Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Martin acoustic volume vs Gibson


BC Mike 118

Recommended Posts

Gibson, Inc., General Assembly Room, 1936. “One section of the general assembling room.” Photographed by Mamie L. Austin.

 

 

25960561065_35b34f60df_b.jpg

 

Great!!!

 

Both this picture and the previous one show a couple of hanging guitars -- one with back binding and one without. This was the year of the Trojan -- the prototype J-35 -- which was a Jumbo without back binding (and a few other changes). So as long as i am fantasizing, here is the only Trojan documented by FON in the Gibson shipping ledgers.

 

g7DWZmy.jpg

6FNykQ6.jpg

 

Thanks again Dave. Made my morning.

 

Best,

 

-Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

My 1988 Martin D-28p has nice tone, but I always thought it a tad light in volume. I'm a finger picker. It was the first adjustable Martin I had had -- so I blamed the new truss rod.

 

Now I'm enjoying my first AJ -- and it's a bit louder than the D-28p. The 2006 AJ surprised me, with how rich the tone was, and how sensitive/expressive it was -- for a 'killer'. The banjo has been forced deep into the hills, around here, so (normally) volume isn't really a big deal.

 

The AJ encourages me to come up with big notes, and I think my playing is a little more dynamic. It's a hotrod, and I'm an old guy who still likes to squawk the tires. A 'Nice to know it's there.' feeling.

The Short: +1 my AJ is a touch louder than my D.

 

Just two very specific guitars, and just one player's opinion. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a confirmed Gibson acoustic lover and have a number of them including two SJ200's, a Dove, Hummingbird and a Songwriter Deluxe Studio. Recently I bought a Martin HD35 even though I had never considered owning one before but I could not resist the price. I couldn't believe the difference in acoustic volume. Much louder than the Gibsons, ever the SJ200's! Have any of you had this experience? The bracing is 1/4" and scalloped but can that make such a noticible difference in volume?

Congrats on your purchase, Mike: i can feel your enthusiasm & understand it. The fact is the HD35 volume is just terrific: a great big sound. On the one hand, this certainly is due to the 1/4" scalloped braces which would accentuate the treble, but on the other hand the three-piece back plays an important part in the whole thing as well because it would enhance the bass. The guys from Martin started to make three-piece backs at the time because they had to face important economical problems and criticisms sometimes have been made as regarding the visual aspect of it, but the fact is that those backs proved to have a genuine consequence regarding the sound, the evidence is that nowadays D35 & HD35 models are highly praised by Martin aficionados. I believe that one could be real hard-pressed before they find a guitar able to sound louder than a Martin HD35, to put it in the mildest words, but although its volume is big, one must keep in mind that's not all: the tone is powerful but definetely warm and clear as well. I do have a D28 i bought in June 1997 & i really love it, but my love struck remains my 2017 Hummingbird i bought last year. Best wishes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would be the main difference between this and a Nick Lucas?

 

Nick Lucas is a flat top -- this is an archtop and it is larger and worth less. This is from a well known batch of L-4s where they used Nick Lucas fingerboards and had a round sound hole-- normally an L-4 has dot inlays and f-holes. I recently saw a picture of a RSSD where they did the same thing. Go figure.

 

Best,

-Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...