-
Everyone here is like "Eastman that, ES175 this, L5 is god" and Im like "sh1t i bet there are only a small handful of people who could listen to Joe Pass (or any one whose guitar quality changed drastically) throughout his years and tell what hes playing".
Reminds me of the wine expert on Howard Stern who, in a blind taste test, thought the $5 bottle was the expensive bottle.
-
03-02-2015 01:44 PM
-
ES 175 or L5...hmmm though one, I guess I will cut in half and chose the ES 350 long scale
-
This reminds me of the Canon and Nikon forums.
-
Had an Eastman - sold it. Had a Gibson - sold it. Had a Godin - sold it.
The guitar I kept? My Telecaster.
The Telecaster can take them all in fight.
-
While I was with you for a lot of this, we part ways here. You may not like the tones of Jim Hall, Pat Metheny, Herb Ellis, Joe Pass, Jonathan Kreisberg, Pat Metheny, Kenny Burrell, Wes Montgomery, etc., etc. but to claim that none of these players had great tone is just silly. Probably half of the most important jazz guitar recordings ever made were played on ES-175s- as well as many of the seminal rock and roll recordings in the 50s, country recordings and even most of the Yes recordings featured an ES-175.
Originally Posted by ArchtopHeaven
it may not be your cup of tea, but it is an important even iconic guitar. Only the L-5 comes close.
that said, Gibson is not magic and the "energy" and "lineage" of the great players is not awarded to you just for buying a Gibson guitar. The energy and lineage is earned by paying your dues, learning from the recordings of the masters and busting your ass to get better. Just buying a guitar isn't going to get you any of that.
-
"You get the energy of Jim Hall, Wes, Burrell, Kessell, Green, Carlton... That´s included on the price."
...Don't know what to say to that......
I guess all that energy is floating around the guitar somewhere after Gibson adds it after pre-inspection and then it wraps itself around you when you pick up the guitar...is that how it works? ? :-)
That must be a really tough job to not get injured or burned when adding energy of all the dead people....
"I think if you are only interested in sound/tone/playability get a Eastman, Epiphone, Guild, Ibanez, etc.. You´ll spend less money and easily get a good guitar and good tone."
Yep,
What else is there except resale value....
Spend $$$$ for the Gibson Experience // BMW experience // or Apple Experience? ....right?
"Non of the greats who had a truly good tone played an Es-175"
I would have to ask, Do you really believe that? C'mon man.....
A great Guitarist will bring his tone (sound) **to the instrument**. Again do you really believe what you are writing?
"The Es-175 is not the most chased after tone. Its just the most iconic looking guitar because of its cheapness and availability"
Cheap?
Must be something about the ES 175's all things considered how popular it still is over the decades......... guitarist's aren't stupid... ...mostly...
"Gibson Es-175's are generally not very good because the design is poor. They are too deep with a poor tonal range and control. Bass is often all over the place, boomy and nondescript"
I think that would depend on who is doing the playing don't you think....... :-)Last edited by jazzimprov; 03-02-2015 at 06:52 PM.
-
What a shame to think that all the people that bought a 175 just threw their money away, they should have came to JGF first. Pitiful!
-
Paul - A very thoughtful post. Enjoyed reading how you approached the trade off's.
---------------------------------
I don't care if people want to use their emotions in choosing guitars, foot pedals, automobiles, or dishwashers. It's their money. In the case of a laminate archtop much of the sound is coming from the pickup and amp anyway so what's to objectively argue about? However, the value proposition for buying a new Gibson archtop died a long time ago. Simple numbers. And yes.. that is considering resale.
-
it really doesn't matter who "wins". A 371/372 doesn't have the same response or feel or tone of a 175. The only plywood guitars I've played that have a similar thunk are the guild 175 and the heritage 550. There are probably others but I haven't played too many. The sadowsky/jazzline doesn't sound like a 175 either.
-
These are all different guitars. They all have their own uniqueness and properties.
I don't get the malice towards Gibson's around here from some.....
These are some nice instruments people are trying to trash......Last edited by jazzimprov; 03-02-2015 at 06:29 PM.
-
bash gibson all you want but nothing sounds like a gibson 175 or L5 though the heritage comes closest. None of the eastmans are even close
-
i think Eastman 175 knockoffs are good guitars. I had one. I'd rather have the real thing sorry.
Steve Howe did some nice things on a 175 too..
