Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

New Gibsons


djw171

Recommended Posts

I was down at the crossroads picking up some pizza and this old guy was waiting by the door of my car when I came out loaded up. He said: "BK, I been waiting to speak to you. You want to play them bluesy bends, you can if you get that torrefied top OM18, I promise you!"

 

So I did!

 

Last March. It is stunning! I ran a thread here in this very forum - recorded my 1937 Gibson L-0 and my torrefied OM and asked which sounded older .........everybody picked the torrefied top as an old guitar! Embarrassing a little bit, isn't it?

 

I have my torrefied top Martin OM. .......AND also an older 000-15 Martin with cutaway!

 

Sign me up for a torrefied J45, if they ever arrive on these far shores! Don't care if it is red or green if it sounds good, and put a cutaway on while they are at it.

 

 

BluesKing777.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it's been done different ways for centuries - mostly to treat building lumber and feed grain. But, to be fair, it's only been used for guitars for a few years. Martin was the first major builder - and introduced torrefied guitars to the market less than 2 years ago. Taylor and Gibson quickly jumped on the bandwagon. The process changes the cell structure so the wood is resistant to absorbing humidity. So, the face will react to dampness differently than the rest of the guitar. I'm sure it's fine and Martin's research has been thorough, , but I just can't subscribe to claims you can torrefy/tune a guitar top to replicate the cell structure and sound of a guitar to the extent you can dial in "60 years old" or "80 years old" or "100 years old".

 

 

 

I'm not blowing the horn to heck and back for the process, but the use with musical instrument woods has a birth in experimental use at least back to 1990. Some insight can be had at www.ruokangas.com/?F1871. Thats Ruokangas Custom Guitars. Go to the reviews section and scroll down to the Tone Quest Thermal Treatment article from 2006. Pretty good info on the beginnings of the theory and first use with guitar tone woods. Seems to me the process touts stability as the real advantage to thermal treatment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it ain't spruce over mahogany it ain't a J-45. Geez.

 

 

 

What's in a name?

Words matter!

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

I agree completely a 'real' J45 is the standard, with Mahogany.

But, I submit a bit of a compromise. Call the other variations "J45R" and "J45K" and "J45M" for the different b/s tone woods deployed (Rosewood, Koa and Maple, respectively).

Upgrades in bling do not really change the model. A Chevy Corvette with leather seats or vinyl - is still a Chevy Corvette.

But, differences in neck, bracing, etc should render the model a "Custom" designation.

If the body shape is altered, or the length of the neck - it's just not a J45.

My favorite dislike in this category is the GC "Hummingbird Pro". THAT is a travesty!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the notion of J-45s with appropriate letter designations for varying back/side woods. Seems completely logical, easy to grasp, keeps the possibilities somewhere close to a manageable number - what's not to like? Also agree with the 'custom' designation applying to structural/blingy variations. Makes too much sense - never gonna happen....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with PickitPaul - that blonde babe will be a beauty in 2035 when the waiting cream-hue has found its way to the woods.

 

A cut-away J-45 !? , , , mmmmm, sure of course it should be tried, but admit I got to get used to it.

 

Have to admit to myself that the baked tops generally leaves me twi-minded.

The ones I've tried (5 or 6) have all been very convincing, if not splendid. Same with what was heard here and on the Tube. Including a played Mart. D-35 50 year anniversary model from last year.

 

To be honest I really like them, but feel doubt for 3 reasons :

 

1/ How will they age - will they over-open at some point - meaning 'be too loose'.

 

2/ There's something forced or artificial 'bout the concept, isn't there, , , and I really dig the purist dimension to the whole acoustic guitar thing.

 

3/ It is as if getting a torrifried axe inside the collection would kind of betray the real vintage dry, smokey, fast responding deers in the herd (the monk senses).

 

 

Don't know, , , really don't know. As said, the ones tried all stood out like something special. Must look further into this dilemma.

