Modern or classic J-50

[Handmedownguitars]

Back before I was born, mom bought dad a brand new Gibson J-50 (somewhere around 1967-68). He never learned to play anything other than the "Little Knoxville Girl". Mom got tired of hearing it and sold the guitar a couple years later while he was at work. Mom passed a few months ago and I was waxing nostalgic about a birthday gift for Dad this year.

 

I found a 66/68 j-50 for $1500 and a Silver Creek dreadnaught. It is lacquer checked everywhere top to bottom extensively. No cracks, but played for years. Adj. bridge replaced with a standard bridge 40 years ago. Other than that, all original.

 

Also found a 2002 j-50. There asking $1200. It also has the slope shoulder shape and is in excellent condition.

 

Does the extensive lacquer checking and use affect the guitars value terribly. Which would be a better use of money?

[Handmedownguitars]

For some reason I can't load pics, so here are the links

 

http://asheville.craigslist.org/msg/5493791744.html

 

http://myrtlebeach.craigslist.org/msg/5455993784.html

 

The serial number actually starts with an 8 instead of a 3. So he was wrong about it being a '65. It should be a '66 or '68. The double numbered years.

[slimt]

I think the 2002 model would be just fine.. non adjustable saddle.. play it often.. it will open up more..

 

 

the adjustable saddle guitars are okay.. But ..

 

its your dime.. Im sure you would enjoy either one..

[OldCowboy]

If I were buying the guitar to play and had smaller hands, my choice would probably lean toward the older guitar. The narrow fretboards from the era you describe won't work for me, however. The finish checking is only typical, and having been played extensively should improve the sound, tone, and such. If it were a '65 it'd be a no-brainer for me. If I were buying furniture, as they say, the newer guitar would probably look nicer. With hands the size of mine, the decision would be to go with the newer one. SO: Will your father play it or just appreciate it according to visual aesthetics? How big or small are his hands? As someone recently stated, it's your dime and finally your call. Hope you and he both enjoy the one you select!

[MorrisrownSal]

Yeah... I think this is a question of whether you prefer the 1 9/16 neck or the 1 23/32 neck. I could not play the narrower one aside from strumming, personally.

 

I have a modern Fuller's J50 circa 2012. Great guitar. I sold it once, and then bought it back from the buyer just recently. I won't sell it again. Obviously I would lean towards the modern one. I bet it has opened up really nice in 13 years, and it has a nice hue to it. I would also lean that way, as either correctly assuming or not, I would it bet it has less propensity for "issues".

[OldCowboy]

The issue concern is one to consider. There's really no way to know for certain unless you have lots of experience and know what to look for and/or can get both to a good luthier for inspection before buying.

[Boyd]

I have a 1965, 1974 and a 2008 J-50. Bought the 1974 new, it was my first acoustic guitar. The 1965 is by far my favorite, it still has the original adjustable rosewood saddle. Hey, it was good enough for Lightnin' Hopkins and it's good enough for me. :) I really love this guitar and it's the only one I play anymore. As the others said, the neck is much smaller and that suits my hands perfectly. BTW, it isn't just the nut width, it's the thickness as well. My 1974 has the same nut width, but the circumference is greater, so the 1965 is easier to wrap my hand around.

 

When you say 1966-68, that can make a big difference. I played several in that range but the 65 with the ADJ bridge was the special one for me. The 2008 is a nice guitar, pretty much the same as other recent Gibsons I've played. I just find the neck a bit on the large side for me. I can play it fine, but my hand gets tired much more quickly.

 

[OldCowboy]

I have a 1965, 1974 and a 2008 J-50. Bought the 1974 new, it was my first acoustic guitar. The 1965 is by far my favorite, it still has the original adjustable rosewood saddle. Hey, it was good enough for Lightnin' Hopkins and it's good enough for me. :) I really love this guitar and it's the only one I play anymore. As the others said, the neck is much smaller and that suits my hands perfectly. BTW, it isn't just the nut width, it's the thickness as well. My 1974 has the same nut width, but the circumference is greater, so the 1965 is easier to wrap my hand around.

