Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Gibson SJ 100


alexthegreat404

Recommended Posts

Hello everybody!

 

Im new here and am proud to say I recently purchased my first Gibson guitar. Im 19 and have been playing for about 6 years.

 

I love Fender and was thrilled when I got my Stratocaster (which Ill never give up =P), but still, I yearned for a Gibson for years. Gibson acoustics were always the apple of my eye for their unique tone and beautiful looks. Back in high school, I'd spend hours looking on guitar center and musician friend's websites. One particular model I always looked at was the SJ- 100. Cheaper and more basic than the legendary J 200, but it still maintained that great Jumbo tone. I never got to play one as local stores by me never had one (that I saw).

 

Finally, after years of wanting a Gibson acoustic I saw a local add on craigslist for a 2000 SJ 100. The seller listed it at around 1000. I knew it was more than i could spend but after negotiation, I got the price down to 800. I know I'm supposed to be using every penny i make at work for college but I couldn't resist. After seeing it (mint condition) and from the first minute I played it, I knew I had to have it. I bought it on the spot and couldn't be happier. It has a tone and feel like I've never felt. Needless to say, buying that guitar you've always wanted is a nice feeling.

 

Somewhere down the line in the past few years, I've noticed the model has been removed from Gibson's site, along with other music store's stock. I know the original J 100's from the 30s on the most revered and thought of, but what do you guys think of the SJ 100s from say 2000- 2007ish (or whenever they were discontinued)? Anyone else own one or played one, did I get a good deal? or know why it was discontinued again?

 

Sorry for such an essay... I'm just quite thrilled with it! Can't believe I finally have one.

post-33996-025901000 1308704654_thumb.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what do you guys think of the SJ 100s from say 2000- 2007ish (or whenever they were discontinued)? Anyone else own one or played one, did I get a good deal? or know why it was discontinued again?

 

You got a fine deal, definitely not bad but good and plenty fine. I have a 2002 Xtra maple back and it is a fabulous guitar, so that's what I think. I havent played a bubinga back which is what it looks like you got, but I have heard good things about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats on your new SJ100. With the price of college tuition, you could hold off buying a decent car, let alone a guitar, for four years. Books probably cost as much for a year as you paid for your guitar. You'll be enjoying your Gibson long after your sheepskin has faded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI - The guitar in your pic is not a 2000 model. The 2000 version was called a J100xtra. It had black binding and an abalone rosette with a plain J200-shaped pickguard. It had a natural finish top, with maple back & sides in either natural or a very dark vintage antique finish. I bought one new and still have it (as well as catalogs from that peroid). Note that the first and fifth serial number numerals will tell you the year. This particular model has gone through many changes, both in appointments and materials. Regardless of the year, it appears that you did very well on the price. Enjoy your new guitar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI - The guitar in your pic is not a 2000 model. The 2000 version was called a J100xtra. It had black binding and an abalone rosette with a plain J200-shaped pickguard. It had a natural finish top, with maple back & sides in either natural or a very dark vintage antique finish. I bought one new and still have it (as well as catalogs from that peroid). Note that the first and fifth serial number numerals will tell you the year. This particular model has gone through many changes, both in appointments and materials. Regardless of the year, it appears that you did very well on the price. Enjoy your new guitar!

 

thanks!

 

hmmm though. the guy said it was a 2000 model that he purchased in 2002. he didnt seem like he was very into guitars though. seemed more like he wanted a "pretty" guitar with the brand name to learn on, and forgot about it until he sold it. the serial number is 00367046, which would indicate its a 2007 guitar... something seems off...

 

it wouldnt make sense to lie about the age based off of a 2000 or 2007 model. maybe he got it second hand and didnt want to admit he was the second owner. oh well, i guess it doesnt matter, its still a beautiful Gibson acoustic!

thanks for the info!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI - The guitar in your pic is not a 2000 model. The 2000 version was called a J100xtra. It had black binding and an abalone rosette with a plain J200-shaped pickguard. It had a natural finish top, with maple back & sides in either natural or a very dark vintage antique finish. I bought one new and still have it (as well as catalogs from that peroid). Note that the first and fifth serial number numerals will tell you the year. This particular model has gone through many changes, both in appointments and materials. Regardless of the year, it appears that you did very well on the price. Enjoy your new guitar!

