Buc McMaster

Hmmm. This makes one wonder what the taper on the headstock was for in the first place. Mechanically this would make the string post length above the headstock longer at the far end which in turn could make the nut break angle smaller for these strings, assuming that these strings are not wound to the bottom of the post. This makes any mechanical advantage inconsistent. So the tapered headstock was simply a cosmetic thing? Seems so. Any other speculators on this particular attribute of vintage Gibsons? Personally I think it was an attractive thing and it would be nice to see it incorporated in modern builds.

Very distinguished looking instrument, suitable for orchestra pit work in a tuxedo. Brass pins are original equipment? Odd choice. Pins swaps should make for some interesting tonal variety.

Yep. Looks like a fine example of the Vintage model Hummingbird. Had a Standard several years ago........changed the heavy Rotomatics for a set of keystones, which is the proper machine head for all Hummingbirds..............

Well it's no surprise to me that there's a bunch of old dogs here.............we have grown to appreciate the finer things in life like Gibson guitars. I am a bit surprised there is no representation of youth..........none from the Ford, Bush, Clinton, etc. eras. I'd guess these folks might be more impressed with a Taylor instrument because they appear to be a more 'modern' version of a guitar. (yes, yes......I'm sure some of you old farts own a Taylor or two as well.) A lot of things got interrupted when JFK was shot, not least of which was a national feeling of comfort and security........the country seemed quite 'vanilla' before that episode. But no.........Vietnam, the Chicago Democrat convention, Kent State, Watergate. Seemed like the wheels were coming off.........and it still seems that way...........but here we are, still rolling along.........

Some consider it impolite to ask someone's age, and perhaps in some circles it could be. But an internet forum can leave participants a bit incognito as to where each is coming from and there is little doubt that the era one grew up in plays a large part in cementing one's worldview.......what's important and what is not, what is acceptable behavior and what is not, even what is true and what's not. So to take a roundabout general pulse of the folks on the forum, who was president of the United States when you were born? Such info will not specifically reveal your age but can serve to identify the cultural era that has contributed to your sense of the world..........yes? Just for fun and some perspective................. Harry S. Truman was POTUS when I first opened my eyes. (........and just for curiosities sake, anyone seen J45Nick recently?)

Indeed. In my experience an ETL mic is a perfect choice.......one input for voice and guitar with absolutely true reproduction. Of course feedback can be an issue in some circumstances but can be overcome in a various ways. Solo performers (or acoustic duos and trios) rarely require massive volume or monitors to be heard in small to medium venues. If your voice and guitar tone are up to snuff, extensive outboard EQ is not necessary (perhaps a notch filter or parametric EQ).......an ETL mic reproduces exactly what it hears. A muting footswitch is handy to kill the mic while tuning and during breaks. Just an unbeatable mic for studio and live performance.

This 'side-by-side' of the two pickguards in question is revealing. (my printer has died and I am unable to print out the templates made available.) Without a perfect match in profile there will likely be a tan line showing in places......the finish is 20+ years old and has surely been altered by exposure to UV. The profile of the replacement guard does not seem to match the original at the back: the flat edge at the top does not appear to be as long and the upper right corner and backside curve look different. If the photo is correct this may not be good as a replacement. As I have figured from the start of this thought experiment, it will likely be necessary to send the original guard to a maker to get the right thing but I am quite reluctant to remove the original guard for a variety of reasons without an exact matching profile. This may be a non-starter.

Been out of the acoustic loop for a few years and had not heard of this finish. I did a quick search and found this on the AGF............should be helpful......... https://www.acousticguitarforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6580330 Good luck and welcome to the GAF!

