1963 ES-175 or is it a 1967?

[garybaldy]

I'm watching what is listed as a 1963 175. Looking up the serial number it says 1963 or 1967. The 175 blog here says a '67 would have the skinnier neck.
Any other obvious differences?
Thanks

[Stringswinger]

The 63 Would have a 1 11/16 nut, the 67 would have a 1 9/16 nut.

Assuming original pickups, the 63 would have PAF's or non-T-Top Patent sticker pickups. The 67 would have T-tops (but you would have to remove the pickup covers to check.

The 63 would have nickel hardware, the 67 would have Chrome hardware.

IIRC, the 62 would have a pickguard attachment to the neck whereas the 67 attachment would be directly to the top.

[jads57]

Agreed with above statement. The 63 would be preferable!

[garybaldy]

The 63 Would have a 1 11/16 nut, the 67 would have a 1 9/16 nut.

Assuming original pickups, the 63 would have PAF's or non-T-Top Patent sticker pickups. The 67 would have T-tops (but you would have to remove the pickup covers to check.

The 63 would have nickel hardware, the 67 would have Chrome hardware.

IIRC, the 62 would have a pickguard attachment to the neck whereas the 67 attachment would be directly to the top.

Thank you Sir
Seller says they are 'pat no. pups (AKA PAFs)'.
There are no screws through pg.
Repair around jack socket and new socket.
I also have a 2016 figured in my sight!
A case of chalk and cheese?

[Stringswinger]

Thank you Sir
Seller says they are 'pat no. pups (AKA PAFs)'.
There are no screws through pg.
Repair around jack socket and new socket.
I also have a 2016 figured in my sight!
A case of chalk and cheese?

Well the early patent number pickups can be the same as PAF's with a different label, but most have a different wire, so they are not the same. Again, you would have to take the pickup covers off to check. Breaking original solders can be a hit to a guitars value.

I had a genuine 63 175 and I own a 2017 Figured 175. They are indeed very different. I was the victim of a misrepresentation when I bought my 63 and I had some restoration work done on it that did not please me so I sold it. I figured I would one day buy another early 60's 175, but today's prices preclude that.

The early 60's 175's have a very slim neck, but at the same time a wide fingerboard. They are not everyone's preference, but I loved it. The late model figured 175's are heavily built (much like the Norlin examples of the 70's) and they have a fairly full neck.

They are both fine jazz guitars, but there are significant differences.

[garybaldy]

Well the early patent number pickups can be the same as PAF's with a different label, but most have a different wire, so they are not the same. Again, you would have to take the pickup covers off to check. Breaking original solders can be a hit to a guitars value.

I had a genuine 63 175 and I own a 2017 Figured 175. They are indeed very different. I was the victim of a misrepresentation when I bought my 63 and I had some restoration work done on it that did not please me so I sold it. I figured I would one day buy another early 60's 175, but today's prices preclude that.

The early 60's 175's have a very slim neck, but at the same time a wide fingerboard. They are not everyone's preference, but I loved it. The late model figured 175's are heavily built (much like the Norlin examples of the 70's) and they have a fairly full neck.

They are both fine jazz guitars, but there are significant differences.

Thanks again. Some great info.
Yeah, the prices now are rapidly increasing.
I should have got myself a 175 a long time ago. I really need to do it now and hopefully have some years to enjoy it (I'm in my mid 60s!) and ultimately as an investment for my children. I'm thinking that going for an older guitar is probably, albeit more costly, the best route to take.

[floatingpickup]

The 63 Would have a 1 11/16 nut, the 67 would have a 1 9/16 nut.

Assuming original pickups, the 63 would have PAF's or non-T-Top Patent sticker pickups. The 67 would have T-tops (but you would have to remove the pickup covers to check.

The 63 would have nickel hardware, the 67 would have Chrome hardware.

IIRC, the 62 would have a pickguard attachment to the neck whereas the 67 attachment would be directly to the top.

Chrome hardware vs. nickel is the easiest way to tell. Going by the pickups can be tricky. My ‘69 ES-175 (which I recently sold) still had patent sticker pickups.
Keith

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

Seller says they are 'pat no. pups (AKA PAFs)'.

I'm surprised no one mentioned this yet. Either they're PAFs or they have a patent #. As I recall, the number stickers went on in late '61 or early '62. A '63 or later instrument did not come out of the factory with PAFs. Whether or not the first pickups with patent number stickers are identical to PAFs is irrelevant to the issue of originality.

[Crm114]

know this board is just the biggest group of enablers to spend

but the smart move is to buy the older 175 the laminate they used were thinner and more resonant this is an era before gibson started over building guitars

get the older one it will be a much wiser investment not only in your playing experience but it’s something you can leave your children


BigMike

[wintermoon]

I'm surprised no one mentioned this yet. Either they're PAFs or they have a patent #. As I recall, the number stickers went on in late '61 or early '62. A '63 or later instrument did not come out of the factory with PAFs. Whether or not the first pickups with patent number stickers are identical to PAFs is irrelevant to the issue of originality.

Pretty much correct for guitars w nickel plating but I have a few mid 60s Gibsons w gold plated PAFs
Gold plated humbuckers didn't get used up as quickly because they went in high end guitars which are much rarer.

[Stringswinger]

Pretty much correct for guitars w nickel plating but I have a few mid 60s Gibsons w gold plated PAFs
Gold plated humbuckers didn't get used up as quickly because they went in high end guitars which are much rarer.

I have heard of some 63's having one PAF and one Patent sticker with nickel parts. My guess is that Gibson did not rotate their pickup inventory very well. Back in 1963 there was no extra value to a PAF.

[wintermoon]

I have heard of some 63's having one PAF and one Patent sticker with nickel parts. My guess is that Gibson did not rotate their pickup inventory very well. Back in 1963 there was no extra value to a PAF.

From what I've heard a lady at the factory reached into a big bin of pickups and pulled out whatever she grabbed first.
And yes, to Gibson the only difference was a sticker.

[Stringswinger]

I'm surprised no one mentioned this yet. Either they're PAFs or they have a patent #. As I recall, the number stickers went on in late '61 or early '62. A '63 or later instrument did not come out of the factory with PAFs. Whether or not the first pickups with patent number stickers are identical to PAFs is irrelevant to the issue of originality.

A Genuine 1963 ES-175 Gibson will have one of three pickups if it is an unmolested original:

A leftover short magnet PAF (I have seen some all original 63's that had one PAF and one Patent sticker Pickup)
An early Patent sticker pickup that is identical to a short magnet PAF; or
An early Patent sticker pickup with different wire (in mid 1963, Gibson started winding the pickups with a different wire)

Patent sticker T-tops came later. After that came Patent number T-tops, then Shaw Pickups, then Classic 57's. On some 59 Reissue 175's, MHS Pickups were used.

The only other factory pickups used on ES-175's were P-90's (1949 to early 1957) and Charley Christian pickups (1978 and 1979)

[Stringswinger]

Chrome hardware vs. nickel is the easiest way to tell. Going by the pickups can be tricky. My ‘69 ES-175 (which I recently sold) still had patent sticker pickups.
Keith

Your 1969 probably had Patent Sticker T-Tops. My 1970 ES-175 had those. My 1977 ES-175 had the Patent number T-Tops. My understanding is that those pickups have other differences besides a stamped patent number vs, a sticker. The earlier ones (with the sticker) are starting to command serious money (compared to the later T-tops), but are still a bargain compared to the early (non-T-top) patent sticker pickups. PAF's are going for stupid money these days.

[garybaldy]

know this board is just the biggest group of enablers to spend

but the smart move is to buy the older 175 the laminate they used were thinner and more resonant this is an era before gibson started over building guitars

get the older one it will be a much wiser investment not only in your playing experience but it’s something you can leave your children


BigMike

Thank you Big Mike
On that basis, I now have to decide if the asking price is fair! I should be able to see it first as it's located just a spitting distance from me.

[floatingpickup]

Your 1969 probably had Patent Sticker T-Tops. My 1970 ES-175 had those. My 1977 ES-175 had the Patent number T-Tops. My understanding is that those pickups have other differences besides a stamped patent number vs, a sticker. The earlier ones (with the sticker) are starting to command serious money (compared to the later T-tops), but are still a bargain compared to the early (non-T-top) patent sticker pickups. PAF's are going for stupid money these days.

Thanks for the explanation. I am not totally up to speed on all of the variations during that period.
Keith

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

I have heard of some 63's having one PAF and one Patent sticker with nickel parts. My guess is that Gibson did not rotate their pickup inventory very well. Back in 1963 there was no extra value to a PAF.

I’ve heard that too. But if one comes up for sale, it’d be impossible to confirm that the NOS PAF was put there by Gibson during assembly. The soldering and other evidence suggesting factory vs post-delivery installation would help, but I don’t see how absolute assurance could be gotten. It really doesn’t matter except to those who would pay more for originality confirmed by provenance.

The reason I posted those sticker pictures is simply that the OP contains the statement that “Pat. No pickups” are “aka PAFs”, and that’s definitely not true. Either it’s one or the other, even if they’re identical apart from the sticker. The seller is being disingenuous in suggesting otherwise.

Ahh, the allure of history!

[garybaldy]

I’ve heard that too. But the reason I posted those sticker pictures is simply that the OP contains the statement that “Pat. No pickups” are “aka PAFs”, and that’s definitely not true. Either it’s one or the other, even if they’re identical apart from the sticker. The seller is being disingenuous in suggesting otherwise.

Ahh, the allure of history!

Thanks.
The statement is a quote from the seller. I too felt it was a little creative! Even with my limited knowledge I am pretty clear as to the different stickers/stamps that were used. My gut feel is that the pups are pat no. stickered which obviously aren't pafs. Hopefully they haven't been opened up. My knowledge of their history/chronology and which were used on what guitar is minimal.
So I'm hoping to check it out tomorrow, try a few II V Is and hopefully see the underside of the pickups!

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

I'm hoping to check it out tomorrow, try a few II V Is and hopefully see the underside of the pickups!

If it’s a good guitar that plays and sounds great, which pickups they are won’t matter unless the seller wants more money for originality. If you love the guitar when you see it, it’s worth what you’re willing to pay for it. I hope it’s what you want and, if so, that you get it and live happily ever after. I’m a sucker for guitar love stories

[bluejaybill]

Thanks for the explanation. I am not totally up to speed on all of the variations during that period.
Keith

Things were all over the place in the '60's. For instance, I have a gold pickup from a '68 LP Custom here, and have been told that it could still be the same construction as a patent number, since it is gold, though it's pretty late for that. I'm not sure how to find out if it's true, but I might put it in a guitar soon to see how it sounds.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

Things were all over the place in the '60's.

True enough - but I think the reason for that is something most don't quite understand: few (if any) cared about these things back then. There was no cult of ceramic or debate over which Alnico was best for jazz. A PAF sticker was just an interim step to patent protection for the pickup design. There were no high output pickups or coil tap switches, at least in production guitars.

What's funniest is that a lot of the things for which purists make a stink and pay through the nose now were done solely for convenience or economics. Leo Fender used car paint because there was a shop near his factory. Those "translucent" finishes were actually the result of his telling his crew to spray only enough paint so the guitar looked [insert color here] - after all, paint cost money. Fiesta Red was a '56 Thunderbird color used only that year. It was nitro, and it was cool - but more importantly to LF, it was readily available to him at an advantageous price.

I don't recall ever seeing non-stock pickups in anybody's guitar through most of the '60s. And having Norlin take over in the middle probably set the entire place to scrambling for dollars by using anything and everything they had lying around.

[John A.]

What I find especially funny about all the esoteric discussion of Gibson pickups is that the consensus for many years was that it was all downhill once they got the patent. In 1978, nobody was talking about T-tops or Shawbuckers. Dimarzio, Duncan, and the entire pickup business was built on the premise that stock Gibson pickups sucked. Ditto for Fender, with CBS being the watershed. Yet here we are praising 70s pickups. It all just tells me that the collector tail has been wagging the player dog for 50 years, and we all should be very skeptical of received wisdom.

[Stringswinger]

Guitar players often pay for what is in their imagination rather than what is in their ears.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

What I find especially funny about all the esoteric discussion of Gibson pickups is that the consensus for many years was that it was all downhill once they got the patent. In 1978, nobody was talking about T-tops or Shawbuckers. Dimarzio, Duncan, and the entire pickup business was built on the premise that stock Gibson pickups sucked. Ditto for Fender, with CBS being the watershed. Yet here we are praising 70s pickups. It all just tells me that the collector tail has been wagging the player dog for 50 years, and we all should be very skeptical of received wisdom.

Examples abound! No one wanted 3 bolt Fenders when they made the switch from 4. For no good reason, everyone assumed that 3 were inferior - and maybe they were, but I never saw any kind of comparison testing to even begin to find out. And today I see ads for ‘70s Fenders at ridiculous prices because they have the “original rare and desirable 3 bolt neck”.

[Stringswinger]

Examples abound! No one wanted 3 bolt Fenders when they made the switch from 4. For no good reason, everyone assumed that 3 were inferior - and maybe they were, but I never saw any kind of comparison testing to even begin to find out. And today I see ads for ‘70s Fenders at ridiculous prices because they have the “original rare and desirable 3 bolt neck”.

Leo Fender liked the three bolt neck and you will find them on G&L guitars. My understanding is that CBS did not do a good job with them and as a result, they got a bad reputation. CBS era Fenders and Norlin era Gibsons were seen as inferior back when they were new and are now commanding inflated prices as "vintage collectables".

This will give University Professors of Marketing something to discuss for many years to come.