The Gibson ES-335

Modify this? Are you out of your fu...oh, hello. Below is a post about how to turn your 345 into a 335. Don't do it if you have a red 59 like this one.

I’ve avoided writing this post for nearly two years because I don’t like to modify guitars but just because I don’t like it doesn’t mean you aren’t going to do it anyway and you might as well do it right. In addition to your ES-345, this also applies for rewiring a stereo ES-355. Before you do anything, ask yourself what you don’t like about your 345. Can’t deal with the stereo? Don’t like the Varitone? Think the Varitone is sucking all the tone out of your guitar? Don’t like the added weight? If the stereo aspect bothers you but you still find the Varitone useful, just have the guitar rewired for mono, keeping the Varitone in the circuit. You can eliminate a bunch of weight by removing one of the two chokes (inductors) as well. Just save the parts because the next guy might want it put back to stereo. Changing the guitar to mono isn’t simply a matter of swapping out the jack. The pickups in a stereo guitar are wired to the three way instead of the volume pots, so you have to rewire them to make the controls work as expected. Also, the pickups in a stereo guitar are out of phase with each other. Reversing phase in most situations just means reversing a wire but in this case, we’re talking about magnetic phase. Reversing the wire to one pickup won’t fix it. So here’s the bad part…You’ll have to take the cover off one of the pickups-I would suggest the neck pickup since it is easier to remove from the guitar-and flip over the magnet. To do this, you would partially unscrew the four philips screws on the bottom and  also loosen the pole piece screws. That should loosen up the bobbins to the point where the magnet (and the wooden spacer) will probably drop right out. If it falls out then you have a problem because you won’t know how it was oriented to begin with and you literally won’t know which end is up. So, take your time and hold the pickup so that you can slip the magnet out. If it’s stuck, there’s usually enough sticking out that you can grab it with a pair of needlenose pliers and pull it out. Once out, flip it over-top to bottom like a pancake-not end to end. Tighten all the screws and put the cover back on and don’t forget the maple spacer-it probably fell out. If you decide you don’t like the stereo AND you don’t like the Varitone, then you may want to wire it like a 335. You could modify the harness but I would suggest not doing that because when it comes time to sell the guitar, the buyer might want a stock 345 and he won’t want yours unless the mod can be easily and cheaply reversed. The simple solution is to remove the entire harness and the chokes. They come out easily but they don’t go back in easily. Take my word for it. Get a pre built 335 harness from RS, Mojotone or Dr. Vintage. Mojotone is the cheapest but they are a little fragile. Dr. Vintage is the most robust but its also the most expensive. All sound good. Remove the stereo VT harness including the VT switch and choke. Put it somewhere safe, like the case pocket. Install the 335 type harness as per the instructions. I suggest putting a dummy switch in the Varitone hole or plugging it with something removable. The ring and chickenhead look pretty cool if you ask me and I would leave them attached to whatever dummy switch you put in there. It could also be a dummy pot or even something functional. Your guitar will still look like a 345, it just won’t sound like one.  If you want a stereo guitar but not a Varitone, then you have a very simple option-you can simply disconnect or remove the choke from the circuit and the VT will cease to function. Good mod or bad? You can decide that. I like my 345s to be 345s and my 335s to be 335s. If I could only have one guitar on a desert island (that had electricity and a Fender tweed of some sort-preferably a big loud 2 channel one), I’d go with a 59 or 60 ES-345 but that’s just me. Want to learn more about varitones? Go here. It was written by my friend and resident tech guru, Chris Wargo. If you want to go totally geek, then read this one too.

1959 ES-355 mono. Who knew there would be a zebra in the bridge and a double white in the neck? I love an extra added bonus, don't you? It's in the "sweet spot."

