I think the L5 sounds a little better. I don't know if it's as "easy" as the 175. I have del 175 (I mostly play blues) and I think it's the most comfortable guitar I've ever had (maybe because of its short scale). I have in it 0.13 strings (Thomastik)....and it remains soft ad playable! Great review.
I've owned both, and I can say the L-5 has a lot more transparency in the low range (ebony fingerboard and 25.5" scale), but on a smaller stage with some volume it WILL feed back owing to the solid woods. That said...I want BOTH of 'em back :-S. the L-5 for fingerstyle stuff and just to gawk at, and the 175 (I had '53 with p90's) for that fat sound MIT de Bassman on 4, or the great versatility for different gigs.
I prefer the L5. Glassy, yet buttery tone. Articulation and bell-like clarity with simultaneous warmth. But it all comes down to personal taste and aim. Joe Pass and Pat Metheny got so many great performances out of their 175's. Now I really want to see an L5 go up against a Super 400. Both carved tops, and same guts - but the 400 has got that extra girth... does it produce a special tone amplified that would distinguish it from the L5? Kenny Burrell seems to think so. Hmmmm.
Wow, I was expecting to hear more difference! I think I'd be more than happy with a good example of an E175. Acoustically I'm sure you'd hear more difference but an amp can colour the sound of both so much that I'm not sure I'd want to spend the difference in cost for the L5.
Lovely sounds from both. I lean towards the L5, but not by much. Seems like it was slightly clearer and more articulate, but hey, both are just sooo nice
Obviously, both guitars are extraordinary, not to mention way expensive! I believe Lee Ritenour prefers the L5 and I know that Pat Metheny used his blond 175 up until about 10 years ago when he made a deal with Ibanez.
@dudleysaun Metheny he retired his 175 in the mid 90's, but his association with Ibanez goes back to 1989 when he recorded Question & Answer on the prototype of his signature model
L5 SOUNDS SWEETER ......... ES 175 IS OK TOO..........IT IS LIKE CHOOSING BETWEEN A MERCEDEZ BENZ OR A BMW..!!!!!!!!!! BOTH ARE OK. IT DEPENDS ON THE PLAYER´ S CHOICE AND NECK FEELING
@teovenbar As you say, they are both beautiful guitars and who in their right mind could possibly disagree with you. I would slightly prefer the transparency of the 175 but that is a purely subjective observation.
I would be happy with either...but I would prefer the 175. The 175 is a little easier to play and better for playing solos. L5 is great for rhythm. In a trio the L5 will shine but not so much with a larger band.
I've had both and @SteffanLlwyd is correct. Just sitting around playing the L5 is absolutely georgous in looks and sound; but, the 175 will cut through the mix better. Unless you of course are Scotty Moore, - Oh Yeah! it's up to the player again, I forgot.
@SteffanLlwyd The first one is the L5. I think that, played in a band, the E175 would be heard with more clarity since its sound is not as full (more defined in a way) than the L5. Compare the 2 solos (1.00 & 2.10). Also, I think the E175 has a more vintage sound, as one could hear on old records. In my opinion, the E175's sound is more interresting. But this is a matter of taste. I guess the E 175 is somehow smaller as well.
I'm certainly not a world class jazz player, by any means but I have had both guitars. The ES 175 is a slightly smaller body and would be a bit more comfortable for a smaller player. I'm a big guy and I like the L5 body just fine. The 175 is made of laminate and the L5 is carved wood. Lots of difference in the acoustic only sound, not so much once it's amplified. The 175 is more suited for a working cat's guitar as it is not so fragile and resists feedback better.
Very nice!! I love Gibson hollow and semi hollow bodies..have a '58 dot reissue that gives me the mean overdriven blues i like on my jtm 45 combo amp as well as the clean tones I want on my Gretsch 6160 "country gentleman" amp..great playing, btw...
both these guitars are top shelf.have one friend who plays a Wes montgomery L5 and another who plays the 175.Both guys can make them sound like butter,especially the one who plays the Wes because he plays fingerstyle and with his thumb like Montgomery did and uses flatwound 12s. the 175 player uses a pick and usually plays with more speed. Still manages to get a nice fat rich sound .If I played electric , I'd sell body parts for either one.Just not arms and fingers.
