| Author |
Message |
    
Ekkerman
Username: Ekkerman
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 03, 2007 - 3:03 am: | |
how many of you guys (and possibly girls as well) have ever tried out an gibson , let say a goldtop 57 ( nickel covered humbuckers)
any thought on how they relate in comparing to lets say a ar 100 polar white?
what are the main differences?
does the ibanez stand his ground? |
Holmis63
Username: Holmis63
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 03, 2007 - 6:39 am: | |
A gibby 57 goldtop. No, but against other gibbys including CS models. My ar100nt hold up god against any gibby iīve tried and the ar500cs is way better in both finnish, quality and sound.
Only my opinion!
Holmis63 |
Ekkerman
Username: Ekkerman
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, October 04, 2007 - 2:16 am: | |
not more vieuws on this then ?
thanx holmis63...
shame there arent any more detailed answers... |
Talajuha
Username: Talajuha
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, October 04, 2007 - 6:35 am: | |
I guess most people on here think it is so obvious ARs are better than Gibby LPs that they don't take the trouble to say it. Also Ibanez LP copies are regarded better.
Juha |
Careycorson
Username: Careycorson
Registered: 7-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, October 04, 2007 - 9:20 am: | |
I know I traded a white 1974 LP Custom even-trade for a 1978 2617-Artist, and never regretted it for one instant. Tone, balance, finish, neck, the Artist was, in every way, a better guitar. I've never played a vintage Goldtop, so I can't speak to that. |
Johns
Username: Johns
Registered: 2-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, October 04, 2007 - 9:49 am: | |
Ekkerman:
You are talking about the NEW '57 Goldtop...not an original 1957 Goldie?
It's difficult, but not impossible, to compare a Gibson Custom shop guitar with the lowest end production line Artist.
Aside from the cosmetic differences: Acrylic Block inlays vs. dots; Gold vs White finish, and nickel vs. gold hardware they are pretty similar: Mahogany body with Maple top, Rosewood fretboard and two humbuckers with minimal controls (although the '83/'84 AR100 did have DuoSound pots for a Hum/Single split).
List price for the '57 Goldtop is $5200.00, but MusiciansFriend is selling them for $3500.00 (case included). In '84 list for the AR100PW was $590.00 and probably sold for $400 (case extra). A mint AR100PW would probably fetch $800.00, maybe more at today's rising prices.
The Gibby has the Burstbucker pickups, the AR100 has Super58s. Dave_G is a big fan of both.
Dave, have you ever put these Burstbuckers into an AR100 to make the discussion a little closer to an apples to apples comparison? |
Ekkerman
Username: Ekkerman
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, October 04, 2007 - 10:37 am: | |
i think with gibson its mostly brand name witch you pay for...
off course its quality but i hear of some gibsons that arrive in the shop not living up to the price its is suposed to be worth and some evan get send back.
a shopkeeper from where i live himself goes to the importeur to hand select the gibsons , bcause that little faith he's got in just ordering them !
stil the good ones are good but i think the 80 's ibanezzes are just as good perhaps cause tem days they had a reputation to loose and would not have send out junk.
i own a 1982 pw ar 100 and its a very good guitar!!! |
Ekkerman
Username: Ekkerman
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, October 04, 2007 - 10:39 am: | |
johns, i think that such a dave g experiment is very welcome so lets hope he will do this so we can put these discussions to rest once and for all!!!
go dave go!!!!! |
Jason43
Username: Jason43
Registered: 9-2007
| | Posted on Friday, October 05, 2007 - 6:29 pm: | |
I had a 98 Les Paul Classic that I just recently sold. Comparing it to my 83 Artist, the Ibanez is just a better guitar hands down. Build quality and sound quality both go to the Artist, plus the Artist has a killer locking bridge and and I can actually use the upper frets. I'd even go so far as to say that my mik AR200 would be Les Paul competition if they used better hardware like the Gibraltar II and better tuners. The build quality is definitely up there with the LP. And I think everyone agrees, you are paying for the name when you buy a Les Paul. |
Roland_g303
Username: Roland_g303
Registered: 5-2007
| | Posted on Friday, October 05, 2007 - 7:39 pm: | |
I have a '78 2618 Artist and a '70 Gibson Les Paul Deluxe Gold Top. I like my Gibson way more than my Artist, but that's just my personal preference. While the Artist is a very well built guitar and has many nice features I would still pick my Les Paul every time. I think it has a lot to do with the fact that it was one of my first guitars and I knew I was a Gibson guy by how it reacted to my playing style. It's also because the Gibby fits the styles of my playing way better than my Artist. Another thing to compare between the two guitars is that my Deluxe has a nitro finish whereas the Artist has a poly finish. IMHO that makes a huge difference in tone.
