Printable View
I was just thinking the other day about this when I saw my ES-3 next to my SG .I didn't know if this guitar existed, so I asked Mr. Google and low and behold it did. What a beautiful looking guitar. If this was available in a kit I think I would want to buy one. Pictures to come.
Attachment 14924Attachment 14925Attachment 14926
Here's a couple of pics, sorry I didn't crop my phone screen off.
A Gibson Barney Kessel model (later modified to become the Trini Lopez model as well). Made between 1961 and 1972.
That neck joint detail is very different from a standard ES-3, so the neck would have to be a new neck as well. There also seems to be variations on the neck joint on Gibson models from different years. The length of the body extension out to the heel seems to vary by around 30mm or so. Here's the long one:
Attachment 14927
The longer ones probably have a more stable neck but the thick heel then negates the benefit of the double cutaway for high fret access. The long neck heel seems to have been used between 61-64 (which also generally have laminates spruce tops, rather than the later maple) and these first models seem to be the most prized models today.
Here's the shorter neck joint:
Attachment 14928
For the short version, the neck would probably have to have a tenon that slipped under the neck pickup position to give sufficient strength - another change from the ES-3 neck.
Thanks Simon, I did read most of that on Google . It's good to see someone knows their guitars. Still, a stunning and unusual guitar. What was your thoughts on a PB kit, yah or nay? By the way Simon , your ES-3 is looking great. I love the burst.
there have been a few very nice ES3 builds. Like any kit, take your time and work around any issues. Seems to be about the same difficulty as the 335 styled kit
I'd imagine that general interest probably wouldn't be great enough to warrant the factory designing and tooling up for such a guitar. Whilst superficially similar to an ES-3, that double cut-away and neck join are really very different. If the bodies are based on guitars the factory is fully assembling for other companies, then the cost of setting up a small side-line to make a different body and neck design just for the kit construction market, then it may simply be cost prohibitive.
For instance, the ES-3 cutaway has a constant radius curve, whilst to match the Barney Kessel model, the curve to heel join would either have to be bent at a much tighter radius at the join point, or else the curve and heel would need to be separate pieces of wood, with the danger of a very obvious join line. Bending at a tighter radius requires a lot more care and skill (and maybe a better quality of ply or using a different wood), and would probably result in a lot higher breakage rate. Whilst modifying the design to the extent I mentioned might put some people off.
To keep the correct overall shape, you could alter the design even more so that the large 'heel' was part of the neck rather than the body, and so move the join line way back near the end of the fretboard. This should allow you to keep a constant radius curve for the cutaways, but would create a real headache as to how to join the neck and body together. You'd need a very long tongue running inside the guitar for neck stability, but this would be very difficult to glue together without supplying some custom clamping jig parts as well (remember by extending the neck's heel, we have made it a very heavy neck to support).
If this pushed the cost up for the bare kit alone from around A$250 for the ES-3 to say A$450 in order to try and recoup design, tooling, retraining and longer construction times, then only the real die-hard BK lovers would buy the kit. Of course I'm simply guessing here at costs, but the kits do need to be relatively easy to make designs in order to sell them in bulk at affordable prices.