jimmiJAMM Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 For three grand this seems like a really sweet deal. For one thing, it doesn't have a golden, devil-horned "Angus" decal on the headstock or etching on the Maestro. It actually looks like the real thing. Has anyone around here played one of these or better yet does anyone own one? I'm curious to hear your assessment. Thanks. http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/SGSRVOFCNM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddairy Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 For three grand this seems like a really sweet deal. For one thing' date=' it doesn't have a golden, devil-horned "Angus" decal on the headstock or etching on the Maestro. It actually looks like the [i']real[/i] thing. Has anyone around here played one of these or better yet does anyone own one? I'm curious to hear your assessment. Thanks. http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/SGSRVOFCNM They are cool. I don't like the aged look. 3 grand seems steep and I know there are all these 61 RI vs the custom shop debates, and yes the custom shop does look more vintage... However, as a gigging musician I always ask myself in a live band setting if i was given two recordings could I tell the guitars apart? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hbomb76 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 For three grand one that was actually an accurate reissue would be a "sweet deal". I've actually owned 3 of them total (one stock, ugh...and two custom order ones with different, non-aged cherry finishes), and I can vouch that they play and sound great, but not "a thousand bucks more than a '61 RI or Angus signature great". If Gibson still made the USA '61 with Maestro, it'd be a more historically-accurate looking guitar AND would sound and play every bit as good. You can scour the forums on here to see what specific differences are, and why these aren't quite the "reissues" they should be. Are they decent guitars? No doubt. Are they worth what they're asking for them? Not really, with the historical inaccuracies and quality-control issues. If you hold it up to the real thing (meaning any early-to-mid 60's Standard, of which I've owned a few, seen thousands and played dozens), you'll instantly see the things that are "wrong" about them. The only thing that makes them seem more "vintage looking" to most folks is the fake aging process with the finish, although the Angus' "aged cherry" is much more pleasing to the eye than the "faded cherry"; and plenty of folks would rather see a NON-aged finish option but for whatever reason Gibson chooses not to make that so, most likely because it costs a few bucks more with the red dye and extra topcoats. Some folks are fine with them, and that's great. Others like myself are trying to get Gibson to update them with more accuracy and mojo/aesthetic before we invest in another high-end guitar. It might be worth your while to try one out in person and see if you still like it. H-Bomb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wonker Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 $3000 Gawd that’s as high as Giraffe pu$$y!!! What makes that worth $3000? It’s just an SG w/ a Maestro right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sok66 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 It's really all about what you want. The Historic SG is close to the original body & headstock shape compared to the '61 RI, and the finish does approximate an aged early SG guitar. Just depends if those features and the hardware changes are worth the extra money to you. I'm sure that would be a great axe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddairy Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 For three grand one that was actually an accurate reissue would be a "sweet deal". I've actually owned 3 of them total (one stock' date=' ugh...and two custom order ones with different, non-aged cherry finishes), and I can vouch that they play and sound great, but not "a thousand bucks more than a '61 RI or Angus signature great". If Gibson still made the USA '61 with Maestro, it'd be a more historically-accurate looking guitar AND would sound and play every bit as good. You can scour the forums on here to see what specific differences are, and why these aren't quite the "reissues" they should be. Are they decent guitars? No doubt. Are they worth what they're asking for them? Not really, with the historical inaccuracies and quality-control issues. If you hold it up to the [i']real thing[/i] (meaning any early-to-mid 60's Standard, of which I've owned a few, seen thousands and played dozens), you'll instantly see the things that are "wrong" about them. The only thing that makes them seem more "vintage looking" to most folks is the fake aging process with the finish, although the Angus' "aged cherry" is much more pleasing to the eye than the "faded cherry"; and plenty of folks would rather see a NON-aged