Just my 2 cents and I have a feeling I'm gonna get hammered for it.
Patrick |
Ekkerman
Username: Ekkerman
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, October 06, 2007 - 11:12 am: | |
no way patrick!! you wont get hammered just for saying your taste!
you cant arque with taste and so i believe that in your perception the gibby is better and perhaps it is, because no one can honestely say that ibanez didnt miss the board once in a while and made a little less quality guitar especially in the lower price ranges!
still, my ibby ar 100 polar white with the infamous stock pups sound as a real gibson killer. for sure when you bear in mind the huige prices asked for the gibsons ,ridiculous!!!!!! |
Ekkerman
Username: Ekkerman
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, October 06, 2007 - 11:18 am: | |
and i would like to mention the huge differences in sound and tone ,like my ar 100 is very good for rock especially 70's rock and gets a warm transparent tone with the volume knob turned down a little . however, an 1990 ar 300 ive got in witch i had put in golden toni iommi pups ( black sabbath guitarist signature pups) that guitar has slightlly more playing comfort this baby has due to the pups more bite and can really scream and when single coiled its a little strat like .....
so theres much difference both in guitars and the pups put in! |
Roland_g303
Username: Roland_g303
Registered: 5-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, October 06, 2007 - 4:54 pm: | |
Thanks for the support Ekkerman. I've commented on a thread similar to this before about a comparison to an Ibanez Musician vs. a Les Paul Custom. I was really fortunate to get my '70 Deluxe for $1k before the prices went through the roof on 'em. I really do like the old Ibby's, I just find that the old Gibson's fit my taste a little better. The pups do play a big difference. The flying fingers in my 2618 are really hot and the pups in my Gibson seem to just have a little more character (IMO of course  )that fit my needs. Both are great guitars for sure.
Patrick |
Holmis63
Username: Holmis63
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, October 07, 2007 - 4:45 am: | |
Very interesting discussion! Whe seems to agree that Ibbys is better than Gibbys except for Roland g303!
How do consider Fender vs Ibanez? I have never stumbled on a guitar that is superior to a fender when it comes to single coil sounds! I love my ī79 strat and i am realy impressed about my "new" Lead II!
Maybe a matter for a new thread but still an interesting question, or what?
Holmis63 |
Gemberbier
Username: Gemberbier
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, October 07, 2007 - 6:38 am: | |
I agree, Holmis63. Being a Shadows fan, I can't get the "right" sound out the Ibanez RT240 single coils. I don't know how close the Silver and Challenger series come to the Fender sound, but I like the sound of my MIJ Fender Standard Stratocaster with OEM Kahler Spyder (1987-'88)better than that of my (also by Fuji Gen) Ibanez RT240. The prices were about the same.
I think it is mainly the pickups and/or the fact that the RT240 is a 24 fret guitar. The distance between the pickups and the 12th fret is what makes the sound warm or not.
And then of course the quality and specs of the pickup.
About Gibson: they had a really bad period of inconsistant quality in the '70s, BECAUSE of trying to compete with Ibanez, which sold their guitars quite cheap. So a GOOD Gibson is probably better than the average Artist, but then you must look for earlier (more expensive) ones or just be lucky, because inconsistent quality means ups and downs. Don't buy them without trying. Especially those 1976 ones with maple necks.
But then again, I like my two The Pauls 1978, although some Ibanez collectors say they're no good. But I drove a few hundred kilometres to try the second one. The first one was closer by. I just wanted work horse guitars that keep their value or even gain value. And then the 1978 with ebony fretboard is a good choice. Not enough for my pension (like a 1959 LP Standard Cherry Sunburst), but I'll always get my money back + some inflation correction, when I sell.
And then there's my LP Standard DC, which sounds very full and is LIGHT (sound chambers), and which I can't compare with the Artists, although it has a DC body. The list price was much higher too. But that's a good guitar, that doesn't give me a neck hernia.
There's one for sale in Canada. I wonder for how much it will go.
