Rich Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 I have watched the videos of the J45 vs the J45 TV, and this video of the J45 vs. the J35. In both videos, when the guitar with the advanced jumbo bracing is played, I feel as if my ears have cleared up. Does that sound weird? I like the clarity that the wide bracing gives the guitars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiloMinderbinder Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 I didn't realize the bracing was different, so that's useful information. Even the specs on the Gibson website say both guitars have "Scalloped Top Bracing". I had to watch the video a couple of times, at least the playing... I like both, but agree that the J-45 comes out more even and warmer. A couple times, it sounded like the J-35 had some fret buzz and I wish there had been a bit of a pause before he started on the J-35. I say that because doing that before the J-45 is played I think makes it easier to hear the bass on the J-45 than on the J-35. I also was liking the J-35 better on some of the first licks, but then the J-45 better. Fun to watch and then think about. Getting back to the bracing, does the J-35 have the same bracing as the AJ? And where does the J-45 TV fit into all this in terms of bracing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojorule Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 Nifty and timely video... terrible hair & beard combo, Tony 'the thumb' P has to sort that out, not a good look at all..... I must admit, the 35 I tried out in Glasgow a few months back sounded more like the 45 than the 35 that's in this video, I tried some other Gibsons beside it for comparison and it's why I stated I thought it was great, it had that warmth we hear in the 45 in this clip. The 35 here, sounds a wee bit thinner and more brash to me. But if I wasn't 4 deep in Bozeman acoustics already I would buy a 35, no problems.... to buy one when I have a 45 & 50 already seems a bit unnecessary though... The 35 I tried in Norwich was at the other end of the scale. Not so much 'warm' as placid. No real growl or bark when given a bit more welly. Admittedly, I only had a short time in which to try it out, I didn't have a pick, and I didn't really go at it with that much attack from the old thumb and fingers, but I could tell it was a very polite instrument from the off. Gibson slope voicing for sure, but neither the almost classical-like warmth that some produce with the right technique, nor the rough-edged bark that you can coax out of some with more aggressive playing. It's precisely the capacity to go from one to the other that I love in the Woody - though I admit that most of my playing seems to be producing the rough stuff at the present. I'd take the MV 35 over the 35 I tried any day, because at least it does one end of the spectrum really well. I'm sure the Norwich 35 will be somebody's ideal though. As I keep saying, a very nice instrument, just not one I'd want. If there were no hedge option here, I'd have voted 45 too, but only by a whisker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jebus Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 I tried about 8 j-45s when looking for a new guitar about a month ago and 2 j35s. The j35s sounded better to my ears... more alive while still keeping that gibson woody tone. The 45s really didn't really do much for me except give a bit more volume. I'd actually gone in to buy a Martin but ended up coming home with the j35. Its just a dream to play and sounds heavenly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generaldreedle Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 When I made my recent purchase at GC, they had a J35 there, as well as the AJ, Hummingbird, Sparrow, J45, and J45 Custom. I really liked the J35, but went home with the J45 Custom because it sounded more complex and had more depth to it. I'm not as good at describing sounds as some people on this board, but I liked them both, just liked one a little more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yggdrasil Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 When I made my recent purchase at GC, they had a J35 there, as well as the AJ, Hummingbird, Sparrow, J45, and J45 Custom. I really liked the J35, but went home with the J45 Custom because it sounded more complex and had more depth to it. I'm not as good at describing sounds as some people on this board, but I liked them both, just liked one a little more. a j45 custom would be RW, tho ? apples & oranges. I had a J35 FVG that was phenomenal - I don't hear that in the new "stock" J35. And for me, a Gibson has to be a burst (YMMV) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generaldreedle Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 a j45 custom would be RW, tho ? apples & oranges. I had a J35 FVG that was phenomenal - I don't hear that in the new "stock" J35. And for me, a Gibson has to be a burst (YMMV) You're right of course, apples and oranges. I did like the regular J45 a little better than the J35 I tried, but I liked them both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiloMinderbinder Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 And for me, a Gibson has to be a burst (YMMV) I tend to feel that way as well. Even some aged toner on the J-35 would make it more visually appealing for my tastes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stupotstu Posted June 16, 2013 Share Posted June 16, 2013 Hi After playing several of both models I opted for the J-45, defenatly a sweeter sound than the J-35, The burst apeals to me more than the natural too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted June 16, 2013 Author Share Posted June 16, 2013 Hi After playing several of both models I opted for the J-45, defenatly a sweeter sound than the J-35, The burst apeals to me more than the natural too. You will make Gibson marketers very happy by that statement, as Im sure thats exactly how they want to differentiate the two models and make sure the workhorse keeps on selling. Sounds like they have done very well in having both in the portfolio without massive fear of cannbilisation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted June 16, 2013 Share Posted June 16, 2013 Hi After playing several of both models I opted for the J-45, defenatly a sweeter sound than the J-35, The burst apeals to me more than the natural too. Yeps, the 35 I tried the other day definitely had a raw nature. Felt it immediately after taking it from the stand. Made an imaginary A/B with my 45 Standard and it came up much different than Tony's clip. Had a feeling it would be like this – but I see why the 35 would appeal to a broader audience. It is highly primal, , , and will be a strong case when played in and tanned a tone or two down – talkin' hue here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 Hmmm...we're gonna have to put some Christmas lights inside one of the J-35's to verify Tony's bracing info. I was told by someone at Gibson who should know that it was braced exactly like the J-45 Standard. Red 333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 a j45 custom would be RW, tho ? apples & oranges. I had a J35 FVG that was phenomenal - I don't hear that in the new "stock" J35. And for me, a Gibson has to be a burst (YMMV) It is a certainty that the Fuller's J-35 DOES have the AJ's top bracing (on an adi top), and its heavier back bracing too. The "new" J-35 has the same back bracing as the J-45 Standard, and does not have the heavier back bracing like the Fuller's. Red 333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 Getting back to the bracing, does the J-35 have the same bracing as the AJ? And where does the J-45 TV fit into all this in terms of bracing? To simplify the back bracing description, I'm going to describe them as Light, Medium, and Heavy in attempt to indicate their total, cumulative mass. Obviously, each of the four back braces may be relieved differently, according to their position. Advanced Jumbo Top Bracing Bracing: Wide Back Bracing: Heavy Top: Sitka B/S: Rosewood Bridge: Rectangular Scale: Long J-45 Standard Top Bracing: Standard Back Bacing: Medium Top: Sitka B/S: Mahogany Bridge: Belly Scale: Short J-45 TV Top Bracing: Wide Back Bracing: Light Top: Adi B/S: Mahogany Bridge: Belly Scale: Short Fuller's J-35 Top Bracing: Wide Back Bracing: Heavy Top: Adi B/S: Mahogany Bridge: Rectangular Scale: Short "New" J-35 Top Bracing: ? (Standard is what I was told; Tony sez Wide) Back Bracing: Medium (I compared this side by side with a J-45 Standard) Top: Sitka B/S: Mahogany Bridge: Rectangular Scale: Short Red 333 NOTE: This chart was updated on 6/17 in Post #43 to reflect that the "New" J-35 has Wide X bracing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 To simplify the back bracing description, I'm going to describe them as Light, Medium, and Heavy in attempt to indicate their total, cumulative mass. Obviously, each of the four back braces may be relieved differently, according to their position. Advanced Jumbo Top Bracing Bracing: Wide Back Bracing: Heavy Top: Sitka B/S: Rosewood Bridge: Rectangular Scale: Long J-45 Standard Top Bracing: Standard Back Bacing: Medium Top: Sitka B/S: Mahogany Bridge: Belly Scale: Short J-45 TV Top Bracing: Wide Back Bracing: Light Top: Adi B/S: Mahogany Bridge: Belly Scale: Short Fuller's J-35 Top Bracing: Wide Back Bracing: Heavy Top: Adi B/S: Mahogany Bridge: Rectangular Scale: Short "New" J-35 Top Bracing: ? (Standard is what I was told; Tony sez Wide) Back Bracing: Medium (I compared this side by side with a J-45 Standard) Top Sitka B/S: Mahogany Bridge: Rectangular Scale: Short Red 333 Jeremy from Gibson says, "wide X bracing" in this video: And the guitar sounds great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainpicker Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 They