Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums


All Access
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About MikeJ30

  • Rank
  1. You're welcome! I fully appreciate the difficulty in getting detailed information on neck shape and feel. I don't know why more manufacturers don't provide those details more clearly since it's such a crucial aspect to the experience of a guitar. I mean, Gibson has been using the term "Advanced Response" for well over a year now and, to my knowledge, there is no official information on their website or elsewhere that actually explains what "Advanced Response" means! Similarly, they've used the term "Slim Taper" for years now as well as "Round" but nowhere do they really explain what those terms mean, their advantages, differences, etc. You create a neck shape, put a specific term on it, and you now have the opportunity to use it as a selling point but...no details? No priority on providing the information to potential buyers?? Really bizarre stuff. Big thanks to those websites I mentioned earlier for actually posting details.
  2. Hi all, I have a beautiful L-00 True Vintage from 2012 up for sale on Reverb if anyone is interested. All details are there. https://reverb.com/item/29785280-gibson-l-00-true-vintage-1930s-reissue-2012-w-audio-demo Outstanding L-00 reissue with a nice, fat 1-3/4" neck, if you like that sort of thing. There's an audio demo linked. Open to reasonable offers. Thanks! Mike
  3. The adjustable-saddle bridge IS the reason for that Gibson tone heard on so many classic '60s recordings. It's that plucky, thunky tone. It doesn't promote great volume but it sort of clips the tone in a really cool way. Records fantastically well and is full of that character. I look at it not as inferior but simply as different. If you want THAT sound, a normal bridge won't quite deliver it. It's not a sound you might want for everything but it's really its own kind of tone, and nothing else really does that except for maybe some of the Japanese copy acoustics of that era that also had similar adjustable bridges. What I would like to know is if it's possible to duplicate that tone with a normal bridge. Seems you'd have to float the saddle a bit. Maybe a cardboard shim?
  4. I can offer some good insight here. I looked into this very question on the way toward purchasing an L-00 Studio, as I am extremely picky about neck feel and NOT a fan of low-profile necks. Although there are subtle variations from neck to neck, in general, the Advanced Response neck is indeed noticeably fuller in feel than the traditional Slim Taper neck. The AR necks tend to range in depth from around .86" to .90" at the first fret. The vast majority that I've seen spec'd have been in the .87"-.88" range at 1st fret. My L-00 Studio measures about .877" at the first fret. A nice full feel. An AR neck on one particular Hummingbird Studio I tried was unquestionably fat. That one must have measured around .90". Almost a Banner feel to it. In contrast, typical Slim Taper necks tend to run around .80" to .84" at the first fret (i.e., instruments such as the J45 and L-00 Standards). Closer to the '60s Gibson profile. One thing both neck styles have in common is that they don't get very obviously thicker up through the 9th fret. In that sense, they both have a "slim taper" quality. However, the general feel of the AR necks, and indeed my L-00 Studio as an example, is much fuller than any Slim Taper neck I've ever handled. Also worth mentioning is that the AR neck has a subtle V feel at the first fret that gradually flattens to a C around the 9th fret. The radius is 16" as mentioned earlier. All of this considered, the Advanced Response neck, to me, feels like a hybrid of the late-'50s Gibson rounded profile and the '70s Martin full profile soft V. It is not a huge 1" bat neck but it definitely feels more chunky and full to me than your typical modern low-profile neck...and, for me, that's a really good thing. Gibsons from the late '80s and early '90s often have a similar feel--a fuller C profile. I have a '91 J30 with that profile. It seems to have started to thin out again around the mid-'90s. Two great resources for gauging neck depths are the websites for Wildwood Guitars and The Music Zoo. Both sites routinely post neck-depth specs on instruments. Chicago Music Exchange also posts neck depths on used and vintage instruments. All of these will display commonalities among neck profiles across different brands, models and years. It's a great research tool if you are--again, like me--very picky about neck feel and more a fan of fuller-feeling necks. Hope that helps. -Mike
  5. If anyone owns one of the B-25 reissues from around 10 years back, what kind of neck shapes did they use on these? I believe the nut widths were the standard 1.725, but what were the actual neck profiles? How do they feel? Thanks a lot, Mike
  6. Thanks, all. Right, I'm not speaking about the nut width here. I'm interested in knowing specifically about the neck shapes. Are we saying that the early B-25s varied a lot in neck profile, some being a little slimmer and some chunkier? Round profile? Slim shoulder feel or deeper? Is the LG-2 AE neck generally considered to be a low-profile neck or more of a medium? What do these necks actually feel like? Thanks once more.
  7. Hi all, I'm in the market for a sitka/nat-topped small-body Gibson and I'm looking specifically at a later LG-2 American Eagle (pickguard/Grovers) and a '60s B-25N (1964). The '64 B-25N still has the older 1-11/16" nut. Can someone tell me what to expect of the actual neck profiles of these two? I understand that the B-25N was slimmed down quite a bit from the chunkier necks of the '50s LG-series guitars. Are these early B-25s legitimately slim in the profile feel or is there still some decent substance to the neck? In addition, how does the neck of the LG-2 AE feel in comparison (aside from the 1.72" nut)? Will it feel slimmer or chunkier in general? Thanks a lot for any help, Mike
  8. Hi there! New member here and proud owner of a 1991 J30 and a 2012 L-00 TV, both of which are just fantastic instruments. I'm in the market for a J35 reissue, a model I've loved since they were brought out in 2013. I was wondering if the neck profiles on these ("Round", as Gibson calls it) have changed at all since they were introduced or if they have remained relatively consistent. Over the last few years, I have had a number of these in my hands. There have been very subtle variations in the neck feel between certain examples, but nothing drastic. They have all seemed to be in the ballpark of a medium C shape that feels relatively full. None had what I would call a bona fide chunky/fat neck...still nice and fullish, though. The 2017 Gibson spec sheet shows .803" at the first fret for the J35. On the earliest examples from 2013, were the necks pretty much the same or were they commonly any thicker/chunkier? By comparison, my '91 J30 has a clearly fattish, chunky neck with a deeper U shape. Probably around 1" at the first fret. Love that neck. If earlier J35 reissues had more of that kind of neck, I'd love to find one. The ones I've tried, though, do again have a very nice full feel. Thanks a lot for the help, Mike
  • Create New...