Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

The J-45 is not an entry level guitar?


STAR CHILD

Recommended Posts

Hey Guys,

 

I've been reading some post else where about the J-45.

Some say it's an entry level guitar, and that it's not so great?

They say Gibsons quality is way down, and the price of a

J-45 is not worth the price?

 

I just purchased a new J-45 from Guitar Center the other day,

because I always wanted one!!! I finally got one, and I'm

thrilled!!! Is this guitar a professional instrument or is

it just a cheap entry level guitar? I need to get the action

and neck adjusted, and after that, I think the guitar will be

excellent to say the least!!!

 

Thanks again for your advise

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 146
  • Created
  • Last Reply

.

You've been listening to some knuckleheads.

 

A new J-45 goes for over $2K - a professional grade instrument, made with quality materials and craftsmanship.

 

An "entry level" guitar is a piece you buy to learn the ropes on - typically $100 to $500 would be about right. Something you can use to learn to play and learn about guitars. When you learn more, the "entry level" guitar gets sold and you purchase something maded with better quality materials and craftsmanship.

 

Opinions about quality, playability and sound are just that - opinions. You've got to check these out and decide for yourself.

 

My opinion is - there are great J-45s out there, try some and you'll find more than one.

 

Sounds like you've got a nice one. Get her setup to your liking and enjoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like BK said, a J-45 is not an entry level guitar. You can certainly make it your entry level guitar and it will still be a pro guitar as you improve your skills. I worry about some of those entry level guitars (the real ones). I often wonder how many kids/beginers were turned off guitar because they played entry level guitars that were hard to play (i.e. you could land a 747 under the strings), and they sounded like tin cans dragged down a paved road. That being said, there are good entry level guitars out there. But the J-45 is not an entry level guitar. It is probably the most affordable Gibson guitar tho' so in that sense I suppose one could consider it entry level for a Gibson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Guys,

 

I've been reading some post else where about the J-45.

Some say it's an entry level guitar, and that it's not so great?

They say Gibsons quality is way down, and the price of a

J-45 is not worth the price?

 

I just purchased a new J-45 from Guitar Center the other day,

because I always wanted one!!! I finally got one, and I'm

thrilled!!! Is this guitar a professional instrument or is

it just a cheap entry level guitar? I need to get the action

and neck adjusted, and after that, I think the guitar will be

excellent to say the least!!!

 

Thanks again for your advise

 

The short answer is no. But I believe it was originally designed as somewhat of a budget guitar when times were tight after World War ll--the sunburst top was apparently there to mask flaws in the tops. I believe the J200, Advanced Jumbo, etc. were Gibson's more high end guitars. But ti's the very "working man" rep of the J45 which give it its appeal to many.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few blessed people have had the ability to enter at top level. Can't remember any of them at the moment. . .

 

 

The short answer is no. But I believe it was originally designed as somewhat of a budget guitar when times were tight after World War ll--the sunburst top was apparently there to mask flaws in the tops. I believe the J200, Advanced Jumbo, etc. were Gibson's more high end guitars. But ti's the very "working man" rep of the J45 which give it its appeal to many.

 

I read a serious article bout the J-45 which mentioned there was a shortage of wood during WWII and that the J-45s suffered from this. They had to use unclean knotted spruce-quality and therefor turned to the famous bursts. Don't know if there is anything to it, but have a off topic Q. :

 

 

 

For what was high quality wood used during the war. Rifle butts, aircraft carrier landing decks ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The J-45 is a professional instrument in every sense of the word. I would guess that it and the Martin D-28 are the most widely used acoustic guitars in history by professional musicians. There are many Gibson aficionados who would make the case that Gibson is producing as fine if not better acoustic guitars today than in any time in their history.

