-
Some elbow grease will take off most of it and turn it glossy. Metal polish like Autosol or Simichrome will take care of the hardware. A lot of work though. The VOS treatment is merely a lot of finish left unbuffed.
Originally Posted by farlow
(The classical cats use Novus 2 on French Polished guitars. Novus 3 is more abrasive and will work well in taking off the VOS, followed up by Novus 2. Use at your own risk. Novus is what is used to keep airplane windscreens, plexiglass domes of underwater cameras scratchfree. Works on the optical sides of CDs and DVDs too but avoid getting it on the printed lacquered sides.)Last edited by Jabberwocky; 01-09-2015 at 08:47 AM.
-
01-09-2015 08:38 AM
-
I think the 175 is a brilliant practical choice for live performance. It's a precise sounding guitar that sounds a lot less wooly than carved archtops when loud and behaves a lot better, which is of course why they invented it. (Admittedly I was comparing the tone to Eastman's with floating pick ups, so it's not really fair.) Originally Posted by ArchtopHeaven
FWIW my favourite guitar I've played on a gig yet was a 50's ES175.
I would imagine an L5 would be a best choice for the studio. I've never been a fan of 'soupy' pure electric humbucker jazz guitar tones on record (I like Grant Green's tone though - P90's?) especially when close miking came in.
For that reason I love Jim Hall despite his 1960/70's recorded tone rather than because of it. (It got better!) A bit of acoustic body sound on the guitar does a lot to open it up, and a carved box is better for that obv.
Well of course money wise if we are going to get into L5's it gets even worse.
Heritage Golden Eagle anyone? :-)Last edited by christianm77; 01-09-2015 at 09:06 AM.
-
Originally Posted by farlow
They were certainly offering the glossy versions of the VOS guitars a year or so ago ....
unfortunately with an upcharge
-
Man, I can't believe the vitriol over 175s. I agree with Mr. Beaumont that, "...it's the most recorded and iconic jazz tone in history.."
I have had a lot of guitars, ranging from Gibson L-5s to Godin 5th Avenues to Guilds to Martins to every import under the sun and last year I "stupidly" dropped almost four grand on an ES-175 VOS. I dropped that much because when I plugged it straight into a Fender amp, I heard that sound I have heard and loved on a thousand of my favorite recordings from the 50s to now. It not only is the quintessential sound of Jim Hall, Joe Pass, and countless other talented people, it is a lot lighter than the boat anchor regular 175s so it doesn't break my middle aged back and it has a great vibe, both in playing and in appearance. I still have other guitars, but the 175 VOS has become my main gigging axe because it sounds great, plays great, and it's built solid.
If you don't want to pay for a 175, don't do it. Let Gibson know how you feel with your wallet. You can get an Eastman or an Epi, nice guitars--one of my favorite guitars is my Epi Elitist Broadway--but they just do have not the same feel or sound. You get what you pay for.
-
Everyone is different when it comes to guitars. I bought a VOS 1959 175 2 years ago and hated it. It had a neck like a baseball bat. skinny thin frets, thin acoustic sound with no sustain, and the binding on the neck was so thin you could see through it on one spot. Not to mention it looked like it was buffed with a wire wheel ( their exclusive VOS treatment). Yes it was super light but I play sitting down so weight is not a big factor for me. To me the 59's don't sound like a 175 at all. The 59's sound very bright. Not warm and fat at all. Of course just my opinion. Hey when I buy a new guitar I want it to look new too. Not some new guitar faked out to look old and then upcharged a grand to make it look old. Hey if you want to pay a grand for yellow binding and a finish dulled with course rubbing compound more power to ya. Luckily I had the Nashville custom shop make me a custom 175 in 2010 just like Joe Pass' last custom 175 except full body depth. Price was $3100.00 and it sounds as good as it looks. Still would like to find a real nice double pickup 175 though but no VOS for me.
-
Another Gibson thread?
1. I've never had a problem with, or a hesitation to pay the amount it took to buy the Gibson guitar I wanted to.
2. I've never had a single moment's displeasure of playing or owning any Gibson guitar I've ever played.
3. I've never had a problem recouping at least the same amount I paid for any Gibson guitar I've ever purchased
and over the past 30 years or so of buying Gibson guitars I've totally lost track of the number. More often than
not, I've sold the guitars for more than I paid for them.