You know, my main guitar is a 2000 J100 that I've always assumed is an J100xtra (same specs you describe, and let's not forget the gold hardware), but recently, I looked again at the label--it says J100XT. Does your label say "Xtra?"

 

Could it be that the XT does not (as I had assumed for over a decade) stand for "Xtra" but instead indicates the top finish?? (The top on mine, when new, was as least as light-colored as the maple but has since mellowed to a lovely dark-ish honey-color. I'm guessing it's a natrual finish, not vintage antique, if it started out so light, right?)

 

So...does anyone know if a 2000 J100-XT designation makes it an "xtra," or a a natrual top (or even a vintage antique top that took awhile to get goin'')?

 

Perhaps there is a mystery afoot, or was I lying all these years? :^o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, my main guitar is a 2000 J100 that I've always assumed is an J100xtra (same specs you describe, and let's not forget the gold hardware), but recently, I looked again at the label--it says J100XT. Does your label say "Xtra?"

 

Could it be that the XT does not (as I had assumed for over a decade) stand for "Xtra" but instead indicates the top finish?? (The top on mine, when new, was as least as light-colored as the maple but has since mellowed to a lovely dark-ish honey-color. I'm guessing it's a natrual finish, not vintage antique, if it started out so light, right?)

 

So...does anyone know if a 2000 J100-XT designation makes it an "xtra," or a a natrual top (or even a vintage antique top that took awhile to get goin'')?

 

Perhaps there is a mystery afoot, or was I lying all these years? :^o

 

nope it would seem you are very right! and most early 2000s models ive seen are the Xtras. on the inside paper mine simply says "SJ- 100."

 

furthermore, based off the serial number my guitar was indeed manufactured in the early part of 2007. in fact, it looks just like the SJ- 100s i remember starring at online in 06 and 07 back when i was researching Gibson acoustics more. im not exactly bothered by this im just a little miffed the guy i bought it from was making things up. the only reasons i can think of were that he mixed up his dates with the guitars he purchased (he said he also recently sold his old taylor), wanted to seem like the j100 was more "vintage", or simply bought it used and didnt want it to seem like i was getting a guitar with 2 previous owners.

 

i was thinking the guitar could be a fake but ive gone over it 100 times. its excellent quality, the Gibson logo on the headstock looks 100% authentic, it has the white paper on the inside with the classic Gibson message about quality, the serial number checks out, and above all it sounds great with that unique tone.

 

so its safe to say its a 2007 model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I own a 94 J-100 Xtra which has Mahogany B&S, and which is my go to guitar, with a lovely big zingy tone.

P1010341.jpg

 

However a couple of months ago I had the chance to try out a 2006 SJ-100 with the Bubinga B&S sides, and that guitar was absolutely awesome, it had everything my guitar has and more! After thinking about the guitar for some days I went back to the shop (Frailers, Runcorn) with the intention of buying it, but alas it had gone. Oh well such is life.

 

One thing to note is how much these guitars vary, my friend has a 93 with the same specs as mine, and it sounds completely different!

 

If your SJ-100 is anything like that one I tried, you are very lucky indeed.

 

Steve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, my main guitar is a 2000 J100 that I've always assumed is an J100xtra (same specs you describe, and let's not forget the gold hardware), but recently, I looked again at the label--it says J100XT. Does your label say "Xtra?"

 

Could it be that the XT does not (as I had assumed for over a decade) stand for "Xtra" but instead indicates the top finish?? (The top on mine, when new, was as least as light-colored as the maple but has since mellowed to a lovely dark-ish honey-color. I'm guessing it's a natrual finish, not vintage antique, if it started out so light, right?)

