jimmiJAMM Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Looks awesome and cheap too. http://cgi.ebay.com/Japan-70s-made-Vintage-SG-standerd-model-cherry-finish_W0QQitemZ120391955271QQcmdZViewItemQQptZGuitar?hash=item120391955271&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1728%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318%7C301%3A1%7C293%3A1%7C294%3A50 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
80LPC Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 It's a Greco. It looks ok, but it's only a bolt-on neck and this particular one is not high quality. I think that Greco and Ibanez made other copies that did have the set-neck. A friend has an Ibanez SG from 1971. Here's a picture, but it's difficult to say for sure if it is a set-neck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 man, that looks like a mighty thick slab for an SG knockoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demoryn Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Greco's done quite a few different SG knockoffs. I even saw a Greco Glenn Tipton (Judas Priest) signature SG once, kinda like the one Custom Shop used to make Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
80LPC Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Here's a set-neck Greco SG from 1974. You can understand why these better copies were called 'lawsuit guitars'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vourot Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 I would rather have a Yamaha SG 2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
80LPC Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 I would rather have a Yamaha SG 2000. Which is best, an SG Standard or an SG 2000 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dred31 Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 i saw a couple gibson knockoffs at the vintage store near my place and they looked pretty legit, till you picked one up and played it :S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chongo Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 Which is best' date=' an SG Standard or an SG 2000 ?[/quote'] Two COMPLETELY different guitars. The only things they share, really is the SG in the name. For my money, the SG2000 (which is far more like a Les Paul than an SG) is hands down the better guitar, but YMMV. The SG2000 is a neck-through guitar; the neck is a three-piece with a center stringer of maple and the sides of mahogany and that goes all the way to the strap button at the bottom of the guitar. The solid mahogany body sides are glued to that. Like the Les Paul, the SG2000 has a maple top (usually plain), and that's carved and about the same thickness as the LP's (as is the entire body). Unlike most LPs, the SG 2000 has a *really* comfortable and deep "tummy cut" in the back (see below). The neck is thinner than the usual LP and the radius of the fretboard is about 13.5". The fretboard is ebony and the inlays are real MOP. Tuners are VERY solid (as is everything else on the guitar. The Bridge is massive; a very weighty piece next to an LP's, as is the tailipiece, and the bridge actually screws into a brass "sustain block" that weighs between 8 oz and 10.5 oz on its own. That sustain block is screwed down to the body. The pickups on an SG2000 are killer and few people change them. They also have an interesting "cover" -- it's made of plastic, I think, but it keeps crap out of the coils without covering the pole pieces or affecting the magnetic properies, so it's like the best of having both a covered pickup and an uncovered one. Build quality on an SG2000 usually exceeds that on a comparable Les Paul up to double the price. This is also one of the all-time monster sustain guitars, and Carlos Santa (who played the predecessor to this model) was supposedly in on the design. You can still buy an SG2000 from Yamaha, though they're now the "SBG-2000".The only change is to the name. There's also an even fancier SG 3000. It doesn't have the sustain block under the bridge, but it does have abalone inlays just inside the binding, and it has Spinex pickups (these are amazing). It's also still available from Yamaha, but you have to pick one up in Japan or the UK. Not marketed at all in the US. These are built by what amounts to a small custom shop within the Yamaha purview. The SG Standard by contrast is a THINNER than normal solid body, has a set neck, a rosewood fretboard with a 12" radius, plastic inlays, has a fairly lightweight bridge and decent pickups. Here are some "significant bits" SG-2000 shots..: This is a very heavy bridge, and notice the brass sustain block under the bridge: The pickup covers that aren't pickup covers: This is a much-brighter-than-they-really-are picture to show the neck through... Notice also the very comfortable tummy cut! And this is a shot of an SG-3000 (with the abalone inlay just inside the binding on the top), but the body style is identical. These pickups are possibly the best humbuckers I've ever played, thanks to the magnet material: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
