Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Extremely Rare There -


E-minor7

Recommended Posts

I dont mind the Guard... I wish they would build more of the Celeb style... 45s and J200s... The 45 I had actually sounded and played really Nice...

 

I have a Acoustic Catalog with the Guitars Pictured..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't a natural top J-45 a J-50? - Oh Yes.

 

I like the J-200 truss rod cover. But the pickguard - a what were they thinking moment.

Guess they thought : Let's dare to create something new. How about an elegant p-guard f.x. . . .

Admit that guard turned out a bit sissy, even feminine, but maybe therefor I see some romantic halo round this specific guitar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't a natural top J-45 a J-50?

 

 

Only if they say it is. [confused]

 

The distinction between the J-45 and the J-50, in terms of the natural finish denoting the 50 and the sunburst finish denoting the 45, kind of fell by the wayside in the 1970s when they had the "either/or" model designation "J-45/50".

 

Since then, at various points, when they have done something a little different on a J-45 model (like for example the rosewood back and sides J-45s, or the J-45 vines, etc), and left the top unsunbursted, that was ok. Apparently.

 

Even nowadays, there have been natural-finished J-45s -- even ones with per-spec mahogany bodies -- that were called J-45s and not J-50s.

 

Weird, but still Gibson.

 

Fred

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't a natural top J-45 a J-50?

 

 

 

Because (for whatever reason) an old J-45 is today considered a more desirable guitar than the J-50 of the same period, I think they have dropped the J-50 designation. Even the new J-50 equivalent is called a J-45 "natural".

 

Times have changed. Originally the "50" suggested a step up in quality from the "45".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Times have changed. Originally the "50" suggested a step up in quality from the "45".

 

This stands to reason though, as the original sunbursts were to cover less than perfect woods, a natural finish meant there was no hiding the woods, therefore the tops, by that logic, 'should' be better. I think the marketing is much more cynical, the J-45 earned its name within user circles and as such it's its own legacy, so by falling into using the terms that were used by the intended market they may sell more j-45's than they would J-50's. Makes sense to me.... If I had the J-45 legacy under the banner of my name I'd offer them in any colour you wanted.

 

There's always models which come out that just capture the audience, J-45, Hummingbird, J200, D-28 etc etc..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's always models which come out that just capture the audience, J-45, Hummingbird, J200, D-28 etc etc..

Think I see what you mean, and agree. The J-45 became a symbol, an icon (as we call it) - a giant.

Therefor Gibson chooses to call the slope shouldered models with the particular 45 measures 45's regardless of tan, hue, burst or non-burst.

45 is a signal, , , and not least a sound.

 

 

 

 

 

Btw – I don't think tulips really belongs on a 45. In this case the p-guard kind of 'allows' them. . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only if they say it is. [confused]

 

The distinction between the J-45 and the J-50, in terms of the natural finish denoting the 50 and the sunburst finish denoting the 45, kind of fell by the wayside in the 1970s when they had the "either/or" model designation "J-45/50".

 

Since then, at various points, when they have done something a little different on a J-45 model (like for example the rosewood back and sides J-45s, or the J-45 vines, etc), and left the top unsunbursted, that was ok. Apparently.

 

Even nowadays, there have been natural-finished J-45s -- even ones with per-spec mahogany bodies -- that were called J-45s and not J-50s.

 

Weird, but still Gibson.

 

Fred

 

 

Good points Fred and well said.

 

My new J45 in a natural and bought partially because of the color. Easy for me since I have 2 'burst. But I really wanted a natural top for the beauty. After a pretty good search for a decent J50, I decided on a new natural 45 for a number of reasons inclucing the warrenty, dealer service, the 2011 neck (confort contour), the beauty of a new guitar, and the tone of this particular instrument. I was also on sale, making it the same price as the best pre 69 J50 I had found. This instrument also had an interesting pattern in the side wood and a lighter stain than the 'burst 45, again adding to the beauty.

 

Certainly, the "look" of the guitar comes third behind tone and playablity. In my case I was able to get all three.

 

I do agree that the pickguard could be better, well perhaps a 3 ply ... but why nit picks?

 

So having fun here in the Heart of Dixie breakin' in a new "Blonde" ! Love those Gibsons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because (for whatever reason) an old J-45 is today considered a more desirable guitar than the J-50 of the same period, I think they have dropped the J-50 designation. Even the new J-50 equivalent is called a J-45 "natural".

 

Times have changed. Originally the "50" suggested a step up in quality from the "45".

 

Well, for what it's worth, my 2011 Gibson of slope-shouldered mahogany body construction with mahogany neck and sitka spruce top, built in spring of 2011, is labelled a J-50:

 

IMGP9774.jpg

 

Like the English language, with Gibson, there's ALWAYS room for exceptions to "rules". :rolleyes:

 

Fred

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like the English language, with Gibson, there's ALWAYS room for exceptions to "rules". :rolleyes:

 

Glad to read this. My mother-language isn't English and I guess your words permits me a certain percentage of linguistic clumsiness.

