Best single pickup ES-175 variant?

[chris32895]

So, here's a bit of a fun question for you all. I have a nice workhorse guitar and am now in the position where I want something nicer. I really really want a single pickup ES-175 of some kind. I play unplugged a LOT and my main guitar influence would have to be Pat Metheny. Plugged in, I like an archtop to have a fat sound. Unplugged I am not picky on the sound and don't need it to be loud but I do want it to be pleasing.

I am in a bit of a unique position for myself at this time as I am able to purchase any of these guitars:

1. Gibson ES-175 '59 VOS (single pickup, sunburst)
2. Gibson ES-165 (black)
3. Archtop Tribute AT105 (blonde)

All are within my budget but there is some variance in price (to me it is negligible, I simply want the best guitar possible). Of course, these all have to be bought sight-unseen. As far as I know these guitars differ in that #1 will be lighter and more acoustic sounding but #2 and #3 I'm not sure what the difference will be. I will say I am leaning towards Gibson in any case. #2 exhibits perhaps the most wear of all these guitars. All that aside, I thought it wound be interesting to compare and wanted to see what the forum had to say.

[andrew]

May I add one more suggestion to the list? A vintage '50s version with a single P90.

I've seen those go for as little as $4,000 as of late. If you want a fat sound, it doesn't get much better than that. And for the acoustic sound, modern laminates can't hold a candle to the ones from the '50s. I can't imagine a better ES-175 than the originals.

[Rob MacKillop]

Any of those are good, but if you are into Metheny, why not consider an Ibanez Metheny model, the 120 or 200?

[chris32895]

Any of those are good, but if you are into Metheny, why not consider an Ibanez Metheny model, the 120 or 200?

I've gone through a lot of Ibanez models, specifically PM models (two PM20's, one PM35, and one PM100) and for some reason could not bond with them. I found the Gibson's livelier and more unique and warm sounding - it's a bit hard to explain but Gibson guitars just have a sound to them. Also, the ES-175 body shape specifically is super comfortable to me with the florentine cutaway. I never fully got along with the Ibanez PM/FG style body shape.

[chris32895]

May I add one more suggestion to the list? A vintage '50s version with a single P90.

I've seen those go for as little as $4,000 as of late. If you want a fat sound, it doesn't get much better than that. And for the acoustic sound, modern laminates can't hold a candle to the ones from the '50s. I can't imagine a better ES-175 than the originals.

Aren't the 50's models lighter built, like the '59 VOS? Wouldn't that lend itself to an airer/brigther sound rather than fat? Not purposely trying to contradict you, just wondering I guess if it's possible to have a guitar that is light and airy sounding acoustically that is then simultaneously fat when plugged in.

[jads57]

So some other considerations? Neck shape and width,laminate type construction? Weight, pickup itself?

Ideally trying as many until it Feels and Sounds Right!

[caue amaral]

Of the three options, the VO59 is clearly the closest to the design, style, and construction of the 175 that Metheny used. It would be my choice anyway... I've played a few side-by-side with "standard" models and they were always better, more resonant, and with the tone you'd expect from a 175 based on the most classic references.

[Stringswinger]

Get the 175

If you get one of the others, you will still want a 175 and will get one up the road. Take the shortcut and be content.

[andrew]

Aren't the 50's models lighter built, like the '59 VOS? Wouldn't that lend itself to an airer/brigther sound rather than fat? Not purposely trying to contradict you, just wondering I guess if it's possible to have a guitar that is light and airy sounding acoustically that is then simultaneously fat when plugged in.

Yeah, I know it seems like an oxymoron, but it really is that way. I think some of it might have to do with the vintage P90, which is such a fat sounding pickup. And there is certainly some warmness imparted by the old, well seasoned woods, including that Brazilian rosewood.

I may be biased because I have a ‘55 dual P90 ES-175D, but I really can’t imagine a better 175 out there and it sounds like exactly what you’re describing.

[ewall]

Heritage H575 with a floating single pickup?

[gitman]

Last fall I picked up a mid 60's Gibson ES-125C , it's the deep-body version with a single P-90 pickup. After a general setup, re-strung with a set of medium Chromes (0.13 E, 0.17 B) and an extra shim under the pickup this guitar delivers just that : acoustically it sounds balanced with excellent midrange projection and when plugged it the vintage P-90 pickup really shines. The electric sound is fat and warm with the known bit of extra "Air" imparted by the single-coil pickup while the 16" wide plywood body of 60 years is alive + resonant and adds to the dynamic voice of this guitar. Whether or not the rosewood fingerboard has any audible part in this equation is beyond me but YMMV. The guitar was really affordable despite its vintage and the still un-molested electronics which is mostly due to the fact that many players shy away from the narrow fingerboard width these mid 60's models all share. It's my luck that my left hand has no issues with the smaller real-estate in the first 2 or 3 positions. While the deep-body versions are not as common as their thin-body brothers these ES125 are def. worth considering- after all, it's just a trimmed-down version of the ES-175 ....

