Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums


All Access
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Days Won


62burst last won the day on February 13 2017

62burst had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

38 Neutral

About 62burst

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

13,493 profile views
  1. 'Been thinking about the song since people were tossing out ideas for Sal's '60's gig. Looking for other ideas on the song, but I just put this into the iPhone: 1949 LG-2 (yes, that one) feel free to put up a take of this Steve Goodman song if you'd like.
  2. Try typing those soundhole labels all day- surely misprints will happen. Maybe it was a Monday guitar. . . or a Friday. Script logo is correct, banner ("Only a Gibson..."), correct as well. Taking a close look at the top line of the label in photo 2, it looks to also have the "Xtra" after J-200, which is how the J-100 was designated. The 1994 guitars would have the centennial logo, so as Slim says, maybe earlier. A misprinted label is fine, and so Gibson. I'd be more concerned with what looks like a crack going into the rosette at the soundhole on the bass side of the fretboard extension.
  3. Even though that whole “driving the top” thing is lost on me, I’m sure it’s always going on to some extent. .. Not much into the whole “you gots to stomp ‘em”- thing, either. Jinder had some good thoughts on the topic where 11s could be useful : PROS : slightly easier on the left hand, brighter tone if the guitar is excessively dark, reduces the volume of a very punchy instrument which can be useful for a quiet singer looking for an instrument for accompaniment. Also- if “someone” was enamored with the sound of an early 60s Square with a ceramic saddled ADJ bridge, an a/b with a contemporary Gibson with 11s would be an interesting comparo to hear (hint, hint). About as likely as hearing that recently played version of Galveston, oh Galveston🐠.
  4. . . . and I missed seeing your big avatar around here. (believe it was a Hummingbird) So- you had a Dove through all of that guitar sampling? What was that like? Both Birds flown, I suppose.
  5. Musta been the bull market. Nice photo- the shadow, too.
  6. A luthier once installed a PlateMate on a guitar I had- it did pick up the volume of the guitar, but it also added a metallic edge to the sound. . . I ended up taking it out. It would be a cheap enough thing to try on a guitar that was on the quiet side, though. Yes, Sal, the PlateMate is a bit thinner than Doug's solution, but in line with how little he's got into the guitar, that fix will do I suppose, but I wouldv'e avoided the permanency of the CA- The PlateMates have an adhesive no stronger than a post-it note; string tension keeps them in place, and they're a reversible mod. Bridge plate replacement really isn't necessary for something like this, StewMac has that strange device that cuts a half sphere, and an identical wooden piece gets glued in. But Dave at Brother's likes the sawdust & superglue fill of the hole & then he re-drills for the pins. The mix gives a nice hard surface for the ball ends to rest.
  7. Two questions only you can answer: 1) how often you're going out & plugging in, vs the vids you put up here on the board where you're playing into a condenser mic, and 2) if having all of that shtuff out of there means anything to you. You could always keep a nice soundhole pickup stored in the case pocket. Isn't it ironic- paying extra for the True Vintage/Vintage series so that the electronics don't come on the guitar.
  8. Now who's the Eggman? (ouch, Mo'Pick) I guess I /we had that coming.
  9. Now you're blowing my mind. . . Yes, on the subjectivity of it all, and also bearing in mind your earlier mention of bracing differences, of which for some reason I've always drawn a line in the sand of guitar trivia (the same line for knowing which years of J-45's were showing 19 or 20 fret 'boards). If you could expand on that a bit, I will try to remember.
  10. That's fine. But let me ask a question: If we could make two guitars of the same scale length, but exaggerate the dimensions, say one a three-quarter sized J-45, and one with a box the size of a cello, which would sound tighter, and which would project better? "Just wondering..."
  11. Don't recall seeing that either ('never forget a 'Bird) Hummingbird more of a projecter than a J-45? Maybe if it were a Koa ? How way back were those observations, and have they changed since then? I mean "The projection and 'whelm' of the 45 – will be the most significant difference between the 2." and... "...The Hummingbird being tighter, having more note separation and not that depth" Funny- the square shouldered body of the Hummingbird seemed to me to allow the sound to develop more first in the box, giving a fuller/rounder sound, where the J-45 allowed the sound to get projected out sooner keeping the mids strong. In the same way the small body of the L-00 can be punchy and loud, where the superjumbo '200 can be a surprisingly quieter guitar. The "something" really can be elusive, and it can be a moving target, changing with time. My first J-45 (a 50's R.I. Triburst) had super-strong upper mids, yet I moved it on; 'coulda just got that one, and been done. Love the one you're with, and all that. Easy, Murph. . . e a s y. ('sounds like Murph is in songwriting mode)
  12. It just feels better getting that junk out of there, the wiring, the large-ish Baggs end pin guts, and especially the UST coming between the saddle and the bottom of the saddle slot. You can most likely measure, or dig up the height of the UST, but if memory serves, it's ~.030". You could get a taller saddle (I don't care about choir-of-angels tone- and Tusq = good enough ), and I've also not gone to a taller saddle before, and it was fine.
  13. It might take some time to update, in the same way a change of your avatar photo takes a day or so. After just adding a photo to Jinder's AJ thread, I checked the profile info under attachments- it told me "You have used 0 B of your 500 kB attachment limit", so using an image hosting site (imgur) seems to be the way to go. There also seems to be a much shorter window to edit posts now, after that, the only option that is given is to the delete the entire post, as opposed to removing a photo (for example) from that post.
  14. Not out of the woods by any means, but appreciate the mention.
  • Create New...