Ebay Item #200159285059
Note that the body is NOT symmetric like the Ibanez Artists, but it was based on the old LP Special Double Cut (with the P90s, remember?).
Ginger |
Holmis63
Username: Holmis63
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, October 07, 2007 - 11:27 am: | |
I would like to try a silver series ibby strat to compare it against my fender strat, have never done that. Silver series Ibanezes is quite rare here in Sweden. Have never seen one actualy!
I owned a Tokai strat back in the eightees and that one couldnīt hold up to the Fender in any parameter except build quality and looks. It wasīnt that bright and clear in tone and it was not that comfortable to play as the Fender. So, i sold it and bought a Gibson firebird ī76 that i never liked either and sold a couple of years later!
Nowadays i just consider Ibanez and Fender when i hunt for guitars. Maybe i miss something here? But i have tried so many guitars and brands that i just donīt consider it possible to beat those two Brands.
Thatīs just for me i guess, you donīt change your taste that easy when you get older!
Holmis63 |
Gemberbier
Username: Gemberbier
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, October 07, 2007 - 5:03 pm: | |
What's also very good, when it's about single coil guitars, is G&L (George and Leo). I think, that if you compare the older ones of G&L (because later they introduced a cheaper series too), you have a guitar that's probably even better than a Fender, because Leo Fender himself was involved, with new innovations etc.
The old man just couldn't stop.
Ginger |
Emilio
Username: Emilio
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Monday, October 08, 2007 - 9:14 am: | |
The point here is the relation price quality, Ibanez wins that race by far.........
cheers
emilio |
Gemberbier
Username: Gemberbier
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Monday, October 08, 2007 - 7:37 pm: | |
When you compare them with USA guitars: yes,
but when you compare Ibanez Silver series or Challengers with MIJ (Fuji Gen) Fender Japan instruments of the eighties, like the JV series, SQ series or even the E-serial numbers, I doubt it...
I think the electronics of the Fenders, which meet Fender's specs, are probably better. The wood is practically the same and the price differences weren't that big.
Ginger |
Roland_g303
Username: Roland_g303
Registered: 5-2007
| | Posted on Monday, October 08, 2007 - 9:31 pm: | |
I've got a Roland G-505 which is the guitar-synth version of the strat. It was made by Ibanez/Greco for Roland in the early to mid eighties. It's a great guitar. I think the main difference for comparison purposes between this guitar vs. Fender Strats is the expressiveness of the single coil pickups. The pickups in the Roland tend to beautify the sound of what a Strat pickup sounds like. It's great for smooth solos and surf type music, but it definitely doesn't fit in as well with heavily distorted rock. I A/B'd it against my friends original '69 Strat and there really wasn't any comparison. The '69 ate my guitar for lunch, but his guitar is really is what many would consider to be an ultimate Stratocaster. I can understand why people pay so much for them. The sound of that guitar was full and big and had great definition in its tone. Both were maple necks too. The cost of my Roland is 1/100 of that strat though, so it's not exactly comparing apples to apples.
Here's a pic of my Roland G-505
Patrick |
Gemberbier
Username: Gemberbier
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 09, 2007 - 7:37 pm: | |
Made in the Fuji Gen Gakki factory, just like Fender Japan, in which Kanda Shokai (owner of Greco) is one of the partners:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fender_Japan
That Roland looks nice, Pat. Blue headstock, a bit like "The Strat". And that black strip is a GK-2 or something?
Ginger |
Poss
Username: Poss
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 09, 2007 - 10:16 pm: | |
Gibsons are overated IMHO. I've an '84 SG special its slop. doesn't stay in tune, doesn't intonate well, string tension at concert pitch is too loose, cracks in the laquer, sounds bad etc etc. its been sitting in my cupboard for the last 10 years hoping it might appreciate in value but really its nothing special (ok to be fair with a set up it might be ok) i will sell it and buy japanese for a fraction of the cost. i want a brighter sounding guitar something that rings out. got my eye on ibanez silver series, challengers, blazers, rsII, yamaha super rnroller, greco spacey sounds etc. as far as i know they all came outta the same factory.
on the otherhand I got '68 Gibson EBO bass and its build quality's great so for me its a keeper. but it has limitations with sound, but this is more the overall design (scale length, set neck, pickup etc) but unique all the same. I recently purchased a Ibanez silver series PJ bass 2369B? (the one that was mentioned on this site) for the "crisp option". I think to compare the two is difficult because they are both so different to each other, they're both well made. But I think overall the Ibanez give me more versatility so thats what i'm gigging with now. The EBO will get a workout in studio for some songs though. |
Poss
Username: Poss
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 09, 2007 - 11:01 pm: | |
sorry my last post might of confused a few things. to make fair comparisons you could compare stock gibsons les pauls and sg's and fender strats and teles with the japanese copies of the late 70'•••••• generally agreed the jap guitars were of good build quality but had inferior pick ups
post lawsuit models such as ibanez artists and yamaha SG do get heaps of praise. where as present day gibsons and fenders tend to be a bit hit and miss.
so for the budding guitarist with cash to burn what the best choice? pre lawsuit, post lawsuit or the so called 'real thing' or NEITHER! |
Gemberbier
Username: Gemberbier
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 10, 2007 - 4:06 am: | |
Well, if we speak about "pre lawsuit", "lawsuit" and "post lawsuit", it's in fact always about GIBSON copies, NOT about Fender copies, because Fender didn't sue Hoshino (Ibanez) or Kanda Shokai (Greco).
However I think that you are right about the pickup quality on the Fender shaped models (single coils). Fender pickups are better.
For the Gibson shaped instruments we know several eras.
At first the early PAF imitations came with a MAXON print on the back and FLAT pole pieces until somewhere in 1974 I guess (Harry will probably know the exact year and month),
then they developed a pickup with round pole pieces and better stronger magnets: the Super 70 humbucker. That was a good pickup. Not as sought after as a Gibson PAF or PAT, but good. It was used as early as 1975 (that I know for sure, but not the month in which they started). Now, in 1975 they still made OPEN BOOK headstocks, until August without serial number, from August WITH serial number. WITH THOSE GOOD SUPER 70 PICKUPS.
Then there was an era of anticipation on the coming lawsuit. All new necks for Gibson shaped Ibanez guitars got GUILD shaped headstocks. But the ready necks they had in stock were used until they ran out of stock for that particular model. So that's an era in which you find GIBSON (OPEN BOOK) headstocks on one Gibson shaped model and GUILD (or TULIP) on another model, simply because they were preparing for a settlement, but they didn't want to throw away good necks.
The lawsuit was filed on June 28, 1977. It was settled out of court.
http://www.guitarattack.com/destroyer/lawsuit.htm
Because of the examples of anticipation the settlement was much easier, and the companies saved a lot of lawyer costs.
So, now for your question: which era is the best choice if you have cash to burn?
As a player, I tend to say "go for those Super 70's", as a collector, I would say "go for a Gibson headstock" and if you combine these two in one guitar, a late 1975 or even early 1976 would be an excellent choice. And I'd prefer a setneck with a serial number, because a neckplate is too easy to swap.
Ginger |
Poss
Username: Poss
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 10, 2007 - 8:03 am: | |
thanks ginger for that, rest assured we are in agreeance about what is "lawsuit", have read a bit in the past re norlin V hoshino over the open book headstock etc. though its fact before 1977, hoshino made almost exclusively clones, and after 1977 didn't hence "pre & post lawsuit". but sure a "lawsuit" guitar is a gibson clone with an open book headstock, most likely ibanez badge.
my theory is the guitars that came out of japan after 1977 are probably the better ones in terms of straight quality cause of those companies ( hoshino, nippon gakki etc) or the factories (fuji gen etc) efforts to make a name for themselves with the original designs. |
Ibanezfreak1960
Username: Ibanezfreak1960
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 10, 2007 - 8:43 am: | |
Poss what kind of bridge and tail piece are on your SG? The tension may be adjustable. In all fairness to Gibson they have made some very good guitars. I have this before that most of the famous guitar brands make entry level and high end instruments and in the mix there are bad guitars once in a while. In the right hands a guitar can be made to play well and function well. |
Poss
Username: Poss
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 10, 2007 - 9:53 am: | |
I think bridge type is called "top adjust" but im not sure. its not a tunomatic with a seperate tail piece. to describe it - the tail piece slides into into the back of the bridge. the height adjusting bolts are the bolts that bolt into the guitar the intonation screws are at the front of the bridge. cheers. |
Roland_g303
Username: Roland_g303
Registered: 5-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 10, 2007 - 10:01 am: | |
Hi Ginger,
That black strip is a GK-1 pickup. It's the pickup that requires a 24 pin cable (looks like a big bulky printer cable). I really dig it and I got it for a steal a couple months ago on eBay for $205. It's got a beefy neck and it's nice and worn in.
