New Epiphone Inspired By Gibson Custom Collection

[BoneDigger]

I'm very familiar with the line. The SJ200 isn't bad, but the real gem is the Hummingbird, at least in my opinion.

However, I would like to see how the updated SJ200 sounds once someone plays one.

[BoneDigger]

Bumping this up. Someone needs to give a real world review of these. I've seen the YouTube reviews, but you have to take those for what they are. I have not seen one in stores yet.

[Pickcity]

Originally Posted by Moldstar

They all look very promising, but when I go in stores to play them, they always disappoint me. Not to poop on them, but I have played them all, some multiple times, and it has been a resounding no way everytime. The SJ-200 looks amazing, but when you play them (at least the 2 different examples I have played) you will notice they weigh a metric ton, and are very, very tight sounding and quiet. Looked great, though.

This was my experience, exactly. The J200 copy looked great, but was completely unimpressive, while my Gibson sounds like a Steinway piano.

[Steve DeRosa]

Originally Posted by BoneDigger

I could be wrong, but weren't those Elite and Elitist Les Paul's still about half the price if the Gibson LP? I might be wrong.

Indeed they were, but the real gems of the lineup were the Byrdland (one-third the price of the Gibson version, with no sacrifice in QC/playability or tone) and the all-carved '38 Emperor comp box (they called it a '39, and TMK only 44 were made), along with the true-to-Jack-Bruce 30" scale EB-3 (still wondering why the standard Epi version went with a 34" scale...) - all presently collectors' items in their own right, and considering what Henry J. et al. were pumping out (and what they were charging for it) small wonder they were discontinued...

[BoneDigger]

Originally Posted by Moldstar

They all look very promising, but when I go in stores to play them, they always disappoint me. Not to poop on them, but I have played them all, some multiple times, and it has been a resounding no way everytime. The SJ-200 looks amazing, but when you play them (at least the 2 different examples I have played) you will notice they weigh a metric ton, and are very, very tight sounding and quiet. Looked great, though.

I'm sorry I missed this. So, you have played the new 1957 SJ200 and found it to be not very good? That's disappointing. I had hoped that the new top and appointments would have improved these. Since these were released just recently, I have not found anyone locally who carries them yet.

[BoneDigger]

Originally Posted by Pickcity

This was my experience, exactly. The J200 copy looked great, but was completely unimpressive, while my Gibson sounds like a Steinway piano.

Thanks for responding. It looks like stores must be getting these new models in now. Locally, I can't find one to try out. I had high hopes for this new variation.

[kitandkat]

From my experience playing these guitars, add my voice to the chorus of 'nope, not even close.'

The tone is cheap, with no depth, no mojo, and little sustain. Online reviews are honestly a waste of time. If you've had any experience with the Gibson equivalents, you'll know as soon as you play the first note of these 'inspired by' instruments- they are not even in the same ballpark.

[BoneDigger]

Originally Posted by kitandkat

From my experience playing these guitars, add my voice to the chorus of 'nope, not even close.'



The tone is cheap, with no depth, no mojo, and little sustain. Online reviews are honestly a waste of time. If you've had any experience with the Gibson equivalents, you'll know as soon as you play the first note of these 'inspired by' instruments- they are not even in the same ballpark.

Thanks for the response. I'm guessing these must be more readily available than I anticipated. I can't find one locally but they are available online. I have played the original IBG SJ200 and was hoping this new variant with the torrified top might be different. I do like the wider nut on the newer version and it sure looks good, but it's not cheap. Thanks for the reply!

[kitandkat]

Originally Posted by BoneDigger

Thanks for the response. I'm guessing these must be more readily available than I anticipated. I can't find one locally but they are available online. I have played the original IBG SJ200 and was hoping this new variant with the torrified top might be different. I do like the wider nut on the newer version and it sure looks good, but it's not cheap. Thanks for the reply!

Sure thing. Of course, this is just my opinion. I had high hopes, too! They are priced at about 1/3 of what used Gibson Historic's are going for, and you'd be much better off having a 'lifetime guitar,' than spending the money on one of these.

Funny how the raw materials are not really the difference maker.

[tinnitus]

I've noticed Epiphone Hummingbirds for some time now and always wondered how much they might resemble their Gibson namesakes. And I've seen (in passing) some favorable praise. I know where I stand on Fender's Squier line. Some are excellent, some not at all.

