-
Which is your preference between the three, and why?
Also, do you prefer the ES-339 (14") or ES-335 (16") body size?
-
03-28-2025 12:11 PM
-
I definitely prefer the 16" body size.
I absolutely love a good Gibson ES-335 (or, especially, ES-345), and prefer them to most of the Ibanez equivalents I've tried...but there's a big caveat:
- not all Gibson ES-335/345 are "good" and the difference between a "typical" one and a "good" one can be significant. And depressing. My philosophy (which also applies to Fender guitars fwiw) is to not make too many generalizations based on model name, and instead base opinions off of individual units. aka Try Before You Buy. And plan on trying a lot of different guitars before finding The One.
- conversely, Ibanez quality and predictability seems much more consistent. The difference between the best Ibanez 335-clone and the worst Ibanez 335-clone I've ever tried were small. If I were lazy, or frugal, or both, I would just get an Ibanez and be done with the searching.
I've never played an Eastman.
-
The Eastman’s shape appears the same as the Gibson. Surprising.
-
16" for me.
I've had an ES335 since 1986 as my main guitar, so I guess I could be said to like it.
But I probably wouldn't buy another one, mostly because of the price.
I've played both Ibanez and Eastman ES335-style guitars but I don't have a strong preference. I rather like mahogany necks, but neither the Ibanez nor the Eastman has one of those. I've liked every Ibanez semihollow I've played, even with the maple/nyatoh neck.
The Ibanez you showed appears to be a full hollowbody rather than a semihollow, because of the trapeze tailpiece.
I'd also look at Comins, D'Angelico (same price range as Eastman), and Epiphone (same price range as Ibanez AS93).
-
Pretty sure that stud-mounted Tune-o-matic bridge requires a solid center block, no?
Originally Posted by dconeill
-
my fully hollow Epiphone Casino has a stud mounted tune-o-matic bridge. The bracing provides enough wood for the studs. Originally Posted by Bob_Ross
-
Not always. Originally Posted by Bob_Ross
It's more the tailpiece than the bridge that needs the solid support. A bridge can be supported by a smallish wood block glued to the underside of the top, whereas a tailpiece, under much more stress, needs a larger support piece. Some otherwise-hollow guitars have a small block that runs from the top to the back to support the stop tailpiece.
-
Originally Posted by supersoul
Wow. Never knew that! I stand corrected. Originally Posted by dconeill
So wait, does a trapeze tailpiece require support also, or just a stop tailpiece? I'm still trying to figure out what you meant when you wrote that the Ibanez "appears to be a full hollowbody rather than a semihollow, because of the trapeze tailpiece." Originally Posted by dconeill
-
Not one of the choices above, but I prefer the Gibson ES336, smaller scale but still packs a punch with great tone, but smaller body for comfort, plus it's real carved top and back, not pressed wood... The other choices are all nice, I've played both, the Eastman and the Ibanez, they sound great too.
Cheers,
Arnie...
-
The Gibson will be best for resale. That should be part (and certainly not all ) of what to consider. I have owned several 335's. All have been easy to sell.
-
The Gibson will indeed be the most economic choice if resale price matters. But when you buy used, with some patience and a bit of homework you can buy either brand without risk of losing serious money.
I’ve played all three and they’re all good, just different. I have owned a Gibson CS 335 but sold it. Still have an Eastman Romeo (be sure to look into that one) and an Ibanez GB10 (ditto).
With Gibson and Eastman a good setup is usually needed whereas a Japanese Ibanez is ready to go.
(PS I sold my CS 335 to finance a PRS 594 Hollowbody II and have never looked back. Try one if you can. Quite different, fully hollow, fabulous.)
-
Here's a picture from inside my Casino. It's looking back towards the controls. In the upper right corner, out of focus, is the bottom of one of the bridge mounting studs, poking thru the support struts. Originally Posted by Bob_Ross
My Casino doesn't have a block between the top and bottom. I was looking into the Ibanez ASR70, which is supposedly fully hollow, but it does have a block between the back and front. Some Casinos do too, evidently. Sometimes the block is called a soundpost, similar to a violin.
