fretplay Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Have any members experience with Gibson ES137 and Gibson ES175. How do they compare and which would you close between the two? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versatile Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Interesting to compare the two.... The ES 175 in several forms is a hollow jazzer from way back The ES 137 is a semi which evolved from the ES 135 which was not a total success General concensus and MOX is that the ES 137 is a very well realised hybrid A mahogany centre block and LP style pickups give it a modern versatility Whilst retaining the great looks of a florentine archtop with jazz capability The ES 175 is a 'piece of history' and well loved by many The ES 137 is a successful update to the archtop theme with a wider usability.... V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JellyWheat Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Interesting to compare the two.... The ES 175 in several forms is a hollow jazzer from way back The ES 137 is a semi which evolved from the ES 135 which was not a total success General concensus and MOX is that the ES 137 is a very well realised hybrid A mahogany centre block and LP style pickups give it a modern versatility Whilst retaining the great looks of a florentine archtop with jazz capability The ES 175 is a 'piece of history' and well loved by many The ES 137 is a successful update to the archtop theme with a wider usability.... V This is an outstandingly good summary! Well done! I'd like to add: the ES 175 is very prone to feeding back, and not always at the same volume or frequency. A lot of the feedback characteristics change with the room, which can be a real pain. Also ES 175s have a "drier" sound with much less sustain than an ES 137. Everybody loves to crap on the 490/498 pickup combination, but I find these pups to be very well-balanced to one another, and extremely versatile... HOWEVER, I have to back the volume control down a bit to get the sounds I like. I have owned many, many Gibson archtops and hollowbodies over the years, and I must say my ES 137 Classic is probably the best of the bunch. I used to like my Howard Roberts Fusion a lot, but the 137 I have now is much, much nicer sounding, more beautiful, easier to play, and retains that classic Gibson hollowbody vibe that is coveted by so many. As someone else posted in another thread, the ES 137 is worthy of the "Gibson Custom Shop" moniker, IMO. My $0.02/FWIW J/W [PS: If you want to get some idea of the difference in sound, check out these 2 tunes. Route 66 was played on an ES 165 Herb Ellis (a 1-pickup ES 175), and It Don't Mean a Thing was played on the Howard Roberts with 490R/498T pickups/jw] http://soundcloud.com/search?q%5Bfulltext%5D=JellyWheat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy2 Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 I actually compared an ES 137, 137 Custom, and 175 back to back so to speak when I was shopping for a new guitar 6 years ago. Whereas I was very impressed with the 137 Custom, I actually liked the feel and the sound of the 175 more, and bought it. I had been comparing Gibson guitars in both a "clean" and "dirty" setting and found the 175 to have the most pleasant clean sound. Having humbuckers, all three guitars sounded great with the distortion turned up. My best advice is to try out both guitars back to back for yourself and see which one you prefer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincentw Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 My only concern would be the feedback issue on 175s. The 137 will do better at higher gain situations. Both sound good clean, but if it's a jazzier cleaner sound you're going for then the 175 is probably the winner tone-wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanC Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 My only concern would be the feedback issue on 175s. The 137 will do better at higher gain situations. Both sound good clean, but if it's a jazzier cleaner sound you're going for then the 175 is probably the winner tone-wise. I own both a 137 and a 175. I really like both but the choice for me about which guitar I play is about what sort of music I want to play. Given that I mainly play in a jazz guitar duet and play jazz standards, I use the ES175 a lot. I never use the 137 for this purpose. Why because the 175 is built for this type of music and sounds great. In my opinion the 137 is better for when you are using greater amplification and playing more in the jazz/funk, jazz/rock, country rock styles. But that's just my view! I agree with the sentiment expressed above that for many jazz players the 175 is a work horse in the industry and at one stage was the most played working jazz guitar on the planet. It is an icon in the jazz world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CajunBlues Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 I play in a 15 piece jazz big band. We play everything from litte brown jug, in the mood to James Brown, or BB Kings let the good time roll to Miles Davis.... Along with the rocky theme and some Chicago... etc.... So I need a guitar that can handle funk/rock as well as any type of jazz... I once owned an ES175, but I didn't like its tone for the rock oriented stuff.... So, I bought a 137.... it fits the bill perfectly... Also my LP custom does well for this purpose also.... Jazz sounds just as good on a LP custom or 137 as it does on a 175... p.s. Trying solo over a big band creates feedback issues with a 175.... Just another reason to not use it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JellyWheat Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 I play in a 15 piece jazz big band. We play everything from litte brown jug, in the mood to James Brown, or BB Kings let the good time roll to Miles Davis.... Along with the rocky theme and some Chicago... etc.... So I need a guitar that can handle funk/rock as well as any type of jazz... I once owned an ES175, but I didn't like its tone for the rock oriented stuff.... So, I bought a 137.... it fits the bill perfectly... Also my LP custom does well for this purpose also.... Jazz sounds just as good on a LP custom or 137 as it does on a 175... p.s. Trying solo over a big band creates feedback issues with a 175.... Just another reason to not use it... FWIW, I agree completely. I think my ES 137 would be mt "Desert Island" guitar (... or maybe one of my Strats? .. or BOTH? LOL), but my Les Paul "Guitar of the Week" worn Studio with P-90s and Studio Plus with 490R/498T continually amaze me when I play mixed genres on them. Lester surely got it right! I think only a performing musician could have designed something as practical. [i can coax some pretty nice Jazz and funk tones out of my old Telecaster with factory Bigsby, however!] Regards J/W \:D/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CajunBlues Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 I should also add that the ES335 or any configuration like it (dot/riviera/sheraton), makes a great all around jazz/rock guitar... If you can't tell, I am a big fan of the semi-hollow... I just hate trying to do electrical mods on them... nasty stuff... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JellyWheat Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 You're right again, on both counts, as far as I'm concerned. The only thing that bothers me about the ES 335 is that it FEELS quite a bit bigger to me than the ES 137 or ES 165/175. I once had a 1962 ES 330 that I traded in for a POS '67 Stratocaster. I NEVER should have let that guitar go, but I was only 18 at the time and didn't know what I had. The only reason I haven't included the 330 in this conversation is that I find they are quite prone to (uncontrollable) feedback issues, too. In some respects, I found the ES 330 more problematic than dealing with feedback on a full-thickness hollowbody... My old one would feed back considerable bad, even when I stuffed rags into it (carefully!). J/W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CajunBlues Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 You're right again, on both counts, as far as I'm concerned. The only thing that bothers me about the ES 335 is that it FEELS quite a bit bigger to me than the ES 137 or ES 165/175. I once had a 1962 ES 330 that I traded in for a POS '67 Stratocaster. I NEVER should have let that guitar go, but I was only 18 at the time and didn't know what I had. The only reason I haven't included the 330 in this conversation is that I find they are quite prone to (uncontrollable) feedback issues, too. In some respects, I found the ES 330 more problematic than dealing with feedback on a full-thickness hollowbody... My old one would feed back considerable, even when I stuffed rags into it (carefully!). J/W looks like we are the same wavelength (so to speak) :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JellyWheat Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 B) A-a-a-a-h YUP! Looks like! [... us old blues guys ride the same sorta roads, so we tend to git saddle-sore in the same spots!] J/W :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I started on a classical guitar (even for blues) so... I'm likely prejudiced in ways toward a thicker body. I've never played a 137, but it's a gorgeous semi. But semis will give a different playing geometry than a full hollow (or even one with a log in the middle). The 175 somehow to me simply is "the" electric guitar. No, I likely wouldn't use it in a country or country/rock band. A dot or sg would handle that in my preference, although I had a lotta fun with a not dissimilar-sized '50s Harmony cutaway archtop playing country rock in the '70s... A number of factors why the 175 stayed home, but the ... atmosphere ... of country saloons and -20-30 F weather had something to do with it. Don't ask my why the 175 seems most to help me