So I've got my ES-335, my Sheraton, and my ES-339. 

My Gibson ES-335 is a 2016 Studio version.  As I recall, it has a few differences from the regular ES-335 model, but, overall, it's still the same guitar.  It has the 4-knob arrangement (unlike the Studio version from a couple of years earlier), and it has 57 Classic pups in it.  I think the bridge used was a different bridge from the regular version.  I also think that the neck is a torrefied neck.  I think there were a couple of other minor differences, but those two are the most significant changes in the Studio and regular versions.

The Sheraton is a 1962 50th Anniversary model.  It's biggest differences between it and an actual 335 are that it uses Gibson mini-buckers instead of full size ones and it has a Frequensator tailpiece (closer to a trapeze) instead of using a stop piece tailpiece.  It has CTS pots and switches, and it has GIbson cloth wiring inside.  Those are also differences between it and the regular Sheratons of the time that it was built.  For the purpose of comparison, when I bought the Sheraton nearly 10 years ago, it cost approximately 50% more than a regular line Sheraton and half the price of an ES-335 (which is the model I would've gotten).

My Epiphone ES-339 is from the second run that they produced.  The first run was during the summer or fall of 2011.  I had been looking at and toying with the idea of buying a Gibson ES-339 for a while when they announced that Epi would be producing that model as well.  I got my order in late enough that I missed that first run and had to wait on the second.  The only difference in the two that I recall is that the first run had Epi's ProBucker pups in it (their equivalent to Gibby's BusrtBuckers) and the second run had the Alnico Pro pups in it (their equivalent to the 57 Classics).

Although, mine have some pretty significant differences in them, the 335 and Sheraton are very similar guitars in theory.  However, I believe that the Sheraton was an Epiphone creation and not a Gibson copy originally, but it's a little more ornate than the basic 335; it's closer to an ES-355.  I actually like my Sheraton better than my ES-335, and, moving forward, I'm going to talk about them as if they were the same unless specified otherwise.  Also, I'm not covering the differences in Gibson vs Epiphone.  This is 335 vs 339.

The 335 guitars are bigger bodied.  I'm too lazy to look up the actual dimensions, but they're huge guitars.  They're big enough that I know at least a couple of folks that won't play them because they're "just too big."  They're also pretty heavy.  I attribute the weight to the fact that they're so big.  Although I've always said that the 339 is the same size as a Les Paul, I've read (and seen when they're side by side) that they're not quite the same size.  But they're close.  See the pics at the bottom for a comparison.  It's not a huge difference, but that little bit makes a pretty big difference in weight and comfort when playing.

If it makes a difference to anyone, the 335 has the jack on the face of the guitar where the 339 has it on the hip like a Les Paul.  I don't usually think about where the jack is, but every time I pull out the 335 and plug it in, I'm afraid I'm going to hit the plug and crack the face of the guitar or break the jack.  I've never done that and probably never will, but it's always in the back of my mind.

From a parts standpoint, they're not really that different of guitars (and I'm not talking about the the Gibson vs Epi difference, this is the 335 vs 339 difference).  They both have the same control setup.  Both have 2 vol/2 tone setups with the pup selector down by the knobs.  They both have a stop tail bridge.  They both have humbuckers for pups.  There's the jack location, but, other than that, they're similar.

Tones from both are very nice.  They both have that nice semi-hollow sound.  The longer I play, the more I really like that airy sound that you get from a semi-hollow like a 335 or 339.  The difference is that the 339 can get into those Les Paul-ish kind of darker sounds that a 335 can't do.  I imagine that's because the wings of the 339 are smaller so it's as close to a solid body as it is to a semi-hollow.  The 335 is the standard for a semi-hollow, in my opinion, the semi by which all others are measured.  The 339 does an adequate job in that semi-hollow arena, but it also can get into the LP territory.  The 339 is a good balance between the two. 

Once I understood that what I was hearing was a semi-hollow sound, I've liked the 335 and played one at least as often as I played my Strats.  I've always wanted to like a good Les Paul, but have just never bonded with one.  Since I started to migrate from primarily playing an acoustic to playing an electric, I have always been drawn to my Strats.  However, about a year ago, I pulled my 339 out of the closet, set it up really well, and have been playing it almost exclusively since then.  It's just a great guitar that covers a lot of area.

The 335 vs the 339.  Both are great guitars that are very similar.  If you like the humbucker sound, give them a shot.

And, yes, I've ripped those from the interwebs at some point.  Don't remember where so I can't give credit like I should.

...for several months now.

​Here's something I posted on my favorite guitar forum back in January.  Realized I had never posted it here, so figured I'd do that today, along with some of my updated thoughts on it.
------------- ​
Used the last of my Reverb credit over the holidays, and ordered a pedal I had been eyeing since the summer...the Danelectro The Breakdown. It's supposed to be their take on the Univox UD50 only without the treadle part of the pedal. I've had it since the weekend and been playing around with it. Here're my initial thoughts on it.

I really like the 2-knob simplicity of it. Volume and Break-up. Volume is just that, volume. The Break-up is the gain knob except that, rather than being a rheostat kind of knob that smoothly transitions around the dial, it has 6 clickable spots. The first one doesn't do a whole lot to my ear. Settings 2 and 3 I've read would work as the always-on settings. Settings 4-6 can get pretty gnarly.

Jumping back to the Volume knob real quick, one of the things that I like about it is that it doesn't seem to have much affect on the gain. On some pedals I've used, if you want to retain the drive/fuzz when you turn the volume down, you have to turn the gain up. On this pedal, volume is just volume. It doesn't seem to do anything to the gain. So, if you have the right amount of fuzz clicked in at 3 and then turn the pedal down, the volume will drop accordingly, but the gain doesn't change; the fuzz remains.

I really like the 3 and 6 settings. I don't ever see this as being an always-on pedal even on the lower settings. Maybe I would if I was big into garage rock, but it doesn't really fit that bill for blues. I like 3 because it gives that loose, starting to fuzz sound on the low end, but doesn't really do a whole lot on the higher strings. 3 is almost perfect if you're wanting to play some fuzzy power chords. Starts getting pretty fuzzy on the low end, but the highs only get a little crackle. At 5, and especially 6, it gets that full on Hendrix Purple Haze fuzz.

They've been advertising this as an overdrive pedal (they released a fuzz pedal in conjunction with it called the Eisenhower), but to my ear it's more of a fuzz pedal without the octave. I make the distinction because, to my ear, OD is usually pretty tight, and fuzz can get kind of loose and floppy. This one leans much more to the floppy side.

Overall impression so far: I like the simplicity of it. I like that the volume doesn't seem to affect the gain at all; it just makes it louder or quieter. I like that the gain settings are clickable. For instance, I know I like the 3 setting. If the pedal gets changed, I don't have to try to find that perfect spot on the dial anymore. I just click back to 3 and voila. Easy peasy lemon lawn chairs.

Definitely not going to be a pedal for everybody I don't think. I ordered it thinking it would be another OD pedal (since that's how it was advertised), and was pleasantly surprised when I started playing it and thought it sounded more like a fuzz since I've recently been looking to buy another fuzz pedal. To my ear, it can do the Hendrix thing pretty well on 5 and 6. On the higher settings, I could also hear it being used for that garage rock, Detroit Cobras, Black Keys kind of thing.

As always, my ears aren't yours so you may hear something completely different than I do with this pedal. YMM-definitely-V.
------------- ​
After having had it and using it for the last few months, here are my more recent thoughts on it.  

I'm still convinced it's closer to a fuzz sound than an overdrive.  The lower settings (1-3) are a bit OD-ish, but the higher settings (4-6) get really fuzzy. 

I still, very much, like the fact that the volume will affect the volume and not the level of fuzz.  I'm not sure that I've got another pedal that does this quite as noticeably.  You get the amount of drive/fuzz that you want, and you just tweak the volume button to turn it up or down.  No need to adjust the volume knob and then find that perfect level on the gain side again.  It's also a very responsive pedal.  You dig in, and it digs in.  You lay back a bit, and it lays back with you.

I still like the 6-click knob.  You can't get anything between the clicks if you want it, but the simplicity of finding the the right amount of fuzziness really appeals to me.  There's no wide range from which to choose.  6 options.  You either find one that you want or you don't.  And you you do so quickly.

Since I'm mostly a bedroom player, I generally run a couple of ODs on my board.  I keep a klone of some sort on it as a clean boost kind of pedal that's almost always on, and then a TS of some sort for that extra push to make it stand out during a solo.  I had initially envisioned this Danelectro pedal as one that would be a different type of boost pedal to run as an always on kind of thing.  The more I play it, this is not that pedal.  This is a pedal that has a great sound and would work as a good boost or drive, but isn't one that I'm going to leave on all the time. 

As much as I like a couple of the settings on it, it's not a pedal that is going to be on my board and stay there all the time.  It definitely has it's place, and is one that, honestly, is still giving me some inspiration and being used regularly, but it's also one that I pull out for a week or so to get a particular fuzziness to my tone, but then goes back on the shelf for a week or two.  I think, when I've used it, it's almost exclusively been on either click 3 or click 6.

All in all, I think it's a great pedal.  I've enjoyed playing with it enough that I really want to try out Danelectro's new 3699 Fuzz.  If that one's as good as The Breakdown, it'll be a great pedal for the cash.