The Gibson ES-335

It’s kind of an ugly word and it has lots of ugly connotations. A crack kills an awful lot of guitar deals and often, it kills them for me. But there are an awful lot of ways that wood can crack and some are a lot worse than others. It’s important to understand what cracks are benign or cosmetic and what cracks are a flashing red light with sirens and bells. Wood is durable and fragile at the same time. It can be extremely flexible and extremely rigid. It will take a lot of abuse but only up to a point and then it gives up, usually all at once.

Wood has grain and is weaker along the grain lines. A quarter sawn neck takes advantage of the strength across the grain and makes for a stable, strong neck. The cracks we see in a guitar neck are often the result of trauma. The guitar falls off the stand and the headstock cracks (or breaks off). No wood will withstand a fall every time. Headstock cracks can be an easy fix with little effect on the playability and tone once properly glued up. They can also be impossible to fix. The conventional wisdom is that the glue is stronger than the wood. That’s true but only if the repair is done properly. That’s another post. I generally avoid guitars with headstock repairs but I’ve had plenty of them over the years that have caused no problems at all. The ones I have had that have caused me trouble usually re-break right at the repair which, of course, calls the conventional wisdom into question.

Another common neck break, especially in 335’s, is the truss rod crack. Guitars with a very slim (front to back) depth have very little wood between the truss rod and the back of the neck. When overtightened, the neck will crack vertically-usually along the grain. The crack usually starts at the third fret or so and can extend from 1″ to as much as 14″ in a very straight line. Folks call it a check, a scratch…anything but a crack. A crack means big trouble to most folks. But a truss rod crack really isn’t that big of a deal. It’s really mostly cosmetic. There is very little stress in that direction-the force vector of a strung up guitar is perpendicular to the neck (remember your high school physics). So, it isn’t likely to get worse unless you overtighten the truss rod again. I’ve had my luthier float a little super glue in there but that’s not even necessary in most cases.

Sticking with 335 cracks, there is another type that is largely cosmetic but cause all sorts of anxiety in buyers. A top crack on an acoustic guitar is kind of a big deal. The top is what generates most of the sound and a crack will diminish that. In a 335, there isn’t a whole lot of top vibration (due to the center block) so a top crack is less of an issue. On top of that, the crack in the top (or back) of a 335 is usually limited to the top ply of the plywood. It is most unusual for plywood to crack through more than one ply. So, even with a top crack, there isn’t a significant amount of disturbance to the vibration of the top. ES models made of plywood do this a lot. The top ply will crack from changes in humidity or temperature especially where the wood in the plies is different ply to ply. Different woods will expand and contract at different rates and when that happens, something has to give and it’s usually the top maple ply. Also, you can’t see the other plies so who would know?

There are cracks to the rim which can be trouble in a deep body guitar but rarely in a 335 or other thinline. They simply don’t happen very often. The crack in the headstock between the tuners (or just beneath them) is a pretty frequent issue. Sometimes it’s a separation in the “wings” of the headstock which isn’t a crack at all-it’s just a glue issue. If the crack is between the tuners, then it can be significant. get it glued up and it shouldn’t cause any further trouble. It can happen when tuners are changed and the new screws are slightly larger than the old ones. The headstock veneer on a 335 from the 50’s or 60’s is holly. It’s a hard, brittle wood that takes the black paint very well. It also cracks really easily. If you come across a guitar with a crack between the tuners, look to see if it goes all the way through the headstock. If it doesn’t, it’s not a big issue and won’t cause problems later. If the crack goes all the way through the headstock and you can see the same crack on the back of the headstock, then have your luthier look at it. That can be trouble but is easily fixed.

Lastly, we all love the thin top 335’s made in 58 (and a few in 59 and even 60) but they are prone to cracks around the area of the jack. A straight plug puts a lot of stress on the top due to the leverage caused by the length of the plug. Again, go back to your high school physics-you see it wasn’t a total waste of time. A 90 degree plug reduces that stress so a top crack around the jack is less likely. Too late if your 58 already has them (and more than half of them do) but as long as you’re careful (and use a 90 degree plug, it shouldn’t be a big issue. It is fixable. My luthier fixed my blonde 58 by gluing a round layer of wood inside the guitar around the jack hole. The area is much more stable now.

A crack doesn’t have to be a dealbreaker. One of my personal players has a “smile” crack at the headstock and was probably repaired 30 years ago and has never been an issue. A well executed repair can save you thousands. A cosmetic crack can also save you significant money even though it will never get worse or cause you trouble. So, is a guitar with no cracks of any kind more desirable than one with a small crack somewhere? No, the crack free guitar will always be more money and more desirable but if your heart says you must have a dot neck and your budget says block, maybe you should look at a dot with a crack somewhere. An experienced luthier will know whether it will be trouble down the road.

This type of crack is generally limited to thin top 58’s but is possible on later 3×5’s as well. This early 58 was repaired by essentially adding a layer to the plywood inside the guitar. it is totally stable now.

If you aren’t looking too closely, you probably won’t even notice that this 64 has a repurposed wrap tail. Sometimes they would drill out the holes and sometimes they leave everything as is and the string ends stick out. It’s fairly common 62-64 but seems most likely in 64

Many of us consider 1964 to be among the best of the vintage 335’s. No PAFs (usually) but the neck is so right for so many people that it trumps just about everything else. After nearly four years of very slim necks, the heft was back and while we may not have been delighted back in 64, we certainly are now. But 64’s have some weirdness along the way some of which makes perfect sense but some is simply, uh, weird.

