From: mic@ut-emx.uucp (Mic Kaczmarczik)
Newsgroups: alt.guitar
Subject: Re: Soliciting Onions:  ES 335, 355
Date: 15 Sep 92 01:46:29 GMT
Organization: UT Austin Computation Center, Unix Services

In article <pquince.716487808@blacks> pquince@blacks.jpl.nasa.gov (Peter Quince) writes:
>Greetings; I have a couple questions about the Gibson guitars
>of the subject line; the ES 335 and 355.

	I own a '64 345, which has features in between those of the
	335 and 355.

>My understanding is that the 355 has a stereo output and a 
>control of some sort for this.  What does the control control,

	It's a 6-position rotary switch that selects between an assortment of
	tone filters.  The wiring diagram shows the switch going to a bunch of
	capacitors with different values.  I think the idea is for it to be a
	selectable band-cut filter, but that's about the extent of my
	understanding of the electronics. 

	Some people use it, others ignore it or even take it out of the
	circuit.  The effect I usually use it for is to make the guitar's tone
	more nasal or biting. I don't use it a lot, but sometimes it makes
	a nice contrast. 

>and what if anything are other differences between the 335 and
>the 355?

	I think the 355 has gold hardware, ``block'' style fretboard
	markers (compared to dots on the early 335's and split trapezoids
	on the 345), and perhaps fancier binding on the body.

>  Are their sounds indistinguishable?  Are they both
>semi-hollow bodies with big bricks of wood through the center?
>Or, more directly, is the 355 just the same as a 335 with a 
>couple hundred dollars of extra electonics that never gets used?

	The 355 is more or less a 335 with fancier fittings and the stereo
	VariTone circuit.  The construction is the same. Aside from possible
	differences in the pickups, wood and workmanship, which can happen
	even between two instances of the same model, you ought to be able to
	get the same sound out of either one. 

>Second issue; these guitars are frequently associated with 
>'previous generation' music.  (cf. recent posting describing
>one or the other as good for '60's and '70's type music.)
>While I don't believe that the guitar is incapable of playing
>any music composed after 1979,	 I am wondering if there is some
>subtle limitation to what these things can do.  This is sort of
>a stupid question, but you can smarten it up by restating it 
>'How would you characterize the tone, playability, and versatility 
>of the 335/355 w/r/t say a Les Paul or a Strat?'

	Well, the guitar is a compromise, as it was designed to be.  Its tone
	isn't as woody as a big hollowbody like an ES-175, nor is it as
	squeaky-clean as a Strat with its single-coil pickups.  Similarly, its
	sustain falls between that of a hollowbody and a solidbody.  It also
	feeds back quicker than a pure solidbody, which can be a real problem
	on stage (if feedback isn't part of your act, that is. :-) 

	I guess most players are looking for tones you can't really get out of
	a 335 because of these compromises.  I didn't see the post about 60's
	or 70's music, but the 335 does make a great rhythm guitar for lots of
	the stuff it probably talked about.  For me, I like the warm tone I
	can get out of my 345 when I dial in just a little ``breakup'' on my
	tube amp and play with both pickups on.  However, were I actively
	playing in a band, I'd probably play a Strat (or maybe a Les Paul with
	a coil tap) for more versatility.

	Unless, that is, I were in a Freddy King cover band, in which case
	I'd strap on my 345 and wail all night. :-)

>thanks for any good info.  pquince

	I'm typing this at work, so some of the details might be a bit off,
	but I hope this helps. 

--mic--

-- 
Mic Kaczmarczik             \
Unix Services Group          \          Picard and Riker in '92!
UT Austin Computation Center  \
remark@{ccwf,emx,bongo} 1-0251 \
From: dea@hplb.hpl.hp.com (David Allport)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 14:09:42 GMT
Subject: CORAL Electric Sitar
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories