2016 SJ-200

[Victory Pete]

I have been looking at this http://www.gibson.com/Products/Acoustic-Instruments/2016/SJ-200-Standard.aspx#SJ22VSGA1 I am wondering about the "Round Neck" profile. How does it compare to "Slim Taper"?

[BigKahune]

.

Very nice guitar. The thickness spec they give is .817" at the first fret - it's pretty much average and hardly thicker than the slim-taper. But the round profile will feel a bit fatter because the slim-taper neck is tapered off along the sides and rolls under the fretboard more than the round. Check the chart and compare the 50s rounded shape to the slim-taper shape and you'll see what I mean. I have a 2008 J-200 that was spec'ed with a round neck profile and it is comfortable and doesn't feel too fat to me.

 

.

[Victory Pete]

Thanks for the information BK, I have never seen that chart before. Do you think they include the fret in the measurement? I wish I could try it out but I don't think any local stores has one. Yes life is too short, I need this guitar.

[skilsaw]

Starting a new thread on my son's SJ 2000 purchased in 2014 having a problem with the pick guard peeling.

 

Not nice. Turns out it appears to be a Gibson problem. At least that is what I have heard.

[BigKahune]

... Do you think they include the fret in the measurement? ...

 

On the chart? . No. the measurement is taken of the wood thickness of the first fret in front of the nut. . I created that chart a few years ago based on one that had a coupla shapes and no measurements. The thickness numbers are averages taken from measurements I made of Gibson guitars, as well as measurements that were available on the net. I find that the measurements apply nicely to other guitar makers too.

 

The nut width spec of the J-200 you linked to is 1.725", and the width at the end of the fretboard is 2.245", which is the same as my 2008 J-200. Some find the old 1.6875" (1-11/16") a bit tight. That extra .0375" doesn't seem like much, but it makes it easier to handle for a lot of people.

 

Good luck with your search. . B)

 

 

.

[Victory Pete]

I have 3 pictures of SJ-200's. I see 2 kinds of bridges, two has a single pair of abalone "slashes", and one has 2 pair, one behind the pins and one between the pins and the saddle. I would prefer the single set because the pins are closer to the bridge which will give more down pressure on the bridge for increases volume. any thought on this?

[Tman]

I have both neck profiles (thin on a J-45 and round on the J-100 that I have and J-200 that I sold). The rounded is fairly chunky compared to the thin tapered. Thin tapered is my all time favorite and is extremely comfortable for my hands. That being said, although the rounded is chunky in comparison, it is comfortable and easy enough to play. Of course you'll have to see for yourself.

[BigKahune]

I have 3 pictures of SJ-200's. I see 2 kinds of bridges, two has a single pair of abalone "slashes", and one has 2 pair, one behind the pins and one between the pins and the saddle. I would prefer the single set because the pins are closer to the bridge which will give more down pressure on the bridge for increases volume. any thought on this?

 

The subject of 2 bridge inlays versus 4 bridge inlays on the J-200 has been discussed here a few times since I've been around (1/2009). Just as you have mentioned, the discussion centers on the break angle over the bridge. There are two camps: One finds no differences in sound, while the other would prefer to have more downward pressure on the saddle that the 2 inlay bridge provides, citing better vibration transfer and sustain. I prefer the 2 inlay bridge.

 

The other topic that comes up is bone vs tusq. I see the one your looking at specs tusq nut and tusq saddle. Gibson prefers the tusq on acoustic-electrics because it has a higher density than bone and is thought to be better for amplification. My 2008 was spec'ed with a bone nut and a tusq saddle. It took a long time for that guitar to open up and one of the things I did was replace the factory tusq saddle with one of bone. I thought it sounded better. When the guitar finally opened up I ended up keeping the bone saddle on it - seemed to me the sound with the bone was about the same as the tusq when the guitar was amped, while the bone sounded better acoustically. My 2008 -

 

 

 

.

[Victory Pete]

Thanks for the replies. How long has this "flubber" material been used on the pick guards? What did they use before? I am going with the 2 piece abalone bridge, I think it looks better, would be less mass on the soundboard and would have the maximum break angle for better volume and tone. I think I would prefer bone on my J-45 Custom and the new SJ-200. I have all bone on my 2 Martins and think it sounds great. The issue is with the under saddle pickups and any potential uneven density to the bones. I suppose a compromise is bone for nuts and Tusq for saddles. BK, do you have a pickup under your saddle?

[BigKahune]

.

