0% Interest for 24 Months! Learn more »
(800) 222-4700
  • Español: (800) 222-4701
Cart
Microphone Month 5

Sweetwater Forums [Archived]

After 15 years of great discussions, the Sweetwater Forums are now closed and preserved as a "read-only" resource. For discussions about current gear, check us out on Facebook, YouTube, inSync, and our Knowledge Base.

Gibson Johnny A

reederbill

I'm trying to decide on a Johnny A Custom, but I can't decide whether to get the one with the Bigsby, or the one with the regular tailpiece. The Bigsby looks really cool, but it also covers up a great deal of that beautiful wood, and it adds weight. Also, replacing strings is a hassle, and the bar is in the way. It may even affect sustain. The one without the bigsby shows much more wood, and very few people use a Bigsby much even if they have it. However, having the Bigsby may keep the value up. Or, it may make the value go down, since there will be more of them out there. Another issue is that Gibson's pricing on these models varies by $400.00, but the lower cost one is being sold (by everyone) for only $200.00 less. Does anyone have any thoughts as to which of these two guitars would be a better purchase?
Bill
May 14, 2010 @11:40am
R Whittington

I think it would come down to whether or not you currently or at some point want to incorporate a Bigsby into your playing style. If the answer to that question is no...then you'd potentially choose the Bigsby for aesthetic reasons, which wouldn't make the guitar more or less collectible/valuable either way. Bigsby's do look cool. For me personally, they're not worth the extra hassle, tuning problems...etc.
May 14, 2010 @12:32pm
Jefrobie

Bought mine with the bigsby. Little bit more hassle changing strings, but you get used to it. I also use elixir strings to last longer. It just adds a dimension that is hard to describe. Would I have a bigsby on all my guitars? No...but on a johnny a? Absolutely.
November 21, 2011 @01:13am