• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

300 series horn shapes

BillyB

New member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
449
Just curious - I heard that the change in horn shapes on the 335, 345 + 355 between '58/'59 and the mid '60's was due to wear on the tooling.

Is that really true - by '65 they looked pretty different. Almost deliberately different; was Gibson trying to follow the SG range with a more pointed appearance?

I haven't checked yet but did the 330 follow the same trend?
 

tuberide

Active member
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Messages
1,469
I heard that too about the dies wearing and thus the gradual change in horn shapes. If that's the case, then it seems unlikely that Gibson is using the original forms on the Historic line as stated in some adds.
The 330's generally run the same as the 3X5's in horn shape as far as I can tell.
 

j45

Active member
Joined
Jun 14, 2002
Messages
9,081
check post # 19


http://www.lespaulforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=116636&highlight=shapes

Even though it shows for example 63-67 as the same shape, they are constantly changing and no two years are exactly alike.67 ends up much more pointed than say '64. '68 goes back to very rounded, example D on the chart looks way off to me compared to 68's I've owned. There was a time I had an example of just about every year and none were exactly the same.
 

keef

Active member
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,006
Within any given year between 63 and the late 60s two guitars can have differently shaped horns, so generalizations are difficult.

What also seems to differ in this period is the depth of the cutaways - I've seen an unusually shallow '64 owned by a member here, but in general (....) around '66/7 the cutaway seems to become deeper, giving the impression that the horns become longer (I never measured any existing examples though - Danelectro, where are you?).

Another problem here is that Gibson's numbering systems were rather messy at the time, which complicates dating of these guitars.
 
T

Troels

Guest
Just curious - I heard that the change in horn shapes on the 335, 345 + 355 between '58/'59 and the mid '60's was due to wear on the tooling.

Is that really true - by '65 they looked pretty different. Almost deliberately different; was Gibson trying to follow the SG range with a more pointed appearance?

I haven't checked yet but did the 330 follow the same trend?

It has nothing to do with wear... it's simple to understand if you see how these guitars are made...

The sides are three layers ply pressed/glued into the right shape in huge heated steam presses.

After sides are glued to the center block the oversized top and back are glued onto the sides and the center block - and then trimmed to match the sides.

SO... the guitar gets it's shape in the side press - a tool with absolutely no wear on heatede parts that have contact with the wood.

There are four types of body horns and two types of body waist over the years (the bigest are Mickey mouse Ears that lasted from 1958 to early 1961) then came the pointier body horns and all styles are matters of design.

Sides, tops and backs for 330, 335, 345 and 355 was pressed in the same presses - so they are identical.
 

Uncle Gary

Active member
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
2,431
Given the way these guitars are built, with "soft" tooling and multiple setups, it's a wonder that any two of them are the same shape/size.
 
Top