1959 Gibson ES-175 VOS vs 1982 Gibson ES-175

**TonyD** · 04-19-2014, 06:18 PM

DB..

Thanks for the comparison between the 1959 VOS and your 80s hog version!!! How was the neck on the 1959 VOS? Was it very chunky or just right? I know that is subjective, but it's always nice to hear someone's opinion that has played many of these guitars.

-Tony

**jzucker** · 04-19-2014, 06:20 PM

Originally Posted by roger taylor

Your inexperience gives you the same clarity of an inexperienced doctor. Sure, you can render an opinion, but it's worth about the same. Actually, if you aren't regularly gigging jazz dates, you're more like a medical student.

Agreed. To take the analogy further, my inexperience gives me clarity over someone who's been a doing the same mundane spinal surgery for 20 years. I guess I'm in the wrong business.

In terms of plywood is plywood, that's just *TOTAL* ignorance. First of all, a guitar's top is just one part of the equation of what a guitar sounds like. No ibanez guitar and in fact no guitar of any kind has managed to get the sound of the '60s 175s. Though many have tried (Holst, Painter, Sadowsky), the truth is that no $5000 archtop has managed to nail the sound of the '60s 175 exemplified by the tone that Joe Pass got on Django or Joy Spring.

I have owned a zillion archtops including a '48 super 400, a '60s L5, numerous eastmans, Guilds, a Holst, Sadowsky, Painter, numerous Heritage guitars and a vast number of others and not a single one even comes close to a '60s 175.

They were all great guitars in their own right but to dismiss a guitar based on the construction of its top and to ignore the 5 decades of brilliant music played on that guitar is ridiculous.

Dutchbopper · 04-19-2014, 06:25 PM

Thanks for clearing this up Jack. I know you have dealt with this subject a lot.

DB

**MaxPicks** · 04-19-2014, 07:35 PM

If only it had a pointy headstock .....

**Patrick2** · 04-19-2014, 09:42 PM

Originally Posted by jzucker

The reason the internet is the great equalizer is that a guy with a sofa guitar collection who plays a 1/2 hour a day can argue with guys who have dedicated their lives to practicing and playing jazz.

That's a rather unfair assessment. Also, argue is a harsh word. Debate is a much friendlier word.

I have more than enough guitars to fill quite a few sofas. I very seldom find myself able to devote 1/2 hour a day to playing/practicing. Sometimes when I do have more than a half hour to play . . . the rigors of the day are such that I really don't want to do it. But, that doesn't make me an ass-hole unworthy of participating on this forum. Generalizations suck!! We all don't fall into that catagory.

Broyal's comments weere his own. No one's but his own. Don't generalize.

**Patrick2** · 04-19-2014, 09:43 PM

Originally Posted by MaxPicks

If only it had a pointy headstock .....

Yeah . . . I got your pointy head stock . . . right here.

**Philco** · 04-20-2014, 12:20 AM

Originally Posted by Broyale

Actually, lemme clarify my statement. I don't like the 175. The epitome of hype over substance. It is the most overrated, overhyped guitar in jazz, hands down. I don't care who played what. Joe Pass had a drug problem, too...should I indulge that also? Tonally similar to a school desk with strings on it. Construction-wise, no different than a mid-range Artcore. If I must apologize to anyone, its to the Artcore guys---I really like those guitars and appreciate the value they represent for the cost. The 175, on the other hand, is really just an overpriced Artcore, when in reality, Ibanez pretty much owns Gibson when it comes to the laminate archtops these days.

Stone him!! Stone him!!

all he said was Jehovah

**Engine Swap** · 04-20-2014, 10:13 AM

Thanks for the interesting read DB. I've never played a 175, but would like to try one out someday.

**iim7V7IM7** · 04-20-2014, 10:42 AM

Guys, have a little faith in the readers/participants of this forum to see "signal" through "noise".

I would also concur with Patrick that hobbyist (non-pro) player such as myself can provide valid contributory input just as easily as a veteran pro can provide poor input here. Like most things in life, it comes down to the individual and not a "category".

