Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Jesse_Dylan

Members
  • Posts

    1,220
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    ND, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Also throwing my opinion in, which is worth about what it weighs. ๐Ÿ™‚ I like that they're trying to do affordable guitars. It reminds me of my J-15, which was maybe underpriced at the time. Or who could forget the WM series? A WM-45 went for as much as Martin DM back in the day, about $500. Martin DMs still go for $500, but WM-45s don't. The DM had well-laminated back/sides, nice guitar, but a WM-45 or my WM-00, is on another level. Gibson has always tried to do some budget guitars that still have all the important building blocks of the rest of their line while Martin has moved to using non-traditional neck joints, hybrid bracing, a-frame bracing... I'm not so sure about the Generation series, but it was an attempt. I think this is a better attempt, though of course "affordable" is not the right word to use... less cost anyway. Definitely not in the same range as the G series, but anything costing less than the standards, but still packing what the standards have, is exciting. As for satin finish, it's funny how some makers trump it up, and others use it on budget models. Martin uses a vintage satin finish on their Authentics. I got a discount on a custom Martin choosing satin finish back in the day (2010). Now the custom shop charges extra for satin, and it's probably their vintage satin finish (similar to Gibson Montana's "VOS" finish or whatever--but I don't mean to imply they're using VOS on the faded series... or maybe they are? if so, it's a great finish). I doubt there is too much difference between one of these extra cost premium satin finishes and regular satin finish, but I could of course be wrong (and even if I'm right, they'd want to keep their VOS and Martin's Authentic whatever on another level, not "more affordable!") Sorry for word count
  2. Are you really in the Pine Barens?? ๐Ÿ˜„ I'm super fascinated by that area of NJ. Yep, I'm with Sal here, and if I may suggest a dealer I used back in 2015-- If anyone is wanting/thinking of getting one of these, or any Gibson, check E.M. Shorts Guitars. They're in Wichita, Kansas, attached to Wichita Band. They were doing almost 50% discounts off of Gibson's old retail prices. Now Gibson does list, and we're in a pandemic with a supply shortage and recession. But I bet they're still discounting as much as they can. I got my SJ-200, Les Paul Jr, and J-15 all from them, great deal all three times. They're wonderful to work with. wbic@wichitaband.com is their e-mail. They were not able to list their Gibsons on their website back when (unless they stopped carrying them, which would be sad after my sales pitch here). But e-mailing will get you their folks who do the local Gibson sales, and they are allowed to sell via e-mail/etc, just not allowed to advertise (that's what they said back when). They're nice folks. I don't suppose they'd remember me. They do great (included) setups, too. When I bought my J-15, I asked them to put a bone nut/saddle on. They also removed the pickup for me and put a different one in. Just don't pay list price for gosh sake. I know sometimes there's no choice, but if a person can get a healthy discount on one of these, I think they'd be a pretty great deal compared, unless a person hates the finish.
  3. There is a lot more to a tuner than just the ratio. That's like saying "Does a guitar play good and make a sound? Well then what's the problem?" I'd recommend OP ask the tuner question in the main lounge and get more responses.
  4. This is mindblowing! I'll study it. I'm a little scared to do it on purpose, now that I know what the pickguards sell for. I wonder why the heck Gibson sent me a free one, especially when it wouldn't fix the problem. But that gives me a spare in case I mess up maybe...! I wonder if a person could just carefully yank off all the flubber off the top. I don't think I have any separation yet. I thought about trying to get a custom pickguard, too--I'm broke, unfortunately! Can't afford a luthier either, so I am my luthier (i'm learning a lot, I guess?) I was frustrated, because Stewmac doesn't say which 3M they use. However, I managed to eyeball the screenshots, and it's the 467MP 200MP, whatever the heck that means. I think 467MP is the model of the tape/sheet/whatever, and the 200MP is the model of adhesive (or type of adhesive). So I ordered a $3 roll of the tape from Amazon, and I hope it's the same. I was not willing to pay Stewmac shipping just for an overpriced $5 sheet. I'm attaching a screen grab I took, because Stewmac changes their stuff, but in case anyone searches and finds this, here's the screenshot proof of what Stewmac sells or sold for this task. I don't like Amazon, but a person can use that information and find versions of tape elsewhere, too, if one searches for 3M 467MP 200MP Whether it will work, I don't know ๐Ÿ˜› I'm thinking I can just stick some strips under the pickguard where it pulls up. De-flubberization is also under consideration and might be really preferable when combined! Or maybe without the flub, it would no longer curl. I have a spare Hummingbird pickguard, too, and it's just been stored for 6 or so years--and it's curling too! (I don't know how I ended up with so many spare pickguards... Usually Gibson just ignores me, so it's odd they sent me expensive pickguards)
  5. My SJ-200 pickguard curls up some. Gibson actually sent me a new pickguard, but it's exactly the same as the other one, so I'd imagine it would just curl up as well. I know there's the hairdryer method, which would involve taking the pickguard all the way off, and using some adhesive on it anyway. Would rather just stick something adhesive under the curling parts. I saw some folks recommend a 3M adhesive sheet that Stewmac sells. What other 3M stuff would work? Aren't there flat little double-sided tabs I could stick under? There are also rolls of tape. But there are so many, I have no idea what would be good, or what could harm my guitar. Here's the Stew Mac one https://www.stewmac.com/luthier-tools-and-supplies/materials/pickguard-materials/3m-pickguard-adhesive-sheet/ Here's the overpriced one I ordered (but can send back, and the process repeats) https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00LWFO5R6/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 Help! I don't want to get some industrial thing that will never come off the top of the guitar without damage (i.e. I want to avoid "super glue" of all types)
  6. Yeah, I'm all for boobies, but marketing drives me nuts (and not in the same way that boobies drive me nuts) I only have my personal experience with a (dead-stringed) 2014 Quilt Hummingbird to draw upon, but it was so tasty warm. Maybe it was just my player's perspective (i.e. sounds different from in front), and the dead strings. It blew me away though. At that point, I didn't think I'd ever want a maple guitar (which, admittedly, was my own psychologically strategy to talk myself out of my SJ-200 love, but now I have an SJ-200, and it might be my favorite of favorites). It was then I realized that Gibson are the wizards of maple. Of course, as 62Burst says, the body shape has an awful lot to do with it, but I think Gibson's bracing also has a lot to do with it, even on the small maple Gibsons (full disclosure: I have yet to play any Gibson maples except: J-185, J-200, Hummingbird quilt--but I have listened to lots of maple Nick Lucases, and they don't seem to lack in the warmth). I didn't know one could get a mahogany Bird in a true cherry sunburst. (The maple one, or at least that maple one, is actually a "bright cherry sunburst," where as the standard comes in "Heritage cherry sunburst," and my vintage is "Vintage Cherry Sunburst"....... and for instance the Donovan J-45 is just a plain cherry sunburst, which they don't seem to use much anymore and really should.) I would still like something in a true cherry sunburst. I might even settle for a honeyburst. You need a degree in guitar finishes to even keep up with all the variations when, deep down, all you want is a dang cherry sunburst. I play the blues (but not on purpose) on just about any electric guitar... When I used to use medium strings on everything, it was even worse. When I first started trying out Hummingbirds (light strings, 24.75" scale) I would bend all over. I've been told I have a grip that is far too hard, but if I don't grip hard, I get buzzes. Hard to tell I guess. It is all very subtle, or at least to me it is. I wish we could get everyone and all these guitars in the same place and really do some comparing.
  7. Yes, it is. I prefer this video, as he doesn't have half his boobie out. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-tT-B0qOys One can also find videos of him playing the standard Hummingbird to compare, and maybe even the Vintage. I'm not sure any of the videos quite capture how the maple sounds to the player. It sounded much warmer to me, but it did have dead strings when I played it. I don't feel like it loses any of the warmth but at the same time gets some oomph. The Vintage goes a different direction to get the same effect of more oomph and even more warmth. Are the 2016s lighter? I know each particular guitar varies, and yes, the 2016s are very nice, but I don't think they made any significant internal changes. The 2016 Vintage is light as a feather, but a 2016 standard vs a previous standard shouldn't have much difference. The quilted maple does weigh quite a bit more than mahogany. Quilted mahogany is also a bit warmer than flamed mahogany. No, you're right. It is fairly subtle for me, too--Neither is better, but having both is a lot of fun. I love that the neck is just a tiny bit shorter, frets a little closer together (for better or worse). If you use lowered tunings, you'll be able to tell that the tension is lower compared, but a decent setup makes 25.5" perfectly playable. But I just meant that the quality of tone changes based on the difference between scales, nevermind the differences in how they play. I think that is part of the secret to the Hummingbird's warmth and certainly to the J-45's warmth.
  8. All true except that a maple Hummingbird is definitely NOT a Dove in different trim. The different scale lengths really seem to make a difference. 24.75" or 25.5" scale length, is almost as big a difference as mahogany vs maple.
  9. Wanted to report that I gave the Nickel Bronze lights a try on my J-15. I was disappointed, because they did not sound broken-in out of the box like I'd hoped. They remind me a lot of the Martin Retros, which many people swear by, but to me, they are rather garish, bright, and just never seem to tame down. Sadly, I have been doing a lot of alternate tuning back and forth on my J-15, and I think I have a g-string nut snag (whoa! tmi!), so my g-string snapped before I ever found out if the Nickel Bronze would break in or not. I do plan to try them on some other guitars (I bought more packs than I should have), but for someone like me who likes warm and tame strings, and was hoping they would be that, they are not. I bought some Dunlop PB lights (I didn't even know they made strings) to try, so I might try them next, and bought some Gibson Masterbuilt PB. Right now I have replaced the Nickel Bronze with D'Addario 80/20 Mediums on the J-15. I think I like PB on the J-15 best, though (and 80/20 best on the Hummingbird--go figure--that is what each came with for me, so maybe I'm biased). Edit: PS I did want to agree that I think these "non-traditional" traditional strings (Nickel Bronze, Retros, and the only ones I truly like, the JP Pure Nickels) really last a lot longer than PB and 80/20. I think they handle humidity and corrosion a lot better. Seems like I have to change uncoated 80/20 and PB fairly regularly, even if I don't play them a whole lot, but I can leave these "silver" strings on forever.
  10. Yeah, it's hard because depending upon where one looks, prices vary so much. I think the prices for used ones are a little high on the internet. (Tman's is a steal of a deal, but it's natural.) The new ones can be had for about $3000, though, believe it or not, at E.M. Shorts at least (they're a shop out of Wichita), and used usually seems to be only a few hundred less than that. They both sound pretty great... Nothing's ever quite easy, huh? Would love to A/B them. I do think I like thick and mellow, but who could say no to a grand piano? Wow! I will check it out on the trading post! Didn't know we even had a trading post. That would be a good thing for me to keep an eye on. I think that's good advice... I think it'll be E.M. Shorts for me, a forum buddy, or a (hopefully) reputable place on Gbase or Reverb.
  11. I know how apparently sycamore was used in the 1989, 1990 and perhaps some 1991 Gibson Montana maples. Other than that... What kinds of differences can one expect from an earlier Montana J-200 compared to a newer? My current line of thinking... If I can ever find a good used sunburst from 1989-2001 or so, possibly a little later (2006 and 2005 were cool years for me, for instance), I would consider it. However, the prices I see them for usually approach the price of a new 2016, which I could get for a little over $3000. If I'd end up paying $2500 or more anyway, I might just go new instead. But there doesn't seem to be a lot on the market anyway. There are lots of good deals on natural finish ones, but I gotta have sunburst! My other possibility is that I might grab both an SJ-100 walnut and SJ-200 from E.M. Shorts, A/B them, and send back the one I don't want to keep. Looking to do this around Christmas time and would probably not buy before mid-December, even if a really great used one popped up. Just curious what the thoughts are on these "older" newer J-200s versus the new, new ones.
  12. Oh! For some reason I thought the Canadian dollar was up on the USD. Don't know why I thought that. Do you get a lifetime warranty in Canada? Maybe that's how it's technically cheaper. Maybe I should drive up to Canada to buy my SJ. On second thought, I don't think I want to drive up to Canada in December.
  13. Yep, any person who starts playing now, or last year, and ends up with a J-15 for their first good guitar and keeps playing, will have a fine lifetime instrument indeed. I really wish I'd done more homework when I started out and got something like a J-15, but frankly, I don't think there was anything this good in such a price bracket at that time. (A WM-45 would have been nice, though! Not sure what they went for back then, but whatever it was, with inflation, is likely more than the $1100 I got this J-15 for.)
  14. Yeah, I wonder about Henry. It's possible it's sold at a break-even price in order to lure folks into the Gibson flock. Or maybe we're drinking the kool-aid and they are actually making money on it. I've had quite a few Martins, and I found it stands side by side with them, including a pre-2012 D-18 and a D-28 standard. After getting my Hummingbird and J-15, I sold my D-18 and D-28. Great guitars. I still have my Martin M-36 and 7-28, though, and will not part with them. Just different guitars, not better or worse. In a bluegrass jam, I'd want the D-18 or D-28, not the J-15, but I think the J-15 could hack it, too. Singing in my living room, I want the J-15 or Hummingbird. I do sometimes miss being able to throw in a well-timed, extremely aggressive strum and knock people over across the parking lot, but on the other hand, I sing a bit more quietly with a Gibson because I'm not drowned out otherwise. Not only that, but Gibson always names things a year ahead, so my Hummingbird 2016 is actually from the future, and my "last year" 2014 is actually a 2015! No, but seriously, I got a New Old Stock price on it. The new ones were a few hundred more, and the J-15 is one of the few that were spared the Gibson price increase, oh I mean value added tax. I totally agree. It is like a J-45, just different. (I suppose one could say that about the J-35, too, but you know what I mean.) Considering the price difference between it and my Bird, you'd think I wouldn't even play the J-15, but that's not the case, and one can't always tell a lot by price difference. I also think I just prefer the "modern" J-45 bracing, which is what the J-15 has. Even on the J-45 Vintage, I think that wider bracing makes it a little too strident. It is a heavy guitar overall. I think walnut is a heavier wood, like rosewood. I haven't weighed my Hummingbird or my J-15, but the J-15 is significantly heavier. I don't think it would have any worse nose-dive issues than anything else, though. The neck feels really solid, but I don't know if it feels heavy. Yikes. Is this a Gibson thing, or is it just currency fluctuation?
  15. I was actually just about to post a very late NGD thread for my J-15. :) It was "born" April, 2014, but I've had it a couple months now, new old stock! It sounds fantastic, and I agree--even dead strings sound great on it!
×
×
  • Create New...