Sometime in 1962, Gibson stopped using the uncompensated wrap tailpiece (used on LP Specials, Jrs, Epiphone Coronets and few others). They substituted the “lightning” tailpiece that was mounted straight across the body and had graduated steps for proper intonation (with a wrapped G string). That left them with a whole load of wrap tails. Throw them out? Not a chance. They start showing up in 1962 on 335’s. They must have had a lot of them because they show up in 63 and, most often, in 64. They would usually remove the set screws and sometimes drill out the holes for the string ends but sometimes, they left the small holes and the string ends stick out and they simply hoped nobody noticed. Functionally, they are totally fine-there is really no difference between a proper stop tail and a wraptail used as a stop tail. It’s just those string ends. Ugly but not particularly weird.

This is a little weird though. From late 60 until sometime in 64, the pickguard was a shorter affair and functioned perfectly well (even if I prefer the look of the long guard but, hey, it isn’t always about me). Over the years the guards have aged fairly well…no deterioration except for a bit of warpage. The guard would become somewhat concave-dishing inward. That is, until 64. Many 64 guards act exactly as they did in 60 to 63 but some (and it’s not just a few) dish outward. I suppose they simply could have made them upside down but I think there is something about the plastic that causes this. That’s speculation but there is definitely something different (and weird about a lot of 64 guards.

The average depth of a Gibson thinline has changed a few times over the years from 58 to the late 60’s. A 59 is usually around 1.64″. Some are as slim as 1.5″ (mostly 355’s for some reason). By 1962, they tend to measure 1.68″ and that stays fairly normal until 1964 when they balloon to 1.75″ to as deep as 1.79″. OK, 1/10″ is not a lot but it’s enough to notice. Also, given that Gibson was always trying to save pennies, it seems odd that they were intentionally using more wood in 64 than they were in 58-63. Very un- Gibsonlike. It doesn’t seem to affect the tone in any way but when I see a 64, I always notice how deep it is.

Finally, the other change that occurred in 64 was the end of the Lifton case era at Gibson at least for a while. Lifton went out of business in 1973 but I wonder if Gibson isn’t part of the reason. In 64, Gibson started using cases from another company called Ess and Ess. The Ess and Ess case is a perfectly nice case and they are very common from 64 to 69-perhaps the most common Gibson case during that period. The biggest problem with mid 60’s Gibson cases is the piece of crap they call a handle. The early plastic handles seem to hold up ok but by 65, they would break too easily. There are probably more mid 60’s cases with broken handles than there are with intact plastic handles. I’m not sure who made all the different cases that show up in the 70’s (purple interior, red interior) but they sure don’t say Lifton anywhere.

We love our 64’s and rightly so but I think it is pretty universal that 64 was the beginning of the end of the Golden Age.

The red 59 on the right is 1.642″ deep 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.

This 59 blonde walks into a guitar dealer and it looks pretty awful. It’s sticky and it smells like feet. Do you sell it as is? No? I didn’t think so.

Aging new guitars was an interesting new concept a few decades ago and it seemed a little silly at the time to those of us who were already into vintage instruments. It was the mid 1980’s and what are now considered vintage guitars were simply considered old. The aging concept caught on and is big business today. The idea of paying extra to have someone beat up your guitar seemed ridiculous but I have been proven wrong and, frankly, it’s nearly an art form here in 2025. They scrape them, scratch them, add dings and checking and buckle rash. They tarnish the hardware and warp the plastic and even add fake headstock breaks on certain “artist” models. What they don’t do is add dirt and all that toxic crud that builds up on a vintage piece after decades in smoky bars (remember smoky bars?). Nobody wants their guitar to rub off on their arms or clothing. The crud that accumulates from sweat, smoke and spilled beer is not something you want to be touching at your regular gigs. It is probably dangerous. I suppose the “VOS” concept which is simply fake oxidation, is as close as anyone gets.

So, that leads me to my topic for today’s post. I buy a lot of very old guitars and usually they are relatively dirt free and don’t require any cleaning at all-maybe under the guard but not much else. I rarely touch the finish but when I do, it’s with a product that isn’t abrasive (I use Virtuoso Cleaner). But sometimes I get a guitar that is so covered with something brown and sticky and smelly that I have to do something. Usually the Virtuoso Cleaner will remove it. It’s made to dissolve organic matter and much of what accumulates is, in fact, organic. Tar from cigarette smoke is probably organic too but it doesn’t come off easily and will usually require some serious elbow grease and maybe an abrasive polish. Fortunately, most of the polishes available for musical instruments aren’t terribly abrasive so you aren’t removing much, if any, finish. But when it’s been twenty or thirty years of buildup, a turn on the buffing wheel might be the only way to get it off. Buffing a guitar is a tricky maneuver. I don’t do it-I don’t even have a buffing wheel. I might do some serious hand buffing with StewMac fine compound but I’d be afraid of buffing right through the finish with a wheel, so I leave that to others more skilled than me.

