The new Dave Grohl Gibson DG-335

robertoriginal

the one and only pro of lament,

it does not warp,(as easily) thats it, period, thats the main reason why someone would want that certain gibbson over a custom mad archtop.

but then again, i have never known/ heard of a 4 mm thick maple top to buckle under the pressure of an archtop bridge.

you can get pre shaped laminent plates from stu mac for like 100 bucks a peice, its way too high for what they are i know that.

gibson is the one of theonly manufactuers that does multiple solidbodies and archtops that are readily accepted tho. and for 4 grand a peice you may as well check out bennedetto, or MB in st. louse and get one for about 3.

Spitfire

I've never played a carved top hollow, what's the difference soundwise? Does it make that much difference on something like a 335 when you've got a solid block?

Fran

The solid block is supposedly a 'sustain block', and i imagine the sound would be superior to a copletely hollow body. Not to mention feedback problems.

On the subject of hollow bodys did'nt chuck berry stuff his guitars with cotton wool because he got pissed with feedback?

Spitfire

I don't think that's Chuck, he always plays ES345s and 355s with the centre block. You might be thinking of Billy Duffy, he stuffs his Gretches with strips of cloth. I've got an ES335 and it's very feedback resistant, my Gretsch 6120 on the other hand is a real howler. At stage vols I often need to stand to the side of the amp. I've stopped gigging with the Gretsch now because it can be such a problem.

What I meant about sound is why is a laminated top so inferior to a carved top in a guitar like the Lucille which is practically a solid body anyway?

Fran

I thought Duffy stopped using the White Falcon after the 'Love' album? Did'nt he go all RAWKOUS with Les Pauls and Aerosmithic riffage.

Spitfire

He stopped using them for a while I think but when I saw him in that 'supergroup' thing he played in last year he was using a Chet Atkins. Not sure what he's using on the new Cult album though.

robertoriginal

on a normal gibson the center block doesn't even really touch the top or bottom, and on something like a 335 there is not a HUGE difference, but there is definitly a difference,

i played jeromys epi dot and then the one i made for him side to side and the one i made for him is much heavier and has a better all around balance in terms of acoustic quilities, electric quilities and just being able to have a strap on it without it diving at the neck end.

i have also played a tru carved hollow body(1940's something epiphone, new york factory) and a number of laminent hollows.

and there is a huge difference in sound, a laminent sounds really...... thin to me compared to the epi i played,

but then again, the wood is 60+ years old and it has had time to "settle" quit nicely.

sttawke

How can Gibson justify getting so far behind in being able to offer real guitars for realistic money? "Getting better"? That's bull####. As PRS moves further into the mainstream, Gibson is leaving it. It's like the two of them are swapping sides. PRS used to be all "Hey, fancy paying a premium for a custom made piece of art?" whereas Gibson used to be "Want a rock guitar that will last for years?". Now it's almost the opposite. Which is bizarre, because PRS are still thrashing Gibson into the ground in terms of build quality, sheer value (!), and sound. And versatility.

robertoriginal

thats a really good observation ek, i say that mainly becuz i konw two people that are 45+that were gibson players and now they are playing prs, for whatever reason.

Fran

sttawke said: How can Gibson justify getting so far behind in being able to offer real guitars for realistic money? "Getting better"? That's bull####. As PRS moves further into the mainstream, Gibson is leaving it. It's like the two of them are swapping sides. PRS used to be all "Hey, fancy paying a premium for a custom made piece of art?" whereas Gibson used to be "Want a rock guitar that will last for years?". Now it's almost the opposite. Which is bizarre, because PRS are still thrashing Gibson into the ground in terms of build quality, sheer value (!), and sound. And versatility.

Er... HELLO! They are offering realistic guitars foe realistic money. The three models i mentioned.

What sub-500 guitar do PRS offer? The SE Tremonti and Soapbar? I dunno you tell me. If you say them two they are not superior to the Junior or SG.

