Review: 2013 Gibson Hound Dog Dobro

Review: 2013 Gibson Hound Dog Dobro

The Gibson Hound Dog is intended to be a starter dobro for the beginner, although at around 1300.00 street price it may not seem like it. To understand the price, you have to understand the history of the Hound Dog. 

Back in the 1920s, a distant ancestor of this guitar was manufactured by the Original Musical Instrument Company, founded by the Dopyera family, inventors of the Dobro in 1928. Back then, it was, and still is, a fierce competitor to the National Resophonic company, which made the now legendary metal-bodied guitars. 

Back then, the “Dobro” wasn't a generic term. You had a Dobro, or a Resophonic (National), and it virtually always meant a product from the respective companies. The Dobro was intended to be a high-quality, but lower-cost alternative to the National. 

Essentially, a Dobro is like a National, with its sound produced by an aluminum cone that vibrates and amplifies sound, but with a wood body. The combination of resophonic type volume, warmer sound due to the wood body, and its lower cost made the Dobro a staple in the Bluegrass and Country genres. 

That same warmer, almost slinky sound, made it less of a force in Blues and Hawaiian slide music. However, players from all genres used Dobros if that's what they could afford or preferred. Like all slide-oriented guitars, it came in a square or round-neck configuration. The square necks were exactly that. Guitars with square-shaped, heavy necks that were intended to be played on your lap, or face up. 

Roundnecks were played pretty much like regular guitars. Gibson bought out the company in 1993 and moved production to Nashville in 1998 and added the Dobro, to the mandolin and banjo lines into what they called their new Original Acoustic Instruments division.

The Hound Dog is a direct descendant of the old Dobros but sports some modern touches. The round neck has Fishman electronics and a radiused fretboard. The neck is relatively short, like most old Dobros (and Gibsons for that matter), but the new rounded fretboard does force the player to make a choice. Keep the action low, but have a harder time executing full chords with the slide, or raise string height and have your bass and treble strings further away (and harder to fret).

Old slide guitars generally had flat fretboards for that reason. Adding a radius just adds cost, really. The best compromise is to adjust the nut so that the strings are lower in the first position, and let the action run high from there to the bridge for slide work. In my case, I tend to adjust it down for finger-style playing and use a lighter glass slide (giving up some tone in the process). Keep in mind we're talking about the round neck here.

Some players will find the Fishman's lack of tone and volume controls annoying. One can adjust it at the amp (and most guitars sound better that way) but it can be a dealbreaker for many. The Hound Dog is an acoustic though, and its pickup system isn't out of line with the way most pickups for that kind of guitar function.

It's an attractive guitar, with clean lines. It has a figured, and laminated maple top, which helps reduce feedback. Also, for those not familiar with Dobros and Nationals, body resonance is virtually irrelevant. The sound is made at the cone and spider bridge, the body material mainly needs to be rigid and provide a good sound chamber.

That's why you can replace the stock cones in a cheaper dobro-type guitar with a high-quality one, and transform it into a passable pro-quality guitar. You can pay for higher quality wood, but after a point, it's mainly for looks. There'll be those who'll disagree, but my point is essentially the truth.

Getting back to it's price. Its Epiphone equivalent is the Biscuit, named after its biscuit-style bridge (a simple slab of wood). If you compare the two, there's a noticeable difference in wood quality in terms of appearance, but the mahogany Biscuit is a bit warmer, especially if you change out the cone.

Where the Hound Dog is better is in the volume department. Its tone is brighter and projects well. It clearly has a better-quality aluminum cone that's thinner and better machined. This translates to a better slide sound in the genres it's made for, Bluegrass and Country. The Biscuit has a sound better suited for folk blues, Hawaiian, and fingerpicking.

The other noticeable difference is that the Biscuit is around 350.00. Add a 75.00 cone upgrade, and you have 90% of the Hound Dog in terms of sound. Obviously the latter is wired for sound, has better hardware, etc., but as a starter, it's for those who want the name. This is an ideal guitar to find used.

It's 1300.00 or so price tag is quite competitive with the average National Resophonic guitar, which averages 2500.00, and it's a price battle that's been going on since the '20s. 

However, both styles of resonators have been targeted by a lot of companies determined to sell lower-cost versions. The early ones were mediocre, but lately, companies like Saga (who bought the classic Regal name) are dominating the starter category with models in the 400.00 range. 

Many of them, particularly the Regal, become excellent guitars when the cone is upgraded. It becomes harder to tell the difference between brands also, because of all the types of acoustic instruments, resonator-type guitars are the most dependent on who's playing it (well, maybe except for the banjo). You can take a 2500.00 National, and easily make it sound like a 350.00 Johnson without breaking a sweat. That's the key element for a guitar that was designed first to be loud above all else. 

The original intent of both guitars was to provide affordable (though pricier than regular acoustics), tough, and very loud instruments that could stand up to extensive playing in rough establishments. Their competition up to the sale of Dobro to Gibson was fierce and at times marked by lawsuits.

The Gibson Hound Dog in a sense has ended that fight. National is now a boutique manufacturer that can't duke it out with a company like Gibson. Gibson in turn, has created a Dobro without the pressure of competition. It's been modernized and given a Gibson pricetag for a guitar that's been crafted with its philosophy of using good woods and expert workmanship. None of these will influence the sound much unless the cone is good, and the Hound Dog has a decent but not an excellent one.

The cone is the secret of any good Dobro, and now everyone who makes one knows that, and manufactures cheaper resonator-type guitars knowing that many buyers will simply change out the cone or not even know the sound difference. 

