sbpark
-
Posts
1,213 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by sbpark
-
-
Find a Gibson authorized repair center in your area and take it to them. I had an issue with a 2016 J-45 Standard I bought brand new and Gibson was very receptive and quick to cover the issue. Seems like your guitar would easily fall under their warranty. I've also had an issue with a cracked pickup surround and tenon cover for a 2013 SG I was the original owner of and, again Gibson sent me out the replacement parts pretty fast.
-
I personally hate slim taper necks on SG's. Not a great combo in my opinion. They've always felt rubbery and were easy to knock out of tune. The chunkier the neck the better on an SG.
Also not a fan of the 490 pickups. Had a 2013 Standard with a slim taper neck and 57 Classics in it. Great sounding guitar, but couldn't bond with the neck and sold it. Later picked up a used but mint 2008 SG Standard that was a VERY nice guitar. Fantastic neck, but those 490 pickups sucked and replaced them (along with the PCB board) with some Seymour Duncan Seth Lovers. Took a VERY nice guitar and transformed it into an AMAZING guitar. Most recent acquisition was a 2008 SG Classic with P90's. Absolute favorite SG neck I've ever played and hands down my favorite SG. Loved it so much I sold the 2008 Standard.
I wouldn't use price of either as a factor on whether or not to buy one over the other, especially since you stated the price difference is minimal. I'd go with the one that feels best on your hands. A small savings now will quickly be forgotten down the road.
-
Looks like Chinese junk. You should dispose of it immediately.
In all seriousness, wondering why you think it might be fake, and if so, what made you still buy it?
-
1
-
-
On 2/1/2021 at 12:37 PM, rickc said:
If you mean the EDS-1275 there are a number for sale; Reverb, Facebook Marketplace, music stores so just Google "Gibson EDS-1275"
I think he means the SG that has a single coil in the neck and a hum bucker in the bridge, not a double-neck guitar.
-
Personally I think too many people overdo it on "oiling" the fretboard. In most cases it's really not necessary. If you insist on doing it just use the smallest amount of mineral oil to do it, and if you think you're using a small amount, then use 1/4 of that. The fretboard doesn't need to be saturated and dunked up with oil. It gets enough if that from the oils in your fingers from actually playing the guitar.
Also prefer using a fret guard and some sort of metal polish on an old t-shirt (something like Brasso or Mother's mag wheel polish) for the frets. Or you could mask it off with painters tape instead of using the fret guard. Steel wool is super messy and unnecessary.
personally I'd just wipe the guitar down with a damp cloth, or use naphtha/white gas.
More importantly, take the time to actually take some aesthetically pleasing pictures of the guitar. That's what's going to sell it. Cannot tell you how many deals I've scored where the seller posted an awful pic that was out of focus or had awful lighting with their bare feet or unmade bed in the background. Sounds cheesy, but I promise you high quality photos will sell the guitar. You can use your camera phone and a tripod and get some pretty impressive shots.
Btw, looking at your photos, that fretboard doesn't need any oil, but I'd have someone look at it since it looks like there's something going on with the neck joint at the heel.
-
1
-
-
I've owned two SJ200's over the years and wouldn't consider either of them super loud guitars like my D-18 or AJ. One was a total dud and the other was pretty amazing, but far from a cannon. Loud doesn't automatically mean amazing, at least in my set of criteria. Your criteria might be different.
-
8 hours ago, Salfromchatham said:
ham fisted. yes.
and i stopped trying to polish the headstock for fear of taking off all the finish.
you will get no argument from me that it was horribly done. The tuners are phenomenal though. Anyway I sold the guitar a few weeks back. Took the hit. disclosed condition of course and priced for it. the selling had everything to do with me losing my home office which housed all my guitars (in favor of a bedroom for a home health aid for my mother in law, who lives with us). Sometimes life happens.
There's no shame in selling it and turning your office into a space for an elderly loved one. Good on you!
-
1 hour ago, Salfromchatham said:
I swapped tuners on a few Gibsons... to the Kluson creme buttons. A few came out really well, and SB Park’s thread is great. I think I read a few threads pre SBPark as well.
anyways, the last time I was not so lucky. Stripped screws. Scratches. Raccoon eyes. I tried polishing it all out but made it worse. This was on my J-45 Studio FYI. I wish I dropped it off at Russos instead.
looks good from a distance... not so good close up,
So what went different this time? Hate to be direct, but looks like a pretty ham-fisted attempt. Also looks like you really didn't put much effort into polishing the headstock, or is it a different finish than what's in a J-45 Standard? I could see a matte finish being harder to work with, but then again you can easily go from matte to gloss with the same product I used. I've tuned a few necks and headstocks on Martins to gloss that we're matte from the factory with a gloss body and didnt care for the mismatching finishes. The Meguiars Scratch-X 2.0 was the one thing that really took the tuner swap from looking like yours above to looking like it came off the assembly like. Just 10 minutes of buffing with that compound and scratches and raccoon eyes were all gone. If there were deep scratches there before the tuner swap, well those aren't going to buff out. But the light surface swirls and rings from the Rotomatic bushings were buffed out with just the Meguiars and a cotton cloth.
Here's a pic of a Martin headstock that used to be matte, and I polished them with the Meguiars Scratch-X 2.0:
[img]https://i.imgur.com/3GcXCuA.jpg[/img]
-
8 hours ago, Paul14 said:
The bigger washer also cover the ring left from the Grover’s. I used the kluson deluxe on my J-50. Last owner took off the kluson’s & added Grover rotomatics😱😱😳
the J-50 looks much better, even with the bigger washers. Headstock is lighter, & the tuners work great.
Got the Kluson’s from Slimt, for which I am forever grateful. Thank you again.
You can easily polish out the indent left by the Rotomatic bushings. In the photo I posted above of the J-45 Standard headstock, that guitar had big, ugly Rotomatics and you wouldnt even know it ever had them on there.
-
I did it on a J-45 Standard a few years ago. I prefer the Kluson 3 on a plate tuners, and they cover up the Rotomatic screw holes and you'll never know they were there. You'll need the 3/8 " conversion bushings from StewMac.
As far as whether or not you'll decrease the value of the guitar 20 years from now...probably, but who the heck cares! You might not even be alive 20 years from now. Might as well enjoy the guitar and make it the way you want it!
Here's a tutorial thread I made when I did the conversion listing the steps, products used, etc.
-
I replaced the Rotomatics on a J-45 Standard a while ago and here's the thread with some pictures of how it turned out.
Here's the thread, which is sort of a mini tutorial about how I went about replacing the tuners, what bushings to use and how to get rid of the "raccoon eyes" from the Rotomatic bushings.
Kluson now also makes a set of 3 on a plate with vintage white buttons in 18:1 gear ratio. Those should be pretty darn smooth.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07WJX6VVX/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
-
Have had the guitar for a week now. Restrung it with some new EJ26's and the guitar sounds fantastic. It sounded surprisingly good with what I think were they beyond dead original strings, but it really came alive with new strings. May also try some Martin Retros in 11-52 since I've had good luck with Retros on a Waterloo WL-14XTR and a Custom Shop Martin OM-15.
It's a very dynamic guitar and I haven't been able to put it down. It's arguably the best small-body acoustic I've owned to date.
-
Recently sold my beautiful Custom Shop Martin OM-15. Great sounding guitar, but after 7 months I still couldn't get along with the shallow neck profile. Funny, my D-18 apparently has the same nut width and neck profile, but the D-18's neck is much fuller and substantial in the hand. This OM-15 had a very thin neck front to back with pretty shallow "cheeks" and jI just couldn't get along with it. Probably the first guitar I've actually parted ways with because of the neck. I used to have a Ren Ferguson era AJ that had a thin neck, but it never bothered me on that guitar.
Had someone offer me a Gibson L-00 Pro, but after some research discovered it wasn't a super popular model and most people gave it the thumbs down. Ended up selling the guitar and a few days later came across a Waterloo WL-K for sale, made an offer for what I sold my Martin for and they accepted!
Yes, it's not a Gibson, but it is based off of/inspired by the Gibson-made Kel Kroydons from the late 1920's-early 1930's.
It's a sweet little guitar. I've had a couple WL-14's in the past and although they were nice, the WL-K seems to be on a different level. Livelier, lighter, and even more resonant and touch sensitive. Even with the absolutely dead strings that are on it (have some D'Addario EJ26's on the way) it sounds wonderful. Fingerpicking it is a dream and it's probably my favorite guitar I've owned for singer/songwriter stuff and just sitting and picking on the couch.
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, Oswald said:
There is a thread on AGF about this model, it was Guitar Center exclusive model, and there is no love for it --
https://www.acousticguitarforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=255898
All the better then. I sold the Martin this morning. Amazing sounding guitar but after 7 months couldn't bond with the thin/shallow neck. Put the money in the bank until I figure out what small body I might want eventually.
-
Nobody? Bueller, Bueller!
-
Haven't been able to find much info in this model, the L-00 Pro, but have someone interested in a Martin that I have for sale and offered the L-00 Pro as a trade. The one being offered is from 2012. I've owned quite a few J45's, AJ's and small body Martins and Waterloos along with a few Martin dreads, but never a Gibson L-00.. I have not really been able to find much info on this model of L-00 and wondering if anyone has had or played one and has anything to say about it, good or bad. I did find a few pics from one for sale from CME and attached the pics of it here just so you guys could see what it looks like.
-
I got to play the guitar yesterday. It had some issues, including a pretty massive hump in the upper frets. Action and neck relief were spot on, but that thing fretted out and buzzed from the 12th-18th fret, and the B string buzzed everywhere. Maybe a good fret level would fix the issue, but for what they were asking it wasn't worth it to me. It did have a nice sound when playing in first position, but the neck profile was a little too thin. I brought along my D18 just to have something familiar and as a reference and even the neck on the D-18 felt much more substantial, and it's a 2018 D-18 Standard with the "Modified Low Oval" profile. Also isn't fair to compare a D-18 to a J-45 because the D-18 stomped all over the J-45. After playing the J-45 for a while I picked up the D-18 and it was a wall of sound in comparison, which is why I parted ways with my J-45's in the first place.
-
3 hours ago, jvi said:
the early 1990s was when my buying Gibson period was in full swing, (it still goes on) and my feeling is that the mid 90s guitars are great! I had dove, humming bird, j45, J 200jr, aj , and I forget the rest but I prefer that era to the last few years fwiw
Thanks for the info. I'm having trouble determine what model it is. It just says "J45" on the orange label inside the sound hole, making me think it's just a regular, run of the mill J45 Standard, but I'm not sure if they made a "Standard" model during that time. Combine that with the fact that I've seen "J45 Western" models from that time that say either "J45 Western" or simply "J45" on the label despite it being a J45 Western.
-
I've read that they made a Buddy Holly model and the "Western" model. Did they also make a "Standard" model or any other models at this time?
-
Visually, I prefer the one that sounds better.
-
1
-
-
15+" fretboard radius is pretty flat. I have the D'Addario / Planet Waves Capo and can recommend it, but the NS doesn't seem like it's working for you. You could also Check out Shubb capos. They also have adjustable tension and come in several different varieties to work with different fretboard radii and they're cheap (very affordable).
Dont bother with the D'Addario Tri-Action capo. It's junk compared to the NS and Shubb. Cant fine tune the tension anywhere near as easily or precise as you can with the other two.
-
Came across a 1995 J-45 Standard that has a bone nut, banner logo and with button tuners and the factory, "mis-aligned" pickguard that goes over the rosette. Now I know that all guitars should be judged on their individual merits and they all sound different from one another, but wondering if anyone can shed any light or give any info on these guitars from this time period. Ren Ferguson was with Gibson at this time and quality control apparently improved. What were the J45 Standards like from this time? It's interesting that it has a banner logo, bone nut and white button tuners stock and no pickup as far as I know. Any additional info would be great. Thanks!
-
Any of these guitars are more than perfectly suitable for "country". I'd say take the one that feels and sounds best to you.
J45's are iconic for the classic country singer/songwriter. They just get the job done and pair amazingly well when sung with. D28's (and D18's) are kind of the de-facto, go-to standard for Bluegrass flat picking. HD28's would work well too for all of the above, but I personally am not a fan and think they sound very unbalanced with an overly scooped midrange, a little muddy in the low end, and can get lost in the mix when played with a bunch of other people. HD28's do fingerpick really well though.
As far as the modern Deluxes go, I haven't played on where I preferred it over a Standard Series.
I would sell the J45, but if you're looking for a guitar to compliment it, A D28 would be a wonderful addition to a J45. You'd have the long scale vs. short scale thing covered, You'd have the rosewood and mahogany thing covered, singer/songwriter and flat picking thing covered, etc.
-
I know every guitar should be based on it's individual merits, and don't like to lump guitars tougher and define them all good or bad based on the era it was made, but I'm wondering what a near-mint Gibson Dove from 1985 is worth these days? Looks like Ren Ferguson joined Gibson in 1986, a year after this one was made. What should one expect as far as overall construction, type of bracing, how tru to the originals, etc. of a Dove from this year? Would this just be a shell of it's former incarnations from the past, or are these the real deal? Thanks in advance!
J-45 Standard
in Gibson Acoustic
Posted · Edited by sbpark
I usually one to say that bumps, bruises, scratches, dings and finish issues are usually overblown and the person posting is nitpicking and blowing it out of proportion and should play more and worry less about wear and tear. However, in this case, after only owning the guitar for several months and taking care of it it seems like a finish issue that Gibson could cover under warranty. I've owned several J-45 Standards, TV and V models and many Martins and have never seen this kind of wear on a fairly new guitar. On an old guitar that's been put through it's paces yes, but not on a babied guitar that's less than a year old.
Also, you can see in the pics that (and we're assuming OP is right-handed) OP doesn't wear any rings on his fretting hand. Also, ,that wear seems to be right at the 9th fret. Dare I say most of us don't regularly play up that high, or at least play up that high enough in seven months to elicit that type of wear, especially since that wear is most likely on the side of the lower bout, so it would see even less contact with the hand compared to the edge of the neck on the upper bout side (this is all assuming that the OP took the photo of the guitar with the guitar flipped around with the sound hole facing him).