-
The '50s guitars had P90 pickups and very thin tops. These were the most resonant of all the 175s and had the sound and feel of a carved top instrument. Due to issues of top stability, gibson thickened the plywood sometime in the early '60s.
My feeling is that the '60s instruments are overpriced and in '65 or '66 gibson switched from 1 11/16 nut width to 1 9/16 which is REALLY thin. In 1970, the switched back to the 1 11/16 width but they also started making the necks 3pc. This was to make the instrument more rugged since they were hit with a lot of complaints of broken headstocks. In my mind, this did not change the tone so much. So a '70s 175 still has the thinner plywood of the '60s models but is a lot less money.
Around mid '73, the switched to 3pc maple, again to make the neck more rigid. This *DID* change the tone. Whether for the better or not you'll have to decide but to me, the classic 175 tone was not to be had from these instruments.
Sometime in the mid '70s they thickened the plywood again to attempt to circumvent sinking tops due to the weight of the pickups. This also changed the sound and made the guitars heavier. From that point to the present the guitars have had thicker tops. Some gigging musicians like the thicker tops including a few friends of mine who are gigging in NY and tell me that with the thicker tops they are able to play with loud R&B, organ trio and big bands without having to tape the f-holes or stuff the guitars. Basically, feedback is not an issue at all.
Reportedly, the 1959 reissue is lighter and it's reported that it uses the thinner plywood like it's vintage counterpart. I have read nothing official that confirms this and it's only speculation at this point. I'd be curious if it *is* thinner and whether feedback is again an issue.
If you want a plywood guitar that has the resonance of the '50s instruments there are a few options. I know of two but folks can chime in with others. Keep in mind that these instruments do feedback. They also don't have the sound of a classic 175. I believe that the newer 175s still have the classic mid-thunk that is the hallmark of a 175 though they may not have the sweetness of the thinner topped guitars.
Steve Holst makes a very thin, hand made plywood guitar with an extremely resonant top.
Tom Painter made some great plywood guitars with an extremely resonant top. I did a video of one of them and you can hear the resonance of these guitars. Unfortunately, he's no longer in business.
-
01-22-2014 12:40 PM
-
The 1959 VOS 175 is certainly not feedback-proof. The first day I got my 175 I sat in with a band that had a loud drummer. At the volume I was forced to play at in this circumstance, my guitar was constantly on the verge of feedback. The amp I was using was not mine. In all fairness, if I had my own amp that I am familiar with, I may have been able to dial out the feedback.
-
Very informative timeline Jack. Oddly enough, I'm leaning heavily in Steve Holst's direction. For my application, solo guitar, I'm wanting that resonance and airiness. My research is indicating there's not many builders doing a laminate. Wait times as well.
-
Here's an option, get a cheap L4C, like my carved top 1949 L4C and then devalue it by cutting a big hole for the pickup of your choice.
-
That's cool but I want and like the sound of the 175. If you want a 175 sound, only a 175 will get it. Despite some of the politically correct speak around here of "what is a 175" and "The 175 specs have changed so much that even gibson can't make one" , well - there's a definitive 175 tone and you don't get it from the eastman or any of the other supposed 175 lookalikes including the boutique ones that I've tried, sadowsk JH, Painter, Holst, etc.
There's something about the construction and the plywood and the neck joint and the materials that just give it a mid-thunk that's unique.
I once had a heritage 550. It had the mid-thunk that I like but it was nasally and affected in some way that the gibson was not. Hard to know why that was. Was the plywood different? Neck materials? Top that was barely arched? Who knows?!?
One thing I do know is that it's not the pickup. You can put a gibson PAF style pickup in it, or a dimarzio PAF or a lollar or a fralin paf and it basically still sounds the same.
Originally Posted by GuyBoden
Here's an option, get a cheap L4C, like my carved top 1949 L4C and then devalue it by cutting a big hole for the pickup of your choice.
-
you also need to find someone who builds their own plates. Originally Posted by teleboli
-
I think I basically agree on that. Originally Posted by jzucker
I'll add Collings Eastside LC to the list of very resonant laminate jazz guitars.
I have both (2010) Es 175 and Collings Eastside LC, they sound completely different.
The 175's top is thick and the guitar is quite heavy, not much resonant acoustically.
However it plays beautifully when amplified (to my ears, of course).
I think Philco, another forum member here, has both guitars as well, although, I think, an old resonant 175 and slightly different specifications on the Eastside.
-
I'm holding out some hope that the (hopefully soon to be available in the US) Eastman AR380CE will be in the ES-175 sonic ball park.
I saw one at NAMM last year, but only a few were made available in Europe. Similar specs to an AR371CE (Actually AR372CE because it has 2 pick-ups) Flamed Maple top with Maple binding in a Honey Sunburst finish, as well as some of the Pisano appointments (Peghead shape)..frog inlay on tail-piece. It will retail for $1500.
I am going to NAMM later this week so hopefully I will get the inside scoop on availability etc and maybe get to play one a little.
Interestingly, the John Pisano models (AR880CE and AR680CE) have not been showing on the Eastman website for several days. Not at all certain what that means, but maybe they are adding the AR380CE to the Pisano collection.
-
I wish I could find some clips of the collings eastside lc. I found a used one for $4k but I really think the tom painter is a great deal if you can find one. I have a line on 2 of them but i'm tempted to just forgo that route and get a 175.
