Gibson ES339: Tell me about them

jeztone2

Im thinking that its time I moved my PRS CE24 on as we've just not bonded & after loaning the guitar to my brother for 2 months. I get the impression that the lack of love is surely down to me as he loved it.

In order to kill two birds with one stone. I figured a ES339 would give me a semi acoustic as well as a guitar that could give me some LP like grunt. Also from the reviews Ive read so far, I get the impression that David Blunkett isn't in charge of QC at Gibsons Memphis factory & someone with a clue is.

Opinions please?

lustycourtier

They are tiny and look silly on anyone bigger than 12 year old girl. I instantly regretted buying one and thankfully managed to return and got an R7 instead. Sounnded ok though (57s).

jeztone2

lustycourtier said:

They are tiny and look silly on anyone bigger than 12 year old girl. I instantly regretted buying one and thankfully managed to return and got an R7 instead. Sounnded ok though (57s).

Oh boy, Im like 237lbs of man. I even get eyed up by the lady gorilla's in zoo's....is it really that bad?

fretfinder

I had one for a year or so, gigged it, it sounded great, very light weight, good upper fret access. But as above I concluded they're just too small, neither fish nor fowl (i.e. neither a semi nor a Les Paul, although they sound a bit like a cross between the two). Also, although the upper fret access is good, I found that my hand sometimes bumped against the treble Mickey Mouse ear, as the cutaway between the 'ear' and the neck is correspondingly smaller on a 339 than that on a 335. 

Lots of people love 'em though. 

Lebarque

I tend to agree with the above - they just don't look right! Besides, my impression is that they give 335 tone, rather than a 335/LesPaul hybrid. If it's a hybrid you want, I'd suggest looking at a carved top semi. If it's 335 tone you want, get a 335.

Blaendulais

I have one. I NEVER play it instead of my 335 or LP.  In fact I just dont play it - too small sounding acoustically and feels like a compromise rather than a guitar of its own

stickyfiddle

They look fine to me, but I've been playing a CS336 for a decade now (and I've never played a 339 that's half as good as a 336). Tonally you can imagine them all on a line:

ES-335 --- ES-339 --- CS-336 --- Les Paul

olafgarten

I don't think they are too small, same size as a Les Paul, I think you need to decide which is more important, ES or LP tones.

Blueingreen

I have one and think for what they are they are very good.  They'll pretty much cover anything a 335 will do, and Les Paul stuff apart from high gain.  Mine was a solid number 1 ahead of pricier guitars for a long time, and probably still would be if I hadn't started preferring guitars with a trem.

The "too small" thing is subjective and presumably based on the prejudice that a semi-acoustic "ought" to be bigger than a solid body.  We can all have our own views on that, and mine is that i'm not strapping on a 335, which I find uncomfortably big, in the fond delusion it'll make me look more coolly retro. Kurt Rosenwinkel and Jon Herington, two of my favourite players, don't have problems playing smaller semi-acoustics.

 In any case I've had lots of positive feedback on the look of the guitar.  I liked the size of mine enough to buy a 336, which is an upgrade mainly in terms of cosmetics, alhough it does also have a slightly more refined feel to it as well.  The idea was that I'd sell the 339 after buying the 336 but a couple years on I've been reluctant to part with it:  in fact it still gets a lot more playing time than the 336, mainly to do with my being less sensitive to the thought it might pick up a chip or two with everyday use.

The one thing I'd say is that the QC on these is probably not as great as on some high end guitars.  Mine had a dryish fretboard and some of the nibs could have been a little flusher to the neck.  As so often with Gibson, these little niggles do nothing to affect the playability or sound of the guitar but you do think they shouldn't be there on a £1700 guitar when other makers can do better at a lower price point,

crunchman

Had one and sold it.  Much prefer the ES Les Paul my wife and daughters got me for Christmas the year before last:

http://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/64223/my-wife-is-amazing-ngd/p1

The ES is a different construction than the 339 - I think it is more hollowed out.  Even though the body is a bit smaller, a greater proportion of it is air.  The other difference that is very significant is the pickups.  The ES Les Paul has the new Memphis Historic Spec pickups - which I think are brilliant.  The 339 I had (2007) had 57 classics.  New ones come with Burstbuckers from what I can see.  I'm not the only one who likes the MHS pickups.  I was talking to the manager in the new Camden branch of Guitar Guitar when I was in there a couple of weeks ago.  He worked for Gibson for several years, and reckons that the MHS pickups are probably the best they do.

