Best Rosewood Gibson?

[onewilyfool]

+1 on the L 20 Wily, nice!

 

I have played some very nice rosewood Gibsons, but when I think rosewood Martin comes to minds, particularly the HD28v which to me is the apitamy of the rosewood sound IMHO.

Thanks Todd......I really enjoy that guitar. The same thought came to my mind.....when I think of Rosewood, I think of Martin. When I think of Gibson, for some reason, Maple and Mahogany come to mind. I have no logical explaination for that, just does. I think it is because the Gibson for me, has that woody, dry sound with good string separation, and that is more of a maple/hog thing, rather than the heavy bass, and overtones and ringing of the Martin style rosewood guitars. I'm probably just programed this way....nothing scientific

[E-minor7]

You're so right : The big Martins follow the trail of rose, the legendary Gibsons are connected to mahogany and maple. It's the picture and tale we've known again and again, and could be a part of the complementary magic. I'd rather not compare or even mention the two in the same sentence atall. For me my Martin D-35 is the base. Without that island well established, I could never sail the mighty sea of exotic, charming, inconsistant, brillant, mysterious, whatever Gibson. It would somehow be a gamble. Yes, yes, I know you might flak me for this, but I risk in all honesty. . .

It's the privilege of contrast and contradiction that does the trick - like everywhere else in life, I suppose.

 

the StriNg

[TP]

And yet the 1930's Rosewood backed AJ's are coveted by many and some have called them the best Gibson's ever.... go figure?!?!

 

Names like "Bone Crusher" (due to them competing directly with the Martin D-28 "Herringbone" guitars that were the rage then) and "Acoustic Canon" were given to the original (and in my opinion the newer releases as well).

 

Gibson can certainly make a killer Rosewood guitar and my aversion to Martins withstanding (it's due to the neck profile) I think I still prefer the Gibson tone be it Rosewood, Maple or Hog backed.

[tpbiii]

And yet the 1930's Rosewood backed AJ's are coveted by many and some have called them the best Gibson's ever.... go figure?!?!

 

Names like "Bone Crusher" (due to them competing directly with the Martin D-28 "Herringbone" guitars that were the rage then) and "Acoustic Canon" were given to the original (and in my opinion the newer releases as well).

 

Over the years, I have developed some well-formed opinions in this area. Not necessarily correct, but certainly well formed in the sense that they are based on quite a lot of personal experience and the opinions of quite a few good (many quite well known) players -- mostly bluegrass players and flatpickers.

 

As to the comparison of old Martin and Gibson RW, here is the pair I have played most.

 

 

This is a 1935 D-28 and a 1936 AJ.

 

My short comparison of these is they both have a big midrange RW punch, but the Martin midrange is wider and more blended. The AJ bass is a bit more percussive. Both have killer clear highs.

 

Both work really well for bluegrass rhythm -- this is saying a lot, because before I got the AJ, my firm opinion was nothing could really provide acoustic rhythm like '35, '36, and '37 D-28s. Tony Rice notwithstanding, the AJ is a better flatpicking guitar.

 

When I try to pick ragtime with fingerpicks, I find the D-28's overwhelming midrange to be problematic. The narrower and clearer mids of the AJ I find to be near perfect.

 

I should note for completeness that I also have several wartime J-45s, which I like a lot for fingerpicking tone -- BUT, none of these have anything like the power of the 1930s Dreads and Jumbos. This prevents them from being totally useful.

 

My most recent revelation came on the mahogany Gibson front. I acquired a quite rare 1935 Jumbo (much played, with a lot of repaired clacks). I expected the Jumbo to sound like a Trojan -- big and raw, but too raw for bluegrass. The old Jumbo turned out to be truly powerful -- like the D-28, AJ, and Jumbo-35 -- but with a tone that worked better for bluegrass than any mahogany I have ever played. Huh?

 

Here is the old Jumbo with our 1936 J-35 Trojan.

 

 

Since we got the old Jumbo seven months ago, it is pretty much all I have played. It is now one of the top four guitars we have -- the '35 D-28, '35 Jumbo, '35 D-28, '35 D-18. It will take another year or two for a final decision, but at this moment the two Gibsons are leading .

 

Truth in advertising requires me to say what no other Gibsons come really close, but other Martins do.

[J-1854Me]

I would say, depending on your playing style and needs:

 

-- Gibson AJ -- this first, the best, the big 'un

-- Gibson CL-40/50 (~Songwriter Deluxe-ish)

-- Nick Lucas Rosewood

 

 

All different, all near or at the Top of the Class.

 

Fred

[jgwoods]

Over the years, I have developed some well-formed opinions in this area. Not necessarily correct, but certainly well formed in the sense that they are based on quite a lot of personal experience and the opinions of quite a few good (many quite well known) players -- mostly bluegrass players and flatpickers.

 

As to the comparison of old Martin and Gibson RW, here is the pair I have played most.

 

 

This is a 1935 D-28 and a 1936 AJ.

 

My short comparison of these is they both have a big midrange RW punch, but the Martin midrange is wider and more blended. The AJ bass is a bit more percussive. Both have killer clear highs.

 

Both work really well for bluegrass rhythm -- this is saying a lot, because before I got the AJ, my firm opinion was nothing could really provide acoustic rhythm like '35, '36, and '37 D-28s. Tony Rice notwithstanding, the AJ is a better flatpicking guitar.

 

When I try to pick ragtime with fingerpicks, I find the D-28's overwhelming midrange to be problematic. The narrower and clearer mids of the AJ I find to be near perfect.

 

I should note for completeness that I also have several wartime J-45s, which I like a lot for fingerpicking tone -- BUT, none of these have anything like the power of the 1930s Dreads and Jumbos. This prevents them from being totally useful.

 

My most recent revelation came on the mahogany Gibson front. I acquired a quite rare 1935 Jumbo (much played, with a lot of repaired clacks). I expected the Jumbo to sound like a Trojan -- big and raw, but too raw for bluegrass. The old Jumbo turned out to be truly powerful -- like the D-28, AJ, and Jumbo-35 -- but with a tone that worked better for bluegrass than any mahogany I have ever played. Huh?

 

Here is the old Jumbo with our 1936 J-35 Trojan.

 

 

Since we got the old Jumbo seven months ago, it is pretty much all I have played. It is now one of the top four guitars we have -- the '35 D-28, '35 Jumbo, '35 D-28, '35 D-18. It will take another year or two for a final decision, but at this moment the two Gibsons are leading .

 

Truth in advertising requires me to say what no other Gibsons come really close, but other Martins do.

 

Well you've certainly earned your opinions! Those are some mighty fine guitars you got there. I wouldn't quarrel with your assessments in any way, mostly from lack of experience with those fine oldies. The generalities- Martin long sustain, big bass; Gibby Mids and thump, seem to hold from way back when your stuff was built to today.

I do have to add that I love the creamy bass on a good Guild as much as anything out there. Obviously there is no comparison to be made via pre-war instruments with Guild starting in 1953(?)but they stand out to me as another fine steel string American guitar and their rosewood models can be outstanding. Over all when shopping for rosewood I don't think of Gibson, I think of Martin and Guild, despite the fine reputation of the AJ.

[onewilyfool]

TPbiii......I am not worthy, I am not worthy, I am not worthy.........lol....those are some nice guits!!!