Looking for opinions.  Looking to bid on this at a local auction but am hesitant.  Too good to be true?

Tags: Eric, baker, bruce, clapton, cream, ginger, jack, the

Views: 1960

Attachments: No photo uploads here

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

that's pretty wacked out

I have never seen anything in the world of authentic that resembles those

Ginger's sig can get a bit crazy, but not that crazy

Jack's can be simple but not that simple

Looks like Eric's at least had some thought put into it

Wait for others to comment

Thank you so much, I appreciate the input. It was supposedly signed January 18th 1967 at a concert in Stourbridge UK. I've been hunting Google images and some of the autographs from that time do look pretty similar, but at the moment I'm not being biased enough

U betchya

Luv Cream... in fact that's what's playing right now. I'll turn it up so you can here it.

1967.... actually yours aren't too far off. This Baker is more wacked than yours posted

Hahaha I dig it.

jeepers man

That Jack Bruce threw me off

Yours posted might actually be good. My apologies. 

wait for other comments

another '67

Damn, that would be cool.  Where did you find that photo? I can only see it partially for some reason, I'm dying to see it

They are from RR auction files

I don't have photo's of my personal sigs at hand

But that Jack Bruce just doesn't look like 60's. He did some basic sigs later on but not this simple. Maybe it was added. It's confusing me. 

I figured it out, I just downloaded the pictures and I can see them.  I thought I looked through RR but didn't see anything.  God Gingers signature is wacky, lol.  I just really want that Clapton signature to be real in the worst way

The Cream signed page in the original post is genuine in my opinion, very nice example...

Thx for steppn in mc, much appreciated

I jumped the gun with that Bruce sig. My sincere apologies

That Bruce still confuses me for that time period

It was the clapton that made me rethink it. Looks right

Yes, thank you so much mc.  So you think all 3 of them stack up?  Like I said before I'm most interested with the clapton, but the other two are certainly bonuses.  It comes with a flyer from the day it was supposedlying signed for provenance

Well christ, I just don't know anymore.  Spent $15 and sent the image to PSA to take a look at it and just got a reply back saying it was "likely not genuine" although got an email back from rareandsigned.Com saying it was "absolutely superb" I can't help but notice little ideosyncrasies like the N in "Clapton" hangs down the same in all of them but it would be nice to be able to get a good COA to back it all up.  Anyone else notice any good details?

RSS

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2023   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service