Gibson ES-175 1959 Reissue

[Ob Com]

I got hold of one of these new reissues, and wanted to share my impressions which are overwhelminly positive, and I feel that Gibson have really hit the mark with this one.

Having once had the opportunity to play a 1950's 175 (not mine) in the past I have always found the modern Gibson 175's to pale in comparison, to feel cheaply made, and therefore overpriced.

I was interested in this 1959 reissue principally because Gibson claim that they are built differently from modern 175's and that they have replicated the construction as it was done in the 1950's, including solid sides, correct spec internal rims and the wooden bridge.

Well, I'm pleased to report that, to my ears anyway, this guitar sounds much closer to a 50's original than a modern ES 175 does.

Firstly, the guitar is feather light- a real surprise when I first picked it up.

Much lighter than any of the modern 175's I've tried.

It feels as though the woods used are exceptionally light, thin and resonant.

Even hammering on produces a sort of hollow resonance in the neck.

The tone is dark, dry, clear and just the right balance between mellow but still with a "tightness" and focus.

I hesitate to say it, but the overused description of the tone as being "woody" is accurate in this instance.

Acoustically the guitar has that dried out dessicated tone, and this translates well when amplified.

The guitar is very nuanced and responsive to touch and dynamics.

It feels like a fine instrument in the way quite a lot of modern 175's don't.

I'm really chuffed with it, and know instantly that it is a life long keeper.

My impression is that Gibson have actually set out and done this properly this time, rather than it being just cosmetics and marketing spin.

Worth checking out.

[fws6]

Looks much better than any other I have seen so far. What do these things cost ? original (one pickup) PAF equipped models are about 6k US$ nowadays so I assume a ri model is well below that ?

[Ob Com]

the one pickup is £3,200 the two pick up is £3,450, however dealers will negotiate that.

It is more expensive than a standard new 175 and arguably getting very close to the price of a vintage es 175 that has been modified from 100% original spec or is in players condition.

I tried to find a cheaper vintage 175, but all the ones in my price range had issues and I cant stretch to the more expensive examples.

[JPMike]

First of all,

Gratz for this amazing beauty and thanks for the review.

Probably, this will be my next guitar, when I am going to have enough money to buy it.

My teacher has a 1956 ES 175, but with P90s. Amazing instrument.

[boles]

That's a beautiful guitar.

When I first heard about them in an email alert, I put a thousand dollar downpayment on one with a boutique music shop on the East Coast with the promise of delivery in "three weeks."

After I paid me my money down, the sales rep came back to me the next day with a "confirmed" delivery date from Gibson of "three months!"

I canceled my order and bought an L5 instead.

I'm thrilled to see these "vintage" 175s are now available and as good as their specs promised!

[NSJ]

If they got it right with this one, Sadowsky, Tom Painter and others, who have capitalized on Gibson NOT building them like they used to, will have to look out. This one seems to be priced about the same level as the mentioned competitors.

I dunno. Having sold an early 1950s ES-175 (dog eared P90) and kept my Sadowsky Jim Hall, I can honestly say that this guitar doesn't excite me too much. I would venture to guess that my 1950s 175 probably sounds much better than this one. the private, custom based luthiers (including Heritage) do it so much better these days.

There came a time for me when I truly ran out of G.A.S. I'm perfectly happy to go to the trenches with my limited but very musical arsenal.

[Patrick2]

It's a definite beauty and it has an unmistakeable vintage ES 175 vibe to it. I would be very happy and very proud to own such a beautiful recreation of one of the most popular and iconic jazz guitars ever made. Not sure if it's the photo . . but, that appears to be the thinnest and most period correct nitro finish I've seen on a RI 175. It looks in the photo, more like a 1959 than it does a Reissue of a 1959.

Congrats!!

[Ob Com]

^ cheers Patrick.

Yes, you are right about the nitro, I've a lot of experience with Gibson's and this is the thinnest laquer I've ever seen.

The whole guitar is just so thin and light- it really affects how the strings sound into the pick ups.