The Hound Dog is a pretty good dobro. If you get one, you'll like it. However, due to its price, you'll like it even better if someone gives you one for Christmas. If you're using your own money, make sure to play it alongside an Epiphone Biscuit first. 

The competition between the Dobro and National was both epic and beneficial. This is one case where I'm sorry that one side finally won. 

-Al Handa

 2013

Note: This review first appeared on the ePinions.com site in 2013. This and other reviews were short takes that accompanied the link to a business that sold the guitar. As a rule, the guitar had to be at least examined and played by the reviewer (and ideally owned). In my case, a severe case of GAS made it possible to have at least owned the reviewed instrument for a short while. I'm reprinting these as having another source on a guitar never hurts, even if the reviews aren't definitive. Other than minor corrections, these short takes are unchanged from the original text. I figure that it might be helpful to keep the older perspective.

 Also by Al Handa:

Podcast Episode 3 now live on Spotify and Apple. 

https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/alhanda/episodes/On-The-Road-With-Al--Ivy-Episode-3-e2k5k0q

Topics:

The Godfather by Mario Puzo, Three Musketeers by Dumas, and the Robin Hood myth.

Some thoughts on Travels With Charley by John Steinbeck, On The Road by Kerouac Scroll Version, and The Road by Jack London.

Music:

My Dog Dreams And Becomes A Mermaid Techno Mix, Sunday's Moon and Nigel Raga by Handa-McGraw International.

Taylor's Blues by Mark McGraw

Review: Rogue Starter/Travel Banjo (synthetic rim model)

Review: Rogue Starter/Travel Banjo (synthetic rim model)

The Rogue Starter/Travel banjo is a product of an interesting company called Saga. Their specialty is inexpensive, but nice instruments under the logos of old-time brands like Regal. The Rogue brand covers more standard instruments like guitars and banjos (the Regal brand covers resonators, etc).

What makes this particular model interesting is that it is a revival of an old type of Kay banjo that used a bakelite rim, and to this day is considered one of the few decent beginner banjos.

The history of beginner (and intermediate) banjos hasn't been a glorious one. The banjo is a simple instrument, and if it was manufactured on the same scale as guitars, the top-of-the-line ones would cost maybe 800.00. 

Unfortunately, the opposite is true. The types of inexpensive banjos varied, with the most common being the aluminum-rimmed type (the ones with square teeth along the edge, taking the place of the flange). Those were actually OK for the price, particularly for bluegrass models which had to be very loud. (I'm having to oversimplify a bit, as bluegrass banjos are another category separate from the type I'm reviewing).

Offsetting the economy of aluminum was a list of faults that included metallic sound, overly thin necks, cheap metal tailpieces (which affect the sound), cheap frets, lousy intonation, and lousy tuning pegs on guitar-style headstocks (to this day, still the mark of a cheaper banjo).

I should note that guitar headstocks are nothing to be embarrassed about. It's a fact that guitar-style pegs work just as well, but the old downward pegs are just more traditional and allow easier tuning changes during some bluegrass songs.

It's not that companies wanted to make lousy beginner banjos. It's just that making one in the 200.00-300.00 range was difficult, even for the Japanese and Koreans.

The best beginner banjos tended to be the “open back” type, without the sound chamber (resonator) attached. Simpler, and the sound was different. Most used these for folk and mountain music, which needed a lighter, more “plunkier” sound.

One of the best of these was the old Kay bakelite, which instead of a wood rim, used one of the then-new synthetics. It did chip easily, but oddly enough, it was a superior material to aluminum and cheaper wood rims (or pots). To this day, a Kay bakelite banjo is very collectible.

The Rogue is a refined version. It uses a more modern plastic synthetic, which is more crack and chip-resistant and has better metal hardware. Obviously, the rim is less prone to warping due to moisture, etc.

The sound is similar. Using light gauge strings, the sound is feathery light and has a nice plunky tone. Tighten up the head, and the sound will sharpen a bit, and still keep that quality. It's also very light and easy to hold, and thus very easy to play. Children and small men and women will find this a perfect fit.

Like most cheapies, intonation is the main flaw. If the action is set right on this one (for a banjo, a bit on the high side) then you'll have a good tone up to around the 12th fret, which isn't bad. As you go higher up some notes are good, some are a bit off. When you get good enough to be able to adjust your bridge, you can minimize intonation problems later, but it won't ever be as good as a 1200.00 model.

I should also note, that for old-time banjo styles like clawhammer, you'll rarely need to go racing up the neck anyway.

For around 160.00 you get a banjo highly suitable for learning, which will sound as good later as you learn to play better. It's eminently suitable for mountain styles like clawhammer or frailing style (whose practitioners prefer cheap banjos) and for use later on as a travel type. If the dealer is an honest one, then you'll get the free gig bag also, and it's a nice one.

A few years ago, the Deering Goodtime banjo made the beginner category competitive again and still is a standard at around 320.00. However, the competition has caught up, and Epiphone, Fender, Rogue, Washburn, and others have very good, and often cheaper offerings.

If your need is a banjo with a nice sound suitable for solo work and learning, that will double as a travel banjo later on, the Rogue is as good as you'll find. With its revival of the old Kay bakelite style banjo, heck, it's even got some snob value.

- Al Handa

  2006

Note: This review first appeared on the ePinions.com site in 2006. This and other reviews were short takes that accompanied the link to a business that sold the guitar. As a rule, the guitar had to be at least examined and played by the reviewer (and ideally owned). In my case, a severe case of GAS made it possible to have at least owned the reviewed instrument for a short while. I'm reprinting these as having another source on a guitar never hurts, even if the reviews aren't definitive. Other than minor corrections, these short takes are unchanged from the original text. I figure that it might be helpful to keep the older perspective.

