Red 333

I have one of the short-scale maple AJ's. It has a slightly wider neck than the long-scale AJ. Plus the neck has a pronounced V to boot. Very clear tone and lots of sustain. Red 333

There's an Epiphone version, too. Elvis impersonators and memorabilia collectors love 'em. Link to Epiphone Elvis Presley Red 333

OWF, that's a Gibson Elvis Presley J-200. That pickguard is a repro of the one he had on his guitar. Vegas-y, No? Red 333

And it's not. Shred wrote "...it was lacking a serial number and made in USA stamp on the head stock..." The Garrison facility has been shuttered for a couple of years now (unless Gibson reopened it and started making guitars there again). I think manufacturing there by Gibson was fairly short-lived. I once heard a couple of Canadian-made Gibsons used amplified by a trio, and they sounded pretty good. That's the limit of my experience with those guitars, though, except to play them at a dealer. My impression is that they had a Taylor-like voice. Red 333

Until recently (maybe 2008 or 2009?), Gibson did make their own strings in their string-making/pick-up factory in Elgin, Illinois. String making was discontinued there, and D'Addario has made Gibson-branded strings since then. Red 333

I love the smell of lacquer in the morning... Happy New Year to you too, Aster! Yes, Gibson L5 strings are what the guitar comes with from the factory, as far as I know. Red 333

Aster, I don't have too much experience with breaking in either of those models of strings, but if you want an alternative suggestion, I find that Gibson L5 strings work great on a J-160E Reissue such as yours, and feel (to me) like they have a lot of compliance right off the bat. There's a member of the BeatGearCavern that makes and sells ceramic adjustable bridges. Look there in the "Expert-Textpert/Fixing A Hole" section. Congrats on your new guitar! Hope you enjoy it. Red 333

I saw one of these in a Sam Ash store. The one I saw had a three piece body, with a veneer on the back. Then neck was two piece, with the joint right where the headstock meets the neck. I'm 99% sure it had the standard Epiphone pups. Nice finish. Red 333

I'll take stab, but describing how guitars sound is so difficult for me. I never feel I have the ability to adequately express what I hear, or do justice to it, especially in light of how eloquent and even poetic some of our forum members are. First, let me say that both the J-45 TV and the SJ TV are fantastic guitars. Any Gibson lover would be pleased to have either. That said, there's something magic about the J-45 TV I was fortunate to get (appologies to Gillian Girl). I've often heard guitars like the J200 compared to grand pianos. Well, this particular J-45 TV is the grand piano in my collection of slope shouldered Gibsons (which also includes a red-spruce topped J-35 reissue, an AJ, a short-scale maple AJ, a rosewood J-45 Vine, a J-160E Standard, J-160E Peace, and three MIJ Epiphone Texans, which I consider in the Gibson family by virtue of both their lineagee and their quality). This J-45 TV is clear and strong and balanced in every register, particularly in the bass, and it has great sustain. It's clear as bell when fingerpicked even lightly, and it thunders when strummed hard. The SJ TV's bass is good and clear, though not as strong, round, or complex; it has less of a deep, reverberating, and authoritive quality. It's top end is smidge less sweet, too. It's sound overall is drier and more percussive, and it likes, or even needs to be driven a little harder. Don't get me wrong, it's a wonderful guitar. I'm just trying to describe it in contrast to that particular J-45 TV I have. Remember, the two have some structural differences. The J-45 TV has an adi top and the high, thin braces on the back. The SJ TV has a sitka top and squatter, chunkier braces on the back. I have not looked carefully at the SJ TV's top bracing or location, so only assume its the same as the J45 TV/AJ/J35, but I don't know for a fact. The J-45 is a 2008, and the SJ is a 2009, I believe. Hope that helps in some way. Red 333

I have a J45 TV and a Southern Jumbo TV. They are braced differently on the back, for sure. I'm sure they both represent how each particular model was braced at some point in time (and perhaps a DIFFERENT point in time if they have always indeed been the same model in different dress), but at THIS point in time, the True Vintage models at least are different. I have not checked the top. Red 333

Yeah, that's why I say they sound like a Gibson in a reverb tank. I think they are excellent guitars, though, and need to be evaluated on their own merits versus the sound you like. Your AJ is a beauty!

Then don't go reading the Recording King threads on the UMGF--your head will explode. Red 333

Hi, Maaty. I've got both an AJ500R and an Advanced Jumbo, and I agree in general with your description of the AJ having stronger fundamentals. The Masterbilt is voiced to emphasize the overtones more. That's true of the AJ500M, as well, when compared to a J45. I've often described the Masterbilts as being Gibsons in a reverb tank. The Gibsons are drier and more immediate. My take on it is that the Masterbilt is a heck of a guitar, and more impressive still when you consider the price. I find the playability of the Masterbilts is excellent, too--they beg to be played. Red 333

Bluelake thanks for sending that link. The desription makes sense in many ways, but it's hard to attribute what the Epiphone response actually was, and what was written by the poster, as no quotes are used. I believe the quote describing the top as "laminated" is the is the poster's, based on his understanding of the term (or possibly misunderstanding as it is used in instrument manufacturing). I think Epiphone's response describes the Elitist Byrdland's top as "not a laminate," and "certainly not a laminate top," meaning not the standard multi-ply construction we have been discussing (as used on a Casino and most other hollow and semi hollow electric archtops): "Is it a carved top in the same sence that the original Gibson Byrdlands were?…No. If it were, the price would have to be significantly higher and no longer fill the role of a high quality affordable alternative in the market place. It is also not a laminate top in the classic sence. The industry standard of veneer material is about .025”(.635mm). Laminate tops are generally 5-ply with cross grain orientation, which get the thickness to about .125”, which is pretty standards thickness for musical instruments. This makes for a strong, durable and attracting top or back plate for a musical instrument, but are not particularly designed to enhance the tone of the instrument.. The Elitist might better be described and a “Hybrid” top, as it is certainly not a laminate top by industry norms. By using 4mm spruce as partially pressed, partially sculpted top, with the addition of the 1mm parallel grain veneer to add strength and rigidity, you get the best of both schools of construction. The nearly solid top with the supporting veneer which has the same grain orientation allows for much better top movement and tone, while maintaining durability and affordability." That description makes sense to me, as it would be a technique a manufacturer would use to keep the guitar affordable: a veneer on a soild top. Epiphone still gets to call it "solid," even though "nearly solid" or "solid with an asterix" might be more descriptive, huh. I will take the pups off and look again, and see if I can confirm a veneer. Thanks for the link. Red 333