stan 58 Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 Theres been A few posts lately about SGs and there differances, so I shot A photo of my 65 Gibson SG and my 2000 epi SG custom for comparison. There the same but differant, what do you think? Stan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muskank Sally Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 Both very beautiful. That 2000 Custom has aged nicely. Is that bridge original? it looks like it has the small Nashville style posts some get those and I've seen Sheri's, Lucille's and a few others with them. The '65 SG looks just like the Angus Young sig model with the trem and the witch-hat knobs. Smoking original. The control knob placements look different, but that '65 could be the culprit?Pickguard near the switch is virtually off the body, and the controls should be offset a bit more? Damn Nice though and who would really notice? What I refer to as 'Gas Jones'. I have Gas and I Jones for new gear. Here's my 2006 SG Custom (Korea I06012455)modded just slightly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copper1281734000 Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 Those are nice. I've always wanted an SG, but never pulled the trigger. Right now I'm gassing for a Tele... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 Good example of the differences in "beveling," on the bodies, and the interior horns (to neck) area. The Vintage has much deeper and wider bevels, and a sharper upper horn, too. The Epi Custom is more subtle, in both those areas. Also, as mentioned, the knobs are a bit different in location and configuration. I've (personally) always preferred the "Vintage" specs, but they both are great looking. Cool! Both, ARE really nice guitars, Stan! Thanks, for the "side by side!" CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotcanX Posted May 29, 2008 Share Posted May 29, 2008 The control knob placements look different' date=' but that '65 could be the culprit?[/quote']Riiiiight... the copy is correct and the original is wrong. :- The big spacing on the switch is due to the fact that Gibson uses a right-angled selector; it has to be that far away. Epiphone cheats by making the bodies thicker so that they can accomodate a short, straight selector switch. And then they stick the knobs anywhere. image of control cavity from 1965 SG Big difference in the shape of the upper cutaway. And do we even need to mention the bevels? Nice SG, Stan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stan 58 Posted May 29, 2008 Author Share Posted May 29, 2008 Thanks for the replys. To Mr. Jones, yes its the stock bridge, the only mods are a gibby neck PU and a new nut. It looks to me like your very nice lookin SG has a little sharper horns then mine, but its hard to be sure. I also think the 65 SG has a narrower waist the the epi, now that I look at it. And spud is right,the Epi is much thicker then the Gibby. The truth is I play the custom alot more then the Gibson. Stan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotcanX Posted May 29, 2008 Share Posted May 29, 2008 I put together a similar comparison pic back when I was looking at the G-400 Maestro: The G-400 in the pic was an EE; unfortunately the one I got was an Unsung and as such the knobs were not as nicely placed as on the EE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted May 29, 2008 Share Posted May 29, 2008 Cool comparison fade in/out! But, for me....the Gibson's the one! Rediculous price, for sure, but that's the baby! CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotcanX Posted May 29, 2008 Share Posted May 29, 2008 Oh yeah. I'd love to have a VOS SG but even at my cost, they're just too expensive. Plus I'm not a huge whammy bar freak so the Epiphone version was good enough for me. Heck it mostly just sits in its case anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Oh yeah. I'd love to have a VOS SG but even at my cost' date=' they're just too expensive. Plus I'm not a huge whammy bar freak so the Epiphone version was good enough for me. Heck it mostly just sits in its case anyway.[/quote'] Yeah, I hear THAT! (Re: prices) But, the Epi is a great looking SG, as well. I only meant I "prefer" the Gibson's VOS specs. Don't supposed I'll ever be able to "justify" that kind of expense, anymore, though. But, one can dream! CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stan 58 Posted May 30, 2008 Author Share Posted May 30, 2008 Jez Spud I thought I was having a flashback for I second there! Cool effect and comparison.Stan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotcanX Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Thanks. BTW it's called an 'animated gif'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muskank Sally Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 Riiiiight... the copy is correct and the original is wrong. :- The big spacing on the switch is due to the fact that Gibson uses a right-angled selector; it has to be that far away. Epiphone cheats by making the bodies thicker so that they can accomodate a short' date=' straight selector switch. And then they stick the knobs anywhere. [img']http://www.marantatech.com/Graphix/65SGcavity.jpg[/img] image of control cavity from 1965 SG Big difference in the shape of the upper cutaway. And do we even need to mention the bevels? Nice SG, Stan. Yea OK I should've known i'd get tackled on that one. LOL They just may have done this one an injustice was all I meant. The copy is just that. A Copy. Gibson make a mistake and it get out the door especially in '65 when Who would give a clue? Never I'm Sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotcanX Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 Gibson make a mistake and it get out the door especially in '65 when Who would give a clue?Never I'm Sure. The thing is' date=' there's an inherent [i']design[/i] to the control layout (at least when Gibson does it). You'll note that the switch, the two top controls and the jack are all on a line, and the two lower controls are on a parallel line. This underlying 'grid' makes the layout esthetically pleasing so that it looks 'right'. On the Epis, this is completely ignored and you get a disharmonious conglomeration of haphazardly-placed components. You don't know exactly why but it just doesn't look good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.