Vintage 1950s J-45 vs LG-2

[jibberish]

If you have owned both (hopefully simultaneously), please share your thoughts on these.

From all that I have read and heard:

- Generally speaking, other than a J-50, the LG-2 is the closest match to a J-45 (1950-1959, we're talking).

- The LG-2 will never boom like the J-45

- The LG-2 is best lightly strummed or finger-picked. As a rhythm acoustic for a folk/rock or americana band, it would probably suck.

- The LG-2 won't behave well if you intend to play a set while tuning between standard and open-G/D. The little guitar just isn't friendly with tension variations.

[jedzep]

My 2 50's LG2s were good for the percussive flatpicking I do, minus the underwhelming low end, particularly low E string.  I ditched them for that very perceived shortcoming.

My '56 J45 and '50 J50 have more of everything, including the balanced low E.  I wouldn't compare the overall woody tone as being too similar, as the LGs seemed to be sturdily compact, a little restrained, where the J's had relative lightweight geometry and had that dry full voice that makes people say 'ahhh' when picked.  In other words they're pretty different guitars.  FYI, I only use medium 13s tuned a step down at standard D-D on all my acoustics.

I don't play much fingerstyle, but I find that a solid fingerpicker can make any good guitar sound awesome.

Edited January 26, 2022 by jedzep

[jibberish]

52 minutes ago, jedzep said:

My 2 50's LG2s were good for the percussive flatpicking I do, minus the underwhelming low end, particularly low E string.  I ditched them for that very perceived shortcoming.

My '56 J45 and '50 J50 have more of everything, including the balanced low E.  I wouldn't compare the overall woody tone as being too similar, as the LGs seemed to be sturdily compact, a little restrained, where the J's had relative lightweight geometry and had that dry full voice that makes people say 'ahhh' when picked.  In other words they're pretty different guitars.  FYI, I only use medium 13s tuned a step down at standard D-D on all my acoustics.

I don't play much fingerstyle, but I find that a solid fingerpicker can make any good guitar sound awesome.

So would it be fair to say that you would wholeheartedly DISAGREE with this:

"Buying a 50s LG-2 is a cheaper way of buying the same appearance of a J-45, with just a little less boom"

[tpbiii]

I don't have a perfect match, but sort of close.  I have a mid 40s pair -- 44 J-45 and 46 LG-2 and 53 J-45 and 50 CF-100.  The CF-100 is often called a fancy  LG-2 with a cutaway.  Personally, I have found the J-45s more personally attractive for me -- might not be to you.  It is sort of like they are similar, but I like the low end a bit more on the J-45.  I must say this is not a primary style for me.  Also the mid 40s pair is stronger than the early 50s pair, but that is to be expected.

 

I often have recordings but not this time.  Sorry.

=Tom

[j45nick]

10 hours ago, jibberish said:

So would it be fair to say that you would wholeheartedly DISAGREE with this:

"Buying a 50s LG-2 is a cheaper way of buying the same appearance of a J-45, with just a little less boom"

Think of it as buying a Prius vs buying a Tesla. Both will get you there. It's a matter of how you want to travel.

The LG-2 and the J-45 are different animals from the same family. Play both of them and decide for yourself what's important.

You seem to want is to make definitive statements about the differences between the two models, but it's not that simple.  It's not about "boom". It's about balance, projection, note separation, and general tonal properties.

Different individual examples of each model will have slightly different characteristics. This is why buying vintage guitars , compared to buying modern versions of the same guitar, can be challenging.

Depending on how you play, and in what setting, a vintage LG-2 may give you what you are looking for, but it will not be the same as a good vintage J-45.

[rct]

3 minutes ago, j45nick said:

Think of it as buying a Prius vs buying a Tesla. Both will get you there. It's a matter of how you want to travel.

The LG-2 and the J-45 are different animals from the same family. Play both of them and decide for yourself what's important.

You seem to want is to make definitive statements about the differences between the two models, but it's not that simple.  It's not about "boom". It's about balance, projection, note separation, and general tonal properties.

Different individual examples of each model will have slightly different characteristics. This is why buying vintage guitars , compared to buying modern versions of the same guitar, can be challenging.

Depending on how you play, and in what setting, a vintage LG-2 may give you what you are looking for, but it will not be the same as a good vintage J-45.

