I love the Gibson Modern Acoustic Line

rabbuhl · #1 08-07-2021, 02:08 PM

I just saw the L-00 Studio Rosewood and J-45 Studio Rosewood. Both look like fantastic guitars from the new Gibson Modern Acoustic Line. My eye is more towards the L-00 Studio Rosewood.

Br1ck · #2 08-07-2021, 02:11 PM

Gibson at it again, a rosewood guitar marketed as a J 45, an insult to their own heritage just to sell guitars.

gibpicker · #3 08-07-2021, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Br1ck

Gibson at it again, a rosewood guitar marketed as a J 45, an insult to their own heritage just to sell guitars.

I'm not sure about the insult part, but I sure don't like to see them doing it.

emuhunter · #4 08-07-2021, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Br1ck

Gibson at it again, a rosewood guitar marketed as a J 45, an insult to their own heritage just to sell guitars.

Do you feel that Ford making cars that aren't black is an insult to the heritage of the Model T?

12barBill · #5 08-07-2021, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Br1ck

Gibson at it again, a rosewood guitar marketed as a J 45, an insult to their own heritage just to sell guitars.

They made the J45 Studio in walnut first. I happen to have one in natural. Now one in rosewood. This is a slim body guitar (similar to an OM; 4 inch body depth). It's not like they are making a "traditional J45" in rosewood. I don't see where they are insulting their heritage. And yes, they are trying to sell guitars.

davenumber2 · #6 08-07-2021, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12barBill

They made the J45 Studio in walnut first. I happen to have one in natural. Now one in rosewood. This is a slim body guitar (similar to an OM; 4 inch body depth). It's not like they are making a "traditional J45" in rosewood. I don't see where they are insulting their heritage. And yes, they are trying to sell guitars.

They have made a standard J-45 Rosewood in the recent past. They can do what they want. There were some rosewood Southern Jumbos (essentially a J-45) in the 40’s, so not entirely without precedent.

Rogerblair · #7 08-07-2021, 03:15 PM

A rosewood J45? That’s just not right. That would be like trying to call a rosewood Martin D18 a D18 Rosewood. That model is called a D28.
J45s are mahogany.

Rb

Wade Hampton · #8 08-07-2021, 03:54 PM

Gibson can - and will - do whatever they want. They always have and always will. Us getting indignant about it isn’t going to change anything.

whm

mball · #9 08-07-2021, 04:03 PM

I owned a J-45 Rosewood and a WM-45 at the same time in the past. I currently have a standard mahogany J-45. They are all very fine guitars with their own voice and character quite distinct from one another.

TBman · #10 08-07-2021, 04:14 PM

I had played a J-45 rosewood back when I was shopping for mine. I liked it.

The thinner bodied studios are ok, but obviously don't match the standard J-45 for depth of tone - I played a few when they first hit the stores. For a singer/strummer player though I doubt a listener would notice the difference.

The 00 in the video does sound more than a bit boxy though to my ears.

davenumber2 · #11 08-07-2021, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rogerblair

A rosewood J45? That’s just not right. That would be like trying to call a rosewood Martin D18 a D18 Rosewood. That model is called a D28.

J45s are mahogany.

Rb

Over the years there have been J-45s made with maple, walnut, all mahogany, granadillo, rosewood, koa, and probably others. That’s just off the top of my head. If Gibson calls it a J45 that’s what it is.

Denandannie · #12 08-07-2021, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Br1ck

Gibson at it again, a rosewood guitar marketed as a J 45, an insult to their own heritage just to sell guitars.

could you elaborate on that answer

Marshall · #13 08-07-2021, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Br1ck

Gibson at it again, a rosewood guitar marketed as a J 45, an insult to their own heritage just to sell guitars.

They have named them "Modern Acoustic" signifying this line is going to depart from the traditional accoutrements. I see no problem with that. Personally, I prefer the originals. But I see no reason to diss them over making guitars that compete with Taylor-esque specifications (body depth, neck thickness, fingerboard radius).

They've made rosewood J45s for decades.

Rogerblair · #14 08-07-2021, 07:51 PM

I’m all for Gibson making all the models they want. I LOVE my J45. Gibson is my favorite guitar company. Just use other designations (like they did with the J15).

Lots of numbers that haven’t been used yet. How about a J47? 😉. I’m out.

Rb

rabbuhl · #15 08-08-2021, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TBman

I had played a J-45 rosewood back when I was shopping for mine. I liked it.

The thinner bodied studios are ok, but obviously don't match the standard J-45 for depth of tone - I played a few when they first hit the stores. For a singer/strummer player though I doubt a listener would notice the difference.

The 00 in the video does sound more than a bit boxy though to my ears.

The L-00 does sound boxy. It sounds much better here.