Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Opinion about this J160e


Recommended Posts

Not sure what you are asking but the case and logo look right to me for one supplied in 1994.

 

Main thing I would consider about this guitar is the P-100 pickup. Different sound than the P-90 the J-160E was originally equipped with and which Bozeman started using again around 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what you are asking but the case and logo look right to me for one supplied in 1994.

 

Main thing I would consider about this guitar is the P-100 pickup. Different sound than the P-90 the J-160E was originally equipped with and which Bozeman started using again around 2007.

 

I think P-100 is amazing. I prefer p-90 but now it is very difficult to find a guitar of year 2007 and posterior. Is it possible to change the pickup?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to believe 1994 was 25 years ago. -_0;

 

I guess that's the logo they used for the 100th anniversary maybe?

 

What else do you want opinions on? I got a million!

 

Maybe.... . i want your opinion about this guitar in function of the photos attached. Anything that catches your attention?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, for me anyway, this would be an expensive version of the Epiphone EJ-160E I guess. I wanted a classic J-160E because I like the sound. Many complain, "it sound dull unless you plug it in!" IMHO, DUHHHH!!! It was an electric guitar with steel strings & a P-90 pup for a reason. [biggrin] I don't want to play it unplugged with 80/20 strings. I already have a J-45 for that.

 

I enjoy the sound of the ladder braced top, and the P-90 vs. the P-100. I started with an Epi J-160E and it's nice, but it don't sound almost anything like a 1960's Gibson.

 

It is prob. a good sounding guitar, but since it won't sound unique (like the Reissued or original J-160 would), what would be different vs. having a good hollow body Gibby?

 

That's just IMHO. That and a buck will buy you a cheap cup of joe. But I have mine for a reason and that vintage/original sound.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, a couple thoughts. Have you played it first?

 

I believe these guitars are ladder-braced, are they not? The originals were, anyway. Or are these all-solid and x-braced? I guess my thoughts depend upon that. :)

 

If solid and x-braced, it will not sound like the Beatles guitar, but it'll sound like a nice guitar and look like the Beatles guitar. It will still sound sort of like it.

 

If it's solid and ladder-braced, it'll sound more like the Beatles.

 

If it's laminate and ladder-braced, it should sound just like it. :)

 

One thing to note is that they pretty much always mic'd these things. Plugged it in, you will hear that pickup, and it'll sound like an electric guitar (they used it on about one song). Unplugged is how they did it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is prob. a good sounding guitar, but since it won't sound unique (like the Reissued or original J-160 would), what would be different vs. having a good hollow body Gibby?

 

 

 

In the 1960s we quickly learned the way to go was a used J-45 with a Dearmond 210 pickup slapped across the soundhole. If you wanted to get fancy you could replace the end pin with a jack.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I wanted "the Beatles sound" I would not buy a guitar with a stacked humbucker and X bracing. With a magnetic pickup the sound you are hearing plugged in is the pickup reading the strings just like with an electric guitar. I would buy that guitar though if I liked the feel and sound of it both unplugged and plugged in.

 

I would think the '94 version with its solid top and X bracing is pretty much a J-45 with room made for the pickup and different inlays on the board.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then... You would not buy this guitar if you want a beatle sound, that's it? .

is it acoustically the same sound that j45? I have got a j45.

Thanks a lot!!

 

Well, you might want to give it a try first and see. Actually, since you already have a J-45, with the right strings, they can sound a little Beatles-like. Unless Gibson did some kind of trick with these x-braced ones to make them sound Beatle-ish but better... I feel like the Beatles guitar really relied on laminated wood and ladder bracing. One thought would be if there was an all-solid J-160E that was still ladder-braced, but if this one is X-braced, I'm thinking it would sound kind of like your J-45, just with everything pushed up a little (including the bridge, I believe) to make room for the pickup.

 

I could be totally wrong though. This guitar is not in a place you could try it out? I think I'd try some flatwound strings on my J-45 and see if that gets my Beatles juice flowing, maybe nickel flatwound electric strings, which is what I believe they used on their acoustics (althoguh no one is totally sure). And if I could try out this J-160E, I might ask if I could put some strings on it, then compare it to my J-45 and see.

