Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Where Did All The Beveling Go...? LOL


charlie brown

Recommended Posts

CB, you brought the "bevel" issue to my attention a few years ago... up to that point, I was fairly clueless on the subject.

 

My old '91 Standard has the nearly-non-existent beveling, while my '13 '50s Tribute has the deep, exaggerated beveling. Not sure if I have a preference, but I must admit—since you raised the point for me—I kind'a like the beveling. Looks more "authentic" to me.

 

 

I think a lot of folks, younger than some of us here, didn't/don't realize there even was a "beveling/horn tapering" issue, because

they've never seen, or played some of the original early '60's SG's, prior. And, even if they did, they may not have noticed,

unless side by side, to one with lesser bevels and no horn tapering. But,as I've stated, many times, the wider, deeper bevels

and substantial horn tapering, of the early '60's, are as much a part of an SG, for me, as the dual "horns!" [biggrin]

 

So, I'm not sure WHY Gibson keeps going back and forth, on those two spec's?! [cursing][unsure] But, maybe it's to try to

please people in both camps? [tongue]:rolleyes:

 

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Help educate me on the SG as I purchased a 2010 61 Reissue. That's the only Gibson SG I've ever had my hands on. How close was this to the 1961 made guitar? Was it "horn bevel correct" or just a weak attempt? If I'm understanding what ya'll are saying the Standard made in 2013 was more of the period correct design?

 

Aster

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Help educate me on the SG as I purchased a 2010 61 Reissue. That's the only Gibson SG I've ever had my hands on. How close was this to the 1961 made guitar? Was it "horn bevel correct" or just a weak attempt? If I'm understanding what ya'll are saying the Standard made in 2013 was more of the period correct design?

 

Aster

 

'61 reissues were certainly a lot closer, to the originals. There were some concerns, about the color (being too light, or too "orange")

on some versions (mostly the VOS versions). But, the bevels and horn tapers were within those early spec's. Even the early-mid '60's

SG's varied a little bit, in that regard. The 2013 SG's, to me, were about as good/accurate as they've been, spec wise, in a LONG time! [thumbup]

And, across the SG line...not on just a couple of models.

 

But, that was then, this is now! [crying] I STILL don't know why, they've decided to go back to the lesser bevels and no horn tapering,

on the "T" models. The HP models seem to retain more of the beveling of the early years. Why make two different body spec's. What's next...

"Norlin" era SG bodies with little to NO beveling? (Heavy Sigh!) :rolleyes:

 

(Yes, I AM a "nut" about proper beveling and horn tapering!) [flapper][biggrin]

 

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info. I do like my SG now that it's warmed up to me. Don't know what/why it happened as I didn't like it much at all when I got it. I love the way it play/sounds now.

 

Aster

 

Well, SG's can be an acquired taste, for some, just as any guitar can be. My problem, is they're addictive! LOL

My other guitars tend to be played less, since acquiring my SG's. [tongue][crying]

 

 

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info. I do like my SG now that it's warmed up to me. Don't know what/why it happened as I didn't like it much at all when I got it. I love the way it play/sounds now.

 

Aster

 

 

Well, SG's can be an acquired taste, for some, just as any guitar can be. My problem, is they're addictive! LOL

My other guitars tend to be played less, since acquiring my SG's. [tongue][crying]

 

 

CB

I would be all over the SG, except I'm kinda a bigger guy. I'm an inch shorter than I used to be, but a few inches wider. Guitars, they just keep getting smaller!

 

SG is really small on me, and a bit hard to hold onto, but the LP is getting that way as well.

 

I guess MY version, my next guitar, is 335 style. Like that long neck...same thing as an SG really. Except they aren't light. And I like light guitars.

 

I DO prefer to play my Special more than the LP. Something about that all hog thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'61 reissues were certainly a lot closer, to the originals. There were some concerns, about the color (being too light, or too "orange")

on some versions (mostly the VOS versions). But, the bevels and horn tapers were within those early spec's. Even the early-mid '60's

SG's varied a little bit, in that regard. The 2013 SG's, to me, were about as good/accurate as they've been, spec wise, in a LONG time! [thumbup]

And, across the SG line...not on just a couple of models.