The photo at the top is a 1959 ES-335 blonde that spent way too much time in bars. The buildup appears dense, sticky and truly unsightly so it made sense to clean it up. I wouldn’t buy, let alone sell a guitar that was covered in human and non human debris. But I’m not the one who buffed that one. I bought it after the buffing was done. The previous dealer who had it doesn’t remember if it was done by hand or on a wheel but it’s done and no harm came of it. In fact, it looks great and has taken on a deeper blonde color. The larger question is whether buffing out a guitar damages the value and I’m kind of on the fence about that. In fifty years when the “relics” made today are considered vintage, will the man made artificial relic work be considered a negative? Is “unrelic’ing a vintage guitar by buffing it something to be avoided? It’s not an easy question. On the plus side, nothing has been added like it would be if it was oversprayed or refinished. The finish is still the factory finish. Some may have been removed by buffing but playing a guitar for fifty years also removes finish and that doesn’t bother anybody. Plenty of guitars out there with arm wear on the lower bass bout and lots of wear on the back of the neck.

Conclusion? I would rather have a guitar that wasn’t buffed but if it’s covered with toxic crud, I’d rather somebody got rid of it. I don’t think buffing should harm the value but I think it should be disclosed so that you can form your own opinion. But until Tom Murphy and company start adding “genuine human sweat, cigarette smoke and stale beer” as an extra cost aging option, I’ll stick with clean, non toxic guitars-buffed if necessary.

This is the same guitar after being buffed out. The crud is gone and it looks and smells very nice. Plays pretty well too. I’m sure someone will tell me that it sounded better before it was buffed.

The dreaded and hated Gibson volute from the 70’s. Lots of folks removed it but one guy actually added one.

I’ve seen some oddball mods over the years but this one kind of takes it. First, a little history. In 1969 at around the time Gibson was bought by the Norlin Corp (beer, cement), somebody, probably a suit, decided that too many guitars were coming back for headstock repairs. So, they did something about it. The thinking at the time was to strengthen the neck at the wrist with a carved bump that would supposedly reinforce that very vulnerable part of the neck. This bump/reinforcement is called a volute. Not to be confused with a veloute´which is roux based soup and won’t help your guitar’s neck at all but will almost certainly taste pretty good. Now, as it turns out, almost everybody hated the volute and to make matters worse, it really didn’t work all that well because the necks kept breaking only now they broke below (or above) the volute. But I already did a post about volutes years ago and I don’t do repeats. This is about a guitar that actually had a volute added to it.

Picture that it’s 1972 or so and new guitars from Gibson are what everybody wants. Strats have gone down the tubes and everybody knows it but Gibsons still are the one to own. Les Paul Deluxes were really popular among the folks I hung with back then (I was 20 in 72). The volute was, largely, considered an improvement for Gibson because neck breaks were something most players were really aware of and many had experienced them. So, what does the owner of this particular guitar (a T FON 60 ES-335 with a pair of monster double whites and a big fat neck) do to “upgrade” his 12 year old guitar? Dumbest thing I’ve seen yet with the possible exception of the “turnbuckle” neck repair. He had a luthier very competently install, you guessed it, a volute. Nicely done too-using a matching block of mahogany carved into the correct volutey shape, it was spliced, using a scarf joint at the lower end and a straight joint at the top partway up the headstock. It must have been a thing of beauty. Voila-a modern 1972 Gibson. Imagine the pride he must have felt. Poor guy.

Now the good news. At some point, someone realized just how freakin’ stupid this gambit was and removed the offensive bump from the back of the headstock. But, because it was attached using tried and true lutherie wood joinery, the scarf joint and straight joint were still visible. They simply sanded off the volute part and left the rest of the new wood, as they should have, as part of the neck. A little lacquer touchup and the guitar is as good as new. Sort of.

This is the work done to add the volute before the finish was redone to hide it.

Well, I own this guitar now and I was kind of hesitant to buy it. I’m positive the neck joint will never give anyone a moments trouble and it is totally stable and the neck was never cracked or broken but, hey, there’s a well executed scarf joint where one doesn’t belong. Other than that, it’s a very clean rare as rare gets 58 factory order 1960 serial ES-335. This is the fourth one of these odd 335’s I’ve had. I can understand the FON and the serial being a few months apart but over a year? That probably means the body/neck was put aside to be used when Gibson got behind on orders. The 58 bodies were prone to cracking around the jack and Gibson got more complaints than they were happy with, so bye bye thin top. You see them sprinkled throughout 1959 and, as I mentioned, rarely in 1960.

Once clearer heads prevailed, the volute was removed by simply cutting and sanding. A few folks have suggested it was done to repair a crack. If that is true then the crack must have been very shallow as there is no sign of any damage to the wood and the added wood is quite thin.

This guitar has what might well be the best sounding bridge pickup I’ve ever encountered on a 335. The guitar cracks the top twenty for sure and possibly the top ten. It’s that good. The top ten is full of guitars with the same description…58 FON with a good neck angle. Late 58, 59 or 60 serial. Thin top. Usually double whites or zebras. Big neck. Out of the top ten, seven fit this description. No, double whites don’t sound better because they are white. But they tend to be somewhat overwound and that makes a difference.

This is the headstock as it looks today. Volute removed and finish touch up. I know. You can’t see it.

So, what would you pay for a 60 ES-335 with a thin top, a pair of killer double white PAFs, a big fat 58 neck and a scarf joint? I know what I paid-probably too much-but it’s such a great player with astonishing tone that I had to say yes. If the joint ever gives up, I’ll give you back your money as long as I’m still alive. Guaranteed or my name isn’t Orville Gibson.