 

So...does anyone know if a 2000 J100-XT designation makes it an "xtra," or a a natrual top (or even a vintage antique top that took awhile to get goin'')?

 

Perhaps there is a mystery afoot, or was I lying all these years? :^o

 

Anne - Just checked my catalog. The finish designations for the "J100 Xtra" (this is exactly how it it written) in 2000 were AN for Antique Natural, and AT for Antique Walnut. Mine has the dark walnut finish on the back & sides with a natural top. Yes, the tuners are gold. Also the peghead logo & crown are inlaid rather than a decal. The many versions of this model vary significantly. For example, I previously owned an '06 J100 which also was called an 'extra' (I believe it retained the letter 'e'). It had a natural finish with mahogany back & sides, white body binding, standard rosette, and a decal peghead logo & crown. As for the label on my 2000, I'll confirm what it says tomorrow when I can get to it without waking up my wife (I'm a bit of a night owl!). I do know that at least one of these two guitars spelled the word 'extra' (or Xtra) out on the label.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anne - Just checked my catalog. The finish designations for the "J100 Xtra" (this is exactly how it it written) in 2000 were AN for Antique Natural, and AT for Antique Walnut. Mine has the dark walnut finish on the back & sides with a natural top. Yes, the tuners are gold. Also the peghead logo & crown are inlaid rather than a decal. The many versions of this model vary significantly. For example, I previously owned an '06 J100 which also was called an 'extra' (I believe it retained the letter 'e'). It had a natural finish with mahogany back & sides, white body binding, standard rosette, and a decal peghead logo & crown. As for the label on my 2000, I'll confirm what it says tomorrow when I can get to it without waking up my wife (I'm a bit of a night owl!). I do know that at least one of these two guitars spelled the word 'extra' (or Xtra) out on the label.

Oooh... the plot thickens! If the finish designations for that year were AN and AT, then "XT" might well mean "Xtra," given that my finish is surely the AN and not some third kind that wasn't mentioned in the catalog. (It seems I read somewhere-perhaps in a thread about another model?- that Gibson has used "XT" to denote a finish, but I could be mis-remembering...)

 

Can't wait to hear what your orangle label says...

 

(BTW, the SN indicates that my lovely was born in mid Jan of 2000, which makes me wonder, now, what the 1999 catalogue says about this model--maybe the "XT" designation on my label can be explained by something as simple as--they were using up the leftover labels?)

 

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oooh... the plot thickens! If the finish designations for that year were AN and AT, then "XT" might well mean "Xtra," given that my finish is surely the AN and not some third kind that wasn't mentioned in the catalog. (It seems I read somewhere-perhaps in a thread about another model?- that Gibson has used "XT" to denote a finish, but I could be mis-remembering...)

 

Can't wait to hear what your orangle label says...

 

(BTW, the SN indicates that my lovely was born in mid Jan of 2000, which makes me wonder, now, what the 1999 catalogue says about this model--maybe the "XT" designation on my label can be explained by something as simple as--they were using up the leftover labels?)

 

Thanks!

 

