Comparing Epiphone’s Casino and Sheraton II Pro

A little bit of background

A few years ago, I decided to add an archtop guitar to my repertoire. Of course, the first thing which comes to mind is the Gibson ES-335 made popular by such artists as Chuck Berry, Bob Weir, Alvin Lee, and B.B. King, among others, but the price was prohibitive.

So I did some hunting around. I was delighted to find the Epiphone Inspired by John Lennon (IBJL) Casino^[1]This particular edition is no longer available, but the current one is pretty similar. in exactly my price range,^[2]This was $1025 at the time. and the associated artisted was just an extra bonus!

It’s a beautiful guitar, and what’s more, it was a favourite among British Invasion musicians—think Beatles (of course), Rolling Stones, Animals—which was my primary interest at the time.

Over the course of time, as I read discussions of guitar styles and hardware, I began to become aware of various kinds of differences such as fully hollow vs. semi-hollow, P-90 vs. humbucker pickups, flatwound vs. roundwound strings, and so on. On the advice of a friend, I acquired a set of Pyramid Gold flatwounds for the Casino^[3]This required fashioning a new nut as I had opted for 11 gauge strings while the original set-up had featured 10s, but that’s another story. and I’ve never turned back. However, everything else remained strictly theoretical.

Revisiting the issue

I recently decided that I should revisit the ES-335 issue and look into alternatives as I was intrigued by the differences a semi-hollow body and/or humbucker pick-ups might make. I found a number of interesting choices, such as

• the so-called Epiphone ‘Dot’
• the Epiphone Riviera
• the Gretsch Country Gentleman (and others in the Gretsch line)
• the Epiphone Sheraton II Pro
• the Eastman T386
• the Hagstrom Viking

and on and on it goes….

I spent some considerable time reading specs and reviews, and I’m blessed if I can remember all the details, but for one reason or another—including cost and the option to actually try the things out first hand without too much inconvenience—I decided to start with a comparison between my Casino in its current incarnation and the Sheraton II Pro.

As it happens, there was a Sheraton at my local music shop so I waited for an opportune time to pay them a visit, which I did this past Wednesday, February 16, 2022. I’m excited to share my findings with you here!

The comparison

Appearance

The differences between the two are, for all intents and purposes, cosmetic. The 1965 reflects the state of Lennon’s guitar when he first purchased it, while the Revolution was sanded down to natural finish at a later date (ostensibly to improve the tone) and fitted with new Grover tuners.

For technical data on these guitars, see their Unofficial Epiphonewiki Archive page.

For technical data on this guitars, see its Unofficial Epiphonewiki Archive page.

On the whole, the instruments are very similar, externally speaking. Bodies are the same shape and size, pot and switch arrangement are identical, scale length is the same, nut width nearly so. Fretboard inlays differ slightly, as do the headstocks. The Casino neck is slightly thicker (SlimTaper™ “D” profile) than that of the Sheraton (60s SlimTaper™). The Casino has Grover small-button silver tuners while the Sheraton sports somewhat larger gold tuners. Hardware is nickel on the Casino, gold on the Sheraton.

The Sheraton is 2 pounds heavier at ≈ 8.7 lbs^[4]According to this site. compared to the Casino’s 6.7 lbs, attributable to the solid centre block, regarding which more will be said below. Believe it or not, this difference is notable when hanging from the shoulders!

Another difference—due to my customization—is that the Casino has slightly heavier flatwounds mounted and, as this required a nut change, a lower action, while the Sheraton features roundwounds and the Epiphone standard action.

Functionality

There are three main functional differences between the two guitars which contribute to their separate personalities:

What does this mean? Well, from a theoretical point of view, based upon what I’ve read,

• A hollow body effectively amounts to an acoustic guitar of sorts with pickups; sound dissipates in the same way that it does in an acoustic guitar. Thanks to the centre block, a semi-hollow guitar is able to sustain notes for a longer period of time. This is of greater or lesser importance depending upon the style of music being played.
• P90 pick-ups are various described as being ‘punchy’ or ‘bright’. Humbuckers, on the other hand, are less prone to interference and thus less likely to hum (as the name implies).
• The Casino pick-ups operate in one mode only. The Sheraton pick-ups, though they default to humbucker, can be ‘split’ by pulling out the volume control, effectively offering a single-coil option as well.

