Does size matter ?..........335 v 339 content

Dominic

Do they pretty much sound the same ?
339 seems unpopular compared .......Indeed ,is it eclipsed by the ES Les Paul ?
 Experiences ?
Is the 339 simply a 335 for less large  people or is it that bit less of a guitar ?

kswilson89

I've had a few of each, the 339 sounds closer to a Les Paul than a 335 to my ears.

Blueingreen

I have a 339 and 336. It’s my favourite guitar format and if I could only have one guitar it’d be a smaller bodied 335 a like. Most players still prefer the full size 335, but I’d put that down mainly to typical guitarist traditionalism than any important tonal difference. They want one like Chuck’s, or BBs or Eric’s or Larry’s. Which is fair enough, I sort of get that too, Rusty Anderson’s 335 is one of my favourite guitars looks wise, but push comes to shove I prefer the less bulky 339.

To put matters into perspective, I’ve been told lots of times that the 339 looks great and asked several times if it’s a 335. At gigs I would estimate the audience consists of people who couldn’t tell the difference between a 335 and a Les Paul (about 90%) people who know a smattering about guitars but still couldn’t tell the difference between a 335 and a 339 (about 9%), guitar geeks who know the difference but still think the 339 is a cool guitar (0.9%) and Luddite guitar geeks who think the 339 is the wrong size and consequently an offence against nature (about 0.1%). If the people whose opinion matters to you is the 0.1%, don’t get a 339. Bear in mind that none of them are women.

stickyfiddle

I've had a CS336 for almost 15 years. It's all about the smaller size for me, and it's a wonderful sounding instrument to boot; unquestionably my #1 take-to-grave guitar. Conversely I actually don't get on with ES-339s as they're a very slightly different shape and sound so never quite feel or sound right when I'm so used to my 336, but they're undoubtedly good guitars.

Tone wise, it's not a question of more vs less, just different vs other different. I generally say if you imagine a spectrum between the LP and the ES-335, the CS-336 is about 1/3 the way along, and the ES-339 is about 2/3. Neither sound quite like an LP or 335 but can do a good approximation of either, and both are great in their own right. 

I don't like the ES-LP, personally; it feels like the worst bits of both worlds, and worse looking than any of the other options. Though it's worth noting I just don't get on with LPs (again probably a symptom of 15 years of CS336).

Most people either love or hate them. Chances are if you try all of them you'll quickly work out which is your favourite. 

Brad

stickyfiddle said:

Tone wise, it's not a question of more vs less, just different vs other different. I generally say if you imagine a spectrum between the LP and the ES-335, the CS-336 is about 1/3 the way along, and the ES-339 is about 2/3. Neither sound quite like an LP or 335 but can do a good approximation of either, and both are great in their own right. 

That’s pretty spot on. As the 339 is the same as a 335 just scaled down, I found it focused the sound more while a 335 is more ‘open’. Not better, just different. 

I had a 339 about 6/7 years ago and I would have kept it if it wasn’t for the upper feet access (and I don’t have big hands either). That was something I couldn’t get over so went to a 335 (via an Eastman T486) and couldn’t be happier. 

The 339 is a great guitar though. Try both if you can. 

thebreeze

Brad said:

stickyfiddle said:

Tone wise, it's not a question of more vs less, just different vs other different. I generally say if you imagine a spectrum between the LP and the ES-335, the CS-336 is about 1/3 the way along, and the ES-339 is about 2/3. Neither sound quite like an LP or 335 but can do a good approximation of either, and both are great in their own right. 

That’s pretty spot on. As the 339 is the same as a 335 just scaled down, I found it focused the sound more while a 335 is more ‘open’. Not better, just different. 

I had a 339 about 6/7 years ago and I would have kept it if it wasn’t for the upper feet access (and I don’t have big hands either). That was something I couldn’t get over so went to a 335 (via an Eastman T486) and couldn’t be happier. 

The 339 is a great guitar though. Try both if you can. 

Great for those walking bass lines though....

Dominic

I see some of the Eastman top end 335 guitars are now £2300 ........are they worth it ?
Too end Tokai equivalent is about £1700

Brad

@thebreeze

crunchman

I've owned a 339, 335, ES Les Paul, and 3 solid body Les Pauls.  The 339 is a different sound to the 335.  As others have said above, it's definitely closer to the LP than the 335.

The ES Les Paul is closer to the 335 than the 339 if you want to get close to that sound out of a smaller body.  I sold my 339 years ago but, from memory, it has a 335 style centre block that takes up a large chunk of the body. The ES Les Paul doesn't have nearly as much wood - it's much more hollow.

