2019 Gibson J-45 Cutaway w/new Videos

[Groberts]

2019 Gibson J-45 Cutaway

I received this new guitar from Sweetwater less than a week ago and I've been bonding and getting acquainted. My style is not all very traditional, but this guitar inspires me to go down a few twists and turns that are rather new and fun. Yet it seems to play along with my cross picking style reasonably well.

I am impressed how loud it is and how it projects with nicely textured tones.

I am slightly concerned the way the Fingerboard drops from the body joint toward the soundhole. It plays and sounds great, but single note runs from the 12th fret and high can be slightly buzzy. So I recorded a couple video's, although I didn't spend a lot of time on the highest notes. I am liking the overall vibe, tone and sound of the guitar I may very well make peace with it. I'll have my guitar tech take a look and tell me if there is trouble ahead with action due to the fingerboard fall off.

That said, here are some video's I made.

[SalFromChatham]

That second video is the bomb, man. You would make any guitar sound fantastic.

I’d love to hear you play my J-50.

Congrats on that fine guitar!

[hotroad]

Very nice playing. Clean. Creative as hell. Nice style. Very good finger style as well as flat pick use. Getting a lot from that guitar that sounds great.

[lar]

Originally Posted by Groberts

2019 Gibson J-45 Cutaway

I am slightly concerned the way the Fingerboard drops from the body joint toward the soundhole.

Not sure if this alleviates your concern, but:

I've been reading Dan Erlewine' book. What you are describing is called 'Fallaway' (page 17-18). He says "..slight fallaway in the last few frets would guarantee no buzzing in the upper register, but it's not a must - either dead flatness, or else fallaway, is correct."

".. a little fallaway is good...to prevent buzz"

If the upper register of the fretboard angles upward, instead of falling, it's called 'rising tongue', which by his description is not a good thing. You don't want a rising tongue.

and BTW, I agree with the previous post. Your second video is great - even my wife turned her head and said 'who's that?' and 'Can you learn that song?'

(to which I responded, 'No')

[tippy5]

Could be a few dozen hours of playing and a truss rod adjustment will get your fretboard plane where you want it. It does sound loud already. More responsive than many new Gibsons. Seems like a great guitar. A cutaway I might look into. Are you happy with the strings? They sound a little nasally. I bet with a setup and the guitar exercised, (especially with your killer right hand), your beauty will open and warm up in no time.

Nice to hear your music. Thanks!

[Groberts]

Originally Posted by tippy5

Could be a few dozen hours of playing and a truss rod adjustment will get your fretboard plane where you want it. It does sound loud already. More responsive than many new Gibsons. Seems like a great guitar. A cutaway I might look into. Are you happy with the strings? They sound a little nasally. I bet with a setup and the guitar exercised, (especially with your killer right hand), your beauty will open and warm up in no time.

Nice to hear your music. Thanks!

Thank you very much. I will see what my guitar tech says about set up. I really like it a lot and find the guitar very inspiring and rewarding to play. I think it’s going to work out. I just never have seen this. Maybe no big deal. The guitar is soooo cool visually too. The sunburst is superb!! Thx again.

[ii Cybershot ii]

Originally Posted by lar

Not sure if this alleviates your concern, but:

I've been reading Dan Erlewine' book. What you are describing is called 'Fallaway' (page 17-18). He says "..slight fallaway in the last few frets would guarantee no buzzing in the upper register, but it's not a must - either dead flatness, or else fallaway, is correct."

".. a little fallaway is good...to prevent buzz"

If the upper register of the fretboard angles upward, instead of falling, it's called 'rising tongue', which by his description is not a good thing. You don't want a rising tongue.

and BTW, I agree with the previous post. Your second video is great - even my wife turned her head and said 'who's that?' and 'Can you learn that song?'

(to which I responded, 'No')

Bingo. I posted this in the Groberts other J45 thread as well. Fall-away = good, and less buzzing. If there is buzzing and notes fretting out AND there's excessive fall-away, then the frets themselves likely need to be addressed.

[Groberts]

Originally Posted by ii Cybershot ii

Bingo. I posted this in the Groberts other J45 thread as well. Fall-away = good, and less buzzing. If there is buzzing and notes fretting out AND there's excessive fall-away, then the frets themselves likely need to be addressed.

Point well taken and much appreciated. Thanks. This new J-45 Cutaway plays great, sounds great, looks great, is loud and projects well. I gave a mild truss rod tweak, but I think it needs a little 'nut' filing too, so I'll take it to my luthier.

The Graphtech nut seems Ok. I might stick with it for now. But I'm always tempted to go for a Bone Nut because I'm an old school traditionalist. I realize it will only matter on open strings, but I do play with a lot open string voicings. So maybe I'll have a Bone Nut installed when I have the set up completed.