This is not a post about racial equality but it is a post about equality or its lack. As guitar aficionados, we are strange. That’s clear. Nuts? You bet. Obsessive? Uh huh. Eccentric? Erratic? Insane? Well, maybe. What is it about PAFs that gets everybody’s heart racing? I play a 64 most of the time and it doesn’t have PAFs and I’m fine with that. It sounds great and that’s mostly what I care about. But consider this…Between July 2011 and July 2012 I bought approximately 65 Gibson guitars (mostly but not all ES’s). Mostly but not all from the PAF era. Mostly and I mean almost completely, double black PAFs. Out of, say, 120 Gibson humbuckers during that period, I think there were six double whites and one zebra. It’s true that folks have been scavenging them for years now but 98% of these guitars had their original pickups. The larger reason is that I bought a lot of 60-64s and they don’t usually get the whites or the zebras. And why should I care? The black ones sound exactly the same as the white ones and with the covers on, they look the same too. So why (oh why) do I get so damned excited every time I get a 59 or early 60 ES. Whyizzit I can’t wait to see what color the bobbins are? Well, they are worth more. Period. It’s like a treasure hunt…something for nothing. I don’t generally ask a seller what color the bobbins are because I don’t want them messing with the pickups (and I don’t want them raising the price). But you can bet as soon

Early 60 with double whites. It don't get much better than this. Ok maybe a stoptail.

as I get the guitar, I check them out. I’ve also learned that there’s a “sweet spot” in the serial number sequence where the white PAFs seem to congregate. It certainly isn’t foolproof but, in general, I know when to expect a white or zebra and when to expect a black-at least with the nickel covered ones. With the gold ones, all bets are off. In the past 2 months, I’ve acquired around 12 ES guitars with PAFs from 1959-1961. An astonishing 6 of them have had at least one white or zebra PAF. Let’s look at the serial numbers of the whites and zeebs I’ve found in the past couple of years. The nickel ones had serial numbers in the A306xx-A309xx range. that’s a pair of zebras and 2 pairs of whites. The gold ones show a wider range -the earliest gold covered whites or zebras I found were a zebra and a white in A306xx and another zebra in 309xx and a pair of zebras also at 309xx (2 numbers away). Two late 59 ES-345s both at serial A321xx had whites and the blonde ES-345 I bought had whites and was serial number A323xx which is an early 60. Then, I found another pair of zebras in (gasp) a 61 ES 355. Serial was not even an “A” serial but a four digit numbers only type. So, perhaps the “gold sweet spot” is less a spot than a blob. But there is a pretty big contingent of them at A321xx-A323xx. As players and enthusiasts, we care about tone and playability, so why would anyone pay an additional few thousand dollars (EACH) for white bobbins as opposed to black ones? I look at it something like this: There’s a scene in the Broadway version of “Kiss of the Spider Woman” (and maybe the movie too, although I couldn’t sit through it) where the window dresser character insists that the mannequin in his window had to have a Balenciaga scarf in her handbag. You couldn’t see it but he would know it was there and it was vital to his design (and comfort) that it be there. Because “she would have one”. I think whites and zebras are a little like that. You can’t see them under the covers but isn’t it nice to know they’re under there? As an aside, none of this applies to Les Paul guys who wear their Balenciagas, I mean their white PAFs, without covers for all to see. Showoffs.

Two of these have double whites. One of them is, uh, the refinned one on the right. That looks cool but it also looks wrong. Leave the covers on. Isn't it enough that you know there's a white under there?

The area in the black mark is a delamination-the plywood is coming apart. It looks like a bubble under the wood. Generally the problem is cosmetic and not worth losing sleep over unless it keeps getting worse.