Here is the guitar. It is a monster player with a pair of double white PAFs. Big neck and thin top. What’s the discount for a well executed scarf joint? I guess I’ll find out.

Every year in the month of January (or February), I write a year end review of the vintage ES-335/345/355 market. This year is no different except that it really is different. After the huge runup in values across the board that occurred during Covid, it was clear (to me, anyway) that it couldn’t be sustained. 2020 and 2021 saw values rise as much as 40% for some years and models. Others rose more like 20% but that is still a very big jump. It had to end. If we were lucky, it would simply have leveled off and prices would settle at their Covid highs. That really isn’t the case. The problem is twofold. Sellers (including many dealers) think that the Covid “bump” is simply continuing with prices rising at the rate of the 2020-2022 years. So, asking prices are higher than ever. But selling prices aren’t. The market has slowed to a virtual crawl because sellers won’t acknowledge that the bull has left the building. Prices are still high but they should be about where they were at the end of the pandemic. We’re all guilty of “ambitious” pricing but some of us have realized that those unrealistic asks just slow the market down. I’ve cut prices in the past few months and things have picked up for me.

When asking prices are unrealistically high, sales lag. That’s simple logic, not economics. As a dealer, if I have to pay inflated prices, then I have to charge even more inflated prices to make a profit. So, I stop buying unless I can negotiate a deal that leaves me some room to make a buck. That happens pretty frequently and so I have fresh inventory. But these massively overpriced guitars are sitting unsold and they will remain unsold until the sellers start wising up and seeing that the market has leveled off. I would even say that some models have dropped a few percentage points since the end of Covid. Let’s look at 335’s in this part one of this past year’s post.

2024 was the “Year of the 59”. Everything 59 seems to have held onto its Covid era gains and continues to rise although not at the pace set during Covid. 59 sunburst 335’s, at the high end, have cracked the $90,000 mark. A pre Covid stop tail, all original ’59 in excellent condition was around $45,000. So, in 5 years or so, the value has doubled. Very impressive. Bound late 58’s are not at those levels (even though they are nearly identical). Top dollar for a bound 58 is in the $80,000 range. Blondes are a lot harder to quantify since so few have been sold recently and so few are on the market. I recently acquired a close to mint stop tail 59 blonde. It was the first one to hit the market since 2021 that I’m aware of. Typically blondes are generally considered to be worth double what a sunburst is worth. I’m not sure that’s entirely true any longer. The 2021 sale (also excellent) fetched $137,500. I have mine priced at $165,000. That’s a nice increase but nowhere near the rise seen in 59 sunbursts based on percentage.

The rest of the dot necks (60 through early 62) went way up from 2020 until 2023 but are now perhaps the most ambitious of all. A 60 is not a 59. The last one I had was priced in the mid $60’s and it sold and I was happy to get that. I’m seeing asking prices rivaling 59 asks. Mid 70k’s is awfully high if my opinion counts for anything. When I say a 60 isn’t a 59, somebody is going to argue (correctly) that a 60 kind of is a 59 in that an early 60 is identical to a late 59. Absolutely true but that’s not what I mean. I’m talking perception here. A collector (and many players) simply want a 59 and nothing else will do. That means 59 serial and 58/59 FON. A 60 serial with a 59 FON will command a premium over a 60 FON but, in my opinion, it’s still a 60. Not fair? Maybe. But reality often isn’t fair. 61 ES-335’s are a similar story only worse. 61’s (and early dot neck 62’s) are the sleeper dot neck largely due to the not too popular “blade” neck. It is prone to issues and not comfortable for a lot of players. But it’s by far the least expensive dot neck and that keeps the market hopping. But really, $50K to well over $60K is not where this market is. Don’t agree? I recently (in November 2024) took a near mint 61 ES-335 with tags in trade. I listed in at a reasonable $42,000. It sat. And it sat. It finally sold for $39K which I believe was a very fair price and not a fire sale. Any guitar is worth what the buyers will pay and they simply aren’t going to spend $60,000 or even $50,000 for a 61-62 ES-335. You can take that to the bank but then again, you can’t because it hasn’t sold.

That leaves us looking at the 62-64 block neck market. This, as last year and the year before and the year before that, red ones sell quickly and sunbursts don’t. I love red guitars and I certainly understand the attraction. The Clapton connection doesn’t hurt either even if some of the boomers are starting to age out of the market (not me, of course). Once again, neck profile drives the market so 62’s and early 63’s with the slim neck are slower sellers than the big neck late 63’s, 64’s and even early 65’s. If your 62 or 63 has PAFs, it will sell more quickly no matter what finish it has. 64’s rarely have PAFs but they do fly out the door. The late 63/64 (and early 65) neck is relatively slim at the first fret (often as small as .81″) but they have much more shoulder than earlier versions and that makes them feel quite a bit larger. It is no wonder that the 63-64 neck is considered to be the best of the Gibson necks. I’m still a 58-59 guy but I get the attraction of the 63-64. Prices for 64’s have pushed up past $40K for clean red stop tails with no issues. Sunbursts are still valued the same but are much harder to sell so a price reduction might be in order if you want to sell one quickly. There are an awful lot of Bigsby 64’s (most with the “Custom Made” plaque over the stud bushings. They tend to fall into the mid to upper $20’s. They are rather a bargain if you don’t mind the Bigsby or the “snake bite”. If you can find a Mickey Mouse ear 63 with PAFs and the big neck, buy it. It’s a rare combination that is really appealing. I’ve only had one. Like the dot necks, the market has gotten ahead of itself so if your 62-64 doesn’t sell quickly, you probably have it priced too high. That’s pretty much true of any popular model. There are plenty of buyers…for the right price.