Podcast Episode 3 now live on Spotify and Apple. 

https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/alhanda/episodes/On-The-Road-With-Al--Ivy-Episode-3-e2k5k0q

Topics:

The Godfather by Mario Puzo, Three Musketeers by Dumas, and the Robin Hood myth.

Some thoughts on Travels With Charley by John Steinbeck, On The Road by Kerouac Scroll Version, and The Road by Jack London.

Music:

My Dog Dreams And Becomes A Mermaid Techno Mix, Sunday's Moon and Nigel Raga by Handa-McGraw International.

Taylor's Blues by Mark McGraw

 Also by Al Handa:

Review: PRS Standard 22 Electric

Review: PRS Standard 22 Electric

Anytime you consider a Paul Reed Smith guitar, it's difficult to get a bead on where it sits in terms of quality compared to the majors, like Gibson and Fender. It's certainly a cult guitar, a large cult, but a cult guitar. By that I mean that the high opinion of a PRS is often as much rooted in emotion as in actual value. Macintoshes are another good example (which I own, so I know).

This extremely good reputation was earned. In the 80's, when Gibson and Fender were putting out mediocre guitars based on corporate values, PRS came along and made the American hand made guitar the icon that it is today.

There were some definite characteristics of a fine PRS. It had a finish second to none, using a two layer process that almost created a 3D like effect. The neck was thin, and gave up some stability for extreme playability. The fretboard and bodies were often made of exotic woods, and the shape was sleek and modern.

Most of all, it had some of the best electronics of the 80's and 90's (for high end guitars), and a superb pickup in the Dragon. No wonder it became a guitar of choice for Ted Nugent, Carlos Santana and others. 

However, success caught up with Paul Reed Smith, and the decision to keep with demand by using CNC methods for the neck and body was made. It turned out to be a good gamble for a high end maker, as demand didn't falter (although it made the pre-'90s models more valuable).

Since then, they've added more models than one can keep track of, even compared to Les Pauls, and now have guitars that go down the price range. Which include Korean made guitars. The Standard 22 is made to be a more accessible model to those who can't afford the top end guitars. It doesn't have the maple cap, and it's all mohogany (albeit with a set neck). It has Dragon II pickups which are excellent.

Top end PRS's tend to look similar to the old Les Paul double cut, the standard version, not the faded finish type. It's a bright guitar, but bell-like, and that pure tone becomes very versatile because sonically it responds better to tone controls. Muddy pickups just get darker when you tone it down, PRS's change tone.

In the case of the Standard 22, you have a cheaper pickup, mohogany wood, and a short 22 fret neck. All that adds up to less harmonic response, and mainly affecting the midrange. I remember being very surprised that an SG sounded fuller in the mid-range. It's not drastic, and in fact, and unless you want an SG sound, you probably won't notice it. 

The 22 fret neck is a joy to play if you have small hands (like me). Even at that spacing, intonation is perfect, and it's a guitar that has incredibly low action without buzzing. This guitar is essentially the equivalent of a natural finish mohogany Les Paul with Burstbucker Pros, which go for around 850.00 street price. The Standard 22 guitar would have outperformed any high end Gibson of the Norlin era, or an CBS strat, but both of those companies have corrected course while PRS has stood still. Add even the highest inflated price you can think of for a paint job, and there still is a huge gap when you're talking 2200.00 street.

By the same token, I'm speaking as someone who thinks PRS's are nice, but will get all emotional when talking about '50s Telecasters or old archtops. So I do get why a PRS lover will prefer his or her axe to a Gibson.

It's also a good reason to read reviews by non-believers before shelling out a couple of thousand on any guitar. I wouldn't have paid 2200.00 for the Standard 22, as my experience with it was during a possible sale/trade for one. However, even at the offered price, it would have made more sense (in my case) to buy a new Custom Shop Fender. After all, if you're dealing with a machined neck and body, with American finishing and set-up, then a lot of the intrinsic value is gone.

A good example is Mexican made Fenders. I use a new Baja Custom Shop designed tele, with US Custom Shop neck and electronics, and people still tell me it's only going to be worth 300.00 when it's time to sell (it's an 800.00 street price guitar). I just reply that the Baja was so good that I traded off my Standard, but they just shake their heads in pity. 

Which bring us back to this PRS. I had nothing but good impressions about this guitar, and in the '80s and early '90s, it would have been in my collection in a heartbeat. In 2007, we're in the middle of a “Golden Age” with high quality choices and real competition present at every price range. PRS is synonymous with quality, but so are many others now. 

The company chose to respond the Gibson way, with lower quality versions as opposed to price cuts. As a result, in a couple of years, this Standard 22 will decline, not increase, in price. The reason is simple, it's at most a 1200.00 guitar. Worth every penny to the right player, but still 50% too high now.

If you get one of these used, it'll be a great value, and the workmanship will last decades. If you're thinking about buying new, then go ahead and wait till you can get the high end PRS models. Like Gibsons, the top end is over priced, but that doesn't mean it isn't a superb guitar.

In other words, there's some difference between paying 2000.00 for a very good guitar, and 4000.00 for a magnificent guitar. You'll overpay in both cases, but getting the best somehow makes that less important. 

PRS used to be a pretty special name. Now it's like any other good company that makes premium guitars, but if the industry has finally caught up, you can thank them for that.