4. As a businessman, I have absolutely no problem what so ever with the way Henry J. chooses to run, operate
and manage his company. It's his company!
5. Gibson's "Custom Shop", is not a Custom Shop at all. It's a specialized sub division manufacturing facility with a
focus on a select few models, made to a different level of standards.
6. (aimed at those who claim there are many people who don't like the tone of the 175) Don't buy one.
7. @ vinnyv1k . . . Gibson is already a great company. Without Henry J.'s intervention . . there might not even
be a Gibson guitar company today
8. @ Broyal . . there probably is no point in "paying thousands for a laminate guitar" . . unless it has Gibson on
it's head stock and is a genuine ES175 model
9. @ jabberwocky . . I totally agree with you about the Norlins. Too many Gibsons from this era get an undeserved
bad rap. I guess it's "guilt by association"??
10. @ Keira . . great post, in its entirety.
11. @ ArchtopHeaven . . it's true that many people don't like Joe Pass' tone, or Jim Hall's, or Pat Metheny's. But,
it's also true that many more do like it, than not.
12. @ christianm77 . . great post. Also, glad you mentioned the Heritage Golden Eagle. If I'd have mentioned it
someone would have jumped all over me. (Hi Danny W.) :-)
13. @ Chazmo . . great post, and comments about the tone of the 175. Wish I had a nickel for every iconic jazz
recording that tone aficionados believed to be L5CES' . . but were actually ES175s
-
Jeez. Now I want a Gibson.
-
Patrick2, Gibson a Great company please............ Great guitar designs yes. Since 1972 I have purchased easily
near 60 Gibson guitars most being very high end archtops. At least 40% of them had major QC problems and sent out that way right from the factory. Used to be the first thing you had to do with a brand new Gibson was get it refretted right out of the case. Yes if you do get lucky and get a good one there is nothing better than a good Gibson but their QC has ALWAYS BEEN horrible. I will say though that anything coming out of the Nashville custom shop from Hutch days to present has been pretty darn good. Memphis shop you are very lucky if you get a playable neck. All my Nashville made archtops are from 1999-2014 now and all awesome axes but I have ordered countless Gibsons that showed up and were complete turds. Gibson a great company, NO. Nashville custom shop, YES.
And as far as Mr.J goes I have met him and not only is he crazy but he is not a nice person at all.Last edited by vinnyv1k; 01-09-2015 at 05:11 PM.
-
^^ when this happens to you, you are blessed^^ Originally Posted by TheGrandWazoo
Of all the Gibsons I have, I've always said that I'll be buried with my 175. (after giving it some thought, it might be because the worms might be turned off by all that glue in between the layers of wood..)
JDLast edited by Max405; 01-09-2015 at 05:46 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Bluedawg
They were offering one before that too, I think it was in 1959
-
i started with a newish 175 in the early 90s - it rattled and buzzed and fed back like a bisterd. the rattles and buzzes did for me in practice and the feedback did for me in gigs.
next to impossible to use in trio and quartet gigs - it was my only guitar and night after night i just had to try to make it work, but it imposed horrendous constraints on what i could get away with
in comparison, an early 50s es 150 and 175, worked wonderfully well in the same sort of gigs (rarely do i play in quiet clubs - typically in noisy bars and restaurants) - particularly the es 150
but whilst the es 150 had a wonderful thunky 50's tone - none of those guitars could compete in terms of usability with a sadowsky jim hall guitar that i used for a couple of years a few years back. not even close. 'usability' here means, at least this - no boom in bass (so e.g. three note rhythm chords work well and lines can descend comfortably into low registers without threatening boom and feedback), wonderful feedback resistance in general, friendly smooth upper register.
i ended up getting frustrated with the sadowsky - but it beat the 175 hands down at its own game (of being a practical jazz guitar).
one of the things i never liked about the 175s were that they sounded so iconic. it made me sound - to me at least - just like a 50s jazz guitarist (except crap). if i'm going to sound crap (compared to jim hall, barney kessel, kenny burrell, herb ellis etc.) i'd prefer to do it on an instrument that did not sound a lot like theirs.
