'43 banner J-45 (Adirondack/hog)

[Static]

I might have a line on a 1943 banner J-45 with adirondack top (two piece) and mahogany back and sides lined up, going to go see how she sounds when I get off work (I work on a ship). Has the maple v truss rod. Anyone here play a similar example of an early banner, or own one? I have only found like...one video of an adirondack one on youtube.

 

Anyone who has experience with one of these that could comment on the sound, it would be greatly appreciated. Since I am stuck on the ship for another week and a half dreaming about the guitar.

 

Information, videos, anything would help. I've only really been able to find mostly sitka, hog and maple banner vids and just hoping an old adirondack isnt too much of a departure from that classic j-45 sound, or curious if it adds something to it. And maybe some opinions on the lack of truss rod in some of these old banners. (My apologies, didn't realize there was a Vintage Corner forum when I posted this)

[jedzep]

There's a few here that have experience with banner year guitars. That's high dollar window shopping. I feel lack of a truss rod in any top line acoustic is worrisome, however if someone could afford a guitar like this they could likely afford the periodic neck resets.

 

My J50 is six years younger than that one and it's got deep bass and full woody pop and bark. I predict the tone will be mind blowing, but the playability will factor in. Can't you afford a chopper to come pick you up and fly you to it?

[Static]

There's a few here that have experience with banner year guitars. That's high dollar window shopping. I feel lack of a truss rod in any top line acoustic is worrisome, however if someone could afford a guitar like this they could likely afford the periodic neck resets.

 

My J50 is six years younger than that one and it's got deep bass and full woody pop and bark. I predict the tone will be mind blowing, but the playability will factor in. Can't you afford a chopper to come pick you up and fly you to it?

 

Thanks for your opinions on this, from what I understand, the guitar has avoided a neck reset thus far and the bracing has remained intact and fully clean.

 

There is some aesthetic issues that mess with the collectibility factor of the guitar (some fixed top cracks and the burst was repainted near the lower bout by a professional and made to look faded a bit. One of the first two owners started sanding it to look like a J-50 and it was rescued from him by a person looking to buy it).

 

The paint job actually turned out great and the cracks are barely noticable. The back and sides are actually in unbelievably good condition. There is a little bit of overspray on the parts that were touched up. It has been refretted and the fingerboard is in great condition. Mahogany neck as well with poplar neck block.

 

Still has the original bridge but the original tuners were replaced with Waverlys. I don't mind. I'm hoping for this to be my main at-home playing guitar and will be more interested in the sound aspects, and will possibly be recording it as well. Hence why the revisions done to the guitar don't bother me. It is only lowering the price and this will be a played guitar, not a wall hanger. I'm hoping it is nice and responsive for fingerpicking some old blues and folk. I'm primarily a fingerstyle guy.

 

Just haven't heard much about the adirondack topped ones, that's all. And I hope once I get the guitar in my hands that the neck isn't too cumbersome. This guitar definitely won't require "helicopter-money" lol. Just an old player's guitar with a story behind it.

 

You must be loving that old J-50

[jedzep]

I do, but I do have an Adirondack topped (3 pc) 1935 L00 that is so freekin' light and responsive. Both guitars have an ever so slightly arched belly that when tapped lightly with my fingertips sound like Tom-Toms.

[Dave F]

I'm afraid I can't tell an Adi from a Sitka.

I picked up this Banner recently. The playability was good but the saddle was taken all the way down and the bridge had been shaved down to avoid a neck reset. There had been a recent fret job performed.

I felt the price was good enough to get the neck reset and a new bridge. Came out great and the old bridge is intact if someone wanted to glue a new piece to the bottom to build it up.

It has no FON but members here estimate it's a '42-'43 transitional model based on it's features.

 

[jedzep]

Killer, Dave! Old growth soundboards have that perfect flex/stiffness ratio.

[tpbiii]

I might have a line on a 1943 banner J-45 with adirondack top (two piece) and mahogany back and sides lined up, going to go see how she sounds when I get off work (I work on a ship). Has the maple v truss rod. Anyone here play a similar example of an early banner, or own one? I have only found like...one video of an adirondack one on youtube.

 

Anyone who has experience with one of these that could comment on the sound, it would be greatly appreciated. Since I am stuck on the ship for another week and a half dreaming about the guitar.

 

Information, videos, anything would help. I've only really been able to find mostly sitka, hog and maple banner vids and just hoping an old adirondack isnt too much of a departure from that classic j-45 sound, or curious if it adds something to it. And maybe some opinions on the lack of truss rod in some of these old banners. (My apologies, didn't realize there was a Vintage Corner forum when I posted this)

 

We have one early and one later. The early 43 is on the far left, the late 44 is 2nd row right. The 43 is pretty much dead mint and the other has a lot more playing ware. We judge the 43 top be the better sounding guitar, but since it is mint it does not go out much. We regard both highly -- the 44 is our go to gospel finger picker using picks.

early 43

Late 44

 

Best,

-Tom

 

[Lars68]

I have a 1942 Adi/mahogany J-45 in very good condition. It is extremely light and the most responsive guitar I have played. Thundering yet very clear bass. I will nerver part with it. All early Banners were adi. Nowadays adi is considered an upcharge on a new guitar, but I don’t think it mattets much if it is sitka or adi on such an old instrument.

 

Best of luck!

 

Lars

[tpbiii]

Nowadays adi is considered an upcharge on a new guitar, but I don't think it mattets much if it is sitka or adi on such an old instrument.

 

Best of luck!

 

Lars

 

I agree. Much more major determiners of sound quality are bracing, bridge/bridge plate design, B&S wood (Mahogany, rosewood, maple), age, and wood thickness. Things like spruce species and the RW species have a secondary effect IME. Of those in the picture above (2 SJs and 3 J-45s), all the banners are basically the same design, but three are adi and two are Sitka. They all sound generally similar -- not identical of course -- except for the 43 RW SJ, which sounds much more like our 36 AJ than any of the banners. The RW seems to make that much difference.

There were very few banners made in 42, but the really early ones from 43 were almost universally miss dated as 42 until Willi Henkes sorted it all out. We did that -- we dated both our early SJs and the early to 1942 like everyone else, but now we are quite sure they were (early) 43.

Let's pick,

-Tom

[zombywoof]

I own a 1942 J-50. It has a red spruce top. But you need to take heed of what Tom said about variations in just about everything. At Gibson in the 1940s, it was like part was considered finished when it looked close enough. The scallops in the X brace, as example, can really vary. The X brace in a 1943 SJ a friend has shows a deeper scalloping than my '42 in which the triangular cross section is more pronounced but the arms of the X brace just exhibit a gradual taper. If you compare the two mine gives up a bit of power which is I assume due to stiffer bracing. But at the same time it has a deep round low end which the guy who restored the guitar said would make a pre-War Martin D-28 run for cover.