-
Well, Joe did play that Ibanez, too...
Originally Posted by Stringswinger
Find a competent medium and ask the spirits of Joe Pass, Herb Ellis and Jim Hall. I am certain that they will confirm this.
I know. There's nothing like a good 175. A friend of mine has a 55 that is really the best of it's kind I've ever played. The sound is great and the next is made of titanium, seemingly. Dead straight and not a buzz anywhere. The truss rod isn't even engaged. It's unreal.
-
12-26-2021 10:00 PM
-
I think he played that one reluctantly. Originally Posted by furtom
Well, Joe did play that Ibanez, too...
I know. There's nothing like a good 175. A friend of mine has a 55 that is really the best of it's kind I've ever played. The sound is great and the next is made of titanium, seemingly. Dead straight and not a buzz anywhere. The truss rod isn't even engaged. It's unreal.
-
What is 'thunk' to you? I've heard that for an ES-335 and I get that. There seems to be low-mid content on the neck pickup that isn't there on other guitars. Originally Posted by jzucker
Do real PAFs, T-Tops, Classic 57s, Custombuckers all sound the same to you in an ES-175?
-
And no, those pickups don't sound the same to me but the kessel I had was gutted and the pickups in it were burstbucker pros and yet, everyone who heard it always remarked about what a difference 60 year old pickups made but in truth, I think the wood is largely responsible and as long as the pickups are in the ballpark of a PAF, it comes through ok... Originally Posted by HeyNow
This is generally regarded as the hallmark of thunk...
Of the guitars I've owned, this '62/63 kessel and my '89 175 were the two best at thunking.
-
I'm sure a check was involved. Originally Posted by jzucker
-
Interesting that on the Joy Spring album cover Joe is holding an Epiphone. Of course it’s way too early for the Epi Joe Pass model. I imagine the pic was taken in the 80’s when Joe was holding a clinic or something.
What a bunch of great sessions for Pacific Jazz in the early 60’s.
This is more age-appropriate:
-
I really think from the 70s on this has always been the case with gibson. (talking perfect neck angle) Of course among the lot, there are some done properly, but you have to be able to weed thru and that's always been the case. Gibson is good at making a guitar that is good looking, properly finished furniture if you will. This is what appeals to the masses. They are looking to sell as many guitars possible, and the demand for perfect playability is on the lower side of the spectrum. Proper neck set, and fret height are the most time consuming, human part of guitar building. There will always be great examples, but to think that they all will be that way is way optimistic. They have good time tested designs and when it all comes together you get a great guitar, but more often than not that isn't the case. Originally Posted by jzucker
-
That is *NOT* what he was saying. He was saying that the post bankruptcy run of gibson has been extraordinarily bad in terms of neck issues. He admitted the guitars they are producing now are beautifully finished but that as "guitars" to be played, they are lacking.
Originally Posted by skiboyny
-
I think the comparison to Bentley is interesting. I don't deny their cars are well-made, but they are a luxury item, and by definition excessive. There are a lot of cars that give as much driving enjoyment if not more for a lot less. Like my Miata.
Is Gibson positioning itself to be the Bentley of high-end guitars, with maybe some expensive LP's and 335's on the side, and of course their budget line, Epiphone?
It would be better if they could be like Toyota/Lexus or Honda/Acura, offering a wide variety of products at all price points. Or at least like BMW and Mercedes, which do offer some entry-level models that even a normal person can afford (especially since the average new car price is $40K these days), but of course still have the >$100,000 models for the aficionados.
-
And we thought it was bad when the cement people took over...
-
Gibson has guitars at all price points from the Epiphone imports (low end), studio series (medium/low end), Gibson USA (medium end) and Custom shop (high end). Originally Posted by Doctor Jeff
Right now, the company is being run for maximum profit with an eye to sell the company in the future. KKR lent Henry J. money with an expectation of a good return on the money. When he defaulted, taking ownership Gibson in exchange for the loans was the best solution for KKR (had they simply pushed Gibson into bankruptcy, they would have taken a huge loss). They need to get the value of the company up (something they have a very good track record of doing) in order to not take a bath on their loans to Henry J.
