peter l Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 (edited) Hi, I’ve owned several Gibson acoustic guitars over the years (j-45, j-50, hummingbird and Sheryl Crow Country Western Supreme). I have always wondered something about the spruce tops. Some very expensive models have tops that aren’t cosmetically uniform. The grain spacing is sometimes very uneven and there can even be runout. I understand that the visual appearance doesn’t make much of a difference in sound but I’m curious why Gibson doesn’t always use the most uniform looking tops for their more expensive models. The top of my Country Western has grain that wouldn’t be considered to be uniform. There are a couple of twists and dramatic variations in the grain size and colour. I’m not really a Sheryl Crow fan but I’m a big fan of this model. It plays and sounds great and I’ve even grown to like how it looks. At this point, I’m just curious about the wood selection. I do understand that it’s wood, not plastic so there will be natural variations in the appearance. I’m just wondering why Gibson chose this top for one of their custom models. Maybe the grain variance is due to the thermal aging process? Does anyone know what Gibson’s top wood selection process entails? Thank you, peter Edited July 30 by peter l 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave F Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 I would be interested in that too. A few years back, one of our more knowledgeable members stated that on vintage guitars, the wider the grain, the better the sound. I take him to his word. A recent Gibson guitar I bought had the widest grain I've ever had. It's a custom built with an aged top. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter l Posted July 30 Author Share Posted July 30 (edited) Very nice Dave, I really like the bridge. Is it a slope guitar? Edited July 30 by peter l Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
62burst Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 6 hours ago, Dave F said: I would be interested in that too. A few years back, one of our more knowledgeable members stated that on vintage guitars, the wider the grain, the better the sound. I take him to his word. But as that person might mention the word "power" frequently in posts discussing his guitars, the sound he's looking for might be different from someone who favors a sound more associated with a guitar whose top has tight grain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave F Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 3 hours ago, 62burst said: But as that person might mention the word "power" frequently in posts discussing his guitars, the sound he's looking for might be different from someone who favors a sound more associated with a guitar whose top has tight grain. True, I’ve had quite a few new tight grain that I thought sounded great. I think his thinking was along the line of dry woody sound. Less sap, more wood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J185cat Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 10 hours ago, Dave F said: I would be interested in that too. A few years back, one of our more knowledgeable members stated that on vintage guitars, the wider the grain, the better the sound. I take him to his word. A recent Gibson guitar I bought had the widest grain I've ever had. It's a custom built with an aged top. I remember that discussion and if I recall the comments were that the lines which were dried sap did not transmit the vibrations as well as wood. Therefore , more wood, less sap, the better. All I can say is I have had example of both extremely tight grain and wider grain tops on guitars and cannot definitively say one is better than the other. Lot of factors to consider. Red spruce is a different animal so I mostly refer to Sitka here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave F Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 10 hours ago, peter l said: Very nice Dave, I really like the bridge. Is it a slope guitar? L00 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars68 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 I think it, at least partially, has to do with the difference in appearance between adirondack and sitka spruce. Adirondack was the first choice for Gibson tops up to sometime in the 50’s when it, due to availability issues, was replaced by sitka. The adirondack available today tends be wider grained and often with minor cosmetic flaws. Adirondack is more expensive and often preferred sonically. That might be why you often see it on more expensive models, especially vintage reissues. Lars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyearspickn Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 Peter I, that spruce top on your SC/CW is one of the nicest looking I've ever seen. I don't know how it sounds, but as you noted - wood is a natural product that will have 'imperfections' you don't get in plastic. Some tops have 'bear claws' and are prized for that irregularity. So, I guess Gibson doesn't throw out the 90% of the spruce that isn't visually perfect for that reason. They use to say that Gibson would take the least attractive spruce and earmark those guitars for sunburst tops. Seems that would have been more trouble than I would have gone to ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 I have never drunk deeply from the tone wood Kool Aid and fall into the John Greven school of thinking which is spruce is spruce, get over it. I figure the top is all about how the thick it is and how well it is radiused (meaning it thins out as it approaches the rim) while the graded quality is more about aesthetics. All I can say for sure though is my favorite Gibson, the one which feels like coming home whenever I play it, remains that 1942 J50 on which one of the book matched top pieces was accidentally flip flopped giving it the craziest looking grain I have seen in 60+ years. Here is a question about grain though for those who are more enlightened than I. You would think from a structural standpoint that guitar tops would universally be made like that on a violin meaning the grain gets increasingly tighter as it nears the center. More like the guitar in Dave F's post than that in Peter I's post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave F Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 Your CW looks great. I don't think of imperfections as flaws but as character. I had a J200 with some silking which I thought was great. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slimt Posted August 4 Share Posted August 4 On 7/29/2024 at 7:25 PM, peter l said: Hi, I’ve owned several Gibson acoustic guitars over the years (j-45, j-50, hummingbird and Sheryl Crow Country Western Supreme). I have always wondered something about the spruce tops. Some very expensive models have tops that aren’t cosmetically uniform. The grain spacing is sometimes very uneven and there can even be runout. I understand that the visual appearance doesn’t make much of a difference in sound but I’m curious why Gibson doesn’t always use the most uniform looking tops for their more expensive models. The top of my Country Western has grain that wouldn’t be considered to be uniform. There are a couple of twists and dramatic variations in the grain size and colour. I’m not really a Sheryl Crow fan but I’m a big fan of this model. It plays and sounds great and I’ve even grown to like how it looks. At this point, I’m just curious about the wood selection. I do understand that it’s wood, not plastic so there will be natural variations in the appearance. I’m just wondering why Gibson chose this top for one of their custom models. Maybe the grain variance is due to the thermal aging process? Does anyone know what Gibson’s top wood selection process entails? Thank you, peter Nothing wrong with the top on this. It looks real nice. I bet it sounds nice too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Pepper Posted August 4 Share Posted August 4 I think cause most, not all G tops get painted. Martin doesn’t paint their tops as much as G does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter l Posted August 5 Author Share Posted August 5 (edited) On 8/4/2024 at 11:27 AM, slimt said: Nothing wrong with the top on this. It looks real nice. I bet it sounds nice too. Thank you, yes it sounds great. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the top. It’s just that cosmetically the grain isn’t all that uniform. I’ve seen some standard models with cosmetically perfect grain while some very expensive models have a unique or unusual pattern. An example would be a modern J50 having a more uniform looking grain than a much more expensive Dove. In the advertising literature you see things like AAA graded wood, which I assume refers to cosmetics. It makes me wonder what goes into the decision of which model gets which top. It’s kind of a stupid concern but I’ve always been curious about the cosmetic selection and grading. Edited August 5 by peter l Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave F Posted August 5 Share Posted August 5 Your comment made me look at the DIF. It is book marked, but not uniform. Also seems to have some flame and claw going on. At the bottom is some Martins. I do think they try to be uniform. Martins 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter l Posted August 5 Author Share Posted August 5 (edited) Interesting Dave! Both look great. I agree that the Martin looks more uniform. Edited August 6 by peter l Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.