stein

I don't know if I agree that vintage (or old) is always better than new as far as sound goes. I do agree that individual guitars can and do get better with age. Gibson has been making some VERY good stuff lately, that does compare favorable to the vintage stuff, even to the 60's stuff (which might be the best, in my experience/opinion). Having said that, 335 style guitars from Gibson seem to vary a lot from one to another. I can't say I have had the opportunity to try a lot of vintage ones side by side to get a handle on how much certain years vary to EACH OTHER, but when trying new ones, I have often has two of the exact same guitar with COMPLETELY different sounds to them. I think the 335 style varies more than any other type I can think of. I think it would be pretty easy to find a modern 355 that sounded better than a "vintage" 355 if one was looking, especially when considering personal taste.

So, when you say you're "in love with the tone of a 1961"...is that a general statement or a particular guitar? My experience, and opinion, is that falling in love with a particular guitar can be modern or vintage, and it's something to aim for. And sometimes being in love with a guitar is more important than price/value. But if it's out of reach, either cause you can't afford it or the guitar belongs to someone else, it's not wrong to date other guitars to find the "one".

Of corse, could always be "Death by Theory".

Ok then...I'll play. It's actually a tough one, a trick question. The recorded performance isn't just not in key, it's not in tune. First instinct says G major, based on the three chords. But wait... There are a lot of "bluesy" licks, that SEEM to be based on D. Also, I haven't picked apart the notes of the piano player, but based on the tonality I hear, HE seems to go back and forth between a Major scale and a Blues scale. BB King was said to be quite the Mixalodian.

I got nothin'.

Actually, I think ACCURATE sheet music for this song would have that written right at the top with the tempo.

So there should be no complaints about having to learn a little "theory" then.

I respectfully disagree, sir. You are right, in that translating what is intended from music IS a skill, but when it comes to Jazz and Blues, what is of greater importance is what the musician feels and chooses to play. In other words, NOT what the composer feels or felt. The ability to mimic is of little importance compared to the ability to create, and express. I would say that in Rock and Roll, what sets apart the good players from the so-so ones is also based on this idea: that a players and performers heart and interpretation is what makes a player worth listening too, instead of just hearing a cover tune. BORING. Thus, written music is best served as a template for mutual communication, if one does classical, then meant to be performed perfectly. For Jazz, Blues, and Rock and Roll, only a tool as a starting point.

Talking about it and playing it are different things. Sometimes theory is fun or not fun, but separate from the music. I guess what I mean, is one can enjoy music theory separately from the music, but neither is required. It's OK to overanylize, but also OK to not anylize at all. It's like practice. Sometimes it's work, sometimes we are just playing for the heck of it. Both improve us in different ways.

While we are having fun trying to decide Am or C, and also the value of knowing theory vs not, these are all good things. But we forgot something. What key it's in COULD be completely from the musicians point of view. If a player chooses to consider it in the key of C, and play it accordingly, he still plays it. He may or may not play it the same as if he was coming from a point of playing it in Am. The chords and notes may be the same, but how and why he comes up with them, what he adds or changes, depends on the one playing it. Same thing if a guy chooses to know theory, or rely entirely on his ear. NOT knowing theory doesn't mean music theory doesn't exist, just as knowing theory doesn't mean one doesn't use the ear. Just the same, the understanding and approach of the one playing isn't wrong or right.

I suppose which key it is would depend on the musicians point of view. I say it's in Am, because of the use of the E chords, and also, the 7th chords, which are more related to blues than classical or folk music. In blues, it's common to substitute MAJ and min chords...and that goes in the face of traditional music theory. In fact, the blues scale is based on a minor scale, but yet played over a MAJ progression. Stones are blues players. Final answer: Am.

Not sure what making a '59 from a Traditional entails, or what you are looking to achieve. The only real difference I can think of would be the bridge, but that would mean taking the Nashville studs out and filling with wood to actually have an ABR-1. Of corse, you could just get a drop-in that's compatible. What else is there?

Again, you do NOT have experience or a handle on the "engineering" of Gibson bridges. If you ever had an ABR-1, and ever tried to flip it OR adjust it, you would know you can't lower the tailpiece hardly at all if you have the bridge backwards. You would also know it isn't hard at all to adjust from the front. NOT a problem to be solved here. And if you had knowledge of Gibson bridges, you would know that Nashville and ABR-1 are NOT interchangeable.