 

When you say 1966-68, that can make a big difference. I played several in that range but the 65 with the ADJ bridge was the special one for me. The 2008 is a nice guitar, pretty much the same as other recent Gibsons I've played. I just find the neck a bit on the large side for me. I can play it fine, but my hand gets tired much more quickly.

 

I really like the way the top has aged on the 1974!

[Boyd]

I really like the way the top has aged on the 1974!

 

Haha, it just looks beat to hell to me. I really did not take care of it and it became unplayable. A few years ago I got it fixed and it plays great now. My son in law loves it, when they visit the 1974 is the only one he wants to play. :)

 

[MissouriPicker]

If the 2002 was a good fit for me, I'd buy it. Not because it's less money, but because it's not an old guitar. Some old guitars have a nice and sweet sound to them, no doubt. Many are just old guitars with the inherit and often unseen issues of old instruments. Some newer guitars have a nice and sweet sound. Some don't, but they're still newer guitars and you can at least change the strings. If you were buying one of Boyd's "old" guitars you'd likely get a really sweet one and one that doesn't needs repairs, but he's not selling his. ...Nothing against old/vintage guitars. I just think when buying one the buyer needs to know exactly what he's buying and what/if anything it's going to need. And, they typically cost way-too-much money.

[jvi]

to me play wear and checking are character, if the old one is structurally sound and sounds and feels good,Id go for it, there is more new ish used than old, and vibe is nice, is the old one round shouldered or square ? if round grab it, j- ps a proper adjustable saddle change should be cool a bad job a no no

[Pittgibson45]

For 1200 bucks you could not go wrong with the '02 J 50. That of course is assuming there are no major problems with it. At that price you could get your money back with no problem if you changed your mind.

[cunningham26]

I've played both and have a '68 j45- the neck issue s a serious one, it took me about a year to get used to the narrow nut. the '02 is a great guitar for a great price- I'd go with that. as someone else said it's probably opened up well in 14 years and remember all those 60s guys were playing younger guitars than that at the time. '65 if you wanna invest in something and deal with potential issues, '02 if you want something that's yours and you put the wear in it yourself.

[OldCowboy]

If the 2002 was a good fit for me, I'd buy it. Not because it's less money, but because it's not an old guitar. Some old guitars have a nice and sweet sound to them, no doubt. Many are just old guitars with the inherit and often unseen issues of old instruments. Some newer guitars have a nice and sweet sound. Some don't, but they're still newer guitars and you can at least change the strings. If you were buying one of Boyd's "old" guitars you'd likely get a really sweet one and one that doesn't needs repairs, but he's not selling his. ...Nothing against old/vintage guitars. I just think when buying one the buyer needs to know exactly what he's buying and what/if anything it's going to need. And, they typically cost way-too-much money.

If you buy from private sellers, you really don't know exactly what you're buying or what it may need, newer or older. You either get lucky or you don't unless your expertise is pretty solid and that's why I tend to buy from well-esteemed places like Elderly when possible. I trust my knowledge and experience with older guitars sufficiently to be comfortable spotting a good buy from an individual, but without actually seeing/playing the thing prior to purchase all that goes out the window. You get lucky or you don't. To me, newer instruments are mainly utility items - I don't expect to be around long enough to see a new guitar appreciate much in value, even to where if I bought it new I could realize the price I paid if necessary. With older ones, not accounting for market fluctuation, I'm reasonably sure they'll at least retain their value. Does that matter? Depends on the individual. Mostly, I believe all of us should be having a good time with our guitars and that what makes you happy is what you should be doing.