[garybaldy]

So, here's a bit of a fun question for you all. I have a nice workhorse guitar and am now in the position where I want something nicer. I really really want a single pickup ES-175 of some kind. I play unplugged a LOT and my main guitar influence would have to be Pat Metheny. Plugged in, I like an archtop to have a fat sound. Unplugged I am not picky on the sound and don't need it to be loud but I do want it to be pleasing.

I am in a bit of a unique position for myself at this time as I am able to purchase any of these guitars:

1. Gibson ES-175 '59 VOS (single pickup, sunburst)
2. Gibson ES-165 (black)
3. Archtop Tribute AT105 (blonde)

All are within my budget but there is some variance in price (to me it is negligible, I simply want the best guitar possible). Of course, these all have to be bought sight-unseen. As far as I know these guitars differ in that #1 will be lighter and more acoustic sounding but #2 and #3 I'm not sure what the difference will be. I will say I am leaning towards Gibson in any case. #2 exhibits perhaps the most wear of all these guitars. All that aside, I thought it wound be interesting to compare and wanted to see what the forum had to say.

A 2 pickup 175 will give you a fat sound!

[deacon Mark]

get the 175 that makes it only 2 decision between the 2 and really I think the 59 VOS is the clear winner. Now that I see the 165 is black it makes it even easier buy the 175 period.

[wfarr]

Get that ‘59 VOS! They’re truly wonderful guitars. I love my 2-pickup one.

[213Cobra]

My vote is for a Gen 1 ES-165. I have two, a '91 and a '92. Acoustically, both are surprisingly projecting, sensitive and loud even though that's not their design intent. Plugged in, the single 490R pickup is harmonically rich and fat / phat, although not as "dark" as a lot of two-pickup 175s. But then, I've never encountered a 175 that I like as much as my Gen 1 165s. Also, those '90s 165s usually have robust necks. The Gen 2 165 with the BJB floater pickup is acoustically brighter and dynamically more responsive than a Gen 1, but plugged in won't have the same fat sound of the inset 490R.

Based on what I see and hear on and from my ATC 150CC, I'd have confidence in the build quality, musicality and articulation of the AT105 but I'd be sceptical it will intrinsically sound fat enough for you plugged in, even with a pickup change.

I still don't have any idea what "thunk" is, so never went looking for it. People here will mostly point you to the 175. Just not me.

Phil

[floatingpickup]

My vote is for a Gen 1 ES-165. I have two, a '91 and a '92. Acoustically, both are surprisingly projecting, sensitive and loud even though that's not their design intent. Plugged in, the single 490R pickup is harmonically rich and fat / phat, although not as "dark" as a lot of two-pickup 175s. But then, I've never encountered a 175 that I like as much as my Gen 1 165s. Also, those '90s 165s usually have robust necks. The Gen 2 165 with the BJB floater pickup is acoustically brighter and dynamically more responsive than a Gen 1, but plugged in won't have the same fat sound of the inset 490R.

Based on what I see and hear on and from my ATC 150CC, I'd have confidence in the build quality, musicality and articulation of the AT105 but I'd be sceptical it will intrinsically sound fat enough for you plugged in, even with a pickup change.

I still don't have any idea what "thunk" is, so never went looking for it. People here will mostly point you to the 175. Just not me.

Phil

I bought my first ES-175 over 50 years ago and I have owned a few different versions over the years. I played 175’s on gigs for most of my life. The one that I kept is an original ‘59 with double paf’s, and it is a great guitar. Having said that, I had an ES-165 (built-in humbucker version) for a number of years, and I really liked that guitar too. It had a neck similar to my ‘59 and the 490R sounded fantastic. At the time, a used 165 was a bargain, despite it being virtually the same guitar with upgraded gold hardware and beautifully flamed maple. Not sure what they go for these days, but I don’t think you can go wrong with a 165.
Keith

[davang55]

Any of those are good, but if you are into Metheny, why not consider an Ibanez Metheny model, the 120 or 200?

I personally love the Ibanez necks on their arch tops and thin line arch tops I get along with them very well.

[2bornot2bop]

I have one. It’s not a named brand. But it’s got the tone!