All of this being said, if I was a touring, gigging guitarist, without question, the guitar that I would take to clubs would be a laminate guitar for a multitude of reasons. Some of my favorite all time plugged in tones have come from laminates with top-mounted PAFs.

My $.02

P.S.

i never play on my sofa...:-)

Dutchbopper · 04-20-2014, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by TonyD

DB..

Thanks for the comparison between the 1959 VOS and your 80s hog version!!! How was the neck on the 1959 VOS? Was it very chunky or just right? I know that is subjective, but it's always nice to hear someone's opinion that has played many of these guitars.

-Tony

It was not very chunky but chunkier than on my 175. It was a good neck.

DB

**yebdox** · 04-20-2014, 11:24 AM

Guys, can we just try ignoring the comments that we find offensive? So much of this thread has been derailed by that left-field comment, when we could have easily continued with discussion germane to the subject.

The Internet is still pretty amazing, in spite of the fact that it does allow for an unpleasant mix of opinions at times. I'm okay with that. Don't we still have a "thumbs down" button to push? If not, can we get that re-instated? (I'm on my phone right now, I can't see if that's still a forum tool.)

I'm looking forward to trying one of the VOS models whenever I can get my hands on one. I agree with Jack, in spite of keeping my Sadowsky and GB10, they still don't sound or play the way the a good 175 will. And the VOS is cheaper than this one, which caught my eye: (dang, it just sold!!!!)

1959 Gibson ES-175 | Emerald City Guitars

**jads57** · 04-20-2014, 11:48 AM

In a way fellas we all are guilty of dissecting the tools rather than the player using it. I think both laminates, and solid carved instruments are equally valid. In the case of a std design jazz guitar(17",16") I prefer non laminate, carved tops w/ a neck humbucker. But in smaller builds(335, Bambino) I prefer laminate construction. They're just tools after all!

**Patrick2** · 04-20-2014, 12:51 PM

[QUOTE=jads57;418719]In a way fellas we all are guilty of dissecting the tools rather than the player using it. I think both laminates, and solid carved instruments are equally valid. In the case of a std design jazz guitar(17",16") I prefer non laminate, carved tops w/ a neck humbucker. But in smaller builds(335, Bambino) I prefer laminate construction.

They're just tools after all!

To some, they're just tools. To others, they're a whole lot more than just tools.

I'm definitely with ya on the solid carved top 17" with a single inset neck position pup.

**floatingpickup** · 04-20-2014, 02:53 PM

Even though I love a hand-carved archtop guitar, I tend to agree with Dutchbopper about the attraction of the unique sound of a laminated archtop. Almost all of the players that inspired me played laminated guitars (Joe, Barney, Herb...). I have both laminated and carved guitars (floating and built-in pickup versions). When playing through an amp, a laminate seems to sound darker, with a "flatter" response, more consistent volume across different registers and less prone to wolf tones etc. I almost always grab one of my ES175's when I'm heading to a gig because I know it will sound great, regardless of volume, the room etc. When I'm practicing at home, however, I usually reach for one of my fully acoustic carved top guitars. Acoustically, they are a joy to play. On a gig, however, it's hard to beat a laminated guitar.
Keith

**newsense** · 04-20-2014, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by iim7V7IM7

P.S.

i never play on my sofa...:-)

Quite right - it's very bad for the lower back.

**teleboli** · 04-20-2014, 04:39 PM

Please tell me more about lower back pain and playing on the sofa. I'm HUGE on the sofa.

**Jazz_175** · 04-20-2014, 04:39 PM

All my jazz guitars are laminate except one.
I'm trying to get rid of that but nobody wants to buy it.

**Philco** · 04-20-2014, 08:51 PM

May fave sounds are from solid spruce tops….usually. Really early Benson, early Martino and KB's Super 400.

But I've also heard Super 400's and Johnny Smiths that sounded bad. Depends on the recording, player, engineer.
Jesse Van Ruller's Levin sounds great to me and also bad on certain recordings.
Billy Bean's Gretsch on the Trio album sounds great……..sounds just ok on other recordings.

I'm not a big fan of the Pass sound on Joy Spring. It's probably my favourite JP sound though.

But we all want to hear different things and we all have opinions.

The tide of popular opinion is only…….just that.