-
Steve Howe model has solid maple top?
How does it improve the tone or sound from the standard version of ES-175?
-
Sorry Archtopheaven I do not want a L5 tone nor do I want a Joe Pass tone. Have you heard Jonathan Kreisberg live or Rotem Sivan, that is the closest to the tone I have heard in my head that I wanted. I wanted my tone.
To get there I have bought and sold:
- Epiphone Casino Elitist (Japan) fantastic for funk but I was crossing over to jazz and it was too metallic sounding for me
- Epiphone Joe Pass (Korean) horrible sound
- Epiphone Broadway (Korean) ok sound but a bit too woody and nasely for what I was after and a bit difficult to play
- Eastman 371 nice neck way too bright
- Eastman 503 (checked out the model up 6 something but too woody for me) nice neck but had this tinny sound even the wife and kids would comment on. Put in a Gibson pick up, massive massive improvement but still tiny and acoustically it was really starting to grind on me.
I spent weeks trying out Ibanez and Yamaha 1970's 175 copies and then came across a 1960's 225 and a 20 year old 175. Now I was frustrated as hell, they sounded amazing, the difference blew my mind. Now I wanted to throw the Eastman through a window I was going insane.
... then I received a text that a local shop had a sale Heritage and Gibson up to 50% off.
Off I went, I still did not want to spend so much even at 50% off (luckily for me the 175 was one of the 50% off guitars). I tried every hollow and semi hollow guitar they had (Gibson, Heritage, Guild etc). Could I live with one of these, the sound is not bad, oh the neck on the 175 is a bit big, oh the money? The only thing that came close to my 175 for tone was a 59 reissue 330.
Today I am not happy with my purchase, I am elated. I am more excited by the day our relationship blossoms, the cost is long forgotten about and we are making sweet sweet music.
-
Well to those who question my comment on tone and great players (and rightly so), heres my reasoning.
1) Wes Montgomery barely used an Es-175 and the recordings of him playing one do not sound good (imo). I think many would agree. His best tone was with his L5.
2) Kenny burrell, agreed yes that is an example of great tone but I didn't say an Es-175 wasn't capable. He also had P-90s on his and the earlier ones (imo) generally do sound a bit better. Combine the two and you have unique example. Thats not an argument I would fight I agree.
3) Joe Pass, Jim hall, Pat Metheny, the classic Es-175 users, all happen to have the most controversial tone because people generally don't like it.
So when you take a look at it in this way, you soon see that actually the Es-175 tone is more contrevesial than widely accepted. Is the tone of the L5 controversial? NO
I think thats a good enough argument to back my comment up.
(p.s) I do not like J K's tone. And that puts the final nail in that coffin.
My issue with the Es-175 is simple. Guitars are there to allow us to play music. To open up our possibilities when improvising. So how does a guitar that has in general, poor bass response, poor upper treble response, rattles (for many), has appointments I dont think improve the tone like Rosewood bridges and fretboards and a scale length that i dont think is the most conducive to gettgin punch articulate notes (23 3/4") suddenly become the best jazz guitar?
There is no logic, but there is emotive irrational opinions.
Look at George Benson as the best example. No one opened up the fretboard like he did. He could play a solo on the bass string and it would sound as tight and as focused as if it was the 'a' or 'd' string on a 175. How did he achieve this? By not playing an Es-175.
-
When I think of classic ES-175 tone, the three that come to mind are Herb Ellis, Jim Hall and Joe Pass. It's news to me that people generally don't like their tone (at least for JH and JP as ArchtopHeaven claims). I wouldn't include myself in that camp. Yes, Joe Pass's tone on the Virtuoso recordings is often criticized, but as far as we know that was Joe's ES-175 recorded acoustically (on Virtuoso I and IV). No one is making the case for the ES-175 as the quintessential acoustic archtop.
PS. The scale length of the 175 is 24 3/4'', not 23 3/4''.
-
I had the pleasure as a college student to have had access to a 70s ES-175, on loan from a friend. Really liked that guitar, loved the playability and sound.
Now that I am much older and have the funds to purchase one, I went on the hunt for one. I played probably 10 or so models, both new and old. On my travels I came across an Eastman dealer and looked at the whole Eastman line as well as some Peerless. I picked up the 371CE and was immediately floored. For a laminate it was so light and lively. Neck was prefect for my hands, not too large and very fast. Using the volume and tone I was able to cover the typical smooth dark tone, but with the tone control up I could get a more later acoustic sounding Joe Pass sound. The price is just plain stupid. Just kind of seemed like a no-brain. The ES-175s cost 7 times more then the 371.
