1970s S-100 and M-75

[GGJaguar]

I've seen far more 1970s era S-100s for sale compared to the M-75 probably due to economics since, in 1975, the M-75 cost $110 more ($545 in 2020 dollars!). But was the M-75 worth the difference? Was it a better sounding or more versatile model? Or were they similar sounding, just in different formats?

 

[mellowgerman]

My guess would be the price differential was due to the extra work involved with a carved arched top and binding. I think the same was true for Gibson SG and Les Paul guitars. To be honest, in terms of playability and actual weight, I prefer S-100's and SG's.
Never been a big fan of the Les Paul design, although ironically, my back-up to my Starfire bass is a 1973 Gibson Les Paul Triumph. It sounds so wonderfully good that I just forced myself to get used to the ergonomics of it. At least it's a short-scale and standing up playability is not so bad... but man that tiny body can feel cramped in a seated playing position! Sure wish they would have done an SG counterpart with the same neck and electronics.

 

[Horuss]

I've owned every style of 70's-era Guild solidbody, except an M-80. None of them sounded as good as my carved S-100 (including other S-100s).

 

[mushroom]

As mellowgerman mentioned I would say the body build costs of the M75 was the price difference given the hardware was pretty similar - pups and wiring etc.

I play through a variety of effects pedals so the difference in sound to me was negligible between my M75 and S100

But on versatility I will say that when I played live I used the M75 and the Bluesbird but for any recording or sit down playing I used the S100 (and more recently an S300).

By far the best playing S100 I have experienced was a mid 90 version. That was a magical feeling guitar and I offered stupid money to get it but the owner of said instrument also knew they had something special and refused / refuses to budge.