-
Anyone play one of these?
Any comments?
-
11-20-2009 02:42 PM
-
I had a '95 Samick-made Sheraton II. I have discussed this at some length on other threads, here.
Pluses: lotsa bang for the buck, robust Gibson design, attractive inlays and finish (from the front row, anyway), nice neck, quality tuners.
Minuses: mediocre sound, gloppy finish (mine was the natural), difficult to work on the electronics, poor quality electronics, very little resale value.
I got mine as part of a horse trade with the local music store owner. At the time, my only motivation was that I wanted an attractive 335-style guitar to play at church when we did our "Baptist Blues Band" thing (electric instruments, percussion, bass and mostly black material).
It didn't sound that good, acoustically or electrically, but, like I said, it was pretty cheap. I pulled out the standard wiring harness and rewired it with quality pots, switch and Seymour Duncan pickups. I replaced the whole thing because the switch was intermittent and two of the pots were scratchy, a common complaint.
Rewiring was a challenge, since everything has to go through the treble f-hole, which is .75" at its widest point (mini-pots are necessary -- full-size ones are 1.0"). Replacing the pots and switches required fishing the old parts out and teasing the new ones in with the help of a bent paper clip and string; eventually I was rewarded with a guitar that didn't actually sound bad, but one that I couldn't bond with.
I ended up with about $350 invested, if I remember; I traded it off for the equivalent worth of gear, after I bought a Gibson 335 from craigslist for $1750.
The lower cost proved to be no bargain. Although I didn't spend a lot of money, I didn't end up with a very satisfactory guitar.
I should point out that I have been playing for nearly 40 years, and this was somewhere around #33 in my lifetime list of guitars. I can't say I had high expectations of the Epi, just that I'm getting more demanding in what I want.
So my experience is partially age-related: had it been my first electric guitar, I would have loved it; but it wasn't, and I didn't. It was worth about what I put into it; on the other hand, the 335 that replaced it was worth every penny.
It may suit you: I loved the neck, and the shape, it's just that the Gibson does those things so much better.
Whatever you decide, good luck and good playing.
-
I had a later model, like an '06 or something. The electronics (mostly the pickups) had been vastly improved upon. It sounded great. It played really nice as well. There was some fret buzz around the middle of the neck, which probably could have been taken care of, but I didn't. I eventually sold mine because what I really wanted was a Gibson ES-135, but didn't think I'd ever have the money. If it helps at all, I sold my Sheraton along with two other guitars to get the 135, have barely put that guitar down since, but could see myself owning a Sheraton again in the future. If you really want one, get a later model with the improved pickups and electronics. I liked mine, and the reviews on the older ones can be pretty scathing, whereas the newer models seem to be better received.
-
Thanks guys. Lots of indepth info there. I'll bear those points in mind next time I go to take a look. With others singing the praises of certain Epiphone models I think it comes down to finding the right one. I have played some absolutely crap name guitars with huge price tags and others that sound and feel great. When I was checking out my Fender bass I played a few of the same make and model and noticed differences before finally making my choice; same with my Strat. My Strat by the way is unbelievable for staying in tune (not true when I first bought it) I do a lot of bends and she hardly moves out.
-
I might try to account for my guitar-buying habits one day - when I can explain it to myself - but yes, I've tried the Sheraton II. I'm not tempted to take the 335 shape seriously enough to pay Gibson prices for it after trying an Epi DOT (MIK 2002) - I had to admit to myself in the end that I found the balance all wrong, but I play it sometimes just to confirm my opinion of it. But then I thought I'd give the Sheraton II a try, on account of it's reputation - a MIC 2009. What I'm not sure about is whether or not any differences are due to MIK v MIC or DOT v Sheraton, but ... I think the DOT feels more substantial than the Sheraton, It's certainly heavier (9lb v 7.5lb). Don't know if that translates as better quality materials or not. The Sheraton is slightly smaller than the DOT, and feels more compact - enough at least for me to find it more comfortable to play, and this is enough fro me to prefer the Sheraton. Some of the MIC hardware looks a bit cheap, but is easily replaced; and I'm still thinking about a) what to do with the DOT and b) whether to go through the torment of upgrading the electrics in the Sheraton. (I've rewired the DOT - twice - and an Epi 135 and it really tests your self control but I'm working on a scheme to make it easier).