It was important to me that my Casino doesn't have a block/soundpost, but that's just me and I don't know if it actually matters. But I like my cheap-ass, soundpost-less, Casino a lot, so there's that!
-
The Gibson because of the way it sounds, I like the upper midrange hump you get. I don't like Japanese guitars like Yamaha's and Ibanezes, well made as they are, for this reason - they sound scooped. Also they tend to be poly finished rather than nitro? Originally Posted by DustinG
Which is your preference between the three, and why?
Also, do you prefer the ES-339 (14") or ES-335 (16") body size?
Not tried the Eastmans. I hear good things.
-
I mean don't people do that anyway? I usually want to put some different string on when I get a new guitar, usually heavier, so you need to adjust the truss rod. Originally Posted by Oscar67
Anyway, yes, the set up on my 335 was appalling when it arrived. Luckily I know how to use the provided Gibson multitool.
Don't mean to be snarky, but I'm constantly surprised that a lot of people - even smart technical people - don't now how to adjust the action and neck on their guitars. I do this all the time, when the weather changes, string gauge, or just because I fancy a higher or lower action that day. I fixed an Epiphone Casino for someone that he thought was a bad guitar because the action was set too low - he hadn't thought to adjust the thumbwheels on the bridge.
-
I do almost everything myself but some aspects of a setup might be better left to a tech, such as properly cutting the nut slots. On almost every new guitar the strings are too high above the first fret and/or snagging in the nut slots.
-
Everything requires support. You don't imagine that a trapeze tailpiece just floats in air, surely? A trapeze tailpiece has an endpiece that goes over the edge of the guitar and is screwed or otherwise affixed to the bottom of the guitar. Inside the guitar, at the bottom part of the side, is a wood block that holds the sides together. The endpiece of the trapeze tailpiece is screwed into that internal block. Originally Posted by Bob_Ross
Think of the stress vectors. The six strings of a guitar tuned to concert pitch exert something like 150 pounds of force at the ends of the strings (varies with string gauge, material, and pitch). The strings are pulling on whatever they're attached to, in the direction of the strings. Whatever they're attached to has to be able to be stable in the face of that much force.
You can imagine the stress vectors on a stop tailpiece - the strings are pulling the tailpiece toward the headstock, and if the stop tailpiece were imbedded in sand it would just rotate out of the sand and be pulled toward the headstock. Whatever the stop tailpiece is mounted in has to be able to withstand that amount of force. In a solid body guitar the wood of the guitar itself is strong enough. The top of a hollowbody guitar, only a few millimeters thick, is not strong enough. Therefore the builder has to put some sort of block inside a hollowbody guitar to sustain the forces involved. Hence you can have a stop tailpiece on a semihollow guitar. (What about an acoustic guitar, you ask? That's what the bracing is for - to distribute the forces involved in a way that won't allow the guitar to tear itself apart.)
A trapeze tailpiece has just as much force to resist, but because of the angles and locations involved the force vectors are manifested differently. For one thing, the pressure point is the butt end of the guitar - some of the force is accommodated by the endpiece of the tailpiece bearing against the body of the guitar as it goes over the edge of the guitar, but most of it is absorbed by the butt and sides of the guitar.
So the stop tailpiece and the trapeze tailpiece both have to be supported in a way that can resist the amount of force being applied, but the directions of the force are somewhat different and the construction of the guitar has evolved over time to be able to withstand that force.
And as far as "what [I] meant by "... the ibanez appears to be a full hollowbody ...", contemporary manufacturers tend not to use trapeze tailpieces on semihollow guitars, they use stop tailpieces. Almost (but not quite) univerally, if a guitar uses a trapeze tailpiece it's fully hollow. (Tailpiece vibrato systems like certain Bigsbys and Gibson Vibrolas add even more complexity to the topic; I didn't and won't describe those here.)