Well said, very well said.  One thing the internet has done is to create an environment of comparison that can always end up in absolute, objective comparisons that everybody can live by.  You can't, not now, not ever.  Play them, make up your own mind.  If you need the assurance that having everyone agree with you brings, maybe guitars and the responsibility for picking them and using them well is not for you.

rct

[zombywoof]

Over the past 55+ years I have played and owned my fair share of 1940s and 1950s J45s and LG2s.  As back in the day I could not afford a new Gibson my first guitars were built in the 1950s because they were simply "used" instruments so cost less.  Guess I just got used to them.  While I have owed LG2s and CF100s, there are none around at the moment.  With regard to the J45 the only one I own is that 1942 J50.  So, I have to go on memory here.        

First off, I do not have a clue where you heard an LG2 was best lightly strummed or fingerpicked and that they were sensitive when going between tunings.  While it is only anecdotal evidence, I have not run across an LG2 like you are describing which "shimmers out' when played aggressively or which could not move with ease between standard tuning and Drop D. Open G6, Open D or whatever tunings.  Now if you are talking about the occasional dead sounding top or "tubby" low end yeah, I have run into that.

Also, the 1950s covers a lot of ground as it includes guitars built very differently as at mid-decade Gibson transitioned from scalloped bracing to non-scalloped bracing.  So there will be differences in sound, how the guitars respond and such.  

My take on it is that if there is a characteristic voice of a 1950s slope shoulder Gibson it should have saturated mids.   Where you will find some difference is in the lows and highs and how thick, full, fat (pick your own adjective) they sound.  And this is where having a frame of reference comes in handy.  I have played J45s, as example, which had a subdued bass in that it tended to decay quickly leaving the mid and upper-end fundamentals.  I have also played J45s which had a low end that would give a Martin D28 a run for its money.   Not a good or and bad thing just different.  But those differences will appeal to different ears.

Edited January 27, 2022 by zombywoof

[jt]

20 hours ago, jibberish said:

I...

- The LG-2 is best lightly strummed or finger-picked. As a rhythm acoustic for a folk/rock or americana band, it would probably suck.

- The LG-2 won't behave well if you intend to play a set while tuning between standard and open-G/D. The little guitar just isn't friendly with tension variations.

This certainly is not my experience. Plus, the LGs featured the same bracing pattern and brace sizes as the J-45. The same top, back, and side thicknesses, too (I have copies of the original specifications). This simply cannot be true.

My experience, though, is only with the WWII, Banner-era examples.

Here's an LG-2:

Here's an SJ, which is just a fancy J-45:

 

[jedzep]

Solid demo, John.  Love the tone you get.  Did you recently jack up your recording tools?

[jt]

1 hour ago, jedzep said:

Solid demo, John.  Love the tone you get.  Did you recently jack up your recording tools?

Thanks!

I suppose I have improved the audio ... a bit. I recorded the SJ a few years ago using the Blue Snowball USB mic. I've since switched to a Shure iPhone mic, which is easier and sounds better.

[fortyearspickn]

Jibb, on another original post you’ve asked about the value/prices on Epiphones EJ200s.   Very different than what you’re interested in here.  Are you planning on buying two guitars?   The nuances between the J45 and LG2  are in a different ball field than the EJ200.

[jibberish]

10 hours ago, fortyearspickn said:

Jibb, on another original post you’ve asked about the value/prices on Epiphones EJ200s.   Very different than what you’re interested in here.  Are you planning on buying two guitars?   The nuances between the J45 and LG2  are in a different ball field than the EJ200.

Nope. These threads have nothing to do with each other. I own or have owned all of these guitars and I am simply curious what actual folks here have to say.

Sure, I could study the internet, and I have. I'm asking geeky questions for other geeks who enjoy answering such questions.  🤓🤓🤓

[fortyearspickn]

Thanks Jibb.   Puts the wealth of info supplied above  by some of the Forums Finest in perspective.  Like most, I've never had the chance to A/B these 2 specific models.  But I'm sure to most ears - the J45 would sound 'better'.  For the reasons noted above. 

[Dave F]

Comparisons are nice if you have the guitars.  I do not have what you are asking. I do have a ‘52 J45 but the only LG I have is a ‘42 LG1 which is older and all hog. 
in the past I’ve been fortunate to have some good comparisons in my possession. 
Here are a few comparisons I had. 

vintage ‘42-43 J 45 vs J 45 Legend

J45 Legend vs  J45 TV vs J45 std vs vintage ‘52 j45

Three versions of the modern Stage Deluxe   Hog vs RW vs Walnut

Vintage 42 LG1 vs the modern reissue