Eastman E10SS vs Epiphone Slash J-45

[DC2]

I’ve been interested in the Eastman E10SS and E20SS for a while, but have yet to find one in the wild to test drive. Yesterday, i ran across one of the new “inspired by Gibson” Slash j-45’s.

I was pleasantly surprised with the Epiphone. My question is: is there anyone here that has had hands on experience with both the Eastman and these newer Epiphones that can speak to how they compare. The Epi is half the price. That’s why i ask.

I’m a Martin guy (HD28, D18, 000-15). Ive always liked the J-45, but not enough to spend $3k on one.

[Murphy Slaw]

Originally Posted by DC2

Ive always liked the J-45, but not enough to spend $3k on one.

I've owned, gigged and loved a J-45 for 20 years. I prefer the scale, and mine is rosewood/ebony. It's my very favorite guitar of all time.

I don't get the Slash thing. I'd have to play one I guess.

[Marshall]

The Slash looks very good. Some used ones on sale at Reverb too. Never seen one in the flesh. But they look good.

[Marshall]

How finicky are you about necks? The Eastmans have a thin neck with 12" radius fretboard. The Slash has a fatter neck with a 16" radius fretboard; more like a 1950s neck thickness. Except the 1950s necks were 12" radius.

I like fat necks.

[abn556]

I had an E10SS for a while. I could never bond with it. It did not sound like a J-45, which is why I had got it in the first place. It was a pretty guitar, but the playability and tone were not what I was looking for. So I moved it and got a J-45 Custom Shop. I know - apples and oranges….

IMO the E10SS sounded pingy, more like a Taylor than a Gibson.

[Bluenose]

I own an 2011 E10SS that I bought new and considering what I paid for it back then ($1100 CDN) I got a great deal for a really well made guitar that has never given me any problems and continues to improve in tone. It easily hangs with my far more expensive acoustics.

[DC2]

I’m not necessarily sold on the Slash model. Just happens to be the one i have played. I’d imagine that the other IBG Epi’s would be similar.

[davenumber2]

Originally Posted by Marshall

How finicky are you about necks? The Eastmans have a thin neck with 12" radius fretboard. The Slash has a fatter neck with a 16" radius fretboard; more like a 1950s neck thickness. Except the 1950s necks were 12" radius.



I like fat necks.

I’ve had 4 Eastmans including 2 slopes and they all had a full C profile. Not what I would call thin. The two slope necks were also wider than the 1.69” spec.

[BoneDigger]

I have owned both an E10SS and the Epiphone Slash model. The Eastman is definitely a better made guitar. It's significantly lighter than the Epiphone and less heavily built. The Eastman also plays and sounds a little better.

Neither guitar was a bad guitar and both sounded good. If you don't play standing, the weight difference shouldn't matter a whole lot. I think you would probably be happy with either one. You'll want to have either one professionally setup. If you are shooting for Gibson tone, I'd lean a bit more toward the Epiphone. The Eastman sounds great, but it sounds like an Eastman, not a Gibson.

[SalFromChatham]

I think it depends on the year of the E10ss. The older ones (more than 4 or 5 years back) with nitro finishes are great guitars. Alls I’ll say about the newer poly finished ones is… not my cup of tea. Play first.

[Marshall]

Interestingly, I have an Eastman E1SS-CLA-LTD. Great sounding guitar, but different from a Gibson. Warmer. More even. Less punchy.

But strangely, I couldn’t get used to the thinner neck, so I took it to a luthier friend and he made a new neck to match my 1957 J50. -Now I love it.

[67goat]

I have an E6SS (Sitka instead of Adirondack) and it is a great guitar. Doesn't sound like a Gibson J-45, but it sounds good. I have never played the IBG or Slash J-45s, but I do have an Epiphone J-45 that was the step up from the studio before the IBG line came out.

It is an uninspiring dull guitar. The build quality seems fine. Not sure if it's the top, the bracing, some other geometry, or all of the above, but it is meh. It's not bad, but not good either. It also does not sound like a Gibson J-45. The IBG versions should be significantly better though.

The E6SS is closer in price to the IBG.

[Marshall]

Originally Posted by davenumber2

I’ve had 4 Eastmans including 2 slopes and they all had a full C profile. Not what I would call thin. The two slope necks were also wider than the 1.69” spec.

You can call them as you feel them. I've tried their "full C" and find it not full enough. To each his own.

I point this out because the Slash model specifically goes for a 1950s Gibson neck profile, so the promo material says. That'd be thicker than the "full C" I expect. I would find that interesting. Others would not.

Buyer beware.

[DC2]

Originally Posted by BoneDigger

I have owned both an E10SS and the Epiphone Slash model. The Eastman is definitely a better made guitar. It's significantly lighter than the Epiphone and less heavily built. The Eastman also plays and sounds a little better.

Neither guitar was a bad guitar and both sounded good. If you don't play standing, the weight difference shouldn't matter a whole lot. I think you would probably be happy with either one. You'll want to have either one professionally setup. If you are shooting for Gibson tone, I'd lean a bit more toward the Epiphone. The Eastman sounds great, but it sounds like an Eastman, not a Gibson.

Thanks! This is exactly what i was looking for. This is not going to be my main guitar as i said. I own 3 Martin’s. I’ve always like the J-45 and J-200, but don’t want to spend the Gibson $$$

[LawrenceMollard]

Originally Posted by DC2

Thanks! This is exactly what i was looking for. This is not going to be my main guitar as i said. I own 3 Martin’s. I’ve always like the J-45 and J-200, but don’t want to spend the Gibson $$$

I've been playing my J-45 all weekend, I have a lot of Gibson acoustics. I've owned a lot of other guitars.

I'd be very skeptical to think that you'll capture the subtlety of the Gibson J-45 with an Epiphone or an Eastman. Or anything else, really.

It's not just a body shape, the Gibson J-45 is about subtlety. It's a less is more kind of thing.

I had a J-35, which at the time was a J-45 but with shifted bracing, I have a J-15, which is a J-45 but with walnut, and I have a J-29, which is a J-35 with shifted bracing but rosewood bodied.

So at one point I had four slope shoulder Gibsons. Still have three.

The J-45 is not as loud as any of the others, and has a melancholy, subdued magic to it. It's not just another guitar version.

Maybe the Epiphones would get the sound pretty well, but I would bet that the Eastman would try to do what a lot of guitar makers seem to try to do with the J type guitar, which is to "improve" it.

I guess my advice is if you want a Gibson J-45 get that. You will not regret it.