GotTheSilver Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Anyone know the differences in specs between these three modern guitars - J-45 True Vintage, J-35 Reissue, Original Jumbo? I've seen these three on the market, but don't know what is different between them, other than the size of the sunburst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Th J-45 TV and J-35 Reissue share the same top bracing (which is the Advanced Jumbo's forward shifted bracing). Their back braces differ. The J-45 TV has four thin and widely scalloped braces; the J-35 has the Advanced Jumbo's back braces, too. The lower two are very thick. The J-35 also has a heftier neck. I'm not 100% certain, but I THINK the difference between the J-35 and OJ is the depth of the sides. The OJ's sides are uniform in depth, and do not taper. Red 333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickax Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Yes, the OJ has a uniform depth to the body. Haven't seen many Guitars with particular feature. The TV has hide glue construction but I 'm not sure if the OJ has hide glue. neck profiles are definitely different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GotTheSilver Posted February 13, 2011 Author Share Posted February 13, 2011 Thanks, guys! So I take it then that the OJ has a different top bracing pattern from the J-45TV and the J-35? What tonal difference does the difference in back braces make? I would guess the thin scalloped braces would allow the back to resonate more. How does this affect the tone? Also, how does the uniform depth of the OJ affect the tone? I know when it comes down to it, you have to play each guitar and see what each one sounds like, but I would like to understand at least the theoretical effect each of these features has on the tone of a guitar. Thanks! John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 In terms of sound, the J45TV has more in the way of bass, overtones, long sustain. The 35/OJ are drier, particularly so the OJ, which excels for old time music, blues and rags. Only j35 I've handled was this one Frank Fotsuky's (thanks, Frank) it's a great all-round guitar. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tw6mxnGskTE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suburude63 Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Yes, the OJ has a uniform depth to the body. Haven't seen many Guitars with particular feature. The TV has hide glue construction but I 'm not sure if the OJ has hide glue. neck profiles are definitely different. The TV does not have Hide Glue construction . I called Gibson when I had one. They said some customs do but not across the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aitch Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 The OJ on ebay right now has the saddle string spacing listed as 2 1/4", is it the same for the TV and 35? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickax Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 The TV does not have Hide Glue construction . I called Gibson when I had one. They said some customs do but not across the board. Hard to say with Gibson. I was talking to someone on their customer support line asking what the differences were between the TV and the Legend and he said the differences were cosmetic. The Gibson site mentions hide glue, Wildwood Guitars mentions hide glue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fp Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Rambler, I really like your playing ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Rambler, I really like your playing ! No no not me. That's Mr Frank Fotusky and he plays a mean six-string. Frank was kind enough to let me try it out at a workshop. If you like this clip, though, check out his CD Teasinn' the Frets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markus W. Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Hard to say with Gibson. I was talking to someone on their customer support line asking what the differences were between the TV and the Legend and he said the differences were cosmetic. The Gibson site mentions hide glue, Wildwood Guitars mentions hide glue. I have the TV and my brother own the Legend. The Legend is lighter, has thinner braces, the fat neck, much more low end especally the low E string and sounds really like an very old guitar. For me it' s more than cosmetics... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rar Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 I was talking to someone on their customer support line asking what the differences were between the TV and the Legend and he said the differences were cosmetic. The unreliability of information obtained from CS in Nashville about what's going on in Bozeman has come up more than a few times in this forum. It looks as if you were a victim of someone who hasn't seen or played these guitars doing the best he could operating from published spec sheets. -- Bob R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickax Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 The unreliability of information obtained from CS in Nashville about what's going on in Bozeman has come up more than a few times in this forum. It looks as if you were a victim of someone who hasn't seen or played these guitars doing the best he could operating from published spec sheets. -- Bob R I'm not saying I was buying this line and I agree the info coming out of CS in Nashville about what is happening in Bozeman is not reliable. However, if you look at the specs listed online between the 2 Guitars, they look pretty similar. Yes, the Legend does have a larger neck profile. It would be nice to ask questions direct questions to the folks in Bozeman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Thanks, guys! So I take it then that the OJ has a different top bracing pattern from the J-45TV and the J-35? What tonal difference does the difference in back braces make? I would guess the thin scalloped braces would allow the back to resonate more. How does this affect the tone? Also, how does the uniform depth of the OJ affect the tone? I know when it comes down to it, you have to play each guitar and see what each one sounds like, but I would like to understand at least the theoretical effect each of these features has on the tone of a guitar. Thanks! John I *BELIEVE* but do not know with 100% certainty that the top bracing on OJ is the same as the J-35 reissue and the same as J-45 TV, which is the same as the Advanced Jumbo (and is also found on Songwriter series, too). The back braces certainly effect the guitar's tone, as do many other elements. The component parts that make a guitar act together as a system, and variations in a part or its performance can cause a variation in tone. Sometimes these variations are slight, and some are more easily perceivable. I can't speak to the OJ (I stupidly let one sip through my fingers earlier this year), but I have a J-35 Reissue and J-45 TV (and its sister, the Southern Jumbo TV). Both the J-35 and the J-345 I have are red-spruce topped. I believe my J-45 TV's top is one of the hide-glue constructed ones (it has a Custom Shop label), but really, I have no earthly idea. As I mentioned, the J-35 has a beefier neck. I don't think it is wider, but I'm travelling right now and can't measure. If it is, it's not appreciably wider to me, as I don't remember thinking anything about it. I have a maple-bodied, short-scale AJ, and it indeed has a wider neck (and a French heel). Does the OJ have a French heel? If so, these two models (OJ/maple, short-scale AJ) may share that same neck. But I digress. Both the J-35 and the J-45 TV are great sounding guitars. I love them both. They have a lot of similarities, and a few differences. Maybe these are just the differences that even any two of the same model guitar my exhibit, or maybe they are model-specific--it's hard to say (though I lean toward model-specific). The J-35 is a little brassier and less bassy. The J-45 TV is warmer and has stronger, deeper bass response. The J-35 is drier; the J-45 TV is richer in overtones. In my mind's eye, the J-35 seems more old-timey; that probably has to do with the way music sounds on old recordings, which is (like the J-35) brassier and less bassy. EDIT: Honestly, I just read Rambler's post, and see he's already posted virtually the exact same description! Original post continues: Now, these differences are easily heard by me, even without playing the guitars side-by-side, but it's questionable as to what percentage of listeners would notice a difference, and how much. Both are well-balanced, have very good note separation, and great sustain. Both are very good examples of the kind of guitars Bozeman is capable of building, and do honor to the Gibson tradition. By the way, the SJ TV, with it's Sitka top (and yet another set of back brace variations), also varies in sound from the J-45 TV: it has more of the chunky, anvyl-like thunk some players really like. We players tend to talk a lot about how strings make a difference, but since I tend to use the same brand and gauge strings on my acoustics, I hear big differences from different picks. Honestly, I have to throw some of them away because I don't like the way the make the guitar sound (or maybe I should say, because they make the guitar sound different from what I'm accustomed to hearing). I guess this should be no surprise, since guitars can certainly sound different when played with your fingers, and different still whether you use the flesh or the nail, etc. Anyway, my point is that strings, picks, fingers, the player's attack, etc., are all part of the system I mentioned earlier. So what's all this mean? I dunno. But it seems to me that models like the J-45 TV, Legend series, and special runs like the OJ and J-35 etc. represent the current high water mark in Bozeman production, and you should try one if you get a chance. One may suit your playing style or musical preferences more than another, but I think odds are you'll be able to find a guitar you're very pleased with. Red 333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 I hear big differences from different picks. Honestly, I have to throw some of them away because I don't like the way the make the guitar sound (or maybe I should say, because they make the guitar sound different from what I'm accustomed to hearing)Red 333 Speaking of which, Red, what might be your pick preferences (can't recall if you've mentioned if you are a flat or finger picker)? Me? Nationals, plastic thumb and 1 metal finger pick. Btw enjoy your input and comparisons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 Speaking of which, Red, what might be your pick preferences (can't recall if you've mentioned if you are a flat or finger picker)? Me? Nationals, plastic thumb and 1 metal finger pick. Btw enjoy your input and comparisons. I like Gibson Masterbuilt strings, and it should come as no surprise that I like Gibson picks, (M, but sometimes H) in the triangle configuration. I can't help myself. I like Gibson products. Oh, and the Gibson pump polish is good too. I've never played with finger picks, but would like to try one day. I admire those who can use them. Maybe one day... Red 333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 've never played with finger picks, but would like to try one day. I admire those who can use them. Maybe one day... Red 333 Thanks Red. About those finger picks... if you really are of a mind to... do give it a try. Learning to fingerpick pick turned my (guitar) world around (maybe other parts too). It brought so much more music out of the thing. My (very humble) 2c. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cin Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 I want to know what is finished of J45TV look like,Is it glossy top, back&side? or it is matte and very hard to clean up and make it glossy?I bought new but all over the body is tarnished.Feel like someone played and never polish and clean. Is this a normal for TV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickax Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 I want to know what is finished of J45TV look like,Is it glossy top, back&side? or it is matte and very hard to clean up and make it glossy?I bought new but all over the body is tarnished.Feel like someone played and never polish and clean. Is this a normal for TV? Yes, it's quite normal for a J-45TV. It has the VOS finish which is intentionally meant to look....well, vintage. Some folks have buffed out the VOS finish to a glossier look. I like the VOS finish - I think it adds a neat vibe to the TV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GotTheSilver Posted February 17, 2011 Author Share Posted February 17, 2011 Hey Red and Rambler, thanks for the tone analyses! Since you both said the same thing, I am going to assume that is probably a general trend in the difference in sound between these models, rather than normal variation between two guitars. This is very helpful! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markwillplay Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 I have not played the 35 but I have the 45 TV. Not being biased here but my OJ crushed it in volume and clarity...probably becasue I have played the OJ a lot. I am sure there are good TV's out there. I did not like the neck of the TV..my OJ has a fuller profile and a V (not too sharp) which I have come accustomed to. Here is the big difference though...true, the guitar does not taper until the very end (at the neck) but it is also less deep at the tail and that makes it more comfy for me to play. It is 4 1/2 deep at the tail and that is where your arm hangs over. I immediately noticed that the regular 45's were deeper (probably 4 7/8) and that little difference makes them not as comfy for my shoulder despite their taper. So much so that I am having Steve Smith (Red-Line acoustics) make me one of his 45 replica's with a shallower body and same neck profile as my OJ. It depends on your size I guess but I have noticed lately (I am 5 11) that I like the slightly shallower tail of other dreads I have played in comparison to the ones that are 4 7/8. The OJ may even get slightly fatter in the middle (a fraction though) but I find it more important that the tail be 4 1/2 or less for my comfort. When I first bought my OJ, I thought it was the most dry along with having the most pronounced midrange of any guitar I had owned. Quite the opposite of bose speakers (ha ha ha) and I still do..however, it seems that over tha past couple of years of constant playing, the lows and highs have crept up. I am finishing a cd where I have 13 tracks and used the OJ on every one, for fingerpicking (bare fingers) flatpicking (leads) and strumming, and I think it is the most versitile and best recording guitar I have ever owned by far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 Here is the big difference though...true, the guitar does not taper until the very end (at the neck) but it is also less deep at the tail and that makes it more comfy for me to play. It is 4 1/2 deep at the tail and that is where your arm hangs over. I immediately noticed that the regular 45's were deeper (probably 4 7/8) and that little difference makes them not as comfy for my shoulder despite their taper... The OJ may even get slightly fatter in the middle (a fraction though) but I find it more important that the tail be 4 1/2 or less for my comfort. ... I am finishing a cd where I have 13 tracks and used the OJ on every one, for fingerpicking (bare fingers) flatpicking (leads) and strumming, and I think it is the most versitile and best recording guitar I have ever owned by far. Cool. I did not know there was any variation in the depth of the rims between the OJ and other Gibsons. It's interesting to know the difference is more than just the taper. Thanks. Make sure you let us know when your CD's done! Red 333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markwillplay Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 but of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 my OJ ... is also less deep at the tail and that makes it more comfy for me to play. It is 4 1/2 deep at the tail and that is where your arm hangs over. That right there is the basis for the appeal of Martin's M-series (M38, M36 etc), another well-balanced jack--f-all guitars. Arent Gibson's Roy Smeck models shallower as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yggdrasil Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 That right there is the basis for the appeal of Martin's M-series (M38, M36 etc), another well-balanced jack--f-all guitars. Arent Gibson's Roy Smeck models shallower as well? My 2002 Smeck Radio Grande is overall deeper than the other slopes I've had in the past ( & deeper than my current Walker Clark Fork - esp. the upper bout). I have a Martin M Series coming in about a month - a Jorma Kaukonen Sig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.