- Al Handa

  2013

Note: This review first appeared on the ePinions.com site in 2013. This and other reviews were short takes that accompanied the link to a business that sold the guitar. As a rule, the guitar had to be at least examined and played by the reviewer (and ideally owned). In my case, a severe case of GAS made it possible to have at least owned the reviewed instrument for a short while. I'm reprinting these as having another source on a guitar never hurts, even if the reviews aren't definitive. Other than minor corrections, these short takes are unchanged from the original text. I figure that it might be helpful to keep the older perspective.

Podcast Episode 3 now live on Spotify and Apple. 

https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/alhanda/episodes/On-The-Road-With-Al--Ivy-Episode-3-e2k5k0q

Topics:

The Godfather by Mario Puzo, Three Musketeers by Dumas, and the Robin Hood myth.

Some thoughts on Travels With Charley by John Steinbeck, On The Road by Kerouac Scroll Version, and The Road by Jack London.

Music:

My Dog Dreams And Becomes A Mermaid Techno Mix, Sunday's Moon and Nigel Raga by Handa-McGraw International.

Taylor's Blues by Mark McGraw

 Also by Al Handa:

Review: 2013 Gibson Faded SG Special

Review: 2013 Gibson Faded SG Special

With the faded SG Special, we have that odd situation that Gibson and Epiphone seem to get into every few years. Which is that their mid-price products clash and are in open competition.

The most famous instance is the Epiphone Casino, which was essentially a Gibson ES-330 body (but with P90s) but the latter model faded while John Lennon rocketed the Casino into a clear victory for the economy model (at least at that time). 

At this time, you can get a faded Gibson SG for around 570.00, and the Epiphone 400 model has dropped to as low as 299.00 (a very good deal also, it's an underrated guitar). This can create some confusion, as about the only thing you can do to an SG is change its color. If it's any other wood than mahogany, it's not an SG, period.

So what Gibson has done is produce an SG that saves you the trouble of buying the Epiphone, and buying good pickups for it.  Also, I'm sure Gibson's a little tired of seeing all those competitor SGs and Flying copies selling well at the 400-500 price point.

This particular SG is not the classic configuration. This one is like a special version of the Les Paul. The pickups are standard Gibson 490s, which are more midrangy and dirty than the classic '57s (which are like the Seymour Duncan Seth Lover for another example). There are two camps on this now classic pickup, one hating it, the other liking it. 

Personally, I think on any Les Paul Special, faded SG, or any pure mahogany guitar, the 490s are a very good fit. The rear pickup is pretty hot and sharp, yet thick sounding, and the front gives you anything from a classic hard rock sound like AC/DC, or a little on the jazzy/blues side).

Remember, Muddy Waters' first guitar player used an SG (in case you don't know, it was Buddy Guy). Guitars at this level, which have the same standard pickups that the company puts on its high-end stuff, should frankly be bought that way as a package. 

If you don't like the pickups, you shouldn't buy the guitar (used or at a close-out price, that's a different situation). The reason? You're going to just add another 200.00-300.00 (if you install the things yourself) to the price. Put that 300.00 with the 579.00 and tax and buy an SG Standard.

Or, even if it gives you a guitar that others think is lame, upgrade to an Epi SG and it'll cost a bit less. Since the 400 model has dropped to 299.99 (due to the Faded coming into the market I imagine) it's a feasible idea. 

The faded Gibsons are often a mixed bag, but the lowest-priced ones are as good a deal as any. It's a mid-priced package that emphasizes the key parts of the guitar, the neck, and pickups. The Walnut finish in particular actually has the advantage of looking vintage also.

At 579.00, it's as good as you'll get with Gibson. A decent mahogany guitar, their top-line pickups and a nice neck and fretboard. Also, as we all know, even the cheap Gibsons keep their value better than a lot of other brands, including Epiphones.

So instead of an Epiphone or Agile Les Paul copy, buy a faded SG, and let that Gibson magic rub off on you which is now at a price for the masses.

- Al Handa

  2013

Note: This review first appeared on the ePinions.com site in 2013. This and other reviews were short takes that accompanied the link to a business that sold the guitar. As a rule, the guitar had to be at least examined and played by the reviewer (and ideally owned). In my case, a severe case of GAS made it possible to have at least owned the reviewed instrument for a short while. I'm reprinting these as having another source on a guitar never hurts, even if the reviews aren't definitive. Other than minor corrections, these short takes are unchanged from the original text. I figure that it might be helpful to keep the older perspective.

 Also by Al Handa:

Review: 2006 Dean Six String Banjo

Review: 2006 Dean Six String Banjo

The six-string banjo has been around for quite a while. It was an obvious development in our eternal quest to play the banjo without learning how. 

The only problem, of course, is that a banjo is played differently than a guitar, and thus the strings on a six-string banjo are in the wrong place. A banjo player uses a high string as a twangy sort of drone, much as a guitar picker will use the bass strings to move the rhythm, and both use the thumb to do that.

As a result, a six-string banjo sounds like a guitar that happens to sound a bit like a banjo but has too much sustain to play like one. This has always been true, even though countless players have tried to make a go at it with the six-string.

That's the reason why Dean seems to be the only major player in this category, and why the thing is so cheap. Its real purpose is to serve as a second or third instrument for a guitar player and it's priced at the sweet spot for such instruments. There was a time when even a cheap banjo would still set you back 250.00 to 350.00, wouldn't stay in tune, and wasn't an intuitive experience for your average guitarist. 

The Dean gives you the ability to add banjo lines to your arrangements, without needing to learn a new instrument (at least superficially). It's also an ideal instrument to simulate a tenor banjo for jazz or Celtic if your skill set is primarily with the flat pick. In that case, your knowledge of chords would translate easily to the Dean.