80LPC Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 An excellent summary of the Yamaha SG models ! My question was actually rhetorical - a sprat to catch a mackerel as it were. But Vourot did not reply ! What you find is that the Yamaha SG 2000/3000s were built to a higher and more consistent standard than Gibsons. I used to play an SG3000 regularly and it was a dream to play and very versatle with the push / push coil taps. Side by side comparison with my Les Paul Custom, the Yamaha was clearly better made. There are differences in the sound, and I think Gibson wins back a few points. My Les Paul was louder, and had a more full low-end than the 3000. I prefer the look of the Gibson SG and LPs, although there are some Yamahas that do have stunning maple tops. I think that the latest series are being made by Fuji Gen Gakki for Yamaha. Carlos Santana was involved in the design very early. Yamaha would bring him prototypes, and he would say "no, not heavy enough" ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG dude Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 The SG's inlays are not plastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chongo Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 The SG's inlays are not plastic. Depends on the model. Some (Customs?) have MOP, but the majority are "pearloid" or acrylic, AKA plastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chongo Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 An excellent summary of the Yamaha SG models ! My question was actually rhetorical - a sprat to catch a mackerel as it were. But Vourot did not reply ! What you find is that the Yamaha SG 2000/3000s were built to a higher and more consistent standard than Gibsons. I used to play an SG3000 regularly and it was a dream to play and very versatle with the push / push coil taps. Side by side comparison with my Les Paul Custom' date=' the Yamaha was clearly better made. There are differences in the sound, and I think Gibson wins back a few points. My Les Paul was louder, and had a more full low-end than the 3000. I prefer the look of the Gibson SG and LPs, although there are some Yamahas that do have stunning maple tops. I think that the latest series are being made by Fuji Gen Gakki for Yamaha. Carlos Santana was involved in the design very early. Yamaha would bring him prototypes, and he would say "no, not heavy enough" ![/quote'] The late '70's/early '80's Ibanez Artist AR300's (and up) lacked the neck-through of the SG 2000, but shared the build quality, weight, smooth neck heel and brass (usually, but not always) sustain block of the SG 2000. And they had an even heavier tailpiece and bridge. Some SG 2000's came with the push-push, some didn't (I don't know what years those would be). Sound is a preference thing, I think, and depends a lot on the particular pickups you're comparing to and what you're doing with them; lots of LPs that sound good on their own need some EQing when it comes to working in a band or for recording in order to sit well in the mix. Not so much the Yamahas. I haven't seen great fancy tops on the Yamahas very often, but the Ibanez Artist AR-305 and 505's with the Mahogany burl tops are spectacular. I did see one Yamaha that had been re-topped (!) that was...er...ornate <G>. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
80LPC Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 Those late '70s set-neck Ibanez guitars sounded great, and were competitively priced. I bought my "The SG" in 1979, and a friend bought one of the ARs with the V1 pickups. Retail on my SG was around £360 (I got it for £260), while the AR was about £140. He brought it around to try through my Marshall, and it blew my SG away - so much for the Velver Brick ! I checked it over, and saw that it was set up really well. The pickups had the pole-pieces adjusted to the radius of the strings, and the pickups were closer to the strings - it was driving the Marshall a lot harder. I later did the same to the SG, and the guitars were evenly matched. I used to jam regularly with my Custom and SG with the guy with the SG 3000 (identical to the one pictured above). They sounded really good together, and we would often swap over. We both tried the Custom and the SG 3000 going into the same amp, and we both came to the same conclusion - the Custom was louder and had more bass. The Yamaha was obviously much easier to play with the access to higher frets, and it remains one of my favourite guitars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 My "Velvet Brick" in my old JCM900 (4100) would kill anything in it's path. Period. DOUBLE AUGHT (cdbaby.com) I'm actually toying with the idea of finding a vintage 5150 head. What's an Ibenez? Sounds like a toy for an infant........................ "IBENZZZZZZZZZZ" Murph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