I think I wore out my string crank today......... Went through four different string sets today: D'Addario EJ16, Martin Retro, Rotosound Jumbo King and DR Sunbeams. All light gauge and, save the .053 low E in the D'Addario, all 12-54 sets. Stretched them, tuned to standard pitch, played each set for a couple hours and then on to the next. Some might consider this a rush to judgement but once they settle to tune and are banged on for awhile, a good set of strings should be delivering what I paid for..........at least that's my take on it.........shouldn't have to wait for the tone. I like my guitar setup to be "right on the edge" of rattling under hard attack..........low saddle with good ramping for break angle, as low as possible in the nut and no more than .003" of relief........essentially a flat fingerboard. Different string sets of the same gauge act quite differently on such a setup. The .053" low of the EJ16 set rattled as did the .054" round core Sunbeams, which I used to really like but they don't do it for me on the 185.......for an unknown reason the high E of this set was noticeably louder than all the other strings and had a kind of 'honky' tone to it......I dunno? The Retros are very good, play and feel good under the fingers but I guess my ear has changed and I prefer the harmonics of phosphor bronze on this particular guitar. Which brings me to the Jumbo Kings.........the winner of this shootout. Great feel, very balanced volume across all strings up and down the fingerboard, they stretch to hold tune quickly and zero fret rattle anywhere on the board. For my ear they are the tonal winner as well.........solid low end and nice round highs (which of course is greatly influenced by one's pick choice.......I prefer a round edge, no bevel, 1.4-1.5mm......much like a mandolin pick). As an side, I am considering changing the pickguard. The original is really good, still down flat as a pancake after all these years but I'd like to see a bit more of the golden center showing through. I've ordered this one for a 'look see'...........I might do it I might not..........comments?

Reality.........what a concept! Lots of folks have trouble dealing with it these days.............kind of disheartening that it isn't a dream after all. Your ETL mic is a grand little device, ain't it? Have an Edwina myself. What are you powering it with? Rock on, you old fart!

Sometime back in the 90s a friend found a few old t-shell laminated jewelry boxes at a flea market. We peeled the laminate off the wooden boxes and shaped picks of genuine t-shell, of which I still have two. It is indeed a forbidden material these days, for good reason, but old items like jewelry boxes can still be legally acquired from antique dealers...........very expensive though. At risk of condemnation I will attest that no other material has the tone nor organic feel of genuine t-shell.............it is absolutely unique and if I could have but one pick for the remainder of my playing life it would be t-shell. Casein picks (Red Bear, Charmed Life as examples) are quite close but don't have the same feel on the strings and are generally a bit darker in tone. Both t-shell and casein are malleable.......the heat and moisture of gripping them deforms them to fit the contours of your fingers which provides an excellent tactile feel and grip. If you can't afford a $500+ antique jewelry box to cannibalize, casein is a close second.

Yes......the reference to Darwin and god is a bit wacky relative to the rest of the lyric (and Darwin wasn't an astrophysicist anyway). In the first verse it's "my home".......in the second it's "we built a home"..........trivial, perhaps, but perspectively inconsistent. "I see it.....I feel it.......it's here with me now"? What is it and why is it only you seeing and feeling whatever "it" is? I agree that the production is good on this one Lars, but your voice is quite monotone, lacks dynamics, you often stumble with phrasing and your pitch is.....well....... I applaud your fearlessness and tenacity, sir.

Shortly after landing the J-185, I determined I needed a new case. The original TKL was battered and has obviously been tossed around over the years. The seam at the bottom was split open and had been taped shut......the tolex was cut, peeled up in places and ragged along several edges. So, being the fool I am, I ordered one of Gibson's current Lifton cases for the J-185 and while it's pretty, that's about all it is. The fit is okay but not as good as the TKL. The hardware on the Lifton is but a shadow of what's on the original, particularly the hinges..........absolute junk. The guitar has been in and out of the Lifton for three weeks now and apparently there is no contact between the case interior and the top of the guitar.............no bridge or pin imprinting, no apparent contact between fretboard and case padding. Surrendering to the obvious, I set about repairing the damaged TKL...........removed the duct tape and glued and clamped the seam separations, glued down some of the more troublesome tolex tears and cleaned the funky interior. As beat as it is, it's still a better case than the Lifton, which will go back into the box from which it came and be listed as trade-bait in some future dealing. New is not always better.