The "flubber" guards have been around, I'm guessing, since about 2005. There were a lot of complaints about the painted/engraved patterns wearing off on the more iconic guards (J-200/Hummingbird/Dove), so Gibson came out with the softer/thicker "flubber" guard - pattern on the bottom layer covered with a layer of soft, clear material euphemistically referred to as "flubber". Originally Gibson used celluloid for pickguards and then plastic. The True Vintage versions of these guards were the engraved/painted plastic. I noticed you commented on the J-200 pick guard thread. Due to concerns about tone, weight, and/or aesthetics, some chose to swap out the thick/soft flubber guard for a thinner plastic version. I thought that over for a while and decided to keep the flubber guard.

 

My J-200 came with a factory installed Baggs Element UST, and as I mentioned in my previous comment, seemed to me the sound with the bone saddle was about the same as the tusq when the guitar was amped. If you're concerned about bone density, another option is fossilized bone - Colosi has them.

 

 

.

[Buc McMaster]

Indeed the two ribbon v. four ribbon J-200 bridges can make for trouble in this model. It is the angle of break over the saddle that can be an issue for guitars with four ribbon bridges and do not have an overset neck. A picture is worth a thousand words.........

 

The two ribbon bridge puts the pins immediately behind the saddle which allows for a good break angle even if the saddle is lowered for action adjustment:

 

 

The pins are set well behind the saddle on a four ribbon bridge, by default reducing the angle of break. As the saddle gets shorter for action adjustments this angle gets even lower:

 

 

A bad break angle can result in loss of volume due to lessened transfer of string energy to the top and, in the worse case, cause string rattle. On this particular four ribbon bridge the break angle looks pretty good, but who's to say what the action is like. Personally, I avoid four ribbon bridges unless the guitar has an overset neck. An overset neck will allow saddle lowering without significantly reducing break angle. YMMV.

[Hall]

I have a 150 and a 200. The 200 I had made for me back when special orders were still accepted. It has the 4 ribbon bridge. The break angle is shallow. I do agree with the position folks have taken on the break angle,saddle adjustments and the potential for problems. But, I can't say I've ever run into any of those problems. So I feel lucky. The sound quality more than passes muster with folks besides myself any time I take her out to a show (smile here). I've always been wary of the action and the sound quality with this guitar due to the 4 ribbon bridge factor. I t just hasn't ever become an issue of note.

[Victory Pete]

Indeed the two ribbon v. four ribbon J-200 bridges can make for trouble in this model. It is the angle of break over the saddle that can be an issue for guitars with four ribbon bridges and do not have an overset neck. A picture is worth a thousand words.........

 

The two ribbon bridge puts the pins immediately behind the saddle which allows for a good break angle even if the saddle is lowered for action adjustment:

 

 

The pins are set well behind the saddle on a four ribbon bridge, by default reducing the angle of break. As the saddle gets shorter for action adjustments this angle gets even lower:

 

 

A bad break angle can result in loss of volume due to lessened transfer of string energy to the top and, in the worse case, cause string rattle. On this particular four ribbon bridge the break angle looks pretty good, but who's to say what the action is like. Personally, I avoid four ribbon bridges unless the guitar has an overset neck. An overset neck will allow saddle lowering without significantly reducing break angle. YMMV.

 

By overset neck do you mean a neck that produces very high action requiring a very tall saddle? On my new J-45 I noticed the pins are far away from the saddle and was concerned with the effect on volume and tone. Why would the bridges be this way? http://www.musiciansfriend.com/guitars/gibson-2016-j-45-custom-slope-shoulder-dreadnought-acoustic-electric-guitar#productDetail

[Victory Pete]

I have one of these coming tomorrow. http://www.musiciansfriend.com/guitars/gibson-2016-sj-200-standard-super-jumbo-vintage-sunburst-acoustic-electric-guitar Next day air is very reasonable at $65, the less time this baby is in UPS's possession the better.

[kidblast]

good luck Pete.

 

you're gonna dig it...

[BigKahune]

.

You spent some time researching the J-200 and got a look at the potential issues. Nice work.

 

I hope you get just what you're looking for. . B)

 

 

.

