Used ES-165 opinions please
Joey Goldstein
So I just tried out the guitar shown in the above ad today.
There may be some question as to what model year this really is. The ad
says 2003 but I could have sworn the guy told me it was 1993 when I was
at his house trying it out. I've just sent him an email asking him to
clarify this.
I liked the way it sounded, comparatively better than my 1990
(maple/mahgonay) ES-175, both amplified and acoustically.
I A/B'd both guitars with my amp at his house.
It didn't appear to have any issues as far as playability.
The bridge sits a little close to the edge of the pick-guard for correct
intonation, but his strings were really old. I'm guessing that with
fresh strings the bridge would end up being a bit closer to the tail-piece.
The only downside on the guitar was the state of the "gold plating" on
the hardware. The hardware pieces (tuning pegs, pickup cover, ABR-1, and
tail-piece) all feel sort of rough and partly corroded but not really
visibly corroded, i.e. not smooth.
This seems odd to me for a guitar this young, even if it is a '93.
There are no nicks in the finish that I could see and the fret work is
almost like new.
The case was seriously mangled by the guy's cat but it appears to be
functional.
He's asking $2k Canadian for it.
I'm seriously considering buying it.
What would be a good price for a mint used ES-165 these days?
Do you think that this is a good deal at $2k Canadian or not?
I've heard that many of the ES-165s used the 490R pickup instead of the
57 Classic. Anybody know how I could find out what pickup was used on
this guitar?
--
Joey Goldstein
<http://www.joeygoldstein.com>
<http://homepage.mac.com/josephgoldstein/AudioClips/audio.htm>
joegold AT primus DOT ca
paul
ibanez pat metheny in pretty short order. I got it in 97, in 3 years
half the finish of the pickup was worn off, along with a lot of the
bridge, exposing the silver underneath.
--paul
335
> <http://toronto.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-sell-musical-instruments-Gibson-ES...>
I've seen them selling in the 1500-1700 range. I had a mid 90s model
with the set humbucker. It was a good guitar but somewhat more
feedback prone than the 175 I'm playing now.
oscard
I have an early 90s set p'up ES165 and it also has seriously tarnished
gold finish, and this appears to be typical of the 165s from that era,
for whatever reason. I see these go on ebay from time to time in the
$1400-1500US range if you are prepared to wait and to buy without
trying. Given that you played this one and liked it, that would be
worth a couple of hundred bucks to me for peace of mind. You should be
able to run a serial number check on the Gibson Dater site (http://
www.guitardaterproject.org/gibson.aspx) to get a firmer handle on the
date. Either way, the price is not outrageous - and if the seller
decides to follow standard Ebay practices, he might just take it off
the market before you buy it and put it back on later for $500
more :)
Paul Mitchell Brown
> <http://toronto.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-sell-musical-instruments-Gibson-ES...>
>
Joey,
It looks like a sunburst version of mine which is also a '93:
I'm not too sure when Gibson ditched the routed pickups on their 165s
for floaters but just about everyone agrees that it was a change for
the worse. They also moved the volume knob onto the guard, got rid of
the tone control and redesigned the tailpiece. As for the gold finish,
mine is a little tarnished around the pickup but the rest is OK. Gold
plating seems to age pretty quickly on guitars that get regular use.
Try some Silvo (not Brasso - it's too abrasive). At any rate,
replacements won't break the bank and the price of the guitar seems
reasonable to me. The pickup is probably a 490R if it's a '93 but
don't quote me on that - stats don't seem easy to come by.
Did you find that the sound was a little brighter than your 175? I've
got no complaints at all about mine although being a lefty I haven't
had a chance to make real comparisons. Some people complain that
feedback is a problem due the greater wooden surface area (only 1
pickup) but I used mine on a couple of gigs last week and found it
coped admirably. One was a straight jazz gig but the other was a
harbour cruise depping gig where I used the 165 for a Chuck Berry
medley and I had no real problems - incredible really considering it
was inside the cabin and it was LOUD.
Joey Goldstein
It's not on eBay, as far as I know.
Joey Goldstein
>
> I'm not too sure when Gibson ditched the routed pickups on their 165s
> for floaters but just about everyone agrees that it was a change for
> the worse. They also moved the volume knob onto the guard, got rid of
> the tone control and redesigned the tailpiece.
I'm not even considering the new 165s with the floater.
Not for me.
I just want a good guitar with "that 175" sound.
My 175, as purty as it is, doesn't really do it for me.
> As for the gold finish,
> mine is a little tarnished around the pickup but the rest is OK. Gold
> plating seems to age pretty quickly on guitars that get regular use.
> Try some Silvo (not Brasso - it's too abrasive).
The pics actually show the tarnishing of the tail-piece pretty well.
I misspoke about there being no visible tarnish.
I wonder how much good simply cleaning it with Silvo will do.
I don't really care all that much about the cosmetics angle myself. I'm
just thinking about how it might affect re-sale value, just in case. And
I'm wondering if maybe this guy's price might be just a shade too high.
I promised that if I was going to buy it that I wouldn't 'nickel & dime'
him though.
> At any rate,
> replacements won't break the bank and the price of the guitar seems
> reasonable to me. The pickup is probably a 490R if it's a '93 but
> don't quote me on that - stats don't seem easy to come by.
Turns out it actually is a 2003 model, which makes the corrosion all the
more weird.
Still think it's a 490R?
If it is a 490R then it doesn't sound as bad as I thought it would based
on what I've rad about them.
> Did you find that the sound was a little brighter than your 175?
I don't really find my maple/mahogany 175 all that much darker overall
than the all maple ones I've A/B'd it against.
Acoustically the maple/mahog guitar sounds darker than the all maple ones.
But amplified, it's got more mids, less bottom and a more prominent top
end. I.e. I find the all maple instruments to be darker when amplified
with the tone control rolled off.
But this 165 had really old Chromes (.013) on it. It might sound a lot
brighter with new strings.
It sounded more musical *to me* than my 175 both acoustically and
amplified. It's got more of what I associate with the typical ES-175
sound. And it may even sound a bit more sophisticated than that because
of its acoustic qualities - owing to the less-routed top.
Like I said, I liked it.
> I've
> got no complaints at all about mine although being a lefty I haven't
> had a chance to make real comparisons. Some people complain that
> feedback is a problem due the greater wooden surface area (only 1
> pickup) but I used mine on a couple of gigs last week and found it
> coped admirably. One was a straight jazz gig but the other was a
> harbour cruise depping gig where I used the 165 for a Chuck Berry
> medley and I had no real problems - incredible really considering it
> was inside the cabin and it was LOUD.
I didn't really check it for feedback. D'oh.
But I was playing pretty loud and sitting right in front of the amp in a
small room, and there was no problem.
dwabeslim
> <http://toronto.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-sell-musical-instruments-Gibson-ES...>
>
IMO If you really dug the guitar Carpe Diem !! I've let a few
nice guitars get away because the price was slightly high and always
regretted it. A bird in the hand and all that
Greg
Keith
Joey:
I live near you and I bought an ES165 recently. I shopped around a bit
and have an idea of what they are going for around our neck of the
woods. I am very pleased with mine - it holds its own compared to my
vintage ES175's. If you want to talk, email me at keithmurch-at-
gmail.com
On Nov 18, 8:35 pm, Joey Goldstein <nos...@nowhere.net> wrote:
> <http://toronto.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-sell-musical-instruments-Gibson-ES...>
>
Joey Goldstein
> Joey:
> I live near you and I bought an ES165 recently. I shopped around a bit
> and have an idea of what they are going for around our neck of the
> woods. I am very pleased with mine - it holds its own compared to my
> vintage ES175's. If you want to talk, email me at keithmurch-at-
> gmail.com
Hi Keith
Thanks for your input.
I'm real busy so I won't get a chance to talk to you about this before I
make my decision.
There's a real good chance I'm going to grab it.
Of course, now that I've been publicizing it here maybe someone else
will grab while I'm making up my mind. If so, then that's the way the
cookie crumbles.
ScotGormley
Joey, I've been playing my 165 a lot over the past few days. It's one
of the early ones. It definitely has a 490R pickup, but I would not
let that discourage you. This guitar has "my" sound, for sure. Based
on the recordings I've heard of you, you can get your sound from this
guitar. A lot of body to the sound, with good definition.
I've been comparing the 165 to my L4 and L5 Montgomery, and it
favorably compares with both. When I bought the L5 several years ago,
my think was "If my 165 sounds this good, the L5 should really knock
it out of the park." However, although I am happy with the L5, I have
found that the L5 does not sound, feel, or play $3K (or more)
"better."
I bought my 165 for $1,800 new from Sam Ash in Columbus, Ohio, but it
was really shop worn, with dents and dings.
dwilliams
> The only downside on the guitar was the state of the "gold plating" on
> the hardware. The hardware pieces (tuning pegs, pickup cover, ABR-1, and
> tail-piece) all feel sort of rough and partly corroded but not really
> visibly corroded, i.e. not smooth.
> This seems odd to me for a guitar this young, even if it is a '93.
>
> There are no nicks in the finish that I could see and the fret work is
> almost like new.
>
> The case was seriously mangled by the guy's cat but it appears to be
> functional.
>
> He's asking $2k Canadian for it.
> I'm seriously considering buying it.
>
> What would be a good price for a mint used ES-165 these days?
> Do you think that this is a good deal at $2k Canadian or not?
>
> I've heard that many of the ES-165s used the 490R pickup instead of the
> 57 Classic. Anybody know how I could find out what pickup was used on
> this guitar?
>
> --
> Joey Goldstein
Last month I bought one from a guy who listed it here. Paid $1600 for
this 1994 model in excellent condition, including the original case.
The gold stuff is a little tarnished, but not more than I would expect
from an instrument 15 years old. I felt the price was about right and
have not been disappointed.
Dave Williams
tom walls
>
Ad says "bought it new in 2003", that doesn't necessarily mean it's a
2003 model. Might easily be a 2002. $2k Canadian seems a little high,
but being that you've played it and like it -- that means a lot.
mikeo
and the 5th digit appears to be a '1', but it is blurry, so perhaps is
a 2.
i like this model and if it were me, i would use metal polish to
remove all the gold finish and leave it silver. the gold gets yucky
fast and it looks like this one may be there already.
good luck, Joey.
JoeJazz2000
new. I like it very much, but it lost gold-plating off the tuner
buttons after only a year or so. I finally got tired of the feel of
the tuners without the plating so I replaced them with ebony buttons
that fit the Grover minis that came on the guitar. The rest of the
plating is ok. Mine has the 490R also.
Can't comment on price, but it delivers classic neck-pickup 175 tone
in an attractive package. I don't understand the later changes to the
model with the floater and all that. A set pickup was a big deal to
Herb Ellis; he wouldn't have played a floater. The other, two-pickup
HE model had routed pickups but, I don't see it as an improvement
either. This is my favorite ES-175 variant.
Joe
Joey Goldstein
Only time will tell if I actually bond with it like I didn't do with my
175 though.
I think I might just be *really* neurotic.
I'll probably start loving the 175 now.
Joey Goldstein
> So, I bought it.
>
> Only time will tell if I actually bond with it like I didn't do with my
> 175 though.
> I think I might just be *really* neurotic.
> I'll probably start loving the 175 now.
>
>
>
We settled on $1800.00 btw.
tom walls
ahh... that's much better. If you decide you don't like it, you'll
probably be able to sell it for that much.
Paul K
> So, I bought it.
>
> Only time will tell if I actually bond with it like I didn't do with my
> 175 though.
> I think I might just be *really* neurotic.
> I'll probably start loving the 175 now.
>
I'd like to hear a reasonably hifi comparison, if that's something you'd care
to do.
>
>
--
http://www.youtube.com/TopologyPaul
http://www.soundclick.com/paulkirk
Dan Adler
> > So, I bought it.
>
> > Only time will tell if I actually bond with it like I didn't do with my
> > 175 though.
> > I think I might just be *really* neurotic.
> > I'll probably start loving the 175 now.
>
> We settled on $1800.00 btw.
Congratulations! Lets hope you bond with it!
I think a celebratory clip would be in order!
Jonathan (Cleve)
It always gives me a vicarious thrill to see other people spend THEIR
money on guitars.
Congrats, Joey... Hope it's the love of your life.
Joey Goldstein
No real excuse, but I don't really do clips.
Just shy I guess.
Joey Goldstein
>
> It always gives me a vicarious thrill to see other people spend THEIR
> money on guitars.
Lol.
De Baseaball bena' berry good to me lately.
David J. Littleboy
"Joey Goldstein" <nos...@nowhere.net> wrote:
> Joey Goldstein wrote:
>> So, I bought it.
>>
>> Only time will tell if I actually bond with it like I didn't do with my
>> 175 though.
>> I think I might just be *really* neurotic.
>> I'll probably start loving the 175 now.
>
> We settled on $1800.00 btw.
Congrats on the new axe. I've always been a fan of the ES-165, and probably
should have bought one instead of the PM-100, for which, despite being happy
with the sound (and really happy with the playability), I was never able to
come to terms with the aesthetics...
Whatever. Do report on how you like it.
--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
bigdog
......just kidding!
david
Mr. ES_175
a nitro friendly cleaner/polish a low abrassion metal cleaner and
fretboard oil. Retails for 16 at L&M. This thing erased belt scratches
and pickup tarnishing on mine
good luck!
sheetsofsound
> <http://toronto.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-sell-musical-instruments-Gibson-ES...>
>
>
> There may be some question as to what model year this really is. The ad
> says 2003 but I could have sworn the guy told me it was 1993 when I was
> at his house trying it out. I've just sent him an email asking him to
> clarify this.
>
> I liked the way it sounded, comparatively better than my 1990
> (maple/mahgonay) ES-175, both amplified and acoustically.
> I A/B'd both guitars with my amp at his house.
>
> It didn't appear to have any issues as far as playability.
>
> The bridge sits a little close to the edge of the pick-guard for correct
> intonation, but his strings were really old. I'm guessing that with
> fresh strings the bridge would end up being a bit closer to the tail-piece.
>
> the hardware. The hardware pieces (tuning pegs, pickup cover, ABR-1, and
> tail-piece) all feel sort of rough and partly corroded but not really
> visibly corroded, i.e. not smooth.
> This seems odd to me for a guitar this young, even if it is a '93.
>
> There are no nicks in the finish that I could see and the fret work is
> almost like new.
>
> The case was seriously mangled by the guy's cat but it appears to be
> functional.
>
> He's asking $2k Canadian for it.
> I'm seriously considering buying it.
>
> What would be a good price for a mint used ES-165 these days?
> Do you think that this is a good deal at $2k Canadian or not?
>
> I've heard that many of the ES-165s used the 490R pickup instead of the
> 57 Classic. Anybody know how I could find out what pickup was used on
> this guitar?
I sold mine for around $1400 a few years ago but I see them going for
higher now. They are great guitars.
Paul K
> Dan Adler wrote:
>> On Nov 20, 1:46 am, Joey Goldstein <nos...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>> Joey Goldstein wrote:
>>>> So, I bought it.
>>>> Only time will tell if I actually bond with it like I didn't do with my
>>>> 175 though.
>>>> I think I might just be *really* neurotic.
>>>> I'll probably start loving the 175 now.
>>> We settled on $1800.00 btw.
>>
>> Congratulations! Lets hope you bond with it!
>>
>> I think a celebratory clip would be in order!
>>
>> -Dan
>> http://danadler.com
>
> No real excuse, but I don't really do clips.
> Just shy I guess.
>
PK
Joey Goldstein
Turns out that all that "tarnish" I talked about was mostly just dirt.
It cleaned up real nice and looks almost new now.
But after putting fresh strings on it, as well as a 57 Classic, I'm not
digging the sound the way I thought I would. It's real bright.
D'Oh!
And it does feedback quite easily.
Double D'Oh!
Joey Goldstein
> Joey Goldstein wrote:
>> Dan Adler wrote:
>>> On Nov 20, 1:46 am, Joey Goldstein <nos...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>>> Joey Goldstein wrote:
>>>>> So, I bought it.
>>>>> Only time will tell if I actually bond with it like I didn't do with my
>>>>> 175 though.
>>>>> I think I might just be *really* neurotic.
>>>>> I'll probably start loving the 175 now.
>>>> We settled on $1800.00 btw.
>>> Congratulations! Lets hope you bond with it!
>>>
>>> I think a celebratory clip would be in order!
>>>
>>> -Dan
>>> http://danadler.com
>> No real excuse, but I don't really do clips.
>> Just shy I guess.
>>
> Too bad; the clips on your soundclick site are really good.
>
> PK
Thanks Paul.
I generally hate the whole process of recording and I especially hate
listening back to my playing.
But I'd probably be a much better player if I recorded more and listened
more to those recordings I guess.
If I didn't enjoy the actual playing so much I probably would have quit
by now.
Jonathan (Cleve)
>
> Turns out that all that "tarnish" I talked about was mostly just dirt.
> It cleaned up real nice and looks almost new now.
> But after putting fresh strings on it, as well as a 57 Classic, I'm not
> digging the sound the way I thought I would. It's real bright.
> D'Oh!
>
> And it does feedback quite easily.
> Double D'Oh!
I'll give ya $1,600 for it! :-)
Paul K
> Thanks Paul.
>
> I generally hate the whole process of recording and I especially hate
> listening back to my playing.
is that true even weeks (or months, or years?) later?
> But I'd probably be a much better player if I recorded more and listened
> more to those recordings I guess.
> If I didn't enjoy the actual playing so much I probably would have quit
> by now.
>
--
http://www.youtube.com/TopologyPaul
http://www.soundclick.com/paulkirk
Joey Goldstein
> Joey Goldstein wrote:
>
>> Thanks Paul.
>>
>> I generally hate the whole process of recording and I especially hate
>> listening back to my playing.
>
> is that true even weeks (or months, or years?) later?
lol
even moreso
>
>> But I'd probably be a much better player if I recorded more and listened
>> more to those recordings I guess.
>> If I didn't enjoy the actual playing so much I probably would have quit
>> by now.
>>
>
--
oasysco
>
> - Show quoted text -
I agree! I had yours for awhile and loved it.
Greg
oasysco
Feedback can be semi-cured with Doug's Plugs ($65 shipped). The
brightness issue may be a result of the pickup in that guitar which I
think is a 490, not a 57 Classic. That said, I really liked the tone
of the 490 when I had Jzucker's 165 for awhile, but I can't remember
how bright it was.
Greg
Joey Goldstein
I replaced the 490R with a 57 Classic when I put the new strings on and
cleaned the guitar up.
But I just put the 490r back on today and I find it less shrill and less
bassy and more mid-rangey than the 57.
Generally I think the 490 sounds better on this guitar.
Paul Mitchell Brown
> I replaced the 490R with a 57 Classic when I put the new strings on and
> cleaned the guitar up.
> But I just put the 490r back on today and I find it less shrill and less
> bassy and more mid-rangey than the 57.
> Generally I think the 490 sounds better on this guitar.
>
> --
> Joey Goldstein
> <http://www.joeygoldstein.com>
> <http://homepage.mac.com/josephgoldstein/AudioClips/audio.htm>
> joegold AT primus DOT ca
Thanks for saving me the effort, Joey. Not that I'm unhappy with the
490R - just curious how a '57 would have sounded instead.
oasysco
That was my recollection, too. I remember feeling the guitar sounded
smoother. And I love those pups in the Howard Roberts model, which I
think sounds great, too for any kind of music.
That said, 57's sound really good on my 175 - warm, round. I have
never thought changing them out.
AFAIK, the 165 and 175 are the same except for the pups and single vs
dual pups - unless there's a dif in the cap values in the wiring, so
the 490's might make a good pup for the 175, but I like mine as it is.
On my ex-135's (I had about 4 of 'em along the way) the 57's were just
too bright for jazz and when I darkened up the tone, it got a little
fuzzy in the neck position.And on more recent ES335s, bright may not
be strong enough a word, but they certainly do sound pretty.
Greg
>
> --
> Joey Goldstein
> <http://www.joeygoldstein.com>
> <http://homepage.mac.com/josephgoldstein/AudioClips/audio.htm>
> joegold AT primus DOT ca- Hide quoted text -
Greger Hoel
<nos...@nowhere.net>:
> But after putting fresh strings on it, as well as a 57 Classic, I'm not
> digging the sound the way I thought I would. It's real bright.
> D'Oh!
Maybe you should try a pickup from a PM100 :P
--
Always cross a vampire; never moon a werewolf
David J. Littleboy
"Greger Hoel" <gre...@blowme.com> wrote in message
news:op.u3w24gu5hywuuo@meanmachine...
> P� Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:17:13 +0100, skrev Joey Goldstein
>
>> But after putting fresh strings on it, as well as a 57 Classic, I'm not
>> digging the sound the way I thought I would. It's real bright.
>> D'Oh!
>
> Maybe you should try a pickup from a PM100 :P
Even better: leave that original PM-100 pickup in its original PM-100. (If
you want dark.)
ScotGormley
>
> - Show quoted text -
The 490R definitely emphasizes upper mids, which I really like. I have
those pickups in a Les Paul custom, and they sound great there, too.