j45nick

So, here's the reply I got back from the seller, through ebay: New message from: tikerkma0 (18) You are a moroon..it is not a crime to sell a guitar. The guitar is Gibson brand and is a J 200. Authentic Gibson j 200 guitars sell for thousands. This guitar is fairly priced. If you don t like it don t buy it.

Done.

That's mind-blowing to me. Is this guy in the US? Please report the guy. There is nothing in the listing that suggests it is not a real Gibson. Stuff like this makes me sick. He knows it's a fake, and is selling it as real? edit: I contacted the seller, and told him if he knows it is fake and is representing it as real, he is committing a crime.

There are a whole bunch of details that are wrong, but all you have to do is look at the serial number, which is not in the right format. After that, the incorrect details simply confirm what was already apparent.

That's pretty depressing. If you don't know what you're doing, you'd better buy from a reputable dealer.

If the guitar has a ink-stamped FON on the neck block inside the guitar, we should be able to date it for you and put it in context of what was going on at Gibson at that point in history. Pictures would be helpful in any case, particularly of the headstock, the tuners, and the body. Just pictures of the guitar, front and back, would probably be adequate.

Pretty unambiguously 1966, between the serial number, double ring rosette, serial number embossed on the back of headstock. J-50 in this era (and J-45) would not have had a label inside. If it were 1958, it would have the serial number ink-stamped on the neck block. The serial number would have a T prefix. It should have either "J-50" or "J-50 adj" ink-stamped on the back centerline cleat, visible almost in the middle of the soundhole. That can be hard to see, as it can fade if the guitar has been left exposed to uv rays.

Fuller's does custom Gibson runs to their own specs, often fine-tuning specifications to more accurately reflect the period the guitar represents, compared to "stock" versions. My 2006 Fuller's '43 SJ re-issue, for example, has a slot-through belly-down bridge, 5-ply top binding, dark centerline back stripe, 19-fret neck, serial number ink-stamped on neck block, firestripe guard, etc. The two "non-period" characteristics are bound fretboard (post-war), and the Luthier's Choice (wide modern) neck profile. They do a nice job.

The price you pay over there is pretty close to extortion. I pay about $6.75 for them here from juststrings.com, and shipping is a flat rate of about $6 no matter how many sets you buy, so it pays to buy in bulk. D'Addario EJ16's are about $5.50 from the same source, so there isn't that much price difference. For some reason, you guys seem to get gouged pretty badly on most things associated with guitars.

I'm down to three mahogany/spruce Gibson flat tops (J-45, SJ, L-OO), and I use either MB Premium PB or Sunbeams on all. I've been using up a bunch of MB Premiums that have been sitting around, but am just about to order a new batch of Sunbeams. I'm lazy when it comes to changing strings, and find the Sunbeams give me the warmth and clarity I crave far longer than other strings. Even when they finally die, they've got a funkiness that is appealing. I literally have a two or three year old set of Sunbeams on my L-OO, and I'm sort of reluctant to change them. The slope-J's, on the other hand, benefit from new strings, so they're first in line when the new Sunbeams come in. Still searching for the right strings for my 000-28 EC. I'd like a contrast to the tone I get out of mahogany guitars. Something a bit more sparkly to go better with a mid-sized rosewood guitar. Suggestions? ( don't like coated strings.)

Interesting. It may be that you got some bad ones, or it may be that we like very different characteristics in our strings. I like the Sunbeams a lot. To my ear, they sound a lot like new Masterbuilt Premium PBs, but they retain that "new string" combination of warmth and articulation for a much longer time. To each his own, I guess.

More information, please Grunt?

Turned this into an active link: scratch repair

Bomb-thrower! It will just re-establish the guitar's equilibrium, which has been upset by the scratch...

That's my thought as well. An experienced luthier or repair tech might thin some lacquer way down, and depending on how the far into or through the finish the scratch has gone, drop fill or overspray slightly, then buff it down. It's magic what an experienced guy could do with this, probably at reasonable cost. In any case, the first thing is to get all the polish residue out of that scratch. I've had reasonable success using cotton swabs (Q-tips) and naphtha, but it will take a bit of effort and patience to get it out.

Nah, that was fake news.......

"Fabulous Flat Tops" appears to show a few photos of non-firestripe guards on a few L-body guitars, but they are mostly b&w photos, so it's hard to be sure. Ebony L-versions sometimes had white pickguards, as did a couple of CoP models I have seen photos of. The firestripe seems to have been most common, for sure, but this being Gibson, you would never discount the possibility that tortoise-style guards might have been used on some guitars. Not all versions even had pickguards.

So there you go. To the original poster, a birth year J-45 from the 1970's may not be the best J-45 you could own, but if a birth year J-45 is what you want, try some out, and if you find a good one, buy it and enjoy. The advantage of Gibsons from the mid-19070s is that they are relatively cheap, and despite their generally-mediocre reputation, there are some good ones out there.

This is a 1942-'43 rosewood SJ now owned by tpbiii. Pretty similar grain to your J-60:

Spectacular-looking guitar! Gorgeous back and sides.

I would say that's a reflection. Given the OP's concern over a couple of drops of squeezed-out glue, it's hard to imagine it would be anything significant.

Glue clean-up is a moving target. Aliphatic resin cleans up with water, but if water seeps into the joint, the joint can be "starved" of glue. Same goes with hide glue, which is even more tricky because it must be at exactly the right state of liquidity and temperature to work properly. As you say, I'd rather have a little glue squeezed out and know the guitar was "glued enough" than have a flawlessly clean interior.

So after all this discussion, I poked under the hood of some of my guitars. The cleanest is my Martin 000-28 EC, followed fairly closely by my Fuller's 1943 SJ. Both of these are mostly aliphatic resin glued. TiteBond is pretty easy to clean up if you get it before it fully cures. The worst? Surprise, surprise. My 1948 J-45, followed by my L-OO Legend. Both are all hide glue guitars. Anyone who has worked with hide glue knows you have a pretty narrow window when using it, and getting every last glue bubble or spill is not at the top of the list in a lot of cases. But is sure transfers sound nicely. Does it bother me? Not in the least. Given the fact that the L-OO has cloth side reinforcing strips and the old J-45 has the same feature in wood, there's plenty of opportunity for a little extra glue residue. The old J-45 is, shall we say, definitely "glued enough". Maybe that's part of the reason it's still in one piece after more than 60 years. These are hand-built instruments, after all.

If the glue residue really bothers you, use a single-edge razor blade to scrape it away. There are probably a lot more important things to consider, like how does the guitar sound and play? Personally, those teeny-tiny squeezed-out glue droplets would be pretty unimportant. Remember, "Only a Gibson is glued enough". It wouldn't be a Gibson if it didn't have a glue drop here and there on the inside. Learn to love it.

With the same strings, a longer-scale guitar requires more tension to achieve the same pitch. You might try strings with a round core, like DR Sunbeams, which are easier to bend than strings wound on the more typical hex core hex core. However, it sounds like the J-45 may not be a guitar for you, if you've tried a lot and haven't bonded with them. A J-45 isn't going to sound much like any of the other guitars you've mentioned. But from your verbal description of what you're looking for, the J-45 does sound like the right guitar. Maybe you need to experiment more with strings.