play. The 335 shape somehow is enough of a different geometry that I end up playing it ... differently. It's the thickness... or where the waist is... or I dunno. The nut seems narrower somehow, even though a ruler tells a different tale. I dunno if you'd feel the same way with the 137, although I have a hunch that the thin body would make me feel that way with my short arms. So... My semi goes to this or that sorta gig that doesn't seem right for the 175. Hard to 'splain. More likely for country and rock and blues variations with a group. The 175 is unbeatable for a solo gig, IMHO. The 137 is around $1,500 less new than the 175. <grin> So... if you play country saloons... m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JellyWheat Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I started on a classical guitar (even for blues) so... I'm likely prejudiced in ways toward a thicker body. I've never played a 137, but it's a gorgeous semi. But semis will give a different playing geometry than a full hollow (or even one with a log in the middle). The 175 somehow to me simply is "the" electric guitar. No, I likely wouldn't use it in a country or country/rock band. A dot or sg would handle that in my preference, although I had a lotta fun with a not dissimilar-sized '50s Harmony cutaway archtop playing country rock in the '70s... A number of factors why the 175 stayed home, but the ... atmosphere ... of country saloons and -20-30 F weather had something to do with it. Don't ask my why the 175 seems most to help me play. The 335 shape somehow is enough of a different geometry that I end up playing it ... differently. It's the thickness... or where the waist is... or I dunno. The nut seems narrower somehow, even though a ruler tells a different tale. I dunno if you'd feel the same way with the 137, although I have a hunch that the thin body would make me feel that way with my short arms. So... My semi goes to this or that sorta gig that doesn't seem right for the 175. Hard to 'splain. More likely for country and rock and blues variations with a group. The 175 is unbeatable for a solo gig, IMHO. The 137 is around $1,500 less new than the 175. <grin> So... if you play country saloons... m "Short arms"... never heard that one before. Mine stretch all the way from my shoulder to my wrist bone. How much longer do they have to be? [... just wondering!] J/W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Jelly... Let's put it this way; a shirt that fits the body and comes with a 32-inch sleeve has sleeves about 2 inches too long. The average sport shirt gets rolled up twice and comes to the wrist bone. (That's why I loved being able to afford custom shirts when I traveled to Korea in the 80s and early 90s. Less than Walmart!) I've noticed that it's harder to get a barre at the lower frets on a thin body, either solid or thin-hollow, without getting an Aikido-like bend in the wrist which can't be all that good an idea - yet no prob with the 175. ??? I dunno why exactly. Just seems that way anyhow. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JellyWheat Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Jelly... Let's put it this way; a shirt that fits the body and comes with a 32-inch sleeve has sleeves about 2 inches too long. The average sport shirt gets rolled up twice and comes to the wrist bone. (That's why I loved being able to afford custom shirts when I traveled to Korea in the 80s and early 90s. Less than Walmart!) I've noticed that it's harder to get a barre at the lower frets on a thin body, either solid or thin-hollow, without getting an Aikido-like bend in the wrist which can't be all that good an idea - yet no prob with the 175. ??? I dunno why exactly. Just seems that way anyhow. m Just an observation: if your avatar is illustrative of your usual left-hand playing posture, may I suggest that you are bound to have problems with barre chords. There always needs to be some room for "peanuts, M&Ms or miniature marshmallows" in the palm of your fretting hand (as I am wont to tell my students...). Generally, the more we play on the pads of our fingers AND the pad or the side of the first joint of the thumb, the stronger the muscles in the forearm become, and the easier it is to play as time goes on. Do I fret notes with my thumb? Damned right I do, BUT I am keenly aware of it when I do so. It is a conscious decision that I manage consciously so that it doesn't become a bad habit. As for your preference for ES 175s... does it require explanation or justification? Is it, in fact, driven by the length of your arms? Probably not [after all, some guys I know get really excited by women who don't shave their armpits ... there's just something there that appeals to them ]. Whatever floats yer boat is what I sez! ES 175s are gorgeous-looking, great-sounding, iconic instruments that have their own irreplaceable niche in the panoply of guitars. You cannot go wrong with one. Do they do everything with equal aplomb... nope, but the many things they can do, they do very, very well! My $0.02/FWIW/YMMV J/W B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 jw... Just checked your profile and saw you're just a kid my little brother's age. <chortle> Seriously, a lot depends on what I'm playing. If I'm doing certain things I do a lot of thumb stuff; if I'm doing other stuff it's about as close to a classical guitarist's hand positioning as you'll get. E.g., Ian Tyson/cowboy stuff it's a lotta thumb. I had a batch of pix of me playing at a cowboy poetry/music thing in Montana this fall and all you could see was right hand fingerpickin' and only my thumb on the bass E. I know my fingers were ready to do some other stuff in "G," but... Otoh, if I were doing stuff like Misty or Satin Doll... pretty much as though I were doing Bach - which also works well on a light-strung 175. Then I'm a nut on wrist/finger/thumb-on-the-neck positioning. I figure when you have no talent you've gotta work for skill. <grin> m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JellyWheat Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 jw... Just checked your profile and saw you're just a kid my little brother's age. <chortle> Seriously, a lot depends on what I'm playing. If I'm doing certain things I do a lot of thumb stuff; if I'm doing other stuff it's about as close to a classical guitarist's hand positioning as you'll get. E.g., Ian Tyson/cowboy stuff it's a lotta thumb. I had a batch of pix of me playing at a cowboy poetry/music thing in Montana this fall and all you could see was right hand fingerpickin' and only my thumb on the bass E. I know my fingers were ready to do some other stuff in "G," but... Otoh, if I were doing stuff like Misty or Satin Doll... pretty much as though I were doing Bach - which also works well on a light-strung 175. Then I'm a nut on wrist/finger/thumb-on-the-neck positioning. I figure when you have no talent you've gotta work for skill. <grin> m OK, milod... it was just a suggestion. One of my friends who is a [top] session guy in Nashville and I were talking and laughing a while back about some of the biggest lessons we have had to learn along the road. Call them "Biggest Obstacles to Overcome". We both remembered a bunch of them. Then Bill said to me "You know what, J/W, we're just saying the same thing in this conversation as all the other guys and gals I ever talk to about technique: if you find it difficult, then you are doing it WRONG, simple as that. You have to stop and figure out the way in which you are interfering with yourself, and find a way around it." IMO, truer words were never spoken. [And BTW, I don't really buy that the "geometry of the guitar" has much to do with it. I think its more how you effectively one learns to work with the particular situation at hand. Guitars are a lot like women... each one seems to prefer a certain touch, and you have to throw away the stereotypes in order to get the best response out of them.] But that's just my OPINION. That and 85 cents will buy you a Krispy Kreme donut! Peace. J/W B) [being old does not, of necessity, make us right!... another of my unsolicited opinions] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Yupper on guitars like women... a great shape, but there's strings attached. And they're either sharp or flat. Hmmmmm. I know what you're sayin' on the "if it's hard you're doing it wrong" thing. As I said, when you've no talent you've gotta work for skill. As for the geometry thing... I've done martial arts since I was about 12, and after 20-30 years, that really got me figuring how the joints work, the geometry, the feel... and what happens when the geometry is wrong - as in using a mouse on the computer so you get carpal tunnel syndrome. I figure the same is about right when it comes to guitar. I've no talent at that stuff either except willingness to work at it and figure the geometry for greatest efficiency. But as you said, it's kinda pay your money and take your choice. In my case the only "talent" I have in the first place is willingness to work a bit. I do think different guitars bring a different geometry to how you play, but then I dunno, maybe it's because of other stuff I've done where geometry was so vital in making things work without damaging yourself. I feel a huge difference between a semi and full hollow in how my left hand hits the neck, especially in the root positions. I didn't say it was necessarily "harder" to get it comfy, just "different." To me anyway. Or heck, maybe I'm just an old guy feeling stuff that ain't really there. <grin> Hate to admit it, but that ain't entirely unlikely either. EDIT: Ain't had a Krispy Kreme since I lived in Memphis 20 to 30 years ago! m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnappi Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 I own a 137 custom, it's OK, but I play my epiphone Joe pass more. Right now I'm looking for a 175 that I like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.