The newer ones may be better but definitely look out for QC issues on older ones.  Mine was one of the very first 339s (late 2007) and it had 2 or 3 cosmetic flaws.  It also had a volume pot that hadn't been soldered.  About 6 months after I got it, it was cutting in and out  when I adjusted the volume.  It turned out that the wires from the pickups had been wrapped around the tags on the volume pot but not actually soldered.

pmg

Sounds more like a LP than a 335.  Very good guitars and value for money.  My experience is with 339s equipped with 57 classics although you can get ones with BBs now.  When buying I A/B'd against 3 other 339s.  There was decent consistency in those I tried but as always try as many as you can and find your preference.  Regarding the size, I think you need to play one and decide that for yourself.  

Deijavoo

I absolutely love mine. Tried against various other 335s and 339s in 2008 (I think it was) and it's been a great servant ever since.  Seen them used sell for between £1100 and £1300 and I genuinely wouldn't sell mine for double that.


I do realise that I would never get that if I had to sell it but I'd have to have some outrageous GAS to ever consider it. 

For reference I'm 5'11 and 14st-ish and never felt like it was small.  *snigger*


https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/10530675_10152276417975749_5968958460833719917_n.jpg?oh=38b65505e5b6475a4c1530ae1b56a3e5&oe=591049B2

AlexHunter

Love mine. Great all round guitar, sold it a few years ago thinking I was going to stick with just Les Pauls, instantly regretted it and managed to track the exact same guitar down about 18 months later and bought it back. I prefer the fat neck profile to the 30/60 thing and the 57s work well. Doubt you'd get a more versatile guitar for the money secondhand.

dindude

I like them but I'm also in the too small camp. An 335 is also too big. A 15" wide body would be perfect in my book. But then I'm also the rare bread that think Gibson have never designed a guitar that is quite "right".

Philly_Q

stickyfiddle said:

They look fine to me, but I've been playing a CS336 for a decade now (and I've never played a 339 that's half as good as a 336). Tonally you can imagine them all on a line:

ES-335 --- ES-339 --- CS-336 --- Les Paul

I had an ES-339, sold it, regretted it then replaced it with a CS-336.  The 336 looks very similar but the construction's different, the 339 is made from pressed laminates like a 335 whereas the 336 is a one-piece mahogany body which has been hollowed out.

My 339 had the fatter "59" neck - and it was much fatter than a "59" LP neck - but I don't think that's an option any more, they all have the slimmer 30/60 neck (I'm not sure if they still actually call it a 30/60 profile).  The ones with block markers look cool, though.

As regards the size, I'm only 5'6" and an ES-335 is way too big for me, but I do agree with @fretfinder that the cutaways on the 339/336 are a bit tight, they could've been designed a little better but I guess it might spoil the body proportions.  I think if you see a 339 next to a 335 the 339 looks a bit weird, but it looks fine on its own.

Lebarque

336 - that's what I was thinking about for a LP/hybrid, much more than a 339

Panama_Jack666

I love mine - it's not a 335. It's not a Les Paul. It sits somewhere inbetween. Doesn't really sound like and ES Les Paul either.

I'm 6 2 and 18st so I look ridiculous but sound good so I'm not bothered.

jeztone2

Well just had a quick go on one in PMT Notts & was quite impressed. Would perhaps like to try another couple. But it's on my GAS list 

Titch

I had an early model and I played it for about five or six years before moving it on, they're good sounding guitars but I had a few niggles with mine which were fairly easily sorted,sticky nut, dry fingerboard and intonation problems which on a supposedly "Custom Shop" guitar really comes down to not so good quality control but that aside it never had a bad sound.
As to size well, I'm quite short so it suited me as mentioned in previous replies that in general 335's are a tad on the big side.
I would try a few before buying and by the way I think there are one or two on Gumtree at the minute for reasonable money.
Hope this has been useful to you.  

shaunm

Panama_Jack666 said:

I love mine - it's not a 335. It's not a Les Paul. It sits somewhere inbetween. Doesn't really sound like and ES Les Paul either.

I'm 6 2 and 18st so I look ridiculous but sound good so I'm not bothered.

I agree with this

@Panama_jack666 is around 6ft 2 


in all seriousness I've always liked the ones I've played. I'm not sure I'd have one over a 335 or LP though.

jeztone2

Cheers for all your input folks