OK, the title is a little misleading-you should look for a guitar you love the sound of and that is comfortable to play. I’m going to talk about things to look for that might (but perhaps shouldn’t) keep you from buying that guitar. I’m talking about the things that can be wrong (or go wrong) with these guitars. Every guitar has strong points and weak points. Les Pauls can be overly heavy, SGs have weak neck joins, Firebirds can be neck heavy and on and on. One of the reasons I like 335s and their brethren so much is that they don’t have a lot of weak points. There are things to look for however. The weakest point actually is more Gibson related than specific to ES’s and that is the ABR-1 bridge. Nothing will sink your tone faster than worn or over notched saddles or a collapsed bridge. The good news is that its a really easy fix. To check an ABR-1 to see if it has collapsed, remove the saddles and turn in upside down on a flat surface, If there’s any space between the top of the bridge and the flat surface, it’s collapsed. Get a new one or replacement. If the strings are more than halfway under the top of the saddles, get new saddles or file down the tops of the saddles until that is no longer the case.  The weakest point on just about any Gibson guitar is the headstock. Think it’s easy to spot a crack? Well, usually it’s pretty obvious but don’t take anybody’s word for it. Get out a magnifying glass and a blacklight if you have one. I know of a 63 that was sold at auction recently to a dealer who has more experience with 335’s than I do. He had it for weeks before finding the crack and may never have found it had he not been tipped off by another expert who noticed it at the auction and told me about it. Next, take a look down the fingerboard. There are a lot of dips and rises that can be adjusted out with the truss but there is one that is common that can’t be. ES’s seem to be prone to a slight rise at the area where the fingerboard meets the body. That’s an area in which most of us don’t  play much and it may make no difference at all for you but you should be aware of it. The fix for this is pretty easy as well-a fret level will usually take care of the problem-the rise will still be there but as long as the frets are level, it won’t adversely affect playability. Another weak point is the ground wire on a stoptail version. The ground wire is an uninsulated single heavy gauge strand of wire than goes from the stoptail bushing through the center block and attaches to the braid on the neck pickup lead. What often happens is that when the harness is pulled for any reason, the wire gets broken. It’s kind of brittle and doesn’t improve with age. If it breaks at the pickup end, its no big deal but if you break it off at the stud end, it is a somewhat involved process to replace it-often requiring the removal of the stud bushing-something best left to a repair shop. You could run a thin wire from the pickup lead to the bridge post under the pickguard and it will work fine but it won’t be correct and you’ll see it if you look closely. The last thing to look for are cracks and delamination in the top or back. It’s no secret that ES’s are made of plywood and plywood is held together with glue and glue can give up over time. A delamination will usually be raised and will look like a “bubble” in the wood. You can sometimes move the wood by pushing down on it as there is usually air beneath it where the glue gave way (or never existed).  There is also often a crack at the delamination point. Don’t confuse finish checks for cracks in the wood. It’s easy to do so. A check usually can’t be felt with a fingernail, although that isn’t always true. If the line appears to go beneath the finish to the wood (and follows the grain), it’s probably a crack. There is good news here as well. Because cracks and delaminations generally only affect the top ply, they are neither structural nor do they affect tone. They don’t look that great but they shouldn’t deter you from buying if you like the guitar. Just be aware that they will diminish the value somewhat-not unlike a major ding or scrape.

Note the last few frets (and the binding) are going slightly uphill. This is pretty common and not too hard to fix as long as it isn't to severe.. It requires a fret level.

This early 65 has the "2" stamped above the serial number. Can you see a flaw? It's the bridge pickup. It's slightly rotated clockwise one or two degrees. It should be parallel to the neck pickup but it isn't. I'm sure it has zero effect on the tone and zero effect on the value.

No, that isn’t when you go back up to the Gibson lunch counter for another plate of hash, that’s when a little number “2” gets stamped above or below the serial number indicating some element caught the eye of the QC folks. The QC department was probably one or two workers who spent a minute or two with each finished guitar looking over the fit and finish and giving it a few strums to make sure it played OK. Gibson wasn’t cranking out vast numbers of guitars until the mid 60’s at

This 64 has the "2" above the serial number over to the right of center. The "2" is smaller than the serial number font. On others, I've seen the 2 under the serial in the same font as the serial.