In historical application, Casinos have notably been played by beat groups (i.e., British Invasion bands) while ES-335s and similar guitars have been preferred by rythm and blues, blues, and jazz players.

Though I knew all this, I really had to do the live comparison to get a real appreciation of what it all meant.

Road test

First impressions

On the whole, the two guitars struck me as being of similar quality—not terribly surprising considering that they are made by the same manufacturer and roughly the same price.^[5]The Casino was $1025 with case when I bought it, the Sheraton is listed at $999 now without case, some 6 years or so later.

I liked the larger tuners on the Sheraton. The bridge/neck pick-up switch seemed comparable, though I had the feeling the one on the Sheraton was a little wobbly in middle position, unlike the one on the Casino. I also had the feeling that in some respects the Sheraton’s ‘gold’ had an overtone of imitation compared to the Casino’s real nickel—a downside of which, mind you, is that it corrodes and is hard to polish, in my experience.

General playability

As noted above, the Sheraton is heavier by 2 lbs, and at the time, and being otherwise ignorant of the essential differences, it was part of the reason I bought a Casino rather than a semi-hollow archtop. That said, given the fact that the Sheraton did not have a strap and I was thus forced to play it sitting down, I can’t really give good feedback on how it would feel when hanging from the shoulders other than to say that my shoulders may be less tolerant than most.

The narrower neck profile on the Sheraton was definitely a pleasant switch. I don’t really have an issue with the Casino’s ‘D’ profile as such, but it does take some getting used to, especially in comparison with a Stratocaster, say, which is my other guitar.

The last thing I noticed from the get-go was the higher action and round strings on the Sheraton. I mentioned earlier that I replaced the nut due to the thicker gauge strings I installed on the Casino,^[6]When I first wanted to instal the 11 gauge flatwounds, they bound a bit in the slots, which is not great. I could have filed out the slots but that would have meant an irreversible change. I decided … Continue reading and tinkered with the action; thus, it’s not a fair ‘out-of-the box’ comparison, but I must say I prefer the action on my Casino. As for strings, having played flatwounds, mostly,^[7]The Stratocaster has roundwounds, but they are 9 gauge so less tactile. the extra bite on the fretting fingertips was noticeable. From a theory standpoint, roundwound strings are said to be brighter than flatwounds, so that’s a potential consideration from a tonal point of view.

Actual sound production

For the sake of keeping things as close to what I was used to as possible, I chose a Vox AC30 amplifier. It was not identical to my handwired Vox, so it took a moment to adapt to the controls, but that was not a big deal, ultimately.

I’m not a great player as I lack practice, so I wasn’t able to put the hardware through extensive testing; instead, I played the bits I knew from the following songs:

• Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds (lead)
• Johnny B. Goode (mostly lead, a bit of rhythm)
• Rock around the Clock (lead)
• some exploratory tinkering.

The very first thing I noticed was the Casino’s propensity for feedback. I knew about this, of course; being hollow, it is very sensitive to external vibration, so the result is an eigenvalue effect. The room I was in was quite narrow, and though I had the controls on the amp quite low, I had to turn away from the amp and face in the opposite direction to play it. The Sheraton didn’t seem to care much at all.

The punchiness of the Casino’s P90s was very evident: clear, crisp tones, each clearly separated from the next due to the quick fade of the tone. The flatwounds didn’t seem to me to impede the brightness significantly, but then again, as I only had it strung the one way I couldn’t really do a before-and-after sort of test of this. The roundwounds on the Sheraton (D’Addarios, presumably, as per the specs) didn’t strike me as significantly brighter, to tell the truth. This could be the brand, of course: I have only ever bought D’Addarios once, for the Vantage acoustic guitar I was playing then (many years ago) and they seemed to me much inferior to the Martins I was wont to purchase.^[8]But then again, I was quite the novice, and this could very well just have been in my head.

The ProBuckers, on the other hand, struck me as more mellow, especially in comparison to their sound when coil-split. I’m not entirely sure they were all that fantastic in single-coil mode, especially when compared to the dedicated single-coil P90s, but then one never does expect a general purpose tool to compare favourably with something specifically designed for the job. That said, it’s a handy feature: carry one guitar and have two options, should one need them.

The effect of the centre block was quite clear: especially in tinkering mode, where I would pluck a string and just let it ring out, the additional sustain couldn’t be missed. It’s pretty clear that for certain types of music, this is a real must. Case in point: even when I think I’m getting the hang of Johnny B. Goode (on my Casino, I mean; and the Strat just isn’t the thing for this), I don’t feel very accomplished. On the Sheraton, it just felt right the first time, even at my hackneyed proficiency level!

In summary

My time was limited (as was my ability) so this wasn’t the most extensive road test. However, it did bring home to me the reality of all those theoretical descriptions I’d read of differences between this and that.

There’s no doubt in my mind that the Casino is the thing for beat and British Invasion. One might say this is a circular argument; after all, given that the historical bands played Casinos to a large extent, if one wishes to emulate their sound, one must do likewise. To that, I would reply that I have difficulty conceiving of that style of music being terribly satisfactory played on other instruments. The whole point of beat music was, well … beat, a.k.a. punch, a certain degree of staccato. And while one might argue that those musicians initially played Epiphone Casinos due to their lesser cost, the fact is that years later when they’d ‘made it’, they still played them.

But it’s now equally clear to me that for the music of the 50s, or anything requiring a high degree of melody, an ES 335-like instrument is definitely the thing, and in that regards, I think the Sheraton performs just fine and at a reasonable price. Between the pick-up switch and the coil-splitting ability, the instrument is definitely very versatile, as advertised.

The one thing I missed was something like a Bigsby vibrato which would come in handy for certain songs (the Casino doesn’t have one either, but the Strat does have vibrato capability). As it happens, there was a Gretsch with Bigsby hanging on the wall where I was playing, so I took it down and tried it out. I had, after all, thought about a Gretsch since that was a favourite of rockabilly artists like Eddi Cochran and Brian Setzer (of Stray Cats fame), for example…. Played it for a minute or two, then put it back. Didn’t turn me on at all, somehow!

So, in general, I’m favourably impressed and inclined to add one to my collection. However, I would definitely

• replace the strings with flatwounds
• likely lower the gauge to 9 (more on that below)
• likely lower the action or have it lowered for me
• possibly have a Bigsby mounted.

And that’s it!

A short note on string gauge

The reason I upped the gauge of the Casino strings when I went to flatwounds was that I felt that this would be closer to what the original beat groups had in fact used, historically. It turns out that I was right and I wasn’t; the Beatles, for example, apparently used just whatever they could find, though George Harrison apparently commented that their strings in the early days were hard on the fingers.^[9]Heavier gauges are more resistant to pressing down and bending. I’ve since read that in fact tone isn’t affected all that much by going to a heavier gauge, so there may not have been a lot of point in having gone this route. But I seem to manage with them alright, and 11 isn’t that much heavier than 10, anyway.

As for the Sheraton, I understand that people like Chuck Berry would actually buy the lightest gauge strings they could find and mount then ‘one up’, that is, put the first string in the second slot, the second in the third slot, etc., and then mount a banjo string in the now-vacant first slot, the effect being having effective 8 gauge. That explains the kind of bending he was doing, which would certainly be much easier to do! And as roundwound strings only came out later, he would have been playing flats as well.

Now, I’ve looked about, and as far as I can see, without resorting to that sort of hocus pocus, the lightest gauge one is going to get these days^[10]I’ve read that Pyramid had 8s, but they certainly do not now, so that could well just be an error. in flatwounds is 9. Two brands come under consideration here:

• ghs and
• Curt Mangan.

Both are stainless steel (as opposed to the Pyramid Golds I use now, which are nickel) and I don’t know anyone who uses either, so that’s an area for experimentation!

Bibliography