Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

E-minor7

All Access
  • Content Count

    8,805
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

E-minor7 last won the day on April 9 2017

E-minor7 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

176 Good

About E-minor7

  • Rank
    Winger

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

30,883 profile views
  1. Yes he is and I been after the same set recently. Got the 990 250 ohm, but they are open-backs, which doesn't work when recording. Saw the new Roger Waters videos and he has these close-backs as well. Made me go for them, but had to find out their ohms first. Hard to spot with Waters, now this pair seems to be 80. Figured R.W. used that - I'm hereby certain. Thx AJames ^
  2. Yes - the J-60 was there first. I guess these are guitars you need to try 'in person'. May take you by surprise as something else, , , for NO, they are not H-Birds or Doves at all.
  3. Enjoyed that in all its traditionalism - yet didn't really sound much as a plus/minus 1950 J-45 to me.
  4. Goin' under the waterline seems like a bingo, , , (to present a little rhyme).
  5. As I understand it the tune has already been recorded by a smaller ensemble. And yes, it takes a certain style'n'repertoire to release the essence of these guitars - I personally only get one third = The looks. But sometimes hear others treat them exactly right. Regarding the 80-riddle you'll soon find out - just follow the beat, , , it's a clue in itself. .
  6. Oh, , , not talking about destroying the entire top while trying buff away a hair with some grain 12000. The 65 CW has a nitro-crack on the neck where the heel begins. Already gave it a go and it worked OK - might take second round with the new papers. It's not that hard to control.
  7. Not an expert on archtops or acoustic jazz-guitars (to put it mildly), but this oldie is in superb and sounds like it's supposed to, doesn't it. . Just thought you should see and hear it - now 80, , , like another star named Richard. .
  8. Don't forget I only 'treated' the trashed 1965 CW and the re-necked 66 ditto. Wouldn't dare to work that way on any newer or less battle-worn guitar. Then again if the plan is to take the instrument to a authorized and competent luthier, why not use the opportunity to do a little experimentation yourself - he'll fix that too.
  9. Highly qualified playing in this test - which stays in the soft section. I can't identify the type of wood, but these cans clearly get a well sounding, surprising loose new guitar. The burst lies close to some of the earliest Hummingbirds - that means h o t Listening again the rose may step forward, , , still primarily hear steel. A creation worth trying - will look out for it, , , and sooner or later (after alcohol-bathing both hands) take it from some wall. Asked a shop keeper the other day. It should be no threat to nitro.
  10. Inspired by this thread I finally got the whole array of fine sand-paper yesterday. 9 sheets from 1500 to 12000. (would be a treat to blow your nose in the soft ones) Did a little circle-buff wet-work already - reduced some glue stains on the top of the re-necked CW 66. It's a reassuring thing to have around.
  11. It was and is scary, , , I'm still glad we didn't get clarinet. Regarding wind-instruments - try the flute for a start. But fortyearpickn is right - it's hard if not impossible to change the nature of guitars, , , , well, anything. Still we can adjust, can we not. .
  12. Wow ^ what a situation. I'm not the only one here who'd take an A/B in like a kitten licks cool cream'n'butter. Are you able to offer such a show ?
  13. Dreaming, searching, finding, buying, trading, landing, , and dreaming guitars again is a sign of life. Especially if one gets tempted beyond rationale or specific needs. As we know it's like the girls – once in a while you just can't get your eyes or mind off that chick though she obviously doesn't fit anywhere in your world. A dilemma which must be handled, , , but perhaps only after the rush has somewhat faded. The thing is that certain both vintage and new guitars look so good and call so strongly it gets impossible to hear straight. In those situations the break must be pulled – but only if the instrument is pricey. A cheap irresistible precious looker found on a market should be taken home – it's a good feeling and special connections can grow from such rescues. Expensive guitars without a seducing voice is a mal-path – and it ends blind, , , or deaf. My rule is : Keep the guitars that conjure the feeling that you are a lucky guy by having it. This may not happen every time it's played, but if the thought shows ever so often, don't pass the creature on. Simply because you will regret and never forget it – and write about the sad departure here for the next between 10 and 20 years, , , well, forever. . The vintage dimension is something special – but you gotta be able to sense it, which can be a matter of playing styles. There is no doubt that the divine vintage sub-voice is real – and it's not the sound of torrefaction (but that's another thread waiting to be born). Long novel short : Don't dismiss vintage, yet never let them trap you. There are so many positive aspects about them – looks - history - sound - cash – that it would be a shame to count them out. Besides the basic act of goin' back'n'forth between old'n'new is inspiring in itself. Like switching between models, woods or brands, , , instruments. So get the right oldies inside the herd and fix them if necessary. But never let them rule or fool you, , , though they drooled you from point 1. Why ? Because they have something only they have. And because we apparently fell for that in the first place. My 5 Yen
×
×
  • Create New...