 

The J-45 is known as the "work horse" because it's so very widely used, and because it's such a versatile acoustic guitar--it's well suited for a lot of playing styles and types of music. Since it's relatively unadorned compared to other Gibson acoustics like the Southern Jumbo, Hummingbird, Dove, or J-200, it's also been more affordable than those models, though not inexpensive by any means (the minimum wage in the US was 40 cents and hour when the J-45 debuted, and it cost $45, not including the case). The comparatively lower price (to other more expensive Gibsons) and visual simplicity may make it more appealing to the working man, but it's appreciated by all J-45 lovers rich or poor for its seldom-improved upon performance.

 

There was a MODEL of J-45 that was called "The Workingman" several years back, because it was designed to be more affordable and less costly to average people and non-professional musicians. It was made with less costly materials and manufacturing processes, but is still a fine instrument.

 

Red 333

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is my "Working Man" WM-45. The only thing "cheap" that I have found with it is the pickgaurd. This guitar has beautiful full voiced tone and is a quality instrument.

 

I think there is a fair amount of anti-Gibson sentiment in other forums. I don't know why.

 

I love my Gibson guitars.

 

IMG_1807.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few blessed people have had the ability to enter at top level. Can't remember any of them at the moment. . .

 

 

 

 

I read a serious article bout the J-45 which mentioned there was a shortage of wood during WWII and that the J-45s suffered from this. They had to use unclean knotted spruce-quality and therefor turned to the famous bursts. Don't know if there is anything to it, but have a off topic Q. :

 

 

 

For what was high quality wood used during the war. Rifle butts, aircraft carrier landing decks ? [/colo

 

 

 

 

 

 

Airplanes, gliders, hardware for the army,a lot of stuff.

 

However maple maniac is right, the J-45 and its forerunner, the J-35, were budget guitars, the 35 was named after the price, 35 dollars during the depression, and these instruments were conceived as Gibson's entry level, the Advanced Jumbo, for instance, costed 80 dollars. "Deluxe" models were Southern Jumbos, Country & westerns and later Hummingbird, but the main difference was the decoration.

 

Anyway, back in these days, every guitar made by reputable builders were "professional" instruments because at that time a pro player could just afford one instrument and had to be good, while today we have cheap entry level, intermediate etc..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no 'entry level' Gibson acoustics.

I think you are right....all acoustics produced in Bozeman, any pro musician would be delighted to own, from small bodies to jumbo bodies...really professional grade instruments with a different sound appealing to various tastes and genres of music. Take your pick!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes... the J-45 is an entry level guitar....Start with this and never need another guitar ever.

Of course, most people with a J-45 want another guitar. In my case it was another J-45!

I remember in 1991 in the UK playing an early Bozeman 45. I was completely taken with it.

4 years later I had two, which I still have. I did have three - sold it 5 years ago -DANG!

I have two Martins, an M-26 and a 000-28 custom. The J-45s are way better. My opinion only of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is my "Working Man" WM-45. The only thing "cheap" that I have found with it is the pickgaurd. This guitar has beautiful full voiced tone and is a quality instrument.

 

I think there is a fair amount of anti-Gibson sentiment in other forums. I don't know why.

 

I love my Gibson guitars.

 

IMG_1807.jpg

 

By the way, I was in 48th Street NY some tears ago and tried every gibson and Martin there was.(almost)

There was a WM J-45 which was truly amazing. The best guitar in the street.

Sound and playability was top grade!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of folks that make those statements and talk about Gibson quality are people who have never owned a Gibson acoustic and can't afford a Gibson. I suspect there is a lot of unspoken envy involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roop,

 

Even though I've owned a total of 5 Gibson acoustics over the years and still own two, including a J-45 TV, I am among those posters (here and elsewhere) that doesn't always have positive things to say regarding Gibson acoustics. I really dig my Gibsons, but I'm not of the fanboy type when it comes to Gibsons (or any other guitar manufacturer) and I can understand where some of the others are coming from to a certain degree. I've found Gibsons to be fairly inconsistent when it comes to tone — a lot of people don't get the Gibson thump, and neither do I. I don't go for that damp tone (I've called it the Nick Drake sound in the past) and it's those Gibsons that don't go thump that I prefer - dry, woody punchy and articulate. Dusty rather than damp if you will. So the problem as I see it is that Gibson cranks out both the thumpy guitars as well as those that I prefer. Chances are, people drawn to other brands probably feel the same way as I do when it comes to many of the Gibsons they play. This is nothing new, you can find these sonic differences in vintage Gibsons as well. I only share all of this again to provide some perspective. Different strokes for different folks. Somebody bought all of those Gibsons that I passed on in times gone by and I'm guessing that they're quite happy with them.

