58 Reissue with 59 neck

Discussion in 'Historics & Reissues' started by Frozen Rat, Sep 4, 2017.

  1. Frozen Rat

    Frozen Rat Member

    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    115
    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2016
    Went looking for a '60 reissue because I had a 58 and a 57 a while back and never could get used to the big necks. I looked high and low for a good guitar at a good price (here, TGP, eBay, Reverb) but a combination of sellers being stubborn in their negotiations with unreasonable expectations, and of me being leery of buying used online, forced me to go to stores and look around. I played 15 reissues of all varieties and bought a 2014 '58. I noticed a few things doing this.

    2013 and 2014 models sound better than newer models. I didn't have much chance to play older stuff, except one 2006 and a 2012. The 2006 was decent but they wanted too much, and the 2012 was dull. The 2015 and 2016 models were a bit more sterile. The 13/14 models were the most toneful (to my ears anyway). Every single one I played was a winner. Choosing one amongst them was tough. I even like them better than the one True Historic I played.

    I also noticed that the 13/14 models have thinner necks than 58s from other years. The 57s are still chunky though. I played a 2016 '59 with a thicker neck than was on the '58 I bought. Why would that be? Is there really that much variance? Or did Gibson intentionally make the necks thinner on the '58s in more recent years? That's also why I got a '58 instead of a '60, the neck was almost '60 thin (not quite, but not far off either).

    Anyway, here it is below. Brand new, in washed cherry. I don't particularly like washed cherry, but the tone of this guitar was not to be denied.

     
    MikeC, alnico59, serch777 and 4 others like this.
  2. ARandall

    ARandall Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    6,285
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2012
    Historics were basically becoming homogenised. That way they had basically 1 template to make the guitar, and the flame and back wood was the only way of telling 1 RI from another. Worked well for you....you got the neck at the R8 rather than R9 price!!
     
    bulletproof and Kris Ford like this.
  3. Frozen Rat

    Frozen Rat Member

    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    115
    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2016
    My own personal experience is that I hear very few differences in sound from the R7s thru R60s, so little that I put it down to the normal variances between guitars in general. Therefore I wholly believe you when you say they are homogenized. I'm thrilled this is the case. I love it that I can get a cheaper guitar 'cause it doesn't have flames and they all sound great.
     
    bulletproof likes this.
  4. ARandall

    ARandall Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    6,285
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2012
    Well, there is no necessary correlation between a R of any year and a certain tone to start with of course. The wood itself will make more difference to the base tone of a guitar than a neck thickness in isolation. And I have (like you) not come across any solid evidence that there is a linear tonal progression with either weight or bulk in the neck.


    But the Historics never really got some of the year differences anyhow. The logo is not shape accurate nor does it change position on the headstock like the 50's ones did. There are other hardware font differences that could further make the R4-6 different to the R7-0.
    So the general thing has been that 1 neck rough blank is made. So if there are leftovers from 1 run, they can be simply put on another RI - previously with the shaft profile being individual.
    Now even that has become more generic. So you get (like the USA series) the 50's profile and the 60's and thats it really. But current events of course make it clear they were cutting and running on the RI's.
     
    bulletproof likes this.
  5. grayd8

    grayd8 Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,351
    Likes Received:
    1,083
    Joined:
    May 5, 2014
    From the data in the beauty of the burst, they have always been all over the place.

    Even in the burst years you have some 1960's with fatter necks than 1958's.

    [​IMG]
     
    H. Mac likes this.
  6. Frozen Rat

    Frozen Rat Member

    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    115
    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2016
    I measured the neck last night with calipers and re-checked it just now: 1st fret—.84 and 12th—.93

    Mine is definitely an odd guitar out of the bunch, not really matching anything in the chart above. Not even as thick as most '59 necks. It's between '59 and '60 and feels really good.
     
  7. BDW60

    BDW60 Senior Member

    Messages:
    380
    Likes Received:
    289
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    That's a R0 V2 neck in measurement -- which as you say is a 'tweener but IMO more 60 than 59. I had one, really nice feeling neck.

    My 2014 R8 is another rare one I really love .88 at the first and .94 at the 12th with the carve being a subtle V shape. So there were a few 59s with specs close to that, but definitely on the smaller side up top and the V carve makes it play a little smaller than the measurements.
     
  8. Frozen Rat

    Frozen Rat Member

    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    115
    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2016
    I wonder if the necks in both our R8s (.84/.93 and .88/.94) were carved for R0s and accidentally ended up on R8s instead. Or perhaps that day they ran out of R8 necks so grabbed one off the R0 pile. Whatever the case, I absolutely love the carve of this neck. The other R8s I played were noticeably thicker, which felt just a bit too big for me as I have small hands.
     

Share This Page