[Gibson 355 new or vintage]

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.

[Gibson 355 new or vintage]

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".

[Angie .. is it in key of Am or C ?]

This thread brings to mind a scene from one of my favorite movies:

 

 

 

This isn't a thread

 

It's a rope!

 

I'm out of here

 

 

 

[ Mr G. I say yes - you give the address and then - according to your sub-line - kill me. [/size][/font]

 

 

 

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

[Angie .. is it in key of Am or C ?]

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.

[Angie .. is it in key of Am or C ?]

Sweet Home Alabama - G ior D ?

 

Lets keep this thread going for another 6 pages.

I got nothin'.

[Angie .. is it in key of Am or C ?]

Now you're just messin' with my head. I think I need a drink. Or maybe a little smoke. Or both.

 

Nah, I think I'll just go play guitar. After I have a drink and a smoke.

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

[Angie .. is it in key of Am or C ?]

Cool - that's one of the reasons we love this forum - the incredible knowledge and mind blowing information that comes forth!

 

I am not sure how Keef got hold of the Saung-Gauk, FB ...... they are tightly held by their owners, who go through an 'apprenticeship' of approximately 45 years with the initiation ceremony involving, correct me if I am wrong, trimming some of the skin from the gonads, to see how much they want that Saung-Gauk I assume, and how generally keen they are on learning the instrument? But he probably pinched it from Brian?

 

 

BluesKing777.

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

[Angie .. is it in key of Am or C ?]

 

 

 

 

Why is this important?

 

Because Musicianship involves the Ability to Effectively Interpret Written Notation.

 

Or for those that cannot Read Music, the Creative Ability to Effectively Translate, Interpret and Convey a Composers Inward Feelings, Expressing them Outwardly in a Musical Form.

 

In both instances, the Comprehension of the Composers Creative Intentions and the Ability to Interpret and Convey the Emotion of his or her Writing to the Audience, are Absolutely Paramount and Essential Ingredients of the Craft.

 

 

 

 

 

Properly Understanding what was intended, is really much of what Musicianship is about.

 

 

Understanding How The Composer Felt, what he or her Meant, and Compellingly Interpreting That so an Audience Strongly Identifies with that Expression of Feeling is what it means to be a Real Musician.

 

Instead of Wondering what Key Signature the Music is in. (It is in A Minor). Concentrate on what the Words and Music are all about, think about and Try to Feel Deeply what the Composer Felt and Focus on Conveying That Feeling, in a Powerful Manner to the Audience they Positively Respond To.

 

 

 

This will take you a Long Way Towards.

 

Where you Should Want To Be.

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.

[Angie .. is it in key of Am or C ?]

I remember all the classics I read in English Literature. Every professor I ever had, used to say In Moby **** Mellville used the Whale to symbolize this, and the harpoon symbolizes that, or in Hemminways Old man and the Sea, the fish symbolizes this and the struggle that. On and On, every book we cracked. . I am just asking the question. Is it possible that an author like Hemmingway, just say down with a bottle of rum, a few cuban cigars and 1/2 a key lime pie and wrote a story. And we just overanalyze the syntax, characters, and plot?. Maybe we should just read the book or play a song and enjoy it for what it is.

 

Angie is a cool, bluesy acoustic classic. Who the He*L Angie is, or what Key it happens to be in the the 7th dominant or whatever, is irrelevant.

 

Theory is an area I hope to improve in and there are dudes on this forum who forgort more about theory than i will ever know, but does it comes to a point where something is so overanaylzed it becomes unenjoyable, like work.? Its a job, Christ, I already have one job I do not like.

 

Sting once said that it is impossible for him to listen to a song without his mind constantly working, breaking it down, so he can not enjoy music like the normal man. Well after reading all of this, I am glad I am a dummy wallowing in my ignorance. If I ever get to the point where I have to break stuff down like discecting a frog, Christ what the point.? Are we splitting Atoms at the University of Chicago or listening to Goats head soup.

