1966 Hbird

[JuanCarlosVejar]

check it out :

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WJs-b70ncc

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JC

[E-minor7]

This particular Bird is too sharp sound for me. I hear biiig potential though.

Replace the ceramic saddle with something softer and play the strings down to normal.

I sense an excellent box.

 

If it was mine I would also try a pair of silk'n'steel, , , , with the ceramic where it is.

 

Need to do that experiment with one of my own – the avatar 1963 Southern Jumbo in fact.

Thing is that I recently replaced the combo insert with a tusq version (with screws also) and it sounds better than ever.

The hollow G-string bi-flavor is gone and it is soft and dry, yet moist in the exact right balance.

The double bass-like deep end is intact and it's become one tooth louder to the perfect volume.

 

Strings ? - New Tone 12-54 Bronze Master Class put on the 12^th of November.

 

Talk about Gibson sound. . . .

[EuroAussie]

Sounds close to my 69'er, more on the brighter rather than nectar sounds. I wonder if its also long scale which adds to the brighter tone.

[E-minor7]

I wonder if its also long scale which adds to the brighter tone.

Could look a bit like it, but notice the bridge. Not yet turned around as they were as the other factors changed in '68.

Heavier braces, longer scale and new logo.

 

Besides you are absolutely right. Basically Birds fall in 2 categiories - the mellow glazed and the sharp barbed wire sounding.

Personally I'm 10 + for the first and 10 minus for the latter.

 

But as said in my first post, one can do a lot about that with smaller or larger tricks.

 

[zombywoof]

The narrow nut and skinny butt neck make them a no starter for me. Not a comment on the guitars - just personal preference.

[EuroAussie]

The narrow nut and skinny butt neck make them a no starter for me. Not a comment on the guitars - just personal preference.

 

Yeah Im with you Zomby, I played one of those 60's Birds with the 9/16 nut width and it was joke, absolutely have no idea why Gibson would ever want to go that narrow, especially given 20 years earlier they were making 1 3/4 nut baseball bat necks ...I guess thats just Gibson.

[E-minor7]

I played one of those 60's Birds with the 9/16 nut width and it was joke, absolutely have no idea why Gibson would ever want to go that narrow, , , ,

Guess it became hip to narrow in and get closer to the electric guitars.

And wonder if there was a let's invite the girls-factor.

There must have been some serious second thoughts - maybe even considerable negative response - as they returned to 11/16 after only 3 years.

[blindboygrunt]

wasnt it something to do with the folk boom and everybody wanting to be bob dylan and not buddy holly anymore . as em7 says the narrow neck to not scare electric players .

[EuroAussie]

wasnt it something to do with the folk boom and everybody wanting to be bob dylan and not buddy holly anymore . as em7 says the narrow neck to not scare electric players .

 

Well, folk boom to me does not equate with electric guitars and hence narrow nut widths to be honest ...

[j45nick]

Guess it became hip to narrow in and get closer to the electric guitars.

There must have been some serious second thoughts - maybe even considerable negative response - as they returned to 11/16 after only 3 years.

 

 

I'm not sure they returned to 1 11/16" after three years. At least on the electrics, it stayed at 1 9/16" until about 1980. For every Gibson built after 1964, you need to carefully measure the nut width if the narrow neck bothers you.

[blindboygrunt]

Well, folk boom to me does not equate with electric guitars and hence narrow nut widths to be honest ...

 

i was thinking , because of the folk boom , electric players were swapping to acoustics ... looking for similar narrow electric size neck on their new fangled folk guitar

i may well be talkin outta my arse

[zombywoof]

Yeah Im with you Zomby, I played one of those 60's Birds with the 9/16 nut width and it was joke, absolutely have no idea why Gibson would ever want to go that narrow, especially given 20 years earlier they were making 1 3/4 nut baseball bat necks ...I guess thats just Gibson.

 

I never really thought of 1930s or 1940s Gibson necks being that fat - not when compared to the 1920s and 1930s mail order catalogs I play like the Kay Krafts. Those things are massive and often with a 1 7/8" or 2" nut.

 

If you look at Gibson's early 1960s advertising though, they describe their necks as low action, fast playing or something close to that. I agree that the thinner necks and narrower nuts were influenced by the rise of the electric guitar. I don't buy the folk boom thing if only because the guitar Gibson marketed directly to that crowd - the "Folksinger" - came with a 2" nut. It is also hard not to notice the 1 9/16" nut came the year after the Beatles appeared on the Sullivan show which got alot of folks to put away their acoustics and drool over the pictures of those Silvertones in the Sears catalog.

[blindboygrunt]

what do you reckon the thinking behind a narrow nut was then ?

