What makes an advanced jumbo advanced?

[Pauldwinston]

I have read on this site that the advanced designation had to do with the bracing being moved father foward toward the sound hole. I checked my other guitars and conld not see a difference. Any thoughts.

[jefleppard]

i am under the belief that the bracing is closer to the soundhole. why not post this Q on the gibson acoustic site? you'll get dozens of in depth answers there.

[YerDugliness]

To call the AJ series a "jumbo" is somewhat of a misnomer....I stood my AJ500RC (a 12-fretter design) up beside my Washburn WD32SW (a standard dreadnought design) and there was virtually no difference in the height of the body. The only dimensional differences were related to the larger lower bout of the AJ (it was easily 1 inch wider than the lower bout of the Washie) and the slope-shoulders of the AJ's upper bout compared to the square shoulders of the dreadnought. I didn't measure, but just looking at the two, the "thickness" or depth of the body appeared almost identical. Other manufacturers' Jumbo designs are clearly larger and deeper than their dreadnoughts....I, too, wonder what makes the AJ a "jumbo" compared to Epiphone's dreadnought series guitars??? Perhaps it is the location of the bracing....it certainly doesn't seem to be the size of the guitar's body.

 

My Washburn dreadnought fits into the AJ's case (which is an Epi Masterbilt "DR" case) every bit as securely as does my AJ500RC--as if it were made for it!

 

Dugly

[stone1281734000]

i am under the belief that the bracing is closer to the soundhole. why not post this Q on the gibson acoustic site? you'll get dozens of in depth answers there.

 

I believe you're right. I'm pretty certain "Advanced" means the forward shifted(advanced) X bracing.

[Nelson]

When Gibson introduced the original "Jumbo" model in 1934 it was a round-shouldered 16" body that had X bracing that crossed about 1 1/8 " below the sound hole. In 1936 Gibson came along with a new, improved model which was also a round-shouldered, 16" bodied guitar whose X bracing met about 1" below the sound hole or "Advanced' an eighth of an inch to about 1" below sound hole so this model was known as the "Advanced" Jumbo. There was also a difference in that the "Advanced Jumbo" had a 25 1/2 scale length where the original jumbo had a shorter 24 3/4" scale length. The advancing of the X bracing, which increased the sound projection of the AJ, along with the longer scale length made the original Advanced Jumbo arguably one of the best-sounding acoustics of all time. The term "Advanced" when referring to these guitars does in deed concern the positioning of the X bracing.

 

Nelson

[Red 333]

 

I believe you're right. I'm pretty certain "Advanced" means the forward shifted(advanced) X bracing.

 

Epiphone calls its slope shoulder flattops "Advanced Jumbos" because they share a shape that is somewhat similar to Gibson's Advanced Jumbo model. In the 30's, only about 300 of these models were made, and they are considered by many the finest flattops ever built (the model was ressurected in the 90s, and are still terrific guitars).

 

I used to think, like you, that the Advanced Jumbo was called "Advanced" for reasons to do with the location of the X bracing relative to the soundhole. The real reason seems to be this: Gibson's first slope shoulder flat top was called named the Jumbo. It was named "Jumbo" because it was much bigger than the other flat tops Gibson was making at the time. It sold for $60.

 

Now, this was the Great depression, and $60 was a couple of week's wages for most people, so that was a lot of money for the time. So, Gibson replaced the $60 Jumbo with two new models designed to appeal to the low and high end of the market: a $35 J35 (Jumbo 35), and a sumptuous, rosewood bodied model, the Advanced Jumbo, which sold for $80. It was called "Advanced" because the rosewood body and facy pearl inlays represented an "advance" over the plainer, original Jumbo. "Advanced' seems like an odd term to describe "improved", or "fancier", but Gibson had been using it in their advertisments for the previous several years to describe the steadily increasing body size of its archtop line, so it was a term customers were used to.

 

Since the introduction of the original Jumbo, most every slope-shoulded dreadnaught has carried the J prefix (J45, J50, J55, J160e, etc.) or had the word Jumbo in it (Southern Jumbo), etc., as that indicates the shape of the guitar.

 

When an even larger flat top was introduced a few years after the Jumbo, it was called SJ 200 for Super Jumbo.

 

Epiphone has often issued their own versions of Gibson models, but they add an A or E to the Gibson name to distinguish them from the originals (EJ200, EL00, AJ45). And, as I mentioned earlier, the Epiphone jumbo shape is not exactly the same as the Gibson's; the waist is wider, like a Martin.

 

By the way, I've heard someone who works for Gibson Montana grumble about the Epis being called AJs. He felt this wasn't right, as most of the AJs Epiphone makes bear little relation to the Gibson Advanced Jumbo, and they consider it a very special model.

 

Red 333

 

Gibson Advanced Jumbo (reissue)

Gibson J35 (reissue)

Gibson J160e

Epiphone Elitist Texan

Epiphone McCartney Texan

Epiphone Elitist J200

Epiphone Masterbilt AJ500RC

Epiphone Masterbilt AJ500R

Epiphone Masterbilt AJ 500M

Epiphone EL00

Epiphone EJ160e

[Nelson]

 

Epiphone calls its slope shoulder flattops "Advanced Jumbos" because they share a shape that is somewhat similar to Gibson's Advanced Jumbo model. In the 30's' date=' only about 300 of these models were made, and they are considered by many the finest flattops ever built (the model was ressurected in the 90s, and are still terrific guitars).

 

I used to think, like you, that the Advanced Jumbo was called "Advanced" for reasons to do with the location of the X bracing relative to the soundhole. The real reason seems to be this: Gibson's first slope shoulder flat top was called named the Jumbo. It was named "Jumbo" because it was much bigger than the other flat tops Gibson was making at the time. It sold for $60.

 

Now, this was the Great depression, and $60 was a couple of week's wages for most people, so that was a lot of money for the time. So, Gibson replaced the $60 Jumbo with two new models designed to appeal to the low and high end of the market: a $35 J35 (Jumbo 35), and a sumptuous, rosewood bodied model, the Advanced Jumbo, which sold for $85. It was called "Advanced" because the rosewood body and facy pearl inlays represented an "advance" over the plainer, original Jumbo. "Advanced' seems like an odd term to describe "improved", or "fancier", but Gibson had been using it in their advertisments for the previous several years to describe the steadily increasing body size of its archtop line, so it was a term customers were used to.

 

Since the introduction of the original Jumbo, most every slope-shoulded dreadnaught has carried the J prefix (J45, J50, J55, J160e, etc.) or had the word Jumbo in it (Southern Jumbo), etc., as that indicates the shape of the guitar.

 

When an even larger flat top was introduced a few years after the Jumbo, it was called SJ 200 for Super Jumbo.

 

Epiphone has often issued their own versions of Gibson models, but they add an A or E to the Gibson name to distinguish them from the originals (EJ200, EL00, AJ45). And, as I mentioned earlier, the Epiphone jumbo shape is not exactly the same as the Gibson's; the waist is wider, like a Martin.

 

By the way, I've heard someone who works for Gibson Montana grumble about the Epis being called AJs. He felt this wasn't right, as most of the AJs Epiphone makes bear little relation to the Gibson Advanced Jumbo, and they consider it a very special model.

 

Red 333

 

Gibson Advanced Jumbo (reissue)

Gibson J35 (reissue)

Gibson J160e

Epiphone Masterbilt AJ500RC

Epiphone Masterbilt AJ500R

Epiphone Masterbilt AJ 500M

Epiphone EL00

Epiphone EJ160e

[/quote']

 

 

 

That's very interesting but doesn't quite agree with what everyone from George Gruhn to Walt Carter to Tom Wheeler to Ren Ferguson have written concerning the origin of the use of "Advanced" in the model...Martin at the time even referred to its " forward advanced" bracing system so I have a small problem with it being a marketing decision to suggest up-market features though that could have been inclusive in making the final model naming decision, If you would, please state your source for this information as I'm sure I'd find it interesting reading...and "Jumbo" was in response to "dreadnought"...and according to Julius Bellson, Gibson's historian, they discontinued the AJ because it plain and simply wasn't selling in the same numbers as the cheaper J-35 and coming out of the depression Gibson was all about volume sales rather than making limited run/limited selling GREAT guitars...and if truth be told the rosewood AJ were originally intended to venture into Martin D-28 territory and didn't quite cut it from a sales point of view (even though the original AJs and original D-28s are both in classes of their own as far as being all-time great guitars) so Gibson went back to making the slope-shouldered, mahogany-bodied and super jumbo, maple-bodied models they did best and which sold very well against the other Martin popular models of the day such as the D-18 and 000 models. If you'll note, Gibson didn't make another rosewood-bodied acoustic guitar after the late 30's SJ-200 (and a VERY few early 40's rosewood Southern Jumbos) until 1963's Epiphone Excellente' and Gibson's 1965 Heritage acoustic and didn't venture into square-shouldered acoustic territory until 1960 and the Hummingbird. This is why I think it was probably more of a doing what they did best while maintaining a tradition of not making rosewood-bodied acoustic guitars which is still the case except in rare occasions.

 

As far as what Epiphones calls what it sells, it is easier to just call that body style an Advanced Jumbo or AJ style so I do see their reasoning. As far as anything Epiphone currently makes being in any way comparable to what Gibson makes in the way of acoustic guitars, I can't think of a thing except maybe the Bozeman-made McCartney Texans. I bought a Gibson AJ reissue a few years ago because I had played an original '38 AJ for twenty minutes and it was a life-changing event. The reissue was a great guitar but didn't come close to the magic, mojo and mystique of the original. I sold the AJ RI and eventually bought an OM-28V which while worlds different from the AJ, has a magic all its own...but I am not under any delusion that it's even remotely close to what an original OM-28 would be like -my dream guitar of all time is a 1930 OM-28 another GREAT guitar that was discontinued because it didn't sell very well...my second dream guitar is a late 30's original AJ so you can kinda see where my head is at-though unfortunately the reissues, while great guitars, just seem to lack something from the originals and it's more than the musty-smelling cases. There have also been rosewood J-45s but with the shorter scale of the J-45/J-50 they still are different from the Advanced Jumbo model. The FT-79 Texans come closer on the scale issue but their mahogany bodies make for a much warmer, less-focused (in your face) projection. I currently own an HD-28V, an OM-28V, a '65 Texan and a recent SJ-200 and none of the newer guitars come close to the originals and the Texan, as close and as bonded with it as I am (I've had it since 1966) still isn't to me a "holy grail" instrument such as an original AJ or one of the original Martins would be...and if it weren't for a lot of wannbe be Maccas these would $2K instruments on their absolutely best day. While similar to the J-45/J-50 the Texans do have a different sound dynamic happening. I think the Texan has more going for it as a finger style guitars where the J-45/J-50s make great strummed, vocal accompaniment instruments. The problem is that in 1966 they were putting 1 5/8" at the nut necks on them that doesn't enhance finger style playing. I've played some J-35 Jumbo reissues and they were interesting but really didn't grab me. I'm very curious about what the originals are like. After playing the original AJ I almost became obsessed with them. The reissue was a let down of sorts but had I never played an original the reissue would have probably blown me away too. Anyway, Advanced Jumbos and OM-28s...my two all-time favorite acoustic guitars.

 

Nelson

[Red 333]

 

That's very interesting but doesn't quite agree with what everyone from George Gruhn to Walt Carter to Tom Wheeler to Ren Ferguson have written concerning the origin of the use of "Advanced" in the model...Martin at the time even referred to its " forward advanced" bracing system so I have a small problem with it being a marketing decision to suggest up-market features though that could have been inclusive in making the final model naming decision' date=' If you would, please state your source for this information as I'm sure I'd find it interesting reading...Nelson[/quote']

 

Gruhn's has a short desription describing it this way on thier website, and that's how the naming is described in detail in Gibson's Fabulous Flat-Top Guitars, by Eldon Whitford, David Vinopal, and Dan Erlewine.

 

I don't doubt that either explanation could be true (and I've probably posted the shift toward the soundhole explanation myself, on this forum!), but the Whitford/Vinpopal/Erlewine explanation seems to me more likely, as Gibson did advertise archtops as "advanced" as they were becoming bigger. I wonder if Martin or especially Gibson advertised anything about bracing shape or location in those days, anyway. Do you know? That would probably help put the whole thing to rest.

 

I wonder if we in modern times may think of the AJ bracing as being advanced because many years later, Gibson did begin to shift the X back toward the bridge to strengthen tops. I wonder if we don't look at that in retrospect, think about the Martin bracing story, and apply the same explanation. When Gibson released the J35 and AJ, It SEEMS like thay hadn't settled on a location, anyway. They were famously inconsistent in those days. For instance, some J35s are said to have 95 degree bracing (like the OJ), and some the 100 degree AJ bracing. Some are said to be scalloped. Some not. Some are said to have cloth supports at the X. Some have wood. Some have said to have two soundbars. Some have three. Backbracing differs from guitar to guitar, though not necessarily from year to year. perhaps if more AJs were built, we'd have seen more variation in their bracing, too. Of course, there are so few examples. You were lucky indeed to have played one.

 

Hey, here's something intersting: did you know the first appearance of what you'd describe as Fender's see-through blonde finish may have actually been on a couple of J35s? There's an interesing article about it in December's Vintage Guitar magazine.

 

As you may remember, I have an Elitist and McCartney Texan (and almost bought an unlabled, overrun Bozeman made one, but it didn't sound too much different to me at the time). I really like the neck, and since I'm not to good at fingerstyle anyway, I'm no worse on it that!

 

Nice to see you posting. I wish it were more frequent.

 

Red 333

 

By the way, after looking agian at Gibson's Fabulaous Flat-Tops to check my memory after I wrote the first post, I revised the original seeling price of the AJ from $85 to $80.