charlie brown Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 I have always wondered, why Epi's G-400's have never had the deeper inside bevels (into the body, almost to the edge of the pick guard, on the Horns, between the tips, and the neck, since they appear to emulate the Gibson '61 SG, in most other areas. A bound neck, would be nice, too. I've seen some of the Faded, or "Vintage" versions of the G-400 WITH bound necks...but they seem to be rare? Maybe the cost factor, on the neck binding and associated fretting, would be a factor, but surely they could more closely match the deeper bevels, of the Gibson, without much effort? I (personally) have always loved the deeper bevels, of the '61-64 Vintage SG's... just seems more angular, and attractive, to me. But, maybe that's just me? What do you all think, or do you care? LOL! CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokestack Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 No it's not just you. The accuracy of body shaping [and spud's pet hate , knob placement ..ooh missus !] has been rather hit and miss throughout modern Epi production from the varius sources. [ As has the "violin carve" of the LP top.] It's really just a matter of how much care is taken when the tooling is set up...which hasn't always been a great deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted February 26, 2008 Author Share Posted February 26, 2008 Yeah, it's interesting that even Gibson seems to only adhere to the spec's that most (who care, one way or the other) really love, on their "Vintage"(Custom Shop), SG's and Les Pauls. Long Neck Tenon's, deeper bevels on the SG's, or the more pronounced Violin Carves, on the Les Pauls. A lot of the Japanese copies (Tokai, Burney, etc.) offer those vintage spec's as a matter of course. So, it would be nice, if the original company, would do likewise, without having to go "Custom Shop," to get it. But, it's all about money, it seems. But, we can "dream," I guess? CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderstruck507 Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 Buy an elite or elitist I have seen 1 black g400 that had proper body bevels...I thought it was going to be the new thing, then never saw one again. It was about the same time the pickups changed in standard epis. Thedeeper bevel on the top edge of the guitar makes it WORLDS more comfortable to play. One of the main reasons I sold my G400, it just wasn't comfortable in comparison...so I never played it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted February 26, 2008 Author Share Posted February 26, 2008 Yes, they are more comfortable, to play...as well as nicer looking! The old ones, seemed a lot more "solid" or something, too. Might be just my fond "old" memories, but...the older, wider beveled, SG's just had that somewhat indefinable "mojo," seemingly? Could have been the woods, back then too, maybe? Don't get me wrong, I like the new SG's! I just wish Gibson (and Epiphone, both) would make the old "Vintage" spec's, "standard" on all models. But, again...just my personal opinion/prefernce. CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotcanX Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 Like I've always said, despite Epiphone's hype that the G-400 is a "faithful replica of the venerable '62 SG", the G-400 only looks like a '62 SG in the dark. The neck joint is also completely wrong... there should be a bevel on the back of the body in that area. This, plus, as Smoke mentioned, the completely random knob placement, was the main reason I dumped my first G-400. The only conclusion I can come to is that the guys at Epiphone are nothing more than incompetent buffoons. For a while Jay Turser was making an SG replica that was way more accurate than the "authorized by Gibson USA" G-400. ...check out those bevels (or "scarfs" as they are correctly named) on a real (1965) SG... The funny thing is to compare the G-400 to the Elitist '61 SG reissue... at least FujiGen got it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted February 26, 2008 Author Share Posted February 26, 2008 Yeah....That's IT! COOL! Japanese or not, that's an SG! Thanks, RotcanX CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotcanX Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 Oh yeah, and while I'm thinking about it, most of the Korean-made G-400s from before 2005 didn't even have the shape of the cutaways right... more like a crushed "U" shape than the correct rounded "C" shape, and the top horn didn't curve down like it should. It's interesting in a way... on the surface, an SG is a simpler guitar than a Les Paul, since there's no arch top or maple cap or binding... but apparently it's difficult to get the contours exactly right; even Gibson has strayed from the ideal over the years (you should see my 1978 SG... yuck). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingfrets Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 I always liked the SG design. Maybe it was thanks to a great Ibanez lawsuit SG I had and used as my number one through most of the 80's. I just couldn't stop playing it. Sadly it was stolen (along with the rest of my equipment at the time) a little over 6 years ago. I replaced it in November of '06 with an Epi G400 Custom (the Ivory colored 3 pup job). I think I've played it twice. It's a beautiful guitar in the looks department, and it might be the right guitar for someone...but that someone isn't me. It's just not what I expected and it's definitely nothing like I remembered. I can't quite put my finger on what it is that irks me about it. It's built very well, but it doesn't feel "right" to me. Frankly, I bought it because I got a killer deal on it, but in hindsight, it was still wasted money as little as I play it. Shame really, I want to like it. I just can't... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokestack Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 The annoying thing about shaping is that it's just as easy to get it right as get it wrong. It's simply lack ofattention to detail at the outset. [unless it's done on purpose ?] . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted February 27, 2008 Author Share Posted February 27, 2008 True! Which begs the question, why Gibson hasn't maintained the "proper" serfs (bevels), over the years. Was it a ("new"/ updated) design modification decision, or economic (time) consideration, etc.? And, why one has to go to the "Custom Shop," to get those "original specs?!" Obviously, it's more aesthetic, than functional, but they are more comfortable, to play...IMHO. And, they just look so great, too! I (personally) have always liked the (Gibson '61 Reissue) with the Maestro vibrola, but the stop tailpiece version is great, too! Unfortunately, with Gibson's price structure, of late....I will have to, now, put off my purchase, even a bit longer. Charlie B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotcanX Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Was it a ("new"/ updated) design modification decision? That wouldn't make sense in view of their ongoing marketing claim of "faithful rendition of the venerable '62 SG"... However I must be fair and point out that I've handled a couple of really nice G-400s lately, all from the QuinDao plant (avoid the DWs)... these look, play and sound pretty good, and they only cost about $309 Canadian these days. Pop in some aftermarket pickups and Al's your uncle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotcanX Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 It's just not what I expected and it's definitely nothing like I remembered. I can't quite put my finger on what it is that irks me about it. It's built very well' date=' but it doesn't feel "right" to me.[/quote'] It's probably the weight and also a lack of resonance in the wood, plus I doubt that the thick polyester paint job is helping matters either... good news is that some of the newer G-400s out of QingDao seem to be improving in this area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 The Elitists aside, most Epi SG's have laminated tops and backs, no? My guess is (like the LP violin carve) Epiphone's subcontracters are concerned with delamination when slopes or angled shapes are too acute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotcanX Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Nah, the laminate is only applied to the flat top and back... it ends where the bevels start... which is one reason why it's so obvious that there's a veneer there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted February 27, 2008 Author Share Posted February 27, 2008 That wouldn't make sense in view of their ongoing marketing claim of "faithful rendition of the venerable '62 SG"... Actually' date=' I was referring (in my previous statement) about Gibson's abandonment of the wider/deeper "serf/bevel," on SG models after about 1964, to what the [b']current production [/b]model (IE NOT the "Reissue '61-62(w/Vibrola), is...most often. And, really...it's just MY personal preference (the wider serf's), anyway. It's just that they feel so much better (and look it, too) with the wider/deeper serfs...IMHO! LOL! Epiphone seems to have adopted the current (SG Standard, Classic, Junior) stylings of a more limited beveling. Which, of course, is no big deal...UNLESS, they're going to tout it as, as you say, a "faithful rendition of the venerable '62 SG"... In that case, they need to adopt the more pronounced "serfs" or beveling. But..."Horses for Courses," as they say. Charlie B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.