@pisobarz Just buy any cheap crappy home keyboard and you will get no end of this soulless lame midi playbacks. Have you been living in a well for 30 years?
What amp did he use? Why the tone SO rolled off? It got way too flubby when he went to the ES175. I'd love to hear both guitars played the same great way but with improved tone. No sustain or sparkle = lack of lively tone. Could this be done again but with a proper amp and better tone? Poor treble and no sustain doesn't cut it for multi-thousand dollar instruments, and I mean MULTI!!!! If you can play to the level of instruments like that, you should know or afford to have proper tone.
I'd like to hear a few more melodic runs. to me the first (L5?) sounded brighter, with a bit more bite/growl/watever u wanna call it. the second (175) imo sounded warmer but also quite a bit less punch to its sound.
That said... I eventually sold my beloved 175 because I found I prefered the feel/tone of my blond Epiphone Emporer Regent at 25 1/2" length. It's closer to an L5 feel and about the same size as a Super 400. Huge guitar... There's a couple of videos of this big blond beauty on my youtube account if you're interested in the tone. Not that I'm a fantastic guitarist or anything :)
I used to own a 1965 ES-175 and found it to be a very warm and beautiful sounding archtop, as is the L5. The main diff to me is the scale length and how if affects feel and tone. ES-175 is short at 24 3/4", while the L5 is a longer 25 1/2". Shorter length = less string tension and a change in tone/feel.
If you're used to a Les Paul scale length and accompanying string bounce/feel, 175 is for you. If you like a Strat scale length and feel, L5 has a more bell-like tone IMHO
I have an L5 and a Benson GB-10 and have played a few 175s. You can get them all to sound roughly the same with changes in amp set up, strings and pick, but it's like trying to make fish taste like chicken; not better, just different. If you think 175s sound dull, listen to Kreisberg, or Metheny's earlier recordings.
Variation in sound is from woods, old vs. new, bridges, scale length, pu placement, and. necks, Price wise, a 60's 175 will run about the same as a newer L5. Practice helps!
Regardless of the semantics - it must be wonderful to own these iconic guitars. I have an old Antoria L5 laminate copy which is neither one thing nor t'other but nice instrument all the same. My idol Jim Hall played an old 175 in his early days and produced - to my ears - the sweetest jazz sound. I think the L5 has the edge here.
Actually your cheap Antoria is just as well made and constructed as a Gibson Es-175.
Dont forget the Es-175 was $175. It was a mail order guitar like an encore in an argos catalogue.
Jazz musicians are poor and its what they could afford.
Its my personal taste that the Es-175 has a very dull lifeless tone. Jim Hall and Joe Pass's recordings with the es-175 are thin and dull, or muddy and bass heavy.
Check out the washburn J-10 video on here (not the yellow one)
@Goergebenson Yeah - I've see the Washburn clip - had one once - a flat top - very nice instrument. Just which quality arch top to buy next is not an issue yet because of lack of funds but there seem to be one or two good alternatives to Gibsons for reasonable amounts of cash. When I was a lad an old jazz guitarist told me that if I did get a Gibson I should get a pre-war model (that's pre WWll) - he was of the opinion that 'new' models were not very good. His certainly did sing like no other
Respond to this video... In fact, if the person who uploaded this video could do a laminate top comparison, that would be more interesting. Then we could tell which one sounds more like an l5 which is considered the holey grail.
Gibson Es-175
Guild x-175 and x-500
Ibanez Fa/Fg series/2461
Washburn J-10
D'aquisto fender standard
Greco Fa
Yamaha Ae-1200
You get the idea.
Anyone out there who can put that together would get a thumbs up from me :-)
I dont have to watch a video that displays a stupid title. Compared, might be more acceptable, V:S is just plain stupid american hyperboles.
Its not even a great comparison, why? Well you cant here both unplugged, there is no comparison on things like cost, feedback issues, string tension, ease of use, the list could go on. Get a grip man!!
@overandout58 Really? The L-5 sounded a lot more bright and smooth to me. The 175's tone is a little too tinny and dull for me. The guitar was clipping a little bit on the recording for both of them, though, so it's a little hard to tell.
I have both instruments. The 175 for 14 years and the L5 only for 5 months. In my ears on my own amps the L5 sounds more smooth, but I guess it is really a matter of taste - and the feeling of having a unique instrument in your hands when playing the L5. Only problem is that it is so expensive that I don't dare taking it out on gigs.
It is a shame that the sound quality is so bad on this recording. Why don't you try once more without oversteering the level of accompaniment?
I was really interested in this video. I have an L-5 and have been wondering if the 175 sound might be more what I have been looking for. Only trouble is that the solo part on the 175 is far too short to compare with the L-5; also the backing track is a little loud. Anyone got a link to a more lengthy piece featuring a 175 in similar solo?
the l5 sounded a little nicer to me for this style of jazz...Just my opinion...i love the look of the es-175 though...cheers! great playing, thanks for posting.
I think the L5 sounds a little better. I don't know if it's as "easy" as the 175. I have del 175 (I mostly play blues) and I think it's the most comfortable guitar I've ever had (maybe because of its short scale). I have in it 0.13 strings (Thomastik)....and it remains soft ad playable! Great review.
fenderosa 1 week ago
I've owned both, and I can say the L-5 has a lot more transparency in the low range (ebony fingerboard and 25.5" scale), but on a smaller stage with some volume it WILL feed back owing to the solid woods. That said...I want BOTH of 'em back :-S. the L-5 for fingerstyle stuff and just to gawk at, and the 175 (I had '53 with p90's) for that fat sound MIT de Bassman on 4, or the great versatility for different gigs.
beezerk1 1 week ago
I prefer the L5. Glassy, yet buttery tone. Articulation and bell-like clarity with simultaneous warmth. But it all comes down to personal taste and aim. Joe Pass and Pat Metheny got so many great performances out of their 175's. Now I really want to see an L5 go up against a Super 400. Both carved tops, and same guts - but the 400 has got that extra girth... does it produce a special tone amplified that would distinguish it from the L5? Kenny Burrell seems to think so. Hmmmm.
NightGallery 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
zachNewYork 3 weeks ago
Wow, I was expecting to hear more difference! I think I'd be more than happy with a good example of an E175. Acoustically I'm sure you'd hear more difference but an amp can colour the sound of both so much that I'm not sure I'd want to spend the difference in cost for the L5.
Guitarooster52 1 month ago
Lovely sounds from both. I lean towards the L5, but not by much. Seems like it was slightly clearer and more articulate, but hey, both are just sooo nice
doogal1234 1 month ago
The first guitar sounds much better. However, I'd happily own the 175 if the chance should arise.
ssolooc 1 month ago
Obviously, both guitars are extraordinary, not to mention way expensive! I believe Lee Ritenour prefers the L5 and I know that Pat Metheny used his blond 175 up until about 10 years ago when he made a deal with Ibanez.
dudleysaun 1 month ago
@dudleysaun Metheny he retired his 175 in the mid 90's, but his association with Ibanez goes back to 1989 when he recorded Question & Answer on the prototype of his signature model
simonjeans 1 month ago
L5 SOUNDS SWEETER ......... ES 175 IS OK TOO..........IT IS LIKE CHOOSING BETWEEN A MERCEDEZ BENZ OR A BMW..!!!!!!!!!! BOTH ARE OK. IT DEPENDS ON THE PLAYER´ S CHOICE AND NECK FEELING
teovenbar 1 month ago
@teovenbar As you say, they are both beautiful guitars and who in their right mind could possibly disagree with you. I would slightly prefer the transparency of the 175 but that is a purely subjective observation.
sykes101 3 weeks ago
I would be happy with either...but I would prefer the 175. The 175 is a little easier to play and better for playing solos. L5 is great for rhythm. In a trio the L5 will shine but not so much with a larger band.
