Gibson Guitar Board: Advanced Jumbo Herringbone - Gibson Guitar Board

Jump to content

  • (4 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Advanced Jumbo Herringbone

#41 User is online   blindboygrunt 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7949
  • Joined: 22-November 11

Posted 08 October 2017 - 07:33 AM

Zingmungus is word of the week
0

#42 User is offline   zombywoof 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6741
  • Joined: 24-January 08

Posted 08 October 2017 - 07:34 AM

I also have to say that guitar is gorgeous. The Martin-esque herringbone is an interesting touch.
__________________________________________________


"I play so rough - I stomp 'em"
Bukka White
0

#43 User is offline   Victory Pete 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 712
  • Joined: 23-May 11

Posted 08 October 2017 - 07:35 AM

View Postzombywoof, on 08 October 2017 - 07:34 AM, said:

I also have to say that guitar is gorgeous. Interesting blend of a 1960-ish Gibson burst with Martin-esque herringbone.



Yes, my 1998 HD-28 has not met the AJ yet, they are very similar for sure, bright and punchy.






0

#44 User is offline   Victory Pete 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 712
  • Joined: 23-May 11

Posted 08 October 2017 - 07:39 AM

View PostJinder, on 08 October 2017 - 07:30 AM, said:

I wonder whether it was the strings coming in with a bit of play? I remember my AJ was a VERY string sensitive guitar and always sounded best with a bit of age on the steel.


I don't know if it is the strings or the guitar "breaking" in. I suspect it is the guitar. Whenever I put new strings on any guitar I do not recall it ever doing this.
0

#45 User is offline   Victory Pete 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 712
  • Joined: 23-May 11

Posted 08 October 2017 - 07:39 AM

oops!
0

#46 User is offline   Tyler A 

  • Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 23
  • Joined: 04-October 16

Posted 08 October 2017 - 08:41 AM

Great looking guitar!
0

#47 User is offline   sbpark 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 776
  • Joined: 09-January 14

Posted 08 October 2017 - 02:17 PM

I love my AJ. It kind of is like a hybrid between a Martin and J45. Also, for having rosewood back and sides, at least mine doesn't necessarily have that softer, rounder (some say mushy?) lower end a lot of rosewood Martin dress have, while my AJ is crisp and articulate. It's a fairly loud guitar compared to my J45TV, but has a long scale neck like a Martin. It's a monster strummer and great to take to a jam or group, but also can sound super sweet and articulate finger picked. What ai like about the AJ over a Martin (have owned an HD28 and D28) is the AJ stayed a bit fatter and thicker sounding in the higher strings and has that Gibson midrange, where the Martins seemed more unbalanced to me, having a big, fat low end, but the high end always sounded thin in comparison. AJ's are great guitars. Only time I don't reach for my AJ is when I'm playing quieter, singer/songwriter type stuff, where, if I'm not careful the AJ can be a little overpowering.
0

#48 User is offline   sbpark 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 776
  • Joined: 09-January 14

Posted 08 October 2017 - 02:18 PM

I love my AJ. It kind of is like a hybrid between a Martin and J45. Also, for having rosewood back and sides, at least mine doesn't necessarily have that softer, rounder (some say mushy?) lower end a lot of rosewood Martin dress have, while my AJ is crisp and articulate. It's a fairly loud guitar compared to my J45TV, but has a long scale neck like a Martin. It's a monster strummer and great to take to a jam or group, but also can sound super sweet and articulate finger picked. What ai like about the AJ over a Martin (have owned an HD28 and D28) is the AJ stayed a bit fatter and thicker sounding in the higher strings and has that Gibson midrange, where the Martins seemed more unbalanced to me, having a big, fat low end, but the high end always sounded thin in comparison. AJ's are great guitars. Only time I don't reach for my AJ is when I'm playing quieter, singer/songwriter type stuff, where, if I'm not careful the AJ can be a little overpowering.
0

#49 User is offline   Victory Pete 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 712
  • Joined: 23-May 11

Posted 09 October 2017 - 05:54 AM

View Postsbpark, on 08 October 2017 - 02:18 PM, said:

I love my AJ. It kind of is like a hybrid between a Martin and J45. Also, for having rosewood back and sides, at least mine doesn't necessarily have that softer, rounder (some say mushy?) lower end a lot of rosewood Martin dress have, while my AJ is crisp and articulate. It's a fairly loud guitar compared to my J45TV, but has a long scale neck like a Martin. It's a monster strummer and great to take to a jam or group, but also can sound super sweet and articulate finger picked. What ai like about the AJ over a Martin (have owned an HD28 and D28) is the AJ stayed a bit fatter and thicker sounding in the higher strings and has that Gibson midrange, where the Martins seemed more unbalanced to me, having a big, fat low end, but the high end always sounded thin in comparison. AJ's are great guitars. Only time I don't reach for my AJ is when I'm playing quieter, singer/songwriter type stuff, where, if I'm not careful the AJ can be a little overpowering.


The one thing the Martin HD28 does not have that most Gibsons do, a Rosewood bridge. Rosewood is better at transferring string energy than Ebony. So why does Martin use Ebony on most or all of their high end guitars? I am not sure, maybe tradition.
0

#50 User is offline   j45nick 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9845
  • Joined: 05-February 11
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted 09 October 2017 - 05:57 AM

View PostVictory Pete, on 09 October 2017 - 05:54 AM, said:

Rosewood is better at transferring string energy than Ebony.



Care to elaborate on that one?
0

#51 User is offline   Buc McMaster 

  • Follow your joy, grasshopper.
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2680
  • Joined: 03-March 09
  • LocationTexas!

Posted 09 October 2017 - 06:08 AM

View PostVictory Pete, on 09 October 2017 - 05:54 AM, said:

Rosewood is better at transferring string energy than Ebony.


Is this true? If it is correct that density is an important factor in vibration transmission (and I'm not saying it is, but it certainly makes sense), then ebony is a better transmitter.......it is denser than rosewood. Take a look at this hardness (i.e. density) chart.........Janka Hardness table. By this test and resulting numbers, ali but one species of ebony is substantially harder than all the rosewoods. "Better" is subjective. I would think rosewood, being softer, would damp high frequencies more than ebony and produce a warmer tone, and likewise ebony would be brighter due to its' hardness. All speculation on my part, but logical, me thinks.

How have you arrived at this statement, Pete?
J45 Vintage - J45 12 fret
Knowin' where you're goin' is mostly knowin' where you have been. Buc, from Me & Eddie
ATLANTA: Bitter Tears An original account of Gen'l Sherman's march through Georgia in the winter of 1864
0

#52 User is offline   Victory Pete 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 712
  • Joined: 23-May 11

Posted 09 October 2017 - 06:51 AM

View PostBuc McMaster, on 09 October 2017 - 06:08 AM, said:

Is this true? If it is correct that density is an important factor in vibration transmission (and I'm not saying it is, but it certainly makes sense), then ebony is a better transmitter.......it is denser than rosewood. Take a look at this hardness (i.e. density) chart.........Janka Hardness table. By this test and resulting numbers, ali but one species of ebony is substantially harder than all the rosewoods. "Better" is subjective. I would think rosewood, being softer, would damp high frequencies more than ebony and produce a warmer tone, and likewise ebony would be brighter due to its' hardness. All speculation on my part, but logical, me thinks.

How have you arrived at this statement, Pete?


I found this hard to believe also. There are numerous discussion's about this fact online. Rosewood has lower Impedance than Ebony. I have 2 identical D-28 bridges in my shop, One Rosewood, one Ebony. When dropped on my marble counter the Rosewood rings like a bell and the Ebony just makes thud.
0

#53 User is offline   Victory Pete 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 712
  • Joined: 23-May 11

Posted 09 October 2017 - 07:03 AM

Here is one of the Forums I found:




https://www.tapatalk...ne-t112978.html



0

#54 User is offline   Victory Pete 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 712
  • Joined: 23-May 11

Posted 09 October 2017 - 07:09 AM

Taken from the above link. I have an expensive Cordoba Classical that does in fact have a rosewood bridge with an ebony fretboard, never really noticed this until recently.



" MikeHalloran

Posts14,047 MikeHalloran Registered MemberJoined: 14 Jun 2005, 05:43 <h3></h3>
02 Jan 2011, 17:54 #10 2011-01-02T17:54

> Bridges: Ebony or Brazilian Rosewood for Max Tone? <

The question is wrong. There is no such thing as "Max Tone". Tone is in the ear of the beholder and is highly subjective. The real question involves max volume and there is an answer to that one.

There are differences between rosewood and ebony. Rosewood has a lower impedance - like in electricity, it means resistance to the flow of energy. In a world where all things are equal i.e. strings, top, plate, saddle, bracing, neck, sides and back, this means that rosewood is more efficient at transmitting the energy of the strings to the rest of the guitar. It will exhibit more volume and bass as the effect is not linear. Ebony will have more sustain as the energy stays in the strings longer.

Will you hear the difference? Yes but you are not likely to hear the increased volume because the human ear is not very sensitive to volume changes of one dB or so. You should hear a slight increase in bass and this will color the rest of the tone. You may or may not hear the differences in attack or sustain - they will be there.

Classical guitar makers favor small BRW bridges for this reason. The object of a concert guitar is to maximize volume and projection and an ebony bridge does not do this.

If the bridge ever pops off my 00-28G again, I intend to replace it with a BRW one from an 18G or 18/16C/N-10 to see how much difference it makes. I am not so interested that I will pull the current bridge from my guitar, however.

Maple, BTW, has a much lower impedance than any of the rosewoods. This is why it is used for bowed strings and banjos. I would think a maple bridge wouldn't hold a saddle well without splitting which is why it isn't generally used for guitars. I do have a mandolin with a one-piece, non-adjustable maple bridge that works well."


0

#55 User is offline   Victory Pete 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 712
  • Joined: 23-May 11

Posted 09 October 2017 - 07:12 AM

Here is the next post from that Forum:







"Alan Carruth


Registered MemberJoined: 02 Jul 2009, 12:12


<h3></h3>
03 Jan 2011, 01:07 #11 2011-01-03T01:07

Impedance is not a material property, it depends on how the material is used.

Mechanical impedance is the ratio of velocity over force at a given frequency. It's determined by mass, stiffness, and damping (the rate of energy dissipation in the material). Increasing any of those will raise the impedance, but have different effects on the frequency response. Adding mass doesn't raise the impedance much at low frequencies, but has a big effect at high frequencies. Stiffness works the other way: effecting high frequencies more than low ones. Damping adds to impedance at all frequencies, but tends to kill highs more than lows.

Rosewoods tend to have lower damping than ebony, to be less dense, and to have about the same stiffness. Generally, then, a rosewood bridge will have lower impedance overall than an ebony one, and the lower mass and lower damping will tend to favor highs. That assumes an 'average' piece of wood, and the same size and shape of bridge.

Maple is generally less dense than rosewood, with soft maples (Euro of Red) being lower in density than Rock maple. Maple also has higher damping than rosewood. When I have used maple for a guitar bridge I've taken advantage of the lower density and made it larger, which allows you to put the saddle slot further back and have more meat behind the pin holes, so it holds up better. It also helps keep things from getting too bright.

Walnut is much like a soft maple, and Ovation's been using walnut bridges for years without a lot of splitting problems. You just have to design around the differences."



0

#56 User is offline   zombywoof 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6741
  • Joined: 24-January 08

Posted 09 October 2017 - 07:55 AM

Sounds like the combination of the rosewood body and the long scale continues to create one formidable beast.
__________________________________________________


"I play so rough - I stomp 'em"
Bukka White
0

#57 User is offline   j45nick 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9845
  • Joined: 05-February 11
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted 09 October 2017 - 09:21 AM

View Postzombywoof, on 09 October 2017 - 07:55 AM, said:

Sounds like the combination of the rosewood body and the long scale continues to create one formidable beast.



Especially if you could figure out a way to play the guitar without holding it against your body...

Certainly a good piece of rosewood will ring like a bell when struck, which is presumably why it is the preferred material for the bars in some mallet-struck percussion instruments like the marimba or xylophone.

Sound transmission in a guitar top is pretty complex. At the bridge, you have the sandwich of the strings, saddle, bridge, bridge pins, soundboard, bridge plate, and top bracing.

I don't know how it all works, but I like the result in a good guitar.

The next question, of course, is how well the modern Brazilian rosewood substitutes perform these functions compared to Dalbergia nigra...

(maybe I'll just go play for awhile instead.)
0

#58 User is offline   j45nick 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9845
  • Joined: 05-February 11
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted 09 October 2017 - 09:53 AM

View PostVictory Pete, on 09 October 2017 - 05:54 AM, said:

So why does Martin use Ebony on most or all of their high end guitars? I am not sure, maybe tradition.



Maybe because ebony is a lot harder than rosewood, which can be pretty important in things like fretboards and bridges. All you have to do is look at pinhole and fretboard wear on older guitars with ebony vs rosewood.
0

#59 User is offline   Victory Pete 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 712
  • Joined: 23-May 11

Posted 09 October 2017 - 10:07 AM

View Postj45nick, on 09 October 2017 - 09:53 AM, said:

Maybe because ebony is a lot harder than rosewood, which can be pretty important in things like fretboards and bridges. All you have to do is look at pinhole and fretboard wear on older guitars with ebony vs rosewood.


Seems like that would be a neglible reason, at least for the bridge. There is no doubt that ebony is better for fretboards.
0

#60 User is offline   j45nick 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9845
  • Joined: 05-February 11
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted 09 October 2017 - 10:29 AM

View PostVictory Pete, on 09 October 2017 - 10:07 AM, said:

Seems like that would be a neglible reason, at least for the bridge. There is no doubt that ebony is better for fretboards.



It's not a negligible concern for those of us who buy vintage guitars. Bridge wear can be a significant issue, to the point where with a lot of older guitars with rosewood bridges, you look at whether it makes sense to drill out and plug the pin holes, and start all over.

Maybe it's a concern for builders, or maybe they just like to keep the boards and bridges of the same material for aesthetic reasons. You seem to acknowledge that ebony is better for fretboards for wear properties, so maybe even Martin looks at it that way. Sometimes manufacturers actually consider the long-term implications of the material choices they make.

You would think that somewhere along the line, Martin has made some conscious choices about materials, balancing one property or material characteristic against another.
0

Share this topic:


  • (4 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users