Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Jayyj

Members
  • Posts

    651
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Jayyj last won the day on March 7 2017

Jayyj had the most liked content!

Reputation

10 Neutral
  1. The F holes on later 355s are bound in plastic rather than painted - you'll see white paint on early natural finish 335s but the look is different. I can't remember the exact year they started doing it but it's definitely late 60s. The F holes on 3*5s get larger in 1969 anyway and I wouldn't be surprised if the binding appeared then. If the one you're looking at has a 1 9/16th nut and no binding in the F holes you're probably looking at late 1965 to 1968. The serial number will help pin down the date, also earlier guitars will have reflector knobs and later ones witch hat and the pots will have date codes on them that will usually show them to have been made within a year or so of the date of the guitar.
  2. I can understand it: the 355 sells well in the mono configuration and lots of people prefer rosewood to ebony, so it figures there might be a small market for people who want a flashier 335 without the ebony board. In fact, since 355s currently have Richlite boards, given how much unhappiness there is over Richlite on posher guitars there's probably a few customers who would pick this mono 345 over a Richlite 355 for that reason as well. This is the first run of 345s I can remember seeing without the varitone dial - perhaps a special run ordered by Sweetwater?
  3. Trapeze tailpieces were used on most 335 models from 1965 to 1980 (the ES355 stuck to a vibrato and there were a few late 70s oddballs with stop bars such as the Pro and ES347). It was essentially a cost saving device, since there are less stages in fitting a trapeze and Gibson in 1965 were trying to cope with a huge upsurge in sales. Many feel the trapeze alters the feel and tone of the guitar but there are still a lot of great trapeze equipped 335s out there.
  4. Headstock repairs for me depend very much in the nature of the repair. People quote the 50% off thing add ad nauseum but there's a world of difference between a clean break along the grain with plenty of surface area to glue and a mess of dowels or filler covered in opaque overspray. To me there are examples of guitars with headstock breaks that in no way deserve a 50% hit in value and examples that are worth little more than the value of the pickups and hardware. I respect Larry's viewpoint that there are plenty of unbroken guitars out there but guitars with issues such as minor headstock breaks, changed parts etc can be a good way into a vintage instrument for people who might otherwise not be able to afford that level of guitar, particularly where the high value golden era models are concerned. The chief issue for me with headstock breaks is the resale issue - there are so many people who won't touch a guitar with a headstock break, and so many who expect a rock bottom price on them, they're a risk if you think you might need to resell the guitar further down the line.
  5. I've always been curious about actual numbers of mono 355s from the '66 - '69 period: although I know conventional wisdom is that mono 355s were a rarity a suspiciously large number of them seem to come up for sale for a supposedly rare version. I follow 355s on Gbase, Reverb etc and I'd say maybe a quarter to third from that era are mono. The 70s are a different matter: the only mono ones I've ever seen were from 1979 and I own one - it's also the only non-varitone 355 I've seen in stereo. That's one cool thing about the very late 355s, they have a different stereo circuit similar to the type you find in keyboards where the first socket is mono unless anything is plugged into the second. Admittedly I've used it in stereo about twice in 20 years, but it's a cool feature.
  6. Thank you! I've had it for twenty years, back when 70s Gibsons were what you bought if you couldn't afford a second hand contemporary one. I can see all its faults compared to a 60s example and one of these days I'll add an earlier one to the collection but I love this guitar warts and all. The good news if your heart is set on old wood is you can often find pretty good deals on '66 - '69 ES355s, sometimes not far beyond what you would pay for a new one particularly if you don't mind the odd changed part. You'll need to look into neck profiles and whether you can cope with the narrow nut - I don't mind it myself but I have pretty slim fingers.
  7. The 355 was always available in stereo and mono versions with the early monos the most valuable vintage 355s. 355s vary a lot depending on era. The neck profile is a big one. The very first guitars had a big '59 profile but went to a significantly shallower profile earlier than the 335 so there are very few big neck 355s. The profile did get a little thicker around '64 but then the nut size dropped from 1 11/16s to 1 9/16ths in 1965, remaining at that width until the late 70s although the profile changed a few times through the 70s. The neck material also changes. Classic 355s have one piece Mahogany necks. At the end of the 60s there was a brief period of three piece Mahogany, then most 70s 355s have three piece Maple. To my ears the Maple necked guitars sound brasher and a little more Les Paul like than the classic 355. The pickups follow the same lineage as other Gibsons but models with gold plating generally lagged behind nickel/chrome so you'll find gold PAFs long after the nickel version changed to patent numbers. A 50s or early 60s 355 will have PAFs, a early to late 60s will have Patent Nos, late 60s to late 70s will be T Tops.I've heard people claim to have Tim Shaws in their 345s and 355s from the very end of the run around 1980/81 but never seen