Why call this post “Platypus”? A platypus is an animal that appears to have been constructed from left over or spare parts. Part mammal, part bird and maybe part reptile or amphibian. In any case it’s not like any other animal in the animal world. Shift gears to the guitar world and we’ll look at an ES guitar that is something of a platypus. It is a custom order from the days before Gibson had the Custom Shop when they would build just about anything you wanted to order. It took a while and cost extra but there are a fair number of one offs out there in the often homogenous guitar world.

OK, what makes a 335 a 335? What makes a 345 a 345? What makes a 355 a 355? I’ll take a run at this but the lines tend to blur the farther into this you go. A 335 is mono unless special ordered in stereo. A 345 is always stereo. A 355 is either. A 335 and a 345 have a simple headstock with the crown inlay whereas the 355 has the big headstock with the “split diamond” inlay. A 335 has dot markers or, later, small blocks. A 345 has split parallelograms and a 355 has big MOP block markers. 335’s have nickel hardware and single ply top binding. 345’s have gold hardware and three ply top binding. A 355 has gold hardware and 7 ply top binding. Back of the body bindings vary as well. 335’s and 345’s have rosewood fingerboards while the 355 has ebony. Other than these aspects, they are largely the same guitar. Suppose you got an ES guitar that had a mono circuit, gold hardware and an ebony board with big block markers. What would that be? It would be a mono 355. But what if that same guitar had the “crown” headstock and two ply binding on top? Those are both 345 features but, being mono, can’t be a 345. Or can it?

It was marketed as a 345 and the label says 345. I have never owned or even seen a mono 345 from 59 to 65. There are modern ones. That, to me, says it isn’t a 345 or else it’s perhaps the only mono 345 on the planet. The only feature of this guitar that is unique to a 345 are the body bindings. The gold hardware and the ebony board suggests a 355 but where’s the big split diamond headstock that is unique to 355’s (yes, other Gibsons have it but we aren’t talking about other Gibsons). I could, I suppose call it a mono 345 with a 355 board but mono kind of eliminates the 345 in my mind. More likely, I would call it a 335 with a 355 board and gold hardware (and 345 bindings). Or not. It is a true platypus.

So, how do I market it? I can simply call it a one off 345 as the previous seller did. But, the one thing that makes a 345 less desirable than a 335 is the stereo/Varitone circuit. So, I do the guitar a disservice to simply call it a custom 345. I’ll give you a similar situation…I had a red 59 ES-335 which is one of the rarest of the rare varieties. there are only 8 known. One of them is stereo with a Varitone that was special ordered. It sold for about 70% of what a stop tail red 59 335 would have brought. I know because I had a red 59 stoptail at the same time as I had the one with the Varitone. So, do I take that 30% reduction and turn it into a 30% increase in value? I’m not sure but being mono certainly should add value to a “345”. Because of the headstock, I don’t think I can call it a 355 even though the ebony board and the MOP block markers are clearly ES-355 country. I’d like to think I can call it a 335 since it has the 335 circuit and that’s the big factor in pricing 335’s vs 345’s. If 345’s were mono, they would likely be close or equal to a 335 in value just as a mono 355 is relatively close in value to a 335 with a Bigsby. I’m a big fan of one offs and if I was a collector (which you really can’t be if you’re a dealer and want to actually make a living), I’d keep this one as it is a true platypus. Call it what you want, it’s a very cool guitar.

Trouble in paradise. This stunning and rare red 59 ES-335 had a grounding issue that I was having no luck resolving. My little knowledge was probably dangerous.

It’s a baseball analogy and a double pun (“grounder” and “short”…get it?). I couldn’t call it a hard short to ground and lose the baseball reference. We’re going to talk about electronics here, specifically grounding a 335. I recently acquired one of my holy grail guitars…a 1959 ES-335 in red. According to my inside guy at Gibson (who has been incredibly helpful for years), they made 15 red 335’s that year, all of them special orders. You might have noticed how often I write about them. Most of them pass through my hands (quickly, I might add) without much more than a setup. There are eight that have surfaced and of the seven that I’ve owned, all have been well cared for and kept in good order. The one I got recently out of Germany was no different. It was probably played mostly at home and certainly not every day. The condition was 9+ and it showed no wear at all. Just the kind of guitar I like to buy and sell.

First, a little background that many of you already know if you’re a regular reader here. I spent 45 years in the Film and TV business mostly as an editor, motion graphic designer and colorist. That requires a fair amount of technical knowledge of electronics. Essentially, it means if something breaks during an edit session, I had better know how to fix it. It’s also worth noting that to get one of my first jobs, I was required to have an FCC Second Class Radiotelephone License. The test was full of schematics and troubleshooting and I learned a lot of that kind of stuff in order to pass. That was in 1979. I’m pretty sure nobody has those any longer. But anyway, I learned a bit about circuits and it has been helpful. What I never entirely understood was grounding. I get how it works but I don’t get why.

