2004 Gibson ES-175 Sunburst

[Jabberwocky]

2004 Gibson ES-175 Sunburst - Cedar Rock Studios

No price posted yet. It appears to be a recent listing.

[Max405]

The Benchmark..
Thanks Jabbs. JD

[QAman]

Nice find Jabs- thanks for sharing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[frankl99]

Looks beautiful! I wish I had the money to buy this right now.

[tomvwash]

Already on hold. Would most of you here opt for a 175 over an L-4 CES?

[Max405]

I wish to have both at some point. A maple 175 and a Mahogany backed L4ces.
The methuselah of all things Archtop Guitar (and my bro) Vinny convinced me years ago that while they look the same, play the same and have the same dimensions, they sound VERY different. So, why pick one..
I LOVE the maple 175 that I have. It stands on its own merits. There were mahogany backed 175's made for years that would probably scratch my L4CES mahogany itch, but I'd rather have the L4 level of materials and upscaleness for that version.
But if only one is on your radar, why not look for a 175 with mahogany back and sides? Not a bad idea. I think they were made after 1982 till about 1990. I see them around.
Good Luck finding a nice L4CES. They are rare.
JD

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

Would most of you here opt for a 175 over an L-4 CES?

If I needed an axe for frequent gigging, I’d take a 175. But I prefer the sound of an L4 both acoustically and amplified. So I’d take it over a 175 for a pure pleasure toy that I’d only take outside my home for special gigs.

[Stringswinger]

Already on hold. Would most of you here opt for a 175 over an L-4 CES?

I have owned many 175's (and I have three as we speak), but have never wanted an L-4CES. I have two L-5's and a Super 400 CES, so I do like the sound of a fully carved Gibson electric archtop. I have played a few L-4CES guitars, a couple of times for a complete set, where the other guitarist that I was gigging with let me use his L-4CES while he played my 175.

My feeling is that the L-4CES is neither fish nor fowl (and I know many here will take umbrage at that remark). The dry, woody tone of the 175 is not present while the short scale and smaller body restrains the sweet, detailed tone of the L-5 or Super 400 from happening. That is my two cents on the matter for what it is worth. I would point out that no jazz guitar legend ever adopted the L-4CES as their primary guitar. Perhaps they came to the same conclusion that I did?

[Max405]

SS, Your opinion is extremely valuable to me. It is always based on experience and sound logic.
The reason I plan on adding a nice L4 at some point in my life, is it would probably fit my lifestyle perfectly. I LOVE the appointments. I've stabilized on the L5 and 175 style guitar and that is what I will play, for the rest of my days. To be able to pick up a different flavor of a 175 (like the Tal to my L5's) and sit down a play a familiar guitar that sounds very different in my environment is attractive to me.
To me, the 175 is what a guitar should like. Its etched in me being.. The modern L4CES is a BEAUTIFUL guitar. I want one to!!
JD

[deacon Mark]

I have owned many 175's (and I have three as we speak), but have never wanted an L-4CES. I have two L-5's and a Super 400 CES, so I do like the sound of a fully carved Gibson electric archtop. I have played a few L-4CES guitars, a couple of times for a complete set, where the other guitarist that I was gigging with let me use his L-4CES while he played my 175.

My feeling is that the L-4CES is neither fish nor fowl (and I know many here will take umbrage at that remark). The dry, woody tone of the 175 is not present while the short scale and smaller body restrains the sweet, detailed tone of the L-5 or Super 400 from happening. That is my two cents on the matter for what it is worth. I would point out that no jazz guitar legend ever adopted the L-4CES as their primary guitar. Perhaps they came to the same conclusion that I did?

Well then I have made the same conclusion however let it be known I am far from a jazz guitar legend. I have never thought of it that way SS, but it seems to make sense the round bigger sound of the L5/S400 is different. Wes would still sound great on a L4ces but my guess the sound just is bigger on his L5.

[2bornot2bop]

And to think I gave away a mint 2012 L4CES Mahogany for $3k!

[mwilliams]

I'm a fan of the ES-175. I love mine, and I wouldn't change it for anything. The combination of the ES-175 with my Henriksen Bud 10 is perfection.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

I would point out that no jazz guitar legend ever adopted the L-4CES as their primary guitar. Perhaps they came to the same conclusion that I did?

I wonder if the reason isn’t that the L4-CES was changed so often over its lifetime, made so intermittently, and produced in such low numbers that our heroes never have/had a chance to play, hear, or even see one.

L4 s have always been rare birds. The 175 has been a workhorse for jazz players for decades, as much for its toughness and reliability as for its sound and feel. Most of us who have embraced it (I bought my 175DN in 1961) have used it hard. If I’d had a choice between my 175DN and an L4-CESN even at the same cost, I’d still have taken the 175 because it was my only gigging guitar. A cracked top would have been a serious problem for me with multiple gigs every week. The laminated top was / is bulletproof, and I’d have worried about an L4 every time I exposed it to bad weather, rapid temperature changes, etc. Even loose binding from hydration problems would have caused problems for me - and we didn’t have humidifiers back then.

In about a decade of very hard use, my 175 never failed me, never needed repair, and survived hundreds of weddings, bar Mitzvahs, restaurant and bar gigs, etc. I dragged it up & down the east coast in ratty old cars with neither A/C nor decent heat, and it lived in college dorms and “low budget housing”. The body and neck were still completely intact and gorgeous when I foolishly sold it to buy a new L5CN a la Norlin. An L4 was less likely to have survived such use with perfect attendance and zero repair costs.

But I’ve preferred the sound of an L4 to a 175 since the first time I heard one. A girl in my middle school had an L4C in 1957 when I had an LG-1, and I’d probably have married her if I could, just to be able to play it every day.

[Stringswinger]

But I’ve preferred the sound of an L4 to a 175 since the first time I heard one. A girl in my middle school had an L4C in 1957 when I had an LG-1, and I’d probably have married her if I could, just to be able to play it every day.

I have played some wonderful L-4C's (and non-cut L-4's for that matter). To my ears, an L-4CES is a different sounding guitar.

[Flat]

If memory serves, Joe Diorio played an L4-CES occasionally back in my GIT days circa 1983. Although I also saw him with an ES-175 quite often as well. This image is from his album--one of my all time favorites--"To Jobim With Love." I think this is an L4, although I heard he actually used an ES-175 on the recording.

(Take this with a grain of salt. No doubt my memory is growing weaker daily. And most of my information is sourced from gossip anyway. )

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

I have played some wonderful L-4C's (and non-cut L-4's for that matter). To my ears, an L-4CES is a different sounding guitar.

Sure is! But I prefer both the electric & acoustic sounds of an L-4CES to those of a 175 for jazz. And when it’s your only gigging guitar, and it has to handle everything from bop to rock, there’s no contest - it’s a 175 all the way for me.

The more I think about it, the more I wonder why the “modern” L4 wasn’t more popular even back in the big band era. There’s no shortage of love for 16” bodies among rhythm players. I had an L50 that cut through a 17 piece band like a knife through olive oil. And the original L-4 was a wonderful and popular guitar - why’d it fade into obscurity?

[Stringswinger]

The more I think about it, the more I wonder why the “modern” L4 wasn’t more popular even back in the big band era. There’s no shortage of love for 16” bodies among rhythm players. I had an L50 that cut through a 17 piece band like a knife through olive oil. And the original L-4 was a wonderful and popular guitar - why’d it fade into obscurity?

Wes Played an L-5

Kenny Played a Super 400

Joe, Herb and Jim played a 175

Those are the guitars jazz guitarists all want (me included )

[jazzkritter]

But only Tal played a Tal.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

Wes Played an L-5

Kenny Played a Super 400

Joe, Herb and Jim played a 175

Those are the guitars jazz guitarists all want (me included )

They all played many guitars over their careers, from Fender to D'Angelico. Wes played a 175 when his career started to catch fire. The cover photo on The Incredible Jazz Guitar was the reason I got rid of a gorgeous 345 for a 175 when I was in high school.

Kenny actually considered his 175 to be his "blues and rock" guitar, per this interview in Guitar Player:

"I also had a couple of what I call blues or rock guitars; I set up an ES-175 for that and used the bridge pickup and lighter-gauge strings, for bending."

Joe, Herb and Jim all played a variety of guitars over the years, including Fenders (Joe) and Arias (Herb). They all also had "better" guitars, e.g. Jim played D'Aquisto and Sadowski.

[vinnyv1k]

Huge difference between a maple back and mahogany back L4CES. HUGE tone difference.
Apples and oranges actually. The early mahogany and maple were plywood and after 2004 carved mahogany. IMO the Crimson L4 had a very angelic tone. No thunk just a great sweetness. Not good with drums but wonderful with a piano.

[skykomishone]

... IMO the Crimson L4 had a very angelic tone. No thunk just a great sweetness....

Your opinion is my opinion.
A local guitar store had one priced 'not to sell' that I absolutely loved.