Just saw this as an opportunity to mention, , , back to Gibsons - busy and off I am. . . . .

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, for what it's worth, my 2011 Gibson of slope-shouldered mahogany body construction with mahogany neck and sitka spruce top, built in spring of 2011, is labelled a J-50:

 

IMGP9774.jpg

 

Like the English language, with Gibson, there's ALWAYS room for exceptions to "rules". :rolleyes:

 

Fred

 

 

Mmmmmmm ..... my blond 2011 45 was made in Febuary but has a different pickguard (tort. teardrop) .... perhaps that is the difference between a J45 Natural and a J50. Ya think? Otherwise they Look the same including the lighter color of the sides and back. I don't think there is a J50 on the Gibson website.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mmmmmmm ..... my blond 2011 45 was made in Febuary but has a different pickguard (tort. teardrop) .... perhaps that is the difference between a J45 Natural and a J50. Ya think? Otherwise they Look the same including the lighter color of the sides and back. I don't think there is a J50 on the Gibson website.

 

I just don't know about 'the distinction'. As I said earlier, I think if the person typing the label types in "45" then it's a J-45 and if he/she types in a "50", it becomes a J-50, even if it's the same guitar. This one has the thinner tall tapered braces top and bottom, rather than the larger railroad tie braces on the back, so that was one aspect I looked for.

 

I actually prefer what I would call a late '40s to early '50s J-50, in terms of the bracing and the appearance. I actually don't care for the bigger pickguard that mine sports, but my understanding is that they are shooting for the mid-to-late '50s look of the J-50. With the J-45s, they often go for the look of the earlier ones, and hence they put the smaller teardrop pickguards on 'em.

 

Me -- I way prefer the teardrop pickguard, such that, when I got the guitar, I went over to the factory (I bought it in Bozeman, e.g.) to ask them to please change it out for the teardrop style, and they said that -- even though the guitar was only a couple months old -- it would leave a slight 'tanline'.

 

Whatever. It plays great and sounds great, and those are the main things of importance to me.

 

If one of the shops ever does do up a more "anatomically correct" late '40s J-50, or better still, a banner or '46-style J-50, I would have to give that serious consideration, if it sounds as good as this one does. [biggrin]

 

Fred

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add further confusion over 45/50 name and finish, here is a new Country and Western

from Wildwood guitars. You will immediately note that it is finished in Sunburst.....Southern Jumbo you say?

Also of note, is that Wildwood have two of these instruments, one with an orange label and one with beige.02999032_p.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just returned from a folk-evening in another part of town. 3 acts, 2 Gibsons involved. A J-45 white nut Standard and, , , , a 1991 J-45 all hog. The head a bit more pointing than the Standard/45 norm and with the old logo, no banner.

 

The young folkie told me only 20-something were made back then. He obviously loved the guitar and used 12 month old '13 strings. Played fine and created a pretty soft rounded sound, which worked good in the room – and with his splendid high voice.

 

So here's another completely new 45 to me : Mahogany back'n'sides'n'top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add further confusion over 45/50 name and finish, here is a new Country and Western

from Wildwood guitars. You will immediately note that it is finished in Sunburst.....Southern Jumbo you say?

Also of note, is that Wildwood have two of these instruments, one with an orange label and one with beige.02999032_p.jpg

 

Yeah, the "Triburst Country Western" -- that one just shouldn't be allowed.

 

CWs are always always always natural (even MORE than the J-45s are always sunburst [blink] ).

 

Interestingly, before the Wildwood tripleburst CWs came out, with their rounded shoulders and all, there was this triburst square-shouldered version that I saw at last year's Dallas Guitar Show:

IMG_1032.jpg

 

Clearly, a beautiful guitar....

IMG_1030.jpg

 

...but named without regard for the history of the model (IMO).

 

That one, btw, was a very nice-sounding guitar; had I not been on the hunt for a vintage guitar at the time, I might have considered the TB CW.

 

Fred

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interestingly, before the Wildwood tripleburst CWs came out, with their rounded shoulders and all, there was this triburst square-shouldered version that I saw at last year's Dallas Guitar Show:

 

Clearly, a beautiful guitar....

 

...but named without regard for the history of the model (IMO).

 

I posted this one in the Hummingbird the same as a Sq Shouldered CW or SJ? thread.

 

Country and Western – no way. It's a square sh. Southern Jumbo.

 

Take yourself seriously Bozeman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see that we are now recycling our threads. Must be our brains our getting tired...... [rolleyes] (I know mine is!)

I posted the same text under 2 different threads on purpose. It fitted both. But yes we weaving a little, but that's okay with me.

And yes – I'm a little tired too. Zzzzzzzzzz z z z z z. . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...