A year latter, still really love this guitar. I still for some unkown reason still have some GAS for an ES-175, maybe because for nostalgic reasons, but it would really have to be amazing.
Regards,
Rick
-
Arch- Your points are well taken and even eye opening. Yes the rattles, the imperfect response on the top end and bottom end are also a factor. I have to say, I am not an expert at anything musically either playing or hearing but last night I was in a recording studio and I had a chance to really listen to what I played on my ES175 and I must admit, I was shocked. A smile grew on the producer/engineers face as the intro progressed on Here's that Rainy Day. I am always very critical of my own playing but could find nothing wrong with what I heard last night. The 175 was thicker, deeper and more soulful than the sound coming from my L7c. The entire package of a 175 is more loaded with "close to perfection" than compromises. Now would an Ibanez, Eastman, Epiphone or any other knock off sound as good? Maybe. But you just cant knock the Gibson ES175. Its the original. It is what it is supposed to be. A step down from the L5 and super 400. Nothing more and nothing less.
I think Ren is right about the scale length on the 175. 24-3/4 feels right to me.
JD
-
Originally Posted by Joe DeNisco
All fair points I cant argue with Joe. A good Es-175 is a great guitar. I suspect that a lot of the issues could be fixed by making it half an inch shallower. That would tighten up the bass a bit. if they also narrowed the shoulders, it would i think make the trebles a little rounder too.
In fact thats what the Japanese did with their version of the Es-175 and why to my mind its a muh more playable guitar. You can use the whole fretboard and everything sounds very even tonally and very tight.
Great examples would be Greco Fa-95, Ibanez Fa-100, Gb-20, JP-120 etc..
Yes my scale length was a type 'o' I meant 24' 3/4Last edited by Archie; 03-03-2015 at 11:28 AM.
-
Lord knows I am not a fan of Gibson's recent history or their questionable commitment to quality control but when a jazz guitar forum starts arguing about the tonal capabilities of the ES175, then I have to think that the boys have gotten restless and are simply behaving badly (as boys are prone to do according every intelligent woman I have ever known). There have been countless iterations of the 175 with all sorts of feature and construction changes. Some are great and some are not so great but to dismiss the tonal capabilities of the 175 is to dismiss a mountain of evidence to the contrary and probably to dismiss the foundation of electric guitar tone in general. Therefore, I can only conclude that some people are arguing because they're bored and looking for a diversion.
-
To the OP - do you still have the Eastman, or have you moved to an ES-175?
-
Interesting thread in that Gibson and the ES-175 bashing goes on and on and on.
If they're so awful, why the angst?
I don't see the same level of energy about, say, a Teisco Del Re.
I love my two Es-175s.
-
I played a '68 and a '69 (they were not mine unfortunately) and they were really great guitars. I really want an ES-175, would be great next to my ES-333.
-
- Many here are big Gibson ES175 fans
- Only saw one input (Archtop) really not liking the design for what it is and he certainly has a right to his opinion
- Some others, like the OP, prefer one of the many ES175 competitors
- Some find this baffling and are compelled to subjective expression
- Some don't like the neck profile on the ones they have owned or playes
- Some (myself included) feel they fail to represent a reasonable value
- Some are dubious of recent Gibson quality
- Especially given the price
- There were expressions for and against the presence of lingering spirits
- Probably in the finish or fret wire
I don't think we're up to the standard of 'bashing' yet. Not that we won't get there shortly.Last edited by Spook410; 03-03-2015 at 03:56 PM.
-
From a recent Gilad Hekselman interview:
What’s the difference between a good instrument and a bad one?
A good one helps you transcend the physical boundary to your full expression. A bad one puts another boundary. A great instrument could mean something very different to each individual so it's about what each person needs and looks for.
Full interview hear:
PREPARED GUITAR: Gilad Hekselman 13 Questions
I agree with Gilad, it is a personal question, a personal experience.
I think Wes said he is not a guitartist, they spend too much time looking at guitars, talking about strings etc. He is a musician that happens to use a guitar to express himself. Something along those lines.
Reply With Quote
Playing live and getting the best sound from the...
Today, 02:08 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos