Acousticologist Posted February 26, 2011 Author Share Posted February 26, 2011 that surprised me but i'm so glad i said 3 was my prefered sound. question is... who's going to chuck away their gibson and buy a martin instead? i noticed many folk liking 2 best..lol haha - to be fair, the recording doesn't do any of them justice... But i don't think it's possible to capture the "real" sound of the guitar. There's something about having it vibrating and singing in your arms, which no recording could ever capture... And the 45 is really special. Not as refined as the Martin, and not finished to the same level. But there's also a few hundred bucks in the difference... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 That is certainly the most interesting experiment of them all... From my side anyway.... What you were listening to, in order: Guitar 1: Gibson Advanced Jumbo Guitar 2: Martin CEO 6 Guitar 3: Gibson J45 What is the Martin made of? I seem to recall some of them being made of strange materiels. And you said you were going to reavel the price differences? Come to think of it, can you explain breifly the woods of the guitars? What do you think of that?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markus W. Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 That is certainly the most interesting experiment of them all... From my side anyway.... What you were listening to, in order: Guitar 1: Gibson Advanced Jumbo Guitar 2: Martin CEO 6 Guitar 3: Gibson J45 What do you think of that?? You should Tonerite your J-45...;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acousticologist Posted February 26, 2011 Author Share Posted February 26, 2011 You should Tonerite your J-45...;-) i've heard so many different reports on the tonerite, so I've been a little scared to use one. Don;t want to lose the tone I already have. I know it's good. and I've never heard anyone else's guitar pre - and post... Do you reckon the Tonerite will open her up a bit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 it is really hard to tell with this puter, but i would say the first one is the best, closelt followed by the 3rd, and the middle one sounds like dry taost to me. could not begin to guess what they were, but i am going to guess small body or oo size? guys..guys, look, i may have been wrong on the price comparisan guess, and i was way off on the body size, but i think i at least deserve a +1 for nialing the description of the middle one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acousticologist Posted February 26, 2011 Author Share Posted February 26, 2011 Haha - dry toast... It feels more like creamy coffee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spot Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Results please????? I'm putting money on 2 (my pick!) being a Gibson, possible SJ, j-45 or j-50... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burgardj Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 3,2,1 for me. 3 sounded like it played the smoothest, 2 had a nicer bottom end perhaps, but sounded like either a higher action or cheaper guitar. Sounded, as I have no idea what you were playing on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burgardj Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 You should Tonerite your J-45...;-) Markus is right - I've had a tonerite on mine since I got it on Tuesday. Well, in between playing it anyway. And I'm sure there's people who don't believe it does anything, but I've used it on about 6 different guitars now, and I notice a difference. I'm doing that and ordering a new bone saddle and pins from Colosi. Not that it didn't sound nice when I first got it, but I definitely prefer the sound of bone over Tusq and plastic! And now that I went back and saw the description of the guitars, I think that while I may have had the pricing wrong, the Martin is probably the more difficult guitar to play, having a couple myself. It looks like in picking #3 I've quickly become biased towards my new J-45 ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acousticologist Posted February 26, 2011 Author Share Posted February 26, 2011 BEHIND THE CURTAINS WERE: Guitar 1: Gibson Advanced Jumbo Guitar 2: Martin CEO-6 Guitar 3: Gibson J45 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larryp58 Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 I picked #2, you can shoot me now. :ph34r: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojorule Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Lots of us picked number 2, but perhaps Acousticologist can hang fire on the trigger. After all the CEO 6 is Martin's tribute/allusion/answer (delete as appropriate, so we don't get into another awkward debate about exactly what the relation is) to another famous maker's classic instrument which we all know deep down to be a Gibson AJ, J45 or both. So not a typical Martin. A brilliant wheeze, Acousticologist. Fantastic, though I take it from your comments about your relationship to the J45's sound that they aren't all new instruments as you said at the outset. If they are all new, then it would stand to sense that none of them has really opened up yet, explaining some of the difficulties in making the models out properly. And to think I thought that they were all maple! Zing was the thing on these recordings though, not balance and warmth to my ears... Interesting, however problematic and limiting the recording situation, as Gibson acoustics are famed for the ease with which they can be recorded. Go on, admit it. You were really comparing a J185 Standard, a J185 True Vintage and a limited edition maple-backed J45 from Fuller's in Houston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acousticologist Posted February 26, 2011 Author Share Posted February 26, 2011 Lots of us picked number 2, but perhaps Acousticologist can hang fire on the trigger. After all the CEO 6 is Martin's tribute/allusion/answer (delete as appropriate, so we don't get into another awkward debate about exactly what the relation is) to another famous maker's classic instrument which we all know deep down to be a Gibson AJ, J45 or both. So not a typical Martin. A brilliant wheeze, Acousticologist. Fantastic, though I take it from your comments about your relationship to the J45's sound that they aren't all new instruments as you said at the outset. If they are all new, then it would stand to sense that none of them has really opened up yet, explaining some of the difficulties in making the models out properly. And to think I thought that they were all maple! Zing was the thing on these recordings though, not balance and warmth to my ears... Interesting, however problematic and limiting the recording situation, as Gibson acoustics are famed for the ease with which they can be recorded. Go on, admit it. You were really comparing a J185 Standard, a J185 True Vintage and a limited edition maple-backed J45 from Fuller's in Houston. The J45 and the CEO arrived at my place within a couple of weeks of each other. (this Month) and The advanced was bought new in January, but a 2010 model. The 45 having been played the most. including at a gig tonight.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markus W. Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 i've heard so many different reports on the tonerite, so I've been a little scared to use one. Don;t want to lose the tone I already have. I know it's good. and I've never heard anyone else's guitar pre - and post... Do you reckon the Tonerite will open her up a bit? I have tonerite my J-45 TV (made in Oct. 2010) and I can tell you this thing opend up my guitar extremly well. Before it was tiny and stiff. Now i have a growly punch and the sound is great & woody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espasonico Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 I´m sorry but such a crappy recording means nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spot Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Heheeeeee,...well I got that COMPLETELY wrong!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tartanbeastie Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 the recording wasnt to blame, i think theres maybe some hurt pride by folk who assumed they could imediately guess which was gibson. Actually I thought it was a great little test. As i said all the way through, i thought 2 was a hummingbird but I was wrong. 3 was the one I liked best and not because i was guessing which model etc, i just liked the soound better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WiseAxe Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 It would be nice if you could sit in front of the same microphone & not be comparing onboard electronics. Tbs; let's have a do-over! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riptide Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Dang, that can't be a J45 I liked the Martin best... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acousticologist Posted February 26, 2011 Author Share Posted February 26, 2011 No electronics used... Simply acoustic in front of the same mic. No EQ. No reverb. I even kept the recording going while I changed guitars so my position couldn't change, and to tried my best to remain as consistent as possible with strumming and picking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDdeuce Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 No electronics used... Simply acoustic in front of the same mic. No EQ. No reverb. I even kept the recording going while I changed guitars so my position couldn't change, and to tried my best to remain as consistent as possible with strumming and picking. 'gist...where did you post the guitar types? (I will probably embarass myself...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Well I got 2/3 right, suprised the third was a J-45, sounds a lot brighter than a J-45 normally, but the second one was a deadset Martin give away with the strong bass and reserved mids. It was good fun, thanks for doing it ! cheers. That is certainly the most interesting experiment of them all... From my side anyway.... What you were listening to, in order: Guitar 1: Gibson Advanced Jumbo Guitar 2: Martin CEO 6 Guitar 3: Gibson J45 What do you think of that?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devellis Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 As several others did, I ranked them from most favorite to least favorite, 2, 3, 1. The differences weren't huge but there seemed to be more balance and richness from #2. For those who might be wondering, the likelihood of getting the results we have here (based on the first 30 responses) purely by chance is well below 1 chance in 1,000. So, while the recordings may or may not accurately reflect the merits of the individual guitars, the results don't favor guitar #2 "by chance," not by a long shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDdeuce Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 As several others did, I ranked them from most favorite to least favorite, 2, 3, 1. The differences weren't huge but there seemed to be more balance and richness from #2. I don't care what my ears thought about #2 sounding good, I'm still buying my 200! Just glad the others weren't something really embarassing like who knows what! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 I told you about the rare fish - Swim on lightly. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.