which point the QC department would have had to have gotten much larger. There’s a big difference between knocking out a few dozen guitars a day and a few hundred. Even so, the percentage of factory seconds seems very low and the flaws are generally imperceptible. Most often, it’s a tiny finish flaw-but sometimes it was something more sinister. The first question I usually get when I have a factory second is “does it lower the value of the guitar?” Conventional wisdom says no. If you can’t see the flaw, then the appearance of a tiny number “2” isn’t going to make much, if any, difference. If you can find the flaw and its something benign, like a drip or run in the clearcoat or a dark spot in the red dye, then take off a buck-nobody cares. But there have been some other flaws that I’ve seen that might set off an alarm or two. There was the 65 with the splice in the wood in the cutaway. The dealer insisted it was from the factory that way (the guitar had the “2” stamp) but I thought it was a repair-a really good repair. Could it have come from the factory that way? I suppose it could have but if I was the QC guy, I would have labelled it “BGN”. BGN? WTF? “BGN” stands for “bargain” and is stamped on guitars that have more serious flaws. Unlike the factory seconds, I’ve heard that “BGN” guitars were sold only to employees of Gibson and not the general public..  BGN guitars have more obvious flaws like veneer separations or poorly aligned center blocks or neck joins. I don’t believe a simple finish flaw is a ticket to the “BGN” bin. Generally, on a factory second,  I can’t find the flaw or it’s something really, really minor. I had a 63 ES-345 with a couple of clear coat drips on the headstock. I recently sold a stunning 64 ES-335 that had a small spot on the back where the red dye was applied a little too heavily. But it isn’t always the finish. I have a 65 factory second that has a poorly placed bridge pickup. It’s cocked about 2 degrees off its proper axis. The rout is straight but the assembler who screwed the ring in had a few extra martinis at lunch that day. There are plenty of flaws that don’t qualify as factory seconds but we’ll cover that another day. One final note-Gibson no longer sells factory seconds. According to the Gibson CEO (in a forum post), they are sawed in half and thrown away. The rationale is that Gibson no longer “condones” mistakes which is sort of noble, I suppose, but it seems a waste of resources. Worse than that are all the stories I hear about new guitars being returned to Gibson for serious flaws. Granted, you don’t hear about the good ones but if errors aren’t condoned, then we shouldn’t be hearing about returns, should we?

Note the BGN stamp between the tuners. This guitar would have had a flaw more serious than a paint issue but not necessarily one that would affect its playability or vintage value. Thanks to my friends at Southside Guitars for the photo.

Here's a nice example of a set of bonnet (or "bell") knobs from the nice folks at Vintage Correct parts. There's a link for their store over in the links. Nice guys, too.

It’s not a millinery convention, it’s a post about knobs. I’ve covered them sort of peripherally in the posts about plastics but there are some finer points and dates that merit a little more detail. The first ES models had the “bonnet” or “bell” type knob. You know, the Les Paul type that are gold colored and are numbered 1-10. These are also called tophats by some but I usually refer to the later reflector type as a tophat.  All 58 and 59 ES-335s and 345s had them (except the 10 or so red ones that have surfaced).  The earliest  ES-355s had them too but most 355s of the era have the same knob in black. Of the ten

These are reflectors-"short shaft" on the right and "long shaft" on the left.

made in 1958, the three or four that have surfaced all have the gold bonnets. Once red guitars became standard issue, the black knobs became common but not for long. Most, if not all 1959 ES-355s have black bonnets and  a few early 60 335s and 345s (in red) have them as well. By early 1960, the first reflector knobs showed up. I suppose it was important to someone that the knobs were designated as tone and volume on the knob itself. After all, it can be pretty confusing to have four knobs with no labels-at least for the first 20 minutes you own the guitar. Reflector knobs (which I call tophats) come in a few sizes and shapes. The earliest ones are what I called “short shaft” where the opening for the pot shaft is positioned very low in the knob. It seems this type lasted into early 62-more or less. After that, the shaft was set farther into the knob-probably to make them fit more flush to the top of the guitar. The reflector knob was in use at Gibson well into the 70’s but not on the 335. They came in black and in gold. They also came with silver reflectors and gold reflectors. As they age, it can be hard to tell the silver from the gold. As you might expect, the gold insert gold knobs were for sunburst ES-345s and the gold insert black knobs were for ES-355s and red ES-345s. If you’re lucky enough to own a sunburst 355, it would have a gold knob with a gold reflector insert. I know of exactly two of them. By late 66, the ES-335 and its brethren got the witch hat knob which looks suspiciously like a Fender amp knob. To my eye, witch hats never really looked right on a guitar-maybe because we were all so used to seeing blackface and silverface fender amps by the time Gibson decided to change the knobs on the ES series. They are called witch hats because they look a lot like a witch hat. Duh. The transition occurred right near the end of 66. Most 66’s have reflectors and virtually all 67s have witch hats. There are enough other ways to date your “on-the-cusp” 66-67 that the knobs-which are easy to change anyway, aren’t a critical dating feature. The 335 kept the witch hats until the 81 reissue dot neck was released which went back to a somewhat modified bonnet knob-now more amber than gold and with a slightly shallower slope to the sides. Wait, what about “speed” knobs. You know, the barrel shaped knobs that were on early goldtop Les Pauls? Didn’t they show up on 335s too? Well, actually, they show up a lot but not from the factory. Given that nothing Gibson ever does is totally consistent, I wouldn’t be surprised if a few slipped through that way. I can just see the assembly guy on a Friday afternoon in July. He just finished a batch of ES-335 “Pro” models (which did have speed knobs as did the ES-347) and he has one more standard 335 to knock out before quittin’ time. He’s got a pile of speed knobs on his table and no witch hats. Whaddya think he’s gonna do? Go all the way across the room to grab 4 witch hats from the bin or stick on the speed knobs that he already has? It’s Friday. It’s July. It’s hot. Duh.

Here's a set of witch hats in their native habitat. Note the inserts are gold. If they're silver, they should be on a red 335. 345s and 355s got the gold inserts no matter what color they were. Walnut finishes normally got the gold.

The serial number on this ES-355 is 1981 indicating that it was shipped in 1961 but the factory order number is R5401 21 which means they built the body in 1960.

Everybody knows about serial numbers and how unreliable they became by the mid 60’s. There is, however,  another number in many older Gibsons that will be a big help in dating your guitar. The bad news is that it won’t help you during the period when Gibson was reusing serial numbers with reckless abandon-three, four or more times over the course of a few years.  The Factory Order Number (FON) was used by Gibson from 1952 until 1961 as a sort of in house inventory system. At the very beginning of the construction process, a number was stamped in the body of the guitar that began with a letter prefix. They are usually visible through the treble side f-hole. They seem to be some kind of batch number but I don’t know of anyone who has truly deciphered the system. I can’t even tell you if the numbers are unique or whether they followed some “batch” numbering system. Where they are very useful is for guitars that seem to be at the end of one year or the beginning of another. During the period of 1959 to 1960 and, 1960 to 1961 there were a number of transitions going on in the ES series. You might have a guitar with a 61 serial number that still has a long guard, or a 60 with a big 59 neck or 59 type knobs (no reflectors) or even a combination of features that seems to contradict the year indicated by the serial number. This is especially true of 345s and 355s. Because they were relatively low volume sellers (especially 355s), they may have been

Not easy to see but thats a FON.

stored at the factory in partially finished form for a number of months. For example, I have an ES-355 with a short guard and a white switch tip-both associated with 1961. The factory order number is from 1960, however. The likelihood is that this guitar was built in 1960 but not fully assembled until there was an order for it which apparently came in sometime in 1961-hence the later serial number and later features. I had a wonderful blonde 1960 ES-345 that had a most un 1960 like big neck (although not as big as an early 59) and bonnet (non reflector knobs). It was an early January build and had a 59 FON. So, why didn’t it get the later knobs? Probably because the transition to the reflector knobs was still going on. When the guitars were assembled, I’m sure all the workers cared about was whether the knobs all matched. It was probably easier to grab the older type because you didn’t have to pay attention to whether they went on a tone pot or a volume pot -so my assumption is that was what they did until they ran out of older knobs. You will see amber switch tips into 61 but you will also see white ones at the end of 1960. I’ve seen 61’s with long guards and 60’s with short guards. These kinds of “anomalies” can call the originality of a guitar into question. Enter the FON to save the day. All most folks need is a reasonable explanation as to why a guitar  doesn’t strictly conform to the accepted norm and an earlier build date (FON) with a later serial number can explain a lot. Here are the prefixes (they go in reverse) 1952=Z, 1953=Y, 1954=X, 1955=W, 1956=V, 1957=U, 1958=T, 1959=S, 1960=R and 1961=Q.