-
Yes Patrick I was a former Gibson dealer long ago and a jazz guitarist that expects a guitar to play perfectly when I pay thousands of dollars for it. You are not hearing what I am saying. I love/hate them. I love Gibson archtops and play them 90% of the time. I love their necks and how the look,sound, and play. For the life of me I can not figure out why they can't build something as simple as a straight neck without a sky jump though or a truss rod that works on every guitar they make. It's obvious you haven't had that many Gibson's come into your hands as I have had or you would know what I am talking about. As far as Gibson dealers go, we are all dropping like flies and it is all for the same 2 reasons: QC & HJ. Yes some people buy new cars every year and with me it is archtops and my guitar of choice is Gibson. My car of choice is Cadillac that also has always had QC problems but I still drive them too. I can guarantee you this that it won't be long till the only dealers selling Gibsons will be the big online chains. That is what HJ wants.
My good friend who has owned Gelb Music for almost 45 years will agree with me 100%. He stopped being a Gibson dealer last month after selling Gibsons for that long. He said he has been sending 50% of what Gibson sends him back to them with major neck issues lately. Finally he has had enough too.
Maybe Gibson just sends all there crap to California ?
P.S. I knew you would flame me on this Patrick but I respect your opinions & advice ! Vinny
-
good thread folks...aside from "archtops" gibby does make some very nice solid bodies..my wish was when I could afford it .. a NEW Les Paul (2006-07)..I did not realize how many different models of the LP there were..or how pricy they were..so did some homework/research for several months..played a bunch at GC etc..then wanted custom touches..and the color had to be "wine red" .. found a "classic antique" with PAF 57 pups..needed a set-up..bone nut and lower action..($25) have not had to adjust anything since..no problem getting past the 15th fret and it just keeps getting better (minus some wear and tear-scratches and a wood chip on the back) yep..$2k..
checked the Gibson site - 2015 - models of the LP..lots of new teckie things added..adjustable nut..built in tuner "turbo switch" etc..new string gauge config and of course a 2015 price..will it play/sound better out of the box..i doubt it..not for me anyway..i like my action and string config and it is critical part of the sound I can get without a lot of tweeking dials and pedals..and it can get as close to the classic jazz sound feel as a solid body can get..
yes Gibson & Co has to keep making improvements-adding models and dropping others .. many guitar sales are related to the guitar a certain artist uses..and how they configure it..so yes they have to stay current with all the new innovations that are being used on gear..
I recently played a "import" strat..($200.00) through a tubed fender amp..great action/feel..did all the tricks a strat can do .. out of the box..hope fender is paying attention..Last edited by wolflen; 01-09-2015 at 07:55 PM.
-
Gibson are a pretty unethical company for other reasons (or so I've heard.) That kind of puts me off.
When it comes down to it Gibson is famous brand so they can charge more. FWIW I've been impressed by the workmanship on every new Gibby I've tried, despite the scuttlebutt about falling standards. I don't think the pricing is completely absurd.
US made archtops are pricey things. The price of an L5 say is not unreasonable compared to independent makers (such as Andersen - I googled them after seeing Bill Frisell playing one) and of course Benedetto.
Making one of these guitars isn't like bolting together an electric. (The pricing of their cheaper US guitars (Les Paul studio etc) actually seems quite reasonable)
The Les Paul standards and various fancy variations are generally going to a 'weekend warrior' or investment market. I know very few pro players who use one - 335 sure, US Fender Strat or Tele, definitely, but Les Paul? Bit of a luxury item.
The guitar is an icon with the baby boomers, so I guess they can sell a Les Paul for thousands just on the basis of its appointments and look rather than spec per se.
Going back to the 175 though, you'd be silly not to try some of the other options in any price range, though, unless your dream is to own a Gibson above anything else.Last edited by christianm77; 01-10-2015 at 10:03 AM.
-
Gibson business decisions are theirs, Henry might have us wondering where he is going with the brand in the last decade, we have to keep in mind it is the same CEO which basically saved Gibson in 1986...
