MapleManiac Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Of course the stereotype about Gibson from the haters is that they aren't clear, they're muddy. Which model do you think most contradicts this idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ataylor Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Of the models I've played and heard, I'd have to say the Advanced Jumbo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearbasher Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Seeing the OPs user name, this should make him (or her) happy. My maple J-45 is the clearest sounding Gibson I've ever heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dchristo Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Seeing the OPs user name, this should make him (or her) happy. My maple J-45 is the clearest sounding Gibson I've ever heard. I dont know, my maple J 200 is pretty clear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 . Maple. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gotomsdos Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 What about KOA ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Haters will tell you theyre inconsistent, often stuffed with socks, but I rarely would hear that Gibsons are muddy (thats rosewood Martin territory). Balance and note seperation is one of the traists of Gibson, so I dont know where youre getting that assumption from. Whats the clearest, probably a maple J-165, very clear but also without any real depth, the rosewood J-165 I find works better. Of course the stereotype about Gibson from the haters is that they aren't clear, they're muddy. Which model do you think most contradicts this idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinder Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 I've never owned a muddy Gibson. I think people often confuse the glorious choral blend of the notes in chords, as exhibited best by a Hog J45, for muddiness. In terms of clarity, the guitars I've owned with the most clarity (ie you can hear every note in a chord ringing separately) would be my former J165 Maple and my current AJ. The AJ manages to incorporate warmth and clarity, whereas the 165 had a more cold milkiness to the tone. Still lovely, though. My former SJ200 had clarity, but less so than the above, with the glorious bass thrum binding everything together somewhat. Hummingbirds have more clarity than a J45, but not a great deal more. Doves are clear with a more chunky, thumpy bass than an SJ200 due to the body shape. The Dove style of bass tends to exist almost separately from the rest of the sound of the guitar, giving a fat, defined bass that almost lives nextdoor to the glassy treble end and the rockpool-like clarity of the midrange. A stupendous guitar. The L-00 sounds almost like a mini-J45. Less bottom end and a bit less choral blend, some hearty snap and pop for fingerstyle, but not what I'd call extreme clarity. Not that I'm criticising the L-00 at all! I love mine. I gather the older long-scale Blues Kings tended towards note separation and clarity more than the shorties like mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe M Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Doves are clear with a more chunky, thumpy bass than an SJ200 due to the body shape. The Dove style of bass tends to exist almost separately from the rest of the sound of the guitar, giving a fat, defined bass that almost lives nextdoor to the glassy treble end and the rockpool-like clarity of the midrange. A stupendous guitar. Jinder nailed it, that's exactly how my Dove sounds.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danner Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Hey Jinder, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on how the Songwriter Studio Deluxe (square shoulder, rosewood, long scale) fits into your tonal hierarchy? Thanks for your thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Morton Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 It really depends on the player and how they make the guitar sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry K Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
struma6 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 I'd have to agree with the AJ vote. Though my CJ165EC is clear as a bell. Why is there always someone here that calls for the defense of Gibson acoustics against the "haters"? I don't get that. I honestly don't care WHAT anyone thinks about the brand except me. I love 'em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MapleManiac Posted December 15, 2011 Author Share Posted December 15, 2011 Haters will tell you theyre inconsistent, often stuffed with socks, but I rarely would hear that Gibsons are muddy (thats rosewood Martin territory). Balance and note seperation is one of the traists of Gibson, so I dont know where youre getting that assumption from. Whats the clearest, probably a maple J-165, very clear but also without any real depth, the rosewood J-165 I find works better. Okay, you win. I wish to strike "muddy" from the record. Muffled? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fretplay Posted December 15, 2011 Share Posted December 15, 2011 Talking guitars without pickups or effects I would say certainly Maple back and cedar top for the clearest sound. Of course this gives a clear sound but on the down side some of it can be lost with fellow players. However solo playing that's the one. Look out for a Gibson Cascade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdd707 Posted December 15, 2011 Share Posted December 15, 2011 All the "it depends" answers are right because, well, it depends. But for a straight up vote, i say Advanced Jumbo (but I might be biased). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted December 15, 2011 Share Posted December 15, 2011 I just played a primo J200 a few weeks ago, and the thing I dug about it was that the bass throbbed, it was right there, but it din't cover anything up, so the mids and top rang true. That's maple talking. Rw has a quick response, so a note is also going to appear to have that right there quality. But when there's 2 voices going, it can be murkier. I fingerpick (piedmont), which means the high and low end are going on at the same time, so unless I'm careful with the damping, the low end can overshadow the mids and top. The AJ I used to have was a problem for me that way. But take this with a grain of salt- different attack, different response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambler Posted December 15, 2011 Share Posted December 15, 2011 the stereotype about Gibson from the haters is that they aren't clear, they're muddy. Which model do you think most contradicts this idea? An adi J5/45 or maple jumbo. But, I think muddy is wide of the mark. Gibson's ring clear enough. That said, the average off-the-shelf Gibson isn't going to have the kind hyper-articulate note-for-note accuracy typical of Martins and their ilk. To an ear accustomed to a Martin a Gibson mgiht seems muddy. Common enough an error, compounded by developing an aversion to Gibsons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinder Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 Hey Jinder, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on how the Songwriter Studio Deluxe (square shoulder, rosewood, long scale) fits into your tonal hierarchy? Thanks for your thoughts. You know what, I've never played one...I've placed a Songwriter Deluxe EC before, which was rich, growly and quite unique amongst Gibsons (very focused, pleasantly boxy mids with a bell-like, overtone-rich top end and an almost feral, throaty bottom end akin to the exhaust note of a great V8 being gunned) but never the non-cutaway version. In my experience of cutaway Vs non-cut, the non-cut is basically similar with "a little more everything". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfox14 Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 That's like asking which Gibson is the best looking guitar. Too subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyearspickn Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 That's like asking which Gibson is the best looking guitar. Too subjective. Asked and Answered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sternfan Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 I thought my 45TV was pitch-perfect clear, until I got my Madi/Adi AJ. It's easily the cleanest sounding instrument I've owned. Certinly no blues machine but damn does it sing country and rock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.