Indeed...If the strings are hitting the screws, YOU HAVE THE BRIDGE BACKWARDS! ...as designed, the screws face forward.

No, been insisting on things to CORRECT what you where you have INCORRECTLY pointed out.

From what I can read, you are the one who is not reading and comprehending the post. And also, you are the one who is accusing others here of not having reading skills or comprehending what is being said. What many are trying to say, is you are WRONG about a few things, and they are correcting you. No one has misunderstood you keep saying "it doesn't matter what side the adjustment screws face". It isn't a matter of convenience as you say, it's always been about what type of bridge the guitar has. If there is misunderstanding about your experience or you being a "newbie", it might be the fact that it's obvious you have NOT any experience with an ABR-1 bridge and stop-tailpiece combination. And the bridge saddles that don't have a slant might make some wonder. Really, the thing is you wrote a paper trying to explain things, but what it explains is full of wrong information. It addresses problems that don't exist, attempts to answer questions that aren't asked, and provides solutions that wouldn't work.

Please review BK's post again, including looking at the pics. He is correct. There are two different bridges, both are TOM (Tune-O-Matic) and they look similar, but one is a Nashville TOM, and one is an ABR-1 TOM. If you can't see from the pics, the ABR-1 has the adjustment screws ABOVE THE EDGE OF THE BRIDGE. Because of the location of the adjustment screws, it is nearly impossible to install the bridge with the screws facing a stop bar on a guitar made with one.

A look inside the pickup routes will tell the story. It's BARELY possible to route a P-90/ mini-humbucker route into a full size humbucker route, but not always. The P-90 is wider than the full size humbucker. Anyway, long story short: if it is a re-routed guitar, it will be obvious. There is no way to re-route a P-90 hole without leaving evidence.

See how he is? He's had plenty of "help", but gets NASTY when he actually gets it. His motivation isn't to fix anything, it's to bash Gibson.

I see a some are still contributing to this thread, but it probably should be removed. Not because the issue of gassing guards isn't real, but the poster and most of the stuff he posted on this thread isn't real. And most of the post are his. This guy posted this thread to start crap, and he very likely doesn't even own any Gibson guitars, but least of all the guitars he posted about. He did it to get us going and perhaps try and give Gibson a bad reputation through false accusation. A REAL thread on this issue is worthwhile, and I think there are on this forum. This wasn't that kinda thread.

Gibson made a lot of amps that didn't sell all that well, or that they made in small numbers. Doesn't mean it's not a great amp. I guess another way of saying it is Gibson changed-up the amp line often. Having said that, the idea of finding someone familiar with THAT particular amp isn't what you should be looking for, but rather, someone familiar with "vintage" tube amps, in particular guitar amps. Most of these vintage amps will be very similar to each other. Biasing power tubes, adding a grounded cord, and changing power caps will be common to all tube amps. And they aren't a big deal. A cap job and tube replacement (and biasing) IS regular maintenance, just like changing the oil in a car or changing strings on a guitar.

The "type" of guy to take it to would be an amp tech, or a tube amp repair guy. Ideally, someone who specializes in guitar amps, and better if they specialize in vintage guitar amps. Don't know who that would be in your town. I notice it has two different power tubes. So, that's a clue it's time for service. You really should get the power filter caps replaced, which need replacing every so often. Especially if they haven't been replaced in the last 10 or 15 years. And you will WANT to get the tubes biased. And also, a matched pair of power tubes there. That MIGHT solved the hum issue. But also, the amp will sound a lot better. The power cord replacement isn't major surgery.

This is not his guitar. I'm embarrassed to say, but I think we have fallen for a troll.

That Gibson color (pelham blue) is the very same color as a Fender color. I can't remember for sure which one, but I think it IS lake placid blue. As for the Cadillac reference, many popular guitar colors ARE Cadillac colors. But also, a lot of General Motors colors used within the company are the same colors, but they use different names. Just a theory, but I think why the reference to Cadillac might have something to do with the fact they just used more colors. Caddy's, especially 60's and 70's Cads, came in LOTS of colors. But either way, point I am making is these colors are more often than not, the same paint itself. Gibson might not be getting the paint from the same supplier as the originals, but back then they all got these colors from the same paint manufacturer. So the same color for a Gibson, a Fender, A Cadillac, and a Buick would each have a different name.