1941 J-35 v 1942 J45

[Bryn6490]

What are the differences between the 1941 J-35 and a 1942 J-45? The guitars look the same. Was it because the J-35 was a "Great Depression" era guitar? The J-35 was made from around 1934 to 1941. I see a lot of vintage J-35's that look like there in better shape than the J-45's.

 

1941 Gibson J-35

http://www.acousticletter.com/shop/1941-vintage-gibson-j35/#lightbox/0/

[zombywoof]

Hopefully JT will drop by. He knows these guitars inside out.

 

I believe the J-35 was still being made in early 1942. Both the 41/42 J-35 and 1942 J-50/45 will have two tone bars and scalloped bracing. I think the footprint is the same but am not 100% positive. I do not have a clue about back braces.

[tpbiii]

What are the differences between the 1941 J-35 and a 1942 J-45? The guitars look the same. Was it because the J-35 was a "Great Depression" era guitar? The J-35 was made from around 1934 to 1941. I see a lot of vintage J-35's that look like there in better shape than the J-45's.

 

1941 Gibson J-35

http://www.acousticl...35/#lightbox/0/

 

The J-35 was introduced in late 1936 -- at the beginning, they had the same body shape as the as the Jumbo, which had a less tapered body than that the Advanced Jumbo, which was introduced at the same time. Later, in 1937, the AJ body shape was adopted by the J-35. That same body shape has been with us ever since -- J-5, J-45, SJ, CW ....

 

Early J-35 had three unscalloped tone bars -- but that has nothing to do with your question. Later two tone bars were used, both scalloped and scalloped. In my experience, different J-35s can have quite different sounds and different tone bar details -- you need to look and/or listen. As a general rule, the J-35s are stronger than the J-45s.

 

Here is our a '42 J-45

 

 

Here is the bracing,

 

 

Let's pick,

 

-Tom

[Bryn6490]

The J-35 was introduced in late 1936 -- at the beginning, they had the same body shape as the as the Jumbo, which had a less tapered body than that the Advanced Jumbo, which was introduced at the same time. Later, in 1937, the AJ body shape was adopted by the J-35. That same body shape has been with us ever since -- J-5, J-45, SJ, CW ....

 

Early J-35 had three unscalloped tone bars -- but that has nothing to do with your question. Later two tone bars were used, both scalloped and scalloped. In my experience, different J-35s can have quite different sounds and different tone bar details -- you need to look and/or listen. As a general rule, the J-35s are stronger than the J-45s.

 

Here is our a '42 J-45

 

 

Here is the bracing,

 

 

Let's pick,

 

-Tom

I've never seen a J-45 in that kind of shape...It looks like it's brand new. I'm thinking also that the J-35 is lighter than the J-45. The tapper you are talking about is it for sound or player comfort? I never notice the body tapper until you just mentioned it.

[Bryn6490]

I just checked all of my other guitars they are all tappered. After over 25 years, Thats one thing I never looked for on a guitar before. How would you compare the new 2013 J-35 to a vintage. Would you say it's spot on or just a modern interpretation of vintage. I'm not talking about sound but the specs. Also would it be safe to say that the Jumbo evolved to the J-35 and then evolved to the J-45/50.

[tpbiii]

I just checked all of my other guitars they are all tappered. After over 25 years, Thats one thing I never looked for on a guitar before. How would you compare the new 2013 J-35 to a vintage. Would you say it's spot on or just a modern interpretation of vintage. I'm not talking about sound but the specs. Also would it be safe to say that the Jumbo evolved to the J-35 and then evolved to the J-45/50.

 

It was not that they were totally untapered -- but almost.

 

Someone asked that question over on the Martin forum, and I did a sort of show and tell.

 

Here are the three guitars -- a 1936 J-35, a 1936 AJ, and a 1942 SJ

 

 

 

Here is a front shot

 

 

You can see the deeper '36 J-35, whereas the '42 SJ and '36 AJ are the same.

 

Now for the taper.

 

Here is the '36 J-35 (low taper)

 

 

 

 

Now the '36 AJ (same as the '42 SJ)

 

 

 

Here is a front view of the '36 J-35 and AJ

 

 

And yes, that '42 J-45 is incredibly clean for a 71 year old guitar.

 

Let's pick,

 

-Tom

[Stubee]

Tom knows these beasts well & from the J-35s I've been around I especially agree that, like any guitar model, their tone/volume vary a bit no matter year, tone bars, etc.

 

Helps to play some.

[Bryn6490]

I cannot believe how good these guitars look. Also I must say that my doubts about a non-belly guitar bridge are laid to rest. You have an amazing collection of guitars. Only 300 AJ's ever made and you have one from the first year. How many AJ's were made in 1936? How many vintage AJ's are known to exist now? WOW!!!! Just for the hell of it I gotta ask....Does your vintage guitar's have "wings" on the head stock?

[Bryn6490]

Thanks for the info and sharing pics of your guitars.

[jt]

Thanks, as always, Tom, for great info, great pics, and great guitars.