 

Some of the less-than-positive comments I've made about Gibson's inconsistencies could also be applied to a lesser extent to other manufacturers, including Martin. But here's the thing: we're not all looking for the same thing in a guitar and as long as you're happy with the guitar(s) you've ended up with, you're doing just fine. You shouldn't worry about what I, or anyone else has to say.

 

Professional guitarists are "professionals" because of their skill set, not because of the guitar they choose to use. They can make great music on a Gibson, a Martin, a Yamaha, a Takamine, etc.. I'd say that any guitar in use by a professional qualifies as a professional-grade instrument, and that obviously includes Gibson J-45s.

 

As far as the "entry level" comments are concerned, there are "entry level guitars" and there are "entry level Gibsons" — big difference. I don't have a problem with someone referring to a J-45 as an entry level Gibson. In general, as you move up the price range in the standard Gibson line you're simply paying for more bling, not better tone or quality of construction. I'm not a big fan of bling on guitars, so models like the J-45 really appeal to me. There has also been a tendency amongst Gibson and other manufacturers such as Martin and others to go crazy with multiple versions of the same basic model. For example, you have the J-45, the J-45 TV, J-45 Custom, and various "signature models". You can see how the J-45 might be relegated to bottom-rung status amongst some. I'd personally prefer that Gibson just build a single J-45 to the best of their abilities and perhaps offer a few options such as topwood choice, etc.. My little pipe dream. I'm just glad that they built the one I own and I'm glad that you feel the same way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

Guth -

 

So . . . . . . sometimes Gibson gets it right. B)

 

 

 

.... I just purchased a new J-45 ........

Some say it's an entry level guitar, and that it's not so great? .......

Is this guitar a professional instrument or is it just a cheap entry level guitar? ......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though I've owned a total of 5 Gibson acoustics over the years and still own two, including a J-45 TV, I am among those posters (here and elsewhere) that doesn't always have positive things to say regarding Gibson acoustics.

 

A good and healthy thing

 

- a lot of people don't get the Gibson thump, and neither do I

 

I think other guitars have the thump as well (it's a matter of playing) – But isn't the Gibson thump characterized by the woody dry flavour.

I don't go for that damp tone (I've called it the Nick Drake sound in the past) and it's those Gibsons that don't go thump that I prefer - dry, woody punchy and articulate.

 

Drake was a splendid guitarist and often recorded his sometimes seriously difficult parts in very few takes. A great talent who rehearsed a lot one guess. Many of his songs are played on nylons, but there were westerns too. Does anyone know what brands he used ?

Somebody bought all of those Gibsons that I passed on in times gone by and I'm guessing that they're quite happy with them.

 

A part of the magic. . .

 

Professional guitarists are "professionals" because of their skill set, not because of the guitar they choose to use. They can make great music on a Gibson, a Martin, a Yamaha, a Takamine, etc.

 

94 % is about touch. The last 6 are for the strings in tune -

It's almost true, but let's not underestimate a good guitar.

 

There has also been a tendency amongst Gibson and other manufacturers such as Martin and others to go crazy with multiple versions of the same basic model. For example, you have the J-45, the J-45 TV, J-45 Custom, and various "signature models". You can see how the J-45 might be relegated to bottom-rung status amongst some. I'd personally prefer that Gibson just build a single J-45 to the best of their abilities and perhaps offer a few options such as topwood choice, etc.. My little pipe dream. . .

Dream on, but yeah it's of another world – the difference between my friends 05 and my 2010 J-45 alone, is remarkable.

 

I'm just glad that they built the one I own and I'm glad that you feel the same way.

