Is this too redundant?

[GotTheSilver]

A local store has a Sheryl Crow SJ in stock. I have played it twice and both times was struck by its responsiveness and liveliness. I am considering a couple of different options for my next guitar purchase, and this SC SJ is one of them.

 

I already have a J-45 Legend, though, which is a great guitar. The J-45 is warm and full sounding, which is great when using a pick, but is perhaps a bit too warm when playing finger style blues. I would not call it muddy when fingerpicking, just not crisp.

 

Conversely, the SC SJ is more crisp. I think it is better for the blues finger style, but not as good sounding with a pick. These two guitars somewhat represent different ends of the J-45 tonal range, and hence each seems more ideally suited to different applications. Don't get me wrong, neither is a slouch at the other application, just looking at where their strengths lie.

 

The other purchases I am considering are a Fractal Axe-FX II amp modeler and a higher end boutique acoustic. A vintage SJ is also an option if I find the right one. Given these other choices, is the SC SJ just too redundant to the J-45 I already have? I have always loved the aesthetics of the SJ and really took notice when the Sheryl Crow model was announced, due to its features, including the Adirondack spruce top.

 

I am just trying to weigh my options here and make a decision. Any perspectives you could provide would be appreciated.

[j45nick]

I don't think it is redundant, but make sure the SC SJ and the Legend have the same strings on them so that you can make a really valid comparison. FYI, there is a substantial tonal difference between my 1948 J-45 and my 1943 SJ re-issue, and it's not dissimilar to what you are seeing between your Legend and the SC.

 

It may just be coincidence, as these guitars are all individuals.

[E-minor7]

Wouldn't say so - but of course the 2 models are very close.

Seems you have found your field.

Were any others considered ?

[duluthdan]

Does this Sheryl Crow have the Trance pick-up? My J45TV and the SJ I just had made sound very different. While the J45 has that airy woodiness sound to it, the SJ displays a bolder, rounder sound. Hard for me to believe these two guitars are basically the same woods and specs, xcept for the wider thicker neck on the SJ. I'm not surprised you note a difference between your Ledgend and the SJ.

[Motherofpearl]

Ah the legend have always wanted one. I'm intrigued by the sc/sj as well. A friend has a kristofferson SJ and its a magnificent guitar. Like stated earlier bold dry.

[GotTheSilver]

Thanks for the responses, guys.

 

Nick, no they do not have the same strings, which does make it hard to compare. I use pyramid strings on my J-45, which are warmer sounding strings and I am sure are contributing to the difference. I don't know what strings are on the SJ. Still, the difference in tone seems pretty clear.

 

Dan, this is the version without the pickup, which is what I would prefer.

 

Em7, yes, I am a big fan of the J-45 family. I love the mahogany round shoulder dreads. I also have an AJ and an L-00, so I have a couple of other bases covered already. I would like to have a Hummingbird some day. I really was not looking for an SJ, I was focused on the other options I mention above, but this one just showed up and caught my attention. I need to decide if I want to stick to my original plans or divert funds to this SJ. The Axe-FX would be really cool!

[Lars68]

As you might have noticed, I have posted a couple of threads recently praising my new Sheryl SJ. I love the Gibson slope shoulder tone and look and simply wanted an SJ to complement my vintage 1942 J-45 and modern AJ. I bought the SJ simply based on specs because it had everything I was looking for, like adi top, narrow bridge, bone nut/saddle/pins, waverly tuners, tortoise guard, bound fingerboard, a "brighter/more red" sunburst, Banner era headstock logos, etc.

 

I have never been more impressed with a new guitar. I have played several very high end new Martins and Gibsons but this one takes the price in my book. Of course, it shares more tonal characteristics with my old -45 than my other guitars, but at the same time it is very, very different. The SJ is incredibly crisp, clear, and loud, while the -45 is pure woodiness.