[CindyC]

Guess it became hip to narrow in and get closer to the electric guitars.

And wonder if there was a let's invite the girls-factor.

There must have been some serious second thoughts - maybe even considerable negative response - as they returned to 11/16 after only 3 years.

 

I think the narrower nut would even be too slim for me and my hands are way smaller than a guys. I made sure mine had the 11/16 for that reason and for possible resale down the road.

[onewilyfool]

I had Narrow nuts once....antibiotics cleared them right up....

[ParlourMan]

I had Narrow nuts once....antibiotics cleared them right up....

 

Ye dirty midden ye.......

[E-minor7]

I'm not sure they returned to 1 11/16" after three years. At least on the electrics, it stayed at 1 9/16" until about 1980. For every Gibson built after 1964, you need to carefully measure the nut width if the narrow neck bothers you.

As we are talking Gibson, there might be exceptions*, but I have the nerve to challenge you on that : Ever seen or played one ?

 

I think the narrower nut would even be too slim for me and my hands are way smaller than a guys. I made sure mine had the 11/16 for that reason and for possible resale down the road.

11/16 is a nice width for sure, but you were lucky as the majority of '65's were narrows to my knowledge and experience anyway.

 

Hey Cindy - is it time for a Bird-alone sample. . .

[j45nick]

As we are talking Gibson, there might be exceptions*, but I have the nerve to challenge you on that : Ever seen or played one ?

 

 

I'm not saying they didn't go back to 1 11/16" on acoustics, but they certainly did not on electrics with any consistency until the ES 335 dot re-issue in 1981. Any trap-tail ES model between 1965 and 1980 is likely a 1 9/16" nut.

 

I'm just saying that you need to check a guitar from this era before you buy.

 

And, by the way, I have one Gibson electric and one Gibson acoustic with the 1 9/16" nut. The acoustic plays just fine, although it takes a few minutes to adapt to it after playing a wider one.

 

The electric is a 12-string, and that can be a bit of a challenge.

[E-minor7]

I'm not saying they didn't go back to 1 11/16" on acoustics, but. . . .

 

Yeah, guess the electrics stayed more or less narrow up through the years, still I'm not sure.

Think I recall meeting some rather beefy Les Paul necks back on the track - then again there's a difference between necks and nut-widths.

I'm sure BKahune knows much more about this.

 

[Motherofpearl]

A friend if mine has one in collectors condition he is selling but I too have a hard time with the nut. Sounds great though!!

[iwalktheline]

who gives a damn of the nut size......it's a beautiful guitar and I would take her in a second

[CindyC]

As we are talking Gibson, there might be exceptions*, but I have the nerve to challenge you on that : Ever seen or played one ?

 

11/16 is a nice width for sure, but you were lucky as the majority of '65's were narrows – to my knowledge and experience anyway.

 

Hey Cindy - is it time for a Bird-alone sample. . .

 

 

I'd say it's past time but I want to give you guys something decent without hurting your ears. I'm working on a couple samples to get up asap! Recording is lets say not the easiest for me and down right terrifying to hear myself! lol Getting a clip out is going to be my weekend mission!

[zombywoof]

who gives a damn of the nut size......it's a beautiful guitar and I would take her in a second

 

Feel is just as important as sound. I have passed on more than a few great sounding guitars because of a skimpy a neck and nut. A certain 1966 Epi Texan I ran across last year immediately comes to mind.

[E-minor7]

I'm not sure they returned to 1 11/16" after three years. At least on the electrics, it stayed at 1 9/16" until about 1980. For every Gibson built after 1964, you need to carefully measure the nut width if the narrow neck bothers you.

As we are talking Gibson, there might be exceptions*, but I have the nerve to challenge you on that : Ever seen or played one ?

Have to eat a little of this back.

Played a 1968 Bird yesterday with screwed down p-guard, upbelly bridge, rosewood adjustable insert and, , , , 1- 9/16 nut width.

A seldom ex. must be said and probably a borderline case. Still claim the overwhelming majority of '68 – '69 Birds have the 11/16 nut.

 

Sounded very good btw.

[j45nick]

Have to eat a little of this back.

Played a 1968 Bird yesterday with screwed down p-guard, upbelly bridge, rosewood adjustable insert and, , , , 1- 9/16 nut width.

A seldom ex. must be said and probably a borderline case. Still claim the overwhelming majority of '68 – '69 Birds have the 11/16 nut.

 

What do you want to bet?

 

(Actually, I'll only bet through '68, as I have no experience with 1969 models. It is pretty certain that the electrics stayed narrow until the ES 335 dot re-issue of 1981. We should get DanvillRob to measure his Jubilee for the sake of discussion.)