 

But, that was then, this is now! [crying] I STILL don't know why, they've decided to go back to the lesser bevels and no horn tapering,

on the "T" models. The HP models seem to retain more of the beveling of the early years. Why make two different body spec's. What's next...

"Norlin" era SG bodies with little to NO beveling? (Heavy Sigh!) :rolleyes:

 

(Yes, I AM a "nut" about proper beveling and horn tapering!) [flapper][biggrin]

 

CB

The bevels on the 61 reissue have slightly change over the years.

Without google it, i think late 90's early 2000 has the deep bevels.

Mid 2000 slightly less bevels, and i do think they might got the deeper bevels around 2010

 

The Gibson USA line have different hardware and building speck than the Cs or the original, and that do have a impact on the sound.

 

Having said that, i'm not a snob and saying the CS i better

But played unplugged the Cs has a different signature sound than the USA line up, yea i know its a bit different anyhow even between Cs models or USA models.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To my eye's the Gibson official Sg '13 catalog, might be their best ever!!

 

 

[thumbup] I agree. And, I wonder if it wasn't the best sales year, for SG's, in a long time, as well?

Most (if not all?) comments by SG lovers were very positive, about the 2013 model year. I certainly

loved that year's models, as after not owning any SG's since the '60's, I bought 1 in December 2012

('61 SG Satin), and 3 more (Original, Kirk Douglas Custom, and '61 Tribute), as they came out, in 2013.

(Yes, I went SG "Crazy," that year, for sure!)

 

I love the CS versions, as well. However, when I was looking at getting an SG again, I compared a couple

of CS SG's (one with stop bar, the other with a Lyre vibrato), to the newly released "Original" at my dealer,

and found the "Original" to be as nice, in both fit and finish, and "better" in unplugged resonance! Plugged

in, they sounded pretty much the same. The CS versions have VOS finishes, and "aged nickel" hardware,

along with the slightly more (accurately) squared headstock. But, the lovely grain pattern on my "Original"

made it "The One," for me!

 

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[thumbup] I agree. And, I wonder if it wasn't the best sales year, for SG's, in a long time, as well?

Most (if not all?) comments by SG lovers were very positive, about the 2013 model year. I certainly

loved that year's models, as after not owning any SG's since the '60's, I bought 1 in December 2012

('61 SG Satin), and 3 more (Original, Kirk Douglas Custom, and '61 Tribute), as they came out, in 2013.

(Yes, I went SG "Crazy," that year, for sure!)

 

I love the CS versions, as well. However, when I was looking at getting an SG again, I compared a couple

of CS SG's (one with stop bar, the other with a Lyre vibrato), to the newly released "Original" at my dealer,

and found the "Original" to be as nice, in both fit and finish, and "better" in unplugged resonance! Plugged

in, they sounded pretty much the same. The CS versions have VOS finishes, and "aged nickel" hardware,

along with the slightly more (accurately) squared headstock. But, the lovely grain pattern on my "Original"

made it "The One," for me!

 

CB

Yea i agree with the resonance, my original do resonate better then my sg cs standard

But the Cs has a different voice, and i think that's in general with the historic line up.

I suspect that the main reason is that the bridge pin/anchor is screwed directly to the wood, and the ABR1 with alu stop-bar.

The vos can also play a part here.

 

BTW did a little upgrade on the Original that made her more stable and i like to think it sounded even better(could be placebo)

First thing a Bone nut

Then i bought these

Includes one pair of STEEL studs and thumbwheels and a hard plastic installation tool and a 5mm bolt to remove the old Nashville bridge inserts.

faber_zpsrxckhh7h.jpg

 

And a Locking bridge from Tonepros

 

I is super stable after this mod and i felt that pinch harmonics got better after the upgrade

 

 

Anyway love 'em both [thumbup]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...