Frapzoid 1 month ago
great job L5 sounds better 175 more of a muffle sound
morrisman64 1 month ago
blue bossa! :)
AndreGole 1 month ago
175->laminated->more punch->better for lead/solo guitar
L5->solid wood->softer->nicer for chords/rhythm guitar
Eurobubble70 1 month ago
I've had both and @SteffanLlwyd is correct. Just sitting around playing the L5 is absolutely georgous in looks and sound; but, the 175 will cut through the mix better. Unless you of course are Scotty Moore, - Oh Yeah! it's up to the player again, I forgot.
Big Ron
BIgRon2176 1 month ago
belissimas guitarras , very very good sounds ! 5*
viniguitarjazz 1 month ago
I 'd like to hear such a (excellent) comparative test between the ES175 and the new BURNY RFA-75.
lust4bass 1 month ago
your swing needs some work
sKarmA115 1 month ago
Where is the LOWEST price for an L-5 {Wes OR CES},thanks.!!!
shecky308 1 month ago
For me the fisr guitar is best; but which one is it?
SteffanLlwyd 2 months ago
@SteffanLlwyd It's the L5
Hawkeye62158 1 month ago
@SteffanLlwyd The first one is the L5. I think that, played in a band, the E175 would be heard with more clarity since its sound is not as full (more defined in a way) than the L5. Compare the 2 solos (1.00 & 2.10). Also, I think the E175 has a more vintage sound, as one could hear on old records. In my opinion, the E175's sound is more interresting. But this is a matter of taste. I guess the E 175 is somehow smaller as well.
lust4bass 1 month ago
I'm certainly not a world class jazz player, by any means but I have had both guitars. The ES 175 is a slightly smaller body and would be a bit more comfortable for a smaller player. I'm a big guy and I like the L5 body just fine. The 175 is made of laminate and the L5 is carved wood. Lots of difference in the acoustic only sound, not so much once it's amplified. The 175 is more suited for a working cat's guitar as it is not so fragile and resists feedback better.
Big Ron
BIgRon2176 2 months ago
I wonder whats your type of amp and setting is as my 175 sounded a bit too bright on my Ibanez amp
indoorgreatman 2 months ago
I want both.
BluesFrets 2 months ago
Very nice!! I love Gibson hollow and semi hollow bodies..have a '58 dot reissue that gives me the mean overdriven blues i like on my jtm 45 combo amp as well as the clean tones I want on my Gretsch 6160 "country gentleman" amp..great playing, btw...
ro307805 2 months ago
both these guitars are top shelf.have one friend who plays a Wes montgomery L5 and another who plays the 175.Both guys can make them sound like butter,especially the one who plays the Wes because he plays fingerstyle and with his thumb like Montgomery did and uses flatwound 12s. the 175 player uses a pick and usually plays with more speed. Still manages to get a nice fat rich sound .If I played electric , I'd sell body parts for either one.Just not arms and fingers.
bobbyearl60 2 months ago
l5 sounds great!
elevenAD 2 months ago
Comment removed
jazz1bro 2 months ago
Gibson 175 for me
aordaz41 2 months ago
blue bossa?
EVERYTHINGELECTRON1C 2 months ago
I would take the 175
Hawkeye62158 3 months ago
what strings and size are you using??
guitalfredo 3 months ago
hey where can i get this backing track from?
pisobarz 3 months ago
@pisobarz Just buy any cheap crappy home keyboard and you will get no end of this soulless lame midi playbacks. Have you been living in a well for 30 years?
Internetpolice666 3 months ago
@Internetpolice666 wow that was a bit arrogant of you. i was just asking
pisobarz 3 months ago
@pisobarz Yes....sorry for that. Was just trying to help in my own sarcastic way. No offence meant.