Still, some of what you say is true in general terms.

matte30is

I wish prs would buy gibson and make the gibson guitars.

or something......

sttawke

sttawke said: How can Gibson justify getting so far behind in being able to offer real guitars for realistic money? "Getting better"? That's bull####. As PRS moves further into the mainstream, Gibson is leaving it. It's like the two of them are swapping sides. PRS used to be all "Hey, fancy paying a premium for a custom made piece of art?" whereas Gibson used to be "Want a rock guitar that will last for years?". Now it's almost the opposite. Which is bizarre, because PRS are still thrashing Gibson into the ground in terms of build quality, sheer value (!), and sound. And versatility.

THREE GUITARS. That's abysmal.

PRS have a whole budget range, encompassing nearly all of their major, top-bracket guitars in a cheaper form. I'm pretty sure the number is up to around five or six different models, with the same range of finishes available on the pricier guitars. That's excellent. I mean, that's really unprecedented with most guitar brands nowadays. They're so confident in that range that they are still kept under the PRS brand, and not shuffled into some other company as though they're ashamed of having made a guitar cheaper than one of their royalty models. Here's a good example of an absolutely amazing model from PRS:

That guitar has an RRP of around

robertoriginal

i hate how prs has those "compensated bridges" that work well for 9-10'b but anything else and you have to install a new bridge.

i know i have seen that same bridge, except gold plated on a 4k prs.

Fran

sttawke said: How can Gibson justify getting so far behind in being able to offer real guitars for realistic money? "Getting better"? That's bull####. As PRS moves further into the mainstream, Gibson is leaving it. It's like the two of them are swapping sides. PRS used to be all "Hey, fancy paying a premium for a custom made piece of art?" whereas Gibson used to be "Want a rock guitar that will last for years?". Now it's almost the opposite. Which is bizarre, because PRS are still thrashing Gibson into the ground in terms of build quality, sheer value (!), and sound. And versatility.

I can only thibnk of three off hand. Its a similar situation to Gibson what you are stating. The PRS models may be marginally better in terms of quality but they are not Gibsons.

As much as it sucks Gibson can use their name to exploit the market, plus the SG and Junior are legendary guitars as used by some of the greats.

PRS is growing but has a long way to go and it didnt help them when all them faggot metal bands started using their gear.

Quality is only part of the sale. Look at UK builders like Gordon Smith and Patrick Eggle. Great guitars, fairly priced but who gives a ####? No one. Coz no one credible springs to mind that uses them...

I'm gonna shut up now because i'm reminding myself how fickle and dumb the music industry is. I want to stay in a good mood tonight.. 😆

Spitfire

I still subconciously associate PRS with the likes of Charvel, Jackson, Ibanez, and BC Rich. Like Fran says the name became tainted with hair and leather trousers and once that happens it takes a long time to shake off.

Whilst I agree that Gibsons are unjustifiably overpriced, and that PRS probably offer a similar if not better build quality, I can't get away from the fact that (to me at least) Gibson guitars look much, much, much sexier.

Fran

Spitfire said: I can't get away from the fact that (to me at least) Gibson guitars look much, much, much sexier.

There is that as well. PRS offer how many variations on shapes? One i think. Also PRS guitars are too clean cut and shiney if that makes any sense, its a guitar you sit and polish after every gig.

The Junior and SG are fun, they are rock and roll, they mean business and command respect.

They also have their own tonal identity, especially the Junior. I cannot think of any 'moment' in music where i or any else has said "listen to that! that's a PRS...".

I suppose Alex Lifeson should have achieved this but to be blunt, he could easily be playing any guitar from the recordings i have heard. Great player though.

Lou

When I saw Rush a couple of years ago Alex Lifeson used a different guitar on every song.

Fran

That would explain it 😆

He was the main PRS dude for years though.

Lou

And I do mean every song...literally. And the played well over 20 songs too!

didn't know he played PRS before.

BanditGuitarist1

I had a PRS with single coils, and it buzzed like a mother####er! It was so annoying so I got rid of it after a month, quality yes but sound not so much, very generic and buzzy.

« Previous Page Next Page »