Rambler Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 "can you elaborate on the corporate ladder issue jkinnama?" Ok, this is theory, but, say, take the J45. Bozeman has made well-regarded vintage replicas for places like Daves in WI or Fuller's in Tx. But the main product line from 00-05 was the "Historic" line, rigged with pickups. Numerous threads have commented on the comparative lightness of Bozeman's special issues, which leads one to wonder if maybe the stds have a little extra lacquer to take road abuse, maybe a little extra on the braces as a hedge vs feedback. That would seem to be a marketing choice, and, for all I know, its a proper assessment of the marketplace. Re-labeling a/e 45s the "mod classic" and adding a line closer to vintage specs is a step in the right direction, except.... we have the TV, with its somewhat 'wet" approach to classic tone. Now that, to me, is the head scratcher. (Some of the TVs, notably the SJ, also have a mishmash of appointments. As has been pointed out, Gibson already had a Gutherie "signature" model so they had to make the TV "different," ergo a banner w/57 appointments and AJ bracing. One want to ask- WWJWD [what would John Walker do?]). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jefleppard Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 once again, great insights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 "can you elaborate on the corporate ladder issue jkinnama?" (Some of the TVs' date=' notably the SJ, also have a mishmash of appointments. As has been pointed out, Gibson already had a Gutherie "signature" model so they had to make the TV "different," ergo a banner w/57 appointments and AJ bracing. [/quote'] I think the point of the TV line is not reproduce or reissue an instrument from one particular year, but one that is generally representative of a vintage instrument (which is why they're equipped with a mix of apponitments that might otherwise be found on quitars from different specific years). By the way, Diogo, Mike suggested the Fuller's J35; I have one, and want to second the opinion that it's a fantatstic guitar. I don't know if it has the sound you're looking for (a 50+ year old guitar), or if it has a sound that some of the others would describe as vintage, but it plays and sounds wonderful. Best of luck in your quest. Red 333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearbasher Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 thank you very much for that reply Red' date=' really helps put things into perspective. my main concern is tone, since i know i can live with the bozeman finishes (i had a 2005 and it was fine, not ideal - i like to see real rugged wood, not gloss - but i know i can live with it and it'll wear off a bit with the years)...again, my main concern is tone, with my reference being the first Dylan record, more specifically [i']song for woody[/i]. now i just need to know if the TV will nail that.. Correct me if I'm wrong. If Dylan used a '46 Gibson to record "Song for Woody" in '62, the guitar was only 16 years old at the time. Shouldn't you be looking for a '92, to get the same "aged" sound? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Correct me if I'm wrong. If Dylan used a '46 Gibson to record "Song for Woody" in '62' date=' the guitar was only 16 years old at the time. Shouldn't you be looking for a '92, to get the same "aged" sound?[/quote'] THAT's an interesting point, worthy of more discussion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 "I think the point of the TV line is not reproduce or reissue an instrument from one particular year" Well, that's the party line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 "Correct me if I'm wrong. If Dylan used a '46 Gibson to record "Song for Woody" in '62, the guitar was only 16 years old at the time. Shouldn't you be looking for a '92, to get the same "aged" sound?" LOL! (actually Gtr Ctr had a 92, last time I looked). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearbasher Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 I can go a step further. You are also talking about the sound of a guitar that was recorded on equipment that was, most likely, "state of the art" in the late '50s. Who knows what this instrument sounded like "in real life". There are a lot of factors. I had a '94 J-45 that sounded great in the winter. But, in the middle of the summer it sounded like I was playing under water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogo Posted August 18, 2008 Author Share Posted August 18, 2008 "can you elaborate on the corporate ladder issue jkinnama?" Ok' date=' this [i']is [/i]theory, but, say, take the J45. Bozeman has made well-regarded vintage replicas for places like Daves in WI or Fuller's in Tx. But the main product line from 00-05 was the "Historic" line, rigged with pickups. Numerous threads have commented on the comparative lightness of Bozeman's special issues, which leads one to wonder if maybe the stds have a little extra lacquer to take road abuse, maybe a little extra on the braces as a hedge vs feedback. That would seem to be a marketing choice, and, for all I know, its a proper assessment of the marketplace. Re-labeling a/e 45s the "mod