Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Posts 1 to 50 of 80
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    I see a lot of negative reviews of the new ES-175s and was curious as to what the complaints were exactly?
    Tone, acoustic sound, weight?
    I refer to these manufactured from the year 2000 to today.

    Thanks.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    I see a lot of negative reviews of the new ES-175's and was curious as to what the complaints were exactly?
    Tone , acoustic sound , weight?
    I refer to these manufactured from the year 2000 to today.

    Thanks.
    I have two 175vos that were made in the last runs. I couldn't be more impressed with these guitars. They totally nail the 175 sound of the 59s. Light and airy with pretty darn good acoustic sound. That said, they both needed some fine tuning out of the box. I have owned many Gibsons and have come to expect set up issues. They have always gotten low marks in that department from my point of view. Most complaints you hear center around the fact that at the price point of Gibson, everything should be tended to. That may be so. Once they are set up to fit you as a player they are hard to beat in all departments, especially the identifiable sound that no other maker seems to get. I have owned more guitars than any one person ever should, by all makers. I have 5 now they all say "Gibson"

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    I see a lot of negative reviews of the new ES-175's and was curious as to what the complaints were exactly?
    Tone , acoustic sound , weight?
    I refer to these manufactured from the year 2000 to today.

    Thanks.
    I am a total beginner in evaluating jazz guitars but what I have read and understood is a some kinda consensus that after 1990 the ES-175 (& ES-165) are mostly better than before.

    There is of course goods and bads from every year and someone likes another ones bad guitar but that is my impression generally speaking about overall standard.

    I have had an ES-165 from 1990s and currently have a ES-175 VOS from 2012 and I have no bad about these single guitars.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    I see a lot of negative reviews of the new ES-175s and was curious as to what the complaints were exactly?
    Tone, acoustic sound, weight? I refer to these manufactured from the year 2000 to today. Thanks.
    I dunno. I have a dreaded Norlin 175 (1982) and I compared it side by side to a 1964 175, to a 1995 ES 175 and to a recent VOS one. My Norlin 175 held up pretty well and I actually preferred it in all 3 cases. It's all cork sniffing I guess. Or taste. Or what have you.

    Kreisberg sounds fabulous on his 70s one (with the off specs maple neck).

    DB

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    My 2013 is a perfect 175. The tailpiece did break, but I got it new so they replaced it no questions asked. I think that can happen to any 175, though. I had 14s on it
    White belt
    My Youtube

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    In all decades there were some excellent guitars, some good guitars, some average guitars, some poor guitars, and some guitars that should never have made it past quality control. Ditto for PAF pickups - some are exceptional, but given the inconsistency in the winding there are also some poor ones out there.
    Last edited by Ray175; 07-05-2019 at 11:15 AM.

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by DB's Jazz Guitar Blog View Post
    Kreisberg sounds fabulous on his 70s one (with the off specs maple neck).

    DB
    I had a 'Kriesberg' maple neck Norlin 175 from the 70s. Although it was both the ugliest and the cheapest 175 I ever bought, with a big volute and black/yellow 'un-burst', it played and sounded as well as any 60s 175, maple neck notwithstanding.

    To the OP, I think it depends on whether you're talking cosmetically, or sound-and-playability wise. Cosmetically, the 2000 onwards 175s do tend to look prettier, with bright 3 colour sunbursts and flamey maple, or the accurate-looking 50s re-issues. Be aware that some early 000s gibsons have sticky lacquer, which feels as you'd expect after a hour's playing. Gibson may well have solved this issue later in the decade. As to how they sound and play, it can vary with the instrument, and of course the set up - as in any other decade.

    You have to actually play the instrument to know what you've got, if at all possible. I've always preferred buying s/h from another player, for that reason - more chance of the guitar being set up properly.

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    I think there are two considerations that are being conflated here perhaps. There is modern design vs old design or modern build quality vs traditional build quality.
    There seems to be broadly two categories of ES 175's design-wise. 50's models and early 60's onwards models. 50's models were lighter build. Some had P-90's. They are not only phsically lighter but acoustically louder. Electricly they are generally brighter and may be with more acoustic edge. Sort of like a carved top guitar.
    60's onwards they are build more heavily. Quieter acoustically. Amplified sound is more electric guitar like, also darker and with more sustain. Still unmistakably archtop sounds. Acoustic air is there, good dynamics, warm and clear. I have an 2013 model. It's everything I could hope for. They are still lighter than most solids. Mine is about 7 lbs.
    There are also VOS reissue models introduced in the 2000's. They are like the 50's models. I prefer the modern heavier design.
    One other possible variation is 80's mahogany back and sides models. They are still part of the modern design. I've never played one but they should be ball park the same as other modern ES 175's.
    In terms of building practices and quality difference over different periods, that depends on who you ask.
    Last edited by Tal_175; 07-05-2019 at 03:02 PM.

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Guitars have to be graded individually. The year it was made is inconsequential. People thumb their nose at the Norlin years. The best Gibson I ever owned was made in 1978.

    I very much liked the final run of 175’s 2016-17 before they discontinued them. Gibson pinned the bridges but the intonation was spot on. They also had Grover’s and titanium saddles. A little brighter but great sustain.

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    I've been consumed with 175s (and 335s) for the 45 years I've been playing. I've played, borrowed, and owned some from every era - 60s Kalamazoo, 70s Norlin, modern Memphis and Custom Shop, (not to mention the Heritage 575s I've tried out). I'm a college professor and researcher by vocation, so I'm always looking for patterns and correlations. When it comes to Gibson ES models, I can't find any generalizations that hold. It truly is a guitar-by-guitar decision. It's so subjective (it drives me crazy!).

    Anecdotally, (and to answer your question) about a year and half ago, I bought a brand new 2016/17 ES-175 from Chicago Music Exchange. (Several guys on this and The Gear Page forums took advantage of the same CME sale.) As much as I tried, I could not "bond" with that guitar. The fit and finish were very bad (the nut was not cut correctly, and there was overspray and finish irregularities everywhere), it was incredibly heavy, and worst of all it sounded "heavy" and somewhat dead. After about six months I sold it to someone who just loves it and plays it all the time.

    Just a few weeks ago, I had the opportunity to play a relatively new 59 VOS 175 at a shop in NYC. I fell in love with that guitar instantly! I probably sat there for two hours playing it acoustically as well as through an amp. It was light and lively and the neck felt wonderful. It was also beautifully finished. I just couldn't afford it and had to walk away.

    I have a 2002 that is being shipped to me to try out and possibly purchase. I have high hopes, but won't know until I pick it up and play. One thing I do know is that I'll know immediately - within one or two minutes - whether this guitar fits me. It's just so subjective.

    I know your question was about 175s since 2000 (I recently posted a similar question about this time period), but someone above mentioned Jonathan Kreisberg's ES-175. Not many of us would give a '70s Norlin 175 with a weird neck a second look on Reverb or eBay; but, man, look what he does with it and how much he loves it! I'm sure folks like Benedetto and Sadowsky have courted him, but he stays with his "substandard" Norlin era guitar.

    This probably doesn't help, but it's been my experience.
    I never practice my guitar — from time to time I just open the case and throw in a piece of raw meat. - Wes Montgomery
    Gibson ES-335 | Gibson ES-175 | Ibanez LGB-30 | Fender Telecaster | Martin HD-28V

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by vinnyv1k View Post
    Guitars have to be graded individually. The year it was made is inconsequential. People thumb their nose at the Norlin years. The best Gibson I ever owned was made in 1978.

    I very much liked the final run of 175’s 2016-17 before they discontinued them. Gibson pinned the bridges but the intonation was spot on. They also had Grover’s and titanium saddles. A little brighter but great sustain.
    Vinny has this correct you really should in the case of a 175 play it and evaluate it on it's own. They vary and just like anything made they have good and bad days in the manufacturing environment. That said though, it has been my contention that if you are having issues of some kind consider letting a pro set it up and fiddle with the guitar to your style of playing. Sometimes players do better with a refret because you get rid of the nubs issue and get a full neck width of fret to play on. If I had a 175 that would be the first thing I would evaluate. Then of course you have the whole bridge issue of using a metal TOM or a wooded rosewood/ebony. In my case I prefer wood but I have seen some 175s because of the pickup configuration that will sound better on a TOM.

    Finally you really should consider have a pro fit you to the guitar. Yes, that is my new term I use because each player has a style and tendency in their own playing and the guitar can be set up for your preference. A few players can do this themselves but unless you have the tools and experience it is better to just get it done by a pro. During the session since it requires your presence to see how you play, it is possible to have explained how to keep the guitar in the correct set up.

    The attention to detail includes how the nut is shaped and depth of the slots, are they nice and evenly rounded on the bottom like the string itself. Also the break over the bridge and the depth of the indent at the saddle. Finally the neck and amount of relief and specific types of strings the player normally uses. It is my belief that most of these issue can make a 175 an incredible guitar if set up properly. You have to look at the basics like the body, neck, and condition, then many of the other items can be changed. You can try different pickups, strings, action, bridges and those 175's are pretty tough to beat. I have to believe that Jim Hall,, Joe Pass, Herb Ellis, and all the rest that gigged and played those guitars took them through the paces. While I am sure they did not abuse them too much they got plenty of action and travel, and stood the test of time. Naturally like a car they need to go in for the routine maintenance. When you find the right one you just say...……..I going marry you and pony up the money.
    specializing in repair and setup, does your guitar play like it should?

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    I have a 2016 Memphis Figured from the CME sale. Guess I got lucky. No issues after a luthier buffed out some remaining red compound from the finish and lowered the nut. I understand it is on the heavy side but it plays like a dream and allows me to get that iconic 175 sound. Not much of an acoustic sound.

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    The CME blowout deals had a lot that I would consider 2nd’s but they also had many that were perfect. I bought 5 175’s and sent back 2.

    I bought a new 2016 when they came out and it was dead flawless. I sold it to Rhoadscholar. I was buying it back. He brought it out to Ca. but Delta Airlines broke off the headstock. Another horrible tragedy.
    It had a fantastic neck and sound.

    I think more than any other archtop the 175 has been all over the map in sound and quality. When you get a good one though they are a tuff act to follow regardless of year. I hope Gibson will make them again.
    Last edited by vinnyv1k; 07-05-2019 at 04:44 PM.

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=vinnyv1k;964753 I bought 5 175’s .[/QUOTE]
    White belt
    My Youtube

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    I like my ES-175, bought new in 2006, just fine. It took a little dialing in (pickup height, string choice and so forth), but the end result was an eminently playable, great sounding instrument.
    Best regards, k

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Anyone who thinks 175's made after 2000 are all (or mostly) bad is expressing an opinion, not a statement of fact.

    And that is a fact.
    _____________________________________________
    "When the chord changes, you should change" Joe Pass

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    I think the problem is there are different constructions of Gibson ES-175 models throughout Gibson's history. The early ones meaning late 1950's till say the Norlin Era, were fairly light weight due to the ply sandwich they used. Also they had different neck shapes and humbuckers depending on year produced. The pre 1957 all had P90's as standard equiptment.

    Norlin changed construction techniches on many of Gibson's models due to cheaper production methods. They also introduced the pronounced volute at the back of the headstock. Henry J and Gibson continued with newer as well as older methods of construction For ES-175's the volute was gone but a much heavier ply laminate constuction was employed.

    With the introduction of Historic 1959 models they went back to original lighter weight construction as well as neck shapes etc from that era.
    Which is best is very subjective indeed. I personally like the heavier laminate construction due to supresion of feedback. But I prefer larger shape necks, which are crap shoot!

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Ray175 View Post
    In all decades there were some excellent guitars, some good guitars, some average guitars, some poor guitars, and some guitars that should never have made it past quality control. Ditto for PAF pickups - some are exceptional, but given the inconsistency in the winding there are also some poor ones out there.
    I have no real expertise with ES 175s - though I wish I had - however when I heard this comment from Ray, although I know Gibson is particularly famous for its inconsistency (even in its golden era), I felt this was true about every guitar I have ever played.

    I have had guitars sitting side by side in the shop of the same brand, model and batch and still found them to be markedly different.

    There are lots of arguments about tone wood, lacquer, bridge materials and whether they contribute as much difference as they are often credited with, but one thing's for sure, we can demonstrate that the instruments sound different than each other. Even seemingly identical instruments.

    I guess this must be true of anything made out of wood. Two pieces of wood weigh differently, have different grain and density.

    The human element that goes into making instruments also increases the amount of variation we are going to have into the building process.

    What it comes down is the combination of elements as well as the synergy between them. A PAF with fewer winds may be brighter and airier and matches well in a naturally darker sounding instrument. That same instrument's potential might have been masked if the pickup they had placed in it, stayed on the winder a bit too long and resulted in a darker pickup.

    Set up also matters a lot! I have recently had a indifferent guitar turn into my favourite instrument after getting a new bone nut and set up done on it. I had no idea what I had until I changed out the pickups and had the set up on it. It was a revelation!

    Some of it also comes down to self knowledge. You start to know what YOU prefer in a guitar, how you want it to feel and what you intend to use it for.

    That heavy ES175 that may seem "awkward" and "clumsy" to one player, may feel "substantial" and "solid" to another player inspiring greater playing than perhaps a lighter, more widely coveted example.

    I think instruments tend to happy or unhappy "accidents".

    Also, have you ever gone back to an old instrument that you used to love and said "What did I see in her?" ...ahem, I mean "it".
    Modern Gibson ES-175-shopping-jpg

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    The Best 175 design for me was actually not a Gibson,but a Benedetto Bambino.
    I know they are way different,but both being laminate Archtop guitars. The Bambino has all of the improvements design wise I would make to a 175
    Smaller, Thinner, lighter, 25"scale, ebony fingerboard, maple neck, nicer shape neck profile, nicer wood pickguard mounted to the pickups, not the body,

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jads57 View Post
    The Best 175 design for me was actually not a Gibson,but a Benedetto Bambino.
    I know they are way different,but both being laminate Archtop guitars. The Bambino has all of the improvements design wise I would make to a 175
    Smaller, Thinner, lighter, 25"scale, ebony fingerboard, maple neck, nicer shape neck profile, nicer wood pickguard mounted to the pickups, not the body,
    I don't think Benedetto Bambino is 175 design anymore then Tele thinline is. If it doesn't sound anything like an ES 175, it ain't anything like an ES 175.
    Last edited by Tal_175; 07-06-2019 at 11:13 PM.

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    I guess there are no modern 175s at the moment as they were not made in 2019?

    I am sure they will be back in production every now and then. Makes business sense.

    the 57 pickups yeah dunno. I swapped mine out for lindy Fralin p90 in humbucker but it did not sound like a p90 so 57 is back in and sounds better. Might try his pure PAF pickup one day when I can be bothered going through the inconvenience of guitar repairs.

    quality and acoustics of my 2012 are top notch, tried many many guitars before settling on it.
    “When you’re creating your own ...., man, even the sky ain’t the limit.”
    Miles Davis

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Never owned a "better" archtop than my current 2010 model.
    "You've got to be in the sun to feel the sun. It's that way with music too." - Sidney Bechet

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    My 2013 ES-175 was the best made Gibson I’ve ever owned. Literally perfect.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by vinnyv1k View Post
    The CME blowout deals had a lot that I would consider 2nd’s but they also had many that were perfect. I bought 5 175’s and sent back 2.

    I bought a new 2016 when they came out and it was dead flawless. I sold it to Rhoadscholar. I was buying it back. He brought it out to Ca. but Delta Airlines broke off the headstock. Another horrible tragedy.
    It had a fantastic neck and sound.
    I saw the guitar yesterday at Pete Moreno's. He said it was a good break. Once repaired it will be very strong. The veneer was not damaged. He'll put a small stinger on it. It will look new.

    Pete built 175s in the 60s through 80s and has repaired them under contract with Gibson from the 70s to the 90s. He knows 175s. The guitar in question he said is excellent.

    Modern Gibson ES-175-20190706_110841-jpgModern Gibson ES-175-20190706_110831-jpg
    MG

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    I wanted a newer ES-175 and choose this 2007 because I wanted red to match my other guitars. I have plenty of traditional and vintage archtops, and I wanted something newer. It is hard enough keeping all my older guitars in good playing condition. BTW, this one sounds fantastic.

    Modern Gibson ES-175-es175-jpg

  27. #26

    User Info Menu

    I got a 2017 ES-175 from that amazing CME blowout. I love it.

    It did take a bit of sorting out -- I had to deal with pickup spring rattle and I changed out the titanium bridge for brass.
    But now it is everything I could want in an electric guitar. I even quit guitar shopping !!!

    Hard for me to imagine they won't start making the venerable ES-175 again at some point.

  28. #27

    User Info Menu

    Mark,

    Thanks for the update on the 175. I was sick about it. Bob please give me the Delta update.

  29. #28

    User Info Menu

    The Benedetto Bambino is way more like an ES-175 in design than a Tele Thin line.
    Perhaps you have never had the opportunity to try one. I will grant you the Bravo model might be even more so,since its 16" and a fatter 2&1/2" deep.

    I used to own a ES-175 as well as a ES-775. Both guitars were great but th Benedetto guitars imo take that design into a more modern spec that seems more practical for today's applications.

  30. #29

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Marty Grass View Post
    I saw the guitar yesterday at Pete Moreno's. He said it was a good break. Once repaired it will be very strong. The veneer was not damaged. He'll put a small stinger on it. It will look new.

    Pete built 175s in the 60s through 80s and has repaired them under contract with Gibson from the 70s to the 90s. He knows 175s. The guitar in question he said is excellent.

    Modern Gibson ES-175-20190706_110841-jpgModern Gibson ES-175-20190706_110831-jpg
    That just breaks one's heart! Thank God it was a clean break. It will be stronger than new when repaired! I don't know how professional traveling musicians doing it anymore. I would panic if I had to check a valuable guitar. All the airline damage reports these days are incredible. And when Air Berlin lost Larry Carlton's iconic 335 for month, that did it for me!
    I never practice my guitar — from time to time I just open the case and throw in a piece of raw meat. - Wes Montgomery
    Gibson ES-335 | Gibson ES-175 | Ibanez LGB-30 | Fender Telecaster | Martin HD-28V

  31. #30

    User Info Menu

    I can't debate ANY of the observations above. Good advice there.

    I've played a few 175 duds from every decade but most were very good but a few were exceptional. Some that were heavier were better than lighter models and one that was RATTY and SHITTY looking was the best. I fell in love with it but at its premium price could NOT bring myself to buy it. I am Sooo sorry I did not buy it and will always remember it as the one I should have never passed up.

    I learned my lesson well enough to get my 1995 which was a score but it too has an issue the next owner will have to accept :-)

    Nitpickers need to buy new. :-)
    Last edited by GNAPPI; 07-07-2019 at 09:18 PM.
    Regards,

    Gary

  32. #31

    User Info Menu

    I went for a Figured Memphis ES 175 during the CME sale, kind of towards the end of it. The one I got had a poorly cut nut. I think that was the main issue. I loved it other wise. I tried to get them to knock off a couple bucks for me to get it sorted but they wouldn’t.

    I returned it and, for a few hundred more, got a 59 VOS 175 which I love in it’s own right. But something about that Memphis Figured really spoke to me. Maybe the metal bridge or the larger frets but I could see having one of each.

    That sale was an opportunity for sure.

  33. #32

    User Info Menu

    This thread has a lot of substance to be a sticker.

  34. #33

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by 73Fender View Post
    I went for a Figured Memphis ES 175 during the CME sale, kind of towards the end of it. The one I got had a poorly cut nut. I think that was the main issue. I loved it other wise. I tried to get them to knock off a couple bucks for me to get it sorted but they wouldn’t.

    I returned it and, for a few hundred more, got a 59 VOS 175 which I love in it’s own right. But something about that Memphis Figured really spoke to me. Maybe the metal bridge or the larger frets but I could see having one of each.

    That sale was an opportunity for sure.
    My 2017 ES-175 has that nut issue -- the top E string being too close to the edge of the fretboard. I kept the guitar and when I subbed in a Brass Tunomatic, I made the groove for the top E a little closer in rather than straight down the middle. It was a good fix -- I've stuck with the factory nut so far. Seldom gives me trouble (but every so often). Interestingly, this is not the only Gibson guitar I have owned with a high E string too close to the edge. I had a Midtown Custom and a LP Junior exactly the same way. I don't think the company sees it as a defect -- but it's definitely not one of their best design ideas.

    Oh, and if we are talking Gibson design misses, might as well mention the ES-175 neck pick up being not level with the strings !!!!

  35. #34
    PM Sent Vinny. THANKS... Quite the adventure with Delta. I paid a premium price for what was supposed to be the 'white glove' shipping treatment for a direct flight. Luckily MartyGrass (Mark) is close to Pete and has helped me get all the necessary info to Delta. Worst customer support experience I ever had with their Baggage claims dept.

    Hoping for a resolution from Delta in 2019 (based on how things have been going so far).

    Pete will make it right and I will have a very rare 175 with the highly sought after "STINGER". I saw some internet posts with broken headstock guitars for sale stating

    'Tone is actually improved when a headstock break is repaired properly'.


    Quote Originally Posted by vinnyv1k View Post
    Mark,

    Thanks for the update on the 175. I was sick about it. Bob please give me the Delta update.

  36. #35

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Franz 1997 View Post
    I had a 'Kriesberg' maple neck Norlin 175 from the 70s. Although it was both the ugliest and the cheapest 175 I ever bought, with a big volute >>SNIP<<
    You say volute like it was a dirty word or that it somehow detracted from it's appeal or value?

    Newer players really need to know that there's absolutely nothing wrong with a volute, and IMO players lost the battle (they thought they won) the day Gibson caved in to the prejudices from the throngs who rose up in protest against the volute.
    Regards,

    Gary

  37. #36

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by GNAPPI View Post
    You say volute like it was a dirty word or that it somehow detracted from it's appeal or value?

    Newer players really need to know that there's absolutely nothing wrong with a volute, and IMO players lost the battle (they thought they won) the day Gibson caved in to the prejudices from the throngs who rose up in protest against the volute.
    I don't think there's anything wrong with a volute, and it may well provide some break protection. I actually prefer a well-executed volute, especially on a mahog neck guitar. However I do think the 70s Norlin volute looked clumsy and out of proportion to the neck dimensions, compared with better-executed volutes of many other guitars. Rightly or ( probably) wrongly, it did detract from the appeal of the instrument, as you've yourself gone on to point out. It's hard to see this particular volute as attractive.

    Anyway, the whole point of my post was to say that ugly ducklings can be great players, which is what matters, and that individual instruments vary, irrespective of the era they were made in.
    Attached Images Attached Images Modern Gibson ES-175-175-b-jpg 

  38. #37

    User Info Menu

    This is from Chuck Thornton's website. The design makes sense but is labor intensive compared to most guitar factory approaches. A couple of years ago Chuck told me that he's never had to do a headstock repair yet despite reports of his guitars falling off of stands and being dropped. However, he hasn't made thousands of guitars. Further, his clientele tends to be more mature.

    Heritage calculated breakage rates with shipping. I don't recall the percent but it was in the ballpark of 2-4%.


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A patented headstock design with a volute in the back of the headstock and a carved top of the headstock for two opposing radii.
    A radius is a very strong architectural design, you can see them holding up bridges.
    By using two opposing radii I feel that the integrity of an angled headstock is far enhanced and much less likely to break if the guitar were to fall.


    MG

  39. #38

    User Info Menu

    Having a hard time visualizing “two opposing radii” on a headstock. Can you give me some help?

  40. #39

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by TedBPhx View Post
    Having a hard time visualizing “two opposing radii” on a headstock. Can you give me some help?
    I think it can already be seen in the pictures. Both sides of where the neck meets the headstock is thickened.

  41. #40

    User Info Menu

    Attachment 63446

    Mark Campellone is a believer in volutes.

  42. #41

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175 View Post
    I think it can already be seen in the pictures. Both sides of where the neck meets the headstock is thickened.
    Ahhh! Now I see it. Thank you.

  43. #42

    User Info Menu

    Radii or not, the neck/headstock junction is fattened up where it otherwise would be thinnest at the truss rod adjustment cavity.

    A completely opposite but even more bulletproof design is the headless guitar. I had one for traveling for many years. No headstock issues whatsoever.
    MG

  44. #43

    User Info Menu

    I bought two 175's from the CME blowout, both were made in 2017. One is the 59 reissue and the other is the figured. Neither is a second. I bought them late in the game when all the seconds had presumable been shipped. Early in the game i bought a 330 that was clearly a second. That guitar was sold to a happy owner for what I paid (and I got to demo it for 8 months or so)

    The 59 reissue is a lightly built guitar that is very much like the best 50's 175's that I have played. The figured is a more heavily built modern guitar. I rotate both on gigs. Having owned many 175's over the years, I can say with certainty that these two are as good or better than any of the older ones I have owned, which included a 63, a 67, a 70, a 77, an 82 and others. Here is a picture of me playing the 59 reissue on yesterday's duo gig with San Francisco guitarist Ned Boynton. Ned was playing a 59 reissue 345. We were doing a concert for the City of Healdsburg in California's wine country. Modern Gibson ES-175-marc-ned-jpg
    _____________________________________________
    "When the chord changes, you should change" Joe Pass

  45. #44

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by gggomez View Post
    the 57 pickups yeah dunno. I swapped mine out for lindy Fralin p90 in humbucker but it did not sound like a p90 so 57 is back in and sounds better. Might try his pure PAF pickup one day when I can be bothered going through the inconvenience of guitar repairs.
    .
    I had exactly the same experience in trading out a humbucker for a Fralin P-90 in a cover. I didn't get the humcancelling version but rather the regular one as it got some really good reviews in magazines.

    I had been having some trouble with "boominess" with the neck pickup I had in my particular guitar with my set up and felt a P-90 would sort things out. It did a fine job at taking away the overly bassy voice of the instrument but I felt it was kind of insipid. It didn't have the strong character I associated with my favourite p-90 wielding guitarists on record. - I wonder if perhaps I would have, against my instincts, liked one that was wound a bit hotter. People seem to love the stock Gibson P90s of yesteryear (and today's also) and many of them are hotter.

    In a humbucker, I would be inclined toward a Duncan Antiquity although they are pretty pricey. I think I might appreciate the degaussing of the magnets over the less expensive Seth Lovers.

    I seem to want something that is difficult to have. A lower output pickup with a darker natural voice rather than finding it through rolling down the tone control. Most lower output pickups tend to be brighter and most darker sounding pickups are higher output.

    I do like Lollar's Charlie Christian pickups, as they are quite loud but seems to resist breaking up a fair bit (I am not sure how they manage to do this. Something about the 38 gauge wire.) however I am also in the market for some humbuckers for the moment. (They also require fewer adjustments to your guitar.)

    It seemed to me that 57 would sound too 'edgey' for me.

  46. #45

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mateo2006 View Post
    I seem to want something that is difficult to have. A lower output pickup with a darker natural voice rather than finding it through rolling down the tone control. Most lower output pickups tend to be brighter and most darker sounding pickups are higher output.

    I do like Lollar's Charlie Christian pickups, as they are quite loud but seems to resist breaking up a fair bit (I am not sure how they manage to do this. Something about the 38 gauge wire.) however I am also in the market for some humbuckers for the moment. (They also require fewer adjustments to your guitar.)
    Try the Lollar CC hb-size. Very happy with mine, at least with SS amps and in full-depth archtops (less of a fan in thin-bodied instruments).

  47. #46

    User Info Menu

    Marco I see you put a tun-o-matic on the 59RI. Better ?

  48. #47

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by vinnyv1k View Post
    Marco I see you put a tun-o-matic on the 59RI. Better ?
    Due to fingertip pain, I have (at least for the time being) gone to 10 gauge strings (DR pure Blues) with a plain third. I need the TOM to have proper intonation. I am using nylon saddles to keep it "warm".

    If my hand heals and I go back to TI 12 flats (my days of 13's are over for good), the wood saddle will go back on. I prefer the dry, woody sound and quicker decay that the wood bridge affords.
    _____________________________________________
    "When the chord changes, you should change" Joe Pass

  49. #48

    User Info Menu

    How do you manage to use a strap on your ‘59 RI? I also have one, and the end pin comes right out. There is nothing securing it in place.

  50. #49

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark M. View Post
    How do you manage to use a strap on your ‘59 RI? I also have one, and the end pin comes right out. There is nothing securing it in place.
    My endpin is a tight fit. It sounds like yours needs some kind of shim.....
    _____________________________________________
    "When the chord changes, you should change" Joe Pass

  51. #50

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by vinnyv1k View Post
    Attachment 63446

    Mark Campellone is a believer in volutes.
    Some volutes are SPECIAL!
    "You've got to be in the sun to feel the sun. It's that way with music too." - Sidney Bechet