracked and checked up and down. I actually think the lacquer kept the headstock from snapping off completely.

The questions now become how well can this actually be repaired, what will it cost, will I ever recoup the money?

The guitar plays really well and has a great vibe. The electronics are working although perhaps a bit scratchy in the pots, but it sound very nice. It plays well and I think it can play even better with the action lowered a bit and of course some fresh strings. The neck looks straight and the intonation is very close. The bridge looks fully adjustable and there is an adjustable truss rod so there's no reason to think this guitar can't be spot on.

I really think this could be a long term keeper, so I'm wondering does that make it more or less important to get it fixed? Part of me says that if this is going to be a cherished guitar you hold onto for a lifetime, it should be repaired. Another part of me says leave it alone. I'm not sure a repair would make this any better and I got a relatively good price on the guitar which I wouldn't have if it wasn't damaged. True it kills resale, but it also lowers the price of entry to a decent hollow body guitar.

What would you do?