Because the guitar in question left the factory as a Bigsby (with stud bushings) it was supposed to be grounded two ways. The first ground wire usually goes from the treble side tailpiece bushing to the braid on the bridge pickup. In order to ground the guitar when used without a stop tail, another ground wire is required. It’s usually a wire that goes from the hinge of the Bigsby to the braid on either pickup. Some Bigsby equipped guitars don’t have stop tail bushings so they are sometimes grounded with a wire that runs from the treble side bridge post to the braid on the bridge pickup. 355’s are very often grounded that way. The red 59 had two ground wires and when I got it, it worked great. But it was set up as a stop tail when I got it. The Bigsby was in the case. The buyer wanted the Bigsby mounted, so I did that. Trouble.

The neck pickup was quiet as a whisper. The bridge pickup roared and howled and squealed. That problem is sometimes caused by the pickup leads shorting out the three way by touching it. Gibson was aware of the problem and very often wrapped the three way in electrical tape (yes, that tape is usually factory). So, I did that. No luck. OK, maybe the ground wire isn’t making contact with the stop tail bushing, so I tightened that down. Nope. How about I remove the ground wire that runs from the stop tail? That didn’t work either. I really didn’t want to pull the harness (I had checked the codes with a dental mirror). But since it was only the bridge pickup, I figured it had to be something in the harness since the guitar was properly grounded to the harness. So, I loosened the bridge pickup tone and volume pots and pulled them out the f-hole (no other way to get to them on a dot neck-no cutout in the center block until years later). I was nearly two hours into this fiasco with the buyer in the room with me (which always makes me nervous).

Everything looked right. The ground wires that run from pot to pot were all there and appeared to be intact at least on those two pots. So, I decided I’d better pull the entire harness. No fun. But, as I pulled the bridge volume pot through the f-hole, I saw that the braid that is supposed to be soldered to the pot cover (and the third leg of the pot is supposed to be bent so it touched the pot cover) didn’t look right. BTW, don’t ask me why the third leg of the pot has to be soldered to the pot cover. I have no idea. BUT, the braid was soldered to the pot cover but the leg of the pot had pulled away from the cover. I dropped a blob of solder in there and put it back together. Voila. Quiet as a whisper on a calm day. Great but why did it work perfectly when set up as a stop tail and then not work when I set it up as a Bigsby. If the problem was the leg of the volume pot not being connected to the back of the pot with the stop tail installed, it should have been the same with the Bigsby installed. I have no answer other than maybe the leg of the pot came unsoldered when I installed the Bigsby. I can’t think of any other possible reason other than grounding is mystical and capricious.

I guess the larger point is that you can work on these things for years and years and still not know everything. I suppose taking a class in electronics wouldn’t hurt so instead of using rote memory, I’m using knowledge and understanding but, hey, I’m an old guy. I don’t learn so good these days.

Not the best example but you can see the leg of the pot that is soldered to the back of the pot cover. I don’t know exactly why but it’s part of the ground circuit. If it comes undone, the ground loop is broken and you pickup will be noisy.

Ahh, the mysterious factory order number. The thing that seems terribly important when you have a 1960 serial number guitar with a 59 FON that you really want to sell as a 59. Except when it goes the other way and you have a 58 FON that you want to call a 59 because the serial number is 59. Hint (it’s the serial number that counts) This is T 5972 24. Find out below what that means.

Here’s a short lesson in Gibson’s manufacturing practices in the 1950’s until 1961: When construction of a guitar was started, a number was stamped into the piece of wood that was to be the back of the guitar. That number is generally visible through the treble side f-hole. It’s called a factory order number (FON). It is composed of a letter and three or four numbers followed by a space and then the number 1 through 35. The number identifies a “rack” of guitars to be built at the same time. A rack is usually composed of 35 guitars usually the same model (but not always). They are put on a rolling rack (hence the term) and wheeled through the various stations that do specific jobs. In general, the wood would have come from the same shipment and the workers were the same (usually) throughout the process of building that particular rack. The letter that precedes the number designates the year. The letters work backwards…T was 1958. S was 1959. R was 1960 and Q was 1961. Then they stopped using FON’s. So, if your guitar has a “T” FON, the process of building that guitar was started in 1958. It doesn’t mean it was completed in 1958 or shipped in 1958. The lag between FON and ship date can be literally years, although it was usually months. The FON is sequential until it reaches 9999 and then it starts again at some three digit number. I don’t know why but it seem to start at 600. That’s the lowest FON number I’ve seen. The final number is called the rank-it is the number that designates each guitar in the rack 1 through 35 (usually). So, my guitar has the FON of T5972-7. That means its the 7th guitar in rack number 5972 from 1958. Simple, right?

Well it isn’t so simple because that particular rack being late 1958 had most of its guitars shipped in 1959 but they are dispersed over more than 18 months. Serial number A29063 is the earliest one I’ve had from that rack, shipped in January 59. A33765 is the latest which, surprisingly, is July 1960, a year and a half later than A29063. I date guitars by the serial number for a number of reasons. Even when a guitar has a 58 FON, it may not have been assembled until much later. I make a distinction between building and assembling. The body and neck may have been built and finished in 1958 but if the guitar wasn’t shipped until 1960, it is likely to have parts from 1960. There weren’t a lot of changes between January 1959 and July 1960 but there were a few. The ones from 1960 have a number of 58 features…big neck, thin top, shallow neck angle. But they have a 60 harness and 60 tuners (small oil hole) and possibly other features (different truss rod cover for example-no roll marks).

