True Vintage J-45 Sitka Top vs adirondack Top

[sfden1]

" So I think there's more going on there than luck' date=' and adi is one of the factors.[/quote']

 

I think your misreading my post. I certainly agree that adi will make quite a difference and there's no luck in that. But I was talking about how good that one MC was in comparison. I fully expected the adi-topped TV's to have way more going on than the Sitka topped standard J-45's. I was very surprised at how well that one MC sounded and played in comparison to the two TV's, and in fact I liked it better than the TV's ( and it made the other two MC's seem very average in comparison). That it sounded and played so good in comparison to what I think of as some of Gibson's best guitars is, to me, the luck of the manufacturing draw. There was nothing special about that guitar in terms of materials or manufacturing method to make it stand out, but it did. A guitar at the top of the proverbial bell curve, in other words.

 

Or, am I misunderstanding your point?

[Rambler]

Sfden--I guess when I heard "luck of the draw," I read it as "random/inexplicable." Going back to the bell curve, I think that's a good example, that the really good MCs are outliers-- probably the consequence of lighter bracing or a really nice top. I guess my idea is that there is a different curve for curve for TVs, with is going to show more grouping in the B range with plenty of As. So to my mind, there is more than random chance at play. But in the case of the outlier MC--there is! Point taken

 

ps, re adi factor: that was more about Larry's post. The danger of quoting--I sideswiped you! Cheers, JK

[Guth]

I've gotten to the point where I don't pay nearly as much attention to the woods involved (although I do tend to agree with the generalities that were pointed out) in the guitar's construction. I've had numerous experiences similar to sfden's example where a guitar just stands heads and shoulders above the rest (to my ear and given my preferences) and it wasn't just because of the woods used and often might be a less expensive model. TVs might be more consistent in general, but again, I've heard some that I personally would consider to be duds.

 

I've owned a few guitars over the years that are no longer with me, including some Adi-topped instruments. The fact that the guitars I've hung on to are sitka-topped doesn't necessarily indicate a preference for sitka on my part as much as it does a simple preference for those particular instruments themselves, irrespective of the tonewoods used. I'd rather have a stellar example with a sitka top than a good one with an adi top. Some guitars just make you want to play them more than others. In my case, I guess I would say thank goodness for the good luck that sometimes comes from the "luck of the draw".

 

All the best,

Guth

[steverok]

If it's a Gibson J-45, and it sounds great, I don't really give much of a rat's arse what it's made of. I'm a happy camper at that point. A little too much analysis going on at this juncture!

[Rambler]

In interest of disclosure my main squeeze is also a sitka/hog. I've enjoyed comparable boxes with adi tops but Im happy enough.

[sfden1]

If it's a Gibson J-45' date=' and it sounds great, I don't really give much of a rat's arse what it's made of. I'm a happy camper at that point. [/quote']

 

In a nutshell

[tw2_usa]

I think some guitars just have "it", and "it" is always subject to the listener/player. I played a bunch of guitars yesterday at two stores and the one that stayed with me turned out to be a Martin D-35JC with Engelmann spruce top. Of course, I didn't know it was Engelmann until I got home and looked up the specs, but it threw a whole new wood into the equation for me. It was an awesome box. I also have played a lot of j-45 TV's that did not thrill and one standard that did. It's maddening and exhilarating. Take your time. Take a year to buy one, go play as many as you can, cuz it's more than just the wood, it's the combo of all the components that ultimately make "it" happen.

[Modac]

I thought the OP asked what the differences might be in the tonal characteristics of red and sitka spruce on a J45, not whether there are great instruments made with each topwood. There is no doubt that there are outstanding guitars made with both, just as there are outstanding guitars made with mahogany tops. But there are genetic and structural differences in topwoods, and there are pattern tonal characteristics to each, which might vary from instrument to instrument and from builder to builder, but which are nevertheless intrinsic to that wood's tonal palette---and to the holistic experience of playing.

[tw2_usa]

I thought the OP asked what the differences might be in the tonal characteristics of red and sitka spruce on a J45' date=' not whether there are great instruments made with each topwood. [/quote']

 

True. My post specifically addresses the madness that one can feel in getting concerned with the differences. I went through a similar process - a maddening desire to make concrete what is elusive and subjective - and sought to share that experience in relation to the OP's question. Sorry if this was not understood.

[sfden1]

Apologies for resurrecting this thread, and not to beat a dead horse (well, not too much anyway) but I came across this quote from Rick Turner on another forum and thought some here might be interested. It well encapsulates what many have said on this thread:

 

"Once again, don't ascribe particular qualities only to certain wood species. As Al has noted, there is tremendous overlap from one species of spruce to another in terms of the measureable qualities...stiffness along or across the grain, density, damping characteristics, etc. Yes, the average for one type may be a bit this way or that way from the others, and hence we wind up with all this Adirondack vs. Sitka vs. Englemann, etc. debate, but it's about each individual piece of wood. But all this happens with side and back wood, too. I've seen a lot of pretty spongy Indian rosewood...stuff that had higher damping that a lot of mahogany or maple, yet it was "rosewood"...ooooooh!

 

Non-luthiers (and more than a few luthiers...) want definitive definitions for these various woods; they want to buy into a belief system that is rigidly compartmentalized with regard to names and wood species.

 

Sorry...it's all very fuzzy borders with lots of overlap. The rest is marketing..."

 

Dennis

[Modac]

"I like red spruce better because it is clearer in the high frequencies. If you like warm and fuzzy, get Sitka."

 

----- a quote from John Arnold, on another forum.

[drellis]

I have a fantastic 2007 J-45 True Vintage with a sitka spruce top. Can anyone tell me what the tonal differences are between this guitar and one with an adirondack spruce top?

 

 

You have a PM...