Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About qblue

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. We would need more pics. Especially of the front and back of the headstock and the body. The neck would also help because some came with block inlay or dots. Things like a stoptail or trapeze are important to know. The original case should be pictured, as it can help. The length of the pickguard and position of the switches all aid evaluations. But your serial number indicates your guitar is a 2011 model. T would indicate a thinline model; D suggests dual pickups or double cutaway. The sticker suggests it was made in Memphis, TN.
  2. Hi. I've had only one guitar with the Kluson replicas on it, a 2012 Gibson Les Paul 60's Tribute. My guitar tech took a look at them because while I playing a song either the D or G string will go flat. I suspected a problem. He thought it was the way I mounted the the string on the peghead post. The tech restrung the D& G strings and it played well for a couple weeks. Recently it has been detuning again, often the G string during a song after I meticulously tuned the string. I considered the Nut as a possible problem , but the tech didn't think so. I has suggested these Klusons weren't the best for staying in tune, but he again thought it was my stringing technique. But because it is happening again, with the Tech's technique, I think the only constants are the Klusons being the culprit. My ES-347 and L6-S have tulip shaped button Grovers (in gold on the ES-347, in the avatar) and those things are beasts for staying in tune. The LP goes out of tune while chording, and while I do like doing Don Felder 1.5 step bends, it detunes with chords. I have had Schallers on both my strats and they stay in tune with floating tremolos. I have locking tuners on my Strat ultra and Schaller M6 minituners on the 1970 Strat. You won't have a problem with these. The Ping vintage tuners on my Telecaster are the best tuner I've had. So Dylan I agree with you. Something is fishy with these Kluson tuners. In 2012, who was the manufacturer?
  3. I don't think Gibson cares about the differences b/t the long tenon vs. the short tenon. It is a way of setting the neck at the region where the body and neck join. The longer tenon might have more surface and thereby create more sustain and less sustain with a short tenon. It seems the Custom Les Paul may have the long tenon and other ones with non weight relieved bodies. But it isn't always so. The historic reissues also may have the long tenon. I think the proliferation of weight relived bodies in most Les Pauls are proof that Gibson doesn't think this is an important issue. My opinion is that it really doesn't make a difference. So I'll play my LP and ES-347 without cork sniffing attitude and have fun playing.
  4. I think collectors and appraisers like the first and simpler model, and because of this the 335 is considered more "collectable". The fancier models 345, 347, or 355 (BBKing) are more complex and less desirable, a conclusion that doesn't really make sense to me. Even with the lack of binding and the Ebony fingerboards the 335 is still king. Here is what is commonly believed about the ES-335, as quoted from "Antique Vintage guitar info" website: Description: Gibson ES335 Electric Thinline Archtop guitar. Available: 1958 to 1981 (but reissued by Gibson as a reissue dotneck in 1981) Case: Brown hardshell case with a pink lining was the top-end Gibson case from 1958 to 1961. Then in 1962 the case changed to a black outside with a yellow plush interior. Also available with a low-end aligator cardboard case. Collectibility Rating: 1958-1960 "dot" models with "large" neck: A+, 1960-1962 "dot" models with a "thin" neck: A, 1962-1964 "block" marker models: B+, 1965 to 1969 "trapeze tailpiece" models: C+. Production: 1958:317, 1959:592, 1960:514, 1961:886, 1962:876, 1963:1156, 1964:1241, 1965:1750, 1966:2524, 1967:5718, 1968:3760, 1969:2197 General Comments: The Gibson ES-335 guitar with its semi-hollowbody construction is a great guitar. The solid maple block down the center of the body minimizes feedback, but the hollow body wings gives good sustain, tone and weight. This model is most desirable with a stop tailpiece and a large neck size. Also the dot fingerboard inlays (aka "Dot Neck") version is also desirable. Additionally the long pickguard (pre-1961) models are also nice. Bottom line, the 1958 and 1959 models with stop tailpieces are considered the best. Alternatively I like the 1963 and 1964 models with a stop tailpiece, because the neck shape is nice. A Bigsby vibrato on the 1958 to 1964 models hurts the demand of this guitar. Also the 1960 to 1962 style "thin" neck also hurts demand (compared to the earlier "large neck" models, but this is a general fact of all Gibsons of this era). In that case, the 347 is the most simple model with an ebony board. It doesn't have a mahogany neck as the others do, but a 3-piece maple neck, same as the BBKing model. The absence of the Varitone or a Bigsby vibrato is a mark for simplicity. The TP-6 tailpiece puts it up to the level of some pricier tailpieces I've seen on L5 models. Hang on to these guitars and I think they will become collectable.