It's a crappy picture, I know but its a very unusual serial number. This 60 ES-345 (that had a short guard) has the FON stamped on the orange label. Never seen another like it. I thought it might have been relabeled at some point and the only number available was the FON but that looks like the work of the Gibson folks to me. Also it says "Stereo Varitone" across the label and extending onto the wood. Let's see you fake that convincingly. In case you can't see it, it read R8022-8

This is a stoptail 61 weighing in at 7.5 but the scale is only accurate to a half pound so it could weigh as much as 8 or as little as 7 lbs. This is not the best way to weigh a guitar. Fortunately, I don't sell them by the pound.

That’s about how much a good stoptail block neck 335 will cost you.  Your car, even a pricey one like a new Porsche, is relatively cheap and might cost you $20 a pound-about the same as a good filet mignon. My old ’97 Volvo wagon cost me around $1.50 a pound-half the cost of the cheapest hamburger. Gold will cost you about $24000 a pound which is pretty close to what a burst will cost you. Imagine, a solid 24k gold burst. Eight pounds of gold at 1500 an ounce or so. That’s $192,000 which won’t get you the cream of the crop but should get you a nice one. Now $2000 a pound  doesn’t sound so bad, does it? Most people ask the weight of a guitar they are interested in buying and rightly so. After all, a gigging musician is going to spend a few hours with the thing slung over his or her shoulder and a few ounces could make a considerable difference. The weight range of ES-335s from 58 to 68 runs from around 7.25 lbs to just over 9 lbs. That’s a pretty big range. A 345 or a stereo 355 will weigh as little as 8 lbs and as much as 9.75 lbs-perhaps even 10 lbs. My problem is that I don’t have a really accurate scale, so I generally get on the bathroom scale with and without the guitar in question (which is only accurate to a half pound) and at least get in the ballpark. An average stoptail 335 (or trapeze) weighs just over 8 lbs. There is a chart on Tom H’s 335 page that you can check out here. I believe the variation comes largely from the varying densities of the wood involved-specifically, the maple block and the mahogany neck. I’m sure there’s variation in the plywood as well but probably not that much. There have been discussions-arguments, fights, shouting matches, even pissing matches-over what role the weight and density plays in the tone of the guitar. Frankly,  I don’t know. I’ve played absolutely killer 335s that weigh 9 lbs and killer 335s that weigh 7.5 lbs. Weight doesn’t seem to correlate to resonance in any direct way either. The only reason I can see for looking for a lighter guitar is to make it easier on your shoulder. I’m not saying that the physical characteristics of the wood don’t affect tone, I’m simply saying that there is no apparent direct correlation between weight and tone. It isn’t just the wood either. For a Bigsby, you can add about 6 ounces (it weighs more than that but presumably, you’re subtracting the weight of the stop and studs). A Varitone switch is only a couple of ounces but that choke weighs at least 8 ounces. That’s a lot of weight to add to an 8 lb guitar. If you’ve got a stereo 355 or a Bigsby equipped 345, you could be looking at a close to 10 lb guitar. Yikes. I generally don’t advocate removing the Varitone but if my favorite guitar weighed 10 lbs, I’d have to consider it. If you have Grovers or Schallers replacing your lightweight Klusons, you’ve probably added another 3 ounces. If you’ve converted your trap tail to a stop, check to see that the stop is one of the lightweight aluminum ones. You’ll save 2 ounces if you switch from the heavy zinc one to the aluminum.  It adds up. I could probably make the argument that light gauge strings weigh less than medium gauge but that would be nitpicking. Again, I’ll emphasize that the weight of the guitar seems to have no direct correlation to tone. It does, however have a direct correlation to pain. Especially at my advanced age.

This '60 345 had one teeny ding in the headstock and a little pitting in the gold on the trem. Other than that, it looked unplayed. The case was even better. Even the pull ribbon on the case pocket was not only intact but still looked ironed.

I’ve already done my rant about calling guitars mint or near mint or mint for their age and all the other silliness that the “m” word engenders. But there is another aspect to it that can be more than a bit vexing. You pay a serious premium for a mint guitar. It can be 50% or more over the cost of a “merely” excellent example. Collectors seem to gravitate toward the museum pieces and I can’t blame them. If I were a serious collector, I’d want one of everything in the best possible condition. One dot neck in each color, one block neck in each, one 345 and one 355. True mint is truly rare. Out of approximately 200 ES-335s, 345’s and 355’s I’ve had come through the OK corral, only 2 have been truly mint and perhaps another 5 or 6 approaching that status. Here’s the dilemma-and I’ve had to discuss it with every buyer who has asked for a mint piece: Are you going to play it? Gig it? Owning a museum quality guitar comes with another price. It won’t stay museum quality if you play it too much. The occasional hour here and there probably won’t make a difference over the course of a few years but, rest assured, no matter how careful you are, the condition won’t get any better. Donn’t get me wrong, I love buying mint examples. I’m always awed at the fact that something can be as old as I am and still look new. Mint cases even more so. But I don’t think I could own one. I play every guitar I own (I don’t actually own that many) and I play every guitar I sell. The mint and almost mint ones scare the crap out of me because so much value is tied up in the condition. All I need to do is forget to close the closet door and turn to my left and WHAM, it isn’t mint any more. Mint carries a responsibility, I suppose. Unless you have more money than you know what to do with, the reason you paid the premium for a mint guitar is to have the best example there is. If you don’t take very, very good care of it, it will cease to be that. So, not only do you have a responsibility to the guitar but perhaps a responsibility to your wallet and the next buyer. “It was mint when I got it” doesn’t mean much to the next guy once you’ve worn the frets down. On the other hand, it’s your guitar and you owe it nothing. So, play away and enjoy it. It was mint the day it was bought by the original owner 50 years ago and he probably rarely played it (which is why it’s still mint). Just don’t smack it into the closet door.

The 59 on the right is 1.642 and the 64 on the left is 1.776. that's a difference of close to 10%. Seems like a lot to me. The early ones 58-59 tend to be thinner than the later ones.

We all know them as “thinlines” -so named because the body was thinner than the normal archtop. If you aren’t already aware the ES-335TD stands for ElectricSpanish-335-Thinline Double (pickup). If there’s a C on the end, then its a cherry finish. A N means blonde (or natural). You guys all knew that or if you didn’t, you’d never admit it. Gibson is notorious for being wildly inconsistent with regard to the specifications of its guitars during this period and body depth is perhaps the most inconsistent of all. The factory spec for body depth is 1.75″ but a quick check of my current inventory shows a range from 1.642 to 1.776. That’s a difference you can see (and probably feel after standing with the guitar over your shoulder for a few hours). A quick check of Tom H.’s es-335.net site shows a chart that indicates different depths even within the same year. I don’t measure every aspect of every 335 I get (although perhaps I should start doing so) so I donn’t really have a database that’s any better than Tom’s. I’m going to guess that when they cut the strips for the sides, they weren’t really all that concerned about getting the width of the strip dead on to the factory specc. If there was an end that was a little wide or a little narrow, so what. It was barely noticeable and probably had no effect on the build. Or did it? Wouldn’t it make sense that the center blocks would be precut to size? So, if the body was deep enough, there might be an air space between the top of the block and the top of the guitar? There is normally a piece of spruce between the flat top of the block and the arched top of the guitar but was that custom fitted or precut? Without tearing a bunch of guitars apart, I have no way to know, so we’ll just have to forget that aspect for now. There is certainly some kind of relationship between the depth of the guitar and the weight. But it isn’t consistent, so I don’t think there is any judgement to be made as to whether a “deep” 335 is better than a “shallow” one.  It appears to have become more consistent by 64 settling down at the deeper 1.7716″. I don’t have any later 335s to measure at the moment but I’m guessing that it stayed pretty consistent as they streamlined the process to accommodate the huge increase in orders that occurred during the guitar boom of the mid 60’s. It wasn’t just body depth that was all over the place either. Weights are always a crapshoot since individual pieces of wood have different weight characteristics like moisture content and density. But so are nut widths as you can see on the same chart on Tom’s site. We’ll get into that in some depth down the road.

The case on the left is a Gibson badged 61 that is 5" deep. The one next to it is a Lifton badged 61 that is 4.25" deep. Both are cases that came with "original" 355s. Both brown cases are 4.5" deep and are both from 59 335s. The one on the right is a Stone and the one next to it is a Gibson badged. What guitar is supposed to go in the 5" (outside measurement) case? An ES-350? A 175?

I’ve written about cases a few times and covered the various manufacturers and changes. Recently, I’ve begun to notice some discrepancies in the presumably original cases that have been arriving at the OK corral. Here’s what keeps happening. I’ve been getting a lot of 1959 through 1963 335s and 345s in brown and black cases-nothing unusual about that-but here’s the weird thing-more than half of them are the wrong size. The correct Gibson badged ES-335 case is just under 4.5 inches deep. Lifton badged cases tend to be around 4.25″. Stone cases come in around 4.5. I don’t have an Ess and Ess on hand but they showed up later, anyway. Strangely, I’ve gotten a number of 5″ deep cases and I wondered what was going on? What guitar was this case supposed to fit? Even in the correct vintage case, a 335 tends to move around a good bit in its case but when the case has an extra half inch or so in there, it’s even worse. I have a 2″ piece of foam that I set on the strings that keeps the guitar from moving when the case lid compresses it.  The easiest part to change on a guitar is the case and lots of guitars end up with cases that are from a different era. But why would a vintage piece, from its original owner have the wrong case? The answer is deceptively simple. The new guitars would show up at your local music store-usually in a case-and would be unpacked and taken out of the case for display. No music store is going to sell many guitars if they don’t take them out of the case and put them up on the wall. The cases would be stacked up or leaned against a wall in the “back room”. I remember going into Manny’s on 48th Street when I was a kid to buy my first serious guitar. I wanted an Epiphone Crestwood and they brought one out for me to play (it was Inverness Green and horrible looking). I didn’t like it and asked to play a Fender instead. They pulled one off the wall and I ended up with a brand new 64 Jaguar and they put it in a brown case. All my friends played Fenders and they all had black cases which looked so much cooler. I was only 12 but I spoke up. The sales guy yells to a guy in the back room “hey Lou, bring me a black Fender case.” The guitar fit and I was off. The point is that they didn’t care whether they gave you the right case. They cared about whether the guitar actually fit into the case. They didn’t care much about how well it fit-just that you could get it in there and shut the lid. They didn’t carefully label each case as the guitar was removed in order to keep the guitar with the case it showed up in. It just wasn’t that important. At least until you tried to fit an ES-350 into an ES-335 case which was all you had left because you kept putting 335s into 350 cases.  So, my theory is that even if the case is wrong for the really expensive vintage guitar you just bought, it doesn’t mean that the seller is lying. In fact, the chances seem pretty good that the case you have for your guitar isn’t the case it showed up in. If there are a dozen semi hollow and hollow Gibsons in stock at the time yours was bought, the sales guy had an 8% chance of getting the right one. It may have been the correct one (a 335 in a 335 case) but it may not have been the one that it showed up in. Here’s another wrinkle. Most dealers offered a cheap cardboard case and a hard case (and you paid extra for the case-it wasn’t included). So, if a bunch of buyers cheaped out, there could be a glut of hard cases in the back room. I’m not certain if Gibson always shipped in a case-I’m assuming they generally did but the dealers also probably bought cases in separately so they could offer a range of them. In 1968, when I was 16, I was back at Manny’s buying an SG Standard. I had called to ask them how much it would be and brought the exact amount of cash. The case wasn’t included. Somewhere, there is a 68 SG in a vintage correct case (I bought one later) but the “original” case is a cardboard box.

Here's another photo. Why do Gibson badged brown cases handles turn blue? Another nice thing about early cases is that the handles are metal and they don't break like the plastic ones that show up in 63.