Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

bobouz

All Access
  • Content Count

    3,312
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by bobouz

  1. Because of the 16" lower bout, a J-185 will fit reasonably well in many dreadnought cases. Try before you buy to assure a good fit.
  2. I had a 1948 L-48 with skinny F-holes similar to the OP's guitar, a truss rod & modern logo. The top was solid pressed mahogany, the back was solid mahogany & flat with bracing, and the sides were solid mahogany with fabric support strips (essentially the back & sides looked like they came straight from a flat-top). Have never seen another one like it. Lots of interesting variations during the '40s.
  3. Do not back-bow the neck under any circumstances. You actually want a tiny amount of relief (or bowing) for optimal playing performance. If the action remains high with a properly adjusted truss rod, look next at the placement of the saddle. Since this model has an adjustable saddle, it's very easy to see if you can dial in a setting that works better for you. Beyond that, the guitar might have some neck-set issues that can be reworked via the bolt on neck. Many Japanese guitars from the '70s & '80s have a good reputation, but not Epiphones from this period. Overall, the Epiphone models with bolt-on necks & the zero-fret are not well regarded for their build quality, and hence do not retain much value. Edit: Just wanted to add that I'm not trying to dissuade you from enjoying this instrument - just be cautious about sinking money into it. If you can get it dialed-in without too much expense and the tone is satisfying, then it's all good!
  4. Body woods, including the top, are all laminates on this model. As I recall, it also has a very narrow neck profile. Some folks might be willing to pay a bit more for the Everly Brothers connection, but essentially this is an inexpensive guitar. Depending on condition, I'd say somewhere between $150 & $250 seems fair. I've seen people ask more, but it's not worth more, imho.
  5. Whoa, very interesting! Have never run across one of those.
  6. Yes, a natural finish LG-2 is a misnomer. Historically, that’s an LG-3. I own a LG2-AE from the initial year of 2013. Super comfy neck (for me) & excellent build quality. Bass is not to be confused with the thump of a J-45, but there’s enough to satisfy & overall it’s a fun fingerpicking alternative.
  7. The ceramics I've owned have been flat on the bottom. I believe the one rosewood saddle I have is also flat. Will report back if I can find it & confirm. Therefore, I don't believe I've seen one with the saddle grooved on the bottom. Every one I've had has also come with the flat steel plate under the saddle, which I typically remove for a better fit with the ceramic (never have had a ceramic crack under tension).
  8. I've always liked small-bodied guitars, including the Gibson LG-2 & B-25 (as well as the B-25's Epi Cortez clone). But last year, I picked up a 2007 Gibson CJ-165ce, and it's become a new favorite. As an added bonus, in '07 & '08, this cutaway model came with a Fishman Aura soundhole pickup, which I greatly prefer to electronics mounted in the side. The current Gibson Parlor models have the same body dimensions as the 165, but some of the specs are different, including the fretboard radius (16" as opposed to 12").
  9. By googling "Gibson LG-2 banner reissue", I found two references to instruments (with pics) that appear identical to yours. In both cases, they indicate a build date of 2012. You can check this on yours by looking at the first & fifth digits of the serial number.
  10. There have been a number of LG models produced in recent years, beginning with the LG-2 American Eagle in 2013. There also was a limited run all-mahogany LG. I've seen your particular model, but don't recall the year. Typically, on these small run CS models, it can be difficult to find much info. I happen to have a 2013 LG2-AE, and a 1966 Epiphone Cortez (Kalamazoo-made B-25 clone). The small LG size can indeed have a very satisfying sound, along with excellent playability. Congrats & enjoy!
  11. Actually, the bridges were still plastic in 1966. The change back to rosewood occurred in 1967.
  12. The serial number indicates it was built between 1973 and 1975.
  13. Back in the '70s, I decided it was pointless to consider what an acoustic guitar might do as it ages. If I didn't like the way it sounded, right then and there, it seemed like a giant leap of faith to hope that someday a guitar's tone might develop into something more satisfying. I've since held true to that position. A guitar has to tonally be a winner in hand, right now, or have an overwhelmingly positive playability factor for me to consider it as a potential keeper. Does this guitar, as it currently presents itself, satisfy you tonally to the point that it might be difficult to find the same sound elsewhere? Does it's playability, combined with it's tone, make you want to pick it up & play? Imho, those should be the main considerations. Fullerplast or nitro, checking will frequently occur. Paddle or dovetail, a neck reset might someday be needed. If those future possibilities tend to dominate your view, it would probably be better to just move on to another instrument. Hope it all turns out to your liking.