Made in Korea of all places!

[Herbie]

I don't know what is The Best Single Pickup ES-175 variant, but after some mistakes I know what is best for me.

I too started to look for a fat sound. Being unexperienced I bought an ES-165 BUT with the floater. Thought it was prettier.

It was nice to play, but no fat sound. I changed many pickups in it, but being a floater none of them satisfied my ears.

Then a 1-PU VOS 1959 came close to me so I sold the ES-165 and grabbed the famous reissue. After a while I realised again that it was nice to play, but no fat sound. Again I changed many pickups in it (MANY, over 20!), but none of them had the sound I was seeking, it was always "too acoustic".

Then I found a two pickup ES-175 from 1984 (the mahogany era) and the fat sound was there!

For my surprise I found about same time also a 1954 Reissue with P-90 pickups and it has the fat sound too. So I sold the 1PU VOS 1959 and have never looked back.

Sometimes I think that if I had bought the humbucker version of ES-165 at the first place I had found my sound at once and saved some money.

But sometime I think that it is just the two pickups that make the ES-175 sound fat.

Metheny's ES-175 was two pickup model after all – although he took the bridge pu away. But the hole stayed!

Good luck for Your quest!

[John A.]

I don't know what is The Best Single Pickup ES-175 variant, but after some mistakes I know what is best for me.

I too started to look for a fat sound. Being unexperienced I bought an ES-165 BUT with the floater. Thought it was prettier.

It was nice to play, but no fat sound. I changed many pickups in it, but being a floater none of them satisfied my ears.

Then a 1-PU VOS 1959 came close to me so I sold the ES-165 and grabbed the famous reissue. After a while I realised again that it was nice to play, but no fat sound. Again I changed many pickups in it (MANY, over 20!), but none of them had the sound I was seeking, it was always "too acoustic".

Then I found a two pickup ES-175 from 1984 (the mahogany era) and the fat sound was there!

For my surprise I found about same time also a 1954 Reissue with P-90 pickups and it has the fat sound too. So I sold the 1PU VOS 1959 and have never looked back.

Sometimes I think that if I had bought the humbucker version of ES-165 at the first place I had found my sound at once and saved some money.

But sometime I think that it is just the two pickups that make the ES-175 sound fat.

Metheny's ES-175 was two pickup model after all – although he took the bridge pu away. But the hole stayed!

Good luck for Your quest!

Metheny's guitar actually was a single-pickup 175, and the second pickup was a modification he had done. He decided he didn't like it, took the pickup out and had the hole covered up (for a while with duct tape, later with a piece of wood). Most of the recordings of it (maybe all of them?) are with one pickup and the covered hole. Jim Hall's and Herb Ellis's 175's both had single pickups and fat sounds (and started out with with P90s before being modified humbuckers). I've also heard plenty of people play fat sounding single pickup 175's and 165's. I have a single pick-up sort-of copy of a 175 (Seventy Seven Hawk Jazz) that sounds pretty fat to me.

So, I don't think the configuration precludes it. It might be true that certain eras of production are in general more or less acoustic sounding than others, but I think overall it probably comes down as much to different individual guitars sounding somewhat different and perceptions of eras being influenced by the samples people have tried. There are countless posts/threads here saying things to that effect.

[Herbie]

Metheny's guitar actually was a single-pickup 175, and the second pickup was a modification he had done. He decided he didn't like it, took the pickup out and had the hole covered up (for a while with duct tape, later with a piece of wood). Most of the recordings of it (maybe all of them?) are with one pickup and the covered hole. Jim Hall's and Herb Ellis's 175's both had single pickups and fat sounds (and started out with with P90s before being modified humbuckers). I've also heard plenty of people play fat sounding single pickup 175's and 165's. I have a single pick-up sort-of copy of a 175 (Seventy Seven Hawk Jazz) that sounds pretty fat to me.

So, I don't think the configuration precludes it. It might be true that certain eras of production are in general more or less acoustic sounding than others, but I think overall it probably comes down as much to different individual guitars sounding somewhat different and perceptions of eras being influenced by the samples people have tried. There are countless posts/threads here saying things to that effect.

Thanks, I didn’t know or remember the story of PM’s ES-175.

It's comforting to hear that there are other guitarists too who don’t hesitate to mod their precious instruments to achieve batter art!