Here's a pic of the backside so you can see the cable attachment. It also can be used as a straight guitar via 1/4" input.
Patrick |
Ibanezfreak1960
Username: Ibanezfreak1960
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 10, 2007 - 10:22 am: | |
So the strings are wrapped around the bridge? Can you post a pic? |
Poss
Username: Poss
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 10, 2007 - 11:32 am: | |
ibanezfreak sorry no pictures for now.
"So the strings are wrapped around the bridge?"
maybe the tail piece the wrong way round? anyway the old strings have been binned so the bridge is off the guitar. I'll get some strings and try get to the bottom of it. cheers |
Poss
Username: Poss
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, October 11, 2007 - 11:52 pm: | |
[IMG]http://i24.tinypic.com/2eqgrya.jpg[/IMG]
quick update for ibanezfreak. you alluded me to the fact i had a bridge upsidedown back the front with string going straight thru not around. so i've now reassembled as the per the pic seems much better. thanx. will adjust the tension, intonation and height etc give it some love before i sell it. i will take back some previous comment and say this axe has suffered neglect and proper set up...so not all gibsons fault in this case.
i'm interested to know if anyone seen this type bridge on sg b4 as i cant find any pics on the net? and wether its original or not? |
Munch
Username: Munch
Registered: 2-2001
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 3:02 am: | |
Hey Poss,
I think what you have there is an aftermarket Badass bridge. Malcom Young from Ac/Dc has one on his Gretsch doublejet.
With regard to the Ibanez/Gibson thing..... the other night I played a guy's early '70's Les Paul that has been gigged heavily. Age patina all over it!!! His amp is gigged just as heavily (held together by duct tape) and sounds like crap (a silverface Vibrosonic Reverb). I can't comment on the tone due to the lousy amp, but man that Gibson sure could sustain a note! I've never experienced anything like it before. Just hit a note, give it some finger vibrato, and prepare to be amazed. Even at low volume without any kind of overdrive! I've never played an Ibanez (or any other guitar) that could do that!
Cheers,
Mark |
Snowjays
Username: Snowjays
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 7:54 am: | |
I'm afraid I will have to agree with Much. I play a '71 LP modded with '80's ceramic pups and the older it gets, the better it gets. Hopefully, I'll get to show him an Ibanez that comes close when we get to Sydney. |
Gemberbier
Username: Gemberbier
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 8:45 am: | |
I have seen them on Ibanez guitars before, but don't know if they were original. What I know for sure, is that Schaller in Germany (the supplier of Gibson's hardware) makes them under the model number 455.
http://www.schaller-guitarparts.de/1215.htm
I have a used one in a box from that parts bin that I bought last year for 25 EUR (I mean everything the guy had, including gold Schaller machine heads... yummy...)
I still don't have my own digital camera, so I scanned it, it says MADE IN GERMANY:
Ginger |
Sixvsix
Username: Sixvsix
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 8:53 pm: | |
I agree with Munch and Snowjays too. I'll go one further and say that having owned a fair mix of the two brands over the years, for me, it's Gibson everytime.
Sorry
six |
Poss
Username: Poss
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Friday, October 12, 2007 - 11:15 pm: | |
ginger your right its a schaller 455 no doubt whatsoever i got this link off a gibson forum -
http://everythingsg.com/catalogs/1983sgspecial.jpg
which confirms its original.
sixvix i wouldn't vouch for every ibanez made either, but put clearly the late 70's 80's guitars made in the fuji gen factory including ibanez are definitly of a good quality and better bang for the buck than american fenders and gibson. to think i spent nearly a grand in the 90's on an sg what could i have i got if i went looking for mij? |
Poss
Username: Poss
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, October 13, 2007 - 12:07 am: | |
[IMG]http://i23.tinypic.com/2eqfj9i.jpg[/IMG]
the new; '77 Ibanez 2369 the old; '68 Gibson EB-O
[IMG]http://i24.tinypic.com/i24ndg.jpg[/IMG]
Cimar mij jumbo well travelled, one for the (buskers) road.
[IMG]http://i23.tinypic.com/sxlrt1.jpg[/IMG]
the neglected; '83 Gibson SG |
Sixvsix
Username: Sixvsix
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, October 13, 2007 - 3:54 am: | |
Poss,
Yeah sure I agree that Gibson churned out some real rubbish notably in the LP range. Probably Norlin had a lot to do with it. They were definately doing something wrong back then. I think they rested on the past laurels and just couldn't be bothered to make good guitars.
That's good in a way because without a doubt, the McCarthy years are the best for Gibson and anyone who was anybody has played one from that era at some point thus bolstering the mystique. You can say the same thing about Fender
Strange then that it took them 40 years to get anywhere near reissuing a sunburst Les Paul that actually looks and feels a bit like the original series. Guitars built pre 1999 didn't hit the mark. The 99 was good but for a start the inlays are toilet seat and the logo's on the headstock are awful. Change these to the correct type/look and you're on the way. Or just enjoy it for what it is a reissue....ish.
IMHO..If someone wants to buy a decent Les Paul then anything below a Historic is a waste of money. I'd rather have a top end Ibanez a Tokai LS150/200 from the late 70's (if you can get one) or a top end Greco Super Real (same era)...Check out Mark's site for these:
http://www.japanguitars.co.uk/.
Saying that, Gibson wise, you have to hunt around to find the good ones. Some of the burst reissues have such outrageous book-matched tops that they look nothing like the originals. They seem to fetch a few quid though. Some of the fingerboards are too light in grain (R8's mostly) and anything over 9Ib...forget it. Optimum weight for a good Lester is about 8Ib 7oz. Pick one that has a ringy neck. If the neck isn't humming nicely when you play it acoustically then put it down and go find another. Fit a lightweight tail. Go buy a copy of "The Beauty of the Burst" for reference work.
I've had a couple of Les Pauls from 1968 too. A gold top and a custom. I can tell you these were nothing like the 50's guitars but they still command a high price these days with a lot of unused 50's bodies and necks hype attached to them. It's nonsense.
I reckon best value is a plain top or gold top with brazilian board. Forget the Murphy's. I have one...seen lots and to be honest, it's average looking ageing for the masses. Gibson are holding him back. I reckon if you took your Les Paul to Murphy on the side, he would make it look 100% authentic but don't tell anyone he did it.
Anyway, there are guys out there who are clever enough to fool seasoned collectors and dealers. I've seen em' so I know....but I won't tell you who.
Sorry, next to Ibanez Gibson, (especially Les Pauls) is my other passion (and Tokai).
I'm ranting and I'm hungry so I'll shut up now.
six |
Paul_a
Username: Paul_a
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, October 13, 2007 - 2:22 pm: | |
Six, I've owned and played Les Pauls (goldtops) from the 1968/69 era that were very good guitars indeed and very, very different from the 70s Les Pauls. I don't buy the unused 50's bodies and necks hype either but I believe these models - which after all were Gibson's first reissues - are good instruments and historically significant. BTW, Shiro Arais visit to the 1967 NAMM show - where he saw the first Les Paul reissues - is often credited with being the catalyst that kicked off the Les Paul copy syndrome! |
Sixvsix
Username: Sixvsix
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, October 13, 2007 - 8:33 pm: | |
Hi Paul, My old 68 goldtop had some mojo. Small headstock, crown inlay, "Les Paul" on the truss cover, one piece neck and body and most noteably, stripped gold revealing a crazy blister maple. I sent Tom Whittrock a couple of shots. He's seen plenty stripped but none with such a heavy looking blister. When I got the guitar it had no pickups so I slapped a pair of 50's creme P90's in. I sold it to a German guy who was going back home. May still be out there now.
Unfortunately the guitar was way too heavy for me as was the custom. I'll mail you some shots.
six |
Sixvsix
Username: Sixvsix
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, October 13, 2007 - 8:35 pm: | |
I bet some of you must be scratching your heads by now on reading that last post. 
six |
Gemberbier
Username: Gemberbier
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, October 14, 2007 - 6:52 am: | |
Associative thinking aloud:
"That crown on the logo on the Cimar Jumbo looks a lot like the E-ROS logo, I had on a dreadnought. E-ROS was Italian (Recagnati) and they also produced flattops for EKO, they also outsourced production to Japan. So there could be a connection.
Let's see:
http://www.fetishguitars.com/index/eros.html
No, that's not it. Probably just an imitation of the Guild logo."
Ginger |
Victor
Username: Victor
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 2:33 pm: | |
Hi there,
Sorry guys, maybe this isn't the right topic to ask my question, but I am new here and hardly trying to find somebody who's experienced in pickups. I bought two humbuckers from an Ibanez AR50, but it was a modificated guitar and I have some doubts about the origin of the pickups. One of them seems to be a Super 70, since it has the engraving at the back and has a simple ground and a white wire. The strange thing is a wood rod next to the side of the pickup (check out through the hole at the lower right corner of the back). Is it common or is a home-made something?
But maybe it is the easier thing to identify. The tought one is the other pickup. It has a 6 digit number stamped at the back. Has a simple ground, white and red wire. The strange thing is that this pickup is much lower than the one seems to be a Super 70. Both pickups has the same type of fixing legs. I try to put some pix here, hopefully there is somebody out there knowing the answers to me questions.
Thanks!
 |
Holmis63
Username: Holmis63
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 8:03 am: | |
Yes, that is a super 70 i believe and the other one seems to be a ibz pup to! The things you call, fixing legs, points toward a ibz pup. I think it is a super58, look at the pool pieces, they are open, if it was a super80 they would be covered!
I have never reflected on the different thicknes on ibz pups, i have ibz guitars equiped with super80:s, super58:s (both the old and new version) and V2:s. i will look at that thing.
Iīve never owned a ibz equiped with those super70:s, are they any good? I think that will be my next catch!
Holmis63 |
Sixvsix
Username: Sixvsix
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 11:17 am: | |
This type of Super 70 showed up from about 1978 on. The wooden block you mention is just a support for the coil so that it fits flush against the base of the pickup. So no, it isn't home made though I agree it does look like a piece of match wood stuck in there.
six |
Victor
Username: Victor
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 4:06 pm: | |
Hi there,
Thanks for all your help guys!
I bought this 1980 Artist AR100 on ebay but it is not arrived yet. It is equipped with 2 non-splittable Ibanez V2 humbuckers so I bought the others to have some option in sound. I never heard a V2 yet, but the folks said in sound has much more middles compared to a Super 58 or Super 70, so V2 is more suitable for rock sound. I am looking for a good jazzy sound so I try to find out what are the ones I have. Some people said the best is to put a Super 58 at the bridge, and a Super 70 at the neck. Surely it is a matter of taste. I just heard a 1975 Ibanez Les Paul Custom with two Super 70s and I really liked that rich sound.
Six, if I understood your comment well, the inside of the two pickups could built up the same way, but in the Super 70 there is a wood block to keep a distance for the higher cover?
Holmis, the thing I called fixing legs are for the side parts of the pickup where you make the pickup height adjustment. Some people said that this is not too common to have a leg in one side with 3 screw holes. I do not know really... but seems some early uncovered Yamaha pickups had the same legs and I saw a same Super 58 too. One thing is also sure... the pole distances on my Super 70 and the other are totally the same so I think even the chrome cover is changable. |
Holmis63
Username: Holmis63
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 4:38 pm: | |
If you like and want traditional rock sound i think you are going to like the V2:s, they screem when you crank them! Both the super80 and 58 are jazzier to my ears!
Iīve never seen an another brand pup with that configuration of the fixing legs, thatīs one of the things why i think itīs a ibz pup.
That is a nice ar100 youīve got there, is that a transition version? The AV colour looks like on the 2618..19 era Artists. Iīve got one ī80 ar100nt and that one has a "tiger" striped maple top!
Holmis |
Victor
Username: Victor
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 6:13 pm: | |
Holmis, I don't know if it is a transition version, but I bought it from its first owner and it is in original condition. Nothing was modificated. I checked the 1980 Ibanez catalogue and this instrument is there as AR100AV. Maybe 600 was a bit too much for it, but I don't think I will regret it. I am absolutely sure that there isn't any new instrument out there these days with this quality and price relation. |
Holmis63
Username: Holmis63
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, October 21, 2007 - 10:48 am: | |
You are right man! You will not regret it! If it said Gibson on the headstock, you would have to pay at least the double amount of money and got a guitar that couldīnt hold up to the ar100 anyway!
Holmis63 |
Victor
Username: Victor
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Monday, October 22, 2007 - 8:47 am: | |
I bought a '78 PF230 also. Not arrived yet. Does any of you have closer experience about this instrument? |