classic" and adding a line closer to vintage specs is a step in the right direction, except.... we have the TV, with its somewhat 'wet" approach to classic tone. Now that, to me, is the head scratcher. (Some of the TVs, notably the SJ, also have a mishmash of appointments. As has been pointed out, Gibson already had a Gutherie "signature" model so they had to make the TV "different," ergo a banner w/57 appointments and AJ bracing. One want to ask- WWJWD [what would John Walker do?]). makes sense! the historic you mentioned was an exception then, correct? although i should admit i have nothing but fond memories from my 2005 historic J45. i remember it coming pretty close to the tone i'm looking for, and the day i had to let it go was a sad day indeed. but it was more than a year ago, i really have no idea of what i would think of the tone now..i just remember thinking it was close, at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogo Posted August 18, 2008 Author Share Posted August 18, 2008 I think the point of the TV line is not reproduce or reissue an instrument from one particular year' date=' but one that is generally representative of a vintage instrument (which is why they're equipped with a mix of apponitments that might otherwise be found on quitars from different specific years). By the way, Diogo, Mike suggested the Fuller's J35; I have one, and want to second the opinion that it's a fantatstic guitar. I don't know if it has the sound you're looking for (a 50+ year old guitar), or if it has a sound that some of the others would describe as vintage, but it plays and sounds wonderful. Best of luck in your quest. Red 333 [/quote'] thanks Red...you have a PM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeebee Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 "Correct me if I'm wrong. If Dylan used a '46 Gibson to record "Song for Woody" in '62' date=' the guitar was only 16 years old at the time. Shouldn't you be looking for a '92, to get the same "aged" sound?" LOL! (actually Gtr Ctr had a 92, last time I looked). [/quote'] Nah.....you just gotta find a twenty somethin Dylan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogo Posted August 18, 2008 Author Share Posted August 18, 2008 Correct me if I'm wrong. If Dylan used a '46 Gibson to record "Song for Woody" in '62' date=' the guitar was only 16 years old at the time. Shouldn't you be looking for a '92, to get the same "aged" sound?[/quote'] assuming the guitar was built with the same materials, bracing, etc, etc, etc, then that would make sense. but i very much doubt that was the case with 90s J45s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogo Posted August 18, 2008 Author Share Posted August 18, 2008 I can go a step further. You are also talking about the sound of a guitar that was recorded on equipment that was' date=' most likely, "state of the art" in the late '50s. Who knows what this instrument sounded like "in real life". There are a lot of factors. I had a '94 J-45 that sounded great in the winter. But, in the middle of the summer it sounded like I was playing under water.[/quote'] nothing more natural than vintage ampex tape machines and the valve stuff they were using. owning a home studio filled with nothing but 50s and 60s gear, i can attest to the absolute fidelity of this gear if setup and maintained correctly, which i'm sure was the case at Columbia. 50s and 60s gear is still, freq. response, fidelity and modulation wise, the state of the art today, if kept properly and up to spec, believe it or not. most of the colour you hear came from the poor tape formulations (generally not the tape machines), the few overdubs and several passes of bad tape in order to overdub, instruments (strings and the gauges used, woods used, etc.) and the rooms on which these things were recorded, and how they were recorded (bands playing live in the same room, not many overdubs, etc.). i can safely say that the Dylan J-50 would sound pretty much exactly like it sounds on most of his records, especially the first one, if you should hear it in person. that goes for his nick lucas as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 thanks Red...you have a PM! I responded. Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey62 Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 I have not come across many post war J-50's and J-45's that were not victims of poor maintenance work over the last 50 years. I was not commenting on the guitars as they were initially conceived and built (pre 1964) but rather on the condition of them today. I have found that most of the guitars on the "for sale" circuit are well played (worn), overpriced and need work. Many of the ebay guitars are in bad shape. I have seen some at reputable shops in need of work. You need to be cautious with a vintage purchase and be prepared for some $$ to get it playing right. I do have a 1957 J-50. It needed new frets, saddle and nut to get back to being a great guitar. At least I knew this from the start and have learned some repair lessons the hard way over the years. Mandolin Bros, Southworth Guitars, Bruce Sandler at the Guitar Exchange and Acoustic Roots in PA have all treated me to a masters degree in used acoustic guitar slight of hands. If you want to get a doctorate then apply to University of Ebay. Bottom line - there is usually something that needs tending to with these old guitars and Gibsons seem to get played a lot harder than old Martins. Once you start fixing them you realize they may be more of a "player's" guitar than a collectable. Is my old J-50 better than a current new Gibson?? Depends on your ear, your pocketbook and how you want to use it. Would I gig with it?? No way. I think if you have and open mind you will find that Gibson is really making good guitars now and you will get a good value for your dollar and a good sounding guitar. If you want old then be prepared for what you MIGHT need to deal with. One other thing: your best intentions on getting the unforeseen repairs done properly do not always work out. Too many folks take on repairs that are beyond their skill level and the unsuspecting guitar owner is left holding the bag. Make sure you know a place or an individual that is up to the task. Don't use your vintage guitar as a measuring stick for their results. A bad neck reset can ruin a guitar. A bad bridge plate repair can destroy tone. The list is endless. Just trying to save you some aggravation. I can wholeheartedly recommend some new Gibson models. I can't say the same for many of the "vintage" guitars floating around out there now. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeebee Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 It stands to reason that the requirements for entry into the Vintage market are 1) a fundamental understanding of how guitar components fit together to create a quality instrument; 2) an appreciation of the Vintage market, prices and trends 3) trust in a good repairperson. This notwithstanding, the risk of getting financialy burned on a Vintage purchase is lower than that of buying new if a few basic practises are observed. Foremost, never buy a guitar you haven't critically reviewed in person and if possible by a luthier. Exceptions might include acquisitions from a well respected and established dealer that offers a money back examination period. Forget Ebay unless it is an obvious "steal" with lots of room for suprises. As an observation and based on recent, real market conditions, lets say you acquired a new geet for $4000. The day you walked outta the shop that guitar dropped in market value anywhere from 25- 40% ( check the buy and sell forums if you doubt me). Non vintage guitars tend to appreciate at approx the rate of inflation which means it will take about 10 years for you to be able to sell for the price paid. Now lets say you bought a Vintage for $4,000. Even if you and your luthier totaly screwed up (unlikely if you observed the aforementioned precautions) and you have a $750 repair bill (lots can be repaired for that $), you are still holding a guitar that will appreciate at an average of 8% per year (low estimate based on past 10 years) such that your investment will be worth more than $8,000 in 10 years. Risk/reward ??? seems to me it lies with new purchases. In the interim you have a sweet vintage sound with lots of mojo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogo Posted August 19, 2008 Author Share Posted August 19, 2008 folks, thanks for all the help and different opinions, they're all valid. i have decided, based on my previous experiences, and especially my Kalamazoo KG-11 purchase, that i should try my luck once more...on ebay of all places, but there's no other way. reputable dealers want double of the amount i just spent, and i won't ever be able to afford that sort of thing, it's hard to justify this amount as it is, no matter how affordable it was. in my interaction with the seller, i trust that a true confidence bond was created, and i really feel this happened, from both sides. i have been nothing but greatly treated by this person, and all my questions were answered and a lot more than was asked was also done. this person went out of his way to make this a truly comfortable situation for me, and i trust that all will go well. this to say that i just spent 3300 euros on a 1953 J-45. should be here sometime in september. hopefully this is the one, i really hope so. i had to go for this, having owned a 2005 historic, and having played several 50s and 60s models, i know that there's no substitute for the real thing (not to take absolutely nothing away from the work that's being done at Bozeman), even if the appearance of the TV J-45 made me hesitate a bit. i shall post some pictures when it's here, thanks again for all the help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey62 Posted August 20, 2008 Share Posted August 20, 2008 Exciting news and I truly hope it all works out well. You did get a lot of good advice here and it looks like you paid a good price. Looking forward to pics and the review. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogo Posted August 20, 2008 Author Share Posted August 20, 2008 Exciting news and I truly hope it all works out well. You did get a lot of good advice here and it looks like you paid a good price. Looking forward to pics and the review. Mike thanks a lot Mike! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.