80LPC Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 My point (and I think chongo's) was that in the 70s, the Japanese really got their act together at a time when Gibson and Fender's production left something to be desired. Japanese manufacture and quality control has been exceptional for decades. I could be wrong, but I think the name Ibanez was chosen because it sounds Spanish. And those V1 pickups are legendary... I never liked the the JCM900. A friend bought one new and rang me up after a few days to ask if I'd have a look at it. We went down to the practice room and compared it with a JCM800. We gave up. IBENZZZZZZZZZ...... that's someone snoring Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 My point (and I think chongo's) was that in the 70s' date=' the Japanese really got their act together at a time when Gibson and Fender's production left something to be desired. Japanese manufacture and quality control has been exceptional for decades. I could be wrong, but I think the name Ibanez was chosen because it sounds Spanish. And those V1 pickups are legendary...I never liked the the JCM900. A friend bought one new and rang me up after a few days to ask if I'd have a look at it. We went down to the practice room and compared it with a JCM800. We gave up. IBENZZZZZZZZZ...... that's someone snoring [/quote'] Ha.... Best to ya, pal..... I gigged a JCM900 (4100) 1/2 stack for damn near 10 years. It was a solid rig. The clean was far better than it got credit for. The fuses were a real good idea, I wish Mesa would do them. Believe it or not...... I used that rig in a Country Band in the Mid 90's and made tens of thousands of dollars with it, then used it on the DOUBLE AUGHT CD, (cdbaby.com) and then swapped it even, for the Prosonic in my sig. Murph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chongo Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 My "Velvet Brick" in my old JCM900 (4100) would kill anything in it's path. Period. DOUBLE AUGHT (cdbaby.com) I'm actually toying with the idea of finding a vintage 5150 head. What's an Ibenez? Sounds like a toy for an infant........................ "IBENZZZZZZZZZZ" Murph. And of course it's accurately pronounced ee-BAHN-Yeth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chongo Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 Those late '70s set-neck Ibanez guitars sounded great' date=' and were competitively priced. I bought my "The SG" in 1979, and a friend bought one of the ARs with the V1 pickups. Retail on my SG was around £360 (I got it for £260), while the AR was about £140. He brought it around to try through my Marshall, and it blew my SG away - so much for the Velver Brick ! I checked it over, and saw that it was set up really well. The pickups had the pole-pieces adjusted to the radius of the strings, and the pickups were closer to the strings - it was driving the Marshall a lot harder. I later did the same to the SG, and the guitars were evenly matched. [/quote'] I think about 50% of the whole "try 100 guitars out to find 10 that speak to you" syndrome has to do with setup. When I worked in a music store I'd always set up the guitars we really wanted to sell (the ones that had been hanging on the wall longest) and leave the rest as they came out of the box. Steering customers was pretty easy that way. The V1's were mostly on the AR100's, which were near the bottom of that line (and still hellaciously good guitars). Above that they got Super 58's. There was a body change around '79; the bodies before that were a bit wider and a bit thinner; after '79 they got slightly narrower and thicker, and Ibanez started to designate them the AR series (they were merely numbered prior to that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
80LPC Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 I think about 50% of the whole "try 100 guitars out to find 10 that speak to you" syndrome has to do with setup. Definitely with you on this. The V1's were mostly on the AR100's' date=' which were near the bottom of that line (and still hellaciously good guitars).[/quote'] Can't remember the exact model, but it was the cheapest Ibanez with a set-neck, twin cutaways and a pair of V1s. I must admit, I was amazed how good it sounded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
80LPC Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Believe it or not...... I used that rig in a Country Band in the Mid 90's and made tens of thousands of dollars with it' date=' then used it on the DOUBLE AUGHT CD, (cdbaby.com) and then swapped it even, for the Prosonic in my sig. Murph.[/quote'] I can believe that it sounded good in a country band...I also believe a good player can make just about any amp sound good :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.