The use of a guitar-style neck and headstock makes it an even easier tool for the guitarist. For most types of banjo riffs, you don't need traditional banjo pegs anyway. The problem is that its tone isn't really at the pro level, so it's mainly a specialty axe for live gigs. It wouldn't cut it in the studio, except maybe in a tenor banjo role. If you got one that was made of top-quality materials with top-flight workmanship, that would be a question worth trying to answer.

So how is the Dean as a playing experience from a banjo player's perspective? It's OK, but it's not a true quality instrument for pure solo playing. The tone is only good enough for someone who only wants to use it occasionally. It does have a full sound, but a bit muddy and it has a “slow” tone. In other words, you could play fast on it, and it would still sound a bit draggy. 

No banjo can be like that. There is a way for a banjo player to use this Dean. Substitute high strings for the two bass strings, and you'd have a banjo that would play like one that had a capo for its drone string. Or, just capo it off at the 5th fret and above, and you could have a hybrid of banjo and finger-style guitar (if you know both).

Its real purpose, however, is as I've described earlier. It's a good enough substitute for a banjo, for guitar players who don't want or have the time to learn to play the banjo.

I wouldn't tell you not to try it though. It's not an expensive gamble, it's cheaper than most Squires for example, and I've noticed that you can always sell one. There's always a used one for sale. I guess there's always some guitar player out there looking for a shortcut to banjo proficiency. Hope springs eternal...

- Al Handa

  2006

Note: This review first appeared on the ePinions.com site in 2013. This and other reviews were short takes that accompanied the link to a business that sold the guitar. As a rule, the guitar had to be at least examined and played by the reviewer (and ideally owned). In my case, a severe case of GAS made it possible to have at least owned the reviewed instrument for a short while. I'm reprinting these as having another source on a guitar never hurts, even if the reviews aren't definitive. Other than minor corrections, these short takes are unchanged from the original text. I figure that it might be helpful to keep the older perspective.

Classic Blues Album Review: East-West by the Butterfield Blues Band

Classic Album Review: East-West by the Butterfield Blues Band

Note 2022: This review was written in the 90s and was part of the Delta Snake "Classic 60's Blues Album" series of reviews. It was republished online in 2014 and now, in 2022, edited down from its original length.

It's a special piece to me, as one of the founding members of the Butterfield Blues Band, Mark Naftalin, took an interest in the review and looked over early drafts. He gave me a great deal of feedback and backstories, which increased my insight into the album, and my conversations with him about the album are some of my fondest memories from that time. Mark was a generous person with his time and insights.

For that reason, I've made very few edits, only where there were obvious grammar mistakes. I wanted to leave the review basically as Naftalin saw it published.

CLASSIC 60'S BLUES ALBUM REVIEW: EAST-WEST by The Butterfield Blues Band

Note: You'll notice that many songs are discussed out of order as the review unfolds. The reason is that I wanted the review to follow the flow of my discussion and because the most influential changes often come from particular songs, not entire albums.

I owe a lot of thanks to one of the founding members, Mark Naftalin. He looked at the early drafts and offered many critical and helpful comments about the text. But, of course, the final opinions are my own and don't necessarily reflect Mark's view of this classic recording.

The Paul Butterfield Blues Band's "East-West" recording is one of the most important 60's era records, particularly in its effect on other musicians.

Given Mike Bloomfield's charisma at the time, particularly after their work with Dylan, they could have become rock stars. As it was, many later guitar greats like Carlos Santana (who stated it in an interview) admired Bloomfield, who was probably the first of the 60s American "Guitar Heroes," and as a side note, one of the guitarists who popularized the use of the Gibson Les Paul in rock.

Instead, the Band moved into more intricate jazz and modal territory, with at least one step into popular rock. It wasn't a sound that evolved in the often insular blues world. Instead, it was as much a part of The Times as the San Francisco psychedelic bands and, in many ways, predated and anticipated what happened later in the 60s.

Their awareness of the outside world differentiated them from all of the young blues bands of the day. Instead, the Butterfield Blues Band took the blues and related to the music as younger musicians aware of rock and jazz would have. The East-West record clearly shows a band aware of modal scales, jazz of all types, New Orleans R&B, and rock.

One change was Sam Lay's replacement on drums, a genius of a drummer named Billy Davenport. While Sam's work on the first album was superb, Davenport had a flexibility that could only come from a drummer who understood rhythm as a "pulse," providing propulsion as opposed to a beat, very much in the jazz sense.

It may be a digression, but it's interesting to briefly look over what happened in 1966 when East-West came out. Folk-rock was becoming big, the Jefferson Airplane was a harmony folk-rock band, the Beach Boys and the Byrds were beginning their periods of adventuresome work, and Miles Davis was Exploring modal-based jazz that seemed more straightforward on the surface but had a concept of space and time that became highly influential. The Beatles and Stones were turning everyone's idea of what a rock group was upside down.

The English Blues scene was splitting into a traditional faction exemplified by early Fleetwood Mac and John Mayall and an experimental one typified by the Yardbirds. By the late '60s, many of the above trends and ideas had merged...long improvisational jams based on interpretations of Coltrane, Miles, Sitar music, and other influences could be heard everywhere. Music seemed more "serious" but freer.

But back in 1966, there was "East-West." As you listen to the title cut, "East-West," and follow the changes in dynamics over its 13-minute length, one realizes that this work was visionary. One can see the entire gamut of jazz, modalisms, and even San Francisco psychedelic.