 

My advice would be to ask the store to put on the strings of your choice and then bring your Legend in for a comparison. Try to forget about the similarities in specs and just close your eyes and let your ears and hands guide you. Like I said in one of my other threads, my new SJ sounds VERY different from the J-45 TV I have compared it to, and these two guitars should be virtually identical. But then who knows with Gibson specs... Either way, this experience has really opened my eyes to the concept of looking for individual guitars and sounds, instead of reading too much into a spec sheet.

 

Also, what in the world could be wrong with having both a J-45 and an SJ. These are two of the most classical Gibson designs of all time. There are many equally good kinds of chocolate...

 

Lars

 

Edit: I think I should add that I believe that we all come to the hobby of guitars with different backgrounds and areas of interest, which in turn affect our choices of instruments. For example, a proffesional guitarist is more likely to focus more on tone and playability than someone like me, who is perhaps more interested in the guitar as an object of art and design. So, keep this in mind when reading my "advice" above.

[BluesKing777]

I need to decide if I want to stick to my original plans or divert funds to this SJ. The Axe-FX would be really cool!

 

I have not tried the Axe-FX (or the guitar in question), but have read a lot of the guff on modelling because I have a newish Line 6 POD HD Desktop.

 

Have you tried these Pod HDs? I love mine and can't believe the possibilities......I would get one of these for a few hundred bucks to try before spending 3000 plus extras on the Axe.

 

I did this video's music (link below) with just my ES125 into Pod HD direct (mono only) to iMac : (And guess which amp model? - Yep Gibson EH135 or something like that!

 

I also play my pickup equipped acoustics in to the Pod for experiments, and have obtained a lot of the early Beatles/Stones sounds......

 

 

 

 

BluesKing777.

[EuroAussie]

Its interesting you say that. I often felt that J-45's have a softer, dryer more woodier tone while SJ's are a little more crisper, brighter with a stronger edge. In particular on the TV models and vintage Gibsons.

[Lars68]

I also participate over at the Martin forum, UMGF, quite a bit, and it it interesting to note how the discussions over there are more technical and specification oriented in nature. Martin is much more detailed in regards to the construction descriptions of each specific model. So discussions of the difference in tone between construcion X and Y are very common on the UMGF, and not so much here. Gibson gives much less technical reference information, making those types of comparisons hard. I can only assume that this is done on purpose as a part of their strategy. By the way, this is a strategy I don't agree with. I think we as customers have a right to know the specifics of what we buy. It should not be up to experience to know that when Gibson says "Rosewood", it is infact Indian rosewood.

 

Lars

[zombywoof]

To my ears J-45s and SJs from the 1940s and 1950s do have a diferent sound to them. The SJs were not as wide open and as big banging as the J-45s having a tighter or more defined upper and lower end. The only thing I can come up with is that if you look, Gibson tended to use better quality woods for the SJs. It is almost like they used wood to tune the SJs. I am not sure though there is as much a distinction between the SJ and J-45 these days.

 

I also do not think Gibson is "short changed" over at UMF. There is alot of info and respect for them over there at least in the Vintage Corner section.

 

When it comes to choosing guitars we all have ourt little quirks. You have to find the neck profile and nut width you are most comfortable with and then combine the natural voice of the guitar with favored setup and individual style. Good example - I really like the sound of small mahogany top guitars like the old Guild M-20 and Martin 00-15. But no matter what guage or type of strings I go with and how much I raise the action to accomodate my style of playing they just sound too flippin' polite for me when played with my fingers. I can't force enough punch out of them or get a percussive enough low end. Yet I could rattle off a list of blues players I know who love those guitars - particularly the little Martins.

 

With apologies to Gibson's marketing team, if there is a Gibson associated with blues it would have to be a 1955-1959 J-50 with a Dearmond 210 pickup slapped across the soundhole. Think Elmore James and Lightnin' Hopkins. But I will betcha if you threw a J-45 Legend or Sheryl Crow SJ in their hands they would still sound like them. Funny how that works.

 

So in a long winded way, I would say you are just overthinking the whole thing. If the Crow model works for you then great. Don't worry about this or that. It just makes the mind wobble.

[Lars68]

I totally agree, the UMGF Vintage Corner has a lot of Gibson love. It is a great source of information.

 

Lars