finish option but for whatever reason Gibson chooses not to make that so, most likely because it costs a few bucks more with the red dye and extra topcoats. Some folks are fine with them, and that's great. Others like myself are trying to get Gibson to update them with more accuracy and mojo/aesthetic before we invest in another high-end guitar. It might be worth your while to try one out in person and see if you still like it. H-Bomb H-Bomb, One thing you never fully talk about is actual tone. I've heard all your stuff, your a hell of a good guitarist. You can certainly tell the differences of these guitarist physically. How about tonally? Say on a recording. Could you pick them out? I've been a Telecaster guy for years and I can't tell the difference, if one was to put the same pickups in a mexican, usa, or custom shop Telecaster then record all three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurt Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 If I weren´t more into the big pickguard and if I wouldn´t hate nickel hardware... But if you like it and if it feels and plays good for you. Why not? On one hand I agree with H-Bomb that 3k are a lot of money for what you´ll get. On the other hand it´s an investment for life. So the only question can be whether it´s worth it to you. Greetings Kurt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmiJAMM Posted February 18, 2009 Author Share Posted February 18, 2009 Btw- I aint saying three grand's not a lot of lettuce for a guitar but considering the trusty Standard retails for $1,650.00, it seems like a reasonable price for such a special "historic" edition with "case candy." Haha. Personally, I can't afford to pay that much that's why I bought both my SG's on eBay for around a grand a pop. Now THAT's a bargin, especially considering one's a mint '78 with original case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hbomb76 Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 The Historic SG is close to the original body & headstock shape compared to the '61 RI... Well' date=' that's partially true. I like the Historic's less-pointy horn outline (from the front-view) but they tend to overkill on the lower horn, making it "stubby" on some and resulting in less symmetry (or less symmetrical illusion anyway) than the originals, or the '61 Reissue for that matter. Plus since they don't properly taper those horn-tips on the Historic, it still only VAGUELY resembles its namesake. Headstock's kind of subjective, since they varied a LOT in the 60's (depending on whatever was lying around assumably), and it's not that big a deal with accuracy. ...and the finish does approximate an aged early SG guitar. As long as you've never seen a naturally-aged one in person...lol Actually, as much as I hate to admit it, there was ONE Custom I saw that was aged/relic'd good enough to where if I didn't notice the un-tapered horns off the bat I'd have sworn it was a real '64/'65 Custom that had been played hard and left in the garage, and I saw one of the Rossington models (but refused to touch it because I don't care for Rossington as a player or a person) that had a less-faded cherry shade and was checked and dinged pretty convincingly. Otherwise, the "faded" finish to me just looks like another color altogether and shouldn't be called ANYTHING "cherry" (and we should be offered an as-new cherry finish as an option). H-Bomb' date=' One thing you never fully talk about is actual tone. I've heard all your stuff, your a hell of a good guitarist. You can certainly tell the differences of these guitarist physically. How about tonally? Say on a recording. Could you pick them out? I've been a Telecaster guy for years and I can't tell the difference, if one was to put the same pickups in a mexican, usa, or custom shop Telecaster then record all three. [/quote'] Honestly man, there's not much difference tone-wise between a Historic and a '61 Reissue. The Historics have a tiny, tiny bit more sweetness on the bottom-end, but honestly nothing that a slight tweak of the amp's EQ couldn't bring out of the '61 with barely any effort. Since we're talking about same basic dimensions and construction/materials and very similar electronics, you can't expect miracles. Both sound great, and you can close your eyes and you'd be hard pressed to tell which is which sonically. That's why I only gripe about the cosmetic differences, because tone-wise the only one of mine that sounds any significantly different is my Angus model (because of the AY humbucker). I've recorded with all mine, and the only ones I can 'hear' any difference on recordings are my Angus and my Epi w/Maestro (again, because of the pickups mainly). The rest are so close I've forgotten which one I used on which parts...lol Factory-made guitars are like that, much like your Tele comment, same basic components resulting in tone too similar for distinction. But cosmetically, I can pick out differences and can tell you what's "wrong" with all of 