Gibson 1954 ES-175 Reissue

**electricfactory** · 02-19-2016, 04:55 PM

I bought this vintage '59 some years ago, I believe it probably sounded much like it does today right off the factory floor. That said I'm keen to try the 2006 ES-175 with P90s Jabberwocky posted above

**Greentone** · 02-19-2016, 06:05 PM

Old/new? Everyone agrees that the old, aged carved-body guitars can sound pretty special. Okay.

Has everyone played vintage, laminated-body guitars? The ES-300, ES-125, ES-175, ES-330, and ES-335 guitars that I have played from the 40s, 50s, and early 60s--on the whole--sound amazing, in comparison with the new ones.

I can't be scientific and tell you exactly why this is the case, beyond saying that, on average, the old ones are markedly light in hand. The typical ES-300 or 350 from the 40s is a hell of a guitar. (with p90s) A 50s ES-175 would rank as my favorite of that model. 330? I'd have to go with '59-60. Same with the 335.

So...I'd say old wood is important for laminates, too. At least, with Gibson guitars.

**SamBooka** · 02-19-2016, 09:14 PM

Too many threads to quote here so...

1) thank you Gibson for coming out with something useful. When they reissued the VOS 175 people were like "great, now if they only did it with P 90s". Well, someone listen for once...and we're still complaining?

2) I don't know if the newer versus older tops were thicker, but the materials used were definitely different. I forget which is which, but one is with maple/bass wood/Maple and the other is with maple/poplar/maple.

3) I am a bit of a hypocrite, because I have never owned a 175. But I do own a 1964 125 and a 1996 165. The 125 is later, and thunkier while the 165 is heavier and more focused. The 165 is actually a better electric attire in the sense that it's more solid sounding. The VOS 175s that I have tried her solidly in between the two.

4) The guitars with volutes that I have tried have been less then ethstetically pleasing But has not affected playability.
I will have to find the book, I think it was by Dave hunter, but the volute did reduce the number of headstock breaks, along with the reduced headstock angle. Did headstock still break sure! But fewer.

5) it may be cheaper to buy vintage the new. That said, would you rather bring my vintage instrument on a flight or to a gig or a new one that is more easily replaced. If you're living in the US that is one thing, but people in less populous countries can't easily find these vintage pieces and when they do do they know that the top is not thinking? Do they know that the braces are well attached? Do they have a warranty that comes with that?

**Jabberwocky** · 02-20-2016, 12:59 AM

Oh, MY, electricfactory, why do you have to go post photos of that stonking beauty? That looks like a time capsule 1959 ES-175. Oh, MY.

**gggomez** · 02-20-2016, 02:18 AM

Dam I am a P90 kind a guy. Had them when I played rock. It took me 47 years to buy a 175 if I had of waited another 2 years grhhh!

**Groyniad** · 09-29-2017, 01:23 PM

sorry if you're not meant to re-start threads like this - thought someone might be interested some time...

i recently got a '54 re-issue with 2 p90s

i also have a real '56 135 (posh 125)

the 135 has a quality none of the newish guitars i've ever owned possessed. it is 'mellower' without any loss of clarity or punch. i think it is also more stable - works a bit better on the gig. it really is the most musical instrument i've ever had.

but the '54 re-issue is really superb. it makes my '59 re-issue seem uninteresting - so i will be selling it.

the '54 is crisper and more lively - maybe a bit easier to play. it looks totally fantastic. neck is not as fat as the '59. much clearer and better defined sound than the '59 because of the p90s.