I've begun discussing what was the album closer first, but we do have the advantage of hindsight, and that cut did become the most famous and influential. The title cut was also a microcosm of the changes in the Band's sound. Gone was the straight-ahead attack of the first release. In its place was a complexity that wasn't always apparent on the surface. A careful listen will reveal a complex jazz-like undercurrent. It had a rhythm track that could have accommodated a multitude of ideas and tonalities. Instead, it made the various improvisations that followed work like a seamless flow of related ideas.

Elvin Bishop took the first solo and opened with the fieriest of the improvisations. Although not as technically adept as Bloomfield, his solo was more aggressive. His ideas and riffs were more straightforward, with a lot of attack, and on the surface, could strike the listener as showing less understanding of the modal concepts being explored. One thing is obvious...his solo works well as pure sound. The distorted riffs had tonal ideas that wouldn't have been out of place on an early 70's jazz-rock album. Although Bishop's solo is rooted in rock and blues, it still sounds fresh, and more so today.

At the time, Bloomfield's work tended to get the most attention, but to these ears, Bishop's work was just as integral to the arrangement's success. It is hard to quantify and put into words, but the best way to say it is that it is his energy that draws you into the song.

Butterfield's harp solo comes next, and he amplifies the sonic attack with which Bishop opened the song. The harp tone is aggressive, and as it unfolds, it comes across as a series of sharp, rapid ideas. At times, the music would seem to call for a fast flurry of notes (as in a traditional blues solo). Still, he would reverse practice and follow a trail upwards, then explore the tonal microtones and subtleties of a particular note or chord.

One could imagine that Butterfield may have shared a closer bond with Bishop than with Bloomfield (Bishop being the original guitarist in the Band). It shows in the music. The two solos sound as if they were built from the same mindset.

Bloomfield comes in next, and his cleaner tone and rapid-fire ideas are an ideal change in dynamics. His solo builds impressively, and the modal explorations show us a guitarist who seems exhilarated at discovering and exploring new and freer territory. Bishop's guitar comes back in, and the two build up to a peak that once again becomes almost pure tone and sound. One would be hard-pressed to find a better example of such pure sonic beauty, all the more remarkable for being created in 1966 by what was known as a blues band.The peak then subsides, and the rest of the song builds from a series of ideas that, at least on record, anticipate the "spacy jams" of the San Francisco bands.

One other significant departure in the group sound was not of the intellectual or theoretical variety. For whatever reason, the Band also covered a song by Mike Nesmith was, at the time, a member of the famous pop group the Monkees. The Band wasn't aware of this as the song was submitted to them by the publisher in the usual way songs are looked at and evaluated for a new album in demo form. 

Anyway...the song was "Mary, Mary," which many rock critics considered a good one. It is a remarkable and successful rock-blues experiment that still sounds as good as any modern blues artist has done since. The arrangement, originally a riff-song in its pop form, is done here as a darker piece, using a heavier guitar opening with harp and piano counterpoint. It was an arrangement that owes much of its success to Naftalin, an excellent keyboardist.

The other extended number on the record is "Work Song," which shows a jazz sensibility in the sound. It covers a wide range of approaches, which include the theme played in stop time, a succession of solos with ever more intricate and wild overlaps, and rhythm breaks on the downbeat of the final theme. It flows a lot better than I describe it. Bloomfield's use of the telecaster as a jazzy guitar in this song is something I wish other musicians would do more often. His solo builds and climaxes with octave runs, which in 1966 was a rare technical effect in the blues. If you love Albert Collin's "Highway is Like A Woman," you'll understand what I'm talking about.

Naftalin contributes organ work that is both adept and beautifully conceived. One interesting aspect is that he uses a lighter, cooler tone than the funkier Hammond sound of the day. It may not have come across as powerful as a Jimmy Smith number on the Hammond organ, but the more relaxed tone sounds more modern and hasn't dated.

Bishop's solo is the final one. It's interesting to hear him here and in later cuts, as it contrasts strongly with the Southern and Goodtime rock and roll he later did in the 70s (with considerable success, I might add).

One of the most robust jazz-flavored songs, yet firmly rooted in blues, is "Two Trains Running." It opens with a unison riff, hard bop style, and the shuffle rhythm that follows moves forward with an energy that reminds me of Art Blakey or Cannonball Adderly (who did some pretty fine blues also when he was in the mood).

PAUL BUTTERFIELD BLUES BAND (FIRST ALBUM)

The record opens with the Robert Johnson classic "Walkin' Blues" and features the arrangement that became one of the definitive versions. Nowadays, most rock and blue bands use that same march rhythm that drives the cut along. Perhaps this version isn't as well known as Elmore's "Dust My Broom arrangement," but Johnson was rarely covered better.

Next comes "Get Out Of My Life, Woman," performed about as flawlessly as you can. Most versions go hard on the rhythm and use a hard funk approach. In this case, the Band decided to lay back a touch, and the result is dramatic for such a small change. Davenport and Arnold's work is superb. Laying back on the rhythm made it an ideal keyboard song, and Naftalin's work here is the backbone of the arrangement. His right-hand work interacts with the rhythm section perfectly, and his fills and melody give the music a sophistication that will appeal to a modern listener even today.

"I've Got A Mind To Give Up Living" is a slow blues, done ballad style. Paul sings with great power and a natural sense of emotion that makes it classic. A cut that still sounds great now. Also, the way the piano and guitars interact and combine to create a single chord at some points is impressive. "All These Blues" turns the tempo up and is a chugging style of blues. Like the song before, the keyboards and guitars are used as an ad-hoc horn section. Butterfield's harp solo cuts through and combines with vocals in a call-and-response manner. Each musical phrase sounds perfect and focused.

"Work Song," Mary, Mary," and "Two Trains Running" follow and have already been discussed in detail. 

Next up is "Never Say No." It's called (by its author Percy Mayfield) "Never Say Naw." It's a quiet number in the "Tin Pan Alley" mold, but done like, say, Mose Allison would have done it. The general mood is atmospheric, and the Band's playing is understated. It should also be noted that this was Elvin's first recorded vocal and a fine debut.

The set ends with "East-West," and its placement is ideal. It's as if all the changes and subtle touches throughout the work led to this point. It's one of the greatest album-closers of all time. As time passes, I think there has been and will be an awareness that the blues underwent many changes during the '60s that were as momentous as any that occurred in the 50s. At the forefront of that change was the Butterfield Blues Band. What they did with the blues makes the Band's music so great. They chose exploration, change, and, most of all, the idea that the blues was an expression of the times.

In this, they were akin to the great explorers in the jazz scene.

- Al Handa

  May 2014

 Also by Al Handa:

Review: Epiphone Special Edition PR-5-E Cutaway Acoustic

Review: Epiphone Special Edition PR-5-E Cutaway Acoustic 

I'm reviewing a PR-5-E that is a Custom Shop Special that's part of the Epiphone “Guitar of the Month” program. Each of those special editions is really just the stock guitar but comes with one “special” extra feature.

In this case, my PR-5 comes in an attractive Alpine white finish with the usual gold hardware. As I describe this guitar, other aspects may come out that are different than the regular model. Epiphone has made one thing clear about the “Guitar Of The Month” series, which is that the pricing will be affordable (rare with Special Editions). 

In this case, the guitar was manufactured in China, which I imagine kept the price down at its usual 299.99 internet price. This will probably bring about the usual disdain from some guitar snobs, and frankly, it did from me also, but this guitar sold me on its merits.

Among those include a solid spruce top, mahogany body and neck, and excellent Grover tuners. Action at the nut was excellent, and while the action was high towards the bridge, it was easily adjusted with a little sandpaper. I'm a big fan of mahogany guitars, you get the warmest sound from guitars made from that wood.

I have heard and read, however, complaints that this is a “quiet” guitar. The key thing to keep in mind is that Epiphones (and many Gibsons for that matter) are not Martins, or even Seagulls, etc. Historically, those guitars have always had a quieter, silker tone. 

The thing to remember is that aesthetic judgment, even by experts, is mainly a matter of taste. I'll trade volume for tone any day.

Even the famous Gibson Hummingbird for all its size isn't as loud as a big Martin. By the same token, the sound is more versatile. Being an acoustic/electric, the price can be kept down as it doesn't have to be built to compete with a more acoustic-only model. Also, one thing I can add, this model is as light as any high-quality brand I've tried (remember, fragility is often a side product of quality in acoustics).

Any acoustic/electric played alongside an equivalent-priced acoustic-only guitar will sound flat or quieter...period. No contest.

Two reasons: One, the cutaway (that sells the guitar in most cases) imposes restrictions on the bracing and sound qualities of the box (which an acoustic guitar is), and two, this type is designed to hit hardest in the midrange. This style was designed originally for stage work where a guitar with a boomy bass or extreme highs sounded lousy on stage or the tone had to be compressed in the studio (and of course, to improve access to the upper frets).

The major player that essentially created this market was Ovation, and its “thinner” sound characteristics made it a superb stage guitar, especially in large halls. From there, it wasn't a big leap to cut away acoustic/electrics built to reduce feedback.

When considering an acoustic/electric, that's the basic lineage to be aware of, and the sound theory you're hearing and considering buying.

That, and “looks” of course. Curaways do look cool. Any honest player will have to admit that any guitar has to have at least some “mojo” and have a look and feel that makes playing it a pleasure. Also, many can overlook less volume because they play at home, or only use it live once in a while in smaller venues. Those who do regularly use it live give up some frequency response so their guitars won't sound tinny or muddy from a boomy bass.

At 300.00 this particular guitar is a fine value. The fretwork is impeccable, running your fingers along the neck shows no rough edges and no uneven frets. The thin neck is as fast playing as you can get for an acoustic.

The acoustic sound is good, use 10's or 11's and you get a wonderful chiming or twang, use 12s and you get a thicker, almost jazzier tone. The body is wide, but the box is thinner, so ergonomically, it's quite comfortable to play. The curves are in the right place, so it fits against the body nicely. It's not a high-volume guitar, but it's got a good tone, and that's where the electrics come in.

It has an Epiphone Dark Shadow 4-band EQ system. You can tell its emphasis by the fact that two of the bands are dedicated to the midrange. The bass does come alive when amplified, and it has a fine electronic sound. I've heard a lot of opinions about this system, but I've had no problems with it, and I like the 4-band system. It would have been nice to have a Fishman EQ though.

Also, put a little extra gain on it (below feedback level) and it's a surprisingly good blues/Hawaiian slide guitar. Just for fun I cranked it up a bit (and stood clear of the amp) and got a bit of the Elmore James/George Thorogood sound. Since I'm using 12s, messing around with the EQ also uncovered a nice acoustic jazz sound, a la Johnny Smith or Howard Roberts, and it became obvious that this is one very nice 300.00 guitar.

The thing about acoustic guitars is that on one hand, you get what you pay for, but also, the price does or does not matter. An old Epiphone FT-130 can blow away a 500.00 Yamaha, and a new 400.00 Seagull can sound twice as expensive. It's very, very subjective.