one myself with Shaws. Early 355s generally had Bigsby vibratos, switching to a side pull vibrato around '62 then to the lyre style by '64. Bigsbys were available as a special order throughout the 60s so later guitars with Bigsbys crop up quite a bit and there are a few early 355s with stop bars. There are lots of small changes as well: shape (mainly the ears and waist), finish, size and placement of f holes, some monkeying with the centre block in the early 70s. Generally the early 355s ('59 to '65) are some of the best guitars ever made - in fact I played a '60 this year that could well have been the best electric of any model I've played. Versions from the late 60s can be great if you don't mind the narrow nut. The 70s ones are quirky but generally they seem more consistent in quality than the high volume models and they have their own sound. I don't have much experience of the recent ones but they seem to be close to classic spec send I'll wager they're a lot closer in sound to an early 60s guitar than any 70s 355 was - richlite or not. Here's mine, a '79 with some oddball features.
  8. I agree, this seems like the most likely scenario.
  9. This is the bit that interests me, without wishing the thread to get overly political. I'm completely behind the guitar industry looking for alternatives to endangered traditional wood species, and I applaud Gibson for their stated commitment to not using questionable materials, but on the other hand I just don't believe that it isn't possible to source legal, ethically harvested Ebony to use on small runs of historic models. Chris Martin has been vocal in support of the Lacey Act, and Martin pulled out of buying from Madagascar at the first sign that there were potential issues with the way timber was being exported from that country so they have a good track record of acting responsibility in sourcing wood - yet they continue to be able to offer Ebony on reissues of any models that traditionally used it. Taylor have made theif own arrangements and Collings and Santa Cruz aren’t reporting any problems. It's pure speculation on my part but I don't think we know the full story where Gibson and Ebony is concerned.
  10. Currently Gibson are using Richlite in place of Ebony on premium models from Nashville and Memphis such as the ES355 and Les Paul Custom, so it would seem there is a long term problem for Gibson in terms of Ebony supply. Fortunately the majority of historic Gibson models used Rosewood rather than Ebony, and for new models they can use whatever they think works with the model. There are plenty of alternatives - I have a lovely English made acoustic made entirely from reclaimed Pine and Oak, including an Oak fingerboard.
  11. If it's any consolation, they've been doing it ever since they gently put old Orville out to pasture over 100 years ago - it's certainly not limited to Henry's regime. Those original 330s with the recycled P-90 covers were released the same year as the fabled Bursts and under Ted McCarthy's supervision, and Gibson history is littered with examples of fudges to save a few cents here and there whoever was at the helm. Still, the innovation has always happened, regardless of how closely the bottom line is being watched.
  12. But weren't the P-90s found on ES-330s designed for guitars such as the ES-175, which has a different top design and geometry to a 330? This leaves the neck pickup on a 330 lower at the front and rising up to meet the strings at the back, which looks a little peculiar. I don't know about the recent reissues, but my Japanese Casino has this design and I'm not desperately keen on the appearance of it. My vintage 330 has after market replacement covers that run parallel with the strings and it looks noticeably better for it. At the end of the day Gibson is a manufacturer with a profit to make, and it's easy to understand why they would use an existing part that does the job just fine rather than have a new part made up specially. Whether that should extend to a pickup ring that costs a few cents to make I don't know, but I can see the logic.
  13. I used to be a Breedlove dealer. I really like the bracing system on the modern style guitars, which seems to give them an extremely even frequency response. They always remind me of a guitar recorded with a compressor with the attack slightly pinched and good sustain. I've played a dozen or so of the staggeringly expensive ones and was never very taken with them: pieces of artwork perhaps but we're talking money you could buy a Banner J45 for. They're not my thing at all. The Revival / Retro style US models were well made but I'd rather have a Vintage Series Martin if looking at that style of guitar. I like their mandolins a lot, had an A style a while back that was quite something. The imported stuff was good and we sold a lot of them. At least some of the imports were made by Crafter in Korea, a manufacturer I hold very highly. I guess my ultimate take on them is that they're one of those brands that will polarize opinion: they have a very distinct tone and look, and they're well made for the price point, but they're certainly not going to be for everyone.
  14. Thanks so much Jay.Your explanation is very straight forwards and clear. Im gonna look into these.Thanks Again

    Nick

  15. On older instruments I find a little checking looks good, particularly the gentle spider webbing you see on 30s and 40s era Gibson acoustics. My L-00 is checked all over, and looks great! On the other hand, I used to have a 90s L-20 with lacquer checking around the heel that looked like the surface of a shattered mirror, which looked desperately ugly and really detracted from the guitar for me. I don't think I'd buy another instrument which had checking of that nature.
×
×
  • Create New...