So, why am I singling out this particular rack? It’s certainly unusual in that the guitars from this rack were spread out over such a long time and I have a theory about that. It’s speculation but it makes sense. The other reason is that of the twenty best 3×5’s I’ve ever owned (over 600), four, possibly five came from this rack. That can’t be random. Here’s the theory…In 1959, all 3×5’s had thin three ply tops. Gibson started getting complaints about cracks, especially around stress points like the jack. Their solution was to build the guitars with four ply wood instead of three ply and the problem went away. I think there were probably a number of guitars that were started in late 58 that coincided with the decision to make the four ply top. Gibson didn’t want more complaints so perhaps they put the guitars from this rack aside using them only sparingly perhaps when they were getting behind on orders. There are guitars that I’ve owned from this rack in the early A290xx range, the A301xx to A302xx range, the A312xx range and, surprisingly three from 1960-A32612, A33108 and A33765. I guess they thought spreading them out would keep the complaints at a minimum.

Finally, there is something else. First, I think the thin top 335’s are the best sounding 335’s ever made. While nearly every 59 335 is a very good guitar, at least four of them from rack T5972 are extraordinary. A30248 is number 30 in the rack and it is the best 335 I’ve ever played. One of the 1960 serial ones is up there as is A29063 and A29069. I’ve only had nine of the 35 guitars in this rack but if you see one, there is a very good chance that it is an amazing player. After all, it’s the wood and the builder that make a great guitar. They all had the same electronics and the same parts. I currently own A29069-a near mint 335 that had a Bigsby that was removed decades ago and the holes filled. An extraordinary play and a good looker. It won’t be listed right away because I want to play it for a while.

This is A 29069 with the factory order number of T5972 24 making it the 24th guitar from this rack. Number 30 from this rack is the best 335 I’ve ever played and three others from T5972 have been in my top twenty. That’s why I call it the “magic rack”.

Mmmmm. Flame maple. Makes a nice neck for a Stratocaster or a gorgeous top for a Les Paul. It’s the LP feature that sets collector’s hearts aflutter but a flamed 335? Not so much. It’s also pretty good firewood.

I spend a fair bit of my time on this blog ribbing Les Paul owners-all in good fun, of course. Yes, the R9 guys love to scavenge vintage parts to get their reissues closer to a real burst. And they buy vintage cases to carry them around in. And they argue about who has the bigger neck and the hotter pickups. I look on from a short distance and chuckle to myself at the folly of relic instruments. They also ooh and aah over their figured maple tops and, honestly, I don’t blame them. I love figured maple. I love it on a Les Paul and I love it on a 335 (unless it’s blonde-more on that later).

I’ve sold a fair number of bursts over the last few years (and a few R9’s as well) and the first question I usually get is “how’s the top?” followed closely by “how much does it weigh?” I don’t think anyone has ever led with “how’s the top?” when buying a 335. Figured top 335’s are rare. Oddly, the figured wood is more frequently on the back of a 335 so it seems that perhaps the folks at Gibson wanted 335’s to have a plain top. But every now and then, I get a 335 (or 345 or even more rarely, a 355) with a figured top. It is often a smattering of birdseye but some times it is a striking edge to edge flame. With a sunburst finish (or even a red one), it looks stunning. In the 80’s, when Gibson reissued the dot neck 335, they used a lot of figured maple and, to be honest, on a blonde, they don’t look quite right. I’ve always preferred a blonde to be grainy but relatively absent figuring. It’s just what a blonde 335 should look like to me. Your mileage may vary, of course.

A spectacular flame top on a vintage Les Paul adds a lot of money to the selling price. My experience is that it can add 30% or more to the price. So, if I’m selling a plain top 59 for $350,000, then a flame top might cost close to $500K. That’s a huge difference just for cosmetics. On the other hand, a flame top 335 commands very little premium. Even if it commanded 30%, 30% of say $80,000, for a very clean 59 sunburst, the actual cost of the flames are a fraction of the LP number. But they don’t command 30%. It’s more like zero to 10%. The demand simply isn’t there and maybe that says something about 335 players. Or not.

How many flame top vintage 335’s are out there? Not many. I’ve owned in the ballpark of 600 58 to 65 ES guitars. And I’ve seen hundreds more listed online that I haven’t owned. I can recall dozens that have flame on the back and very light figuring on the top but a full tilt edge to edge dazzling flame top is almost non-existent. I can recall perhaps eight to ten over the past 30 years or so (it’s hard enough at my age to remember what I had for breakfast). I’ve had six myself.

I think most 335 players aren’t looking for a fancy top-just a great guitar and they get that almost every time if they buy a 58 to 64. I’ve seen only one irretrievable dog of a 335 out of around 600. All the rest have been anywhere from good to unbelievable. But 599 out of 600 were decent players. There are some ugly ones-some of the reds from 61-64 have faded to a pretty ugly brownish red but most are still very attractive. Whether a flame top makes it even more attractive is in the eye of the beholder. When that eye belongs to me, I’ll take the flame top (as long as it plays great too)

I don’t usually name my guitars but this one was called (by someone other than me) “Kentucky Woman”. It was so named because it came out of rural Kentucky. I sold it, bought it back, sold it again and recently bought it back again. She’s no case queen but she’s a looker for sure. Big neck, hot PAFs and a great player.

