1990 Black J100 Sycamore?

[seamonkey]

hi.  a  Gibson lore question... i read that  all black J100s were created from sycamore. any truth to that? seems most of the sycamore ones were 1987 or a little later.  thank you GBF hive mind, any info would be great

[J-1854Me]

I'm fairly certain that sycamore was used in Nashville before Bozeman got what they had from there.  I've seen some (very few, since there were not many acoustics produced) from the mid-80s that appear to be sycamore.  My sense is that Nashville got it from Kalamazoo.

In Bozeman, it was certainly used from 1989 thru (I'm guessing) about 1990, possibly into 1991. 

Fred

 

[seamonkey]

thanks, Fred. for some reason the possibility of sycamore appeals to me

 

[J-1854Me]

Whatever floats your boat, I guess.....  :-)

I had an '89 J-100 (sycamore) for several years.  Very nice guitar, sounded fine, played fine, etc. 

Had it from the late 90s to sometime in the mid-00s or so.  In early '00s, I acquired an '01 J-200, so played the two maple 17" jumbos side by side for a number of years.  After a while, I decided that if one of the two very similar guitars was going to go, it was the vaunted sycamore -- the maple J-200 just sounded nicer (to MY ears...!).

I understand that sort of a 'sycamore mystique' that has developed over the years, and I don't doubt it holds some cachet.  But just be sure to 'calibrate' yourself and check the sound that you're expecting with what you actually hear, is what I guess I'm saying.

Best,
Fred
 

 

[slimt]

1 hour ago, J-1854Me said:

Whatever floats your boat, I guess.....  🙂

I had an '89 J-100 (sycamore) for several years.  Very nice guitar, sounded fine, played fine, etc. 

Had it from the late 90s to sometime in the mid-00s or so.  In early '00s, I acquired an '01 J-200, so played the two maple 17" jumbos side by side for a number of years.  After a while, I decided that if one of the two very similar guitars was going to go, it was the vaunted sycamore -- the maple J-200 just sounded nicer (to MY ears...!).

I understand that sort of a 'sycamore mystique' that has developed over the years, and I don't doubt it holds some cachet.  But just be sure to 'calibrate' yourself and check the sound that you're expecting with what you actually hear, is what I guess I'm saying.

Best,
Fred
 

 

Ive owned those as well. They were just fine.  

[zombywoof]

I have played a fiddle made with sycamore but that is about it.  I gather from a furniture maker I know that American Sycamore is closer to mahogany  than maple while in Europe it is vice versa and as such was used for violin and cello backs and rims.   It is plentiful but I gather the quality can really vary with some of it being good for nothing more than pulp wood.

[seamonkey]

Thanks, All!!

[Don Nash]

J1854ME- I just bought a Maple 1990 J200 built July 2.  It sounds great, could it be Sycamore?  From what I have been reading, the Sycamore guitars are a cut above.  I have a 73 J200 rosewood sunburst that isn’t even close when it comes to sound compared to this one.   Thanks in advance.

Edited May 14 by Don Nash

[ksdaddy]

There are other reasons why the ‘73 doesn’t sound as good. They had different bracing mainly. 
 

Gibson used sycamore in Kalamazoo, then when they closed in ‘84 the stock was shipped to Nashville, where they made acoustics up until ‘88 or so… then THAT remaining stock went to Bozeman and I think they used it until 91 or so. I don’t know for sure of course, but pretty safe to assume your 1990 is sycamore. People have claimed it to be magical wood. I don’t know. I’ve got a 1989 sycamore J200 and a flamey maple 2000 J200 and they are distinctly different.  I can’t say I clearly prefer one over the other. 

[Don Nash]

Thanks for the info ksdaddy I appreciate the reply.

Edited May 14 by Don Nash

[cayine]

On 9/2/2019 at 3:43 AM, J-1854Me said:

Whatever floats your boat, I guess.....  🙂

I had an '89 J-100 (sycamore) for several years.  Very nice guitar, sounded fine, played fine, etc. 

Had it from the late 90s to sometime in the mid-00s or so.  In early '00s, I acquired an '01 J-200, so played the two maple 17" jumbos side by side for a number of years.  After a while, I decided that if one of the two very similar guitars was going to go, it was the vaunted sycamore -- the maple J-200 just sounded nicer (to MY ears...!).

I understand that sort of a 'sycamore mystique' that has developed over the years, and I don't doubt it holds some cachet.  But just be sure to 'calibrate' yourself and check the sound that you're expecting with what you actually hear, is what I guess I'm saying.

Best,
Fred
 

Download Car Parking Multiplayer APK for iOS

I have a Gibson J-100 I bought new in 2003 or 2004...it has been a great guitar and is getting better with age. I've watched many vids comparing the J-100 to the J-200 and I'm a little confused. In most all of the vids, the J-100 has dot inlays, plain headstock, and diamond bridge...mine has crown inlays, an inlay in the head stock and the mustache bridge. I'm assuming that the sides and back of mine is walnut (and not maple)...but I don't know the difference by looking at it...