The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Posts 26 to 50 of 56
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    I have an '06 175 and it definitely feels heavy, but not so much so as to be distracting. I also have an Eric Johnson Strat outfitted with SD humbuckers that is light as a feather. I find myself playing my strat all the time. And yes, I play jazz on my strat through a Polytone MB V.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    tgee, Just order an Eastman Jazz 16 from Guitar n Jazz, how do you like it. Been playing a heavier guitar and after some time it kills my shoulder and neck. Seems like it will offer good tone and playability. How about action and feel of the neck.

    Thanks, Joe

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    Hi Joe,

    My Eastman Jazz Elite from GnJ is great! It is light weight, and with a carved top it sounds great acoustically. I'm not a jazz guitarist, although I'm trying to learn some stuff, but for me it's easy to play and sounds good. I'm more accustomed to playing acoustic dreadnaught-style guitars which is still more comfortable to me, but that's because I've played them for so long.

    Tom

  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    If this helps, my '70 175 (with two humbuckers) is 3.1kg and my '50 (with one P90) is 2.6kg. My '54 Harmony H62, which is similar in size and has two P13 pickups, is 3.05kg. Soundwise, the H62 is brighter sounding than the 175's, and the '50 is more woody sounding than either of the others. Anyone considering a 175 should probably also consider the significant change in neck shape from '60 on. For me, the 50's models have much better necks.

    Bill

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    My '67 ES-175DN is about 2.5Kg.
    Last edited by kawa; 12-26-2010 at 11:24 PM.

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    My clone comes in just under 6 lbs. Don't see a reason why a professionally made instrument would need to be heavier.

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    GIBSON ES-175D DETAILS:
    Age: According to an online serial number chart, this guitar was made in 1979.
    Maker: Gibson Inc., Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA
    Markings: The number 72859037 and MADE IN U.S.A is stamped into the back of the headstock. There is a rectangular white, black & orange paper label inside that says MODEL ES-175D / GIBSON INC., KALAMAZOO, MICHIGAN U.S.A.
    Materials: The body is laminated maple, the neck is 3-piece solid maple, and the fingerboard is rosewood.
    Overall Length: The overall length is 40-5/8”.
    Lower Bout Width: The lower bout is 15-7/8” across.
    Nut Width: The nut measures the standard 1-11/16”.
    Scale Length: Scale length appears to 24-5/8”.
    String Height: At the 12th fret the string height is a very low 5/64” on the low E-string, and this guitar plays like butter!
    Weight: This guitar weighs 7 pounds and 3 ounces.
    Last edited by kawa; 12-26-2010 at 11:17 PM.

  9. #33

    User Info Menu

    That looks almost NOS. Nice!
    I want one!




    Quote Originally Posted by tgee
    Thanks all for replies to this thread. I finally decided to pull the trigger and picked up a 1953 ES-175. So far, I'm really happy I did! Now, I just need to pair it up with a good amp (I'm following other threads on this), and learn how to play it the way it deserves .


  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    Wow!

    Quote Originally Posted by tgee
    Thanks all for replies to this thread. I finally decided to pull the trigger and picked up a 1953 ES-175. So far, I'm really happy I did! Now, I just need to pair it up with a good amp (I'm following other threads on this), and learn how to play it the way it deserves .


  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by tgee
    Thanks all for replies to this thread. I finally decided to pull the trigger and picked up a 1953 ES-175. So far, I'm really happy I did! Now, I just need to pair it up with a good amp (I'm following other threads on this), and learn how to play it the way it deserves .
    Congratulations! That's a beautiful guitar. I'm sure you'll be glad you got her.

    Bill

  12. #36

    User Info Menu

    Congrats! Did you get that for a decent price???? The tailpiece and the pick guard look new!

  13. #37

    User Info Menu

    You sure the tp is new? Hard to find the diamond TPs now .. mostly zig zags.

    I noticed the bound PG but kept my mouth shut.. I am soooo jealous.

  14. #38

    User Info Menu

    Hmm got me thinking what mine weigh, for what its worth.

    2.2kg Maton Messiah flatop
    2.9Kg fully carved Gibson Johnny Smith 1966 17inch
    4.2Kg Fully Carved Gibson Super 400. 1990 18 inch

  15. #39

    User Info Menu

    A little late but I just got a scale today.