[Stringswinger]

Metheny's guitar actually was a single-pickup 175, and the second pickup was a modification he had done. He decided he didn't like it, took the pickup out and had the hole covered up (for a while with duct tape, later with a piece of wood). Most of the recordings of it (maybe all of them?) are with one pickup and the covered hole. Jim Hall's and Herb Ellis's 175's both had single pickups and fat sounds (and started out with with P90s before being modified humbuckers). I've also heard plenty of people play fat sounding single pickup 175's and 165's. I have a single pick-up sort-of copy of a 175 (Seventy Seven Hawk Jazz) that sounds pretty fat to me.

So, I don't think the configuration precludes it. It might be true that certain eras of production are in general more or less acoustic sounding than others, but I think overall it probably comes down as much to different individual guitars sounding somewhat different and perceptions of eras being influenced by the samples people have tried. There are countless posts/threads here saying things to that effect.

It is true that both Jim Hall's and Herb Ellis' 175's started out with a P-90. Herb had a Gibson Humbucker installed (perhaps Forum member TRM who owns Herb's 175 can tell us exactly which Gibson Humbucker it is?). Jim Hall had Jimmy D'Aquisto install a Guild Humbucker (an early one made in New Jersey, not one of the later ones made by Duncan) in his 175 and at the same time removed the Brazilian Rosewood fretboard and replaced it with an Ebony fretboard.

I had a 1967 single pickup 175 that had a T-top humbucker and was too bright for my taste. I could not get the warm tones of Jim Hall or Herb Ellis with that guitar. Perhaps it was that particular guitar? Perhaps it was that pickup? I had a student who bought an early ES-165 with the built-in humbucker (which was a Gibson 490R IIRC) and it had a beautiful, warm tone.

My opinion is that regardless of brand, model or electronics supplied, some guitars are warm sounding, and some guitars are bright sounding because every piece of wood is different. And that is OK because some cats like the warm sound and others prefer the bright sound. It does make buying guitars sight unseen a bit of a gamble for certain.

[garybaldy]

It is true that both Jim Hall's and Herb Ellis' 175's started out with a P-90. Herb had a Gibson Humbucker installed (perhaps Forum member TRM who owns Herb's 175 can tell us exactly which Gibson Humbucker it is?). Jim Hall had Jimmy D'Aquisto install a Guild Humbucker (an early one made in New Jersey, not one of the later ones made by Duncan) in his 175 and at the same time removed the Brazilian Rosewood fretboard and replaced it with an Ebony fretboard.

I had a 1967 single pickup 175 that had a T-top humbucker and was too bright for my taste. I could not get the warm tones of Jim Hall or Herb Ellis with that guitar. Perhaps it was that particular guitar? Perhaps it was that pickup? I had a student who bought an early ES-165 with the built-in humbucker (which was a Gibson 490R IIRC) and it had a beautiful, warm tone.

My opinion is that regardless of brand, model or electronics supplied, some guitars are warm sounding, and some guitars are bright sounding because every piece of wood is different. And that is OK because some cats like the warm sound and others prefer the bright sound. It does make buying guitars sight unseen a bit of a gamble for certain.

I have the 490r and t ( not the 498t) in an SG! Lovely pups.

[ThatRhythmMan]

It is true that both Jim Hall's and Herb Ellis' 175's started out with a P-90. Herb had a Gibson Humbucker installed (perhaps Forum member TRM who owns Herb's 175 can tell us exactly which Gibson Humbucker it is?). Jim Hall had Jimmy D'Aquisto install a Guild Humbucker (an early one made in New Jersey, not one of the later ones made by Duncan) in his 175 and at the same time removed the Brazilian Rosewood fretboard and replaced it with an Ebony fretboard.

I had a 1967 single pickup 175 that had a T-top humbucker and was too bright for my taste. I could not get the warm tones of Jim Hall or Herb Ellis with that guitar. Perhaps it was that particular guitar? Perhaps it was that pickup? I had a student who bought an early ES-165 with the built-in humbucker (which was a Gibson 490R IIRC) and it had a beautiful, warm tone.

My opinion is that regardless of brand, model or electronics supplied, some guitars are warm sounding, and some guitars are bright sounding because every piece of wood is different. And that is OK because some cats like the warm sound and others prefer the bright sound. It does make buying guitars sight unseen a bit of a gamble for certain.

The Herb Ellis ES-175’s P90 was replaced with an early Gibson Pat # (pre-T-top) humbucker, as best I’ve been able to tell it was done in about 1963-4.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[John A.]

Thanks, I didn’t know or remember the story of PM’s ES-175.

It's comforting to hear that there are other guitarists too who don’t hesitate to mod their precious instruments to achieve batter art!

Agreed, though I'm not willing to go as far as replacing a strap button with a toothbrush through the tailpiece.