Danny W.

It is a nice guitar, but that's a six-year old post. Danny W.

I have 50 albums with Kenny as leader or featured sideman so I'm rather obsessed with him too. Midnight Blue was a groundbreaking and highly influential recording that's provided me with years of listening enjoyment--I bought my first copy in 1963 and have listened to it often since then. Great-looking guitar, Jim. I've never owned a guitar with a CC, mostly because I hate the looks of the mounting screws; maybe I should reconsider that. Danny W.

Many of my Gibsons over the years have had this, so much so that I'm not sure if it's a defect or just "The Gibson Way." In either case it doesn't bother me and I just ignore it. Many years ago I leveled one, found it made no difference in anything and haven't bothered with it since. Danny W.

The acoustic sound of your L-48 does not exist on the surface of it, but in front of the f-holes. If you want to preserve the acoustic sound, your best bet is a small body condenser mike--see this: My link If you really want a more typical jazz guitar sound, the floating pickup mentioned previously will work. Danny W.

1.Limited edition but some have been built on order. Not sure if they'll still do it. 2. I agree. When Gibson replaced a 1994 WesN for me under warranty, the replacement was much too white for me. I asked them to color-match my original, which they did. The result was spectacular. Original: Replacement one (note that this is a stock WesMo antique natural): replacement two: Danny W.

Es-355's were my main guitars for stand-up gigs for about 40 years--here are some of the more recent ones: About ten years ago I decided they were too heavy and switched to a couple of CS-356's and Johnny A's. Danny W.

I just checked a few guitars and found out that I've actually put them on either way, sometimes on the same guitar, so never mind. <_< OTOH, I've never ever had a string break, not counting restringing accidents, and I change strings as seldom as I can, so I doubt that stress on the string is a significant factor. Danny W.

I prefer to put them in flat (hole towards top), but they stay in either way and no, it doesn't affect the sound. If you put them in flat you you can more easily use a fingertip to find if they are well seated--they other way they will all stick out somewhat, seated or not. Danny W.

Eight years ago I asked Gibson to quote on making that same guitar for me. When I saw the price I lost interest, but it is a beautiful-looking guitar. Danny W.

No, I don't, but in any case, it's a lighting problem rather than a camera problem. Danny W.

Your seemingly innocent question earns you a lecture: I am, in fact, a very skilled photographer, and I use top-quality equipment. However, the photo in question evinces non of those traits. It's a completely artless, straight-on shot using on-camera flash, (causing the ugly bright reflection) and required no skill whatsoever. Furthermore, it was taken over nine years ago with a Nikon Coolpix 990, a camera from the paleolithic era of digital cameras--it would be hard to imagine a camera made in recent history (except maybe in a cell phone) that would not produce better results, if properly used. Which brings me to my point: unless your camera is actually defective, the problem is operator error. Either you have it set wrong or you need to learn the basics of photography, or both. Over the years I have found that anyone who has to ask if better equipment would improve their photos needs to learn more about photography. Once someone knows how to take photos they can usually figure out whether equipment is limiting their technique. Danny W.

The BJB was a revised version of the Gibson Johnny Smith pickup, and as Jim has mentioned, it was designed by Bruce Bolan. Unlike the Smith, it doesn't have adjustable slugs, and has somewhat more mid-range; it's punchier overall, but not as "hi-fi." Since it's not adjustable, installation and string choice are more critical than with the Smith--it's got to be level and electrically centered under the strings. Despite that limitation, I generally prefer it to the Smith, and have it on most of my floater-equipped guitars, all of which have T-I Benson roundwound .012's. Here's what one looks like: Hope this helps, Danny W.

It has a short scale, so it's no more likely to be an L-5 than a Byrdland. I don't know if this is the photo you were referencing, but this is an L-5CES Thin on the right and a Byrdland on the left, both with 25.5" scales: Danny W.

Here are five thin L-5 variants with four different body depths--I wouldn't make too much of it. Danny W.

The location of the pickups varies. Here's my 1959 (photo taken in 1970): Here's my 1966: Here's a 1968--not mine: Please note that the front of the mounting ring easily fits under the curved edge of the raised fretboard extension. The guitar in question seems to have all the features of a Byrdland with either a replacement fretboard or a custom ordered one and the wrong pickguard. That seems easier to believe than a 350T with different headstock, binding and top. Danny W.

In 2004 a dealer had a blonde Custom Shop Byrdland for sale. It had a 25.5" scale length, Bigsby and parallelogram inlays in an ebony fretboard. Since I'm obsessed with long-scale, thin-body archtops, I was thinking about buying it, but it was sold in the meantime. A year later, the same guitar showed up on another dealer's site. The price I was quoted on it seemed reasonable, but when I contacted the dealer again, he told me that the price had been a mistake and quoted one $1300 higher. I thought the new price was too high considering the Bigsby and inlays, and passed on it. I sometimes keep photos of interesting guitars I didn't buy, but apparently not for this one. Anyway, that's at least one Byrdland with factory parallelogram inlays, so I figure there could be more. Danny W.

Gibson also built a sunburst version of that blonde CG/L-5: Danny W.

Don't be too sure about the f-holes: Danny W.

The ES-357 was originally built at the request of studio ace Mitch Holder, who wanted a Gibson thinline with a more cutting tone for increased versatility in the studio. His guitar was based on an ES-347 (hence the ES-357 moniker), with three P-90’s hidden inside humbucker covers, so he could fool people with the sound. It seemed successful enough that they built five more and sold them all. In collecting and studio circles this model was often called the “ES-Mitch.” The one I had was not from that run, but appears to be a one-off. It was based on an ES-355 and the P-90’s weren’t hidden--in addition, Holder’s had a slightly deeper body. In an odd coincidence there’s a lesson by Holder in this month’s Guitar Player (Sept 2010 issue) on page 94, which shows him with his ES-357, so check it out! Danny W.

It's been around ten years since I've seen that guitar, but I think the switching was Neck--Middle + Bridge--Bridge. There was a mini-toggle that I think combined all three, although it's also possible it put the middle pu out of phase with the bridge--I can't remember. There was a tone and volume for the neck and another for the bridge--I'm pretty sure you couldn't blend the pickups. It was a nice guitar, but I never particularly liked the neck on it. Danny W.

Here's a one-off ES-357 that I used to own. It's an ES-355 sans f-holes with three P-90 pickups: Danny W.