Yes, not my intention to dis modern Es 175's- I've had several myself.

Just wanted to do a mini review because I hadnt seen one anywhere and Gibson truly do seem to have cooked up something special here.

peace

OC

[Jabberwocky]

Hi OC,

Why your choice of the 2-pickup over the single neck pickup ES-175 1959 RI? Do you find yourself using the bridge pickup at all? Just curious.

It does look like an under-the-bed 1959, not a reissue of a 1959, like Pat2 says.

[Jazzpunk]

If it's anything like the ES330 '59 reissue I played recently than you've got yourself a great instrument. I thought Gibson really nailed it with that one.

Congrats and enjoy!

[Ob Com]

Hi OC,

Why your choice of the 2-pickup over the single neck pickup ES-175 1959 RI? Do you find yourself using the bridge pickup at all? Just curious.

It does look like an under-the-bed 1959, not a reissue of a 1959, like Pat2 says.

Hi jabberwocky

Reason is because whilst I love jazz guitar, and hope to become better at it, I enjoy playing jump blues/west coast blues/swing blues too, and of course the bridge pick up comes into its own for that.

cheers

OC

[Ob Com]

If it's anything like the ES330 '59 reissue I played recently than you've got yourself a great instrument. I thought Gibson really nailed it with that one.

Congrats and enjoy!

thanks man, yes I would love one of those 59 330 RI's- i believe this 175 grew out of their approach to that 330 reissue.

[NSJ]

Let me clarify a bit:

1. I have not played it, but I have played new 175s. All the new ones I have played didn't sound very good. They were heavy as hell. Seem to be made of a very heavy plywood. At some point, the 175s became reinforced like tanks. I was initially shocked how heavy these guitars have become. No meaningful acoustic tone at all.

2. If this guitar is indeed light as a feather, it really does mean it must be made like the ones in the 1950s, I suppose. My guitar must have weighed like 4.5 lbs. It hardly weighed anything at all, and had a fantastic acoustic tone and a very unique sweet P90 sound.

3. This guitar probably sounds better than other newer 175s--particularly acoustic-based- precisely because of the thinner plywood used. My Jim Hall is made of very thin plywood layers and has a fantastic tone, even acoustically, despite having a set-in pickup.

4. Since someone else mentioned it, what is the big deal with the 1959 RI ES-335? I think 335s sound fantastic in general (I have a newer 339, myself). Why would the the 1959 edition sound significantly better? Were the specs used in that model that much different? Just wondering.

Sorry if I failed to congratulate you initially. Congrats on a great guitar. I was really trying to say that we live in an age where so many builders are making great jazz boxes, it's hard to go wrong.

[oldane]

thanks to everyone for their kind comments.

here is another shot of this guitar from the dealer's web site, which better shows the guitar than my effort:

....

It also seems to have the smaller frets (which i like), used in the 1950s, or ...?

Like others have said, I'd love to have it with a P90 (or another single coil PU) to get a bit more clarity in the buttom. But there are plenty of good single coil PUs in humbucker disguise (P90, CC etc.) out there, so that should be manageable even in this edition. This has the potential to become a success for Gibson (within a very small market of course).

[Ob Com]

It also seems to have the smaller frets (which i like), used in the 1950s, or ...?

Like others have said, I'd love to have it with a P90 (or another single coil PU) to get a bit more clarity in the buttom. But there are plenty of good single coil PUs in humbucker disguise (P90, CC etc.) out there, so that should be manageable even in this edition. This has the potential to become a success for Gibson (within a very small market of course).

Hi Oldane

yes it does have smaller frets than gibson normally use today, my recollection from playing the vintage 175's on my search for an affordable one, is that these are not quite as small as the 50's/early 60's ones I tried.

it does have "50's wiring" fwiw.

Having had an historic les paul RI which has this wiring config, I've never quite understood the tonal significance of 50's schematic wiring.

Agree that it would be easy to put some P94 or other humbucker sized P90 in there, but might need a pot change too?