 

 

That's probably because 1994 was only 21 years ago. [biggrin]

 

Thank goodness! That helps a little bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For some reason I always get the feeling that the guys who want a guitar to capture the Beatles sound are always too young to have seen the Beatles.

 

And I agree with Jannusguy2, I have never played a ladder braced J-160E, including a solid topped, 19 fret guitar that I liked the sound of un-plugged. There are a lot of ladder braced guitars out there I have liked better. I have not played any of the X braced versions though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it might be possible, and better, to try to get the Beatles sound on a better guitar. :) But then again, this x-braced recreation is better than what they had. Better being relative, of course.

 

Plugged-in, it will just sound like an electric guitar, won't it? The only thing being amplified is the strings, and it's through an electric guitar pickup.

 

I think a lot of folks (again, young folks, as was mentioned!) hope to plug in a J-160E and have a Beatles sound, but it is only for one song and sounds nothing like the brassy, unplugged, mic'd tone we're used to from Norwegian Wood, I Should Have Known Better, and about a million others.

 

I bought the Epiphone EJ-160E perhaps ten years ago. I did not expect it to sound Beatlesy plugged in but figured unplugged it should. Nope... just sounded like a generic, laminate-bodied, solid-top import guitar. I didn't bother plugging it in and did not buy it with that intention anyway, as I did not want an electric guitar.

 

I do actually think a J-45 has quite a Beatles vibe to it, especially with the right strings. Again, maybe this one would too. Whatever else one can say about the original J-160E, it did have quite a Gibson sound to it, despite the construction. At least in recordings...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, for me anyway, this would be an expensive version of the Epiphone EJ-160E I guess. I wanted a classic J-160E because I like the sound. Many complain, "it sound dull unless you plug it in!" IMHO, DUHHHH!!! It was an electric guitar with steel strings & a P-90 pup for a reason. [biggrin] I don't want to play it unplugged with 80/20 strings. I already have a J-45 for that.

 

I enjoy the sound of the ladder braced top, and the P-90 vs. the P-100. I started with an Epi J-160E and it's nice, but it don't sound almost anything like a 1960's Gibson.

 

It is prob. a good sounding guitar, but since it won't sound unique (like the Reissued or original J-160 would), what would be different vs. having a good hollow body Gibby?

 

That's just IMHO. That and a buck will buy you a cheap cup of joe. But I have mine for a reason and that vintage/original sound.

 

Your HO sounds right on to me regarding this op's concerns. [thumbup]

 

steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot to all !!! i do not have the possibility to try the guitar. For this reason i am wondering if it's worth buying it.

For my j45 i use normal acoustic strings, do you think if i change the strings to flatwound i could obtain beatle sound??. Despite of change my j45 strings i think that j160e is different (contruction) and his sound will be different to rest of the gibson series.

 

Look this guy, he is playing 1991 j160e:

Brutal beatle sound!!!

 

I have found in another store the 2007 version of j160e. This model mounts p90 pickup, so, do you think that with this version i am more near of beatle sound?

Link to post
Share on other sites

None of my business but why not worry about your own sound. The Beatles were the Beatles. Peter and Gordon as well as many others played 160Es. They probably only played them because they could be amplified. The one thing I have learned in 55+ years is no matter what guitar I am playing I just sound like me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is only if you "don't like that sound" in a guitar! I did & do like that sound and yes, well old enough to have seen the Beatles live. [biggrin] I've listened to fellow play some amazing sounding jazz & some blues on a J-160E ladder braced/lam top etc. Didn't sound like the Beatles at all and much more like a really nice archtop. I may be daft but I do like the sound of the adj. bridge. BUT AGAIN, I don't play my STRAT or SG unplugged either cuz they sound like a dry bone (unless I'm just practicing cording). I can get away somewhat with my Casino but not the others I mentioned. Does that mean they aren't worth owning if you can't play them unplugged and they sound good? [confused]

 

Aster

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...