j45 purchase

[Tascosa]

considering a j45 purchase. Is there a reason to buy a pre 1969 model?  Is the shorter than Martin scale length noteably  easier to play due to string tightness   [ don't know proper question here]

Edited October 25, 2022 by Tascosa

[slimt]

I think it all has to do with how the guitar feels in your hands.  As well as a proper set up.      Its not a easy question to answer.   I have Martins that play better than Gibsons. And vise versa 

[zombywoof]

No argument that the short scale especially when combined with strings wound on a round core do make for a looser or more flexible feeling guitar.  Scale length alone though has never been enough reason for me to choose one guitar over another.  

When it comes to the feel of a guitar, the key is to know yourself and what you prefer in terms of scale, nut width, board radius, neck carve, string spacing at the bridge, and so on.  As important as knowing what is ideal for you is to get a handle on how flexible you are as finding those perfect specs in one package is not always possible.   

[jchabalk]

you should look out for the nut width around that time-period. the internet tells me that from mid-1965 -> 1970 is what you need to be aware of.  I've played a few guitars with that 1-9/16" nut and it's way too crammed for me to enjoy

 

[Tascosa]

good info, I had not thought of that. I am a larger man. Played a 66 hummingbird in early life but made the youthful mistake of selling. 

[Murph]

Everybody should own a J-45.

[Boyd]

9 hours ago, Tascosa said:

good info, I had not thought of that. I am a larger man.

I have a 1965 J-50 and like the thin neck, but I have small hands. I also spent awhile playing it and trying other J-45's and J-50's from that era at a large Guitar Center. Since you don't seem too familiar with these older guitars, it would really be best to buy someplace where you can try first. Or if that isn't possible, maybe buy from a well-known store that has a "no questions asked" return policy if you aren't satisfied. Trying to return a purchase from a private seller on the internet could be a nightmare IMO.

[zombywoof]

I am one of those who cannot get past the less than generous 1960s neck carves, nuts and 2 3/16" string spacing at the bridge all wrapped up in one package.  While I can deal with (and have loved) Gibsons with a 1 11/16" nut and the skimpy string spread at the bridge, they were combined with a neck which clocked in at a depth of .91" to .93" at the first fret. You cut that depth down to say .82" though and it just is not going to happen for me.  The only reason my 1960 J200 never made it into trade bait territory was my wife claimed it as her own and has let me know in no uncertain terms that if I expected to remain married that guitar was going no place. 

[DanvillRob]

3 hours ago, Murph said:

Everybody should own a J-45.

Murph, I agree.... wish I had one....If I could acquire another guitar, it'd be a Bozeman Hummingbird....not a pristine one...0ne I can take out and play.   But, If I could land a J-45...that's be my next pick!  

[Murph]

21 minutes ago, DanvillRob said:

Murph, I agree.... wish I had one...

I'd like a Hummingbird, too.

I've always preferred the short scale, years (decades) of playing Les Pauls and SG's and ES-339's.

[DanvillRob]

4 minutes ago, Murph said:

I'd like a Hummingbird, too.

I've always preferred the short scale, years (decades) of playing Les Pauls and SG's and ES-339's.

Of my 6 Gibson acoustics....3 are short and 3 are long.... I suspect I like the short-scale better than the long.

[Jinder]

I have a ‘67. Love the skinny neck as it hurts my CTS less than any other guitar…bit cramped at the business end of the neck, but worth dealing with that in exchange for no pain!

[Holiday Hoser]

64 or before you need that wider neck at least on the hummer