-
I have a custom shop 335 in cherry (prettiest guitar ever), an Ibanez am200, and 4 Eastman semi hollows - a T59/V (335 like) a T64 (casino like) a Romeo (its own thing) and a T184 (339 like).
I like all of them for different reasons but if I had to choose between them I’d take any of the eastmans over the Gibson or the Ibanez. The Ibanez is built super solid and has a lovely soulful sound; the Gibson has mega mojo and probably the best of the bunch for rock; but the eastmans have that handmade thing going on, comfortable necks, and great pickups Seymour Duncan, Bareknuckle, Lollar etc). They look the business and they just sound great - love all of them.
-
I'd take a nice 335...unless I was paying for it. In which case I would take my Heritage 535, which is pretty darn close and a fabulous guitar.
-
Do you have a favorite out of those 4 Eastmans? Do you prefer the tone of the T184 to the Ibanez AM200? Originally Posted by bustromo
-
"ES" style can be pretty broad and by definition includes both hollow body and semi-hollow body instruments. In any event, I greatly prefer the way the Gibsons sound. I own two ES 335s (Shaws and Custombuckers), an ES 175 (T Tops), and an ES 275 (MHS). They all have a commonality in tone and feel that is hard to describe but very much present for me. I have not played an Ibanez, Eastman, or even Heritage of any size that gives me those intangibles.
-
this is something in my experience that is completely overblown. are there issues with consistency? sure...more variance than ibanez for sure. but quality? ive only seen true gibson wrecks on the internet...never in my decades of running racks. i agree you gotta try before you buy with gibson, but that's still the easy route to go if budget isn't a consideration. to your point, despite having the budget for a custom shop 335, the store's regular USA 335 was the one i walked out with about six years ago. Originally Posted by Bob_Ross
if you love a 335, a compromise aint gonna scratch that itch.
-
I think the Gibson feels like home to most people,especially the 16” body size. I’ve owned several variations including 2 ES-339’s.
They are both excellent choices,and the 2 favorites were a Historic 1958 ES-335 and a lowly ES-339 Studio. I did replace the pickups in the 339. But I preferred the larger neck shape of the ‘58 Historic.
The other brands are excellent instruments and perhaps a bit more precise. But sometimes that doesn’t always feel the best. It’s really subjective and each of us have different tastes.
-
if tone is the only consideration, I'd rate the T59/V highest, though its very much an electric blues/rock guitar which can do jazz rather than the other way round. It has a particularly sweet mid-range. those seymour duncans may be a less boutique-y option than the lollars but to my ear they sound better - on this guitar at any rate. That said, the bareknuckle humbuckers on the T184 sound awesome too, and the T184 is a much lighter, ergonomically more comfortable guitar. The T59/V is quite heavy. The Romeo is very comfortable and lightweight and its the most resonant acoustically - its one those really "alive" guitars. Like the T184, its more of a jazz guitar. The filtertrons have a slightly more aggressive sound (higher output I'd guess) but when you strum a chord the note separation on the Romeo is amazing and much clearer than any other guitar I own. I'm not sure how you engineer that in a guitar/pickup combination but it's a real thing! The T64 as you'd expect from the casino like construction and the lollar P90s is very much a rock and blues machine but with a bit more twang and snap than the T59/V. Rich Kettner on Youtube shows you can play jazz on it too.
I'd be loth to part with any of them!
I sold my Gibson ES335 recently. I found I picked up the Eastmans much more often. the 335 in cherry was a lovely object but I could never quite bond with the slim neck (1961) and slightly honky unpotted custombuckers - my pick made a tapping sound every time it knocked against the pickup cover and that drove me nuts sometimes.
-
My thought is that each of these companies build very nice "ES"style guitars. And in order to widen their respective markets, offer them in a variety of styles, features, price-points and quality based on their desired target-market. In my view it may simply come down to one's personal preference.
-
My only issue with Eastmans is the wide fretboard/nut feels pretty different than guitars I’m used to. Originally Posted by bustromo
Reply With Quote
Raezers Edge NY 8 in Canada
Today, 01:01 PM in For Sale