  5. This version of the 355 is less guitar and Gibson will charge, because they can. This version doesn't have the Varitone, stereo wiring, and ebony fretboard. It looks like my ES-347 with a Bigsby slapped on it. So to further compare the my ES-347, it has a coil-tap to facilitate humbucker to single coil operation, and Ebony FB. So I ask is it worth $4500? I paid $1500 for my 347 in 1993; this version, with the mahogany 1 piece neck, is nearly triple what I paid. I don't hate Bigsby tremolos, but don't slap one on and charge out the wazoo for a guitar that doesn't match up to its past. I think it isn't worth it. I like painted finishes, but in this price range give me a vintage burst museum piece and show something that proves its a high-end Gibson. The 335 is just a state-of-the-art ES-thinline guitar, with no frills. I'd get the ES-335, and add a Bigsby, if I thought it was necessary. I also prefer the larger body of the 335 over the 339 or 359 as the amount of air displaced is noticeable, in a stiff laminated body. MY ES-347:
  6. The use of Richlite is a convenience, not necessarily based on a world low supply of ebony issue. I have the richlite on my D-16-GT Martin and it's the same size as a D-18. Martin also charges less for the D-16. I wish Gibson would do this too. I'll say this: there is no difference in tone between these guitars, IMHO. The ebony used on Taylor guitars' fingerboards are composed of a lot of colors, because they are not demanding the darker colors of ebony. This will preserve a few more trees. But Gibson would put the darker select versions of ebony on their guitars. I have three guitars with ebony on the fingerboards. They are not that special to play and since they don't affect tone, what does it matter? I have an old ES-347 which is the spittin' image of a vintage ES-355. The ES-347 has similar hardware as a BBking model, but has f-holes. The pearl inlays, size of the headstock and the binding on the body, neck, and headstock on the ES-355, are like deja vu to me, since the demise of the ES-347 in 1991. The ES-347 has an ebony fingerboard on it though, and was finished in violin sunburst. The biggest difference between the 355 and the 347 is the neck; a single piece of mahogany is used on the 355, and a 3 piece maple neck is used on the 347, same as on the BBKing model. Believe it or not I have a Fender Strat Ultra (1990) and a Yamaha SBG2200 (1986) that have ebony fingerboards. I would get the ES-335, as it is a more valuable guitar in collectors' eyes. It is a more pure expression of the ES-series guitars, all of which use the laminate of Maple/Poplar/Maple. A Bigsby messes up all the collectability a 355 will ever have. And now it has no ebony fingerboard on it, like the original models. The addition of the Bigsby and richlite signal to me that they won't make this guitar for long. This attitude, the ES-355 as a limited edition, keeps the price high. Also, they painted this guitar, which says that there is a lower grade of maple used. The paint hides the grain and no care is taken to show any fine wood grain. Pluses are that is has no autotuners on it, but no ES model has it.
  7. As for necks I believe a stable neck is the best. A one piece mahogany neck usually symbolizes a Gibson hallmark. It's stable and works great. It is seen on most Les Pauls and ES-335, 345, & 355s. But most of their archtops and some ES models have a 3 or 5 piece construction, mostly with maple. I have a 3 piece neck on a ES-347, and it hasn't had a truss rod adjustment in 25 years. The BBKing model has a 3 piece maple neck. Their higher regarded guitars usually have a single mahogany neck. But arguably the 3 and 5 piece necks may be more stable. The ES-175 has a single mahogany neck.
  8. To me the construction is the key to tone. The woods either add or subtract what the luthiers were trying to attain. A hollowbody is more akin to an acoustic guitar, in which the solid woods used are to increase resonance of the strings of the instrument, along with the air inside the guitar body. This is why they will feedback easier in a gain situation, and why some guitarists will use a floating pickup, to avoid some feedback and only amplify the resonant guitar sound. A comparison with a CS-336 and a ES-339, while similar in size, approach resonance in subtly different ways, due to their construction. The semihollow ES-339 ( Please include the mother of all semi-hollow guitars, the ES-335) has a laminate that is strictly used for the lack of adding resonance, as this laminate is pretty stiff, but air inside the semi-hollowed chambers gives it some added resonance. The hollow body of the CS336 adds to the resonant nature by vibrating in some fashion with the strings. The solid wood maple top of the CS model will also vibrate and add more resonance; its way of reducing feedback is by the thin body, unlike its larger brethren hollowbodies. The solid hollowed Mahogany of the CS-336 body makes it a region for some vibration, but more than a laminate maple/poplar/maple combo would allow. There is some interaction with the woods used in solidbodies, but it was designed to have the least interaction with the vibrating strings. So allowing for the differing pickups installed, the different sound is primarily due to the pickup amplification of the strings. There are differences in the tone between the ES-335 and its little brother the ES-339. The larger semi-hollowbody of the 335 gives a more resonant sound, call it deeper, wider, or bassier, but because of the increased size and air within the semihollowed chambers this difference is manifested. To me there is little difference between the solid Les Paul and the ES-339, in tonal resonance. Woods vibrate in concert with the strings, so it is feasible to think, that different woods will cause subtly differing tones, but one will see this better exemplified in acoustic and amplified Jazzboxes, e.g., L5 CES, Wes Montgomery's favorite. These jazzboxes have a formula of solid maple back and sides, but employ a spruce top, like any other acoustic guitar. I do not think the wood of a fingerboard contributes much to the sound of any guitar, but they may look aesthetically pleasing. Its like selling a clear Pepsi, one would swear the food colored version would taste better. Binding on a guitar only increases cost, but does offer protection from some dings and scratches. Binding doesn't change the tone. Recently Gibson has played around with the formula of the jazzbox, adding a body of solid mahogany back and sides, capped with a solid maple top. It has the same dimensions as a typical L5 CES, and call it the L9. I think they are trying to build guitars without ebony fingerboards and other non sustainable woods. I predict it will sound different.
