#1
hi, so many of these models have added tops to them. which ones have a plain top? i see that most of the 80s ones didnt have a top. seems like all the new ones have some sort of top added.
#2
the 220 doesn't have a top but it has a solid finish. also (i haven't tried it) I'm guessing it's a lower end model. I'm guessing (again, i haven't tried them) to get one along the lines of the quality of the 80s ones (i.e. MIJ) you're going to have to go for the prestige one.
I'm an idiot and I accidentally clicked the "Remove all subscriptions" button. If it seems like I'm ignoring you, I'm not, I'm just no longer subscribed to the thread. If you quote me or do the @user thing at me, hopefully it'll notify me through my notifications and I'll get back to you.
Quote by K33nbl4d3
I'll have to put the Classic T models on my to-try list. Shame the finish options there are Anachronism Gold, Nuclear Waste and Aged Clown, because in principle the plaintop is right up my alley.

Quote by K33nbl4d3
Presumably because the CCF (Combined Corksniffing Forces) of MLP and Gibson forums would rise up against them, plunging the land into war.

Quote by T00DEEPBLUE
Et tu, br00tz?
#3
my 81' AR100 has a maple top. all of the solid body AR's are constructed with a maple top like a les paul but some versions are painted and some are not. mine is painted white but the lacquer has yellowed up a lot now so it looks like vanilla pudding.
#4
Pretty much all the ARs from the '80's had a separate top, ala a Les Paul Standard.
I have an AR-300 from '82 with a somewhat flamed maple top over a mahogany body.
My friend has an AR-105 that has a mahogany burl top (that's what the "-05" designates):



There's exactly ONE AR available from Ibanez that accurately duplicates what was available in the late '70s, and that would be the (I'm guessing at the number, here) 2619.

There IS an AR-300 that isn't close to the original; you have to get into numbers like the AR-720 (I believe) that will get you closer (to include the sustain block, Gibralter bridge, tailpiece and tri-sound switches). You're looking at around $900:



Major differences between my AR from the '80's and the bulk of the newer ones:

The bodies on the newer ones are thinner.
My guitar has a smooth neck heel and a tummy contour.
My guitar had a "sustain block" of brass that weighed around 10 ounces that was set into a rout in the body beneath the bridge, and the bridge was the heavy Schaller Harmonica bridge (they called it the "Gibralter") and there's a heavy brass tailpiece (not a lousy TOM), and (I think) a brass (or brass and bone or brass and plastic) nut.

Mine is a sustain *monster*. The newer ones are pretty much ordinary (the 720 is pretty good and fairly close). The 2619 Prestige actually replicates the guitars as they were pre-1978, when they had a slightly thinner but wider body shape, but still outstanding. But I think the 2619 will run over $2200, whereas the AR series Ibanez are much cheaper.

http://www.guitarcenter.com/Ibanez-AR2619-Prestige-Artist-Series-Electric-Guitar-J05398-i3598081.gc
Last edited by dspellman at Jul 24, 2015,
#5
exactly, dspellman.

awesome. does your's have that "steel can" in the control cavity for shielding?

regarding being a "sustain monster" you're not kidding. mine sustains longer the my 71 lp custom. i love the pu's also -i have the super 58's.

my control cavity cover states "Made by the proud people of Ibanez, Japan" does yours?
Last edited by ad_works at Jul 24, 2015,
#7
maple, which also stated in the sales literature of the era. these were made to compete very closely with the lp and lp double cutaway, and got ibanez into a heap of trouble. before they found their way in the electric world they copied gibson like crazy and were sued numerous times.
#8
Quote by gambit1983
i thought a good amount of them had a bubinga top


I haven't seen them.