It is all a matter of how much one wants to give importance to prestige and value over quality and playability.
How many guitar brands are also considered an investment in terms of keeping or increasing in value over time ?
If these guitars are becoming more and more expensive each decades it makes the initial buy a bit more difficult, but you will mostly never loose a cent by the time you wanna sell anyway unless it was not cared for...
It is basic offer and demand (desirability) and everybody and their grandma know what a Gibson is, Q/A or not.
Luthier's quality guitar on the other hand will always remain a small market despite better Q/A.
Gibson can charge whatever they want because they simply can, that is the power of "branding".
I can't afford a Gibson Archtop because I don't have that kind of money, so I play cheap Epiphones that lost half their original value no matter how many upgrades in them.
That Gibson logo on their headstock is a value keeper and a price tag associated to it.
If I would get a huge sum of money to spend on a custom order guitar I would still go for a Gibson over a maybe better and cheaper Heritage or even Luthier's guitar because I am such a Gibson fanboy.
-
This is a common story from a lot of instrument retailers I've spoken to. Gibson is hard to work with and QC is an issue. I've not experienced it directly being a player (who can't afford Gibsons in any case!) Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
-
I suppose if you have enough money to buy a good old Gibson you are going to lose far less money (might even make some if you take good care of it.) As always, rich people lose less money than the poor. Originally Posted by vinlander
Personally, I'm fed up of buying cheap guitars. I don't have a problem with how they play, and they're fine for gigs, but I'm fed of throwing money away haha. Ah well, it's a phase we go through....
-
If we think investment Gibson are not expensive in the end, most other brands except very select luthier stuff is a loss of money (investment wise). Even if Gibson would go out of business their guitar value would hold on, actually probably explode...
-
Michael DeTemple builds . . "guitar for the stars". Can't imagine any of us mere mortals actually paying $7,000 for a bolt on neck plank, regardless of how awsome they are. And, fumblefingers is correct. Resale is a challenge if one is expecting to recoup more than 35% to 40% of the original purchase price.
I bought a strat pick guard assembled with Michael's Sweet Spot pups, for one of the '61 clone starts I had built by *someone*. The pups are great. What many people don't know about Michael DeTemple, is that he's an amazing monster player/picker. He worked with, toured with and recorded with some of the top names in the business.
-
It's not just expensive guitars. I picked up a 1980's Squire E-series Strat for around £300 ($500, but would be cheaper in the US) a few years back. This guitar has certainly lost no value, and it's tipped that 80's Japanese made guitars are due to rise in value over the next few years.
It's a good guitar too, well made.
I imagine 80's Ibanez's are similar.
So the message is, don't buy new guitars? :-)
-
Patrick, I currently have 12 Nashville made Gibson archtops that range from 1999-2014. Everyone of those guitars are perfect in every way and played perfect from day one. My only complaint might be when they started to plek frets they plek them a bit low for my taste but that is not a QC issue. I just like higher frets. I pulled out my old gibson ledgers last night with a list of every Gibson I had to send back and why. No.1 is the most common reason. These are actual facts and not me just blowing smoke !
1 ski jump neck
2 warped or twisted necks
3 wrong neck angles causing the fretboard to be twice as thick at the 1st fret than the 20th
4 wrong neck sets causing bridge height too high or too low.
5 truss rods that don't work or come from the factory bottomed out
6 off center pickups/pole screws between strings instead of under them
7 off center tailpiece causing bridge to move off center every time you strum a chord
8 zero frets (1970's)
9 file gouges in fretboards and big dings in the necks straight from the factory.
10 nut and saddles cut wrong
11 bridges that buzz so bad the guitar is unplayable
12 tuners installed off center on peghead.
13 lacquer bubbles in finish or checks caused by applying finish too thick / not cold caused
14 splintered F holes on ES archtops
15 defective volume pots
I will say years ago I also dealt WRI Guilds and never got a single bad one. Maybe a occasional high fret but that was it.
I will also give you the telephone no. of 3 former Gibson dealers that will tell you the exact same thing as this post if you do not believe what I am saying. Gibson's guitar designs are the absolute best in the world. That is why everyone wants one. They are certainly not the best made guitar though they do make enough great ones to keep people buying them. You can continue to sling mud at me but my opinion will never change. Gibson is not a good company and is not customer focused but their Nashville custom shop makes the best archtops ever !!!