The other thing to be aware of with all the models is what pickups they come with.  I had an early 339 with Classic 57s, which are not great pickups to my ears.  The MHS pickups in some of the more recent guitars are much better.  If you are looking at secound hand guitars, I'd look for a more recent one with MHS pickups - or budget for a pickup change.

guitars4you

I'm not a tall guy so always had an issue with a 335 as to how they sit 'n' feel on me, be it standing on sitting - I feel like the guitar body is to big for me - As such I prefer a 339 - I actually use a PRS Hollowbody on a regular basis - Not the same but similar vibe - As such I'm not trying to say it is a direct replica of a 335 tonal character - But in many ways, 2 different 335 models, age, spec etc can have a similar but different tonal character

Great buy if you can find a nice used one, but the Collings i35LC is a corker IMO - More expensive - Probably more lush/posh than a Gibson

menamestom

Midtowns are a good compromise between the two.

Personally if I want some air and ‘acousticness’ in my sound the 330 is the choice.  335’s have always seemed like a big guitar for not much air.  A bit of a compromise.

But then again one persons compromise guitar is another persons do it all!

Re the Eastman's, the ones I have played have been excellent, by way if comparisons I’ve had a MIJ Tokai and the Eastmans feel much more like (I’d Imagine) and old Gibson to sound).  

rossi

I have a Midtown which I think is between a 335 and a 339 size wise  .I would prefer a 336 but it isnt  going to happen .The odd thing about all of them is they all sound exactly like  a Gibson.

WindmillGuitars

I currently have a couple of 335, a 339 and also some Gretsch Juniors (one of my 6122-JR is for sale in the classifieds.. shameless plug) which I'd include in this discussion as they fit the same conversation.
Without doubt there are similarities between the 335 and 339s (or full size Gretsch and Jnrs) - however the smaller sized models always feel a little more controllable to me and a good bit "tighter" in sound whilst retaining the semi hollow / hollow vibe 

Lebarque

335 is a tall man's guitar. 339 is a short man's guitar.

menamestom

Lebarque said:

335 is a tall man's guitar. 339 is a short man's guitar.

Yeah BB King, Eric Clapton and Stevie Marriott were all notoriously tall 

roberty

I'm short and I love my 335. It's a bit tail heavy sitting down but standing it's really comfortable. It has a Bigsby B7 which I expect doesn't help the balance. I love how ostentatious and showy it is. I play downtuned fuzz rock with it, it's very lively with harmonic feedback, just on the cusp of being unmanageable. Great fun

the_butler

Brad said:

stickyfiddle said:

Tone wise, it's not a question of more vs less, just different vs other different. I generally say if you imagine a spectrum between the LP and the ES-335, the CS-336 is about 1/3 the way along, and the ES-339 is about 2/3. Neither sound quite like an LP or 335 but can do a good approximation of either, and both are great in their own right. 

That’s pretty spot on. As the 339 is the same as a 335 just scaled down, I found it focused the sound more while a 335 is more ‘open’. Not better, just different. 

I had a 339 about 6/7 years ago and I would have kept it if it wasn’t for the upper feet access (and I don’t have big hands either). That was something I couldn’t get over so went to a 335 (via an Eastman T486) and couldn’t be happier. 

The 339 is a great guitar though. Try both if you can. 

Happy to be proven otherwise, but I always thought the 339's were simply chambered out solid guitars (similar to thinline teles) where 335's were true semi acoustics with bent/shaped top back & sides & not carved

crunchman

the_butler said:

Brad said:

stickyfiddle said:

Tone wise, it's not a question of more vs less, just different vs other different. I generally say if you imagine a spectrum between the LP and the ES-335, the CS-336 is about 1/3 the way along, and the ES-339 is about 2/3. Neither sound quite like an LP or 335 but can do a good approximation of either, and both are great in their own right. 

That’s pretty spot on. As the 339 is the same as a 335 just scaled down, I found it focused the sound more while a 335 is more ‘open’. Not better, just different. 

I had a 339 about 6/7 years ago and I would have kept it if it wasn’t for the upper feet access (and I don’t have big hands either). That was something I couldn’t get over so went to a 335 (via an Eastman T486) and couldn’t be happier. 

The 339 is a great guitar though. Try both if you can. 

Happy to be proven otherwise, but I always thought the 339's were simply chambered out solid guitars (similar to thinline teles) where 335's were true semi acoustics with bent/shaped top back & sides & not carved

As far as I know, the 339 is similar construction to the 335.  The 336 is a chambered out solild guitar.

BGG

kswilson89 said:

I've had a few of each, the 339 sounds closer to a Les Paul than a 335 to my ears.

This ^^^^^ that’s why I sold mine. 

Lebarque

menamestom said:

Lebarque said:

335 is a tall man's guitar. 339 is a short man's guitar.

Yeah BB King, Eric Clapton and Stevie Marriott were all notoriously tall 

They should've stuck to Les Paul Juniors. I bet they wore white socks with sandals too.

menamestom

Lebarque said:

menamestom said:

Lebarque said:

335 is a tall man's guitar. 339 is a short man's guitar.

Yeah BB King, Eric Clapton and Stevie Marriott were all notoriously tall 

They should've stuck to Les Paul Juniors. I bet they wore white socks with sandals too.

No that was Peter Green, in his Jesus dress years....