Okay, just checked, and my label says 'J100 XT' just like yours. I'd have to say I'm 99.99% certain this signifies 'Xtra'. Mine was built in December of 2000. Btw, I also have the '99 catalog. 1999 was the year Bozeman revamped their lineup in a big way, with a nod towards many of their classic models from the past. The specs for the J100 Xtra are identical in '99 compared to '00, as is the catalog picture which shows the pickguard covering part of the abalone rosette. Mine is completely visible, as has been the rosette on every example of this guitar I've ever seen (and I actually saw quite a few during those years - all in natural except for mine). It could be that some early examples left the factory this way, and then they thankfully decided to expose the full rosette. I purchased my '00 J100 new, I believe, in April of '01. Later that year, I also purchased a new '01 J150. The two instruments had a very different tone, with the J100 having a stronger bass projection, while the J150 was very even from top to bottom. Neck material is mahogany on the J100 & was maple on the J150. The neck profiles were very different as well, with the J100 having a fast '60s feel. Also, this particular J100 is seriously light as a feather when compared to the J150 I had. Really two very different guitars in tone & playability, even though all the body bracing looked identical. Eventually the J100 ended up being the keeper, while the J150 became part of a trade that landed a natural finish ES 335. From those early years of the 2000s, I also owned a J50, WM45, and still own a '02 J45 Rosewood. Bozeman put out some super nice guitars in the first half of the decade, and the pricing at the time represented a very good value, imho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, just checked, and my label says 'J100 XT' just like yours. I'd have to say I'm 99.99% certain this signifies 'Xtra'. Mine was built in December of 2000. Btw, I also have the '99 catalog. 1999 was the year Bozeman revamped their lineup in a big way, with a nod towards many of their classic models from the past. The specs for the J100 Xtra are identical in '99 compared to '00, as is the catalog picture which shows the pickguard covering part of the abalone rosette. Mine is completely visible, as has been the rosette on every example of this guitar I've ever seen (and I actually saw quite a few during those years - all in natural except for mine). It could be that some early examples left the factory this way, and then they thankfully decided to expose the full rosette. I purchased my '00 J100 new, I believe, in April of '01. Later that year, I also purchased a new '01 J150. The two instruments had a very different tone, with the J100 having a stronger bass projection, while the J150 was very even from top to bottom. Neck material is mahogany on the J100 & was maple on the J150. The neck profiles were very different as well, with the J100 having a fast '60s feel. Also, this particular J100 is seriously light as a feather when compared to the J150 I had. Really two very different guitars in tone & playability, even though all the body bracing looked identical. Eventually the J100 ended up being the keeper, while the J150 became part of a trade that landed a natural finish ES 335. From those early years of the 2000s, I also owned a J50, WM45, and still own a '02 J45 Rosewood. Bozeman put out some super nice guitars in the first half of the decade, and the pricing at the time represented a very good value, imho.

Whew!!! Good to know the specs (except for the finishes) AND the labels are the same for our Y2K beauties. (As seen in my profile photo, the abalone rosette is not obscured by the guard--whenever I see a guard right up to the soundhole, I get an overpowering urge to "nudge" it south, even if there're only rings beneath.)

 

Yes, it's light--deceptively light, even. Before this, my main guitar was a Guild D-50; superb tone, but heavy as a gunboat. You expect the J100 to feel heavier than it is, and you might also expect it to "feel" big, but I find the body style/dimensions to be about as comfy and cozy--whether I'm standing or sitting--as the law allows.

 

I just love the tone and feel of this thing, and it keeps getting better with age. I am soon to have a bone saddle and nut put on (saddle needed replacement anyway), but this'll be my first trip to the luthiers. Hasn't even needed a set-up in all this while. I play it everday, and gig out with it on occasion. At a weekly open mic I attend, I even let a few specific "regulars" play it on stage. This way, I get to hear it on the other side, in the hands of people who play different styles and with better chops. Even better, we all share the love for this one lovely instrument. Which, as you know, is considerable.[thumbup]

 

Thanks for all your great info and for helping to solve my little puzzle--

 

Anne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whew!!! Good to know the specs (except for the finishes) AND the labels are the same for our Y2K beauties. (As seen in my profile photo, the abalone rosette is not obscured by the guard--whenever I see a guard right up to the soundhole, I get an overpowering urge to "nudge" it south, even if there're only rings beneath.)

 

Yes, it's light--deceptively light, even. Before this, my main guitar was a Guild D-50; superb tone, but heavy as a gunboat. You expect the J100 to feel heavier than it is, and you might also expect it to "feel" big, but I find the body style/dimensions to be about as comfy and cozy--whether I'm standing or sitting--as the law allows.