[Boyd]

Gibson has only offered the J-50 at select times recently. I did not realize they had it in 2002 in fact. I believe they pulled it from their lineup in 2011, and it reappeared last year - we discussed this before in the forums. I bought the 2008 J-50 used at Guitar Center in 2013, you could hardly tell it wasn't new. In doing a little research, I found that they were going for about $2000 new before Gibson discontinued them - here's a page from AMS in 2009 that is archived on the Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20090107024437/http://www.americanmusical.com/Item--i-GIB-RS50AN-NH

 

When they brought the J-50 back in 2015 they called it a "Limited Edition" instead of "Modern Classic" like mine. Going price is about $2,800 now which seems really high. http://www.guitarcenter.com/Gibson/2015-Limited-Edition-J-50-Slope-Shoulder-Acoustic-Electric-Guitar.gc

 

But I think the only way to make an intelligent decision is to spend some time playing each guitar. The 2002 might be a good deal but if the neck is too wide to be comfortable, then it's no bargain. Spend some time playing each (if you can) That is what I've always done and I always will. I don't buy guitars that I can't play in advance. Was just looking at your OP again and it appears you are buying the guitar for your Dad - good for you! In my case, I'm the "Dad" and am always on the buying end of that deal. But you said your Dad never really learned how to play it and apparently hasn't had a guitar an many years.

 

I would just be a little careful if that's the case. Maybe $1,500 is no big deal for you? In that case, give it your best shot. But the risk is that Dad just isn't interested in the guitar anymore, and it will sit in the closet. And it might also make him feel a little guilty receiving an expensive gift he doesn't really want. I think many of us have been there at one time or another, where a family member buys an expensive gift based on something we liked 20 years ago but are no longer interested in.

 

Can you drop some hints and sound him out in advance somehow? If he does want a guitar, it would make a lot more sense to involve him in the purchase, maybe you could go on a father-son shopping trip? :)

 

BTW, what is a "Silver Creek dreadnaught"? Is that some other brand you're considering?

[j45nick]

I would go for the modern one, no question. It will have a slightly wider neck, which many prefer. It is also less likely to have any unknown problems.

 

If your dad bought his new or near-new, and only had it for a few years, he will remember it as a shiny new guitar, not something looking 50 years old.

 

I'd rather look in the mirror and see what I looked like 50 years ago, rather than what I see in the mirror today.

 

Modern Gibsons are really good guitars, usually substantially better in many ways than the ones built in the late 1960's, when Gibson was banging them out to meet unprecedented demand.

[OldCowboy]

Gibson has only offered the J-50 at select times recently. I did not realize they had it in 2002 in fact. I believe they pulled it from their lineup in 2011, and it reappeared last year - we discussed this before in the forums. I bought the 2008 J-50 used at Guitar Center in 2013, you could hardly tell it wasn't new. In doing a little research, I found that they were going for about $2000 new before Gibson discontinued them - here's a page from AMS in 2009 that is archived on the Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20090107024437/http://www.americanmusical.com/Item--i-GIB-RS50AN-NH

 

When they brought the J-50 back in 2015 they called it a "Limited Edition" instead of "Modern Classic" like mine. Going price is about $2,800 now which seems really high. http://www.guitarcenter.com/Gibson/2015-Limited-Edition-J-50-Slope-Shoulder-Acoustic-Electric-Guitar.gc

 

But I think the only way to make an intelligent decision is to spend some time playing each guitar. The 2002 might be a good deal but if the neck is too wide to be comfortable, then it's no bargain. Spend some time playing each (if you can) That is what I've always done and I always will. I don't buy guitars that I can't play in advance. Was just looking at your OP again and it appears you are buying the guitar for your Dad - good for you! In my case, I'm the "Dad" and am always on the buying end of that deal. But you said your Dad never really learned how to play it and apparently hasn't had a guitar an many years.

 

I would just be a little careful if that's the case. Maybe $1,500 is no big deal for you? In that case, give it your best shot. But the risk is that Dad just isn't interested in the guitar anymore, and it will sit in the closet. And it might also make him feel a little guilty receiving an expensive gift he doesn't really want. I think many of us have been there at one time or another, where a family member buys an expensive gift based on something we liked 20 years ago but are no longer interested in.