[Victory Pete]

Got the SJ-200 today, it is very impressive. I had already planned on having at least some issues to deal with. There are 2 small "peaks" in the lacquer on the top, I have seen these before, it is the figure in the wood that expands or something after it has been level sanded. It is clearly a peak and not a dent. These can always be level sanded later when the lacquer really hardens. I think what may have caused these peaks is the lacquer shrinking as it cures. But what really bugs me is apparently the buffer person saw these and spent too much time with it at the wheel, so there now is a very slight depression in the finish. It only really shows up from a distance in reflected light. I see these frequently, especially on SG's for some reason. With time I always touch up my guitar's finish and give it a good "rough" buffing to get a semi-gloss finish, I find it much more pleasing and warm looking. The other thing that bugs me a little is the Anthem control module, it is a little crooked and it sticks out to much, I wish it was not as visible as it is. I may touch it up with a brown sharpie at some point. So now what I like. The sound is great, I put Martin 13-56 SP Phosphor Bronze on it, I don't know why they ship these with light strings. Although the light strings are warmer and easier to play, I wanted it to sound like a piano. and it kind of does. The neck is exactly the same depth as my HD-28 but is 1/16th wider, good deal. The sound of open chords is fantastic, not boomy at all with a lot of clarity, I am new to maple guitars but this is what I had imagined. Barred chords down the neck are a bit restrained compared to the HD-28 but the HD-28 does not have the volume for open chords. The Anthem pickup is terrific. I like how you can blend the actual condenser mic and the under saddle pickup depending on your situation, very versatile indeed. The Piezo doesn't have that nasty quack of the older generations. I find the Grover Rotomatic tuners too be too small for such a large headstock. At some point I think I will change them to what is on all my Gibson electrics, the Grover Deluxes with the Ivory buttons, they will look great. Well I got to get back to the guitar, I am playing through my vintage Pioneer SX-780 and 4 Klipsches. I would try to add a picture but my files are always too big, what is up with that anyway?

[duluthdan]

That 200 sounds like a true tone monster does't it? The trick to posting pictures here is to use a seperate photo hosting site. I use Photobucket, it's good, and it's free. You can read the details here.

http://forum.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/11005-sticky-how-to-post-photos/

[kidblast]

mostly fantastic Pete... The fit and finish issues do seem minor, but I can understand the annoyance. After all, these are not cheap guitars by any means.

 

and yes,,.. we'd all definite like to see a photo or two.

 

enjoy the playing!

[Pittgibson45]

Pete, if you aren't happy with it do yourself a favor and send it back and have them send you a perfect one, so that little stuff doesn't eat at you. I know it will be a pain to ship and to be without it for a while, but it also might be a pain every time you pick it up to look at the imperfections. The next one will sound just as good, and if it doesn't, send it back too. Those are the perils of buying online or over the phone, but you are not stuck. When you talk to them on the phone they will check it out for you if you tell them what was wrong and what you are looking for in your J 200.

[Victory Pete]

Pete, if you aren't happy with it do yourself a favor and send it back and have them send you a perfect one, so that little stuff doesn't eat at you. I know it will be a pain to ship and to be without it for a while, but it also might be a pain every time you pick it up to look at the imperfections. The next one will sound just as good, and if it doesn't, send it back too. Those are the perils of buying online or over the phone, but you are not stuck. When you talk to them on the phone they will check it out for you if you tell them what was wrong and what you are looking for in your J 200.

 

Yes I have notified both the dealer and Gibson, waiting to hear. Having been down this road before it reminds of the saying "The Devil you don't know". The replacement could be worse. I have done touch ups before, but this is so expensive and new I shouldn't have to.

[BigKahune]

.

Too bad the finish isn't satisfactory, other than that and the Anthem control placement, seemed like you were pleased with it.

 

As you mentioned, there's a chance the replacement could be worse. Hope you can get it worked out.

 

 

.

[Victory Pete]

I have both neck profiles (thin on a J-45 and round on the J-100 that I have and J-200 that I sold). The rounded is fairly chunky compared to the thin tapered. Thin tapered is my all time favorite and is extremely comfortable for my hands. That being said, although the rounded is chunky in comparison, it is comfortable and easy enough to play. Of course you'll have to see for yourself.

 

I don't see how my 2016 SJ-200 has a description of "Round" neck profile, it seems to be exactly the same as the 60's Slim Taper on my Gibson electrics. I am pleasantly surprised. I have a way of comparing them, I use a Kyser capo at the 3 fret, I then measure between the arms of the capo. It takes in account strings and frets but so do my hands. Because of the lengths of the arms the distance I measure is not the same as the actual depth of the neck, it reads more, which is good because a small change in thickness shows up more. You do have to realize as the neck gets thicker the distance between the arms gets smaller.

http://www.kysermusical.com/store/