-
The newer Dots are the same dimensions as the Gibson equivalents; Sheratons made in Korea are smaller. I find the 335 comfortable, but then, I played the similar Country Gentleman for 15 years prior.
If anyone is interested, I wrote up my experience rewiring my Sheraton and will be glad to send it to anyone who has not yet attempted the feat.
-
Thanks for the info. What is you opinion of the Sheraton? The general fit and finish on mine is fine, although some of the hardware could be improved upon; but it seems to fit me better than the DOT/335. I tend to play seated in something approaching the 'classical' position and find the DOT keeps slipping off my lap. I've promised myself that if I swap the pickups at all I'll leave the standard pots where they are, but I suppose I'll talk myself into a complete rewire eventually - not just yet though.
Originally Posted by lpdeluxe
-
I think I've given my opinion, but let me add to it: the Sheraton II (in common with many Epis) is a real bargain: in return for not too much money, you get a well-designed, ergonomic guitar. I sold mine because I was dissatisfied with the shortcuts that were taken in manufacturing it, and I was able to indulge my taste for a more expensive guitar. Originally Posted by RAQ
I liked the neck and fingerboard; I never got used to the strap button location (I don't like it on the 335, for that matter). At first, the lack of position markers on the side of the neck at the upper frets bothered me, but I soon learned to use the neck/body seam and other location clues instead to find my way about. The scale length was the 24.75" that I like, and the tuners were of very good quality. Although I wasn't really happy with the sound, a bass player told me after our "Baptist Blues Band" played for the church service that it was the best sounding electric he had heard (I was playing through a Fender Jazzmaster Ultralight, an excellent amp).
As I've said elsewhere, had the Sheraton II been available to me 30 years earlier, I would have loved it and cherished it...but in the intervening period my standards have inexorably gone up.
So I'm aware of the danger of my comments, in that I may be turning people away from a guitar that they would find perfectly satisfactory.
-
I'd like a copy of that if that's ok. Being an engineer with a bias for electrical/electronic I wouldn't have any problems, but any shortcuts via someone elses experience would be really beneficial. Cheers. Originally Posted by lpdeluxe
Last edited by JackBallascoe; 11-22-2009 at 10:16 AM.
-
Jack: I sent it via PM in two parts (too large to fit onto one).
-
Thanks. Got them both. Nice one.
-
Originally Posted by JackBallascoe
Being an engineer with a bias for electrical/electronic I wouldn't have any problems, but any shortcuts via someone elses experience would be really beneficial. Cheers.
I worked on aircraft guidance systems for a while (long time ago now) but engineering is a state of mind, don't you think? If you're used to working in electronics you already have the patience and attention span, and made the adjustment of scale, to work through it. I've been trying to wire the tone and volume pots together on a common earth/ground strap and fit them as pairs - trying to pull all four pots through with fishing-line drove me mad, it didn't work, everything just got tangled up.
-
It's an acquired skill. I learned to fish component parts through a slender treble f-hole via the usual conduit: necessity. I took my Sheraton II to the local tech a couple of days after he had spent a week scuffling with the wiring in a '60s ES-345 SV. The store owner had gotten the guitar in a trade and plugged it in, whereupon he learned that only one pickup worked. He and the tech (and they enlisted the amp tech) pulled out the wiring and started testing all the pots and junctions when the store manager happened by and said, "why does it say **STEREO** on the truss rod cover?" Originally Posted by RAQ
In other words, the other pickup worked, it just didn't work with a mono cable.
Need I add, I felt I could do a better job.
-
A lot of modern equipment across the board is generally made these days so that if tampered with, without the correct tools or knowledge can and often does render the equipment or parts thereof B E R. Some stuff can be very frustrating so yes, patience and thinking is a must before diving in head first. What was the old saying that carpenters used to have...."Measure twice, cut once"
-
Although I'm (more or less) retired, and (as those who have retired will know) I am actually busier than at any other time in my life, I can at least choose what to be busy about. I've spent the morning fiddling with diagrams, and scraps of paper, and spare vol/tone controls - and since it's time for a cup of tea and a slice of toast, I will pause and consider my thoughts.