Internetpolice666 3 months ago
ahh good old Blue Bossa
DreamTheaterisGod1 3 months ago
What year is the L-5?
jazz1bro 3 months ago
Does anyone know the name of this song? Thanks!
smrioles 3 months ago
What amp did he use? Why the tone SO rolled off? It got way too flubby when he went to the ES175. I'd love to hear both guitars played the same great way but with improved tone. No sustain or sparkle = lack of lively tone. Could this be done again but with a proper amp and better tone? Poor treble and no sustain doesn't cut it for multi-thousand dollar instruments, and I mean MULTI!!!! If you can play to the level of instruments like that, you should know or afford to have proper tone.
CTuxford 3 months ago
Cool .. Nice Round sound on the L 5 : )
SIRONEDRAGON 3 months ago
I'd like to hear a few more melodic runs. to me the first (L5?) sounded brighter, with a bit more bite/growl/watever u wanna call it. the second (175) imo sounded warmer but also quite a bit less punch to its sound.
sachary 3 months ago
the L5 hands down........
jetglo325 3 months ago
That said... I eventually sold my beloved 175 because I found I prefered the feel/tone of my blond Epiphone Emporer Regent at 25 1/2" length. It's closer to an L5 feel and about the same size as a Super 400. Huge guitar... There's a couple of videos of this big blond beauty on my youtube account if you're interested in the tone. Not that I'm a fantastic guitarist or anything :)
WadeJacksonMusic 4 months ago
I used to own a 1965 ES-175 and found it to be a very warm and beautiful sounding archtop, as is the L5. The main diff to me is the scale length and how if affects feel and tone. ES-175 is short at 24 3/4", while the L5 is a longer 25 1/2". Shorter length = less string tension and a change in tone/feel.
If you're used to a Les Paul scale length and accompanying string bounce/feel, 175 is for you. If you like a Strat scale length and feel, L5 has a more bell-like tone IMHO
WadeJacksonMusic 4 months ago
I have an L5 and a Benson GB-10 and have played a few 175s. You can get them all to sound roughly the same with changes in amp set up, strings and pick, but it's like trying to make fish taste like chicken; not better, just different. If you think 175s sound dull, listen to Kreisberg, or Metheny's earlier recordings.
Variation in sound is from woods, old vs. new, bridges, scale length, pu placement, and. necks, Price wise, a 60's 175 will run about the same as a newer L5. Practice helps!
yebdox 4 months ago
just remember all the greats started with a Gibson Es-175 (:
KIDLATglp 4 months ago
Regardless of the semantics - it must be wonderful to own these iconic guitars. I have an old Antoria L5 laminate copy which is neither one thing nor t'other but nice instrument all the same. My idol Jim Hall played an old 175 in his early days and produced - to my ears - the sweetest jazz sound. I think the L5 has the edge here.
zthetha 4 months ago
@zthetha
Actually your cheap Antoria is just as well made and constructed as a Gibson Es-175.
Dont forget the Es-175 was $175. It was a mail order guitar like an encore in an argos catalogue.
Jazz musicians are poor and its what they could afford.
Its my personal taste that the Es-175 has a very dull lifeless tone. Jim Hall and Joe Pass's recordings with the es-175 are thin and dull, or muddy and bass heavy.
Check out the washburn J-10 video on here (not the yellow one)
Goergebenson 4 months ago
@Goergebenson Yeah - I've see the Washburn clip - had one once - a flat top - very nice instrument. Just which quality arch top to buy next is not an issue yet because of lack of funds but there seem to be one or two good alternatives to Gibsons for reasonable amounts of cash. When I was a lad an old jazz guitarist told me that if I did get a Gibson I should get a pre-war model (that's pre WWll) - he was of the opinion that 'new' models were not very good. His certainly did sing like no other
zthetha 4 months ago
@zthetha
Well you are right about Gibson and value. Of course Gibson's are not good value compared to better made and constructed instruments.
Gibson also had some very bad designs, the es-175 is kind of a point in case. Yes it is successful so from that stand point, it is well designed.
