J-200 vs J-200 Studio

[DanvillRob]

I know I can look up the specs...but I was hoping someone in here would know off the top of their head.... what are the differences between a J-200 and a J-200 Studio?

I always felt the J-200 was too big for me, but when I played a J-200 at The Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame, I found I really liked it...and my son took video and I didn't look like Little Jimmy Dickens playing it.

Are the woods the same?   bracing?  

Thanks

This post was meant for the Acoustic forum.... put it the wrong place....sorry.

 

Edited March 21, 2023 by DanvillRob

[Murph]

When Les died, around 09', I realized I didn't own a Les Paul, although my longest #1 gigging guitar in my career to that point was a 72 "Recording" model, which was Lester's gigger also.

I'd worn the frets off of it in Arizona and Louisiana and when I relocated here from Louisiana, and didn't know anybody I'd trust to re-fret, and didn't have time or money, as I was gigging a lot at the time, so I swapped it even for a new American Strat and kept working. I was doing a lot of "gunslinger" Country/Southern Rock gigs until I hooked up with Owen and we did the Double Aught project in '98. I still had my 79 SG.

So, in 09 I bought a NOS '07 Les Paul Studio in his honor, and I needed a musical write off.

A Studio Les Paul (at the time) was simply a Les Paul without the bling, binding, nice paint, etc. It had the same pickups and stuff, and "in the studio" would sound the same.

I think they took it to another level on the acoustics, but I'm surely no expert.

[DanvillRob]

18 hours ago, Murph said:

When Les died, around 09', I realized I didn't own a Les Paul, although my longest #1 gigging guitar in my career to that point was a 72 "Recording" model, which was Lester's gigger also.

I'd worn the frets off of it in Arizona and Louisiana and when I relocated here from Louisiana, and didn't know anybody I'd trust to re-fret, and didn't have time or money, as I was gigging a lot at the time, so I swapped it even for a new American Strat and kept working. I was doing a lot of "gunslinger" Country/Southern Rock gigs until I hooked up with Owen and we did the Double Aught project in '98. I still had my 79 SG.

So, in 09 I bought a NOS '07 Les Paul Studio in his honor, and I needed a musical write off.

A Studio Les Paul (at the time) was simply a Les Paul without the bling, binding, nice paint, etc. It had the same pickups and stuff, and "in the studio" would sound the same.

I think they took it to another level on the acoustics, but I'm surely no expert.

The J-200 Studio I played seemed to be pretty plain....although it was still beautiful, and sounded great, (although not quite in tune).

I've played J-200's before (a LONG time ago), and this one seemed comfortable....I wasn't sure if I changed or the guitar was slightly different.

I thought maybe because I've been playing mostly square-shouldered Dreads for the last many years, I'd grown comfortable to larger guitars....just not sure.

But, I think you're right about it being slightly thinner....I need to look it up.

[fortyearspickn]

Don't know more than I remember hearing here about the studio, but have a 'real' standard SJ200.    I'm certain  the body is thinner as Murph said.  I believe a 'V" shaped neck. Mostly made in Walnut and RW on the B&S, but use to be maples available.   I believe the angle you position it under your right shoulder and how high or low - are factors that can make it as comfortable as a dreadnaught. Not sure which you played and liked - but the tone on the SJ200 makes it worth the $ and any ergonomic adjustments.

[Larsongs]

One of these are on my Short List..

It’s confusing! Most of todays SJ-200’s have Spruce Tops with Maple Backs & Sides or Spruce Tops with Rosewood Back & Sides.. The most expensive ones have Spruce Tops with Rosewood Back & Sides. Including the Pre-War model…

The Studio SJ-200’s mostly have Spruce Tops with Rosewood Backs & Sides.. Some have Walnut Back & Sides.. I haven’t seen Maple Back & Sides..

Is the Pre-War the most accurate Spec model? Who knows? If so, a similarly Spec’d model can be had at the Studio price point…. I think that’s a good thing!

Link to Specs…

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/compare.php?item1=OCJB20VS&item2=MCJB2SRWBB&item3=MCJB2SWLWB&item4=MCJB2SRWAN

 

Edited March 22, 2023 by Larsongs

[DanvillRob]

20 minutes ago, Larsongs said:

One of these are on my Short List..

It’s confusing! Most of todays SJ-200’s have Spruce Tops with Maple Backs & Sides or Spruce Tops with Rosewood Back & Sides.. The most expensive ones have Spruce Tops with Rosewood Back & Sides. Including the Pre-War model…

The Studio SJ-200’s mostly have Spruce Tops with Rosewood Backs & Sides.. Some have Walnut Back & Sides.. I haven’t seen Maple Back & Sides..

Is the Pre-War the most accurate Spec model? Who knows? If so, it can be had at The Studio price point….

Link to Specs…

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/compare.php?item1=OCJB20VS&item2=MCJB2SRWBB&item3=MCJB2SWLWB&item4=MCJB2SRWAN

 

Thanks...surprising they don't mention whether the body is thinner or not.

So the woods vary.....flatter fretboard.....still a stunning guitar, (was odd to see it sitting out where anyone could just pick it up and play it!).

I was just wondering anyway.

[DanvillRob]

39 minutes ago, fortyearspickn said:

Don't know more than I remember hearing here about the studio, but have a 'real' standard SJ200.    I'm certain  the body is thinner as Murph said.  I believe a 'V" shaped neck. Mostly made in Walnut and RW on the B&S, but use to be maples available.   I believe the angle you position it under your right shoulder and how high or low - are factors that can make it as comfortable as a dreadnaught. Not sure which you played and liked - but the tone on the SJ200 makes it worth the $ and any ergonomic adjustments.

Thanks for the info.

I think years ago when I played some J-200's I was used to playing my old Jubilee, (not a dread).

I certainly am not looking to buy one.... I'd end up sleeping in the garage if I brought another guitar home!

[fortyearspickn]

On 3/22/2023 at 9:08 AM, DanvillRob said:

Thanks...surprising they don't mention whether the body is thinner or not.

So the woods vary.....flatter fretboard.....still a stunning guitar, (was odd to see it sitting out where anyone could just pick it up and play it!).

I was just wondering anyway.

Body is thinner on the studio, compared to the actual standard.

This is directly from Gibson's  description  on this site:

A Canon of Warm Tone

Hand-built using beautiful Sitka spruce and rosewood, this SJ-200 Studio is sure to please the eye and the ear. Utilizing our Advanced Response neck profile and slim body depth body design this is the most comfortable Super Jumbo we've ever built, without any sacrifice in tone. Outfitted with an active under-saddle piezo pickup for easy plug and play anywhere you perform.

[DanvillRob]

1 hour ago, fortyearspickn said:

Body is thinner on the studio, compared to the actual standard.

This is directly from Gibson's  description  on this site:

A Canon of Warm Tone

Hand-built using beautiful Sitka spruce and rosewood, this SJ-200 Studio is sure to please the eye and the ear. Utilizing our Advanced Response neck profile and slim body depth body design this is the most comfortable Super Jumbo we've ever built, without any sacrifice in tone. Outfitted with an active under-saddle piezo pickup for easy plug and play anywhere you perform.

Well, that settles it!

Thanks