There are some things that are sort of constant. A solid spruce top is desirable, for sound, and for a sound that gets better with age. Body wood counts, in this case, mahogany makes a warmer sound, so preference counts. Neckwood counts, a maple or walnut neck would have sharpened the sound here and maybe made this guitar less attractive to me. Bracing counts, but that's generally irrelevant in this category, the electric/acoustic type.

In the case of the Custom Shop PR-5-E, it's a case of the wood, construction, style, and price point coming together to make a guitar that was more compelling than others that were in some cases much more expensive (or similar, like a Seagull). The fact that it was made in China is irrelevant in this case, as I could only find one small flaw in the construction, and the detailed work was excellent.

I walked into the guitar store looking for an acoustic that I could eventually convert into a Howard Roberts type (this style has the same type of body), and at 300.00, the store manager had himself an easy sale.

The PR-5-E is a proven mid-priced guitar, and I strongly recommend you get the Special Edition while it's still available, it has better detail work for sure. In any case, it's a fine guitar with a unique sense of style, not one of the faceless crowd of very similar acoustics. At this price, it's a steal.

- Al Handa

  2007

Note: This review first appeared on the ePinions.com site in 2013. This and other reviews were short takes that accompanied the link to a business that sold the guitar. As a rule, the guitar had to be at least examined and played by the reviewer (and ideally owned). In my case, a severe case of GAS made it possible to have at least owned the reviewed instrument for a short while. I'm reprinting these as having another source on a guitar never hurts, even if the reviews aren't definitive. Other than minor corrections, these short takes are unchanged from the original text. I figure that it might be helpful to keep the older perspective.

Review: Gibson ES-135 Archtop Electric

Review: Gibson ES-135 Archtop Electric

The Gibson ES-135 is an archtop model that has its roots in the old “student model” ES-125. An extra P-90 pickup was added to the thin body 125, and a sharp cutaway was incorporated.

Which aside from the ES-175, made it one of the coolest, yet decently priced archtops around. It would have remained a pleasant memory except that George Thorogood used one on his early tours, and it's been upgraded and supported since.

First, we do have to back up a bit to the 60s, where we will see why the ES-135 didn't stay a pure hollowbody. The key thing to remember in any field, genre, or market, is that nothing happens in a vacuum. The key difference in the 135 was the addition of an ES-335-type block in the center of the body. 

The reason was to reduce feedback. The other reason? Companies like Guild took the ES-135 shape, gave it a slimmer look, and thus began the Starfire series which eventually evolved into a direct competitor the the ES-335.

In other words, everybody else was doing it, and in the guitar business, no one gives up market share to anyone...period. If people clamored for Yellow Submarine ES-175s, Gibson would make 'em. They might be wincing when no one is looking, but they would make 'em.

So, Thorogood uses an ES-135 en route to owning a pure white ES-175, and the ES-135 line is revived with P-100 pickups instead of 90's, and with a light wood (like balsa) sound block inside. Still a light guitar, and still very cool looking.

The ES-135 has a clean look, it's not ornate like so many jazz guitars. The implied message, the money went into the guitar, not the ornaments. It has a very sweet, yet still woody tone on the front pickup. It's not warm in the sense of the old P-90, which had a livelier tone, but more like a clearer humbucker (users of 490 series humbuckers take note).

Personally, even though I love P-90s, I find the tone of the P-100 neck to my liking, and quite versatile. The Bridge 100 is another story. It's nice and powerful, and loud (it's like 3 ohms more powerful than the neck), but won't have that thick scream that Pete Townsend of the Who got on “Live At Leeds” the ultimate P-90 album. 

It has the traditional tunomatic/tailpiece arrangement of the old ES series, and the neck, fretboard, and frets are well-matched. It's an easy guitar to play and it will pull music out of you. This particular guitar was discontinued some years back, and a fire sale ensued. From a nice 1600.00 jazzer, it became a 999.00 bargain and that price drop still hasn't recovered yet. It's still the perceived original street price.

The reason for all that was the introduction of the ES-137. Essentially the same guitar, but with a heavy wood core inside and lots of fancy stuff to make it look more expensive. It also became a lot more similar to the ES-335 sound (which some critics called an “improvement”) and a much heavier guitar.

I once commented that time can change a guitar's context and value (like in the case of the DeArmonds). In this case, all of the change has seemed to enhance the ES-135's desirability. These come up rarely on boards like Craigslist and tend to go quickly.

The reason is simple. It's the closest you're going to get to a pure retro archtop that looks like a 175. There's no other look like it, and it's no accident that the number of Gibson models with sharp cutaways is small. 

I've been offered custom teles, stat plus's, you name it for my old trusty and cool Ebony ES-135, and it's never been a temptation to deal with it. As the years pass, I notice more looking for one as opposed to getting a 137. 

It may take a while for people to realize it, but for all the effort by companies to create another ES-175, Gibson may have done it by accident with its ES-135. It was a clean, no-nonsense jazz box, state-of-the-art for its time, and reasonably priced. Its look was cool, retro yet modern looking, and people who owned one loved it. Yep, just like the early ES-175s.

- Al Handa

  2007

Note: This review first appeared on the ePinions.com site in 2007. This and other reviews were short takes that accompanied the link to a business that sold the guitar. As a rule, the guitar had to be at least examined and played by the reviewer (and ideally owned). In my case, a severe case of GAS made it possible to have at least owned the reviewed instrument for a short while. I'm reprinting these as having another source on a guitar never hurts, even if the reviews aren't definitive. Other than minor corrections, these short takes are unchanged from the original text. I figure that it might be helpful to keep the older perspective.