On the other hand the quality, is really not good. People rapidly realised they could get a better guitar for less.
The guild x-175 was an excellent guitar. a laminate top with a far superior sound.
Goergebenson 4 months ago
Respond to this video... In fact, if the person who uploaded this video could do a laminate top comparison, that would be more interesting. Then we could tell which one sounds more like an l5 which is considered the holey grail.
Gibson Es-175
Guild x-175 and x-500
Ibanez Fa/Fg series/2461
Washburn J-10
D'aquisto fender standard
Greco Fa
Yamaha Ae-1200
You get the idea.
Anyone out there who can put that together would get a thumbs up from me :-)
Goergebenson 4 months ago
I dont have to watch a video that displays a stupid title. Compared, might be more acceptable, V:S is just plain stupid american hyperboles.
Its not even a great comparison, why? Well you cant here both unplugged, there is no comparison on things like cost, feedback issues, string tension, ease of use, the list could go on. Get a grip man!!
Goergebenson 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Goergebenson why are you still here to bother?
deraio 4 months ago
@Goergebenson calm the fuck down, dude.
strwy2hvn94 4 months ago
@strwy2hvn94
I have every right to comment on the pointlessness of this video in regards to its title and content.
Bite me dip shit!
Goergebenson 4 months ago
@Goergebenson Your mad is showing.
strwy2hvn94 4 months ago
What a dumb title, ES175 V:s L5. Whats the competition?
Perhaps when your done you can stop comparing apples to oranges.
L5's arent as dull and lifeless sounding as ES-175's but then what would you expect from guitars made from different materials and design?
Why dont you just call it 'Showing off my L5 and Es-175
Goergebenson 5 months ago 2
@Goergebenson if you don't like don't watch! It's a great comparison indeed and bless them to make such videos
deraio 5 months ago
through both away and buy a Benedetto......
Dardagan11 5 months ago
I split the difference and got the L4 CES. LoL
Despite the maple laminated top, I thought the ES 175 sounded a little warmer. The L5 was very clear though.
?;^)
L4sleeko 5 months ago
I'll take either
270Gmoney 5 months ago
The 175 is a little fatter, rounder sound, but that L-5 is gorgeous.
123stillthere 6 months ago 2
@123stillthere Buy my 175, I love it but I've had it too many years. Time for that Birdland I've always wanted!
TheHop 5 months ago
Nice comparison of the two instruments. The L-5 has more pop and bounce but the ES-175 is more contained and even.
ditdacoms 6 months ago
@overandout58 Really? The L-5 sounded a lot more bright and smooth to me. The 175's tone is a little too tinny and dull for me. The guitar was clipping a little bit on the recording for both of them, though, so it's a little hard to tell.
TintedRedFilms 6 months ago
@TintedRedFilms I agree with you on the tinny sound on the 175 and dull. An accurate call
khatley1 5 months ago
I have both instruments. The 175 for 14 years and the L5 only for 5 months. In my ears on my own amps the L5 sounds more smooth, but I guess it is really a matter of taste - and the feeling of having a unique instrument in your hands when playing the L5. Only problem is that it is so expensive that I don't dare taking it out on gigs.
It is a shame that the sound quality is so bad on this recording. Why don't you try once more without oversteering the level of accompaniment?
An interesting issue
klaustand 7 months ago
That looks like a fun job.
HMJohnsonGuitar 7 months ago
I was really interested in this video. I have an L-5 and have been wondering if the 175 sound might be more what I have been looking for. Only trouble is that the solo part on the 175 is far too short to compare with the L-5; also the backing track is a little loud. Anyone got a link to a more lengthy piece featuring a 175 in similar solo?
upskidup 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the l5 sounded a little nicer to me for this style of jazz...Just my opinion...i love the look of the es-175 though...cheers! great playing, thanks for posting.
jashobbsie 9 months ago
Comment removed
jashobbsie 9 months ago
The song's name is: Blue Bossa
MML622 9 months ago
What is the song you are playing called? It's beautiful
Elfredo 9 months ago