    1996 ES165: 3.16Kg
    1964 ES125: 2.65Kg

    I know neither are ES175s but they are at least in the same ballpark.

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    my 1970 weighs about 8lbs.

  17. #41

    User Info Menu

    i really wanted to like the newer Steve Howe 175 i played because its the only newer model that doesnt have a flame top. but the second i picked it up i was like "nope". strummed one chord and i just felt like "why does gibson do this?" they sound okay when they are plugged in, but there is no acoustic quality to the amplified sound like there is with a 50s-70s 175. its almost like you might as well be playing a Les Paul. the 50s ones in particular are amazing. im jealous of that pic...congrats.

  18. #42

    User Info Menu

    the 50s ones are very light and resonant but my '70s one has the '60s pat metheny vibe.

  19. #43

    User Info Menu

    again.. I know I am out of my league comparing things but..

    When I got my 125 it was SSOOOO light and airy sounding.. my 165 went in the case.. after a month it was like "Ok.. no point in keeping the 165"..

    Then about 6 weeks ago someone here asked me about the 165. The 125 honeymoon was over so I put a new set of strings on both. End result: I am selling the 125.

    There is nothing wrong with either guitar.. but the 165 has a fuller rounder bottom. Not as loud acoustically but 175 style guitars never sound great unplugged. The 165 has a thicker neck as well. Both have crappy hardware (just some is crappy american.. the other is crappy chinese).

    The 125 has brazillian bridge and FB which is cool to have. I cant tell the difference but it means that either the value will go through the roof because it is rare and desirable OR its value will drop because I can only sell it within Canada (CITES)

    Deep down I am a 17 in guy (although I played a couple of 18 ins at the montreal guitar show.. nice but not within my grasp at this moment). Will hopefully pick up an ES150 and then unload the 125. Then I will NEVER HAVE GAS AGAIN!!!

  20. #44

    User Info Menu

    I've got a 175 that is less than 2 yrs. old but I would'nt know how to go about weighing it.It seems light compared to some of my other guitars.

  21. #45

    User Info Menu

    Love this thread, but wonder if the any of the 175s described in this thread have lightened up since the date of the OP's original post.

  22. #46

    User Info Menu

    My 1995 Gibson es175 in blonde (highly stripped maple) is 7.7 lbs...

  23. #47

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by SamBooka
    Will hopefully pick up an ES150 and then unload the 125. Then I will NEVER HAVE GAS AGAIN!!!
    [QUOTE=BigDaddyLoveHandles;158270]

    funny thing... I DID get an es150...
    It came from eBay and the seller didn't mention the repro bridge and one of
    Braces got knocked off completely in shipping and really hated the pre 1961 ffrets sent it back and it was a long painful claim with USPS and I think I lost maybe 125$ on the whole deal
    but the emotional distress was enough to cure my guitar gas COMPLETELY!
    sure an early 90s 135 would be fun....or an early 70s strat ... Sunburst tele thin line I with a bound body would be cool to make an esquire out of but the I say nah...don't need it...not worth the hassle

    gas is in remission

  24. #48

    User Info Menu

    Out of curiosity I put my guitars on the kitchen scale and these are the results:

    - 1957 ES-175 with one humbucker: 2700g (6 pounds)

    - Eastman T146 thinline, also with one humbucker: slightly less than 2300g (5 pounds)
    Last edited by rgiaccio; 02-17-2013 at 07:31 PM.

  25. #49

    User Info Menu

    Summary from this thread, the older 175's are lighter, "IF" they were all measured on a postal scale, and have the same number of pups. The Kilo conversions done online.

    My 1995 175D (postal scale) 7 lb 2 oz. (3.26K)
    07 7.27 lbs ( from 3350 K)
    79 7lb 3 oz (3.31K)
    57 6.0 lb (2.72K)
    50 5.73 lb (from 2.6k)
    53 5.05 lb (from 2.3k)
    67 5.51 lb (from 2.5k)

    So does it really matter? Dunno, don't care my 175 is fine :-)

  26. #50

    User Info Menu

    I haven't measured the thickness of the back but, the top of my ES-165 is very thick. Probably why they are a little on the heavy side these days. I would guess the older guitars had thinner plates. I'm sure these changes probably came about to stiffen them up. A thinner set of plates would surely sound a lot nicer acoustically, probably even lugged in. They could have a greater tendency to invite feedback.