were close and I could live with either but given my druthers I'd go with the J-45. Like someone else said, I liked the midrange response on the 45. It's good to hear the differences though as they ARE different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 Jeremy from Gibson says, "wide X bracing" in this video: And the guitar sounds great. Thanks, Rich. That seems to clinch it. I will update my chart. That guitar DOES sound great, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 UPDATED To simplify the back bracing description, I'm going to describe them as Light, Medium, and Heavy in attempt to indicate their total, cumulative mass. Obviously, each of the four back braces may be relieved differently, according to their position. Advanced Jumbo Top Bracing Bracing: Wide Back Bracing: Heavy Top: Sitka B/S: Rosewood Bridge: Rectangular Scale: Long J-45 Standard Top Bracing: Standard Back Bacing: Medium Top: Sitka B/S: Mahogany Bridge: Belly Scale: Short J-45 TV Top Bracing: Wide Back Bracing: Light Top: Adi B/S: Mahogany Bridge: Belly Scale: Short Fuller's J-35 Top Bracing: Wide Back Bracing: Heavy Top: Adi B/S: Mahogany Bridge: Rectangular Scale: Short "New" J-35 Top Bracing: Wide Back Bracing: Medium Top: Sitka B/S: Mahogany Bridge: Rectangular Scale: Short Red 333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faron Posted June 17, 2013 Share Posted June 17, 2013 Hey Redd, thanks for the spec's. I am going to try one of those 35s today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted June 18, 2013 Share Posted June 18, 2013 More clarity and high end snap with the '35, more girth in the mids for the '45. Neither is 'better' but there are better 'apps'. Rags, fingerstyle, & flatpick leads (Trad music) for the '35; folk-rock-pop for the '45, which 'splains all the love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissouriPicker Posted June 18, 2013 Share Posted June 18, 2013 There is no "winner" or loser between these two guitars. Both are winners. Each with their own strong points. Again, it comes down to what we each like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
45slinger Posted June 18, 2013 Share Posted June 18, 2013 I'm biased because of my '45, but I still pick the '45 out of this video. I can't tell if the '45 has that pronounced of a mid-range hump or if the '35 is that 'scooped'. Overall I like the '45 better but I can see where the '35 might cut through better in a group setting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyearspickn Posted June 18, 2013 Share Posted June 18, 2013 Tried both out at GC yesterday. Certainly they're very close in tone and volume,such that if you only had one, your ears would adjust to it and you would grow to love it. For these two specific guitars, I preferred the J45: it seemed warmer and more balanced. The two main differences to me were the price, obviously the 35 gets a big plus there, and the neck. I really did not like the thick 35 at all. But, of course, the market for the J35 will not consider that a deal beaker. As an aside, I noticed In the Sanctum Sanctorum, the guitars all had little inspection tags added to the string on the headstock where the vendor hang tag was and the GC price tag. They were sort of like those tags on fire extinguishers that confirm with an inspection techs signature and date that they were recently inspected. The Gibsons and Martins had all been checked over about a week ago. Never noticed this before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 is the J-35 kinda a J-45TV (which would share the same bracing) in sheep's clothing? To this ear, the TV is a 45-standard on steroids. All that warmth but bigger, more resounding'. Funny, tho, it didnt say 'Gibson' to me. The '13-35 sounds more 'old-timey to me==the clarity and snap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GotTheSilver Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 Like many others here, I think the J-45 has more in the mids, whereas the J-35 is more focused on the lows and highs. This does give the J-45 a more mellow tone, whereas the J-35 is more "brash", as others have called it and for lack of a better term. I recently A/B'ed these two guitars in a GC. My experience in person was exactly the same as what I get from the video, and what I describe above. The J-35 was more brash and the J-45 had more mid-range warmth. I was very impressed with the J-35, especially for the money. The one I played was a very lively, responsive guitar, and looked great, too! The J-45 I compared it against was a great guitar also, and was what I expect from a J-45. To me, neither was better or worse, just different. This is not a cop out, but true. I could see both of these guitars excelling at different things and it really comes down to personal preference. I already have a J-45, and think that the J-35 I played would be a great compliment to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.