Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Played my first J-15 Wow ... and first 70's Gibson


EuroAussie

Recommended Posts

I was in London over to watch the last two days of the Ashes test (nobody in the US will understand, but its a traditional game of cricket between the Aussies and Brits).

 

Was meant to be there for final two days but was all over in first two hours of play so what to do in London except to make the pilgrimmage to .... Denmark St.

 

Overally a bit disappointed withe vintage inventory at that time, best from the vintage was actually a 56' D-18, pretty much perfect tone, deep, rich but in that mohogany way. Loved it.

 

But next to was a 1974 SJ 'Deluxe' which sort of looked like a Hummingbird without the flowers. And .... have to say the tone on it was pretty damn good. Granted it had a new set of Elixirs which hide the true tone of the guitar and give it a bit more ooomph, but i could that there was quite a bit of life under that hood. It was the first time Ive experienced a 70's Gibson and have to say, it was pretty damn good.

 

Then I went across the road and finally got a chance to play a new J-15. Ive played many J-35's and evan a couple J-29's but couldnt find a J-15 anywhere.

 

Wow .... what a guitar. I utterly loved it. The tone was like the J-35 + 100%, in the sense that it hard warmth, depth but still clear with the advanced breaking. The strings were old and this guitar just loved them. I really felt like I was plyaing a 50's Gibson slope. Reminded me a lot of a 57' J-50 I played in Oz over Xmas.

 

It was a superb guitar and could stand up to any of my slopes. Have to say i found it infinitely more impressive than the rather thin sounding J-35. This guitar has warmth, character and atriculation.

 

And for the price .... what a steal ! I did think about it for a minute.

 

So, for those who own a J-15, good on ya, you have a wicked Gibson there ! [thumbup]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, those 70's can build up a fairly convincing voice over time - Very woody, warm'n'velvety, still Gibsonesq, but something else.

 

Not many Kalamazoo's there as I understand it. Did you visit both Rare and Vintage and Wunjo Guitars ?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, those 70's can build up a fairly convincing voice over time - Very woody, warm'n'velvety, still Gibsonesq, but something else.

 

Not many Kalamazoo's there as I understand it. Did you visit both Rare and Vintage and Wunjo Guitars ?

 

Exactly. Was mostly in Wunjo where I came across the D-18 and SJ 'deluxe' but then I found the J-15 in Rare n Vintage, although its not called that anymore, but the interior is the same. Somebody made a trade with it for a model they had there.

 

There was a 69' Dove, vintage J-35 and vintage century of progress, but I was too into the J-15 to give them a run ... then time ran out. Was a bit disappointed I couldnt find any 40's J-45's / SJ's as its always a treat to get your mits on one of those.

 

Really impressed with that J-15.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EuroAussie, glad you finally found one of these excellent guitars. You "get" the Gibson magic and obviously always have, but many buy-into the anti-Gibson barrage on the internet and think the J15 is a lesser guitar. They don't have a clue. The J15 can fill whatever role you need it for. It can be Godzilla, or it can be Mary Poppins. It's far above the lower-end Martins and Taylors. It's a first class instrument and guitar-wise is the equal of any of it's more expensive brothers and sisters. The ones I've played at my nearby Guitar Center (and they've gone through several) were all impressive. Big sound and great setup. Very, very playable. And I'm always impressed by the simple, yet elegant beauty of it. That walnut back & sides with that maple neck are really cool.........I guess we shouldn't be surprised if one day you show-up on here with a J15... [thumbup]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest Id be willing to swap my 69er' for that specific J-15, even though its worth twice as much Larry. That guitar punches massivelly above its weight.

 

Interestingly after I played a maple Collings CJ and put it down after two minutes. The clinical precision and coldness of that guitar I found infinitely inferior to the J-15, even though it had a price tag 3 times higher !

 

 

EuroAussie, glad you finally found one of these excellent guitars. You "get" the Gibson magic and obviously always have, but many buy-into the anti-Gibson barrage on the internet and think the J15 is a lesser guitar. They don't have a clue. The J15 can fill whatever role you need it for. It can be Godzilla, or it can be Mary Poppins. It's far above the lower-end Martins and Taylors. It's a first class instrument and guitar-wise is the equal of any of it's more expensive brothers and sisters. The ones I've played at my nearby Guitar Center (and they've gone through several) were all impressive. Big sound and great setup. Very, very playable. And I'm always impressed by the simple, yet elegant beauty of it. That walnut back & sides with that maple neck are really cool.........I guess we shouldn't be surprised if one day you show-up on here with a J15... [thumbup]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interestingly after I played a maple Collings CJ and put it down after two minutes. The clinical precision and coldness of that guitar I found infinitely inferior to the J-15, even though it had a price tag 3 times higher !

 

I agree [thumbup]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE: the 74 SJ Deluxe: Thank you. That is the guitar I am always reporting 'round here I will keep hanging onto regardless of the era and just 'cause it sounds good. Glad to hear mine is not the only one that made the grade that year and that era. That makes two at last!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never could quite put my finger on what it is about most Collings guitars that kept me from really liking them until EuroAussie's "clinical precision and coldness" description. It hits the nail right on the head. Although the new Waterloo line appears to be a Collings recognition that a little funk and imprecision gives back in tone. I can't wait to try one of the upcoming Waterloo Washburn or Recording King jumbos. I've read that they will be very lightly built (in the 3 pound range!) which should be interesting. Great to hear that J-15's are so consistently good. Wonder why that seems to be the case for the J-15 and not so much for other Gibson Acoustics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think with Collings the key is that they really need to be played in hard so they soften up a bit otherwise they do come across as pretty sterile.

 

A few years back in played a 15 yeard D2H that was really broken in and it sounded fabulous, sort of like a D-28 but with articulation, warmth and balance.

 

But that CJ was just like ice, especially after the Gibby.

 

I never could quite put my finger on what it is about most Collings guitars that kept me from really liking them until EuroAussie's "clinical precision and coldness" description. It hits the nail right on the head. Although the new Waterloo line appears to be a Collings recognition that a little funk and imprecision gives back in tone. I can't wait to try one of the upcoming Waterloo Washburn or Recording King jumbos. I've read that they will be very lightly built (in the 3 pound range!) which should be interesting. Great to hear that J-15's are so consistently good. Wonder why that seems to be the case for the J-15 and not so much for other Gibson Acoustics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never could quite put my finger on what it is about most Collings guitars that kept me from really liking them until EuroAussie's "clinical precision and coldness" description. It hits the nail right on the head. Although the new Waterloo line appears to be a Collings recognition that a little funk and imprecision gives back in tone. I can't wait to try one of the upcoming Waterloo Washburn or Recording King jumbos. I've read that they will be very lightly built (in the 3 pound range!) which should be interesting. Great to hear that J-15's are so consistently good. Wonder why that seems to be the case for the J-15 and not so much for other Gibson Acoustics?

I think the Collings guitars sound 'sterile" in my hands. I jam with a couple guys, one sometimes plays his Collings Dread with a flat pick, and it really a crisp clear monster in his hands. In my hands (and fingers) it turns to mud.

I am concluding more and more that it is 99% the player, and 1% the guitar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I finally had a chance to try a J-15 and J-35 last winter. They both reminded me a lot of my 2008 J-50, although the J-15 was more punchy. They are nice, and if I didn't already have the J-50 I might have been interested.

 

However the more time I spend practicing, the more I realize the necks on all these newer Gibsons are just too big for me. I can play them fine, but after an hour, my hand gets pretty sore. My 1965 and 1974 J-50s really have a much better neck for my hands, although the closer string spacing can make some things more diffficult to finger.

 

So I just don't see me buying any new Gibson acoustics, unless they come with with a "vintage neck" model. The 1974 J-50 was my first guitar, and I never especially noticed how different the neck was until recently. I guess you have to reach a certain level of playing and also practice for longer periods of time to appreciate the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However the more time I spend practicing, the more I realize the necks on all these newer Gibsons are just too big for me.

I too prefer a thinner profile, and have found significant variations in recent Gibsons. Most tend to be just a bit larger than what I'd ideally like to have in my hands, but if you sample enough of a given model, you may run across one that's narrower.

 

My early issue J-15 (1/2/14), has a rather slim profile. Likewise, from descriptors I'd read, I was expecting a fairly chucky neck on the LG-2 AE. But mine will have none of that, and is almost identical to the profile on my J-15.

 

I've also found this to be the case with Memphis hollow-bodies. The ES-330 VOS generally has a fat '50s profile. I've only played one that felt good in-hand, and wow, that one came home in a heartbeat!

 

I've also owned many Gibson acoustics from the early 2000s, and found the same to be true then as now. Most had slightly chunky necks, but the two I still have are noticeably thinner. In fact, my 2000 J100-Xtra starts out at 1-10/16" at the nut. Absolutely not the norm from that era, but that's the exact point.

 

So keep trying 'em!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boyd, I think your attitude is typical for many of us. We all like different things and if a guitar isn't right for us, we look for something else. You really thought the J15 was a sweet guitar, but it didn't fit what you need. I totally agree with your comments about guitar necks also. Like many, I've played some awesome instruments that sounded great and were beautiful "high dollar" instruments, but for my hands and arms the playability was not there. It's been a "deal killer" for me more than a few times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree 100%. All my favorite Gibsons are from the '60s for the narrower neck that most players don't like. I'm always hoping to find a new Gibson with no wider than 1.69 at the nut. In fact, I've sold a Dove, Hummingbird, Sheryl Crow CW, Jackson Browne Model 1 and SJ in my long, expensive realization that I'm simply never going to enjoy the slightly wider nut of 1.725 and beyond.

 

What is heaven for some is not quite right for others. I wish modern Gibsons came with more options. I bought my Martin M36 (a beauty) for the 1.69 nut and was thankful for the option. Those wanting that model in the wider nut can check out the M38. How I wish I had that option with a modern Bird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you go to Marguerite's (edit: Macari's) or something like that in London? Oddly enough, when I was in England near Christmas time, I only had time/chance to go to one guitar shop in London, and I chose based on proximity to the station, not wanting to inconvenience the lady. I only wanted to play a Hummingbird, though, and I had to basically wrestle it from the employees' hands. They did not want me to play it. They offered me a J-15 instead (which I wish I would have tried!). But I had eyes only for the Hummingbird. "You are for sure going to buy one in the next year?" "I for sure am," I told him, which was true, and they let me play it (and I did buy one, 8 or so months later, in Montana). I get that they don't want people messing up their stuff, but don't they have insurance? Do I have to walk in with gold chains and a fur coat before I can play a non-Yamaha?

 

Anyway, I wish I'd had time to try the other stores, but I was such a frantic weirdo anyway, and having to talk them into letting me play it freaked me out even more. PLus I was nervous just to play my first Hummingbird. (I've only actually played four total, still...) Would have been nice to have time and confidence and see all the stuff at the other stores too.

 

Glad to hear you liked the J-15 so much!! I hope I have the same impression. Mine should be arriving next week sometime, and I have never played a J-15 before, so I have quite a bit of apprehension. Got such a great deal on it that I could probably sell it for the same price I paid, but obviously I hope to love it and keep it with my Hummingbird for life.

 

 

I bought my Martin M36 (a beauty) for the 1.69 nut and was thankful for the option. Those wanting that model in the wider nut can check out the M38. How I wish I had that option with a modern Bird.

 

The M-38 is an odd model. I'm aware of a "special koa" version that had a 1-3/4" nut, but I think standard they were 1-11/16". They were also always inexplicably much more expensive than the M-36, despite having basically identical specs.

 

I had the opposite problem as you and special ordered my M-36 with a 1-3/4" nut. :) I made other changes to it as well, some smart, others silly, and would have been fine just leaving the rest, but it is a great guitar and one I'll keep for life, I'd imagine, with my Hummingbird (and hopefully J-15!).

 

The M-36 in general is a fantastic guitar. Mine has an Italian Alpine spruce top, which was a little misguided of me, and imparts a little more brightness than I'd like (keep waiting for it to settle down, but it's been 5 years!)--I like the dry Gibson tone, after all... but some JP Pure Nickel strings solved that and gave me back the guitar I had out of the box. (I got so used to it with dead PB strings that when I put new strings on it, I didn't even recognize it anymore. So bright! Again, Pure Nickel to the rescue.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great to hear that J-15's are so consistently good. Wonder why that seems to be the case for the J-15 and not so much for other Gibson Acoustics?

 

I am of the persuasion that there are no "dogs," and probably no "special" guitars. Yes, there is definitely variation between guitars of the same model, but not as much as our emotions and ears and internet scuttlebutt would have us believe.

 

I think there are lots of factors, and I think probably the J-15 holds up better under those factors. In fact, maybe it was designed to (although this could be a problem if the J-15 holds up and other Gibsons don't). I think Taylors are designed to sound good in the shop, with thin tops and coated strings. One those Taylors leave the shop, or are played more, or are played alongside Gibsons and Martins with other equal factors, eh, maybe the Taylor won't hold up so well, but so what? It already sold.

 

A lot of it comes down to strings. The J-15 might handle dead strings better (personally, I think all good guitars handle dead strings well, but that is due to one's personal taste)--maybe a short-scale spruce/walnut in the J-45 shape and bracing handles dead strings better. I think longer-scale guitars don't tolerate dead strings as well. Maybe other woods don't either.

 

Gibson is pretty brave to ship their guitars with uncoated 80/20 strings and capitalize on that vintage tone. Works for me, but Taylor fans like bright, and Martin fans like ballsy and oomphy. Taylor and Martin both ship with strings designed to keep the guitar sounding good longer in the store (and I think Taylors are built to do sound good in the store, too, but can fatigue the ear later). Maybe Gibson accidentally stumbled onto something with the J-15.

 

Long story short, that is my theory on consistency, that, all other things equal (strings, humidity, being played-in, being settled), we would find quite a lot more consistency than the internet and magical thinking would have us realize. But an SJ-200 might sound worse with dead strings than a J-15, and a D-28 that hasn't been played at all might sound tighter than an unplayed J-15, etc etc etc, which can lead people to think, "Gibsons are all over the map!" (I realize I stuck a Martin in there too ha, speaking of being all over the map)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be surprised if they had insurance that would cover damage from a customer trying out a guitar.

 

They're running a heck of a risky business then. I thought most shops, whatever they sold, had some insurance on that kind of stuff. Maybe not! Either way, I look young, but I look about as much like a shredder as Donovan (then or now).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE: the 74 SJ Deluxe: Thank you. That is the guitar I am always reporting 'round here I will keep hanging onto regardless of the era and just 'cause it sounds good. Glad to hear mine is not the only one that made the grade that year and that era. That makes two at last!

 

Make that 3, my Father has a 73 or 74 SJ Deluxe. I'm not quite sure on the year but that guitar sounds great, it's not overly loud but the warm tone is to die for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...