Would love to hear clips of both of yours.
-
the AR380CE guitars I could see in a google search all had 3pc maple necks. Not the same thing...But who knows, maybe with the close to the neck pickup you'd end up with a great sounding - albeit different from a 175 - guitar. Originally Posted by StevieB
http://www.jazzisten.dk/shop/eastman...john-885p.html
Here's another one. Note the different neck pickup placement but still has the 3pc maple neck.
http://www.citymusik.de/info/jazz-gi...astman-ar380ce
-
Or better still, get one cheaply that's already been hacked, as I was lucky enough to do. Great guitar. Originally Posted by GuyBoden
Here's an option, get a cheap L4C, like my carved top 1949 L4C and then devalue it by cutting a big hole for the pickup of your choice.
However, the L4C sound is poles apart from the 175 clank/ thunk, even though the guitars look similar. I might have trouble differentiating the maple and mahog-necked 175s, but the L4 has an acoustic sweetness that is typically carved-top.
I'd play solo using the L4C, but the ( heavy, thick top, 70s ) 175 is a far more useable combo instrument and seems almost immune to feedback, as jzucker points out. In addition, there's something about a (70s) 175 tone that seems to blend more easily in a band setting; there's a solidity that somehow just sits better in the mix when you hear it played back. Or maybe our ears have become conditioned to 'that' sound. Anyway, it just works IMO.
On maple vs mahog necks, I suspect Kreisberg's guitar is maple, but still sounds like a 175 to me, even thru all the delay etc.
On sinking tops due to pickup weight, I'd suggest that the Norlin nearly-cut-through kerfed braces might have something to do with that.
So, bearing in mind all these iterations of the 175, and accepting that there is a ''classic" 175 sound, which model most represents it? Jim Hall 50s 175? Joe P 90s 175? 70s HB 175? To my ears all 175s I have owned ( early 60s, 70s, 90,s 00s) sounded fairly similar, and very distinct from other models.
Played by others, they sound rather different.
-
As for the Eastside I recorded this little piece some time ago, with a Henriksen 112, but I think Soco (Jostein) has plenty of clips with the Eastside LC.
-
i couldn't find any pix or references to what year his guitar is. Why do you think it's maple? From his tone? Originally Posted by Franz 1997
I do think there is a classic 175 time. I hear the common thunk in Jim Hall's, Herb Ellis', Joe Pass' and Kreisberg's tone.
I would be curious to find out whether he's really using a maple neck 175. The maple neck guitar's going to be heavier too...
-
thanks for posting that. It does have the plywood thunk. I think the painter sounds a bit more resonant but as mentioned, that's not necessarily a good thing with a loud band. Originally Posted by Jazz_175
-
In listening to a couple live shows of Jonathon Kreisberg playing with Lonnie Smith (telluride 2013), playing his 64'(?), I've decided that is the sound I want to go for (I'm looking at 175's). He's able to go from ultra smoky jazz sound that has just enough articulation to slightly overdriven tones. Pretty much as good as it gets IMO. No feedback I can hear. Of course it's the player, but man that's the sound for me. Based on clips alone that Painter guitar has a much different tone.
-
Thanks Jack. Surprised to see 1 11/16" nut width as I've been told the US model would be 1 3/4". Also, you may certainly be correct on the maple neck but couldn't see that info on the two links you posted. Originally Posted by jzucker
-
1964 had solid mahogany neck
-
On the vids where you can get a good look at his usual 175, it's def got a volute and the wider 70s head, and I think that the wood in the truss rod pocket ( no cover) looks light-coloured. Could be wrong, but looks that way. As I said in my post, I couldn't tell from the sound. Originally Posted by jzucker
He may also have a 64 model, but I'm talking about his vids with the 70s Norlin guitar. Autumn in NY, for example.
-
I never said the painter sounded like a 175 and in fact I thought I made it clear that it doesn't. Originally Posted by callouscallus
Regarding feedback, he's playing on a big stage on the opposite side of the drums. It's when you are playing in a small sonic space with bass and drums behind you that feedback becomes a bigger issue.
Where is it listed he plays a '64? I couldn't find that reference.
-
autumn in NY looks like a mahogany neck to me. I'm not seeing the maple there unless he had the neck refinished black or brown. Couldn't quite see the volute for sure... Originally Posted by Franz 1997
-
The maple neck ones - or at least the one I have- are finished in that dark brown stain. I didn't realise it was maple at all until I looked in the truss rod pocket. Originally Posted by jzucker
-
which vid allows you to see the wood in the truss rod cover? I asked him what year his 175 is. I'll let you know what he says.
-
Autumn in NY, about 1. 10. Now I have looked again, it's debatable, but the wood does look lighter. Volute definitely visible though.
I think the point I was trying to make is that, to me, the heavy 70s maple ones still sound like 175s.
I suspect Kreisberg may not care what year it is!!!
-
My recollection is that Kreisberg's 175 is from the early '80s.
-
Every maple neck 175 I've seen has at least a small section in natural near the middle of the neck. There are a bunch of them on gbase and they are all like this unless it's a blonde 175 in which case the neck is unstained.
Reply With Quote
Guitar Amps built into case?
Yesterday, 05:03 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos