Dumb Questions on Playing a Gibson ES-175

[jonh]

Hi all,

Got my first ES-175, a 1991 model. Fabulous tone, but I have a few dumb questions for the ES-175 experts.

When I play it acoustically and plugged in, it has a compressed sound to it. This is most pronounced when playing it acoustically. By "compressed" I mean if I pick hard it doesn't respond louder like I would expect, it sounds like it is limited by a compressor. The relative volume doesn't change much.

I have several archtops now, including some 1930s acoustics, a '61 Gibson ES-125TD, an Epiphone Joe Pass and a Loar, and I don't experience the same thing with them (at least not to this degree). In my journey looking for the perfect jazz archtop I've played some Heritage guitars, a Fender D'Aquisto and others...again, I didn't experience the extent of the compression I experience on the ES-175.

I'm used to being able to "dig in" when I want to change the dynamics, and I'm used to having the guitar respond.

I've had it a few days and I'm learning how to play it...it seems like it needs a really soft touch and completely different playing style than I'm used to. Using a soft touch I get a nice range of dynamics through the amp. It's just...different.

It has the 3-piece maple neck, maple body, ebony fingerboard and TOM bridge. (It's actually an ES-775, so same body/neck as a 175 with gold hardware, neck pickup moved to the end of the fretboard and more bling.)

So the range of dumb questions for the group here include:
1). Is this compression that I'm experiencing typical of an ES-175 compared to other archtops?
2). Do you ES-175 players use a significantly different picking/playing style on an ES-175 than you would on other archtops, or even semi-hollow or solid body guitars? Do you not "dig in" like you would on other instruments?

Thanks in advance for your sage wisdom and advice. I've learned so much on this forum and appreciate the contributions so many of you have made to it.

-Jon

[gggguitar]

I can imagine a compressed sound going through an amp having something to do with the electronics but I'm having a hard time understanding what you mean if it seems compressed even when playing acoustically. If the guitar sounds just kind of dead acoustically then I'd check that it is properly set up (you got this instrument recently right?) and everything is happy and good with the bridge etc. If is already good then maybe it's just a matter of experimenting with different brands and gauges of strings until you find what the guitar wants the most. In fact I'd start with trying different picks if you haven't already. Picks have such a profound affect on tone and feel and they are so often seemingly overlooked as a variable when people seek to change the sound of a guitar.
Good luck! This sounds like a great guitar. I hope you find a way to love it.

[sgosnell]

The ES-175 is not an acoustic guitar, it's an electric. Most simply don't sound good acoustically. There are exceptions, but they're the proverbial exception to the rule. They are designed and made to be played amplified. The relatively heavy laminated body and two pickups help to prevent feedback, but that does not allow much acoustic sound. What the OP describes seems typical for an ES-175.

[jonh]

If the guitar sounds just kind of dead acoustically then I'd check that it is properly set up (you got this instrument recently right?) and everything is happy and good with the bridge etc. If is already good then maybe it's just a matter of experimenting with different brands and gauges of strings until you find what the guitar wants the most.

Thanks for the feedback gggg...I wouldn't say it sounds dead acoustically, it just doesn't respond when I "dig in" like I would expect it to. Explaining a sound with words is difficult, but to me, when I pick hard it sounds compressed or "squished." If I had a dB meter I suspect the output volume for a medium attack and a hard attack would be similar...it doesn't get as loud as other guitars. It's as if she says, "Nope, this is as loud as I'm going to get." Through an amp, it has the "thump" you'd expect from an ES-175, but I get the best tone if I turn up the volume: I soften my technique so for normal volume I'm picking lighter than I would on other guitars, and for louder volume I'm picking what is "normal" for me. Hopefully that helps.

It is set up...it was in pretty good shape when I got it but I spent about 5 hours setting it up (I've been setting up and restoring my own guitars for several decades).

I should have mentioned in my original post I use T-I 13 flatwounds. I use those on my electric archtops (except 12s on my '61 ES-125TD).

In fact I'd start with trying different picks if you haven't already. Picks have such a profound affect on tone and feel and they are so often seemingly overlooked as a variable when people seek to change the sound of a guitar.

I try different picks all the time. Mostly I use either a Blue Chip STP100, or picks I make from an antique, socially unacceptable shell material. But in this case I'm making a direct comparison from this guitar to all my other guitars, using the same strings, same picks, same technique, and so on.

[customxke]

It has the 3-piece maple neck, maple body, ebony fingerboard and TOM bridge. (It's actually an ES-775, so same body/neck as a 175 with gold hardware, neck pickup moved to the end of the fretboard and more bling.)

Just a note of clarification.....traditionally, ES-175s have a mahogany neck with a rosewood board.

[jonh]

The ES-175 is not an acoustic guitar, it's an electric. Most simply don't sound good acoustically.

Thanks for the reply...yeah, I get that...I just sometimes practice scales or specific licks on my electric archtops unamplified when I'm trying to stay quiet.

What the OP describes seems typical for an ES-175.

Awesome. Thanks, good to know.

[Tal_175]

I think I know what you mean. When you dig harder it does get a bit louder but also thinner. Tone changes a lot between normal picking (my normal is not heavy) and hard picking, losing it's fatness as it gets louder. That happens with my ES 175 as well (2013). I also have a Byrdland, both acoustically and amplified Byrdland retains its tone across its dynamic range better.

Some amps do that too. IMO, Fender Deluxe Reveb's compress the same way when you dig in. It's not a bad thing for me. Part of the character of some amps and guitars. I think ES 335's compress too.

[jonh]

Just a note of clarification.....traditionally, ES-175s have a mahogany neck with a rosewood board.

Yeah, that is true of many ES-175s. The ES-775 has the three-piece maple neck, plywood maple sides and back like the '91-and-newer ES-175s, and an ebony fretboard instead of rosewood.

[jonh]

I think I know what you mean. When you dig harder it does get a bit louder but also thinner. Tone changes a lot between normal picking (my normal is even and smooth) and hard picking, losing it's fatness as it gets louder.

YES! Tal, that's it, that's the description I'm looking for! It gets "thinner!"

[Tal_175]

Yep that's the nature of the beast. At least the modern ones.

[lawson-stone]

Just a note of clarification.....traditionally, ES-175s have a mahogany neck with a rosewood board.

They did use a 3-piece laminated maple neck from 1976-1981. Mahogany bodies ran from 1983-1990. There were some overlaps in components and years as Gibson used up surplus parts. Still it's hard to figure a Mahogany body and laminated neck from 1991. But there are stranger things out there, I imagine.

[Stringswinger]

Jon,

My experience with the 775 is that it is a heavier build than a 175 and while all 175s made past say 1970 are somewhat dead acoustically, the 775 is an extremely dead guitar in that respect. If you had a 59 reissue, it would behave more like your vintage Gibson electric archtop.

Electric archtops with carved bodies react different than electric archtops with laminated bodies (and both are a different beast altogether from an acoustic archtop). Each reacts differently to different picking styles. IMO, an electric archtop, particularly of the 175 variety is at it's best when set up with super low action and played with a soft touch. That is where the magic occurs.

It is all a matter of taste, but I prefer the more lightly built 175's to the heavier built ones and While I think the 775 is a cool idea, I never played one that floated my boat. I hope yours works out for you.

Hope that helps....

[jonh]

Jon,

My experience with the 775 is that it is a heavier build than a 175 and while all 175s made past say 1970 are somewhat dead acoustically, the 775 is an extremely dead guitar in that respect. If you had a 59 reissue, it would behave more like your vintage Gibson electric archtop.
>CLIP<
...at it's best when set up with super low action and played with a soft touch. That is where the magic occurs.
>CLIP<
Hope that helps....

Swinger, thanks, that is all extremely helpful.

[oldane]

The ES-175 is not an acoustic guitar, it's an electric. Most simply don't sound good acoustically. There are exceptions, but they're the proverbial exception to the rule. They are designed and made to be played amplified. The relatively heavy laminated body and two pickups help to prevent feedback, but that does not allow much acoustic sound. What the OP describes seems typical for an ES-175.

+1.

That said, if the action is too low, the strings choke when they hit the fretboard - no room for a decent amplitude. The OP could raise the action a bit and see if that helps. Me, I don't like a too low action as it narrows the dynamic range of the guitar.

[Gitfiddler]

One of the reasons so many jazz players are drawn to the mighty ES-175 is its 'thunk'. It's almost like the builders intended it to sound a bit dead acoustically. Plugged in it turns into another animal, but still has a bit of that muted or compressed sound. That's what a 175 does best. The amazing Joe Pass made that his signature sound.

[DB's Jazz Guitar Blog]

They did use a 3-piece laminated maple neck from 1976-1981. Mahogany bodies ran from 1983-1990. There were some overlaps in components and years as Gibson used up surplus parts. Still it's hard to figure a Mahogany body and laminated neck from 1991. But there are stranger things out there, I imagine.

I read all the time that the mahogany 175s were made from 1983 - 1990 yes. Still, my mahogany 175 is dated october 1982. It has the Tim Shaw pups too, which I really like.

DB

[lawson-stone]

I read all the time that the mahogany 175s were made from 1983 - 1990 yes. Still, my mahogany 175 is dated october 1982. It has the Tim Shaw pups too, which I really like.

DB

Yes that's why I made the caveat about surplus parts. The "break" years are always soft. Gibson would do unpredictable things with components sometimes.

[jonh]

Thanks everyone for your input.

FYI, just to clarify, this guitar has no mahogany. It's a '91 ES-775 with a three-piece maple neck, and plywood maple sides and back like the '91-and-newer ES-175s allegedly have.

[sgosnell]

Oldane is right, it's possible the action is just a hair too low. I set mine very low and pick rather softly, so it's not an issue for me, but it does sound a little choked if I hit it hard, so I don't. If you pick vigorously, you need to have the action higher so the strings don't touch the frets above where they're actually fretted. Get it low enough and there is fret buzz, but just high enough to not get an actual buzz you'll get thin tone, almost but not quite buzz. The first thing I would try is raising the saddle just a little. Ideal action is a very personal preference.

[citizenk74]

Congratulations on your fine new guitar. Many informative replies above. Got any pics? Asking for a fiend;-).

[Cunamara]

Every guitar has its own personality and will have its own relationship with you. That's the reason to have more than one!

[sgosnell]

What kind of fiend are you asking for, Citizen? A guitar fiend, dope fiend, or some other kind?

[mikeSF]

Hi, I've just returned to the forum after many years away. I owned and gigged with an ES-175 for many years. The "compression" effect you describe is real and largely due to the heavily built nature of the guitar. as you strum harder, the additional energy does not result in any meaningful vibration to the top and bracing.
Fwiw.
This thick heavy system is largely responsible for the classic dark amplified tone of the instrument, although stifled acoustically.
Good luck.

[skiboyny]

Hi Jon,
I have a couple of the VOS 175s that are pretty Accoustic sounding guitars but I would tend to agree with a significantly different picking style for these guitars. They seem to sound best with a light playing style particularly in the higher frets. As other people mentioned digging in only makes the notes fall off and sound thin. Also picked ahead of the pickup is important though over the top might be more accurate on yours. I tended to attribute it to the short scale, producing little tension on the strings. Your impressions are on the mark, that said Imo it’s worth the effort. As with any guitar it takes time to learn how it responds best. Have fun good post.

Hi all,

So the range of dumb questions for the group here include:
1). Is this compression that I'm experiencing typical of an ES-175 compared to other archtops?
2). Do you ES-175 players use a significantly different picking/playing style on an ES-175 than you would on other archtops, or even semi-hollow or solid body guitars? Do you not "dig in" like you would on other instruments?

Thanks in advance for your sage wisdom and advice. I've learned so much on this forum and appreciate the contributions so many of you have made to it.

-Jon

[jonh]

Congratulations on your fine new guitar. Many informative replies above. Got any pics? Asking for a fiend;-).

Hey, Citizen, tell your friend/fiend that I do have a pic! Thanks for asking.