rct Posted June 11, 2016 Author Share Posted June 11, 2016 One thing I've noticed is that while it sings with any type of string you put on her. She really likes brand new strings. There's a godlike shimmer it gives off when strings are fresh that no other guitar has ever revealed to me. Yes. After we had talked moullah and trade and we agreed, Alex at Wade's Guitar Shop put my strap buttons on and my strings. After he was done we sat down with the OM-28 and the M-36 and I showed him what I call Built In Chorus that M-36 has. Some say it is the rosewood, but that was why I wanted to compare it to the Om-28. Some don't like it, and that's ok too. Thanks for the well wishes folks! rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickthemiller Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 That really is a nice guitar. Shouldn't be on a Gibson message board but nevertheless it's a nice guitar. Kiddin' !!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidblast Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 ^--- Oohhh ... a shot over the bow!! !LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br1ck Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 Along about 1995, I bought a 1980 M 36 that is still with me today. It meets all my rosewood guitar needs. I could pare down to just it and my 65 Epi Texan and still be very happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissouriPicker Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 Nice, nice guitar. One of those Martins that looks like it already has history built-into it. I wouldn't sweat the Taylor songs, but you can play Cash songs on any Martin all day long. You going to get us some video? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted June 15, 2016 Author Share Posted June 15, 2016 Nice, nice guitar. One of those Martins that looks like it already has history built-into it. I wouldn't sweat the Taylor songs, but you can play Cash songs on any Martin all day long. You going to get us some video? Someday I may figure out how to do that! rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smurfbird Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Question: It looks like you had a different hole drilled into the guitar just above where a hole exists to insert the pin. Why was this method chosen over expanding where the hole was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted June 15, 2016 Author Share Posted June 15, 2016 Question: It looks like you had a different hole drilled into the guitar just above where a hole exists to insert the pin. Why was this method chosen over expanding where the hole was? So the original pin could be put in the original place, and the next owner could fill that small screw hole and have it finished. rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smurfbird Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 I'd hang on to that beauty if I were you. Never sell. Don't make it easy on yourself to sell, either! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse_Dylan Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 Congrats on buying Martin's best guitar! (Okay, I can't say that... but it surely has to be up there and might be the best kept secret.) I have one myself, though I made some customizations to mine (which I should not have done--the stock model is perfect, though the nut width is a bit narrow). They do it all and are similar to a J-180 Everly Bros in some ways (i.e. 16" top but shallow body depth). Photo of mine about half a year after I got it (have had it 6 years now, lifetime guitar, and it looks a little different)--headstock binding, 1-3/4" nut, modified low-oval profile, vintage sunburst, Italian Alpine spruce top, satin back/sides/neck (gloss top)... think that's "all" I did... I own the posh version of this same model, the J-40 and its really nice to pick up every now and then as a changeup from the Gibson tone, yet still have that balanced tone that i always need. The J's and the M's are somin' different. The M is 0000-sized, meaning it has a 16" top but keeps the body depth of the 00 and 000. The J is the same 0000 size but has the depth of the dreadnought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smurfbird Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 I chose the M-36 for its 1-11/16" nut. If I had been looking for a wider nut, I'd have considered the M-38 which comes with a 1.75 1-3/4" nut. From my understanding there are other subtle changes but the body-size is the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse_Dylan Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 I chose the M-36 for its 1-11/16" nut. If I had been looking for a wider nut, I'd have considered the M-38 which comes with a 1.75 1-3/4" nut. From my understanding there are other subtle changes but the body-size is the same. I did a lot of research on this back in the day. The M-38 has the same 1-11/16" nut. The only differences are (arguably) cosmetic: more bling (bound headstock, some pearl), and a two-piece back instead of three-piece. People have argued over and over that the three-piece back yields more bass response, but I think that's hooey, a false positive because when the D-35 came out, you could see the 3-piece back but not the 1/4" bracing, and people incorrectly attributed the tonal contrast between the D-28 and D-35 to the 3-piece back when it was actually due to the bracing being 1/16" less wide. I can't remember if there were any other differences (between the two M's), but they would have been cosmetic too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted June 19, 2016 Author Share Posted June 19, 2016 The 38 had a lot more bling, including a pearl rosette, I remember the two of them in a store in Philly in the early 80s. The 36 was actually made as the M-35 because of the three piece back, but only a few went out as far as I know and they changed it to M-36 very quickly, for whatever reason. rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smurfbird Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 In any case, you'd have to be a damned fool not to own one. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 The J's and the M's are somin' different. The M is 0000-sized, meaning it has a 16" top but keeps the body depth of the 00 and 000. The J is the same 0000 size but has the depth of the dreadnought. OK, thanks for the note, was not aware of that Jesse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse_Dylan Posted June 19, 2016 Share Posted June 19, 2016 OK, thanks for the note, was not aware of that Jesse. That's okay. I am way over-educated from obsessing over it back in the day. If only I knew so much about Gibsons. I still have to rely on you guys for that! Did not know that bit about it being an M-35 first. Very interesting. I know the numbers generally just indicate "style" (i.e. anything having to do with appearance) which seems a bit odd. For instance, if the M-36 were an M-35, it would have different (forward-shifted, 5/16", scalloped) bracing from the D-35 (1/4", unscalloped). But then again, there are numerous versions of the D-28 with numerous versions of bracing, and while some are "HD" and some are "V" or whatever, they are all still 28... Don't know which is more confusing, Martin or Gibson! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted June 19, 2016 Author Share Posted June 19, 2016 That's okay. I am way over-educated from obsessing over it back in the day. If only I knew so much about Gibsons. I still have to rely on you guys for that! Did not know that bit about it being an M-35 first. Very interesting. I know the numbers generally just indicate "style" (i.e. anything having to do with appearance) which seems a bit odd. For instance, if the M-36 were an M-35, it would have different (forward-shifted, 5/16", scalloped) bracing from the D-35 (1/4", unscalloped). But then again, there are numerous versions of the D-28 with numerous versions of bracing, and while some are "HD" and some are "V" or whatever, they are all still 28... Don't know which is more confusing, Martin or Gibson! I think it was difficult for CFM because the M-38 was the first new guitar in...40 years? Something like that? So once they figured out what Bromberg and others wanted, and realized that the pearl rosette and full length binding weren't really needed, I think they had to decide did they want 35 appointments and 0000 bracing and such? It was complicated! I did mention these guitars to CFMIV and he smiled and said "they'll be bacK" as they weren't in the line at that time and that was why I said something about them. Sure enough, two years later they were back, maybe a little more. I'm sorry to say they broke the friggin mold when they made mine. That thing is just...plush. That's all I got. rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.