[Rev Roy]

Originally Posted by Groberts

Point well taken and much appreciated. Thanks. This new J-45 Cutaway plays great, sounds great, looks great, is loud and projects well. I gave a mild truss rod tweak, but I think it needs a little 'nut' filing too, so I'll take it to my luthier.

The Graphtech nut seems Ok. I might stick with it for now. But I'm always tempted to go for a Bone Nut because I'm an old school traditionalist. I realize it will only matter on open strings, but I do play with a lot open string voicings. So maybe I'll have a Bone Nut installed when I have the set up completed.

I upgraded my 45 with bone nut, saddle and unslotted bone pins. The upgrades were installed before the guitar was shipped to me...so I don’t know what it sounded like before. But compared to my previous 45 going all bone gave this one a bit more zing...to my ears, anyway.

[Groberts]

Originally Posted by Rev Roy

I upgraded my 45 with bone nut, saddle and unslotted bone pins. The upgrades were installed before the guitar was shipped to me...so I don’t know what it sounded like before. But compared to my previous 45 going all bone gave this one a bit more zing...to my ears, anyway.

I may upgrade the Baggs Element to Baggs Anthem too. When I do that may be an opportune time to put a bone compensated saddle in place while optimizing the set up. That makes the most sense. But I'm going to gig it once or twice more to decide if swapping the PU is worth the expense.

[ii Cybershot ii]

I know you mentioned that the action might be kind of high, but in general how do you like the scale length, neck-shape, and overall play-ability compared to your Martins? Any nuances you've noticed?

[Groberts]

Originally Posted by ii Cybershot ii

I know you mentioned that the action might be kind of high, but in general how do you like the scale length, neck-shape, and overall play-ability compared to your Martins? Any nuances you've noticed?

I love the scale length and light gauge strings. That has been a pleasure. The nut width is slightly narrower and since I do a lot of cross picking and playing notes of each chord on adjacent strings, I am noticing I need to work a little harder to play cleanly with m left hand fretting so I can let the adjacent string and notes ring clearly. The nut width (1.72") is not too much narrower than Martin (1 3/4") but I do feel a little more restricted.

The neck Depth is a bit deeper than the Martin MLO/PA neck that I have on all my Martin's. I like Both neck depths equally well. the neck shape feel great. It doesn't call attention to itself.

The action isn't bad on the Gibson. The nut could be just a little lower, but otherwise the guitar plays great!

[ii Cybershot ii]

Originally Posted by Groberts

I love the scale length and light gauge strings. That has been a pleasure. The nut width is slightly narrower and since I do a lot of cross picking and playing notes of each chord on adjacent strings, I am noticing I need to work a little harder to play cleanly with m left hand fretting so I can let the adjacent string and notes ring clearly. The nut width (1.72") is not too much narrower than Martin (1 3/4") but I do feel a little more restricted.

The neck Depth is a bit deeper than the Martin MLO/PA neck that I have on all my Martin's. I like Both neck depths equally well. the neck shape feel great. It doesn't call attention to itself.

The action isn't bad on the Gibson. The nut could be just a little lower, but otherwise the guitar plays great!

Sounds like a very positive review overall! Thanks for the insights.

[Groberts]

Originally Posted by ii Cybershot ii

Sounds like a very positive review overall! Thanks for the insights.

All that said ...I am doing a shoot out with the Martin. (Can't help it ....) I am more at home on the Martin Fingerboard, nut width. I feel more 'fluid' on it. And this is not to take away from the Gibson. But I 'may' make a switch. Thinking out loud at this point.

[saxlylong]

Groberts, I would encourage you to check out the stock TUSQ saddle and pins. I did a huge amount of A/B-ing between the stock TUSQ components and Colossi bone saddle and pins I picked up, with many different kinds of strings. I ultimately went back to the TUSQ. The bone seemed to rob something from the sound I couldn't quite put my finger on. There are a bunch of forum threads where people have switched to bone, but then went back the TUSQ on the J-45.

There are also numerous Youtube videos A/B-ing the standard vs the true vintage J-45(TUSQ vs Bone appointments, among the baked top and other things), and it seems like and even number of comments were in favor of the standard sound. Interesting.

I think TUSQ vs Bone argument is very individual per instrument, but there is something to be said about consistent reports of the stock TUSQ sounding better than bone on the J-45. I remember seeing a thread where the frequency response of TUSQ is more lively than bone, which works better with the the dry J-45 base sound, rounding it out perhaps. Again, YMMV.

I also completely pulled out the Baggs element and went with a Trance Audio Amulet M. Removing the piezo underneath the saddle was a considerable upgrade in acoustic sound. You will need a higher saddle though. Just my 2 cents.

Your 45 sounds GREAT btw!