New 2013 SG Standards...

[DaveSG]

Let's talk about 'em. I did a search and it didn't turn up much.

Went to a GC the other day and they had 3 of them that I got to take for a spin (at least for a lefty).

Initially impression - very nice. I'm usually a diehard 50s baseball bat sized neck guy...but these were nice! They were very comfortable. Also, a lot of variation to the necks. They all have a similar profile, but of varying thicknesses. I've seen anywhere from .770 at 1st fret all the way to .870. Nice to have the options. The bodies I've seen have been a mix of 1 and 2 piece bodies. Old school neck joint. Hopefully it is GTG. I don't know if it has a long tenon or not. Anyone able to confirm one way or another if these new Standards have the laminated rosewood fretboads?

Headstock appears to be a slight mix between the old standards (slightly smaller size) and the 61 RI. I held two side-by-side (a pre-2013 and a 2013) and the 2013 is slightly bigger and the top is a little flatter with the points coming up a little higher. It wasn't quite as exaggerated as a 61RI though.

Of the 3 guitars I inspected, two of them had a huge issue that would absolutely keep me from buying one sight unseen - looking at the Nashville bridge, 2 of the guitars out of the 3 had the treble-side thumbwheels completely bottomed out against the guitar and still had that awful 'GC setup' with high action. Based on what I saw, there was absolutely zero way to lower the strings any further. One would have to grind/file off either the bottom of the Nashville or the thumbwheels for it to sit lower. I'm used to seeing this on Epis, but not Gibsons. I don't know if it just a more shallow neck joint or if something else is going on, but I'd be interested to hear of other reports to see if this is a widespread issue.

I think the deep scalloped body along with 57 Classics right out of the bat is a win. I like the guitars...but have reservations. Hopefully Gibson figures out this shallow neck thing otherwise I might have to hold off on getting one until I find the right one. I want enough adjustability to lower the strings against the frets.

What are your all's experiences so far?

 

[Jonny Rash]

It sounds like the truss rod needs to be adjusted.

The general consensus is that this "new" model is simply the old SG 61. I'm a lefty as well, so I really can't play one in a store, other than a righty flipped around.

 

[Minibucker]

http://www.lespaulforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=183368

It's kind of cool that they are sort a hybrid of the '61 and modern standards. But I wish they stuck with the 50's neck and longer joint.

 

[Jonny Rash]

Yes, I am shying away from them due to the neck joint. I really like the thicker neck profile and neck joint of the old SG standard. I also have a SG VOS, which has a stronger neck joint than the 2013 SG standard as well as the small PG. I can see me getting a new white one though.

 

[DaveSG]

Does anyone know what the neck tenon looks like under the hood?

Gibson really should have made the SG a neck-through guitar. Regardless of SG, there just isn't enough meat there, especially when you consider how much wood is taken out from the neck pickup routing. I'm also wondering if the neck joint kills some of the sustain as well as a lot of SGs are notorious for.

Still my fav guitar though.

 

[veldt666]

I ordered one 3 weeks ago on a 7 day trial.
(Naturalburst, as no Cherry in stock), As I was very cautious, the dealer answered all my In depth questions, honestly.

Let me say, I have more than a few Custom shop & Historic Re Issue Gibsons, in my arsenal, but, I cant put this new SG down.

It arrived ,"Plecked" & well set up, although I raised the action, a little.

1 Peice body, fairly dark rosewood fretboard board, very dynamic, great sound,(I usually hate 57 Classics & fit various upmarket P.U's).

4 gigs in, I pulled the Gibson strings, polished frets & smoothed up the board, a little, fitted D'Adarrio,10's, & It's even better now.

As my interest in SG's had been, re kindled,(I had a standard in 76), I travelled 200 miles last Saturday, to audition a Custom Shop V.O.S. Custom, in white. As luck would have it, they had 2 in stock, & sadly, I could not believe, how underwhelmed I was at the Custom shop models.

Suffice, I did not buy one.

So, "MUCH" Kudos to Gibson, for what they are offering with these new 2013 Standards. Great guitars, & let's hope they remain that way.

 

[Minibucker]

How slim is the neck?

 

[veldt666]

It's listed as a ,"Slim Taper", but it's not as slim as some 335's I've seen.
It's a rounded, "C" shape,(Not chunky, like the Pre 2013, double Batwing standards), but then, they are all different, aren't they?
Maybe I just got lucky, but others I've seen in shops are just as good.

 

[DaveSG]

The necks I have felt on these 2013 Standards have been varied and created a felt difference, although slight. I played one that was on the thinner side (prob .770-.790 at the 1st fret) at it was just a hair to thin for me but was actually still decently comfortable. I played a couple others that were probably around .810-.830 at the first fret and they felt great! I always thought I wanted a big huge neck on a guitar, but these ones have me reconsidering.

 

[Kutt]

Regarding the laminated/bi-layered fretboard inquiry- I can tell you that two weeks ago or so I emailed Gibson Customer Service inquiring as to whether or not their limited run Les Paul Custom Lite (now sold out) through MF had one of these fretboards. I was told that Gibson USA "could use either".

I'll let you all reach your own conclusions on that reply.

My personal opinion? I think it's crappy that they are marketing these are "Grade A", "Genuine", "solid", and "Premium" rosewood fretboards. It's a stretch of the truth given the change in craftsmanship. Nothing but pre-August 2011 for me.

 

[JRW8214@AOL.COM]

I played one today at GC. I ran it through an Orange TH30(didnt like it), OR15(really liked it), and the new Vox AC4 with the top boost.

I noticed the part about the bridge, however to me, it just looked weird. It wouldnt affect me personally because i like my action higher than i know alot of guys do and the action was already too low for my tastes(as they always are at GC). That being said, despite the too low action(again, for my taste), it played and felt beautiful. Now i use handwound PAF clones in my guitar that i have made by Curtis Novak, so while to my ears the '57 Classic were a little harsh and sterile sounding....there werent bad by any means. Of course this couldve also been caused more by the Vintage 30 in the Orange 1x12 i was playing through. I hate Vintage 30s because thats exactly how the sound to me, harsh and sterile(again, just my opinion).

They didnt have any with the Maestros which disappointed me, but aside from the dire need of a setup and a good set of strings(pure nickel wounds for me), it was a lovely guitar and has alot of potential. It was certainly alot better than the GC '62 Reissue SG i bought a few years ago, which was the worst guitar purchase i ever made(and trading it to a guy on the Gear Page for an Edwards Les Paul and Tokai Les Paul was the best decision i ever made).

All in all a very good guitar, i wouldnt mind a bit shelling out the money for one, especially if the one with the maestro has been improved, ive heard the complaints about Gibson Maestro reissues.

 

[latestarter]

Fat neck, proper Maestro angle, ABR-1 and BB's and I'd be all over one. Sigh, Gibson doesn't really like making modern guitars I want.

 

[latestarter]

Oh ohh...not all '13's have a good Maestro. I've switched off already.

 

[Gold Tone]

...Maestro angle...

Gibson please fix this already!!!!!!

Can't use it in trem position since arm is too close to body

Can't fold back and keep on in case since arm sits sky high in that position

GIBSON!!! You've got it ASS BACKWARDS!!

Come On!!!

 

[latestarter]

Yeah, let alone the silly banjo sound this setup creates. Gibson, once again you've not done your homework.

 

[loufed52]

Gibson please fix this already!!!!!!

Can't use it in trem position since arm is too close to body

Can't fold back and keep on in case since arm sits sky high in that position

GIBSON!!! You've got it ASS BACKWARDS!!

Come On!!!

This has been going on for years now, and with some Historics too.
Are they really that stupid?

 

[TM1]

I played one today at GC. I ran it through an Orange TH30(didnt like it), OR15(really liked it), and the new Vox AC4 with the top boost.

I noticed the part about the bridge, however to me, it just looked weird. It wouldnt affect me personally because i like my action higher than i know alot of guys do and the action was already too low for my tastes(as they always are at GC). That being said, despite the too low action(again, for my taste), it played and felt beautiful. Now i use handwound PAF clones in my guitar that i have made by Curtis Novak, so while to my ears the '57 Classic were a little harsh and sterile sounding....there werent bad by any means. Of course this couldve also been caused more by the Vintage 30 in the Orange 1x12 i was playing through. I hate Vintage 30s because thats exactly how the sound to me, harsh and sterile(again, just my opinion).

They didnt have any with the Maestros which disappointed me, but aside from the dire need of a setup and a good set of strings(pure nickel wounds for me), it was a lovely guitar and has alot of potential. It was certainly alot better than the GC '62 Reissue SG i bought a few years ago, which was the worst guitar purchase i ever made(and trading it to a guy on the Gear Page for an Edwards Les Paul and Tokai Les Paul was the best decision i ever made).

All in all a very good guitar, i wouldnt mind a bit shelling out the money for one, especially if the one with the maestro has been improved, ive heard the complaints about Gibson Maestro reissues.

Too bad about the '62 limited Reissue. Mine's great, but it did go to Historic Makeovers for the total package. It was good to start with though..

 

[TM1]

Btw, with the bridge low, it sounds to me like the neck angle's too shallow. I would never buy a Gibson that doesn't have the ABR-1 bridge. Those Nashville bridges are tone robbers. If the neck angle it right, then you won't have any buzz or banjo issues with the SG!

 

[loufed52]

It's not the neck angle.
My vintage SGs have low neck angles and they are fine.
It's the poorly built "Maestro" (really Deluxe) Vibrola with the incorrect spring angle which causes it.

Incorrect Gibson angle- as you can see the arm sticks up when forward or backward, making it impossible to close the case without hitting the arm:

Same guitar after modifications- case can close now without hitting arm.
A vintage style arm would do better.

'69 SG Standard:

 

[Minibucker]

Y'know...I've had three SG standards, and never bonded with them. Always felt kind of 'plunky' after the sustain and response I was used to in Les Pauls and ES-335s. I also always noticed that their bridges were pretty high...a la steeper neck angle. I'm wondering if the newer/shallower ones are an improvement in that area, or....if smaller pickguard/'61 layouts are better altogether in that respect. I could see them needing a shallower angle with the smaller neck joint compared to the 'batwig' models, but I wonder with that thin body if something gets lost in terms of overall resonance/sustain with the steeper angle. Interesting to see how low the bridge is on newer ones, which is something I always prefer on my Gibsons.