-
I currently have (and have had) enough Gibson guitars to be critical and applaud their guitars, BUT... even though I'm VERY fond of my 175 and others I have a real problem justifying a new Gibson when guitars like my Ibanez AK95, or Korean Emperor, and D'Angelico EXS guitars at fractional cost can be had.
It's been said (and I can appreciate the logic) that Gibson has a manufacturing line and perfection can't be expected. Well, I have disagree. If quality problems like Gibson has are less common on Asian assembly lines it's a moot point to make.
-
Off-centre tailpiece is not unheard of. This from TGP (whose style P2 brought over to JGF) : Gibson Archtops: Tal Farlow / 2 'pup L-5 / ES-5 Switchmaster Differences? - The Gear Page .
As for Items 1 to 15, they are the stuff that the Gibson Legend is made of. Not uncommon and neophytes are taught to look out for them. So, thanks for enumerating them. Ah, good times...
P.S. Most of them are my standard 20 questions to a used dealer until I found one who didn't rake me over.Last edited by Jabberwocky; 01-10-2015 at 02:20 PM.
-
Vinny . . you seem to be on a "Mission From God" to prove yourself right and me wrong about your claims that most of what Gibson produces from the Gibson USA production line is poorly made, not inspected . . or carelessly inspected . . and that Gibson and Henry J. just don't give a shit about the quality of their guitars or the image of their iconic brand. I really couldn't care less about your ledger or the three former dealers you sighted. Because, I'm sure I could come up with dealers have have had far less incident of problems . . as well as come up with the names of dealers who would never drop the line, due to the profits they've made by representing Gibson products far out weighing the challenges Gibson and its products represent to them. Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
I'm not slinging mud at you. I'm have an exchange of opinions with you in a dialog about Gibson. You are exaggerating my replies to your posts, just as much as I believe that you are exaggerating the problems you've encountered with Gibson guitars. Further, I'm not trying to change your opinon at all. I'm just strongly disagreeing with your opinions and not believing what you're telling me, as it relates to the severity and/or incidence of problems you've had. Again, you totally disregard the ratios. You can't compare what Guild manufactured back in the day, to what Gibson does today. Gibson probably puts out in two or three years, more problem free guitars than Guild put out during its entire existence. I would suggest you try to reasearch some real world percentages of defects, both actual and perceived defects, then come back and comment.
Just take a look at the sentence I highlighted in black bold and underlined above. Is that not what I've been saying to you all along? Gibson's not perfect . . not even close to perfect. But, the baseless bashing they seem to take time after time after time, is unfair and uncalled for. Then, take a look at the sentence in blue type. If that doesn't deserve a major . . . WTF??? . . . then I don't know what does.
Gibson is its people, as are all corporations. Have you visited them in Nashville? Have you seen their people at work? Have you talked to their craftspeople and experienced the passion from many of them for what they do? Have you ever asked any of them about their concern that the guitars they build will be loved by the people who buy them? Do you know or understand what their turn-over of employee craftspeople is? Do you know or understand what their training processes are for the replacement of those who leave? Do you know what the rigors are, or aren't in their QC department? Do you know what portion of their profits are reinvested in areas of product and employee improvement? Or, reinvested in R&D? Are you really sure you are qualified to be determining what is, or isn't a good or bad company?
The long and the short of it is . . you've got a hair up your ass for Gibson. I don't.
-
Yeah, really, a tele for 7k????? IMHO that is really not cool, no matter how good they are. If you built a top notch custom tele from Warmoth parts it will be second to none and it'll set you back some $1500 or so. Still real money - but worth it. Does anyone buy a 7k telecaster??? I get all the things about vibe and magic and whatever, and I'm willing to pay good money for good craftsmanship but there's got to be a voice of reason somewhere (rant over :-)) Originally Posted by Patrick2
Last edited by Frank67; 01-10-2015 at 02:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
Recommandations for Hollowbodies for $600 and under?
Today, 05:20 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos