John Rutherford Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 What's the reason for Gibson not replicating the slim chamfered SG body of the early 1960s ?. Only the expensive custom models having the slender lines and the deep top and horn chamfer. The modern mass SG models are rather chunky and, like the rest of us, is suffering from middle age spread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strat-o-steve Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 The modern SG Standard and basic SG's are based on the "standards" of the late 1960's and 1970's standards. This is how the guitar has come to evolve, to settle in. If you want the old shape, you will have to buy a custom shop reissue. Otherwise, the modern SG's are shaped just how all SG's have been shaped for the last 40 years :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiamondJig Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 There are a couple of Gibson USA models with nice bevels, the 61RI comes in 2 types faded and non, a few limited run models have them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfox14 Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 The 60s tribute SGs have the nice beveled body style just like the vintage ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 My old '68, had much better beveling, chamfering, and horn tapers, than any of the current Gibson USA "Standards." Granted, it wasn't as much, as the early '60's SG's with the smaller pick-guard. But, it was still much nicer, than the current non-CS variety. I've been "carping" about this, for years, here. LOL The closest one, I've seen, to my actual '68, was a "Robby Krieger" version, in my dealer's store. Even it, wasn't quite as pronounced, that way, as my old one...but, closer. But, they did vary some, even back then. The '61-early '66 are still my favorite styles, and...IMHO, the most comfortable bodies, too. CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powerwagonjohn Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 My 1968 SG Std. has almost no beveling in the horns or the lower side of the body and minimal, 1" or less beveling on the top side. My 1965 SG Jr. has wide bevels in the cutouts and 1 3/4" on the upper body side but the biggest difference is the beveling is straight across the back from the base of the cutouts through the heal to the neck. My 1968 W/ Lyre tailpiece is right at 8 pounds and the JR is right at 6 pounds. That 2 pounds makes a big difference but both play great although, weight aside, the JR does seam to fit better. Thanks John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lungimsam Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 What is chamfering? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Rutherford Posted February 17, 2012 Author Share Posted February 17, 2012 What is chamfering? Check out the top curve of the SG body, the chamfer is more pronounced in the 64 Special than in the 2011 Junior. However, I take the point that the classic shape has evolved through time. http://images.gibson.com.s3.amazonaws.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/SG/USA/SG-Junior-60s/Gallery-Images/SGJ6HCCH1-Finish-Shot.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bender 4 Life Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 easier/faster/cheaper to make + less waste = inevitable current "Std" cuts. I prefer a heavy SG though. My '10 Std. isn't far from being a simple "slab", and heavy as heII for an SG, and it sounds GREAT, I love it! it also came from the factory w/o a flaw to be found, which means a lot nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hbomb76 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 They actually improved the '61 reissue back in late 1999 I believe (might've been 2000) to where not only did it have nice deep inner bevels on the cutaways, but the top edge and lower forward quarter also, PLUS, they reintroduced the tapered horn tips that for the most part they've stuck with, on that model at least. They really haven't changed any of the other models at all since 1991, and I think even if they left the USA Standards/Specials as "late 60's" style guitars with lesser beveling, the tapered horns would make them look far less awkward and slabby. After all, 95%+ of your 60's originals (including the majority of the less-beveled late-60's ones) had a much thinner body thickness at the horn tips, which combined with very deep beveling gave an almost "sharp yet slightly rounded" look that was beautiful in its aesthetic, along with the closer-to-symmetrical front view (which was accented by said beveling and shaping). I never understood why the Historic/Custom Shop models are (and have been since the introduction of the CS/Historic SG/LP Standard) a step BACK to the inaccuracies of the 80's and 90's slabby/edgy horned misshapen and very obviously "reissue" look (I can spot a reissue from 30 feet away due to its lack of authentic bevel placement and those wide/thick horns). Since 2000, the USA NON-CS '61 reissue has been technically as accurate, if not MORESO than the CS/Historic one aside from a few details, and I think it's a slap in the face not to offer it with the Maestro Vibrola again (especially with the newer ones seeing a return to nicer bevels and actual RED "cherry" finishes---although my local Guitar Center sucks and therefore I have yet to see a 2010-present model in person to verify this). There were a few decent offerings for last year, but for the most part I think they REALLY, REALLY dropped the ball on offering a definitive, TRULY "as new" and "Historically Accurate" reissue for the model's birthday. I've considered just checking with my fave dealer about custom ordering a "CS/Historic SG/LP Standard in NON-FADED-CHERRY, with vibrola and with the tapered horn tips like the USA '61 RI (the Historic bevels + the '61 reissue's better outline and tapered tips = just about right...or at least "good enough"), and just calling it a day. I wish Gibson would TELL US something, yay or nay, if we'll see a truly authentic and passable REISSUE anytime in the forseeable future. I actually ran into a loudmouthed Custom Shop rep at GC once a couple years back, and his overall attitude towards SG's (not to mention vibrolas/vibratos of ANY kind on ANY guitar) was very condescending and to the tune of "if it's not a Les Paul it's not worth owning" (meaning "traditional" single-cut basic LP...apparently the fact that the SG WAS the Les Paul for the first couple years and totally REPLACED the Les Paul as we know it for almost a decade was lost on this guy). And if his attitude reflects the general SG-apathy going on (which again, is reflected in the offerings), it's not a huge surprise why the model isn't really given a fair shot at re-attaining some of its golden day glory. Plus, let's face it, there are enough people out there willing to buy the name regardless of specs and not enough of us really voicing a need/desire for a more authentic SG for Big G not to feel inclined to do a whole lot about it. Speak up! :) H Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 I'm with H..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.