J45's need slightly higher action?

[sbpark]

I've had a couple J45 Standards and they've all required me to set them up or have them set up by someone else the exact same way. Usually need just a smidge more relief. I usually like as little as possible, around 0.05", but the J45 Standards seem to sound best with 0.08"-0.10" relief and slightly higher action (6.5/64 on the low E and 5-5.5/64" on the high E) other wise I start getting a B and high E string ping or buzz. This has been pretty consistent on the three J45 Standards I've had. I've been through different string types, bone nuts and saddles, etc, and I will say this seems to be super consistent from one to the other. I've also had the guitar checked out and no high frets, issues with the frets or neck, etc.

 

I'm guessing maybe it's just my playing style, but then again I've had other short scale guitars, like a Waterloo WL14 that had lower action, almost no neck relief and didn't seem as finicky as the J45 Standards I've had or the one I currently have.

 

The B-string zing just tends to drive me nuts. Like I've said I've tried all different things, having new nuts made, ew saddles, checked witness points on the saddle, different string types and brands, and it's always there unless I give it just a little more relief and higher action.

[Proclaimer888]

Cannot reply to the higher action, however, I can relate to the B string "zing". I had the same issue with my j-45. Tried all sorts of remedies; new nut, strings..you name it, I tried it. This might sound crazy but the zing just went away. No idea how or what happened but it's no longer an issue.

[sbpark]

Cannot reply to the higher action, however, I can relate to the B string "zing". I had the same issue with my j-45. Tried all sorts of remedies; new nut, strings..you name it, I tried it. This might sound crazy but the zing just went away. No idea how or what happened but it's no longer an issue.

 

Thats great that your "B-string zing" went away.

 

I sort of have a theory about why that zing exists and I think it has to do with the angle of the string as it comes out of the bridge and breaks over the saddle. Both the B and high E strings have a very shallow angle as the string comes out of the bridge across the saddle. The B and E string tensions are pretty similar (at least they are with a set of D'Addario EJ16 strings). Given these two strings are the same/similar tension and the B string is obviously tuned lower than the E means it's actually looser than the low E. The lower tension paired with a pretty straight/shallow angle over the saddle on a J45 Standard may be the reason for the B-string zing" because the zing happens if the string is played open and at any fret. Maybe if the angle was sharper it would put more pressure down on the saddle and maybe not cause the "zing" anymore. The higher the action, the steeper the angle, resulting in more tension at the witness point on the saddle. I've been able to decrease almost eliminate the zing by raising the action a little.

[jvi]

a higher saddle uusally produces better tones but many of us want more comfort chording... so, 3 frets and a capo!

[Jinder]

I prefer a slightly higher action across the board. The trend for VERY low action has produced some cr*ppy guitar tones in my opinion. B and E strings on a guitar set up like that sound really thin and "plinky" and I can't stand buzz and zing. It's amazing how raising the saddle by something as seemingly insignificant as 1mm can really make a difference.

 

Neck angle, to facilitate decent saddle height and break angle over the saddle, is a big factor in my choices in buying guitars. I absolutely agree that it makes a huge difference, and I definitely find that perhaps more on my J45 that others

[sbpark]

I prefer a slightly higher action across the board. The trend for VERY low action has produced some cr*ppy guitar tones in my opinion. B and E strings on a guitar set up like that sound really thin and "plinky" and I can't stand buzz and zing. It's amazing how raising the saddle by something as seemingly insignificant as 1mm can really make a difference.

 

Neck angle, to facilitate decent saddle height and break angle over the saddle, is a big factor in my choices in buying guitars. I absolutely agree that it makes a huge difference, and I definitely find that perhaps more on my J45 that others

 

All the J45's I've owned in the last 5 years or so, be it several Standards, a couple True Vintage and a Vintage model have all been VERY consistent, if not identical with neck angle. I think that's one having that Gibson does consistently. I've had new Martins that are all over the place.

 

I messed with the guitar today and found a Bob Colosi saddle I had in my toolbox and thing I found a nice compromise. Action is 6.6/64" on the low E and 5/64" on the high E with a VERY darn near straight neck. I think the every so slightly higher action on the high side combined withless relief (and thus providing a stiffer string) got that "B string zing" about 90%-95% gone and the guitar sounds so much better.

 

I also tried out some Herco Gold picks just on a whim because I'm. Neil Young fan, and apparently that's what he uses and they somehow sound so much better than any other thin pick I've ever used before. I'm normally prefer a heavy or extra-heavy pick, but these Herco Golds are very nice and lush and still have a fat bottom end. I wouldn't use these picks for flatpicking, but for strumming they're very nice.

[EuroAussie]

I prefer a slightly higher action across the board. The trend for VERY low action has produced some cr*ppy guitar tones in my opinion. B and E strings on a guitar set up like that sound really thin and "plinky" and I can't stand buzz and zing. It's amazing how raising the saddle by something as seemingly insignificant as 1mm can really make a difference.

 

Neck angle, to facilitate decent saddle height and break angle over the saddle, is a big factor in my choices in buying guitars. I absolutely agree that it makes a huge difference, and I definitely find that perhaps more on my J45 that others

 

Agreed. Was shocked how much, in my case, lowering the saddle impacted the tone. It was really significant, the normal saddle went back in and i even gave it a bit more relief and the SJ started to roar again.

[sbpark]

Agreed. Was shocked how much, in my case, lowering the saddle impacted the tone. It was really significant, the normal saddle went back in and i even gave it a bit more relief and the SJ started to roar again.

 

Lowering the saddle on ANY guitar (I'm even including electrics in this statement, not just acoustics) will absolutely change the tone. I've noticed this the most with banjos, actually. Big reason why a lot of banjo players play with high action. The higher the action the more those things ring out.

[j45nick]

A lot depends on where you are playing on the neck, too. Higher action can mean more volume, but the trade-off can be hard fretting and a choked sound as you move up the neck, with some notes simply not ringing out.

 

I have three nominally-similar hog slope-J's right now, with action varying from really low (my old 1948-'50 J-45), to medium-low (1943 SJ re-issue), to ridiculously high (my "new" 1950 J-45). The "new" J-45 is dramatically louder (same strings on all, same pick) compared to the other two, but is virtually unplayable above the fifth fret due to the high action.

 

It is headed to Ross Teigen for some work, including a neck re-set, in about a week. I'm hoping that big voice doesn't go away, but I suspect it will be a trade-off to get the playability I am after.

 

J-45's aren't particularly known for a big booming voice in any case. If that's what you're after, get a D-18 and put medium/heavy strings on it.

[sbpark]

A lot depends on where you are playing on the neck, too. Higher action can mean more volume, but the trade-off can be hard fretting and a choked sound as you move up the neck, with some notes simply not ringing out.

 

I have three nominally-similar hog slope-J's right now, with action varying from really low (my old 1948-'50 J-45), to medium-low (1943 SJ re-issue), to ridiculously high (my "new" 1950 J-45). The "new" J-45 is dramatically louder (same strings on all, same pick) compared to the other two, but is virtually unplayable above the fifth fret due to the high action.

 

It is headed to Ross Teigen for some work, including a neck re-set, in about a week. I'm hoping that big voice doesn't go away, but I suspect it will be a trade-off to get the playability I am after.

 

J-45's aren't particularly known for a big booming voice in any case. If that's what you're after, get a D-18 and put medium/heavy strings on it.

 

I never said I wanted or was expecting a "big booming voice" from my J45. Thats doesn't mean that the tone isn't going to change as you lower the action on it. But with that said, that wasn't my initial intention of the thread. I was focusing more on why J45 Standards seem to have this zingy B-string thing going on and how this may be related to the shallow angle/string break across the saddle may have something to do with it combined with the fact that the B string has a pretty low tension relative to the rest of the strings. On any of my other acoustics part and present (Gibson AJ, Waterloo WL14, Martin D-18, D-28, HD-28, D-35) I've never seen such a shallow angle where the B and high E strings breaks over the saddle at the bridge than I have on a J45 Standard, and this has been the case on three J45 Standards Iv'e owned, and all have exhibited that zing not he B string once I took the action to 4/64" on the high E side.

 

The inherent lower tension of the B string, combined with the lower string tension because it's a short scale guitar combined with the shallow break angle across the saddle is, in my opinion what's causing this zingy B string. It probably wont be present when the guitar is new in the shop with a high saddle, but every time I've set up a J45 Standard to what most consider acceptable action (6/64" on the low E and 4/64" on the high E) that B string starts zinging.

 

The higher action/great volume but harder to play thing isn't really a debatable thing. It's more a matter of finding where along that spectrum works for you, where you're able to find the combo of action vs. tone is satisfactory to you.

[jvi]

4/64s is pretty low even for me...

[sbpark]

4/64s is pretty low even for me...

 

On the low E side, not the high E. 4/64 is pretty much average action on the high E side. Usually any lower is generally considered low on the high E, and anything above that is leaning toward higher action.

 

Here's the factory "Final Checklist" from my Gibson AJ, and you can even see that the guitar shipped with 6/64" on the low E and 4/64" on the high E. Martin factory spec is 7/64" on the low E and 5/64" on the high E and many consider than a little on the higher side and usually bring it down a little.

 

[QuestionMark]

I read this string when I was out of town for a bit (in SoCal, what a great place), and it got me thinking a lot about about my 2006 J-45 CS 1964 guitar. This is the one that about 9 months ago had its bridge pull up when I was playing at a gig (not the gig where I was next to a juggler) and Gibson subsequently covered the bridge repair under its lifetime warrantee. Since I’ve had the repaired guitar back, I’ve had lights (12s) on it and as the Gibson repairman set the adjustable bridge quite low, I just have left it for the remainder of last year, etc., just thinking I won’t do anything to mess with the bridge or saddle until the glue on the repaired bridge had adequate time to set and dry. Although I regularly played it at my gigs, plugged in through a Fishman Rare Earth Humbucker soundhole pickup.

 

Coming back to Chicagoland from my excursion to SoCal and after reading this thread, I decided to see if I could boost the tension on the strings now that the repaired bridge had 9 months to settle in. To do this, I took off the bone adjustable saddle that I had replaced from the original tusq adj saddle it came with...after comparing the break angle of both. The original tusq adj saddle had a significantly higher break angle than the replacement adj bone one I had previously substituted. Then, with the higher angle break tusq saddle with the light strings back on, I cranked the adj saddle up. Between the two adjustments, that significantly increased the string tension on the guitar giving it a stronger louder sound, plus it made my right hand attack on the strings a lot more sturdier feeling. It made playing negligibly a bit harder, but I’ve played for 56 years so no biggie.

 

Seeing that actually worked, I then replaced the light strings with Mediums (Martin SPs 80/20 Bronze Mediums from Martin SPs 80/20 Lights). Leaving the better break angle tusq saddle on adjusted to a higher height. The Medium strings with the better break angle and higher adjusted saddlet really changed the guitar’s sound. Making it much booomier and louder with a much sturdier feeling. Like a different guitar. Say what you will about adjustable bridges, but it now sounds undifferentiated from the fixed saddle J-15 I have tried at Sam Ash and loved. Is it a little bit harder to play? Yep, but my hands are up for it after years of playing, and worth it from an improved acoustic sound perspective. I found myself having to mute the strings at times with my right hand (ala Chet Atkins style) at times to reign in the new improved volume at times.

 

I assume it’ll sound as it previously did mic’d with the Rare Earth Humbucker soundhole pick up on it. Because pickups provide the majority of the sound anyway. Perhaps I will need to turn the amp’s volume lower, though with the adjusted string height and better tension.

 

Bottom line. A higher break angle and higher saddle tightens the string tension on a short scale J-45 and improves the sound and volume, with the trade off being the guitar is a bit harder to fret, but no biggie. Well worth it for me and my style of playing (fingerpicking with picks and melodic playing.). Well worth it to me to have experimented with it.

 

QM aka “Jazzman” Jeff