You'll find a lot of mahogany burl (I have a 339-sized "small" 335-alike that has mahogany burl both front and back) on Ibanez Artists of the day.
#9
Quote by ad_works
exactly, dspellman.

awesome. does your's have that "steel can" in the control cavity for shielding?

regarding being a "sustain monster" you're not kidding. mine sustains longer the my 71 lp custom. i love the pu's also -i have the super 58's.

my control cavity cover states "Made by the proud people of Ibanez, Japan" does yours?


I haven't popped the cover on the control cavity. I have the Super 58s as well (no "flying fingers," no "80's") and they're spectacular. My control cavity cover has the same script as yours. There are even some versions that have brass TRC's, knobs, pickup rings and control covers (OH, and a brass pickguard!) that have that same script engraved into the control cavity cover.
#10
Quote by ad_works
maple, which also stated in the sales literature of the era. these were made to compete very closely with the lp and lp double cutaway, and got ibanez into a heap of trouble. before they found their way in the electric world they copied gibson like crazy and were sued numerous times.


I know of just one time that Gibson showed up on their doorstep, and that was over a headstock that looked very much like Gibsons. Thing is, Ibanez had already changed the headstock and the Gibson lawyers were far too late to the party. They sent the equivalent of Emily LaTella's "Oh. That's different. Never mind!" and that was the end of it.

The double-cutaway AR series was far superior to the Gibson LP in design, but what really shook Gibson was that they were *far* better quality. Only a decade before, Japanese guitars had been largely ignored as cheap junk, but Yamaha's SG series and ibanez's AR series both exceeded Gibson's levels of craftsmanship, design and materials and were less expensive to boot. Our ARs have multi-layer binding on headstock and body, single-layer binding on the fretboard, real ebony fretboards, real MOP and Abalone inlays, much better tuners, much better fretwork and all those design improvements at price levels where Gibson had single binding, rosewood fretboards (considered lower echelon) with plastic inlays, clunky neck heels, etc.

Gibson was teetering by about 1984 and very nearly discontinued the LP since customers considered it "my dad's guitar" amid the gunslingers running Charvels, Jacksons, and even Ibanez' superstrats. Henry J's syndicate bought it for a song (around $4 million) largely because it couldn't compete, and the only thing that saved the LP was Slash, AFD, and a couple of counterfeit Gibbies built in local LA workshops.
#11
Quote by dspellman
I know of just one time that Gibson showed up on their doorstep, and that was over a headstock that looked very much like Gibsons. Thing is, Ibanez had already changed the headstock and the Gibson lawyers were far too late to the party. They sent the equivalent of Emily LaTella's "Oh. That's different. Never mind!" and that was the end of it.

The double-cutaway AR series was far superior to the Gibson LP in design, but what really shook Gibson was that they were *far* better quality. Only a decade before, Japanese guitars had been largely ignored as cheap junk, but Yamaha's SG series and ibanez's AR series both exceeded Gibson's levels of craftsmanship, design and materials and were less expensive to boot. Our ARs have multi-layer binding on headstock and body, single-layer binding on the fretboard, real ebony fretboards, real MOP and Abalone inlays, much better tuners, much better fretwork and all those design improvements at price levels where Gibson had single binding, rosewood fretboards (considered lower echelon) with plastic inlays, clunky neck heels, etc.

Gibson was teetering by about 1984 and very nearly discontinued the LP since customers considered it "my dad's guitar" amid the gunslingers running Charvels, Jacksons, and even Ibanez' superstrats. Henry J's syndicate bought it for a song (around $4 million) largely because it couldn't compete, and the only thing that saved the LP was Slash, AFD, and a couple of counterfeit Gibbies built in local LA workshops.


thanks for the info!

i have both actually, an 81' ar100 and a 71' lp custom and i agree the ar is just better in a lot of ways. the fit and finish is tight, parts line up, the hardware is better, the fret work and board are better, the belly cut, smooth neck heel, beefy bridge and tailpiece, the tri-align bezels, etc... the gibson is great in it's own gibson way and i'd never sell it, but when played one after the other the differences are clear (to me anyway).