Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Gibson country western guitar


Dave F

Recommended Posts

Very cool. How could you resist, Dave? Narrower neck might be a bit of a squeeze. . . did these get the heavier bracing? FB was considering this one in his eBay with some discussion: http://forum.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/84117-1968-country-and-western/.

 

One good thing about local CL ads for guitars such as this ol' CW- met some interesting people that turned into regulars on the jam circuit. Would like to meet Mary/see what that guitar sounds like, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s a beauty, well played so probably a decent one tonally too.

 

The price is insanely cheap-these sell for 2.5x that here in the UK. I think by ‘69 they had gone back to the wider neck, but I quite like the 1 5/8” ‘60s neck so it wouldn’t be an issue, personally...I know it’s a squeeze for some though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An attractive level of mojo here - it probably sounds really good.

The back-braces indicate they're from the 1964 to 67/68 period before goin' bulky. That's a positive sign.

Rare to see the thin bracing/belly-down bridge/screwed down p-guard on the same guitar, but there you go.

 

The wooden insert is an issue if you want the clear characteristics of a light vintage square.

It may still be great, but on the mellow-quiet side - which again suits some players, styles and especially recordings well.

 

Some of these models are down right fantastic. Wonder what the fate of this oldie will be. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You see pickguards screwed down on both 1968 and 1969 guitars so that is no help. The back braces look to be the typical rounded edge variety and a far cry from the days when they were tall, thin and knife edge sharp. I am not sure whether guitars built one year as opposed to the other were more prone to have labels. What I have stuck in my head though was the first time I was able to afford a new/newish guitar was around 1970. Whenever the opportunity would arise I would try out newer Gibsons (as well as Martins). At the time there was nothing really magical about "vintage" guitars to color my perception. I could not have told you what kind of bracing was in the guitars I was looking at. But every time I walked away empty handed because I could find not one brand spanking new or slightly used Gibson I liked the sound or feel of better than the older guitars I already owned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You see pickguards screwed down on both 1968 and 1969 guitars so that is no help. The back braces look to be the typical rounded edge variety and a far cry from the days when they were tall, thin and knife edge sharp. I am not sure whether guitars built one year as opposed to the other were more prone to have labels. What I have stuck in my head though was the first time I was able to afford a new/newish guitar was around 1970. Whenever the opportunity would arise I would try out newer Gibsons (as well as Martins). At the time there was nothing really magical about "vintage" guitars to color my perception. I could not have told you what kind of bracing was in the guitars I was looking at. But every time I walked away empty handed because I could find not one brand spanking new or slightly used Gibson I liked the sound or feel of better than the older guitars I already owned.

Interesting that not even the now legendary 1960-67 squares were able to light your fuse - not to mention 25 years of J-45s and Jumbos

You should tell us more about how the pre-bulky Birds, CW's and SJ's were seen/heard back then. Actually the whole acoustic Kalamazoo repertoire.

I think someone - maybe you - told that there weren't especially many around - due to the price.

Btw. what do you mean when saying 'vintage' in the plus/minus 1970 perspective.

As you know I find these historical glimpses invaluable. I'm sure others do too.

The eyewitness accounts are kind of terrain vague, , , and soon (pardon me) there won't be any storytellers left to remember

 

To avoid any misunderstandings about the braces, these are the ones between the (flat over-side) original and the heavy sticks introduced in 68.

As mention in post #5, the mix on this CW is peculiar - but not in bad way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Emin7- hadn’t you tried a scalloping of the braces experiment on something in the past, and would you ever consider doing it again? Also- I was of the understanding that the CW models had a thinner pickguard, but looking at the reflection around the soundhole, this one looks to be a bit thicker(?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that not even the now legendary 1960-67 squares were able to light your fuse - not to mention 25 years of J-45s and Jumbos

You should tell us more about how the pre-bulky Birds, CW's and SJ's were seen/heard back then. Actually the whole acoustic Kalamazoo repertoire.

I think someone - maybe you - told that there weren't especially many around - due to the price.

Btw. what do you mean when saying 'vintage' in the plus/minus 1970 perspective.

As you know I find these historical glimpses invaluable. I'm sure others do too.

The eyewitness accounts are kind of terrain vague, , , and soon (pardon me) there won't be any storytellers left to remember

 

To avoid any misunderstandings about the braces, these are the ones between the (flat over-side) original and the heavy sticks introduced in 68.

As mention in post #5, the mix on this CW is peculiar - but not in bad way.

 

 

Sorry but I really ain't all that much on philosophizing. There are only two kinds of guitars out there (same as music) that which I like and that which I do not. No good or bad about it. I do though try and figure out what it is about certain guitars that attracts me or sends me running for cover. And having made my living for decades as a research historian putting things in an historical context is just second nature.

 

As a starting point the only square shoulder Gibson I have owned was a very early 1963 B45-12 on which the neck, of course, was not an issue. I have not been able to shake that square shoulder version out of my head. I actually tried to buy it back but crashed and burned. But the six string square shoulder Gibsons just do not work for me. Even if I could get past the 1960s neck carves, one of the things I really like about Gibsons was their quicker decay. They burst out and bloomed and then just as quickly faded away. For me this is what truly separated slope shoulder Gibsons from Martins and the rest. The square should versions tend to be a bit brighter sounding and do not have that quick decay but ring out longer. Again not a good or bad thing just a personal preference. It is hard to argue with I think it was John Hiatt who described the Hummingbird as the greatest Rock & Roll acoustic in the world.

 

In the historical context though I see the square shoulder SJ/CW and then the J-45/50 as part of the great homogenization of Gibson. One size fits all. In 1969, for the first time since 1934, Gibson was offering not one slope shoulder jumbo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but I really ain't all that much on philosophizing. There are only two kinds of guitars out there (same as music) that which I like and that which I do not. No good or bad about it. I do though try and figure out what it is about certain guitars that attracts me or sends me running for cover. And having made my living for decades as a research historian putting things in an historical context is just second nature.

 

As a starting point the only square shoulder Gibson I have owned was a very early 1963 B45-12 on which the neck, of course, was not an issue. I have not been able to shake that square shoulder version out of my head. I actually tried to buy it back but crashed and burned. But the six string square shoulder Gibsons just do not work for me. Even if I could get past the 1960s neck carves, one of the things I really like about Gibsons was their quicker decay. They burst out and bloomed and then just as quickly faded away. For me this is what truly separated slope shoulder Gibsons from Martins and the rest. The square should versions tend to be a bit brighter sounding and do not have that quick decay but ring out longer. Again not a good or bad thing just a personal preference. It is hard to argue with I think it was John Hiatt who described the Hummingbird as the greatest Rock & Roll acoustic in the world.

 

In the historical context though I see the square shoulder SJ/CW and then the J-45/50 as part of the great homogenization of Gibson. One size fits all. In 1969, for the first time since 1934, Gibson was offering not one slope shoulder jumbo.

Yeah, thanx - thoughts, memories, small snap-shots are all welcome.

 

Don't need to get too deep about it, but I'm sure a lot of us here find it hyper-interesting to hear how guitars

that later became mythical actually 'sat in' reality before they achieved that status.

 

I know I've said it earlier, yet it's hereby repeated :

The eras when the (later) classics first met an unprepared audience and were received, discussed, loved, respected, put aside, chosen are highly intriguing.

They tell us so much about culture, style, fashion, prejudices, crazes, etc. , , , and put everything - vintage as contemporary versions - in a new light.

 

It's a bit like only to have seen Willys Jeeps in museums, Hollywood movies and cartoons and then suddenly watch actual footage'n'photos of the vehicle.

Stuck on cratered mountain-routes, parked by a muddy lake, half hidden behind ruins, sunken in sand, just being a bed, , , or raging through flames. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a bit like only to have seen Willys Jeeps in museums, Hollywood movies and cartoons and then suddenly watch actual footage'n'photos of the vehicle.

Stuck on cratered mountain-routes, parked by a muddy lake, half hidden behind ruins, sunken in sand, just being a bed, , , or raging through flames. .

 

That three speed manual in the Willys Overland jeep presented one heck of a learning curve and the unyieldingly hard suspension made your back feel like jello. Great little engine though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Emin7- hadn't you tried a scalloping of the braces experiment on something in the past, and would you ever consider doing it again? Also- I was of the understanding that the CW models had a thinner pickguard, but looking at the reflection around the soundhole, this one looks to be a bit thicker(?).

 

To my knowledge all screwed down guards are thick.

The thin CW and SJ guards are typically from the early wave which (as you know) is between 1962 and 67 (we look away from widths here).

Never the less I saw a first year Southern Jumbo with neutral thick guard the other day. Might try and find it again - think it's rare.

 

Regarding scalloping the answer is not only no, but NO! Wouldn't dare.

However I re-voiced several guitars, but only after personal instructive correspondence with both mister Scott van Linge and Bryan Kimsey - two very generous gentlemen.

Won't go into detail, advice you to search their pages for information. But the clue is to go slow and highly sensitive. And be willing to take those 6 wires off'n'on a lot.

 

 

That three speed manual in the Willys Overland jeep presented one heck of a learning curve and the unyieldingly hard suspension made your back feel like jello. Great little engine though.

Presume you wheeled around in one when drafted, , , and that they were built like a tank (to stay in guitar-lingo).

Not a bad memory to carry. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding scalloping the answer is not only no, but NO! Wouldn't dare.

However I re-voiced several guitars, but only after personal instructive correspondence with both mister Scott van Linge and Bryan Kimsey - two very generous gentlemen.

Oh.

 

Maybe it was MisterGibs, but I believe he was in visiting the laboratory of his luthier, looking to have his top shaved in just the right places:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS8L7xPmtP0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...