Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Other Guitars, other instruments' started by 3-Chord-Genius, Nov 11, 2017.
Color me "weird", but I actually kind of prefer the Epi head. Different strokes.
but , really with Gibsons lack of quality control , there is no difference between Gibson and Epiphone, I own an early 70's gibson SG ( Norlin era ) and a 96 Les Paul and there is a HUGE difference in the quality of these guitars , I ownd an Epiphone scroll (also Norlin era) and it was better made than my 96 LP
Even though I’m a guitar gear guy, I find that I’m paying less and less attention these days to what gear folks are using and more attention to what and how they are playing. I’ve observed essentially zero positive correlation between the quality of headstock logos and talent among up and coming acts. Most of the time, my gear is better and my playing is worse so why get hung up.
I think the Epi headstock is classy. It's just too long - harder to find cases that fit.
The Epiphone headstock looks wrong on guitars that Epiphone never made in the 1960s, like Les Pauls and SGs. It's fine on a Casino or Riviera.
I have one Epiphone guitar, and its headstock is shaped exactly like a Gibson's:
I don't like the Epi headstock at all. It seems like it's getting longer on some models. I don't care for a long hour glass shape for the headstock on a Gibson off chute. I had an Epi John Lennon acoustic and it wouldn't fit in a generic Gator hard case because the headstock banged the top of the case, the guitar wouldn't go in.
I do have an Emily the Strange SG that I used for drop D rock covers in a band. I love the graphics and I won't sell it.
Generally speaking.....I see that headstock and I just think Qingdao China. It's like the Gibson executives want those guitars to be spotted at 100 feet away as being the B brand.
Historic series get the nod from me regardless of headstock...
Having said that I am quite fond of my 1988 EPI 335. Which has a Gibson Harness in it, and I think the original PUs. Although they are so good as to give me zero motivation to take them out, so not positive about if originals, but I have had it for about a decade I guess.
Both of my Epi's have Gibson shaped headstocks!
It's never really bothered me. But I will say my favorite Epi headstock was the one that was basically the Gibson shape, but narrower at the top. Similar, but different enough to delineate the two lines.
Oh, that or the batwing headstock on the Wilshires...
I've got an '89 Custom, made in Korea for sale in Japan. It's got a modified version of the Gibson headstock. It's slightly wider at the bottom of the headstock than a Gibson.
The pickups started going microphonic and the electronics were cheap, so I put in a pair of GFS Crunchy Pats and replaced everything inside. It's been my workhorse for rock gigs for years.
I'm a big Epi fan. I have three Epiphones, so not quite the size of herd as yours, and the Gibbys seem to me to be too expensive, but I respectfully disagree with your quality assessment. Just the electronics alone are quite a step up in Gibsons. My wife's 2016 Gibson LP Studio is quite impressive.
I don't play any headstocks so unless I'm tuning it's like it's not even there.
I relating to the year by year where gibson had some really bad years , my 96 studio LP is not as playable as my 70's SG, and recently at Long & McQuade I saw a 3600.00 les paul unboxed it a water slide decal of the MOP gibson logo on the headstock, a minor corner cut by gibson but in in the past unheard of. this MHO thats all, I do agree with the electronics as you stated, the SG is hand wired and the LP has the circuit board design.
I certainly care what instruments look like. Design is part of the whole experience. How it feels is related both in a physical and mental sense to how it looks.
I dislike the epi headstock. It's too large in my view. But not just in terms of looks. The headstock/truss rod/neck construction on gibsons is notoriously weak. Epi took that weak point and added more mass at the very end of the neck! It's like they said "how can we add to the likelyhood of the headstock snapping off?" It's not a big difference, but as everybody understands a small change at the makes a significant difference in balance and strength. think that's part of why I think it looks too big: it's structurally a bad idea
In a word....no
I once had a set neck P90 DC Les Paul. The headstock was not elongated like usual. I thought it looked a lot better shorter. One I should have maybe kept as it was quite a nice axe.
I don't have a problem with Epiphone headstocks, either. They're, typically, pretty good guitars.
I prefer the Gibson look; it seems more refined to me. It’s not the selling point for me though. I hate the super thick poly finish on any guitar. If Epi had a nice nitro finish, the headstock wouldn’t matter.
Have you guys ever saw Lucero?
Ben Nichols came right out on stage at the Ryman Auditorium with his Epi plugged into a Blues Junior and rocked the place. The headstock nor the poly finish bothered him.