  14. Jeff already gave you the answer above - it's either a '66 or '69. 1966 is more likely because production numbers of this model were much higher in '66 (compared to '69).
  15. Love that tone through the Fender. Is it just your neck pickup, and is the pickup a '57 classic?
  16. Sadly, every time something political sneaks in here, we get to see how poorly informed & self centered some folks are. Absolutely pathetic.
  17. Imho, buying an instrument without a fully disclosed & liberal return policy is courting disaster. I've never done it, and never will. To pull the trigger, a full refund (or reasonable restocking fee) less shipping must be part of the stated transaction. There are many honorable entities out there to buy from - why settle for less & assume all the risk?
  18. They were simply in the right place at the right time, within the ongoing evolution of music. Add to that a degree of talent & personality that made them stand out a bit taller than others in a similar crowd of boy bands. Then after their initial success, add the money, management, & studio facilities which allowed their creative minds to free-flow. Venuti & Lang, Reinhardt & Grappelli, Goodman & Christian, Bill Monroe, and so many others were part of an extended blues-tinged foundation that borrowed from elements of American Blues - all of which eventually created the opportunity for British boys to discover & emulate the recordings of people like Freddie King, Chuck Berry, John Lee Hooker, Carl Perkins, Muddy Waters, etc, etc, etc. The Beatles were not musically the best of the British bands in 1964, during a period where groups were essentially playing some very similar stuff based on the above - but they could certainly sing & harmonize, and they were "cute" to boot. It was a combination that could only have occurred in that particular moment, in that particular era. As Paul McCartney has said many times: "We were just a band."
  19. Can't tell you any more about it, but it looks very nice. Congrats & enjoy!
  20. Trying to guess BRW vs IRW based on the color & grain pattern in photos is risky business. The one sure-fire method is to assess the pores of the wood, as Dave mentioned. Solid BRW cannot be ruled out if this is truly a first-version Heritage (with a modified bridge). Interesting guitar, for sure.
  21. Something doesn't jive with this guitar. It's appearance seems to conform to the first version specs for a '65 to '67 Heritage - except for the bridge, which should be belly-up and adjustable. A stock belly-down bridge from the late '60s would date it to '68 or '69 - but it too would also have been adjustable, which it is not on this guitar. Does the label say it's a Heritage? If so, it could possibly be the early version (with solid Brazilian back & sides), but with a replacement belly-down bridge. Only problem with that, is that you'd expect to see some obvious remnants of an outline of the original belly-up bridge, which are not clearly identifiable via the photos. So essentially, there are issues here that warrant further investigation.
  22. It appears to be the same as the orange 4oz bottle, but with a new label. The rear label says it is safe for all lacquer & poly finishes.
  23. Django Reinhardt - acoustic Michael Bloomfield - electric
  24. You seem to be basing this on Les Paul's contribution to the electric guitar, but in reality, his contribution was simply one of many. Charlie Christian did more than anyone to initially bring the electric guitar to the forefront of the musical world (in terms of actually playing the instrument in a big band setting) in the late '30s and early '40s. At the time, Les Paul was a darn good guitar player who was trying to develop his own unique sound, and later built his "log" guitar on the Epiphone premisis, and then recorded with it. Paul Bigsby built a guitar for Merle Travis that looked like a solid-body LP with a Fender-ish headstock (but it actually had hollow wings). Leo Fender saw that (but said he didn't) & then built his first solid body. Gibson then jumped on the bandwagon & wanted Les Paul as an endorser, so they struck a deal, but Les actually contributed very little to the design of the Gibson LP. It's somewhat of a long & winding road, and while Les Paul played a significant part, he was just one of many who made important and lasting contributions during this period of major development. The Greatest Guitarist question is somewhat similar. There's a very long line of contributors to guitar playing that have made a lasting impact, and from which others have learned or been infuenced. I don't believe anyone's yet mentioned Chet Atkins (inspired by Merle Travis), Michael Bloomfield, Lightnin' Hopkins, and so many others. Trying to say one, or even a handful, is the "greatest" is rather pointless when you consider different playing styles, genres, and periods in history along the guitar continuum. But if I were indeed forced to name one person, the one guitarist whose contribution I value over all the others, and who I listen to today more than anyone else, it's the guy Les Paul spent years trying to emulate: Django Reinhardt.
  25. Don't know if I've ever seen a sweeter looking top on an LP. Simply gorgeous!
×
×
  • Create New...