  9. I play both ways, but my excessive practice allows me to stand and sing or talk with other bandmates, and say hello to people at a gig. It also allows me to walk around which is more interesting for people to watch. I like the way Jeff Beck moves whilst he plays guitar, so I like to play and do stuff like he does. I recently lowered my height of the guitars with my straps; I was used to the guitar being very high while playing, but it is easier to play standing with the guitar lowered to belt level. This change didn't help sitting with the guitar, but it gave me more room to adjust between sitting and playing. I love sitting on an oak stool, because it allows me to reach my foot pedals, with both feet, and if you're using a wah pedal sitting may aid in stability. When sitting I tend to look at the guitar neck and my left hand. When standing I might sneak a few looks at the neck but I pretty much know what I might do musically Playing an electric guitar is multitasking, and at its ultimate it is like a drummer using all extremities.
  10. The differences are twofold: 1) No stereo connectivity in the 335, which is present in the 345 and 2) a Varitone 6-way switch. The stereo output, remains on a 345, because its a historic model, but a newer one might not have it. They may come with both and the user may be baffled why they do this. IDK either; most people use the mono output to other effects. The Varitone just adds weight and complexity to a guitar, as it is a bunch of capacitors wired to vary the aural output of both humbuckers, but you may bypass this, also. This is because the 345 is a historic model. The collectors like the 335 better as it is a more simpler instrument, without excessive blingy binding and mother-of-pearl inlays. But when Gibson builds a historic model they charge a lot. Both the 335 and 345 have a one piece mahogany neck, as does the 355. The 347 and BBKing models have a 3 piece maple/poplar/maple necks. All ES models use the maple/poplar/maple laminates, even the new ES Les Paul. As the number increases over the 335, there an increase in binding The newer 335's are dropping in prices as they are now offering a line of Studio models without binding and no '57 PAF pickups, made in Memphis. The differences in price likely reflect the popularity of the 335 compared to other ES models. The local shop where you got your guitar probably sold many more 335's than that lovely 345 you have. So to get it moving out of the shop it came at a reduced price. If you are a real vintage guitar aficionado, then the 345 might be your cup of tea. But the differences indicate you got more guitar, but you may not use the additional elements, the price not withstanding.
  11. Thanks for the compliment. But instead of being egotistical, I noted the similarity because I can't understand why Gibson discontinued the ES-347. In 2010-2011 they reissued the ES-355 and charged a lot for it. I paid $1500 for mine in 1993. I thought it was a good price for a Gibson. They now reissue the ES-355 in its initial form according to the historical models, with that Bigsby on it. I actually think that the Bigsby makes it less desirable. But they always charge for any model with a solid mahogany neck. I don't know what year Norlin sold the company to the current owners, but I think they made a mistake to discontinue this model. It is a great guitar. It might have been a casualty because of a corporate decision related to sales. But I see why they charge so much for all the blingy binding and the larger headstock; Its a historical model and is on a short run status. 2015 will go down as the weirdest year in Gibson history!
  12. Interesting that the hardware on my ES-347 (see my post just above your post) is so similar to your ES-355. I like the TP-6 stop tailpiece so much I am going to search for a chrome or nickel plated one for my Les Paul, as it may help to intonate the dang instrument. I think the only difference is the 3-piece maple neck on the 347 vs. the mahogany 1-piece neck on your 355. The 2015 355 has a Richlite fingerboard. I have an ebony board; does your 2011 ES-355 have an ebony board? Looks like it to me. But there is no reason to fear a Richlite fingerboard, as I have one on a D-16GT Martin and it works like a fingerboard should. But paying a high price for a ES-355 without ebony is ludicrous. The Martin emulates a dreadnought like its sibling the D-18, but the D-16 costs less.
  13. qblue


    Thanks. That 347 (souped up 335) is one of my best guitars for sound and playability. Pin I see you have a Yamaha SG 2000. I have a SBG 2100. Mine killed my desire for a Les Paul w/ humbuckers. How's yours?
  14. Those are very special Schaller tuners and waay over the top. They look better than the ones on the current versions of this guitar. You have nothing to worry about. Go and play this beauty... a lot!
  • Create New...