'em. H-Bomb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sok66 Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Hbomb, I love reading your very knowledgeable feedback on SGs. I now see what you've been talking about re:beveling on the RIs, and even on the Historics and also wonder why Gibson can't get this right. I'm fairly sure it's a combination cst management & wanting to be sure the RI can't be counterfeited into an Historic. Same with the big headstock. Would just add that the original 60s & RIs aren't all that far apart in terms of the total package and that the RIs & Standards have to be seen in context as something of a bargain these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigr726 Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 My two cents: I have that same guitar and love it. I can't get into all the details of what's accurate/correct, etc, etc, etc, but I know that it is a sweet guitar. AND, the pickups/maestro and other nickel pieces very easily buff most of that aging stuff they use off the metal(I used an old sock and no polish whatsoever). Before I got around to buffing, you could barely read the Gibson or see the lyre. I do love the that guitar... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dickey Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Ya know, this "aging" crap really scorches me off, just like Fender's ridiculous "relic" series. I mean, I've been playing my old Tele for 30 years, and all of the nicks,scratches,dents, and rustspots (and there ARE a few) Have been put on legitimately by me, gigging over the years,being on tour,smoky bars,beer & grease stains,etc. I paid my dues,my Tele's scars are legit. Then some kid comes along,plunks down bucks for something that's been artificially aged,and guess what?? INSTANT PAID DUES!! What a bunch of fake poseurs and phony "bluesmen" As far as I'm concerned, the whole "ageing" or "relic" thing is just another pathetic example of society's pitiful quest for instant legitamacy and pretentiousness, without putting in the time and effort to get there. As far as I'm concerned, "The big 2" can take their aged and relic phony guitars,and cram 'em in their pickup cavity. At least I know every ding and stain on my axes were put there by someone paying their dues over the years. I bet if the "big 3" automakers came out with a car that was dented,rusting,and paint-scarred, some of these "musicians" would buy them. Pitiful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurt Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Ya know' date=' this "aging" crap really scorches me off, just like Fender's ridiculous "relic" series. I mean, I've been playing my old Tele for 30 years, and all of the nicks,scratches,dents, and rustspots (and there ARE a few) Have been put on legitimately by me, gigging over the years,being on tour,smoky bars,beer & grease stains,etc. I paid my dues,my Tele's scars are legit. Then some kid comes along,plunks down bucks for something that's been artificially aged,and guess what?? INSTANT PAID DUES!! What a bunch of fake poseurs and phony "bluesmen" As far as I'm concerned, the whole "ageing" or "relic" thing is just another pathetic example of society's pitiful quest for instant legitamacy and pretentiousness, without putting in the time and effort to get there. As far as I'm concerned, "The big 2" can take their aged and relic phony guitars,and cram 'em in their pickup cavity. At least I know every ding and stain on my axes were put there by someone paying their dues over the years. I bet if the "big 3" automakers came out with a car that was dented,rusting,and paint-scarred, some of these "musicians" would buy them. Pitiful.[/quote'] +1 If I buy a NEW guitar, I want a NEW guitar! I´ve always managed to stain, damage and break everything for myself. Greetings Kurt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarbob123 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 you can order them in gloss....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hbomb76 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 you can order them in gloss....... Yes' date=' you can get get a "gloss [i']faded[/i]" finish. Still not cool, I can't stand the look of the orangey, washed-out color OR the "bubblegum tan" that's supposed to represent "faded cherry" (that's even more cheesy and fake looking than the "VOS" crap). Glossy and UNFADED, that'd be a different story, and that's what they lack; not to mention the fact that they don't use enough pore-filler or enough coats to keep it from shrinking before it even gets to the display floor. Give me a nice, mirror-quality, deep, rich-red finish (on a better-contoured/tapered-tip body...sorry, had to throw that one in there...lol) and nice shiny hardware. That might be one thing Dickey and I will agree on: I'll "age" or "relic" it myself, with my own blood, sweat, tears and other bodily fluids. H-Bomb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sok66 