Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Larry Mal

All Access
  • Content Count

    34
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About Larry Mal

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Necro thread and all, but to whoever says that all guitar companies use the same wood... I don't know what to say to that. Anyway, a Gibson ES-335 uses a three ply on the body and sides, and the Epiphone uses a five ply. Not the same construction in any way.
  2. Wow, what a couple of different guitars to be asking about. Well, I guess I'm the guy that bought a J-29 and am keeping it. It's just an all around good guitar. I paid like $1200 for it, though... you aren't thinking that the price is anywhere around the $2700 that the vintage J-45 is going for, do you? I would not know how to advise you on this. Gigging out, I would rather take out a $1200 non-vintage J-29 than a sixty year old guitar that can't be replaced. The J-29 certainly is a great instrument, still, I have to wonder why you are considering it? It's somewhat unique- what is
  3. I would say if you are comfortable with dreadnaught guitars then you'll be fine with an SJ. I am 6' tall, I have guitars ranging from L-00s to a J-100 and everything in between, the J-100 is very comfortable. They also don't sound quite like what you are probably thinking.
  4. I think the MHS pickups are wonderful, absolutely fantastic, and I don't know how any pickup at any price could be better. Gibson nailed it with these.
  5. I didn't even know that existed... but yeah, I don't know. I have a 330, also. Fact is I love the ES body, so making it smaller doesn't really do anything for me. I guess if I felt I needed or wanted a smaller body shape for whatever reason I would feel differently. But since I don't, I don't. Like I said above, it's just the same guitar only in a smaller form factor. I don't see that it brings much of anything else to the table, and I have very serious doubts that they sound different in any real way. So the decision really would be do you think that the smaller or lar
  6. Yes, I've shimmed my ES-330 quite a bit. It's easy to do and it really helps with the bridge pickup. No reason not to spend the $20: https://www.lollarguitars.com/accessories/shim-pack-for-dogear
  7. I had a 339 in my possession for a bit, my friend wanted to sell it to me so I auditioned it for a few weeks. I couldn't get along with it at all. I found it totally uninspiring. Now, anyone else might feel differently, of course, but I will echo what I read here, the only reason for a 339 that I can see is that it's physically smaller than the 335 classic shape. It doesn't bring anything sonically to the table. I never did an A/B test, but I feel that the 339 doesn't really bring anything new to the table.
  8. Larry Mal

    Gibson Es335

    It's worth around 2,000- 2,200.
  9. Well, they are doubling the size of the Bozeman factory, so that should indicate some confidence. I also notice in an article that Cesar from Gibson (forget the gentleman's last name) said that they had a great year all around, which would make sense. Also let's bear in mind that Gibson's financial problems were not due to the core guitar business being bad- and certainly not because of the greatly overhyped "quality control"- but only because they stupidly invested in peripheral businesses that failed to make money and in fact lost an incredible amount. Gibson as a guitar company
  10. My first good acoustic was a Martin D-1, and I will always have that one. It's living in Nashville tuning now. When I started up with getting acoustics again, I got a Martin 00-17s, it had some quality control issues with it. I later got an 000-18, before the reimagined series, and it was underwhelming to me. I traded it for a J-45. I had also arranged to get a Dove in trade and a J-35, so I was finally starting to realize how great Gibsons were. When I wanted to break away from the Gibson sound, I read about the J-60, and realized that it was basically a Martin D-28 but didn
  11. Necro thread, but the only of those three I own is a Dove. It was actually my first Gibson acoustic, I didn't quite know what to make of it for a while. It certainly was not like what my acoustics had been up to that point. Maybe I'll go play it today.
  12. I have removed the under saddle pickup from eight Gibson acoustics so far. If I get another one I'll do the same. In some cases, it made a tremendous difference to the sound of the guitar. My J-45 is one... it opened right up. On other guitars, it didn't make barely any difference at all. I make no prediction what will happen with yours just because it's a J-45. The action will get lower, and if this is still the stock Gibson setup then you'll probably be happier. If the action is already lowered, you can get a wooden shim from any arts and crafts store for next to nothing, a
  13. Yeah, they are getting rare, huh? Probably a good sign that the people that have them don't want to let them go. The prices are going up, also.
  14. Welcome to the forum! I would not make any strong effort towards that guitar, personally.
  15. I was going to say that this was just what we might call a Dove "Standard", however those specs have a scale length of 25.75" which I think might be a misprint and they wanted to put down 25.5". Regardless, it looks just like my Dove from the early 2000s. An all around great guitar, I got mine on trade and would not easily be able to talk about what is and isn't a good price.
×
×
  • Create New...