 

Would knowing Theory better make me a better guitar player? , Yup, I believe it. Im working on it. But when I got to crack a text book and use a thesarus and wikipedia to anaylze a sentence, Its time to sell the guitars and start playing spoons.

 

Its Music. No more, no less. When it becomes Science.... Im out.

 

Just my .02.

 

,

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.

[Angie .. is it in key of Am or C ?]

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.

[Angie .. is it in key of Am or C ?]

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.

[Les Paul Traditional to 59 conversion]

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?

[Mixed slants on Les Paul bridge saddles]

maybe you can seek medical help

I do suggest a remedial reading comprehension brush up as all those points were covered and like most things immediately confused and jumbled.

If you have a ABR front screw, wonderful, if you can reach the adjustments with no issues, wonderful, if you have problems either change the bridge or flip it as it does not matter to the function. That is called a point, if that is "screw loose" then I doubt we agree on much of anything in this world.

If your strings are hitting the screws behind the saddles then you have too much an abrupt bend down to the stop piece which is not desirable nor necessary, neither is the myth and lore one's stop piece has to be screwed hard down to the body, it simply does not, and on some Les Paul's with a greater neck tilt without doing the old "top wrap" method the angle bend is too great abd the strings hit the bridge edge.

If you cannot use the high set bridge screws then perhaps get another bridge, they are relatively low price for any model made.

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.

[Mixed slants on Les Paul bridge saddles]

 

If your strings are hitting the adjustment screws, then per the first post you have your setup wrong. Strings need to clear the edge of the bridge if the screws are sticking up above the bridge edge, which my eyes are probably not that bad, then what a horrible design flaw and may I say, bad engineering!

 

 

Indeed...If the strings are hitting the screws, YOU HAVE THE BRIDGE BACKWARDS!

 

...as designed, the screws face forward.

[Mixed slants on Les Paul bridge saddles]

 

Simply not a fuss, or a fuzz, you guys just keep insisting things which I already pointed out.

 

 

 

 

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

[Mixed slants on Les Paul bridge saddles]

Someone gets it.

I merely provided the information for those who wanted to know the issues of the Les Paul bridges.

 

As for "newbie" yeah playing 41yrs, with engineering background and actually knowing real things, makes you a stupid teenager who does not have a clue.

I did mention the different screw side bridge types in post one, I am very sorry so many have poor reading skills or cannot get past a two line twitter say nothing.

If you think something is incorrect do show it and then step back and realize one of two things, you are agreeing with the same thing said, or you have misunderstood the information/words.

 

By the way kids, the front mount screws (towards) the pickups does not work for me at all. AND once again it does not matter which side the screws are on, EXCEPT, for the matter of access.

 

It simply does not matter across the grand scope of bridge issues on the Les Paul, direction of saddles (if slanted and edge sides), screws on either side of the bridge, or if your stop piece is hard down to the body. Anyway that function indicates it HAS to be is OK for the Les Paul.

 

So information given.

Use it, lose it, misunderstand it or whatever. As Always just trying to add something viable rather than one line insults or not comprehending anything.

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.

[Mixed slants on Les Paul bridge saddles]

Actually it's a design difference. The ABR (older) has it's adjustment screws at the top edge of the bridge, so when the factory installs them the screws face the neck to prevent the touching the screw heads by the strings as they angle over the saddle to the stop. Notice the Nashville adjustment screws are set lower than top of the bridge edge, so when the factory installs them the screws face the stop. So, ABR TOMs have their adjustment screws facing the neck, and Nashville TOMS have heir adjustment screws facing the stop.

 

ABR -

 

Nashville -

 

.

 

 

I was talking about the saddle screws either facing the bridge pickup or the stop piece side. Makes no difference which way, merely a matter if you can reach them for easy adjustment. My Les Paul faces the stop piece and it is a new one. My Epi faces the pickup side. Makes no difference to how you set the stop piece.

 

 

Have a happy Les Paul day.

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.

[1975 Les Paul Deluxe or Standard ?]

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.

[pickguard disintegration and corrosion of gold parts]

 

If someone could pull up the Archtop guarantee I'd like to see it.

