-
Hi there.
I went out yesterday and tried about 10 hollowbody guitars ranging from £1000 - £3000 and to my surprise it was a 60-something year old Gibson ES-125 that I bonded with far more than anything else. Ideally, I would like a cutaway, but not if it means compromising on what I liked about the standard ES-125 that I tried. The two dealbreaker aspects for me are:
1) the acoustic tone. This is a great acoustic instrument that sounds even across the whole spectrum. Something to do with the light weight construction and vintage woods. It doesn't over pronounce any frequency range and nothing is missing, down to about 100hz. The whole thing resonates brilliantly with decent volume; its dynamic, percussive, woody and punchy, without being weak, thin and tinny like most of the modern guitars I tried.
2) the neck. This tiny neck is perfect for me. I'd guess is was 42mm or less at the nut, maximum 12" radius, not that wide at the 12th fret, shallow depth D shape, and I suspect the scale was 24.75". For a rhythm player with small hands like me, it was a joy.
Now, with the full depth cutaway not being introduced until 1965, I am concerned that there may have been modifications made to the original design. A sturdier, heavier body or a thicker D shape neck for example?
I can't find any cutaways currently for sale in the UK, so I may have to make a blind purchase. Any advice very welcome. ThanksLast edited by TEMAS; 12-13-2018 at 07:48 AM.
-
12-13-2018 07:32 AM
-
I don't understand. If you like feel and sound of this guitar, and the price is right, why do you bother about a heavier body or shape of the neck? But if the non-cutaway is the dealbreaker then keep looking for that. Maybe someday you will find one you like in the same way.
-
Thanks. I think you misunderstood what I meant. The guitar I tried had no cutaway. I would much prefer to have a cutaway (on all my guitars), but I have never tried an ES-125C and I can't find one. I'm worried to buy one without trying in case it is a different construction - for example heavier.
Thanks again.
-
I see, I thought you were considering whether to buy the non-cutaway 125
-
If I found a guitar within my price range, I like the sound and the playability (neck), I'd buy it. You can get by fine without a cutaway. There is no money above the fifth fret anyway.
-
Yep, I know what your saying. It wouldn't be the first time I've regretted not being decisive, but I do quite often like to strum the low E and A strings quite high up the neck and its annoying when I'm restricted.
Also, it wasn't 100% perfect. The frets were getting pretty low and with a couple of notes you had to go easy to prevent buzz. I do still have one more guitar to go and see - a Martin CF1.
-
You'll probably lose a little of acoustic tone with the cutaway version (even more with the two pick-up version). But bear in mind that there's quite a bit of variation in the acoustic tones of both cut and non cut versions, so you never really know until you play it. As far as construction goes, ca. 1965-69 most Gibsons had 1-9/16" nuts (vs 1-11/16" before and after this period), which makes for a narrower string spacing that some people find uncomfortable. If you're digging this 125 so much, I'd say a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, and it'll have strong re-sale value if something you like better comes along later.
Originally Posted by TEMAS
John
-
The cutaway ES-125TC is, of course, a thinline guitar. Different animal. Plus, it has a different neck joint than the older, full-depth ES-125. The Thinline 125TC has tended towards neck joint problems (although mine never developed any).
If I were you, I'd go ahead with the non-cutaway.
-
Non cutaway Gibsons are just great.
Buy it !!!!
-
Not all cutaway ES-125 are thinline, though. I own a full depth ES-125CD (cutaway, dual pickups) which is very light and a great electric guitar... but not much of an acoustic guitar. Originally Posted by Greentone
This said, I cannot compare with the non cutaway version as I never played one. Also, my guitar has the less common TOM style bridge instead of the more common floating wooden bridge, and I think this greatly impacts its acoustic tone.
-
Argh! The last two comments really worry me. The non cutaway I tried sounded great. I mean, it wasn’t like a flat top, but that’s not what I’m looking for. It just had charm.
And yes, I’m only interested in the deep body cutaway, not the thinline.
I need to go and test that CF1 and if it doesn’t hold up, it looks like a non cutaway es125 is on the cards.
-
I thought an ES125 with a cutaway is basically what an ES175 was. Especially the original single-pickup P90 version?
-
There seems to be two versions of the ES-125CD: an apparently more common version with the standard wooden floating bridge (like the one you tried), and a less common one with a set TOM bridge, like I have, which is probably more intended to be a pure electric: this bridge won’t transmit much vibrations to the top. Originally Posted by TEMAS
if acoustic qualities are important to you, look for the former.
-
Just my 2 cents Originally Posted by TEMAS
That would be exactly how I describe the tone of my '59 125 and why it changed my mind on the need for a cutaway if it "could" mean giving up on some of its tone!
Before that, I could never consider any guitar without one as every single one I bought in the past had a cutaway even my flat tops...
I realised my technique was not involving so much playing beyond 12th fret, might be different for you of course.
Martijn Van Iterson playing his non cut '56 125 was a huge inspiration in getting one myself
I get pretty much the same tone (unfortunately not the chops)
Those from the early to mid '50s tend to be more desired, but my '59 has exactly the neck I was looking for as '58 and older models tend to have a fuller neck contour which I don't like.
Dutchbopper a former forumist here owned both an older model from the '50s and now has a '60s which he likes even more based on his comment.
I would even sell my Tal Farlow before my 125, its that good an instrument (not that I will ever sell the Tal)
-
I just bought a non-cutaway ES-125 and love it for a lot of the reasons you said: the acoustic tone is fantastic with a deep, rich bass that doesn't drown out anything else. It's my favorite part so far and I'm very excited to get it home so I can plug it in.
I was also concerned with not having a cutaway, but I figured the price difference and instrument availability made it worth it to at least try this guitar out and, if it doesn't work, sell it and put the money toward something with a cutaway.
But I don't think that's going to happen. I love how balanced it is tone-wise and how light and comfortable it is in my hands.
-
I look at it more as a tradeoff/compromise than as the non-cut being just as playable. I have a non-cut archtop (Godin Kingpin, sort of a 125 wannabe). I got it because it works for me as both a quiet but good-sounding acoustic guitar (something I find very useful) and an electric guitar. But I do find the lack of cutaway to be a bit of hindrance, not just above the body joint, but a couple of frets south of there, especially for chords and for notes on the lower strings. But it is what it is and there are so many other benefits (as there would be with a 125), that I'm not complaining (not much, anyway ...).
John
-
Thanks so much for the information; it’s been really helpful. I auditioned a further 4 guitars today - a Martin CF1, a 70’s Yamaha, a 70’s Gretsch and most revealing a 50’s es-175 (which was way out of my budget anyway).
They all had their pro’s and cons; the CF1 was loud, quite balanced, decent bass and had a very reverberant sound from inside that was almost like a flat top, but it lacked the ‘charm’ of the es-125. The es-175 was the close, but it lacked something.
So that’s it. Decision made - my next guitar will be a non-cutaway 125. Bring it on!
-
You won’t regret it!
(Sorry, had to find an excuse to post these pictures!)
Reply With Quote
2 new & excellent Jazz Comping Truefire...
Yesterday, 10:22 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions