Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


0 Neutral
  1. No problem mate! Ok, that is very interesting. I do not care whatsoever what my guitar looks like and if it stills sounds and feels great in many years to come, then what happened isn't that important. Though I am a bit curious like you seems to be. I have friends spending all their savings on vintage guitars in player grade just because they sound so good. The rest is a matter of taste I guess!
  2. I know, it does look weird. But I have no reason to lie about what kind of treatment the guitar was exposed to, I just came here to get advices and maybe be reassured as to wether I needed or not to do something about it. It does not prevent me in any way to play my guitar like I always did. I could try and contact them, absolutely! That's a good idea!
  3. Abuse? No, really nothing like that. I have no kids, no pets, and I don’t even wear rings. Now, my girlfriend would pick up the guitar sometimes to sing a tune and she may wear rings, as I have a couple of buddys that have played this guitar at my place to jam and they might wear a wedding ring... But I don’t know if any of that qualifies as abuse, and for 95% of the playtime the guitar had, it’s my ringeless hands.
  4. Thank you very much for your time and advices!
  5. No, It's been guitar stands almost the whole time. The back of the neck was only in contact with my hands, Capo and the microfiber clothes I would use to wipe it clean from sweat and gunk. Especially the first year, the neck was sticky during spring and summer so I would wipe it clean energically everyday with a microfiber cloth. But that's it. The guitar only went into an Hiscox case maybe one time a year when flying away with it!
  6. I bought a brand new j-45 4 years ago. I have played it like maybe one hour everyday, sometimes more on holidays and during summer. Now after those few years, the back of my guitar neck looks like I ripped off the lacquer. Is it something I need to be concern about or that I should "fix" to avoid problems in the future?
  7. I am not sure what you meant kidblast when you say 1/64" higher than factory specs? Because factory specs are 7/64" at the 12th fret on a Gibson acoustic, was it 8/64"? Sounds crazy high..
  8. I saw one looking like that but older, in a piedmont blues documentary, I thought it was one of those square shoulder J-45 from the end of the sixties... It also had a floating old school mic in the soundhole, like those Lightnin had on his Kay.
  9. Good for you they answeared, but honestly, I wouldn't contact Gibson if the painting was wearing off my pickguard. I don't even get why they send another one. If you play the guitar, it will wear off, partially at least.
  10. I actually wrote a post a few days ago where I described quite much the same feeling when switching to bone saddle and pins. The guitar felt brighter and somewhat thinner. After a few days, it settled in or I got used to it. Anyway I also wrote That I believe it is the price to have more clarity, separation and a snappier, tighter low end. I don't play coated strings like you but 80/20's medium lights from Thomastik Infeld that maybe balance the brightness after the " break in" period of a few weeks.
  11. Medium Lights are an interesting compromise here, 12-16-25-35-44-54 or something like that! You get a more "meaty" tone, and a more reactive guitar when played with bare fingers. I find it true anyway with "new" guitars that don't have dried out for many years. My J-45 standard isn't especially lightly braced and only a year old, medium lights helped a lot! If it feels muddy or chocked, a bone saddle can help bring back the balance too. Judt my short and personal experience.
  12. If you already have a bird I would say no, you don't need this.. Of course I am no one to tell you what you should or shouldn't do!
  13. Blind Willie Mc Tell version is much more my cup of tea, but it's a nice effort of you, a nice guitar, and it's good that you want to share what you do!
  14. Of course what you report here is interesting!
  15. I went from tusq saddle and bridge pins to bone a few days ago, and I can give my first impressions. It changed the guitar, drastically. The first negative impression was that it became brighter, maybe thinner overall, like less fat on each string and slightly agressive on the high strings. It felt sensitive to my playing as I hit often with the tip and roll down to the nails, sometimes hit directly with the nails. Then the positive aspects for me. The low E and A became clearer. It lost some "thud" and got tighter. Some like it tighter, some don't, I like it! Also the guitar has now more dynamic I think and better clarity. It's more reactive to very light attacks. It feels like I can get volume out of the guitar without playing as hard as I used to. After just 3 days I start to feel the guitar calming down, like the excessive brightness disapearing and a good balance to settle. The guitar got very midrangy near the bridge too, both finger or flatpicked, and I like it too. I feel like I already forgot how it sounded before, I am a gold fish. Finally I would say I get why some love bone and some prefer tusq. But I think it's choices. A fat blended sound or more clarity, separation? A massive throaty low E or hugely present but tighter "thunder" low E? The bone saddle will stay a couple if month on the guitar to see how I get used to it!
  • Create New...