ajsc Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 Anybody else get their copy yet? KT Tunstall on the cover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilliangirl Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 Not yet, but here's a link with a video review! Guitar sounds great... http://www.acousticguitar.com/article/default.aspx?articleid=22032 Here's an excerpt of what it says (not sure I agree with the first sentence): "The Gibson J-45 and Southern Jumbo may not enjoy the same name recognition as their storied rival the Martin D-28. But those who've experienced the pleasure of a high quality vintage round-shoulder dreadnought know that these Gibson dreads can be just as desirable - and difficult to find. Gibson jumbo fans include Hank Williams, Bob Dylan, Steve Earle, Woody Guthrie, Gilliangirl, Billie Joe Armstrong, Norman Blake, and Russ Barenberg, to name just a few. And J-45's have become the most desired guitar in the traditional old-time music scene, much the way the D-28 is in the bluegrass world." Disclaimer: Please note that this is meant purely in fun; I am not in any way suggesting that I come anywhere even remotely close to those listed in the review. Please, don't sue me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acousticat Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 Disclaimer: Please note that this is meant purely in fun; I am not in any way suggesting that I come anywhere even remotely close to those listed in the review. Please, don't sue me. Thanks ,I was just going to ask you where I could purchase your new CD. Maybe next year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajsc Posted May 24, 2008 Author Share Posted May 24, 2008 [/img]<a href="http://s279.photobucket.com/albums/kk139/sj200_photos/?action=view¤t=2702629.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk139/sj200_photos/2702629.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a> What is this on1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajsc Posted May 24, 2008 Author Share Posted May 24, 2008 What's this model? Thanks for the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajsc Posted May 24, 2008 Author Share Posted May 24, 2008 Here's a link if you would like to hear Kris's SJ. (not the 1 pictured but a very nice 1 http://www.cmt.com/music/unplugged/performance/kristofferson_kris/1563766/performance.jhtml I know what you mean ! Acoustic Guitar leans towards Martins, just a fact!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWilson Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 Just listened to "Sunday Morning Coming Down." Great video. It brought back some memories and I thought his SJ sounded great. Very simple but it all works. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fp Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 I love a nice old vintage Gibson and as much as I want to love their new guitars I just can't. What is going thru the heads of the people at Gibson, how can they call that a "True Vintage" when they put on those Keystone tuners and the upper belly bridge. The 40's SJ's did not use that tuner button and the bridge was of the lower belly type like what is common on Martins. I wonder sometimes if there is anyone working at Gibson that has a clue of the great guitars that were made in the 40's and 50's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajsc Posted May 25, 2008 Author Share Posted May 25, 2008 That guitar looks & sounds dammed good to me. How many D-28's does martin make now? None of them are completely true to the original. How can they call a D-28 a D-28, for that matter? (Because they own the company that's how!! They can call any of their guitars anything they want.) Doesn't mean there not very fine guitars I don't think you'll find anyone who knows more about Gibson's than Ren Ferguson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fp Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 I agree that SJ sounds and looks good but why call it true vintage if thay can't even get the tuners and bridge right. I've got some of the same complaints about Martins as well but they sure aren't all over the board like Gibson is when it comes to recreating a pre war model. At least Martin get's the look's of the tuners and bridge correct. Don't get me wrong I'm a Gibson man and have been since I was a boy but it just blow's my mind that they'd put Keystones on a slope shoulder guitar, yuck ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajsc Posted May 25, 2008 Author Share Posted May 25, 2008 I could see your point if they were calling this a replica of some past model. There not!! I don't think a D-28 looks very much like the original D-28. It certainly not built the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rollie LeBay Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 ...all over the board like Gibson is when it comes to recreating a pre war model. From the official Gibson description of the True Vintage Southern Jumbo: "Late '40's model with upgraded features..." Official Gibson True Vintage Southern Jumbo Page "Pre-war" would indicate prior to around 1937 if you're from Asia' date=' maybe 1939 if you're from Europe, or 1941 if you're from the U.S., if I remember my history, those dates coinciding, if memory serves, with The Rape of Nanking, The Invasion of Poland, and The Attack On Pearl Harbor. On the other hand, assuming that 1940, 1941, and 1942 are "early '40s"; 1943, 1944, and 1945 are "mid 40s"; then 1946, 1947, 1948, and 1949 would consitute "late 40s". [i']Since pretty much everyone agrees that World War II ended in 1945,[/i] there is no way that a case could be made supporting the contention that Gibson has screwed up the True Vintage by not sticking to "pre war" features. I'd like to move for dismissal of all charges against Gibson Guitars at this time, your honor. The defense rests. Uncle Buck, Esq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 I love a nice old vintage Gibson and as much as I want to love their new guitars I just can't. What is going thru the heads of the people at Gibson' date=' how can they call that a "True Vintage" when they put on those Keystone tuners and the upper belly bridge. The 40's SJ's did not use that tuner button and the bridge was of the lower belly type like what is common on Martins. I wonder sometimes if there is anyone working at Gibson that has a clue of the great guitars that were made in the 40's and 50's.[/quote'] The cynical side of me agrees with you, fp, but to be fair, Gibson does disclaim in their literature that they have picked *some* of the features of some of the "classic" years, and combined them with "upgraded features", to produce this. That I suppose "lets them off the hook" from critics who can enumerate all the ways that it's not exactly like a 1942, a 1945 a 1946, a 1949, a 1954, a 1957, etc. etc. etc. -- but it enables Gibson to put out a guitar that is different from the modern classic line and different from the sig models (like the Woody Guthrie) and the ltd editions (like the various and sundry 1942 and 1943 re-issues that have been produced). Incidentally, as to the bridge orientation in the war-era SJs, they seem to "swing both ways" -- I have seen both bottom belly and reverse belly bridges on those. Agree with you on the keystone tuners -- were I to choose an upgraded tuner for the TV series, something that was "neither here nor there", I would select chrome Waverlys. But that's just me. The next person would pick Gotohs, or Grovers, or Schallers, or........ A 'closer' replica of a war-era SJ might in fact be the Woody. Fred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajsc Posted May 25, 2008 Author Share Posted May 25, 2008 One kind of odd thing about this, is, on the web site, Gibson states "White Button Nickel Gotoh" as the tuners they use. They look a lot better, (I think). I have to admit that the keystone tuners are kind of strange on this guitar. I have a picture of an AJ with keystone tuners also. It looks kind of strange too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modac Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 The tuners are a minor faux pas....wouldn't a wartime jumbo likely have had an adirondack, or even a mahogany top? And is sitka then an 'upgraded feature"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajsc Posted May 26, 2008 Author Share Posted May 26, 2008 Truth be told, I couldn't afford it anyway. I'm happy with my AJ-500M. (Don't know how they can call it an AJ?) But I like it. It's the perfect "whatever it is" There's nothing on this planet that we can't find something wrong with!! Take my spelling for instance. & that's after a good 3rd grade education!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eds111 Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 This article got me GASing for a J45/SJ/shortscale AJ. I think they look and sound great. Does anyone know the structural difference between an SJ, J-45 and shortscale AJ? In general is a True Vintage different structuarlly than a Modern Classic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarstrummer Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 Structurally, the Southern Jumbo and J-45 should be the same, unless you go with the True Vintage models, which will have different bracing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajsc Posted May 27, 2008 Author Share Posted May 27, 2008 eds 11 I can't answer your ? but if I were you I would give a call to guitarsale.com They carry all of the guitars you mentioned. They have the last rosewood short scale AJ, on earth!! They can answer all of your questions. They also have short scale AJ's with mahogany, maple, & Koa. Check them out! They carry lots of custom shop stuff, at good prices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarstrummer Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 I'd agree that they have models which you don't normally see, but I'd have to disagree with you about their prices. I recently checked their price on a J-45 TV and it was only 25% off list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajsc Posted May 27, 2008 Author Share Posted May 27, 2008 Yea that's not to good!! I paid $1968. for my AJ I think that's not to bad. Plus there was nowhere else to get one. Seems their prices on SJ's & AJ's seem to pretty close to other dealers. "Excuse the edit" Actually I just checked Musicans friend --- They're 100 higher than guitarsale for the 45TV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 "The defense rests'' --but the prosecution moves for a rebuttal! Makers are a little far along in the reissue game to willfully mix up period details like that (note the pickguard--a late 50's job on a 40's model). Judging from the accurate exclusive repros at places like Fullers, one can hardly blame the good folks at Bozeman. I think Fred's right: its about marketing. I just cant see the sense in building an obvious inaccuracy into a production model just because you have a Woody 'signature.' Martin may be on the right track here. They test the market with ltd ed sig models (Cotton 0018, Guthrie 000) and if it catches on, do a production nummber(0018v, 0018ge). BTW, in terms of fidelity to vintage specs, I's say Martin has a leg up on Gibson. They offer a dead on vintage copy (the Authentic), a near-accurate reissue with modern specs (trussrod) in the GE/Marguis series, and the "not exact but pretty good' vintage series (the Authentics and GEs are decidedly old school). All of this keeps the Martin legacy alive. Gibson has not been as consistent with the details. And not just pickguards and tuners, but neck profiles (a v neck on a J185?) and bracing (AJ brace on J45s?). And it's not just the TVs. There was the long scale version of J185/Humingbirds (now corrected) and L00s (still in production). Gibson's legacy deserves better. Ps I checked the video review at AG this am. No denying its a great sounding guitar. While in a way the appointments dont matter ('just play the thing"), Id offer that loving attention to detail is something buyers want and should reasonably expect in a repro model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eds111 Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 I think Scott Nygard said it well in the video. It is not a "slavish" reproduction to a particular model, but a collection of popular features. Perhaps the term "True Vintage" is what bothers some people. Since "True Vintage" implies it is a faithful reproduction of a vintage model. Maybe they should call the "vintage classic" or something... I like the the guitar as is, and it has me thinking about getting one. Also, most people are not as in tuned to the minor details as those of us on these forums. So Gibson is probably taking some liberties, having some fun with it. I am certain they know exactly how their historic guitars were specified. I am thinking of a road trip to guitarsales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajsc Posted May 28, 2008 Author Share Posted May 28, 2008 eds Take your camera. I would cost me 1/2 the price of one of their guitars to go there. But man I wish I could see that store!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Ferguson Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 eds Take your camera. I would cost me 1/2 the price of one of their guitars to go there. But man I wish I could see that store!! Yeah, that would be quite a visit. It would be so hard to go and not be able to buy something, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.