Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on January 11, 2025 at 2:24pm

This looks authentic to me.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Doug James on January 11, 2025 at 3:03pm

Well, that’s not what I expected to come back to after being gone a few hours…… wow.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve P. on January 11, 2025 at 3:22pm

Having seen Jimi twice in concert, I've always wanted a sig but they've been way out of my price range and authenticity has been an issue.  Nice

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on January 12, 2025 at 3:18am

I'm a little unsure about a part of the "Hendrix" ("end" part doesn't look very natural) but as the Mitch and Noel look spot on I presume it is real.

For the umpteenth time here is my JHE for comparison:

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on January 14, 2025 at 11:19am

The “Hendrix” portion does look a bit odd and stretched out. The Mitch and Noel do look really good though. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on January 14, 2025 at 10:03pm

Yes, the Hendrix letters look atypically round to me, at least the "end" part. Perhaps it is just the exception that proves the rule but I don't think I would lay out $5,000+ on it unless similar examples with authentication could be pointed to. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on January 15, 2025 at 9:53am

The more I look at the Jimi autograph the less of it I like. The main Hendrix signature study may not be gospel but I don't really see any examples in it that look much like the OP. I know you know this study Ballroom but I'm posting a link for others:

https://hendrixautos.wordpress.com/2011/10/22/groovy-script-the-aut...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on January 15, 2025 at 10:17am

How would you explain the solid looking Mitch and Noel along with a Jimi that appears to be in the same pen? It’s a Track promo card too.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on January 15, 2025 at 10:44am

Yes, it is tricky to explain. I guess it's possible that someone has added the Jimi to a card already signed by Noel and Mitch. Maybe all three are fakes and the Noel and Mitch are just more successful. Obviously all three signatures are in dark areas of the  card - unavoidable in this case I know.

It would be good to get more background from Alfie, the "poster" of the images. Maybe someone like Roger has given them the all clear already. I still wouldn't trust the Jimi unless similar known genuine examples exist.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on January 15, 2025 at 10:55am

I suspected the fist scenario in answer to the question as posed. The last name is extended and somewhat slow with some apparent hesitations? If one were to sign the others fast/loose and get lucky - just imagine the hesitance before blurting out the Jimi as fast...but this is careful. I can't swear that is the exact same color ink to me from here anyway as well. I would not feel comfortable. I would always be concerned. That last name has a certain formal weirdness about it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on January 18, 2025 at 9:21pm

It’s a bit tough to see, but here’s a similar signature on a Track promo card.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on January 19, 2025 at 2:58am

I can barely make the red autograph out (only the J and x are really visible) but it doesn't look very convincing either. Perhaps a forger got hold of a stack of these promo cards. Given the dark and busy backgrounds they are ideal for making forged autographs hard to see.

• ▶ Reply