 

I do believe that the change from J-35 to J-45 was evolutionary, though, because this is Gibson, the development wssn't always liner. But for a few cosmetics, 1941 J-35 is nearly identical to a 1942 J-45. Indeed, there are transitional guitars of both models that exhibit some cosmetic elements of the other.

 

The first of the two x-ray articles that I published in the journal of the Americal Society of Radiological Technology addressed, in part, this subject. I x-rayed three groups of guitars: late J-35s, Banner J-45s and SJs, and post war J-45s and SJs. I used state-of-the-art digital x-ray gizmos that let me measure evey surface to the 1/10,000 inch. The bracing and surface plates - backs, sides, tops - of the Banner guitars were measurably thinner than thier pre and post war counterparts.

 

I didn't have sufficient sample numbers (a half dozen of each group) for statistically significant results, but I do believe the results fairly reflect these guitars . Where Tom (accurately, imho) refers to the J-35s as stronger, I'd call the Banner models more responsive. Unless you're playing really hard or wearing finger picks, fingerpicking works better for me on J-45. Hard flatpiking or heavy rhythm playing works better on a J-45. Milage varies, of course, and so do these guitars.

[j45nick]

Thanks for the info and sharing pics of your guitars.

 

 

Tom probably has more hands-on knowledge of these guitars than anyone on the planet. He also has the best collection of them anywhere. And he plays them.

[Del Nilppeznaf]

Where Tom (accuratley, imho) refers to the J-35s as stronger, I'd call the Banner models more responsive. Unless you're playing really hard or wearing finger picks, fingerpicking works better for me on J-45. Hard faltpiking or heavey rhythm playing works better on a J-45. Milage varies, of course, and so do these guitars.

 

JT

 

is that a typo? As in did you mean to say J35 in one of the statements..?

 

Also, when are the Gibson repro's of the Banner's expected?

 

cheers

[jt]

JT

 

is that a typo? As in did you mean to say J35 in one of the statements..?

 

Also, when are the Gibson repro's of the Banner's expected?

 

cheers

 

Old fingers and an iPad keyboard are a bad combo!

 

I meant to type J-35 in the second phrase. I meant to type that the J-35 works better for harder playing styles.

 

I'm on the road for the book and am now in Kalamazoo. Here's last night's coverage of my book signing:

 

Signing, talk, and picking in Kalzmazoo.

[jt]

Also, when are the Gibson repro's of the Banner's expected?

 

The current target is to unveil the guitars in July at the summer NAMM show in Nashville.

 

Thanks for asking!

[tpbiii]

Where Tom (accuratley, imho) refers to the J-35s as stronger, I'd call the Banner models more responsive. Unless you're playing really hard or wearing finger picks, fingerpicking works better for me on J-45.

 

I know what John is trying to say, but I guess I would put it a different way. Strong and weak is one dimension, related to headroom, but I think the more important general evolution in Gibson tonality from the mid30s to the late 40s was raw to smooth. Of course, too much of either is bad -- it is always a compromise.

 

In general, I don't fingerpick mid 30s Large Gibsons -- not because I couldn't but because I have much better choices. I do fingerpick Banner J-45s and SJs -- but only with fingerpicks.

 

Some perspective is required here. My fingerpick style is alternating thumb two-finger lead style often found in Southern Gospel -- think freight train for everything, but with slightly less emphasis on the back beat. For me the vintage guitars that work best for this (for me) are mostly all Gibsons, and the Banner Js are on the list along with a bunch of 00 sized 30s Gibsons. The reason is because of their percussive bass and punchy fast-decay midrange. They all have it, but more so in the 30s than the 40s -- the 40s guitars are smoother with less edges.

 

I pick bare finger as well, but it is not a part of my music outside the house life. When modern bare finger finger pickers come and sample a lot of guitars, the grand winner (almost always) is the '31 Gibson L-2 -- a guitar from Mars I think. The rest however are generally Martins -- '32 00-18, '33 00-18, '34 00-40H, '37 00-18H, '34 000-18 (long scale) and '38 000-28. In general not any large body Gibsons or Martins, either 30s are 40s -- and there are plenty to pick from. They seem to find the large guitars not responsive enough compared to the competition

 

A test case in my own head on the raw/smooth responsive/unresponsive front is our '36 Gibson Roy Smeck Stage Deluxe. It is very responsive and very raw -- kind of an extrema in that direction. For me, this was not good at all until I found I could fingerpick it in a flat out BG session and be heard -- BUT the tone is so raw, it just did not work for BG rhythm,

 

But then our friend David Dugas came by and fell in love with the guitar. Where I heard the raw tone, he bonded to the responsiveness.

 

http://vimeo.com/30580730

 

The message is when judging a guitar, the guitar is critical but so are you. Peoples opinions are indeed great, but people do not scale. So we should never make the mistake of thinking our own preferences are universal. That is why it is so important to explain who you are musically to accompany your opinions.

 

Words to live by[biggrin].

 

Best,

 

-Tom