I love the Gibson Modern Acoustic Line

[Br1ck]

Originally Posted by Denandannie

could you elaborate on that answer

Sure. Just like a D 18 has always been mahogany and spruce, traditionally the J 45 has also been mahogany and spruce. They are both iconic guitars, have both been on thousands of recordings. Martin, when they wanted to build a guitar with less fancy bindings than the D 28, built a guitar they called the D 21. You know exactly what the guitar is. When they wanted to build a cheaper D 18, they made the D 16.

Now here is Gibson coming along in the modern era trading on the J 45 name. They build a cheaper J 45 and call it a J 45 Studio. They found out they didn't sell as many when they called the cheaper version a J 15. So yes, they've made "J 45s" in any wood combination they felt like. People bought them because they wanted that feeling of having an iconic guitar. But it is in name only. Sure, Gibson has the right to call anything they want a J 45. Rosewood J 45s are decent guitars. You might like them more. But Martin cherishes their heritage, Gibson markets theirs. I don't like it.

[emtsteve]

Originally Posted by Br1ck

Gibson at it again... ... just to sell guitars.

Umm, they're a company dude, and a stock one at that.

[Br1ck]

Originally Posted by Br1ck

Sure. Just like a D 18 has always been mahogany and spruce, traditionally the J 45 has also been mahogany and spruce. They are both iconic guitars, have both been on thousands of recordings. Martin, when they wanted to build a guitar with less fancy bindings than the D 28, built a guitar they called the D 21. You know exactly what the guitar is. When they wanted to build a cheaper D 18, they made the D 16.

Now here is Gibson coming along in the modern era trading on the J 45 name. They build a cheaper J 45 and call it a J 45 Studio. They found out they didn't sell as many when they called the cheaper version a J 15. So yes, they've made "J 45s" in any wood combination they felt like. People bought them because they wanted that feeling of having an iconic guitar. But it is in name only. Sure, Gibson has the right to call anything they want a J 45. Rosewood J 45s are decent guitars. You might like them more. But Martin cherishes their heritage, Gibson markets theirs. I don't like it.

I have a Gibson, what do they call it, gold dealer?, locally. I was interested at the time in trying a J 45 vintage, J45 with a cooked top, and a J 45 side by side. They hadn't had a J 45 vintage in six months and didn't have a regular J 45 either. But they had a J 45 Donovan, two Special J 45s, rosewood both, along with two endorsement guitars. I asked the manager why, and was told that being the "gold" dealer, they were forced to take the special editions, and the store owner said no more Gibsons until the inventory they had was sold. I asked for a J 200. They had a $10,000 Bob Dylan model. The new management may have changed things, but that J 45 vintage I was looking to buy is gone, replaced by what I've always wanted, a Slash model.

[Tom60]

The very first J-200 was a rosewood B/S 12fretter (wish I had one)
so - what is your point ?

Edit - that was in response to Br1ck ..

so, again - Gibson is not "at it again: " you hater...

[Mr. Paul]

Originally Posted by rabbuhl

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

That DOES sound good, doesn't it?

[zombywoof]

Hell, I think Rotomatics just look so wrong on a J45. But Bozeman has its own ideas as to what sounds best and that does not necessarily jibe with what Chief Engineers at Gibson from the late-1920s on felt. I am guessing that models such as an H braced L1 would prove popular with only with a small niche of players. The late-1930s Advanced L body guitars like the L-00 and L1 with their scary light builds would be a warranty nightmare. In other instances reproducing the unique bracing of an SJ/J200 could exponentially raise the cost so it is simply economically more sane to go with the bracing carve Ren Ferguson designed and which other than a few notable exceptions has gone into every Bozeman acoustic.

As I have Old School Gibson Tone covered when it comes to an L-1, J50, and J200 (guitars built in 1932, 1942 and 1960) I would if anything be more inclined to go with something that is not traditional in terms of body wood, bracing, and such. I actually think it is when they are coming out with something different such as the Star/Starburst which is where Bozeman really shines.

[RalphH]

Originally Posted by Br1ck

Sure. Just like a D 18 has always been mahogany and spruce, traditionally the J 45 has also been mahogany and spruce. They are both iconic guitars, have both been on thousands of recordings. Martin, when they wanted to build a guitar with less fancy bindings than the D 28, built a guitar they called the D 21. You know exactly what the guitar is. When they wanted to build a cheaper D 18, they made the D 16.

Now here is Gibson coming along in the modern era trading on the J 45 name. They build a cheaper J 45 and call it a J 45 Studio. They found out they didn't sell as many when they called the cheaper version a J 15. So yes, they've made "J 45s" in any wood combination they felt like. People bought them because they wanted that feeling of having an iconic guitar. But it is in name only. Sure, Gibson has the right to call anything they want a J 45. Rosewood J 45s are decent guitars. You might like them more. But Martin cherishes their heritage, Gibson markets theirs. I don't like it.

When you say "traditionally" I assume you mean "for about a year", given they switched to maple back and sides during WW2.

I think that you would do well to understand Gibson history a bit better. At some point in the late 60s (69?) the J45 became a square shoulder 25.5 inch scale guitar and stayed that way till the mid 80s. It has never really been the set-in-stone formula that you seem to think. It's been what Gibson thought was most saleable at the time.

Gibson have always experimented with their products, changed things around and tried new things. Sometimes they work out, sometimes they don't. It's part of their brand DNA. They have never been tied to tradition like Martin. Right now old is cool so we have lots of "historic" models, but they'll only do that as long as they sell.

Jesus, at one point a very long time ago they were putting plastic bridges on J45s. Lets hope that "tradition" doesn't come back, though I note that the custom shop does now make hummingbirds with those terrible adjustable saddles again, so who knows.

[Brucebubs]

OK so Gibson have kept their J-45 model designation for several different specifications - what about Cordoba Guild keeping the same maple jumbo F-412 specifications but now calling it F-512 Maple?
Annoying.