 

I don't see a dilemma, personally. Torrefaction does to the cellular structure of the wood what natural aging does, and, natural or torrefied, it stabilizes at a point where it doesn't change much after that. I don't have one, but I wouldn't hesitate to own one. I don't have enough time to wait 70 years for a top to age naturally, or enough money to buy one that's 70 years old.

 

P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wowza!

 

I played a maple Hummingbird (I know--a Bird is supposed to be spruce over mahogany!) and fell in love with it. Not sure if it was sitka/maple or adirondack/maple, but it was wonderful. Loved the combo of the woods, body size, and 24.75" scale. So, I have to wonder how that J-45 with the heathenly maple back/sides sounds. I'd love to try one out, but I fear I might be tempted. I have a J-15 and a Hummingbird... Hopefully I could resist any and all types of J-45, even a maple one. But man. Would love to try it out.

 

As for thermally treated tops over-aging, I don't know if they have any aging left they can really do. Theoretically, the aging process should be baked right out of them. Of course, the bracing and back/sides will still age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like that Gibson is expanding their use of American tonewoods at a time when other manufacturers are sticking with foreign but cheaper woods like sapele and others, and also staying away from laminates. It keeps these guitars affordable while also keeping the money in the US. I'm sure it also saves a ton of paperwork.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see a dilemma, personally. Torrefaction does to the cellular structure of the wood what natural aging does, and, natural or torrefied, it stabilizes at a point where it doesn't change much after that.

 

As for thermally treated tops over-aging, I don't know if they have any aging left they can really do. Theoretically, the aging process should be baked right out of them. Of course, the bracing and back/sides will still age.

 

Definitely see the point about the cells reaching a max-dry-state from where they won't develop or dry further, , , simply because they can't.

However this is contradicted by the violin aficionados, who can't seem to get their classic fiddles old enough.

Then again they never complain about over-aging (as far as I know - and that ain't much).

Guess they would be the people to ask if one wanted to dive deeper into these logics.

 

Of course, the bracing and back/sides will still age.

'Xactly, , , the whole thing shall mature into that oneness a lot of us appreciate so much.

And the top will - whether we accept/like/hear it or not - be out of synch.

 

 

I don't have one, but I wouldn't hesitate to own one. I don't have enough time to wait 70 years for a top to age naturally, or enough money to buy one that's 70 years old.

 

Still could consider vintage. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Torrefaction does to the cellular structure of the wood what natural aging does, and, natural or torrefied, it stabilizes at a point where it doesn't change much after that. I don't have one, but I wouldn't hesitate to own one. I don't have enough time to wait 70 years for a top to age naturally, or enough money to buy one that's 70 years old.

 

P

 

I hear ya P, I wouldn't refuse to own one either. Though recently I did buy an Ugly Duckling 1948 J-50 that needed a good bit of work. There is a LONG thread about my journey if anyone is interested here:

http://forum.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/130854-a-rough-looking-47-48-j-50-on-reverbcom/

 

After all the work was done I have a little over $3900.00 in the guitar. Maybe with some negotiating I could get that 2017 J-50 reissue for $3300 to $3500 (Advertised Price is $3999)? Maybe, maybe not. In my case I thought it was worth putting money into a great sounding Vintage Project (albeit not such a pretty one!). It is fun and it means a lot to me to keep the Old Gal in the game. It doesn't mean I wouldn't buy a baked top guitar under the right circumstances, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely see the point about the cells reaching a max-dry-state from where they won't develop or dry further, , , simply because they can't.

However this is contradicted by the violin aficionados, who can't seem to get their classic fiddles old enough.

Then again they never complain about over-aging (as far as I know - and that ain't much).

Guess they would be the people to ask if one wanted to dive deeper into these logics.

 

 

'Xactly, , , the whole thing shall mature into that oneness a lot of us appreciate so much.

And the top will - whether we accept/like/hear it or not - be out of synch.

 

 

 

 

Still could consider vintage. .

Or maybe the top is out of sync now, and after awhile, everything else might catch up! I might be dead before it all evens out, though. Hm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or maybe the top is out of sync now, and after awhile, everything else might catch up! I might be dead before it all evens out, though. Hm.