 

 

This is the Gibson warranty that applies to all new instruments. .....

Note that the warranty is for the life of the original owner, and is not transferable. Since you are not the original owner, your guitars are clearly not covered,

 

You're on your own from here on out. I don't think anyone here can help you.

 

 

 

I guess you represent Gibson since you seem to speaking for everyone in the forum? Who said I'm not the original owner??? Please be careful how you answer this question because you really don't know who I am.

If you represent the company you should state it.

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.

[pickguard disintegration and corrosion of gold parts]

My "guess" is that Gibson will do nothing about it. They made a guitar to play, not store, and a case to carry it in, not to store it. It is obvious that it was stored for a time in poor temp/humidity conditions. Gibson did not make or suggest those conditions. I am sorry for your loss on such great instruments. Check the warranty card on those instruments from when you purchased them new or ask your dealer about a warranty claim.

 

 

The majority of purchasers of Gibson Custom Shop guitars prefer as close to vintage materials as possible. Yes Gibson could to use other materials, but have chosen to try to stay true to as close to vintage as possible. What did your selling dealer tell you about a warranty replacement? It sounds more like you came here to start a confrontation rather than gain information.

 

 

I was waiting for him to post a picture of his actual guitar but that never happened.

 

 

 

 

It doesn't matter if I am the original owner. It is a defective product. The fact that some of them were bought used and some where bought new with the same problem only re-enforces my claim. And why would I show my receipts??? I don't know you and you're not trying to help. It is the light brown tortoise shell pick guards that have this problem.

 

 

Yeah the manufactures always try to blame the defective part on the person who's operating whatever the machinery or the car or whatever and it takes a court case to show them what time of day it is. But nowadays the public sympathizes with the people.

If you work for Gibson a better time to wise up

You can't hang with the debate bro give it up..

 

 

It is clear all you mother****ers work for the company.

 

 

I guess you represent Gibson since you seem to speaking for everyone in the forum? Who said I'm not the original owner??? Please be careful how you answer this question because you really don't know who I am.

If you represent the company you should state it.

[pickguard disintegration and corrosion of gold parts]

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.

[GA 19 RVT]

There are legions of amp techs around here but I have never seen one of these and as they only made around 200, I doubt anyone else has either. I can't imagine it sounding much better, other than the reverb hum. I'm more concerned about accidentally seeing my skeleton, or it bursting into flames. Maybe it's worth a call to Gibson USA to locate the right tech.

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.

[GA 19 RVT]

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.

[pickguard disintegration and corrosion of gold parts]

In your first post you had added a link to this picture:

 

 

Sorry, but this is a photo of a badly neglected guitar. Merely the strings speak volumes of prolonged disregard and mistreatment. I have seen a lot, but I never saw a guitar looking like this.

 

I'm in doubt if there's a chance to bring out public sympathy for the owner.

This is not his guitar.

 

I'm embarrassed to say, but I think we have fallen for a troll.

[Origin of The Colour Name "Pelham Blue"]

Being curious about the origin of the Gibson metallic colour denomination, beside others I found this thread here: http://forums.guitarnoise.com/viewtopic.php?t=55998

 

Funny that it was started by a Guitarnoise member from Moscow with the forum name Kopfschmerzen meaning headache in German...

 

Our Bob aka Notes_Norton brought the Cadillac finish into play, but the car makers also must have had any idea or reference I guess. But whatever would that have been? Most pelhams - the horse bits - don't have a hue like this.

 

Any ideas or references?

 

 

I have none bearing it and guess it will stay that way. One of my Strats is Lake Placid Blue, her hue interestingly is very close to Pelham Blue and matches her nicely.

 

 

I think its simply from the Cadillac colour charts.

Why at Cadillac? - who knows, could someone's surname who worked there maybe?

In the 1970's our most popular family car produced by GM could be (and was by some) purchased in a pink/purple metallic colour officially called 'Barney's Shirt' - why? - because some dude named Barney in the GM styling dept office wore a shirt that particular colour one day and they liked it.

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.