 

Can you drop some hints and sound him out in advance somehow? If he does want a guitar, it would make a lot more sense to involve him in the purchase, maybe you could go on a father-son shopping trip? :)

 

BTW, what is a "Silver Creek dreadnaught"? Is that some other brand you're considering?

Couldn't agree more w/your thoughts on the subject; also wondered about Silver Creek.... And, yes, I'm also one of those Dads who gives more expensive stuff than he receives! Kind of the way of the word, I suspect. I once received a wonderful draft-horse-sized saddle long after the draft horse I'd broke to ride had found a new home. At least, it's a cool conversation piece!

[aliasphobias]

"Little Knoxville Girl" should sound good on either one. Hard to turn down the 2002 for the price. A fine job of chiseling to get the '60s J50 down to $1500. Finish checking should not be a deal breaker on the older, now if it's peeling that may affect the re-sale.

G'luck with the decision and acquisition!

[Br1ck]

I agree there is potential for a not so good guitar with the 68. I was able to play four different 60s j 45s recently, and two were not so good, two were ok, but the 65 Texan I ended up with was stellar. I have small hands so the necks work for me. I think the better J 45s were pre 66 if I remember.

 

All the Bozeman Gibsons I've played have been good, except the dead string Guitar Center ones.

[bobouz]

Two very interesting choices.

 

The J-50 was reissued in 1999 as a regular production model, and remained in the lineup for a number of years. I bought one new in 2001 & loved almost everything about it, but couldn't bond with the slightly wider neck. I returned it within the first month. That said, they can be great guitars if the playability suits you. Just remember that even a 2002 can be trashed within a few years by a careless owner, so assess it carefully.

 

The '65 looks sweet, and some '65 necks are 1-11/16" at the nut, as opposed to the narrow 1-9/16" necks. But still, I have two from '66 with the skinny neck & find them to be highly playable because of the overall neck profile, which has a nice taper as you move up the fingerboard. This is very personal preference stuff, requiring a first-hand assessment.

[J-1854Me]

For 1200 bucks you could not go wrong with the '02 J 50. That of course is assuming there are no major problems with it. At that price you could get your money back with no problem if you changed your mind.

 

^^^^^^ This -- right here. What I was thinking too.

[OldCowboy]

Haha, it just looks beat to hell to me. I really did not take care of it and it became unplayable. A few years ago I got it fixed and it plays great now. My son in law loves it, when they visit the 1974 is the only one he wants to play. :)

 

Maybe my affinity comes from being kind of beat to hell, too. Which I am for certain. Kind of an empathy thing.... You have to admit, though, the top has darkened nicely!

[Boyd]

LOL, very funny OldCowboy. The darkening is a curious thing; the bulk of it is NOT the result of exposure to sunlight. That guitar sat in the original P.O.S. chipboard case for a number of years, stored in less than ideal conditions. Then one day I decided to take it out and was shocked to see that the natural spruce top was now as dark as mahogany! ;)

 

The inside of the case and guitar were a bit mouldy, so I think that may have attacked the finish.

[OldCowboy]

LOL, very funny OldCowboy. The darkening is a curious thing; the bulk of it is NOT the result of exposure to sunlight. That guitar sat in the original P.O.S. chipboard case for a number of years, stored in less than ideal conditions. Then one day I decided to take it out and was shocked to see that the natural spruce top was now as dark as mahogany! ;)

 

The inside of the case and guitar were a bit mouldy, so I think that may have attacked the finish.

Martin calls that 'aging toner'!

[vw1300]

^^^^^^ This -- right here. What I was thinking too.

 

Agree that the 2002 is likely the surer thing if you can't play both. The '02 will have a neck like a modern J-45, which I always thought of as pretty normal regarding width. My '01 is aging nicely and getting a drier, more open tone even than when I bought it in 2010.