I suspect that they will move forward in a very risk averse manner (bankers are not known for liking risk) and that is why they are mostly selling Les Paul's, SG's, 335's and J-45's at the moment. Those guitars sell. Archtops are a small niche market and I bet that the top brass at today;s Gibson is being very deliberate about starting archtop production again. As I posted earlier in this thread, I foresee well crafted reissues of classic archtops being made to sell at a very high price point. Whether these new reissues will have the magic of the Gibson archtops of the past is an open question. James Culberson is still with them and probably knows how to train luthiers to make great archtops. I am sure that all of the molds and jigs are still in the Company hands and that if anyone can get great tonewoods, Gibson can.
Between the end of Gibson archtop production in 2017 and all of the money printed by profligate governments in recent years, the value of extant Gibson archtops has gone way up. For most players of modest means, these guitars will be unaffordable. Supply and demand puts the price at where it should be. Those who cannot/will not afford one can find many suitable guitars to play. But Gibson's iconic archtops (L-5, Super 400 and ES-175) will have their fans, many of whom will pay what the market bears. Count me among those fans, and as luck would have it, I had 6 Gibson archtops in my possession when they stopped archtop production. I am feeling lucky indeed!
-
I must disagree with your second paragraph here that" Gibsons cost less than the top Luthiers" there are several top Luthiers on this Forum , who charge Originally Posted by Donplaysguitar
There’s always a new generation of young guys that want to be luthiers. Somehow great guitars continue to be made.
I agree that Gibsons aren’t perfect, but they’re pretty damned good and they still cost less than the top luthiers instruments.
I also agree with Jack’s note about tone woods. (Not that I really have any way of knowing). The “aged and seasoned” part that is. That’s not a “volume product” kind of setup
But if we think they suck so hard, why are we worrying about how they will carry on?
far less than Gibson ,for their own superior built Guitars. Having owned Gibsons since 1963 until fairly recently I can safely say that earlier builds & QC
were better, particularly the Crimson Custom shop models..
My significant "others" include Campellone, Collings, Borys ,Ibanez GB, all cost less than a comparable Gibson.
Kind regards, Silverfoxx.
-
I have bought 3 Gibson archtops in past 3 years a Super 400ces , L5c, and a Legrand. I worked with 2 well know archtop makers and I have played most all of them made. These 3 Gibson are as good as any luthier made guitar for quality control and set up, no question. Now I realize this is not everyone's experience but in my case I went to get the guitars myself no shipping involved. They all come from Hutch era and from the early 1990s to even 2010 I think Gibson did great on the custom stuff. However comparing these guitars to Gibson's made in the 1930 and 40's is just not doable. Different era's and too many years apart. When Gibson gets it right they get it right! It is like comparing Babe Ruth to Albert Pojuls, they played too many years apart.
I hope Gibson gets back at it I am a supporter all the way. Right now Gibson archtop's sell quicker and easier than pretty much any other archtop for sure. Someone mention that a good 175 is all a top class jazz guitarist needs no argument at all. In my case I way over bought to make up for no talent.
-
I think in many cases, the companies you list are going for a different tone, ie brighter and more open, for the most part. But point well taken, I didn't mean to imply that there is no skill involved, only that it is somewhat less for pure electrics vs carved top acoustics. BTW can Gibson even make an accurate 175? I've heard conflicting reports... Originally Posted by jzucker
And yes, McKay is very well known for making superior plywood plates, he even supplies them for some other builders. His 335's are said to be the best, but I haven't played one.
-
I really think we are saying the same things, his comments are of what he's seen more recently, mine takes it back further. I think it will get worse, it's simply not where the focus is. Originally Posted by jzucker
-
OK but I was really just referring to archtops at all price points. I'm not interested in Gibson solid bodies. Epi does offer the Wildcat at $500. There are about a gajillion 335-style models between Epi and Gibson. The Epis look to be good bang for the buck, but the Gibsons, IMO, are crazy expensive. Originally Posted by Stringswinger
We're kind of back to the same old argument from 4-5 years ago, aren't we, about what kind of company we want Gibson to be? In the last 10 years, except for the last run 175's offered at sale prices a few years ago, Gibson archtop prices have just gone up up up.
I also consider myself lucky to have gotten 2 Gibson archtops over that time on the used market for a decent price, but the idea of buying a new archtop from Gibson seems unlikely for me at this point, unless there's an unexpected inheritance I don't know about.
-
I've been in conversations with him. He's made several 175s that have gone to blues players. He based them on a very thin top and says they feed back quite a bit so he's trying a thicker top with the next build. Sounds like he has not ironed out all the details. He thought Joe Pass played a thin 175... Originally Posted by bluejaybill
-
Besides sounding fabulous, that's just an awesome stand-out look for you Jack! You really need to find another good one. And a suit and tie :-) Originally Posted by jzucker
-
"It would be better if they could be like Toyota/Lexus or Honda/Acura, offering a wide variety of products at all price points. " Doctor Jeff
Hi, DJ,
Then they wouldn't be Bentley . . . would they?
Marinero
-
I think most of those guys are trying to make an "improved" 175 and in improving it, they move away from what made the 175 so great in the first place. I remember talking to Jay Wolfe at one point to see if he could convince heritage to make a plywood version of the 575 with a thicker body. The two issues were that they did not have any deeper molds so they couldn't make a 3.5" deep archtop and the 2nd point was that they didn't understand why anyone would want a plywood guitar? He told me the 575 was better than the 175 because it was a solid wood guitar. I was like, "but...but...but..." Originally Posted by bluejaybill
I've talked to a lot of luthiers about making a custom 175 and most of them don't want to do it because inevitably they will be compared to the real thing and are afraid they won't live up to it. I actually have heard way more carved spruce guitars that sound like an L5 (triggs, moll, heritage, campellone) than guitars that sound like a 175. I think it's actually harder to make a great 175. It may not take as much raw lutherie talent but the R&D is more involved and it involves measuring the existing plates and reproducing them yourself or buying them from someone as is common nowadays but causes you to rely on someone else.
Tom Painter glued up his own plates and was on the right track but they were too thin and resonated so much they lost the thunky midrange. He couldn't make any money so he went out of business.
-
I've tried. Like the 175, the Kessels are notorious for fingerboard tailrise and other issues. The last one I had had loose bracing that the previous owner attempted to fix with urethane foam glue. Unless I luck into something, I've pretty much given up on a vintage kessel or 175 Originally Posted by ccroft
-
Good lord! I wonder how many instruments have been ruined with Gorilla Glue. As my dear old dad would've said: "That guy deserves to be shot in the ear with a ball of his own sh#t." Originally Posted by jzucker
-
Don't they still have Epiphone? Isn't that enough? Originally Posted by Marinero
-
I was referring to Gibson, not Bentley…Gibson should be like Toyota/Lexus, not Bentley. Originally Posted by Marinero
I don’t give a rat’s whisker about Bentley the car. They don’t interest me in the least. If someone gave me $150K to buy a new Bentley, I’d buy 5 Miatas in different colors. Oh, OK, maybe 4 Miatas and a Jeep.
-
Well it would make me think better of them IF Epiphone offered a quality archtop, which they don’t currently. Originally Posted by Donplaysguitar
They could make an Inspired by Gibson 175 for instance. With Gibson Classic 57’s and specs.
Or the Joe Pass, with decent pickups.
They have some nice 335 types, but the Broadway and Emperor Regent are not to be found.
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Today, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions