nickammo Posted September 1, 2010 Share Posted September 1, 2010 Recently, I have been traveling around to different guitar stores recording the same chord progression on a whole bunch of guitars. I'm going to be buying a new J-45 and I want a good one that sounds like a vintage one. This past weekend, I went to a store that had: 1) 1943 J-45 2) 1953 J-50 I played and recorded the two guitars and then played them back against my sound clips of the J-45 True Vintage and J-45 Modern Classic. These two new guitars are being compared to actual vintage instruments. Here is my review: Modern Classic: Sounded VERY similar to both models. Had the bass thump that the vintage guitars had. True Vintage: Sounds as if the guitar is trying to over compensate or something. The guitar is brighter and rings more. Similar to the Vintage Martin series. Not a bad sound, but not accurate compared to REAL vintage instruments. What surprised me the most about this was that the True Vintage is billed to not only look like these REAL vintage guitars, but also sound like them, but from what I can hear, the Modern Classic is much closer to the actual sound of these vintage instruments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted September 1, 2010 Share Posted September 1, 2010 I do agree that Gibson TV guitars tend to sound a bit brighter than those from the 1940s and 1950s. But they are not spot-on reproductions of a specific guitar from one of Gibson's past catalogs - they are more like representations. You want that you have to go to the Legend Series. However playing a couple of 1950s guitars in a music store for a bit ain't the best frame of reference. If nothing else, if they have not been played alot they need time to wake up. And the old ones tend to have something a bit unique in their voice, a combination of slight variations in the lumber used and how it is put togther to which is added the aging process. While the vast majority of those I have played have had the distinctive saturated Gibson mids some were louder than others. The lower mids on this one may be chunkier sounding than the next or the upper end crisper. Some just sound a bit fatter overall than another and so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 ZW --I think the AJs are also more resonant ( or resoundin' as I like to say). Maybe it's that fwd-shifted adv jumob bracing. My (small, admittedly) sample suggests they are more Martin-like in that respect. The historic-MC-stds (please, henry, settle on a moniker?) just might be a little more Gibson-y (even more special runs like the OJs and 42Ls). I'm thinking of one I played in the shop that really sounded like a vintage piece waiting to bloom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guth Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 All of the above adds to the reason that I often comment with something to the effect of "you've just got to play as many individual guitars as you can get your hands on". I've played some Gibson examples from the 30's through the 50's that based on strictly the tone, I wouldn't own over a newer example from Bozeman. On the other hand, some vintage Gibsons that I've played still resonate within my memories many years later after the briefest of encounters. Based on my experiences, Gibson has always had it's share of inconsistencies from the standpoint of tone. If you're buying a guitar based on its tone be it vintage or new, knowing what it is you're after is half the battle, finding a particular guitar that matches those preferences is the other half. YMMV and all that. All the best, Guth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modoc_333 Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 also, it's not the treble that vintage Gibsons are known for. it's the woody mids. the other thing you may be hearing is the top. the Adi top on a new TV needs time to break in. i bet if you could have recorded those vintage gibsons when they were brand new and still hanging on the wall at the original dealer, then they would have sounded more like the TV. all of that being said, i own a MC SJ. i love it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisA83 Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 I wonder what a new guitar that sounds vintage now, will sound like when it's 60 years old... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RASHARU Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 I wonder what a new guitar that sounds vintage now, will sound like when it's 60 years old... Hmmmmm ..... now that's deep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 I wonder what a new guitar that sounds vintage now, will sound like when it's 60 years old... Well, my guess is that it would sound brand new. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 If you're buying a guitar based on its tone be it vintage or new, knowing what it is you're after is half the battle, finding a particular guitar that matches those preferences is the other half. Bingo - I have gone guitar hunting with quite a few folks who had it in their head they wanted a "vintage" Gibson only to find they really did not like the sound. May be coincidence but many seem to have ended up with Martins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.