 

I just love the tone and feel of this thing, and it keeps getting better with age. I am soon to have a bone saddle and nut put on (saddle needed replacement anyway), but this'll be my first trip to the luthiers. Hasn't even needed a set-up in all this while. I play it everday, and gig out with it on occasion. At a weekly open mic I attend, I even let a few specific "regulars" play it on stage. This way, I get to hear it on the other side, in the hands of people who play different styles and with better chops. Even better, we all share the love for this one lovely instrument. Which, as you know, is considerable.[thumbup]

 

Thanks for all your great info and for helping to solve my little puzzle--

 

Anne

 

Anne - Have to add another two cents worth of discussion to this J100 lovefest. The one other catalog I have from this period was from the 2003 model year. By that time, the J100-Xtra no longer had the abalone rosette. The fretboard inlays became mop crowns, and the binding was now white. Also, the pickguard was not installed (don't know if it came with the guitar or not). The body remained maple & the neck mahogany. Interestingly, over the years there haven't been too many Jumbo Gibsons that sported a fully visible abalone rosette. For me, the understated appointments of the '00 J100 in conjunction with the beautiful rosette make it one of the more attractive jumbos I've laid my eyes on. It appears to have been a pretty narrow window for this particular combination of features. And like you, I've done virtually nothing to the guitar, but promise to get after it in about five years (retirement!). Which reminds me because someday I too plan to experiment with the nut & saddle: they say that bone saddles do not generally provide as even of a contact surface for under saddle pickups due to varying degrees of density within the bone itself. So in case you frequently use the Fishman, there's a chance it might change your plugged in signal strength from string to string..... Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(BTW, the SN indicates that my lovely was born in mid Jan of 2000, which makes me wonder, now, what the 1999 catalogue says about this model--maybe the "XT" designation on my label can be explained by something as simple as--they were using up the leftover labels?)

 

Not sure if you've ever seen the workstation that they use in Bozeman to make up the guitar labels. I would bet that some of the younger members of the forum have never even seen a device like this. ...anyway...I would expect that any label that does not make sense is probably a mistake...

 

 

IMG_6717.jpg

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

im loving all of the information and love the sj 100 is receiving! i feel like im walking on water every time im playing mine, and im glad to know its actual year now so thanks!

 

that picture of the orange and white label workstation is really cool. does it make a difference if your guitar has a white or orange?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which reminds me because someday I too plan to experiment with the nut & saddle: they say that bone saddles do not generally provide as even of a contact surface for under saddle pickups due to varying degrees of density within the bone itself. So in case you frequently use the Fishman, there's a chance it might change your plugged in signal strength from string to string..... Bob

Yes, I have read about that potential situation, so I asked Bob Colosi about that very thing--he said he's heard of that issue but that he has not had reports of it happening with his customers, possibly because of the quality of bone that he uses or possibly because of dumb luck. And he also mentioned the obvious, which is that most higher-end guitars use bone saddles AND plenty have USTs.

 

Either way, I will be discussing that when I bring 'er into the shop. Worst case scenario, seems to me, would be to sand off a little extra bone and then use ebony shims--maybe that'd provide a hard, possibly more uniform, contact. I'll have to trust the luthier.

 

I'll definitely let you know how it comes out. In fact, I think I'll record a "before" and "after," to memorialize the grand event, and post the results. Won't be an exact apples-to-apples comparison, given all the moving parts, but it'll be fun regardless.

 

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if you've ever seen the workstation that they use in Bozeman to make up the guitar labels. I would bet that some of the younger members of the forum have never even seen a device like this. ...anyway...I would expect that any label that does not make sense is probably a mistake...

 

 

IMG_6717.jpg

I am not even kidding you-- I laughed out loud, and hard, when this pic came up. In fact, I'm still giggling. Thanks for sharing this gem!

 

White vs orange is always an interesting discussion, but I can never remember if there's a consensus as to whether the label-du-jour is connected to certain models or years or what. But if the workstation picture is any indication....it might just be a free-for-all. Hee-hee...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...