Cyberrock Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 Hi, Have been checking out the beautiful J-200 (also known as SJ-200 if I have got it right?). The models are a bit confusing and difficult to get a great comparison. For example, how does this Custom one compare tone/sound/feel compared to the True Vintage (which is not listed on gibson.com for some reason): http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Acoustic-Instruments/Super-Jumbo/Gibson-Acoustic/J-200-Custom.aspx Is the difference all "bling" or is there any other differences? There's a really expensive model named Custom Vine (not on the website either), what is the "extra feature/quality" on those? How do you think the new J-200 compare to, say one from the 60's? And compared to 90s up till today? (I read somewhere that a lot of the 70s and 80s versions might not be as great...) Although I think I'd prefer the sunburst... what's the deal with the Montana Gold model? http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Acoustic-Instruments/Super-Jumbo/Gibson-Acoustic/Montana-Gold-Flame-Maple.aspx The music stores close to me rarely have any J-200 guitars, although I found a used one from the 90's and tried yesterday. I really liked the sound of it, but I suspect this wasn't the best item I can get a hold of. Which one (of all these) would you prefer and why? I've been browsing a lot of pages both here on the forum and elsewhere, but found it a bit hard to get a clear picture of the differences between models and what one should aim for. Thanks for any and all comments and suggestions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 I love the sunburst SJ-200, I think its visually stunning,. However if i was going to buy a natural I actually prefer the J-100 which is the J-200 without all the bling, and they can be picked up at more than 50% discoutn used to most J-200's. Here's one that is beautiful and is on ebay right now. http://cgi.ebay.com/Gibson-J100-Acoustic-Guitar-/110680277391?pt=Guitar&hash=item19c50f018f Happy huntin ' ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 How do you think the new J-200 compare to, say one from the 60's? And compared to 90s up till today? I will share my personal experience, which is not 100% comprehensive but may be helpful. I've owned a few J-200, J-150 and J-100 models. About the J-200s I've owned mid-90s, 1991, 1989 and 1960. An image of my 1960 was used on the Wikipedia page for the model. Here's another shot from my personal website. What I liked about the '60 was the history, the neck (bit slimmer than the new models) and the mojo. It sounded OK, better than some later '60s models I heard and in line with some '50s I have heard. The '89 was cool because the back and sides were European Sycamore. The mid-90s guitar... I did not like the neck. The '91 was the best of the bunch tonally, really one of the best sounding maple body guitars of any brand I have ever owned. I hear good things about the newer production models and I expect others will weigh in. May seem odd to say this when talking about the J-200, but "bling" does not translate to "tone", so you might want to decide to find the best "looking" or the best "sounding" instrument. Maybe you will find both! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 Have been checking out the beautiful J-200.... There's a really expensive model named Custom Vine (not on the website either), what is the "extra feature/quality" on those? ..... "Vine refers to the vine-like inlay on the fretboard. Bob (Rar) has a stunning beauty - J-200 Royal - No such thing as too much bling on a stage guitar. But I'd like to shake the hand of the man, or woman, who thinks it's not enough bling! These make Taylor Swift's rhinestone-covered guitar look pretty quiet and unassuming by comparison. On the other hand, my J-200 Royal -- called "Val", after her builder -- is a bit fancier than a J-200 Vine, and I love her just as she is. Most guitars couldn't get away with all that bling without looking tacky. But Val pulls it off with grace, aplomb, elegance, and dignity. C'mon! You know you want it! -- Bob R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 And a couple more - all from this thread - http://forum.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/26881-the-j-200-vine/ Let's share the bling! Red 333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibson101 Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 "Vine refers to the vine-like inlay on the fretboard. Bob (Rar) has a stunning beauty - J-200 Royal - Wow I don't like that one bit! Way too much going on there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibson101 Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 Wow I don't like that one bit! Way too much going on there! That J-200 custom with the sunburst and stinger that was recently posted is a SEXY guitar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 So agree ... feelks like it had time with the 'pimp my guitar' dudes. Ouch. Wow I don't like that one bit! Way too much going on there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 . Preferences are, of course, personal. I like the bling. . . . . . Here's the one Gibson101 mentioned on this thread - http://forum.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/67304-sj-200-custom-elite/ Let's see if this works: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devellis Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 There are lots of models of the SJ-200 and they seem to be constantly changing. The Studio seems to be a blinged-down version. The Standard, has the usual visual appointments and electronics. The True Vintage has the visual features of the 50's guitars and also their hide glue construction, bone saddle, and (maybe) red spruce top. In keeping with the 50's models, these don't have electronics. The Cusom and Elite seem to be similar designations for fancier models that use abalone in place of pearl on the fingerboard and bridge, have an abalone rosette, and may have a variety of other characteristics that were part of a small run of custom model guitars (e.g., 12-fret configuration, cutaways, etc.). Specifications change from time to time, so you really need to determine exactly what features any particular guitar has irrespective of model designation. I recently got a True Vintage. I preferred that model because my sense (rightly or wrongly) was that the assembly required a bit more care. For example, hide glue has a short work time, so whoever is using it needs to be more experienced and more precise. Some fervently believe that hide glue improves tone. I don't. And if it does, it's a very small piece of the overall equation. Some TVs seem to have red spruce rather than Sitka spruce used for their tops. Many fervently believe that red spruce is superior tonally. I don't. It can be different, but whether that difference means "better" depends on your taste. I've A-B'd identical guitars with different top woods and have actually generally preferred Sitka, although not by enough to matter. A great piece of spruce is a great piece of spruce irrespective of the species of tree it came from. My guitar, I am told, has red spruce. The TV lacks electronics. I have no use for electronics. The TV has bone nut and saddle, which I definitely prefer. Other models have Tusq saddle and some may have Tusq nuts, as well. So, why did I spring the extra money for a TV? The ones I encountered seemed to sound better than other models. My sample wasn't really big enough for that to be definitive and I can't pinpoint the specific ingredient of the TV that gave them the apparent edge. Nor am I certain that someone with different tastes would agree with my judgment that the TVs sounded better. I do think that the TVs might get a bit more attention along the way, although I have no proof of it. They seem to be built to a slightly higher standard, but again, that could be totally incorrect. Ultimately, I just "went with my gut," a process necessitated, in large part, by the relative scarcity of different models to try in this neck of the woods. You have every right to be confused by the various models. It's genuinely confusing. I hope I haven't just heaped more confusion on the pile. Oh, by the way, I like my SJ-200TV a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnneS Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 Atlhough I am not in the market (being, unluckily, too poor and, luckily, already in love with my maple J100), if I were in the market, I'd be interested in this one for sure: 12 fret J200 custom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuanCarlosVejar Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 I would advise that you check the SJ 200 True Vintage out , Those guitars are great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buc McMaster Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 Being an ex-J200 owner I can say they are indeed the King of the Flattops. The only advice I would offer is, if possible, watch closely the models with the 4-ribbon bridge. This style bridge requires an exceptional neck set, even one that is overset, to get the action right. That extra set of ribbons between the saddle and the pins makes for a lot of distance, which means the saddle must be a bit higher than normal to get a good break angle. This is possible on a guitar with an overset neck but gets tricky on one with an average set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jchabalk Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 if I were looking for one right now i'd probably be looking at the SJ200-TV for sure. I'd definitely recommend an SJ-200. play a bunch and pick the one you love Here's mine, red spruce and koa. the vine pickguard is history since these pics were made Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 STOP!!! You guys are killing me!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry K Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 I may end up getting one just because they sound so freaking good, though they are too big for me. The size, of course, but particularly the long scale, I think, makes it different from most Gibsons. There was one at Music Villa last summer, I think it was a TV with adirondack, that really blew me away. Rar snapped it up. It seems like the large body and long scale generate lots of harmonics. That one we were playing in Music Villa had a shimmering, complex, churchy sort of sound. You just strum a G chord and find yourself going off into a pleasant revery of appreciation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robatsu Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 Being an ex-J200 owner I can say they are indeed the King of the Flattops. The only advice I would offer is, if possible, watch closely the models with the 4-ribbon bridge. This style bridge requires an exceptional neck set, even one that is overset, to get the action right. That extra set of ribbons between the saddle and the pins makes for a lot of distance, which means the saddle must be a bit higher than normal to get a good break angle. This is possible on a guitar with an overset neck but gets tricky on one with an average set. ++1 on watching out for the 4 ribbon bridges, especially if you are going to be flatpicking. My 94 J200 was always a great guitar, but lacked a little on the treble for flatpicking. Local luthier bud slotted the bridge pin holes, which made a difference like you wouldn't believe on the bite for the treble strings. I was pretty skeptical of this (I'm skeptical of a lot of luthiery voodoo stuff), but this made a believer of me on this issue. Of course, my had a 2 ribbon bridge. If it had a 4 ribbon bridge I wouldn't have been able to do this mod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 .... Here's mine, red spruce and koa. the vine pickguard is history since these pics were made .... I don't think I've seen yours before Jchabalk. Another gorgeous 200. The adi and koa look great. Love the book on the back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberrock Posted May 4, 2011 Author Share Posted May 4, 2011 Thanks for lots of great comments, tips and advice. It really helps me gettin a somewhat better view of the options. It do sound like many of you think it's a smarter move to go for the quality of the TV then the "bling" of the Custom? Sound/tone and playability is first priority, looks comes second... and somewhere in there is also value (on a second hand market... if I ever was to sell it). Based on this, would you say TV is probably the right one? Feel free to add more advice, pics, tips and so on. It's really appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 . I've got what today is called a Standard Antique Natural. I like the two ribbon bridge for the reason Buc mentioned. No complaints; I love this guitar, but, as you've said, there's plenty of other choices. Today you'd see the Studio for around $3000 (MAP); the EC around $3550; the Standard around $3800; the Koa around $4000; the Townsend around $4600; the Montana Gold around $4700, the Custom around $4800; the TV around $4900 (all MAP prices). There's quite a price jump between the Standard and the rest of the models. Going to a TV you've got red spruce top with hide glue, some bracing changes, tulip tuners and pickguard for over a $1000 price jump. A very nice guitar, but not worth it to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberrock Posted May 6, 2011 Author Share Posted May 6, 2011 I played a Hummingbird yesterday and although a nice guitar it was somewhat similar to my Martin - whereas the SJ-200 I tried earlier this week was a completely different animal. It wasn't a big surprise, I'd read about that prior, but it confirmed that a SJ-200 would be much more of a complement of sound amongst my guitars. I've gotten a really nice offer on a TV that I'm considering (if my next paycheck and the bills leaves the right balance for that), otherwise I might look into BigKahune great recommendation here. That guitar really looks great too!!! I usually go for as classic/vintage as possible (I love the Vintage Sunburst on SJ-200) but I've found myself a bit attracted to the extra decorations of the Custom too... they look really nice and the bling is not overdone IMHO. If one also would count in second hand value over time - which one do you think is the better option? Still the TV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 . Yes, the TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.