So am I – have a fine week !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"a lot of people don't get the Gibson thump"

 

Been thinking about this a bit lately. The Gibson acoustics I'm familiar with are terrific guitars, particularly well-suited for roots-oriented music. I would'nt say they are the most refined instruments in the world, though. Case in point. Here's Ernie Hawkins giving some lessons on Texas Blues, the first on a late 50s J45, the latter on a recent Martin HJ38 (scroll past the talk to get to the tones):

 

Sugar babe (Mance Lipscomb)

 

Lonesome Road (Lightnin Hopkins.

 

Ernie gets a tone out of both guitars that works for this music. Deep bass, aggressive top, not too much in the way of overtones. Of the two, the Gibson has a rawer sound, more right-at-you. Some hear that as crude. For others, it's music to our ears. The Martin is more nuanced and refined. The Gibson is like Lighnin' in the video clip, playing at a bar. The Martin has on a suit and tie. Which is "better?" Depends on what you mean. For the song? General tone qualities and response? You judge.

 

Judging from the difference, though, you can see why some might see a Gibson as 'entry' level (if not downright inferior). I don't agree, but (assuming they are speaking from experience, not attitude) what's going on in this clips is the difference they are hearing. Rambler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This of course is a personal opinion but have to say that J-45 sounds downright awful to my ears. I love the J-45 tone and personally own an SJ but if I showed this clip to somebody who is even a mild Gibson sceptic he would tell me this sounds like a plastic box, and I would agree with him.

 

Theres' some great J-45's out there, but at least to me that certainly was not one of them..

 

"a lot of people don't get the Gibson thump"

 

Been thinking about this a bit lately. The Gibson acoustics I'm familiar with are terrific guitars, particularly well-suited for roots-oriented music. I wouldnt say they are the most refined instruments in the world, though. Case in point. Here's Ernie Hawkins giving some lessons on Texas Blues, the first on a late 50s J45, the latter on a recent Martin HJ38 (scroll past the talk to get to the tones):

 

Sugar babe (Mance Lipscomb)

 

Lonesome Road (Lightnin Hopkins.

 

Ernie gets a tone out of both guitars that works for this music. Deep bass, aggresssive top, not too much in the way of overtones. Of the two, the Gibson has a rawer sound, more right-at-you. Some hear that is crude,. For others, its music to our ears. The Martin is a little nuanced and refined. The Gibson is like Lighnin in the video clip, playing at a bar. The Martin has on a suit and tie. Which is "better?" Depends on what you mean. For the song? General tone qualities and response? You judge.

 

Judging from the difference, though, you can see why some might see a Gibson as 'entry' level (if not downright inferior). I dont agree, but (assuming they are speaking from experience, not attitude) what's going on in this clips is the difference they are hearing. Rambler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just look around at what the professionals are playing, and you will see that the J-45 is a top flight professional instrument. On the other hand, if you can afford one, it is a great entry level choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drake was a splendid guitarist and often recorded his sometimes seriously difficult parts in very few takes. A great talent who rehearsed a lot one guess. Many of his songs are played on nylons, but there were westerns too. Does anyone know what brands he used ?[/color]

[/size][/font]

 

ND most famously played a small-bodied Guild.

 

"a lot of people don't get the Gibson thump"

 

The Gibson is like Lighnin in the video clip, playing at a bar.

 

Perfect analogy given Lightnin's own choice of the J45 (not shown in the clip).

 

 

This of course is a personal opinion but have to say that J-45 sounds downright awful to my ears. I love the J-45 tone and personally own an SJ but if I showed this clip to somebody who is even a mild Gibson sceptic he would tell me this sounds like a plastic box, and I would agree with him.

 

Theres' some great J-45's out there, but at least to me that certainly was not one of them..

 

Well it doesn't sound like mine (or like what I wanted when buying), but I do have time for this sort of J45 sound. Rather drier than many of the current crop, and comparable to some rather nice vintage examples I've heard on the Tube. Sounds great for the blues as played here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...