There are red flame top 335’s too. This super rare red 59 is perhaps the prettiest guitar I have ever seen. It’s back in my hands but it’s going back out the door next month.

This happens more often than we’d like but properly repaired, a headstock break can make a perfectly good player at a reasonable price. The tricky part is knowing how well it has been repaired. Take it to your luthier and get his opinion before your approval period runs out.

Nothing will send your buyer rushing for the exits faster than a neck issue. It almost doesn’t matter which neck issue it is (and there are lots of them), you can bet it’s going to impact the price. But neck issues come in many flavors. Some might drop a few hundred off the price while a major headstock break, poorly repaired or not repaired at all, will knock 40% to 60% off the value. The problem is figuring out how fixable it is and how much will it affect the playability, the investment value and the ease of selling when it’s time.

HEADSTOCK BREAK

I’m not a luthier so figuring out how fixable a neck issue is going to come from my own experiences with old guitars. Any luthier who is reading this is welcome to disagree and help us all understand the problem better. Let’s start with what most folks think is the biggest dealbreaker…a headstock break. Properly repaired, it can be stable and never be a problem going forward. The problem is how do you know how well repaired it is? Ask how long it has been since the repair. Play the guitar and pay attention to intonation and play issues like string buzz or high action. A well repaired, stable headstock break can take 40% or more off the price and you can end up with a wonderful guitar that plays and sounds as good as a museum piece. But you can bet that it won’t be easy to sell when it’s time to do so. It might appreciate at the same rate as a collector grade guitar but if you can’t sell it, it doesn’t matter how much it appreciates.

The bottom diagram (from the Fender site) shows a backbow. They call it a convex bow and it’s a very common issue.

BACKBOW

This is much harder to quantify and my experience will be the driving force here. Backbows aren’t hard to fix but they don’t always stay fixed. They also don’t always show. I know of a few ways to fix a backbow when there’s no more to be done with the truss rod (when it’s all the way loose). Heat treating, compression re-frets (look it up) and shaving the fingerboard can make a back bow go away. The problem is how long the repair is going to last. Let’s say you are listing your guitar for sale and the neck is perfect (or close to it). Are you going to disclose that it once had a problem? Probably not (especially if you don’t know). The problem is that wood isn’t predictable. Shaving the neck is almost always visible and is an effective way to compensate for a backbow. It’s expensive but it works.

Heat treating can fix it but it doesn’t always stay fixed and that is a big problem. Read this again…wood isn’t predictable. It might be perfect the day you get it back from the luthier but it could come back at any time. You paid for a no neck issue guitar but you’re getting one that is prone to neck issues. Slim necks are more likely to have a backbow but there is no foolproof way to know whether it has been properly addressed. There is no visible evidence that there has been a problem but it’s a potential time bomb.

Compression re-fretting is when you refret using larger fret tangs which force the neck to bow inward, compensating for the backbow. I’ve had this done and it worked. It might be worth trying this before you go for planing the board but it’s an awfully expensive experiment. If it doesn’t work, you are out the cost of a re-fret (I’ve been paying $800-$1000 lately for refrets on bound necks). I think it’s another time bomb.

TRUSS ROD CRACK

See that little vertical line that is lighter than the rest of the neck. The seller is going to call it a scratch or a capo mark and it could be that but it usually isn’t especially if the guitar has a very slim neck profile. It can be two inches long or 14″ long. Look closely (with a magnifier or loup) and you’ll see that the finish has jagged edges where the crack is. It’s fixable but not always disclosed.

ES Guitars with a slim neck (from front to back) are prone to what I refer to as a truss rod crack. It is usually down the middle of the back of the neck between the third fret and some fret down the fingerboard-could be the fifth or any other fret all the way to the 14th. That can be a 2″ crack or a 12″ crack. It is the result of too little wood between the truss rod and the back of the neck and too much pressure on the neck caused by tightening the truss rod. Late 60 to mid 62 ES guitars are most likely to have this issue and it’s very common. Folks will call it a scratch, a check or any number of other things because the word “crack” sends the buyers fleeing. It’s a crack. Period. The good news is that it isn’t structural. Once the problem is addressed by loosening the truss rod, the crack won’t get any worse. I have had my luthier glue it (making sure not to glue the truss rod at the same time) and it seems to stay fixed as long as pressure is kept to a minimum. That means you may not be able to get the backbow to go away without cracking it again. I haven’t had that happen and I’ve had this repair done at least a dozen times. It’s going to affect the value of the guitar and it has to be disclosed. This is something most folks didn’t know about until I started bringing it up on a fairly regular basis. I never used to see it disclosed (it’s a scratch…) but now I see it frequently (thanks for reading my stuff). It will knock a few thousand off the value depending on how long the crack is but I have found it to be something you can live with.

There are other neck issues like twists, warping, humps and dips because-I’ll say it again-wood isn’t predictable. Most are addressed by shaving the fingerboard and will affect the value of the guitar. So, strike a balance between your budget and your tolerance for issues. Any neck issue is going to affect the value and the ease of selling when it’s time to sell. The key is knowing the extent of the problem and the manner of repair. I will make one further point…I avoid guitars with neck issues most of the time. As a dealer, I don’t want to sell a guitar with a problem I can’t see or a guitar that is going to be trouble in a year or two.