Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Black Dog

All Access
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Black Dog last won the day on June 25 2019

Black Dog had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

400 Excellent

About Black Dog

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

7,993 profile views
  1. You should probably post some pictures of this horrible example so that we can learn from it lest we all become victims of this hype and fraud know as the Custom Shop.
  2. Nope, just an accidental double post.
  3. Now, this post is very close to a NGD post, in which case pictures would be mandatory.
  4. Obviously I haven't seen it, but it sounds like it may be a nice naturally aged guitar. Some people pay a lot of money to fake that for some reason. So, in the famous words of Robert Plant, "Nah, leave it, yeah".
  5. Cool video. I haven't watched the whole thing yet but I thought the part about the use of pre-notched saddles due to improved neck/pickup/bridge alignment was interesting.
  6. Everything changed with the new management this year. For the solid bodies, all the main models are still there. The many sub-models of the LP have changed. It's a little confusing, but that's not really new, LP models have been confusing for while. They are now divided into the Original and Modern Collections. The new Standards are in the Original Collection, they have no weight relief, which is about the only thing I don't like about them. The new Standard '50s is similar to the old Traditional. The new Standard '60s is similar the old Classic. Of course, there is a new Classic which is part of the Modern Collection (see, it's confusing). The HPs are gone and now there is the Modern Collection which are not really like the old HPs. The site used to have a more comprehensive list of older models with specs but that's mostly gone. They do still have some old models and specs but only back to 2015. It's on the Support menu at the bottom. http://legacy.gibson.com/
  7. That is one nice looking 335. Congrats!
  8. You didn't say so, but it sounds like maybe you're just starting out. If that's the case you don't need a particularly loud amp. The Vox you mentioned doesn't sound too bad for a tiny little amp (on the Tube). I've never played one. I did have a Blackstar ID:core 40 for a while which is a solid state modeling amp. I thought it sounded pretty good. They make a 10w version that is $109 USD. For bedroom practice as a beginner, that or the Vox are probably about as good as you can do for that price. Saving up for something better is never a bad idea, but you may not really need anything better for a while, and having an amp to plug into may inspire you to play more. Good luck.
  9. How do you intend to use it? At home for practice?
  10. The people you need to ask are at Gibson Customer Service. But, I'm pretty sure that they don't replace lost/missing COAs under any circumstance.
  11. What is the reason you don't want to play loud? Is it family, neighbors or hearing loss concerns, or something else? I play mostly rock and blues and I like a driven tube tone that can be harder to get at low volume. I have a Marshall DSL1HR that is 1 watt and has an attenuator down to 0.1 watt. I also have a little Bugera V5 that's 5 watts with attenuation to 1 and 0.1. Both can give good tone at low volumes. If I want to be really quite, I use a Line 6 Pocket Pod and headphones. That can give you any tone at any volume you want and the only ambient sound will be your strings.
  12. I'm not an expert but since you don't have a lot of other replies I'll take a stab. First, more pictures would be helpful. pics of the headstock, the top, the Bigsby and the cutaway. If it was really purchased new in '68 then it's not really a '56 RI, it's an original '68. There are differences like the headstock angle, the thick binding in the cutaway and the headstock logo. As for the Bigsby, I don't know if that was ever done on '68 GTs. If so it was special order or added later. If it was added later, there should be evidence of that, unless it was refinished. Lastly, the SN you have is questionable. There is a website that has lots of info about late '60s LP's and the way I read it, that SN sequence never existed. But, I could be misreading that and I also can't vouch for the site, but it looks legit. http://www.latesixtieslespauls.com/default.asp
  • Create New...