Grabbed an Epiphone Hummingbird the other day for a quick (3-minute) test-drive. I didn't know at the time that the Epis come in two tiers as well - 'regular' and a more expensive Inspired by Gibson model (solid wood).

I play a little game with myself and try to avoid looking at the price tag on instrument until I've actually played it. So, unaware that there are two Epiphones, I honestly don't know which one I tried.

Although I'd probably pass on either model given the nut width and a couple other things that don't fit my admittedly biased style, I'd be interested (just from an academic standpoint) to know how the two models stack up in an A/B comparison.

YouTube vids often don't tell the same story as my hands and ears.

[BoneDigger]

Originally Posted by tinnitus

I've noticed Epiphone Hummingbirds for some time now and always wondered how much they might resemble their Gibson namesakes.

I know where I stand on Fender's Squier line. Some are excellent, some not at all.

Grabbed an Epiphone Hummingbird the other day for a quick (3-minute) test-drive. I didn't know at the time that the Epis come in two tiers as well - 'regular' and a more expensive Inspired by Gibson model (solid wood).

I play a little game with myself and try to avoid looking at the price tag on an instrument until I've actually played it. So, unaware that there are two kinds, I honestly don't know which one I tried.

Although I'd probably pass on either model given the nut width and a couple other things that don't fit my admittedly biased style, I'd be interested (just from an academic standpoint) to know how the two models stack up in an A/B comparison.

YouTube vids often don't tell the same story as my hands and ears.

I own the IBG Hummingbird and I like mine quite a lot. I own a D35 and a D18 and I am just as likely to reach for the Epi Hummingbird. I too don't prefer the narrower nut width, but it sounds really good strummed or played finger style. I have tried the cheaper, laminate, versions and was not impressed. But, the IBG version is very good.

[EllenGtrGrl]

I liked the IBG J-45 I had a year and a half ago, other than it's neck (I've gotten spoiled by wider necks on my acoustics - 1.720" nut width on my Gibson J-35s, and the 1.750" nut widths on my other acoustics), so I said good bye to my IBG J45. When I learned about the IBG Banner J-45, I was very interested in it. I hoped it would have the wider 1.720: nut width neck my J-35s had, and the chunker necks they, and my former IBG J45 had. Nut width is 1.722" , but unfortunately for me, they have a V-profile neck. Oh well, so much for that. I'll stick to my Eastmans.

[67goat]

Originally Posted by Br1ck

A decent step up the ladder, but no substitute fro the real thing.The naming is over the top marketing. I'm trying to figure out what is custom about it. Are they being inspired by the Gibson Custom Shop?

There are a bunch of IBG acoustic models, but the only IBGC acoustic models are the 42 Banner J45 and the 57 SJ200. I would guess that the custom shop part is helping to make them more period correct to those specific models than the standard IBG J45/SJ200.

[Br1ck]

Originally Posted by BoneDigger

I'm not sure on the marketing and naming. It does have the 1.72 nut width and a higher quality top now. Not sure how they come up with names though.

As for your first statement, you are aware that Epiphone is owned by Gibson? Leaving the history of Epiphone out of the equation, Epiphone is generally seen as a cheaper variant and more accessible to people who don't want to spend $3,000 to $5,000 on a Gibson. With that being said, describing is as "no substitute for a Gibson" might be missing the point here. Why would Gibson make a guitar that is a direct competition to their own name brand, at half (or less) the price?

As the owner of a 65 Epiphone Texan, made side by side with Gibson in the Kalamazoo factory, I'm very aware of the Epiphone history. I have to be polite when someone mentions that my guitar sounds really good for a $500 guitar. But Gibson has other ideas for Epiphone, now producing electrics in the $1500 range, so they are hell bent on going mid market. To confuse matters more, They are building Epiphone Acoustics in Bozeman now.

[67goat]

Originally Posted by Dok

You know, I was kind of surprised at the lack of depth and body on that particular example. I've played some IBG J45s that had more, so I wonder if that indicates these models will continue to be kind of a luck of the draw sort of thing.

I thought they both sounded a little boxy and dull. That could be the mic, post processing, or how those two guitars really sound. But in that vid, neither inspired me to want one.