Is Modern Better? - Original 1961 Gibson SG Standard vs Gibson CS 60th Anniversary 1961 SG Les Paul

➡ 1961 Gibson Les Paul / SG Electric Guitar - Cherry:
waltgracevinta...
➡ Gibson Custom Shop 60th Anniversary 1961 SG Les Paul Standard VOS Electric Guitar:
waltgracevinta...
➡ 1965 Fender Pro Reverb Combo Amp:
waltgracevinta...
In 1961, when this rev of the Les Paul was introduced, it was a shockingly different & clear departure from its cousins of the previous nine years. Les Paul himself even distancing from the "demonic" looking new body style, having his name removed from the models by early 1963. As time would go on, many in rock and blues adopted the renamed "SG" body style, with a notable players making it their own signature guitar. It is now one of the most celebrated models in the Gibson arsenal.
#dreamloud #carsandguitars #waltgracevintage #gibson #1961 #sg
CHECK US OUT:
waltgracevinta...
/ waltgracevintage
/ waltgracevintage
/ sebaslannes
CONTACT:
[phone]
[e-mail]
300 NW 26th Street Wynwood, FL, USA 33127

[@johnstaf]

This kind of music that really suits the character of the SG. It's nice to hear a demo that isn't hard rock -although it's great at that too. 😀.

[@scottjua]

The takeaway that the new reissue is a great guitar is the main thing. Yes, they’re fantastic in their own right for sure. I own a 60th custom, but I also own an original 61, and while I applaud Gibson for making a great instrument, I’m equally annoyed that they have the reference scans, and heritage to get it right… but don’t. There’s every effort put into Les Paul reissues in getting almost every detail and body contour correct, but the SG shape only gets a half-hearted effort. The horn bevels, tapers, heel design, as a huge miss, and those are the cosmetic things that make a huge difference in capturing that feel for a vintage one. What a shame

[@cameronmcbride1084]

Was just about to send this video to you Scott!

[@Delboydunno]

The thing you have to remember is a lot of the originals were hand shaped/ hand sanded. Maybe one worker would take more material off the end of the horn while another could perfectly sand out the scratches and nothing else. No hand made/ vintage guitars will ever be exact contours or headstock shape. They said in the Gibson video about the 60tg anniversary that they scanned 2 guitars, but I bet there’s a lot of variance out there with the contouring in the vintage ones.

[@Tonetwisters]

I have a CS '64 VOS that sounds fabulous and has a bigger neck than I thought it would, which turns out great for me. What I care more about than horns and perfect body shape, is the sound (really good!) and playability. "Playability" is where Gibson missed it. You spend that much for a guitar and still have to take it to a good guitar tech to get the nut, frets and saddles right, and I'm not just being picky ... okay, I've been playing 61 years; but any decent player wants a guitar that plays right.

[@Jorgestrat]

This youg guitar player knows how to play all of those great guitars, his sound is pure old way blues playing is just awesome.

[@johnb4024]

The Vintage SG has had the pickups replaced? Ouch

[@bobaldo2339]

I see no point in the video for that reason. It was the original PAF pickups that made them valuable. Lots of people, way back in the day, sold the PU's out of them for 1k a piece.

[@Tonetwisters]

I am blessed to own a '64 custom shop reissue VOS and it is a guitar that I have to MAKE myself put it down ... and that, from a 62 year long Fender player.

[@calvinberkenbile8414]

Nice to hear some clean SG tones coz they clean up nice!

[@RT-vd9nt]

The Inlays shrink fom age

[@ADJ1.1]

Hi, what size fretwire was used on the SG in the 1960's? Thanks! Great video

[@waltgracevintage8620]

Hi! Depends of the era, but medium wide frets is the most common.

[@thesoundpurist]

The answer is I don't know but it seems to have a $hit l0a6 of cash helps a lot. I have boutique gear I had love/hate relationship with that now I can't live without anymore. Knowing how to compose with different instruments/speakers/amps, gear and stuff is a key component that improve with experience IMO. There's so much possibilities with all my gear, I'm overwhelmed and can't justify buying anything else as I always discover a new sound everyday.

[@NHail]

hard to tell which is which since you don't mention when you're switching

[@darwinsaye]

The reissue has a very bright white and wider edge on the pickguard. That’s the easiest way I could tell when he switched.

[@MrTL666]

The Gibson Historic Collection has been making 50s instruments for 30 years now. the only thing different with the 61 is the sideways

[@ZillianZilch]

They definitely both sound like guitars.

[@williambaker5318]

One is not the other! Both are the truth (great).

[@anthonyrichard461]

Blackface Pro Reverb Doesn't hurt the the tone a bit>

[@JamesJones-mm2nm]

The bridge is not angled

[@tfejulienewmar]

If you lined up a bunch of SGs from 1961 you'd immediately notice that they're all visibly very different from each other. You'd notice that none of them have the same shaped horns or bevels. You'd notice that some have better inlay placement than others. You'd notice that some are darker and others lighter. You'd feel that each one has a slightly different neck and so on. This is why it's impossible for Gibson to mass produce a perfect copy of this guitar, or any other guitar from their collection for that matter because no SG or LP is the same. So when it comes to reissues, there's no such thing as "true historic". There's no such thing as "accuracy". There never will be, ever. If you own vintage SGs, like I do, you'd be forced to accept the sobering, bubble bursting reality that the original SGs weren't very good guitars and almost look thrown together too. They definitely made and released them in a big hurry back then, without affording each guitar the time or consideration it deserved. That's why the inlays are placed badly on your one and my one's too. If Gibson released a SG with inlays like that everyone would have a meltdown and demand a refund... just like musicians did back in the 60s, when they noticed that SGs weren't made up to scratch. We need to stop making it seem like vintage Gibson's have magical powers or were constructional masterpieces, they weren't.

[@tfejulienewmar]

I own vintage SGs. If Gibson made an identical replica of a '61 it'd be a downgrade. The original SGs were terrible guitars, which caused a big backlash from musicians. It forced Gibson to change the way they were made very quickly. SGs from 63/64 are much better than 61s and modern SGs are simply better than all of them put together. As for the bevels, they're inconsistent on every model from the 60s onwards. There's no such thing as definitive bevels or horns because like a Les Paul's top, they're all different from each other. If you want a badly made guitar with rotting inlays and a flimsy neck then go ahead, spend thousands on a vintage SG and enjoy your new ornament. But if you actually write songs and play in bands and need a functional guitar you can rely on, then buy a modern Gibson USA model. You don't need a Murphy Lab.

[@user-zx7mx7zn9f]

앰프 소리가 UAFX 드림65랑 똑같네

[@heyho2752]

귀가 없나요?

[@MrTL666]

If You are going to have a video of comparing get some one who knows about vintage guitars..... " rolled for the factory in 1961" seriously