j45nick

Yeah, but it might add 30 seconds or so to the production time. You could probably jig it up to add less time than that. Anyone who has done any kind of fine woodworking that requires drilling clean holes knows that trick. I typically just hold a piece of scrap wood on the back of whatever I'm drilling through. It ain't rocket science, and it's so frustrating to see this when a clean hole through something really is desirable. Like, for instance, the pin holes through a bridgeplate. Suppose, for the sake of argument, it adds two minutes to production time (which is unlikely), and your guitar builder is costing the company $45 per hour between wages, benefits, etc. This would add $1.50 to production costs (assuming you've amortized the cost of the jig over a thousand guitars are so, so that its addition to cost is negligible), maybe $3 to retail price. I'd be willing to pay that, but you should not be in that position on a guitar that costs more than $2000. I frankly find it inexcusable in a high-quality new guitar. In fairness, both of the Bozeman-built guitars I have now are pretty good in this regard.

A lot of people underestimate the tonal difference created by different types of picks. Of course, if you fingerpick the know the difference between the sound of your fingers alone vs finger and nails vs fingerpicks. Matching strings, picks, and playing style to the guitar, of course, is a first-world problem may of us have due to an embarrassment of riches when it comes to guitar ownership.

For better or worse, that's fairly typical of Gibson bridgeplates. The large hole partially filled with glue is not necessarily a problem. The bridgeplate is primarily local top reinforcement under the bridge. If it were my guitar, the next time I changed strings, I would reach inside with a single-edge razor blade and trim off the splinters around the pin holes.

Maybe an employee guitar with a left-over neck from some project. Details such as the position of the crown on the headstock, ear shape, and serial number are all consistent with 1964. I've seen these mid-60s 'bursts fade in unusual ways, just like their acoustic flat-top cousins, but TDC looks a long way from this finish. I had a '68 that had faded almost like some cherryburst Hummingbirds. I'll have to look to see if I have a picture of the label in that one.

65405--which is the way I read the number on the label--is a 1964 serial number. (look at the way the two 5's are made on the label) I have no explanation for the number on the back of the headstock. Maybe the extra holes in the top are from a removed Bigsby?

To my ear, despite the mediocre recording, that sounds just like a ceramic-saddled early 'bird should sound. Shades of the early Stones, etc. Like Em7 says, I'd like to hear it with mellowed-in strings, and maybe a fat "soft" pick like a Blue Chip or a Red Bear.

It certainly appears to have the appropriate number of miles on it.

You were right not to offer anything extra for it. I wonder if the seller knew it was not what he said it was, or if he was just ignorant about what he had? Five minutes on the google machine would have told him it was not an early 1950s Lifton case, much less a case worth $1800. Let the buyer beware.

That was pretty cool, and you were brave to take it on. That guitar was perfect for the job. Nice bird noises, too.

I'm not sure I've seen one from the 50s that actually had the Gibson logo on the outside, and no manufacturer badge on the inside.

Hmmmm… I like that.

There are plenty of J-45s from 1960-1965 with non-adjustable bridges, maybe later as well. The necks got skinnier in section starting in about 1960-1964, even with the 1 11/16" nut width. If the OP wants a vintage J-45, he should look in that period. Otherwise, a modern with one with one of the thinner profiles might work.

I haven't seen that particular case before. Does it have a Lifton brand on it somewhere, or did the seller just assume it is a Lifton?

That was my question as well. Those holes look like the oversized holes for the barrel nuts of an adjustable saddle, but the small bridgeplate is consistent with the original standard bridge in that period. 1952 may have been the last year of the slot-through saddle There's a story there somewhere. I'm hoping Dave will confirm whether or not it still has a tapered headstock. There is some uncertainty when that feature disappeared. The top brace scalloping is similar to that on my "new" 1950 J-45. The top 'burst is almost identical to the original 'burst on my "old" 1950, but very different from the 'burst on my "new" 1950.

Look at the OP's second post. He is looking at a 1952 J-45 with the original case, and is trying to figure out how much value that adds to the guitar itself, to figure out if the price asked for the guitar with its original case makes sense.

Normally you can get this off the Wildwood website, but they don't have any of that model in stock. It's the first fret and 9th fret where this is usually measured. "Vintage round" could mean almost anything. wildwood Gibsons

My 1947 was clear-coated on the inside. It does offer some protection, as it slows down the impact of humidity changes on wood, but doesn't completely prevent them.

That's what I meant by asking crazy money. Does he want crazy money for the guitar as well?

Tough call. Are you talking the tan case with green felt lining, or another version? My guess would be about $500, all things being equal, maybe more. You see people ask crazy money for these as a stand-alone item with no guitar, for both the Lifton and the other brand, whose name escapes me: the one with the fortress logo. Just looked online, and there are various Lifton cases for about $700-$900 asking. I didn't see one that was particularly for the J-45. Remember that there was rarely a separate case for each model, and therefore the fit was not always as good as we expect in a case today. The case was an extra-cost item back then, from the basic chipboard case for about $10-$15 on up. The 1950 J-45 I bought last year had the original Gibson chipboard case, and although I did not have the seller ship the guitar in that case--I sent him a modern hard case for shipping--I did pay about $75 to have the chipboard case packaged and sent to me, since it was original to the guitar and in really nice condition.

It depends on the condition of the finish. If there is any checking or crazing of the finish, polishing can be tricky because it can get into tiny finish cracks and can, depending on the polish, make them more visible. Virtuoso is wonderful for cleaning up a dirty old finish ( the Cleaner) and putting a real gloss on (the Polish). However, as they caution on their website, neither should be use on a checked, crazed, or flaking finish. Gibson pump polish is fairly mild, and seems usable on most intact finishes. I have used Virtuoso carefully on a number of vintage Gibsons, and with no problem on more modern ones. I have also made a few mistakes along the way, getting cleaner residue in finish cracks, where it is literally impossible to remove. By comparison, fretboards are easy to deal with. I do not use steel wool, because it can leave particles behind that can and will rust over time. Instead, I uses either fine bronze wool--readily available either at hardware stores or online--or fine scotchbrite pads. On a really filthy fretboard--like a guitar owned for 50 years by a heavy smoker with nicotine-stained hands--I may start out with naphtha on bronze wool to get the worst gunk off. I have my own methods for cleaning old fretboards, particularly if there is gunk buildup along the frets. I use a single-edge razor blade as a fine scraper, working away from the fret. I can also remove a fair amount of surface wear with this method, but it does take care and practice. After I get everything cleaned and scraped--the frets also get polished by this process--I have finally settled, after a lot of experimentation, on a final burnishing using Fret Doctor oil, rubbing along the grain with fine bronze wool. Wipe of the excess with a clean rag, let it dry a bit, burnish with a clean rag, and you are good to go. I used a lot of different oils before settling on Fret Doctor. I also use Fret Doctor on bridges, but you really need to mask those off to avoid getting it all over the top. I just use a tiny amount on a rag on a masked-off bridge with the pins and saddle removed. This is the basic process I have developed over 50 years of owning vintage guitars (and modern ones). It is still subject to constant refinement.

Love the song, and love the sound of that Legend tuned down a full step like that. Works really well with the gentle fingerpicking.

It's easier to do with strings removed, but you can usually just slacken the strings all the way to slip a measuring device underneath them. Use a digital caliper if you have one, and measure the depth of the neck just behind or in front of the first fret and the 9th fret. Then go on wildwoodguitars.com and look at their acoustic Gibson listings for comparison. The decimal numbers given on that website for each guitar, for example .90-.99 , measure the depth of the neck (excluding the fret) at the first and the 9th frets in decimal inches. You can buy an inexpensive digital caliper at any hardware store, such as Harbor Freight or Home Depot in the US, or online at Amazon, for example. It is a useful tool to own for any number of purposes unrelated to guitars. You don't have to spend a lot of money on this, even though you can if you are a machinist are someone who does small-scale precision work day in and day out. My igaging 100-333-8B cost all of $30 on Amazon, and it is a great tool for not much money. If you're a machinist, you might spend $150 or so on a Mitutoyo or Starrett, but you don't need something like that unless you are a precision tool junkie. If you're concerned about scratching the neck, put a small piece of tape on each of the jaw surfaces and zero out the tool before measuring. All of them have that zero-set capability, as you always re-check your zero point before every measurement. As a metric reference, .90"= 22.86 mm, .99"=25.15 mm. It is much more than neck depth that determines comfort levels. For the same depth dimensions, a neck could be a D-section or V-section (for example) with a significantly different circumference and "feel" compared to another neck of that same depth but a different sectional shape. Realistically, you need to play a number of different neck shapes to find what works best for you, but you need to start that comparison process with an uninjured hand for it to be meaningful. wildwood

I think I might need to trade my 'hog '43 SJ reissue and some cash for that one. Aside from the bound fretboard--which my '43 reissue also has--it looks pretty authentic, and sounds really nice.

The J-45 standard is still listed on their website as part of the Modern Acoustic series. I assume by VS, you just refer to the vintage sunburst finish. Gibson shut down manufacturing operations across the board in late March, including Gibson Acoustic in Bozeman, due to coronavirus business restrictions. There is no indication I can find on the website that manufacturing has resumed yet. Gibson has always had multiple models of the J-45 in production at the same time, even when differences between many of those models were largely cosmetic. There may well be shortages of certain models for some time even after manufacturing resumes. The J-45 standard has always been one of their most popular models, so it seems unlikely the manufacturing of that model would be ended. If and when it does end, you can assume that the end of civilization as we know it is nigh. They could, however, re-name the Standard as something else, but it would still be the same guitar. This is, after all, Gibson, manufacturers at one time or another of some 50 (and counting) variations on the J-45. When I bought my first Gibson back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, there were two fraternal twins: the J-45, and the natural-topped J-50 variant. Now, you need a scorecard to keep track.

As a kid, I had a Zenith Transoceanic radio in a wooden case on a table next to my bed. You could smell the tubes as they warmed up when you turned it on. Scrolling through the shortwave bands at night when reception was good opened a different window onto the world, one which I've never forgotten: a cacophony of languages and accents cutting through the static, the names of faraway places etched onto the tuning bands on the face of the radio. Somehow, YouTube doesn't have the same effect, as great as it is.