adirondack ? my J-45 TV 2008

[gotomsdos]

Hi, buddy

I got a J-45 TV, with a light brown case with "gibson" label sideward.

my j-45 tv was made about the end in May, 2008. any hope with adi ?

any veteran knowing the starting month of adi ?

Thank you!

[jchabalk]

return 10;

 

;)

 

Do you have some pictures? i don't think anyone will know the build sheet for the second guitar built on every day of 2008! ;)

 

the serial number break down is as such

 

XYYYXZZZ

XX= year

YYY = Which day of the year it was stamped

ZZ = the order the serial number was stamped on them that day

 

Your best bet is going to be to wait for Gibson to get back to you but with some good pictures people on the forum may be able to make a guess. i have a 2008 prototype TV with a Red Spruce top and it's a keeper for sure.

 

Where'd you get it and do you have the vintage/brown case and case cover?

[gotomsdos]

any veteran knowing the starting month of adi to J-45 TV?

[Riverside]

What is "adI" - and why is it important?

 

Read the anecdote here:

 

http://frets.com/FRETSPages/Musician/Guitar/ToneWoods/tonewoods1.html

[gotomsdos]

What is "adI" - and why is it important?

 

Read the anecdote here:

 

http://frets.com/FRETSPages/Musician/Guitar/ToneWoods/tonewoods1.html

Hi,Riverside

adi is adirondack. guess ya know it!

[Riverside]

Why is it important to you?

 

Just say it is, and be done with it.

[gotomsdos]

Why is it important to you?

 

Just say it is, and be done with it.

yes, it is. said that adi sounds more fascinating.

[gotomsdos]

No veteran knowing the starting month of adirondack to J-45 TV?

[gotomsdos]

oh, Is that true that if a 2008 j-45 true vintage has a adirondack top, its label has "LIMITED..." ?

It is said that j-45 TV limited edition (with adirondack) was introduced in 2008.

Thank you

[nbtel]

I have a 2008 Limited Edition TV VOS and a 2009 without the label. the only difference I see inj them is the brown upscale case came with the 2009 and no book,case cover and jacket. The tuners on the 2008 are a solid piece of metal(plate) where the 2009 are individual. They both have the same ordering number, braced the same, hot hide glue and adirondack spruce top. The both sound great.

[Guth]

gotomsdos,

 

I'd suggest that you try not to get too hung up on the whole sitka/adirondack thing. A great sounding guitar is a great sounding guitar no matter what woods are used. If your guitar sounds fascinating to you then it is fascinating. If you find out that your top is made from adirondack, is it going to sound even more fascinating all of a sudden? Conversely, if you learn that you top is made of sitka is it suddenly going to sound less fascinating?

 

My 2008 J-45 TV has a sitka top and I've yet to get my hands on another example that sounds as good to me regardless of the top wood and I've played quite a few. By far the worst example I've played had an adirondack top. This isn't to say that sitka is better than adirondack, so much as you need to consider each guitar individually regardless of the woods used. Both woods have the potential to make for great guitars, or not so great guitars. Trust your ears and ignore the hype.

 

For what it's worth, I also own a guitar with an adirondack top and have owned others in the past, so I have nothing against adirondack in general. I simply think that a lot of people get way too hung up on this sort of thing.

[Hogeye]

gotomsdos,

 

I'd suggest that you try not to get too hung up on the whole sitka/adirondack thing. A great sounding guitar is a great sounding guitar no matter what woods are used. If your guitar sounds fascinating to you then it is fascinating. If you find out that your top is made from adirondack, is it going to sound even more fascinating all of a sudden? Conversely, if you learn that you top is made of sitka is it suddenly going to sound less fascinating?

 

My 2008 J-45 TV has a sitka top and I've yet to get my hands on another example that sounds as good to me regardless of the top wood and I've played quite a few. By far the worst example I've played had an adirondack top. This isn't to say that sitka is better than adirondack, so much as you need to consider each guitar individually regardless of the woods used. Both woods have the potential to make for great guitars, or not so great guitars. Trust your ears and ignore the hype.

 

For what it's worth, I also own a guitar with an adirondack top and have owned others in the past, so I have nothing against adirondack in general. I simply think that a lot of people get way too hung up on this sort of thing.

Ya, What you said Guth.

So Gotomsdos, If you really want to know just put the guitar in it's case and take to your local music store.. There are distinct differences in Sitka and Adi tops. Any Luthier or competent repair person can tell in a second. A slight clue if you will. Adi is called Red Spruce as well. Mostly 'cuz the grain lines in the wood have a red cast to them. After you have seen several examples you will be able to tell immediately.

 

No one here should think that Gibson can tell you from a serial number. Gibson does have a spec sheet for each model but it seems to be a suggestion in most cases. If they run out of Adi. tops and the spec calls for one it has been known for them to just substitute a Sitka top and get on with it. There are many cases of this happening with pickguards, tuners, and even bridge material. This has gone on since day one and Gibson/Montana has seen fit to carry on the tradition. It's part of the charm of the company. They don't have a spec sheet for each individual guitar and even if they did they would have no record of it. They can tell you what it should have been made of but.....I'm just sayin'

[Lars68]

Up until 2009 the J-45 TVs had sitka tops. From then on, they have had adi tops. However, earlier "Limited Editions" did have adi tops, but they should be marked "Limited Edition" on the label.

 

But as said above, anything is possible with Gibson and a good guitar is a good guitar...

 

Lars

[Red 333]

Up until 2009 the J-45 TVs had sitka tops. From then on, they have had adi tops. However, earlier "Limited Editions" did have adi tops, but they should be marked "Limited Edition" on the label.

 

But as said above, anything is possible with Gibson and a good guitar is a good guitar...

 

Lars

 

My J-45 TV is a 2008. It has an orange label that simply says "J-45" (no mention of TV or True Vintage), and a Custom Shop decal on the back of the neck. It has an Adi top, VOS finish, and came in the tan case with the pink lining.

 

Red 333

[torca]

Hi Goto,

I like to know the details of my guitar builds also.No need to justify why,if you bought it I assume you like the sound already!The True Vintage J-45's models that had Limited Edition (with or without VOS on label STYLE line)all had the Adirondack tops as part of differentiating feature from the regular TV counterparts.As Red above described feature wise is spot on.I love the J-45 TV's,but will state that the ADI toppers IMO are worth the extra dollars,especially from the 07-08 years,those I think are the best built yet.

Todd

[gotomsdos]

Thank you all buddy

MARVELLOUS to hear from GGGIIIBBBSSSOOONNN so fast in around 2 days!

He told me my j-45 TV has a sitka top.

Just a pity...

I'll get adi one.

[jchabalk]

[Deadgrateful]

I have several pieces of Red Spruce and Sitka around the house (some in raw form) and I'll be dammned if anyone could tell the difference!

[sternfan]

I have several pieces of Red Spruce and Sitka around the house (some in raw form) and I'll be dammned if anyone could tell the difference!

 

That's because they're not being played.

 

Red Spruce isn't as muddy as Sitka when played with an aggressive attack. Under light play you can't tell the difference but when you really dig in, you can tell when ANY guitar has a Sitka top.

 

All of that said, two rules of thumb apply, one of which has already been extolled: If you like the sound of your guitar AND if are going to keep it, don't think that it's inferior in any way to any other guitar.

 

The second is this: the piece to piece quality of Gibsons in general is far lower than that of Martin, Taylor, Santa Cruz, etc. Just too much variance from one guitar of the same spec to another - only to be exacerbated by poor quality in labeling. HOWEVER, when you find a great Gibson it's something very special. There's not another guitar maker in the world that can approach their best of the best. When you do find a Gibson you love, never let it leave you.

[Guth]

Red Spruce isn't as muddy as Sitka when played with an aggressive attack. Under light play you can't tell the difference but when you really dig in, you can tell when ANY guitar has a Sitka top.

 

While I somewhat agree with what you said as a generality, I would never agree with this as an absolute statement as you've put it. I've played enough sitka topped guitars that have had more headroom or were less muddy (or both) than comparable adirondack topped guitars to know it doesn't always work this way. It all comes down to the individual instrument. Conversely, there are also plenty of examples where the sitka and adirondack instruments are distinguishable even at low volumes, but it has just as much, if not more, to do with the entire instrument build as it does the top wood.

 

My guess is that there are enough people out there willing to spend the extra dough on an adirondack topped instrument just to say that's what they own, that the overall quality of the top from the perspective of tone is of less concern to the manufacturer. Sometimes it works out splendidly, but not always.

[pcf]

people spend more money on adirondack bc it is not available in as high of quantities than sitka and therefore costs more. also, bc it has different musical qualities than other woods(just like choosing rosewood v. mahogany). i think the stigma of spending more just bc it's adirondack is an overblown suggestion on many forums. you pretty much have to spend more to try/own an adirondack instrument bc it costs more. that doesn't necessarily make it better, and there are always better pieces of wood tonewise (which is completely subjective).

[Guth]

people spend more money on adirondack bc it is not available in as high of quantities than sitka and therefore costs more. also, bc it has different musical qualities than other woods(just like choosing rosewood v. mahogany). i think the stigma of spending more just bc it's adirondack is an overblown suggestion on many forums. you pretty much have to spend more to try/own an adirondack instrument bc it costs more. that doesn't necessarily make it better, and there are always better pieces of wood tonewise (which is completely subjective).

 

I'm not so sure. If you look at what Guild sells their adirondack topped guitars for, you'll find that they are priced quite a bit below their competitors. Same wood, different price. Some that I've played sounded wonderful and were great value for the money, others weren't. I believe that because the demand exists and seems to be increasing, manufacturers are turning to lower grades of wood than they would have accepted in the not too distant past. I'm not just speaking from a visual grading standpoint, but from a stiffness:weight ratio standpoint as well. By far the worst J-45 TV that I've played was adirondack topped, it was extremely dull and muddy. No amount of playing time/aging is going to change the basic character of that guitar. But I'm guessing someone will buy it because it has an adirondack top, so it has to be good.

 

I do agree that this is all very subjective and all of the above is in my opinion obviously. As always for me, there are no absolutes when it comes to acoustic guitars.