Epiphone "Inspired by" 1964 Texan ( pro pics, and review)

[bkharmony]

This entire thread reads like an advertisement for the "Inspired by" and/or the OP. Lovely photos, but the focus is on the player, not the guitar. And OP hasn't contributed anything to the forum save for this thread. I smell spam.

[frenchie 63]

This entire thread reads like an advertisement for the "Inspired by" and/or the OP. Lovely photos, but the focus is on the player, not the guitar. And OP hasn't contributed anything to the forum save for this thread. I smell spam.

 

The original post may well have been an add for the OP, but maybe not so for the guitar. I`ve had mine since February and I`m really pleased with it. Having said that, it does a better job of looking like a real 64 Texan, than sounding like one! This doesn`t mean it`s a bad sounding guitar by any means, as it has a similar tone to a Masterbilt AJ-500M, and I would guess that it shares that guitars bracing. My post too had lots of photo`s and can be found on page one, and under my previous incarnation of "Frenchie 281734003" I had nigh on 400 posts, so I am not spamming.

 

I`ve done a bit of tweaking on my guitar to get it up to the optimum in my eyes. I have replaced the tuners(For the reasons I stated before), along with the TRC. I have fitted a new bone saddle, and just recently I went over the back of the neck with some wire wool, to take some of the gloss off, and that has helped playability a fair bit for me. As I use a very fine handcrafted Yamaha LLX-400 when I gig, I don`t feel as though I need another electro-acoustic, so I may well get shot of the pickup in mine at some point. Overall though, a pretty good acoustic guitar that should really be judged upon it`s own merits.

 

There are now quite a few vid`s on You-tube for the "Inspired by 64 Texan" one of which by our very own "dhanners" playing "Dallas after midnight" should give you a fair idea of the sound. Oh and one final point I have found the best strings for my Texan are Elixir Nano-web 80/20 12/52`s, which is odd as I hate 80/20`s as a rule.

 

Steve.

[zombywoof]

The "Inspired By" thing kinda cracks me up. It might very well be a nice sounding and playing guitar but I am guessing it is more or less another entry into the 'this is what I can get when my pocketbook ain't fat enough for a Bozeman-made reissue or the real deal' crowd.

[E-minor7]

It's as if there is some spell on that ~ 1964 Texan ~ those numbers, those letters, that year, that name, which kind of crack all of us up, isn't there. . .

Maybe it's the spooky mix between subconscious visions of young Paul gettin' the big Y-song down in second take (5) and the disastrous sudden disappearance of Mister J. Fitzgerald K.(3)

 

 

 

 

 

 

(excuse me, did I go one bridge too far there. . .)

[dhanners623]

Well, I can afford a Bozeman-made guitar (got a '98 J-45, plus a couple of other hand-built instruments) but I also bought an IB'64 Texan and really like it. Is it a vintage Texan? Of course not. Then again, we have to remember that while some of the vintage ones are very good, there were also some that were dogs.

 

It is very playable, and I like the tone. It definitely has that sound you want from a slope-shoulder dread. I've not had any problems with the pickup, and I've used the guitar at some gigs and it has always sounded good. Does it sound as good acoustically as my J-45? No. Few guitars do. And comparing a year-old Asian guitar with a poly finish to a nicely aged 12-year-old Gibson with a nitro finish would be pretty stupid to begin with. I mean, let's be serious here....

 

As Frenchie noted, the tuner holes aren't in line and that's an issue, but I haven't gotten around to switching mine out yet. It stays in tune as well as any other guitar in its price range, certainly, and it hasn't presented any tuning problems when I've gigged with it. I've noted no other construction problems or issues.

 

My only beef with the guitar is the poly finish. Even though it is lighter than other poly finishes I've seen on Asian guitars, it is still, well, polyurethane. It's not going to get that cool, dull patina that a guitar with a nitrocellulose finish is going to get over time. It will probably survive World War III. I'm not sure there's anything that can be done about that. (Well, actually, there is, but it costs more than what I paid for the guitar. There's a guitar shop in Nashville that, for a price, will "relic" your acoustic guitar, and they maintain they can even do ones with poly finishes. In fact, when I wrote to them to get a quote, they even said poly finishes were easier to age than nitro finishes. Then they told me how much it would cost. Oh well. I'd say "If I win the lottery," but I don't gamble.)

 

In short, for the money, I believe the Epiphone IB'64 Texan is a darn good guitar. For the money. I'm not a paid spokesman for Epiphone or Gibson, and if I thought the guitar was crap, I'd say so. But it's a good guitar, as long as you have the right expectations going in.

[zombywoof]

I think there were three versions of the Texan made. Besides the "Inspired By" guitar there was also a small number of Texans made in Bozeman. This one was reportedly a reproduction of the original Sir Paulie guitar and cost a small fortune. There was also a MIJ Elitist version with a price tag in the ballpark of a Bozeman-made J-45 - perhaps a bit higher.

[BigKahune]

The "Inspired By" thing kinda cracks me up. It might very well be a nice sounding and playing guitar but I am guessing it is more or less another entry into the 'this is what I can get when my pocketbook ain't fat enough for a Bozeman-made reissue or the real deal' crowd.

 

* Sigh *

 

The value based market is perfectly legit. And there's plenty of examples of value based instruments out performing "Bozeman-made reissues" and high priced boutique instruments. No need to slam musicians making these choices.

[frenchie 63]

The "Inspired By" thing kinda cracks me up. It might very well be a nice sounding and playing guitar but I am guessing it is more or less another entry into the 'this is what I can get when my pocketbook ain't fat enough for a Bozeman-made reissue or the real deal' crowd.

 

Apart from my Chinese Texan, I do own a very nice Bozeman made 94 Gibson J-100 Xtra too! Do I qualify with that one?

[frenchie 63]

 

My only beef with the guitar is the poly finish. Even though it is lighter than other poly finishes I've seen on Asian guitars, it is still, well, polyurethane. It's not going to get that cool, dull patina that a guitar with a nitrocellulose finish is going to get over time. It will probably survive World War III. I'm not sure there's anything that can be done about that. (Well, actually, there is, but it costs more than what I paid for the guitar. There's a guitar shop in Nashville that, for a price, will "relic" your acoustic guitar, and they maintain they can even do ones with poly finishes. In fact, when I wrote to them to get a quote, they even said poly finishes were easier to age than nitro finishes. Then they told me how much it would cost. Oh well. I'd say "If I win the lottery," but I don't gamble.)

 

 

David.

 

Have you tried going over the whole guitar with wire wool, only the shiny bits mind. I did with the back of the neck on mine, and it gets rid of all that gloss, and leaves a nice satin finish. The rest of my Texan may follow suit soon.

 

Steve.

[zombywoof]

Me thinks ya'll doth protest too much and are missing the point. It ain't got nuttin' to do with the guitar. I just find the "Inspired By" thing funny. The Texan moniker is there to conjure up an image of some storied guitar from out of the past while the "IB" thing is saying, well that is not exactly the guitar you are buying. I ain't slamming the guitar but I am having a chuckle at the marketing.

[The G]

I went to the Gibson sight to check this out .

Sure is confusing. It says Sugg list $1332 ,and when you click on the guitar for details it jumps to

$3617.It also refers to a "Gibson Logo" and a P90 pickup.No P90 on the picture ?

[frenchie 63]

Me thinks ya'll doth protest too much and are missing the point. It ain't got nuttin' to do with the guitar. I just find the "Inspired By" thing funny. The Texan moniker is there to conjure up an image of some storied guitar from out of the past while the "IB" thing is saying, well that is not exactly the guitar you are buying. I ain't slamming the guitar but I am having a chuckle at the marketing.

 

Point taken, and Gibson have their own "Inspired by" models too.

 

They are "Inspired by" a certain artists instrument i.e. Lennon`s Casino, McCartney`s Texan, and in the case of Gibson we have:-

 

Peter Framptons Les Paul.

Elliot Easton`s SG.

Hendrix`s Flying V.

Oh and not forgetting the great Kiefer Sutherlands 336!!! And those "Inspired by" models cost big bucks.

 

Steve.

[dhanners623]

Me thinks ya'll doth protest too much and are missing the point. It ain't got nuttin' to do with the guitar. I just find the "Inspired By" thing funny. The Texan moniker is there to conjure up an image of some storied guitar from out of the past while the "IB" thing is saying, well that is not exactly the guitar you are buying. I ain't slamming the guitar but I am having a chuckle at the marketing.

 

Yes, Zombywoof, we who bought the guitar were all cheapskate mindless dolts who saw "Epiphone" and "Texan" and glossed right over the "Inspired by 1964" and told ourselves we were getting an Epiphone Texan. I'm glad you're having a good laugh at our expense. Were I not playing the guitar and enjoying it, I would probably be able to hear you laughing.

 

Jeez....

 

Of the people here who own one, I don't know that any of us were the least bit confused over what we were buying -- or why we were buying it. I don't think the marketing folks at Epiphone/Gibson hoodwinked us one bit. So I really see no need to heap abuse on us. We're strangers, we've never met, yet for reasons that are beyond me you feel free to make fun of us, to question our intelligence and to say we've been fooled by some slick marketing. (Although I don't know that the words "Gibson" and "slick marketing" have ever been used in the same sentence before.) If someone here posted some comment like, "Gee, I thought I'd be getting a REAL Texan," then you might have some room to talk. But I don't believe any of us did. We knew what we were doing and what we were getting.

 

Obviously, they stick the "Inspired by 1964" part in the name because the guitar differs in a couple of significant respects from the vintage (or even re-issue) Texan.

 

(And Steve, like you, I've gone over the neck with 0000 steel wool, but I haven't ventured to do the entire guitar yet. I've always felt that requires more skill than what I have. A friend of mine is enrolled at the lutherie school down at Red Wing and I was thinking of asking him about relicing the guitar. It could be a class project....)

[BigKahune]

Me thinks ya'll doth protest too much and are missing the point. It ain't got nuttin' to do with the guitar. I just find the "Inspired By" thing funny. The Texan moniker is there to conjure up an image of some storied guitar from out of the past while the "IB" thing is saying, well that is not exactly the guitar you are buying. I ain't slamming the guitar but I am having a chuckle at the marketing.

 

I gotcha now.

 

Sorry I misunderstood yer angle.

 

But I think most everyone gets the marketing gimmick.

[zombywoof]

Lordy Have Mercy. Ya'll sure can read alot into things. No need to get your knickers in a wad.

[dhanners623]

Lordy Have Mercy. Ya'll sure can read alot into things. No need to get your knickers in a wad.

 

No need to insult us.

[E-minor7]

Well, well, well, I don't expect to recieve the real Macca version when ordering an Inspired By. Very few forumers would, I believe. Still look forward to hear what this Chinese Epiphone has to offer. Got a Chinese built Yamaha as a beach/garden/bonfire guitar some years ago and the quality is immaculate for the price (and more). What would be fruitful was to hear from el capitan who owns both. If we read the different posts on this thread, there's a good wave goin for the IB -

frenchie63 who had the possibility to compare, rings a positive bell f.x.

dhanners - who btw. sounds great though turning everything upside down - is pleased with his, okay fine.

I personally could have chosen the real deal, but played my chess towards a 1964 C&W instead. That don't make the curiosity about the IB lesser. BUT - - - Couldn't some experienced guy tell us the factual difference. Apart from the bridge (the IB principle is the better, one would think) it must come down to bracing, scalloping and all that jive. A knowing voice would really set order in chaos.

 

P.S. For your own sake, don't be that thin-skinned dhanners. It simply won't do in a forum of hardcore string-players from all corners of the world, wise old folkies and tough rollin'n'rockin' people.

 

[E-minor7]

For- amongst others - BigKahune.

 

My new Epiphone Inspired by 1964 Texan arrived 2 day ago and what can be said. It's really too early, isn't it - Still I try: The standard or quality is absolutely okay. The Chinese factory people have done their job (as expected) and everything from precision glueing to lacquer work is as it should be. Even the action is fine - though one feel tempted to lower it shamelessly to get some character into the instrument. Because who is this gentleman ? I am close to calling him 'your common Mister Jones'. Not much sticks out and though the guitar is loud and somewhat proud sounding, at this state, the flavour is first of all ordinary. Good bass (must say), a little hog-soft mids, bit cheap ringing highs and when you listen - nothing to actually follow or grow (if you know what I mean).

 

The top has a vintage-like tint which is slightly too yellow for my eyes. The sides and back are light brown, so is the 2 piece neck. Finish is over-glossed like a block of candy in the gab of a hippo - could be sanded down. If we look inside, this is not a scalloped guitar - wonder if the original model was - (have asked here, but nobody seemed to know). The 'full bodied' bracing makes it slightly heavy and might be the reason Mister Jones (again at this early state) appears so straight. It would be unfair to knock this Texan, but it is what it is. That means more than all right for the money and less than those f.x. G's we normally jangle around in this forum. Sound-wise it shouldn't be judged until after New Year, Febuary, March, April .

 

The box came from the factory without any preamp and some refurbisher installed an Epiphone inline preamp system. I haven't tried this and won't spent studio time on it in the days to come - isn't too interested. What I wanna know is what happens after the instrument begins to settle - acousticly. Though in rather tough company here, something could fall into place. It will be given the chance.

 

Finally - is there any resemblance of the big Y-song. . .

 

Naaahhh, , , and then again - if it is tuned one tone down like Maccas (which mine is and probably will continue to be as long as it's here) - you'll be able to hear around 10 % Yesterday from the bass string when thumbing the intro in an ordinary G-finger position (in reality F). Ain't much - he he - but, , , , that too of course might change.

 

I won't attach photos as this IB is totally like the ones you see everywhere, except from the truss rod cover, in my case full black without the E-logo.

 

Don't know if this gave anything - as said, it's too early to be fair.

[zombywoof]

If we look inside, this is not a scalloped guitar - wonder if the original model was - (have asked here, but nobody seemed to know).

 

 

Nope, the original Texan like its Gibson cousins of the time did not have scallop bracing.

[E-minor7]

Talking about the big Y-song sound, it must be remembered that it would be necessary to get a mirrored Texan and then turn it up side down to hit bulls eye. Guess lefty McCartney didn't think twice when re-stringing those guitars back then - the 1964 Texan, the Brazilian Rosewood D-28 - who cared, , , yes, who cared about bracing interiors during the 60'ties anyway. Well, I heard some folkies had their acoustics hand-scalloped to reach certain flavours - but young Paul, , , no, no, can't believe it - he just flipped the thing around and threw the classics onto tape.

 

Must have been a good lunch-break topic for the luthiers back then.

 

(and still is I suppose)

[frenchie 63]

For E-minor7

 

Here is a real 65 Texan which is currently available on U.S. ebay. As you can probably tell it doesn`t sound like an IB64.

 

 

Like my friends 67 it is very alive with a great zingy bass, and it also has what I describe as trashy/crashy trebles(In a good way), my IB on the other hand has a good bass although not as zingy, but the trebles are nothing like a 60`s Texan. Why the difference? Well firstly the woods involved are not the same quality as those used by Gibson Kalamazoo, but cheaper alternatives. The finish is poly and thicker. The top bracing pattern is different(X brace is set a bit further back on the IB`s), which results in the IB`s bridge sitting further back too, although the scale length is the same. But another factor has to be the ADJ bridge with ceramic saddle used on the originals (62-69), I think that is the main contributor to the trashy/crashy treble tone the originals have.

 

I know my IB will never be the same as a proper 60`s version, but the tone has changed somewhat over the 10 months I`ve had it, it`s lost a lot of the tightness it had, and gained a bit more brightness. I hope this continues, as it`s a fine guitar, but it`s not a Texan!

 

Steve.

[E-minor7]

Thank you for the insight. Woods - Yes, thought so. Same with lacquer, but the different X-b and altered bridge position was new to me. If the scale length is the same, it would mean the saddle is moved towards the s-hole or . . . ?

 

The exchange of the adjustable system seems like a good idea. In fact I don't want too treblish or zingy highs. You say your IB has loosened up during the last 10 months. Sounds promising - I need a more relaxed, not too sharp sound from this guitar. Listening to the video doesn't really attract me to the 65. Inspiring to hear from you -

[frenchie 63]

Thank you for the insight. Woods - Yes, thought so. Same with lacquer, but the different X-b and altered bridge position was new to me. If the scale length is the same, it would mean the saddle is moved towards the s-hole or . . . ?

 

The exchange of the adjustable system seems like a good idea. In fact I don't want too treblish or zingy highs. You say your IB has loosened up during the last 10 months. Sounds promising - I need a more relaxed, not too sharp sound from this guitar. Listening to the video doesn't really attract me to the 65. Inspiring to hear from you -

 

The saddle is in the same place, but the bridge is moumted about a 1/4 of an inch further back on the guitars top, making it look as though both the saddle and the row of bridgepins have moved forward. If you look at a 60`s Texan (J-45/50) bridge, the pins are set in right at the back of the bridge.

 

Steve.

[epietheridge1]

Yeah i am def spam bro ha. I will be posting new forums later. ;) The only pictures i had of the guitar where of me playing it. I will post pictures of just the guitar. What is wrong with sponsoring a great guitar? Blessing man ;)

 

This entire thread reads like an advertisement for the "Inspired by" and/or the OP. Lovely photos, but the focus is on the player, not the guitar. And OP hasn't contributed anything to the forum save for this thread. I smell spam.

[epietheridge1]

This is mainly a "live" playing instrument in which to get the J-45 sound i can always set my Fishman Aura pedal to Neumann recorded J-45. Though i must say i was not out to get the J-45 sound, i was out to get a i nice sounding guitar that pleased my ears and eyes, at the same time get it to project naturally through the P.A. Most instrument you pay high dollar for, even the Taylor, fail at getting the natural harmonics to project though a live setting, at the same time getting it to cut though the mix. Thanks to Fishman and L.R Baggs we no longer have to deal with this. Also, the feedback is no more an issue.

 

If it where priced way higher that it is, i would have bought it. Its the "sound" that a musician wants out of a guitar, not its headstock logo. The looks are a benefit to this guitar. There are no flaws that i have seen or tried to even find. This guitar will only sound better as it ages. ;)

 

Well, I can afford a Bozeman-made guitar (got a '98 J-45, plus a couple of other hand-built instruments) but I also bought an IB'64 Texan and really like it. Is it a vintage Texan? Of course not. Then again, we have to remember that while some of the vintage ones are very good, there were also some that were dogs.

 

It is very playable, and I like the tone. It definitely has that sound you want from a slope-shoulder dread. I've not had any problems with the pickup, and I've used the guitar at some gigs and it has always sounded good. Does it sound as good acoustically as my J-45? No. Few guitars do. And comparing a year-old Asian guitar with a poly finish to a nicely aged 12-year-old Gibson with a nitro finish would be pretty stupid to begin with. I mean, let's be serious here....

 

As Frenchie noted, the tuner holes aren't in line and that's an issue, but I haven't gotten around to switching mine out yet. It stays in tune as well as any other guitar in its price range, certainly, and it hasn't presented any tuning problems when I've gigged with it. I've noted no other construction problems or issues.

 

My only beef with the guitar is the poly finish. Even though it is lighter than other poly finishes I've seen on Asian guitars, it is still, well, polyurethane. It's not going to get that cool, dull patina that a guitar with a nitrocellulose finish is going to get over time. It will probably survive World War III. I'm not sure there's anything that can be done about that. (Well, actually, there is, but it costs more than what I paid for the guitar. There's a guitar shop in Nashville that, for a price, will "relic" your acoustic guitar, and they maintain they can even do ones with poly finishes. In fact, when I wrote to them to get a quote, they even said poly finishes were easier to age than nitro finishes. Then they told me how much it would cost. Oh well. I'd say "If I win the lottery," but I don't gamble.)

 

In short, for the money, I believe the Epiphone IB'64 Texan is a darn good guitar. For the money. I'm not a paid spokesman for Epiphone or Gibson, and if I thought the guitar was crap, I'd say so. But it's a good guitar, as long as you have the right expectations going in.