Legit? By what standard? I'd say what's musically legit and what's not is up to you.......yes?

Yes, I understand that soundboards are built with a radius and are not in the truest sense 'flat'...........I'm saying the radius on this one is uniform across the top without localized distortion around the bridge. Put a strong glare on the top of your guitar and see how much distortion there is around the bridge, particularly at the ends of the bridge.............this is what I mean.

No, sir............not the same guitar and no ripples.

I like the look. The LP Custom headstock and block inlays go quite well with the acoustic bodies.......an acceptable level of bling in my eyes.

I've owned several different Gibson acoustics over the last many years.........two or three Hummingbirds, more than a few J-45s, a J-35, a Dove, J-200........many examples of different models, all purchased new. All of these have demonstrated varying degrees of soundboard distortion under string tension, none of them suffering any issues from this, all fine players and overall excellent instruments. The J-185 I recently acquired has without a doubt the flattest top of any of the others, which I find notable since the guitar will be 21 years old next month. Time and tension can and does distort soundboards, some to the point of requiring some kind of remedy to keep them serviceable. But decades of string tension have not moved the top of this 185...........the flattest flattop I've ever owned. (That works great! Thank you, sir!)

I owned a 12-fret J-45 for a awhile a few years ago. It was a fine instrument but not so different from a 14-fret model. Felt a little more compact and was fun to play though. It was not "inspired by web mo'"............just a plain ol' 12-fret 45. https://imgur.com/a/eUH2YjW (Why won't this act like it ought to?!?)

Magnificent! A very authentic rendition. It is good to see youth embrace the old stuff with such vigor.

Yes, Kalamazoo closed in 1984 and Gibson began building acoustics in Bozeman, MT in 1988.............so yours should be a Bozeman build, as I would think the sound hole label would indicate. Where is the "coming back as a Kalamazoo build" info coming from?

Doesn't look to be real Gibson. The label shows no model designation and is the wrong shape. Bound headstock, block inlays, heel cap, belly down bridge........doesn't look right at all. Still, it might be a good player and serve the purpose.

As previously mentioned, old nitro finishes can be quite finicky about what you put on them. The Virtuoso cleaner I have used in the past with good results really messed up the finish on the J-185 and I've been wracking my brain trying to find a solution.......... You can see the hazed-over area where Virtuoso was applied in an effort to remove 20+ years of use............ugly to say the least. But I found an old pick polishing pad from JB Picks (which no longer is in business) and tried the polishing side on the area. It took about two hours of elbow grease (with no additional product of any kind) but the mess is cleaned up! What remains is the original forearm haze I intended to remove in the first place, and I think this might clean up with further work with the pad. Hurrah!

on a guitar that old I wouldn't use anything on the finish but a damp cloth. The 20+ year old finish on my J-185 reacted badly to Virtuoso cleaner in an effort to clear some forearm haze.......old nitro can apparently be finicky. I have used plain old Gibson spray polish on it with no ill effects but it doesn't clear haze. Perhaps the fingerboard needs a bit of oil, perhaps not. Just be very cautious with that old finish.

Difficult to diagnose from your photos but something is certainly amiss........ From this photo I'd surmise that the top is bulged at and behind the bridge, which would indicate to me too much humidity.........but that's a lot of movement shown there. (Hard to say, really.......have no idea where the other end of the ruler is placed.) Have you checked the neck set? Ruler on the frets toward the bridge.........at what point does the end of the ruler contact the bridge? From this and previous photos I'd guess it strikes very near the bottom of the bridge, perhaps as bad as touching the top in front of the bridge.......nothing short of a neck reset will fix such an issue. It may well be salvageable but humidity adjustments alone are not likely the fix.