 

Yes, of course the thing is 'suffering' from anachronistic disturbance from birth. For then to getter better, , , and - tho still disturbed - hopefully better.

 

 

I'm sure a whole lot of those classical violins are one big wooden time-kaleidoscope when it comes to components.

 

Imagine an Engelmann spruce-top from 1877 - back'n'sided with 1910 München maple (apart from a minor undated upper bout restoration in popla).

Original Alpine pine braces expect 2, cut in the extreme rare Warshawa sitka.

Linings all English weeping willow done during WWII - and a brand new fret-board anno 2006 made in Zürich by a blind builder named Max Himmeltohr Sachzenfeldt.

 

 

 

Well, call it speculations - the guitars will probably sound amazing long after we leave the planet.

 

 

Let's get into synch while we can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't they torrify everything ?

Would the sides not bend if torrified ?

 

Surely the back could be done ?

 

A '50's Gibson has every part of it aged , neck and all ...

Is it a cost thing ?

These things never add up to me . Not saying it makes no difference , just being a cynic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't they torrify everything ?

Would the sides not bend if torrified ?

 

Surely the back could be done ?

 

Don said to me at NAMM that they did try a prototype with t/b/s torrified but that they felt that it wasn't a significant impact and also by leaving the b/s uncooked the guitar still had room to mature naturally

 

 

 

 

JC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't they torrify everything ?

Would the sides not bend if torrified ?

 

Surely the back could be done ?

 

Don said to me at NAMM that they did try a prototype with t/b/s torrified but that they felt that it wasn't a significant impact and also by leaving the b/s uncooked the guitar still had room to mature naturally

 

I believe some manufactures roast the braces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Roasted braces." That's a new one for me, but I guess it makes sense....lol....Seriously.... What if the top is torrfied or terrified and the rest of the guitar isn't? As the rest of the guitar ages and changes more than the already "old" top will, what happens to the structure of the guitar? Will the new braces/back/sides/neck twist, change shape, expand, shrink, etc. and be constrained or even altered by the top they are attached-to that may not adept to the natural changes of the other wood parts of the guitar? Perhaps guitar builders have already compensated for this. I'm asking because I don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd imagine that even in a brand new, fresh guitar (non-torrefied), it is all out of sync. After all, it is made from a great variety of woods, all of which "season" differently, at a different rate, and all of which come from different trees and have different ages. Every guitar is a bundle of disparate components, and some think part of the "playing in" is the vibrations that run through, break it in, and get all these different trees/parts to vibrate more cohesively together. (I don't know about that. I sometimes think the difference in tone is due solely to age.)

 

I can't tell, but I don't think the braces are roasted on my Bird. I suppose if they were, they would be advertised.

 

This reminds me of how Ren had Guild (CT) use red spruce bracing on many of their guitars. I have to wonder if it makes a difference.

 

There are definitely guitars where the whole thing has been torrefied (Martin did this while they were experimenting). I suppose it's just a question of what makes the most difference. Sort of like a solid top makes more difference on a budget guitar than having a laminated top with a solid back... a torrefied top makes the most difference. And I also suppose like Em said, it is a combination of differently torrefied components. They can't assemble the guitar and then torrefy it, so torrefying it all separately, mahogany/rosewood would not torrefy the same as spruce, and braces not the same as a top, and yada yada...

 

If guitar manufacturers would tell us, we would know all the secrets, but I suppose no one cares besides us!

 

I have faith in the components of my Hummingbird, though, and if not that, the lifetime warranty. I know it will always sound "at least" as good as it does now, and I think it is probably my best-sounding guitar (out of some pretty darn good ones! subjective, of course).

 

My essay for the night... hope it might half make sense...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For you it seems so. To me it's more a short scale AJ. I suppose I'm a bit stodgy about it, but a guitar model designation should describe a particular set of woods and appointments without variation to avoid confusion in the marketplace. Indeed, it looks like a J-45, but the wood combination of spruce/rosewood is AJ......yes?

 

If it's short scale, it's not an AJ. :) We could play this game all day long over at TDPRI.

 

P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...