Wiring a hollow-body, and even a solid-body, is fairly straight forward - once you learn the basic skills - but why should wiring a semi, 335 type, be done as if it were a hollow-body, but infinitely more tricky? If someone gave me a Gibson 335 (feel free to do this, anyone) and the various electronics, and said 'get on with it', who in their right mind would assemble a full hollow-body harness and then try and force it in through the 'f' holes'. I agree the skill can be learnt - when I first rewired my DOT I was so disatisfied with the outcome I pulled it all out and did it again - so you can teach yourself how to do it; but why?
If it were up to me I'd orientate the controls differently - I'd have the 'bridge' controls on the top and the 'neck' on the bottom - but even with the standard layout why not assemble the harness in three sections and wire it together once it's in there. There are two pups with vol and satellite tone controls, and a selctor switch and output jack - why not insert those in three sections and just attach the two outputs from the vol pots at the last minute? I've already tried mounting the vol and tone pots on a sort-of rigid earth bar so I can put them in as a pair ... locating the vol pot (which is quite easy to do through the 'f' hole) automatically locates the tone control ... none of that tangled mess, snagging caps etc.
I'm going to make the tea, burn the toast, and maybe try it out on the DOT again, or maybe the Sheraton, later - or maybe tomorrow - or the day after. Or maybe I'm just going to avoid the 'gear and gizmo' threads entirely (they are much too interesting) and actually learn to play one of them.Last edited by RAQ; 11-24-2009 at 10:31 AM.
-
Jack, the curious thing about the Gibsons is that apparently, that was the best they could do. I've always wondered why, given the difficulty of installing the output jack on the face, they didn't go the extra small step and put it on the lower treble rim. And what's with the strap button in the middle of the back, which precludes installation of a strap lock?
Comparing three contemporary manufacturers of thin hollow-body electrics, each one has its quirks: the one I am most familiar with is the Gretsch Chet Atkins Country Gentleman, which had a clever strap retainer on the upper bass cutaway that unscrewed, so you could put the strap over the threaded shaft, then reattach the cap: instant strap lock. It had its output jack on the lower treble rim, where it should be. On the other hand, access to the interior is almost non-existent. The pickups are mounted to the top, the f-holes are painted on, and the only way in is via a small oval hole in the center of the back. I replaced a couple of frozen pots in mine, and it was a major, and tricky, undertaking.
Or, look at the Fender Coronado and Starcaster: they are relatively easy to work on, but are, in the case of the former, butt-ugly, and in the latter, bizarre in appearance.
RAQ's points are well taken: why does it have to be so hard? Especially when a little thinking will reveal much more convenient ways of doing things. To Gibson's credit, later 335s have a large piece removed from the center block on the treble side of the bridge pickup, so there is considerably better access. To Gibson's discredit, they didn't do that on the Epiphone Sheraton II. The tech I mentioned is convinced that Epiphone installs the wiring to the top before it's glued on!
Another point RAQ makes is that the control layout doesn't make sense -- except that it does, given the restrictions on assembly-through-the-f-hole. I tried his scheme when I first tackled the Epi, but it was impossible to dress the harness neatly enough that wires weren't visible through that f-hole. I reverted to the original, and it became much easier. But, if I were designing one from scratch, I would incorporate Gretsch's scheme of using four-conductor wire to connect everything, making it easy to route in such a way that it was not out in the open (again, nobody gets it quite right: you couldn't see into the Gretsch in any event).
-
I've lost count of the times I've come across a piece of equipment wherein it has been designed by someone who has never thought about the future servicing of it. I've always maintained; When the designers get together they should have an engineer present that has experience at the repair and or servicing level.
But then, that would take all the fun out of it...
Shit! what the hell am I thinking?
I guess I used to just get a bit pissed off after I'd slipped off a spanner and sliced off half my knuckles in the process because some designer jerk didn't think about putting a valve or other component where you could actually get at it with enough room to get a purchase on the bugger.Last edited by JackBallascoe; 11-23-2009 at 11:00 AM.
-
I had a work colleague some 30 years ago who build his own guitar from the block of wood stage. Everyone at work took the piss until it was in it's latter stages of finish. I can't remember the name of the wood, but it was like a type of rosewood - very heavy stuff. He had it shipped over from the far east. Anyway, he put only the best pickups and furniture on it, gold plated etc. The cost to him eventually was such that he couldn't sell it at a profit; not that he wanted to at the time though. It was, I must say, a real work of art and all credit to him, he wasn't a pro instrument maker. He took his time and never rushed or got impatient and when it was finally finished it played like a dream and seeing the faces on those that mocked was a sheer delight.
-
Leo Fender made his living as a radio repairman before manufacturing instruments and amplifiers, and he has been quoted as saying that serviceability should be paramount in the designers' minds. One commentator noted that, after CBS took over, they took their newly-designed amps to a trade show in Germany. When the power light bulb burned out on one, they discovered there was no way to change the bulb. The writer went to to say, perhaps unnecessarily, that "Leo would have had a fit." Originally Posted by JackBallascoe
But against this is the urge for the decorative -- how many cars, or motorcycles, or, dare I say, guitars, have you seen that sacrifice service at best, or function, at worst, to appearance? As noted, I love my 335, but it seems to be in that category.
-
My first 'jazzguitar' was a Sheraton that I loved very much, and recently I discovered the love is still not over.. (I could never sell it, we spend too much time together.... :-), though - like any relation - we've known ups and downs.
I have done a lot of rewiring to my Sheraton: first new pickups and pots, later on replacing the wiring and tone caps and last week I changed the electronic layout.
I've become quite handy pulling everything through the f-hole, even large-sized pots through the slim f-holes my '92 Sheraton has (yes it's possible, even though the diameter of the pots is larger than the widest point of the f-hole - you have to slide them in side first and then turn them, works well).
Now my Sheraton has only one volume pot and one tone pot! (I left the other two in for looks, but they are not used). What a revelation!!! This works so much easier!!! No more fidling with all those pots, just one tone and one volume! Boy....!
I think my Sheraton is either Japan-made or one of the first Koreans. There is no indication anywhere on the guitar: no stamps, no serial number, no label, no stickers......
It's a fine guitar in terms of playability and -after a lot of tweeking- also in terms of sound again, though it will never be a Gibson. Being an all-maple instrument (also the neck) it sounds different and has a different resonance than a Gibson with a mahagony neck. It doesn't have that typical Gibson "bell" or "growl". It's a brighter instrument I found out, that needs -strangely enough- darker or duller sounding pickups to temper this brightness.
But I know quite a few jazzguitarist here in the Netherlands and especially in The Hague who play a Sheraton and don't even consider buying an ES335 'cause the Sheraton fullfills their needs. Personally I think the Sheraton might even be more suited for jazz, while I would prefer an ES335 for blues or rock.
A funny note though: I would have never changed electronics and pickups if it weren't for the neck pickup that had turned microphonic. But it actually sounded just fine: very mellow, very jazzy. After chaning the pickups to SD SH-1 '59 that mellowness was gone, although it sounded more towards the Gibson, I liked the original configuration actually better....... better wiring, pots and an orange drop tonecap did make it sound more open and let it 'breathe' a little more, but I am considering replacing the neck pickup. I think the Sheraton lacks mids in it's overall sound-image, it's more hifi with bass and treble frequencies being more prominent. The SH-1 pickups lack mids also, so they are not a great choice for mellow jazz tones (agressive blues or rock tones are no problem) I still have a Golden Age humbucker laying around (that was a little too dark in my ES175 but might just be tempering the Sheraton's brightness), that I will try soon.
Btw, you can hear the Sheraton with the SH-1 in the MySpace of Tracin' Tracy: www.myspace.com/tracintracy, where I played it on the song Jan Jan. Funnily enough to my ears it almost sounds like Green's ES330 with P90s in that (live) registration...
Just my experience with my Sheraton.......Last edited by Little Jay; 11-24-2009 at 06:59 AM.
-
Great replies here guys and lots of info. Many thanks; it'll no doubt save me the headaches if I decide to go for one.
Reply With Quote
Playing live and getting the best sound from the...
Today, 02:08 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos