The Gibson ES-335

Great workmanship extends to all things made by humans. This vintage Colnago bicycle is exquisite and expensive. See how this relates to your guitar.

I think there’s a lot more to be said about 355’s. Outside of being under appreciated, they are also a very interesting sub group in the ES family that is set apart from the rest of the crowd in more than a few aspects. You could argue that the body is identical to a 335 and that it’s basically a tarted up 345 with some fancy bindings and inlays and an ebony fingerboard. But somehow, Gibson was able to get more than twice the price of a 335 for a top of the line 355. As I said in my last post, a 355 in 1960 was a $675 guitar and a 335 was a $335 guitar. Translated to 2014 dollars, a 335 would be the equivalent of  $2655. That’s a lot of money even today for a base model but, clearly, Gibson gets that and more at retail. You can pick up a Memphis dot for around $3000 new. A new 355 would still have the same upgrades as a 1960 but it sure doesn’t cost twice as much. A 1960 ES-355 in todays dollars would be $5350. If you use the simple logic approach, Gibson should be getting $6000 for todays ES-355 (double the 335 price). I’m pretty sure Gibson isn’t even making a 355 any more other than the “Lucille”. Custom Shop ES-355’s which they made until recently had all the bells and whistles of the early ones (except the stereo/Varitone) and they cost about the same as a Custom Shop 335. So, why did it cost twice as much in 1960 and it costs about the same now? Or is there more to a 355 than just some fancy window dressing. I contend that there is more than just cosmetics here.  And it’s all about the build quality.

A short detour, if you don’t mind…When I was in college, I worked at an upscale(ish) bicycle shop assembling the racing bikes that came in. We got base model Schwinns and Peugeots but we also got Cinellis, Colnagos and Masis and other exquisite hand made European bikes. Yeah, I put together the $80 Schwinns competently and the $125 Peugeots all worked adequately when I got them ready to sell but I was so much more meticulous with those $1000 exotics (this was 1971, so that’s almost $6000 today). Even though they went together more easily (more precise parts-the same as why it’s easier to set up a Gibson than it is a Teisco), I spent more time with them. Why? Because I respected the fact that someone was going to shell out some seriously big bucks and I wanted that person to get a seriously well assembled and tuned machine. The Schwinn guy? Hey, whaddya want for 80 bucks?

Well, I think that applies to the factory workers at Gibson as well. Pride in one’s workmanship is pretty universal among people who build stuff. Or at least it used to be. If you get the chance, look inside a 335. There’s usually glue squirting out along the kerfing and the center block. The routs are sometimes less than neat and the tuners don’t quite line up right on occasion. Then look inside an early 355. Neat as a pin, usually. It’s simply a higher build quality. Whether the better builders were assigned the higher end guitars or whether pride in workmanship was the reason, it is something worth your consideration. And I don’t mean to diminish the superior materials used either. The inlays in a 345 and 345 are cheap celluloid and they get pretty crapped up over 50 years and they shrink and fall out-especially block 335’s. The inlays in a 355 are real mother of pearl and they never fall out and they never shrink. Ebony used to cost a lot more than Brazilian rosewood and was considered superior (it certainly wears better). The quality of the plywood was often better too. Nicer grain, better figure, fewer flaws.

All that said, a 355 doesn’t sound any better than a 335. Some sound better, some sound worse and most sound pretty much the same. Some would contend that an ebony board sounds different but I can’t hear it. I can feel it but I can’t hear it. But damned if 355’s don’t seem to be better cared for and generally in better shape than 335’s. It’s like the guy with the $80 Schwinn. He probably tossed the bike in the dumpster in 1986 after it got left out in the rain for three years and rusted. The guy with the $1000 Colnago probably kept it in his living room and it treated like his baby. And when he was done with it in 1986, he gave it to his nephew who rode it in the Tour de France.

I never get tired of 355’s. This is a big neck 59 and they are not easy to come by. They made the neck smaller on 355’s long before they did it to the 345’s and 335’s. Workmanship is superb.

This is the only mono big neck ES-355 I’ve had. I’ve had a number of 59 monos but most had a pretty thin neck-wide but thin front to back. This one had a 58 FON but a mid 59 serial. I know, the neck pickup is upside down.

I have a kind of love/hate relationship with ES-355’s. I’ve called them a “335 tarted up like a cheap hooker” but I’ve also called them a “335 in a red tuxedo”. Yes, they can be heavy (Bigsby with a sideways) or they can be relatively light (mono version with a stop tail-rare but not unheard of). Interestingly, the ones I find are generally in unusually good condition. There is a pretty good reason for this. In the 1960 catalog, an ES-335 cost (duh) $335. A 355 was not, however, $355. It was more like $675. In 2014 dollars, the 335 would be $2655 but the 355 would be $5350. That’s a lot even today but the comparison of the 335 and 355 is the more important point. Would you pay double the price for some fancy bindings, ebony board and real MOP inlays? OK, maybe the wood was a little higher quality but it’s still a plywood guitar. The guts are the same as is the quality of the construction, although I could make an argument there which I’ll do in another post. The original selling price has a lot to do with why you find them in such good shape so much more frequently than you find 335’s in great shape. Look at it this way…who could afford a $675 guitar in 1960? Adults, that’s who. An adult who spends that much on a high end guitar is more likely to take care of it than a kid who bugged his parents to buy him an electric guitar. More 355’s are still in the hands of the original owners or their families than 335’s. That usually means better care has been taken.  The same is probably true if you compare a vintage Rolls Royce to an old MG. High end stuff gets cared for. That’s just human nature.

ES-355’s are also less desirable these days than 335’s. Everybody knows that-just look at the prices for 59’s. A 59 335 Bigsby (apples to apples here) in 9.0 condition is currently over $30,000. A 59 ES-355 in the same condition would be more like $18K-maybe $22K if it has double white PAFs and is a mono rather than the SVT version. These are retail prices and vary greatly dealer to dealer. Selling prices and asking prices vary as well. But let’s look deeper. The big deal with 59’s is the neck. A great majority of the buyers want a 59 ES 3×5 for the big fat neck. The later 59 ES-335’s with the “transitional” neck are a lot harder to sell than the early ones. In fact, I can move a 58 with a big neck faster (and for at least as much money) as a thinner necked 59-even though the mere mention of the year ’59 seems to carry some voodoo magic for some. But most of you want the neck. And that’s a problem with 355’s. You see, they didn’t follow the same timeline as the 335s and 345s. You want a big fat neck 59 ES-355? Good luck. The 335’s and 345’s necks started thinning out in the Fall of 59. Many and perhaps most 335’s and 345’s in the A31xxx and later range have a medium to thin neck, although fat necks can be found (in my experience) as late as the early Spring of 60. I’m sure there are later ones-they were hand shaped and anything is possible. But a 59 ES-355 probably isn’t going to have a big neck because the folks at Gibson started thinning the necks on them much earlier, although I couldn’t tell you why. I’ve had perhaps a dozen 59 355’s and, so far, only two have had that big ol’ 59 neck we all want so much. One of those two had a 58 FON but a later serial A306xx. The other is in the late A29xxx range. The 58’s all have big necks but good luck finding one-they only made ten of them. There aren’t a whole lot of 59’s out there to begin with and finding one will probably take awhile. It’ll take even longer if you want a mono. But if you want a mono 59 with a big neck, you better have some real patience. It’s pretty close to a Holy Grail. Oh, and a mono 59 big neck stop tail? I’m speculating here but I think there may have been three of them made. I know of one. If you happen to have the other two, I’ll take both of them please.

This is the only stop tail 355 I’ve had. It’s a 59 in the A314xx range. Nice guitar for sure but the neck was decidedly medium/thin.

Yikes. Why would anyone do this? Because it was 1972 and this was just a ten year old guitar back then and the owner wanted a cutout and a phase switch. Knock off two or three thousand bucks for each hole.

How many times have you asked that very question when examining a vintage guitar (or amp)? Somebody puts in mini-switches or spray paints the back of the headstock black or cuts a big hole in the back? The issue is, of course, issues (do I sound like an existentialist?). After decades of ownership (and many owners), most vintage guitars are going to have an issue. Tuner changes are probably the most common on ES’s but there are plenty of others. But issues like that are quantifiable. You know why they were done and they really aren’t hiding anything. You put Grovers on because the Klusons kind of sucked, although your tuning problem was probably not the tuners at all but the nut. Same with ill advised mods like adding a coil tap or putting in DiMarzios. Someone thought they were improving the guitar. That’s all 20/20 hindsight. Who knew back in the day that these old guitars would actually be worth this much money decades later? But what about the issues that don’t make much sense? You know, the ones that seem to be hiding something. I had a refinished 62 335 that had a piece of veneer over the back of the headstock. The guy who did it said it was to cover tuner holes from Grovers. The guy who bought it from me insisted it must be covering a headstock break-which, by the way, it wasn’t. I recently sold a 59 with a nickel sized spot of overspray at the top of the back of the headstock. Why would anyone do that? Maybe he smacked the headstock into a cymbal stand back in 1976 and took a chip out of it. Maybe he set the guitar down and the headstock was in the ashtray and got burned by a cigarette (which is what I think). Sometimes it’s just impossible to know why a repair or mod was done. These are the ones that worry most buyers and rightly so. They worry me a lot less because every issue gets priced in if I’m a buyer or a seller. The point here is that if the issue raises questions, then it’s really hard to quantify when pricing a guitar. If the issue is straightforward and clear, then it’s easier.

What about the ones with the ones with the little “2” on the headstock? They don’t come with a factory explanation as to why they got the “2”. They often have some factory overspray to cover a finish flaw but it could be something else. There is a theory that the “2” meant it went through some part of the manufacturing process twice (like finishing) to correct a flaw and that these aren’t “factory seconds” at all- just guitars that needed a second pass to be made right. Does that count as a repair and therefore a diminished value if it left the factory that way? I would say yes but it really depends on what was done. I’m sure more than one 335 left the factory with a twisted neck but it’s still a dealbreaker issue to me. Another (like that cool 59 I had with the deep, dark sunburst) may have left the factory with a partial factory respray done before the guitar was ever sold. Not a dealbreaker at all but I did discount the guitar pretty substantially even though it blacklighted perfectly. The 330 I have with the factory red paint in the f-holes (likely used for a black and white photo shoot) is actually kind of cool and doesn’t diminish the value at all, IMO.

Clearly, a case by case approach is the best way to deal with the issue of issues. I get asked to assign a value to various issues all the time but I prefer to take the guitar as a whole and evaluate it. Certain issues bother people more than others even though they may make no difference at all to the playability, tone or appearance. It’s pretty subjective, so you, as a buyer, should take the same “whole guitar” approach. If Bigsby holes in the top drive you nuts, stay away from those but if you can handle a big cut out in the back of the body (which is my number one dealbreaker mod), then you can save a lot of money and get a vintage ES that will play and sound as good as one that has no issues at all.

This 59 most likely left the factory like this because somebody messed up the sunburst and had to respray it. It blacklighted perfectly and had the little “2” above the serial number. It was one of the best 335’s I’ve ever owned and went for perhaps 20-25% less than it would have had it been perfect when it left the factory. If I could have proved beyond any doubt that it was factory original, it would have sold for more. Unfortunately, they don’t come with an explanation.

Royal Olive sunburst, Not the most attractive finish concept from the Kalamazoo folks. But rare? On a Casino, you bet.

Here it is without that pesky hangtag in the way. This ones a bit faded. It’s even uglier when it isn’t.

I don’t always give Gibson/Kalamazoo era Epiphones enough coverage here. They are great guitars and I’ve mentioned how much I love my 59 Sheraton. Recently, I acquired a pretty rare one. It’s a 61 Epiphone Casino. That’s the first year they made them and that’s pretty rare to begin with. Casinos had their own color scheme at the beginning. Most of them were a color called “Royal Tan” which was, essentially, a washed out sunburst. Neither Royal nor tan. But these early Casinos are somewhat different from the “Beatle” Casinos that get all the attention. The headstock was different for the first few years-it was shorter and more Gibson like than the long headstock associated with Epis from ’63 on. Paul’s had the short headstock but John and Georges had the long one. A lot of the features follow a similar timeline as the Gibson 330 which is nearly the same guitar. The inlays on the early ones were dots but they switched to little parallelograms at some point in 62 at around the same time the 330 went to blocks. The pickups went from having black covers to having nickel ones during 63.  Ok, so I got a 61 and there aren’t very many of them. But this one is different from any 61 I’ve ever seen. There was another color in the Epiphone/Gibson palette called “Royal Olive.” Not exactly Royal, but definitely olive. This is a green to yellow sunburst that is pretty strange-a kind of so ugly it’s attractive vibe. Royal Olive Epiphones are not that rare in the Sorrento model (single cut-one or two mini hums-thin body). But this is the first Royal Olive Casino I’ve run across. Sunbursts tend to fade over the years and it would have been easy to have just considered this one an oddly faded sunburst but it is quite distinctly green. As some of you may know, the back of a 330 and Casino sunburst is solid brown. This one is solid brownish green (not sure what they were thinking here). The previous owner wasn’t even aware that the guitar was Royal Olive-he described it as sunburst. But he had the hangtag and it said “Special” with the letters RO written next to it. I pointed this out, of course and arranged to buy it. I won’t say it’s the only one-they made a few hundred Casinos in 61 and I’m sure a few exist in this color. The 61 catalog offers the Casino in Royal Tan or “shaded” finishes. I assume the shaded was a more conventional sunburst while the Sorrento was offered in RO. The 62 catalog touted RO as a “striking new color” but, again, only on the Sorrento. The 62 catalog also shows the Casino with nickel pickup covers and parallelogram inlays. I guess they had a lot of dots and black covers to use up  because just about all of the 62’s I’ve seen have the 61 features. casinos, like 330’s are wonderful old guitars but they have their limitations. They will howl like an impaled werewolf at high volume and the upper fret access isn’t quite like a 335. But, at civilized volumes or just sitting on the couch, they are great. I love the rarities and the oddball colors but any Casino is worth owning. They tend to command a “Beatle” premium which is kind of strange because some iconic Beatle guitars don’t. Country Gents and Tennesseans are downright cheap. Hofner basses aren’t all that pricey either. SG’s are up there but probably not because George played one. And I think the little Ricky 325’s are as high as they are because they are so rare. But a 60’s Casino? That relatively big number (compared to most other Epiphones from the era) is The Fab Four talking.

According to the catalog, Royal Olive wasn’t an option. Nor was a trapeze tailpiece. Also the text says shell guard and it’s clearly white. Didn’t they have proofreaders in 61?

Iconic photo of John with the “stripped” Casino on the Apple rooftop.