I am hazy on the dark arts of electronics

[Philco]

Now listen up Ob!! You can't go posting pictures like that without warning people!!!

You could have said..."for those of you with chronic Gibson arch top gas please avert your eyes'

That picture hit me square in the face.

Bloody hell where am I going to find the money for that?
Where am I going to find the space for that?
What will I tell my L5?
How will I keep my 775 from seeing it?

Really it's just too much


By the way, regarding that beautiful picture, the high E string is about to fall off the top of the fretboard. You may have to nudge that bridge over a little.

[dmorash]

Beautiful guitar. I'm glad you posted this, I wasn't aware that you could get a decent 175 from Gibson. I remember looking for a 175 and looking at the used market and so on. I couldn't find a 175 so I ended up getting a used L4CES , they seem to be kind of overlooked and are relatively affordable especially compared to new 175's - I'm really happy with it. I'd love to try one of these reissues, yours looks awesome.

[Flat]

Wow! Gibson really nailed the '59 look! Nice vintage patina without gaudy relicing. Really nice!

Thanks for the review. Long may she run...

[tstrahle]

Beautiful ax. I have a 1966 single PU 175 that I love.

[Philco]

Hi Ob Com, just bringing this thread back because.....well just because I want to look at those pictures again and ask you if the honeymoon is over or are you still in love with the 175 and playing it a lot.

That Gas has stayed with me ever since you posted that pic.

I'm looking for a light weight 16" jazz box and that 175 ticks all the (jazz) boxes.

Are you still enjoying it?

[Ob Com]

Hi Ob Com, just bringing this thread back because.....well just because I want to look at those pictures again and ask you if the honeymoon is over or are you still in love with the 175 and playing it a lot.

That Gas has stayed with me ever since you posted that pic.

I'm looking for a light weight 16" jazz box and that 175 ticks all the (jazz) boxes.

Are you still enjoying it?

Hi Philco,

yes I am still loving the guitar.

I'm very impressed with the humbuckers gibson have put in this- they sound more "paf-y" than regular 57s, and I wonder if they made a bit more of an effort with this 59 RI, as they did with the RI 330, a sort of sister project, for which they produced low wind p90s.

I love the tight, warm, controlled harmonic richness this guitar gives- its really something.

The bridge pickup is also just wonderful for a blues/rockabilly hack such as myself- its got a lot of bite but is woody and full rather than thin and brittle.

I have played a few 50s and early 60s 175s, and since getting this guitar I have been able to play another one- a 56 with 2 p90s.

It was remarkably close in feel to my reissue, other than a larger neck as you would expect from 56 vs 59.

Are you in the UK? If you are down south you are welcome to come and try it out I'm always up for a guitar hang.

cheers

OC

[hot ford coupe]

Wow, what a great looking instrument. At first, I thought it was a real 50s guitar. Happy NGD. I hope you enjoy it for a long time.

[Hammertone]

...[ ]...Like others have said, I'd love to have it with a P90 (or another single coil PU) to get a bit more clarity in the buttom. But there are plenty of good single coil PUs in humbucker disguise (P90, CC etc.) out there, so that should be manageable even in this edition....

Like this, which Gibson did as a limited run of some sort fairly recently:

[oldane]

Like this, which Gibson did as a limited run of some sort fairly recently:

Yes. Those are genuine dog ear P90s and they belong on a specs faithful reissue. I could have wished they had offered P90s as an option. But from a pure practical standpoint, one of the humbucker shaped P90s would IMHO be more functional because it's dead easy to adjust PU height with a humbucker mount, while it takes shimming to do it with a dog ear P90. It's also easier to swap a PU if one should wish to do so down the line because almost any type of PU is available in humbucker mount, while only P90s comes in dog ear shape.

[Broyale]

Looks much better than any other I have seen so far. What do these things cost ? original (one pickup) PAF equipped models are about 6k US$ nowadays so I assume a ri model is well below that ?

About $4500 new (and used). Premium laminate.