Video comparisons of vintage Gibsons

[jt]

Hello, all,

 

In light of the recent chat about how vintage guitars sound, I offer a couple of comparison videos. This first compares a 1928 L-1, 1929 Nick Lucas, 1931 L-2, 1932 L-00, and 1936 L-Century:

 

 

This second compares rosewood and a mahogany 1943 SJs:

 

[BigKahune]

I spent an enjoyable morning break listing to these wonderful comparisons.

 

A great idea if you have the guitars available to record, and great to share.

 

I found the L comparsions very interesting. Their sounds point right at vintage.

 

I also like the SJ comparsion - hog vs rosewood - very interesting. My taste ran toward the hog.

 

JT, are those all yours? Amazing a collection. I'm going to have to look at the rest of your videos. You've got quite a few interesting instruments there.

 

Thanks.

[Hoss]

Thanks for putting these up, John!

[onewilyfool]

VERY COOL.......THANKS...

[jt]

Thanks for the kind words, all.

 

JT' date=' are those all yours? Amazing a collection. I'm going to have to look at the rest of your videos. You've got quite a few interesting instruments there.[/quote']

 

All but the rosewood SJ are mine. I'm a lucky fellow who managed to pick up some guitars a few years back when I could afford them. The rosewood SJ just stopped by for X-rays.

[Rambler]

JT, thanks for documenting them for us all. My bias leans towards mahogany, but that RW SJ was impressive. J

[Red 333]

Mediocre playing? You are too modest. Nice job.

 

And yes, THANKS for posting. I think it's wonderful that you and others are documenting the tones these wonderful old guitars make, and sharing them with us, especially in situations where we can hear them side by side. It's very illuminating and lots of fun.

 

The mahogany SJ looked pristine. Is that its original state? Like jkinnama, I too, preferred it to the rosewood SJ. If only I had such a difficult choice to make in real life.

 

I'm eagerly awaiting publication of the Banner book! Please keep us up to date with the publication date, ordering information, etc.

 

Red 333

[jt]

Thanks, all.

 

The mahogany SJ looked pristine. Is that its original state?

 

Yes' date=' it's all original, case included. It's just about as minty as a WWII era Gibson can be:

 

[img']http://inlinethumb10.webshots.com/45449/2250465290033810361S600x600Q85.jpg[/img]

 

 

I'm eagerly awaiting publication of the Banner book! Please keep us up to date with the publication date' date=' ordering information, etc.[/quote']

 

Thanks for the interest! We're making really good progress on the book. We'll have the manuscript done this summer and then it's off to our publisher (Michigan state University Press). So, look for it in the fall or next spring. I'll keep folks apprised.

[Red 333]

Thanks' date=' all.

 

 

 

Yes, it's all original, case included. It's just about as minty as a WWII era Gibson can be:[/quote']

 

Wowie.

 

Red 333

[Swicket]

Nice! I think I prefer the mahogany SJ - what a lovely guitar!

[Gilliangirl]

What a cool *experiment*, JT. Thanks for that. I preferred the mahogany SJ as well. And I quite liked the maple in the L series video.

[Oedipus]

Maaaan, I never understand why rosewood has the reputation it has. Mahogany is such a superior tonewood!!!!!

[jt]

Thanks for the kind words, all!

 

My mahogany SJ is not only a great instrument, but I've got a sentimental attachment to it. I discovered Gibson's only flattop guitar inspector during 1943. When I interviewed her and discovered what her job had been, I said, "I've got something out in my car that you've seen before," jogged outside, grabbed my SJ (in its Calton case), and brought it back in to her home. Her eyes light up and she reinspected it! Fortunately, it passed again. It's the only Banner guitar to have passed inspection ... twice!

[Rambler]

Stopped by for another listen. I'd characterize rosewood as "in-your-face aggressive." Just spits out the notes. Freight train bass. Not warm though--can hear that hard RW thing going on. And, while not muddy, its churning out the tones. JT--did you find it took some RH damping to keep it in check? After the RW, the hog sounds so much lighter. Not puny or anything, but not bully like the RW. Once the ear adjusted, I hear very expressive top end and a warm, solid low end. And clearer--not the big churning sound.

 

This is of interest to me because Im ever going back and forth on RW. Impressed by its aggressive qualities but hard. Find hogs prettier, but the ones Ive had are too penetrating on the high end, an exception being my thuddy 60s j50.

[jt]

Stopped by for another listen. ... I'd characterize rosewood as "in-your-face aggressive." Just spits out the notes. Freight train bass. Not warm though--can hear that hard RW thing going on. And' date=' while not muddy, its churning out the tones. JT--did you find it took some RH damping to keep it in check? After the RW, the hog sounds so much lighter. Not puny or anything, but not bully like the RW. Once the ear adjusted, I hear very expressive top end and a warm, solid low end. And clearer--not the big churning sound.

 

This is of interest to me because Im ever going back and forth on RW. Impressed by its aggressive qualities but hard. Find hogs prettier, but the ones Ive had are too penetrating on the high end, an exception being my thuddy 60s j50.[/quote']

 

Thanks for taking another listen!

 

Yes, that RW SJ was a beast, but a lovely beast. I've heard other folks describe rosewood as sounding "metallic," which never made any sense to me ... until I played this guitar. It's got a sort of "clang" to those bass notes. As you put it, clear and not the big churning sound.

 

To my ears, the mahogany SJ is sweet, warm, and not a hint of harshness. I really can't find better words than yours to describe the tone of the rosewood SJ.

 

Thanks, again.

[Red 333]

Thanks for taking another listen!

 

Yes' date=' that RW SJ was a beast, but a lovely beast. I've heard other folks describe rosewood as sounding "metallic," which never made any sense to me ... until I played this guitar. It's got a sort of "clang" to those bass notes. As you put it, clear and not the big churning sound.

 

To my ears, the mahogany SJ is sweet, warm, and not a hint of harshness. I really can't find better words than yours to describe the tone of the rosewood SJ.

 

Thanks, again.

 

[/quote']

 

"Metallic" makes sense to me. I sometimes use "wiry" to try and describe that characteristic. I like jkinnama's "spits out the notes," desciption of that particular SJ, too.

 

jt, sorry if you've answered this before, but what are bridge pins on those Banners made of? Plastic, I presume.

 

Also, what kind of strings are you using?

 

Red 333

[jt]

jt' date=' sorry if you've answered this before, but what are bridge pins on those Banners made of? Plastic, I presume. Also, what kind of strings are you using?[/quote']

 

Red,

 

Those pins are plastic, or, more specifically, celluloid (I think. They are original or, if not original, at least of the same ear as the guitars). The Ls all have plastic pins, some old and some new. The strings are all D'Addario PB lights. New on both SJs. "Well aged" on the Ls.

 

Thanks for taking an interest.

[Tennroots]

Thanks for posting jt, nice way to start the week watching those videos over a cup o' joe.

 

Question, since you know what your doing with the sound of those guitars, what type of strings

would you recommend I put on my 1950 L 50? I have Thomastiks on it now but it doesn't project

well. They seem very quiet to me, but easy on the fingers.

[jt]

Thanks for posting jt' date=' nice way to start the week watching those videos over a cup o' joe.

 

Question, since you know what your doing with the sound of those guitars, what type of strings

would you recommend I put on my 1950 L 50? I have Thomastiks on it now but it doesn't project

well. They seem very quiet to me, but easy on the fingers.[/quote']

 

Thanks for the kind words! That's a beautiful L-50 in your avatar. Most folks I know who play vintage archtops swear by medium gauge strings. I suffer from wimpy hand syndrome, and string my L-50 with lights. I've not tried Thomastiks on my L-50, but did find them rather quiet on my flattops.

[Tennroots]

This thread kinda morphed didn't it? Just re-strung the L50 w/ Martin SP red labels .012-.054

What a difference, there's a lot more sustain and projection than w/ the Thomastiks - I like 'em.

[Rambler]

JT, re the L-series models, I'd say hands down the 12-fret L00 is the pick of the litter. Expressive high end, warm, rounded bass, all nicely balanced. Some of the others were little tight and bright, but that L00-uhm, its got it. Of course it doesnt hurt a bit that its in good hands and handled well. Nice picking. J