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Ya know' date=' this "aging" crap really scorches me off, just like Fender's ridiculous "relic" series. I mean, I've been playing my old Tele for 30 years, and all of the nicks,scratches,dents, and rustspots (and there ARE a few) Have been put on legitimately by me, gigging over the years,being on tour,smoky bars,beer & grease stains,etc. I paid my dues,my Tele's scars are legit. Then some kid comes along,plunks down bucks for something that's been artificially aged,and guess what?? INSTANT PAID DUES!! What a bunch of fake poseurs and phony "bluesmen" As far as I'm concerned, the whole "ageing" or "relic" thing is just another pathetic example of society's pitiful quest for instant legitamacy and pretentiousness, without putting in the time and effort to get there. As far as I'm concerned, "The big 2" can take their aged and relic phony guitars,and cram 'em in their pickup cavity. At least I know every ding and stain on my axes were put there by someone paying their dues over the years. I bet if the "big 3" automakers came out with a car that was dented,rusting,and paint-scarred, some of these "musicians" would buy them. Pitiful.[/quote'] Agreed. When Fender first announced the Relics back in the mid-90s I thought it was the phoniest thing I'd ever heard of. However, I then played a few and had to agree some were great guitars. But, they could have been sold as great guitars without all the faux aging BS. Over the following years so many of them have gotten out that look awful and were sold at an undeserved premium, masking a basically dreary production instrument underneath. Fender's latest Road Worn series are a joke. There's simply no substitute for "aging" a guitar via well-paid dues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmiJAMM Posted February 19, 2009 Author Share Posted February 19, 2009 While we're on the subject... http://guitars.musiciansfriend.com/product/EVH-Eddie-Van-Halen-Frankenstein-Replica-Electric-Guitar?sku=513703 A steal for only $25,000.000 *Faux cigarette burns included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sok66 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 PT Barnum is collecting consultng fees, no doubt..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MI_Canuck Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 wonder how stupid Fender feels now that EVH has his own Wolfgang brand guitars... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaker Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I purchased an SG standard VOS W/O lyre. It may not be exactly like a '64 Standard, but I really like the guitar. Compared with my 96 regular SG standard, the difference is tremendous. I must admit that I went back forth many months between with one with a vibrato unit and another without. At the end, I went with the stop tail route. I really like the neck and frets (plek'd). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustycage Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 To answer the OP - I tried one out in a local shop just last week, and compared it to the Angus Young sig. model and a stock SG Standard. The stock and AY have that corner at the heel whereas the VOS is contoured. I didn't particularly like the sound of the AY which sounds a lot "ruder" and more agressive than the VOS which was sweet but still ballsy. Decent articulation with distorted chordwork too. I also thought the stock SG sounded a lot closer to the AY than the VOS. It might have been my impressions based on the price tags and the sounds but the VOS just seemed like it was on another level, class-wise. If anything the AY came off as badly overpriced (paying for a name). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guitar slinger Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 I do own one but I can't make impartial statements as I'm love with it since I opened the case. And my love for this guitar just grows stronger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guitar slinger Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Damn... This guitar can be so subtle and so soothing and yet so RAW! If I lived next to you I would bring her over to your house so you could see for yourself what I'm talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hbomb76 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 If anything the AY came off as badly overpriced (paying for a name). And this is different than any other guitar with "Gibson" on the headstock nowadays HOW exactly??? lol H-Bomb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dickey Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 While we're on the subject... http://guitars.musiciansfriend.com/product/EVH-Eddie-Van-Halen-Frankenstein-Replica-Electric-Guitar?sku=513703 A steal for only $25' date='000.000 Faux cigarette burns included.[/quote'] Anybody that pays 25 G's for this pile 'o' crud should be checked for a brain tumor! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.