1969 Gibson Johnny Smith Quality

**Lux** · 08-31-2012, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by floatingpickup

Your guitar is beautiful. I have owned several Gibsons from the 50's, 60's & 70's and I have found the ones from the mid 60's to be great guitars. After all, the JS was just introduced in the 60's. As others have said, even the later JS's were spared from most of the undesirable changes Gibson made in the late 60's and 70's. You should be very happy with that wonderful example of a guitar that is one of the most perfect models ever made. I would change it to a single pickup though..
Keith

Thanks! Obviously there's a bias for a single pickup, here

Is that just for looks, or does that effect anything else?

**Patrick2** · 08-31-2012, 03:54 PM

[quote=Lux;251906]Thanks! Obviously there's a bias for a single pickup, here

Is that just for looks, or does that effect anything else?

Yes!!

**edh** · 08-31-2012, 11:57 PM

Is that yes to both or:

yes to the first and no to the second part of the question.
or
No to first and yes to the second part of the question.

**rgiaccio** · 09-01-2012, 05:49 AM

This L5 is from 1970-72 and the shading pattern is quite similar to the Lux's 69 Gibson Johnny Smith.

The back has very plain wood. Neck has no volute, and nut width is 1 3/4".
The size of the teardrop in the picture changes depending on the camera settings, and the sunburst transition is smoother in reality than in the picture.

**floatingpickup** · 09-01-2012, 08:32 AM

Originally Posted by Lux

Thanks! Obviously there's a bias for a single pickup, here

Is that just for looks, or does that effect anything else?

I would say both. A bridge pickup looks unnatural on a JS to me. Also, I would never use it. If you want that type of sound, you would probably buy a different type of guitar. Having said that, the one advantage to a JS-D is that it has a tone control, which I really like. When I have ordered luthier made guitars, I have asked for a single JS pickup with Volume and Tone controls on the guard. That works out perfectly for me. I attached a picture of my Campellone, which was ordered this way.
Keith

**Lux** · 09-01-2012, 11:29 AM

Originally Posted by floatingpickup

I would say both. A bridge pickup looks unnatural on a JS to me. Also, I would never use it. If you want that tyoe of sound, you would probably buy a different type of guitar. Having said that, the one advantage to a JS-D is that it has a tone control, which I really like. When I have ordered luthier made guitars, I have asked for a single JS pickup with Volume and Tone controls on the guard. That works out perfectly for me. I attached a picture of my Campellone, which was ordered this way.
Keith

Very nice.

What's the body depth on that one? I see what you're saying about a one pickup situation - and I would want a tone control as well...

**Jimmy Mack** · 09-02-2012, 11:05 PM

I used to own a '65 JS, single p/up. I have to agree that a bridge p/up is probably very unnecessary. I heard a guy play on the B. p/up once with his JS, and it was just awful!

The JS I had was a pretty bright sounding guitar. I would turn the amps' treble down to 0, bring up the bass and middle, and still, the guitar was bright with no warmth. Great for big band rhythm playing I guess, but not to my liking, (No Wes tones).

Beautiful to look at and I loved the big neck, but, it had to go since I could not coax it into singing the way I wanted to.

**2bornot2bop** · 09-02-2012, 11:34 PM

Originally Posted by floatingpickup

I would say both. A bridge pickup looks unnatural on a JS to me. Also, I would never use it. If you want that type of sound, you would probably buy a different type of guitar. Having said that, the one advantage to a JS-D is that it has a tone control, which I really like. When I have ordered luthier made guitars, I have asked for a single JS pickup with Volume and Tone controls on the guard. That works out perfectly for me. I attached a picture of my Campellone, which was ordered this way.
Keith

Geez, that Campellone has got to be one of the most beautiful guitars ever produced. I'd sure like to see the remainder of the guitar...she's a beauty!

**Lux** · 09-03-2012, 04:15 AM

Originally Posted by Jimmy Mack

I used to own a '65 JS, single p/up. I have to agree that a bridge p/up is probably very unnecessary. I heard a guy play on the B. p/up once with his JS, and it was just awful!

The JS I had was a pretty bright sounding guitar. I would turn the amps' treble down to 0, bring up the bass and middle, and still, the guitar was bright with no warmth. Great for big band rhythm playing I guess, but not to my liking, (No Wes tones).

Beautiful to look at and I loved the big neck, but, it had to go since I could not coax it into singing the way I wanted to.

Interesting, I find the JS is quite warm, though, a Super 400 it's not. But, not too much treble for my taste. Through a great old tube amp it has a great voice, I think.

The neck is perfect for me, too...not Wes, true, maybe a bit more sparkle but still great for solo stuff.

**2bornot2bop** · 09-03-2012, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by Jimmy Mack

I used to own a '65 JS, single p/up. I have to agree that a bridge p/up is probably very unnecessary. I heard a guy play on the B. p/up once with his JS, and it was just awful!

The JS I had was a pretty bright sounding guitar. I would turn the amps' treble down to 0, bring up the bass and middle, and still, the guitar was bright with no warmth. Great for big band rhythm playing I guess, but not to my liking, (No Wes tones).

Beautiful to look at and I loved the big neck, but, it had to go since I could not coax it into singing the way I wanted to.

What is it with bright sounding archtop designs after guitar's were amplified. I'd think an amplified guitar would not need to sound bright for it's amplified...turn up the volume. There must have been other reasons for designers to build bright sounding archtops other than the 'to be heard over a big band' theory.

**Lux** · 09-03-2012, 12:55 PM

I have always thought the brighter, the better...you can dial out brightness, but dialing it in is a bit harder to do.

I'm an awful photographer, but here's those pics I promised...the JS chillin at home...

**Patrick2** · 09-03-2012, 01:07 PM

Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop

What is it with bright sounding archtop designs after guitar's were amplified. I'd think an amplified guitar would not need to sound bright for it's amplified...turn up the volume. There must have been other reasons for designers to build bright sounding archtops other than the 'to be heard over a big band' theory.

It seems that you might be confusing bright and loud. Most of the time, an X braced guitar will be on the brighter side . . . and parallel braced (tone bars) will be a bit warmer. I'm pretty sure the Gibson JS is an X braced guitar.

**2bornot2bop** · 09-03-2012, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by Lux

I have always thought the brighter, the better...you can dial out brightness, but dialing it in is a bit harder to do.

I'm an awful photographer, but here's those pics I promised...the JS chillin at home...

much better pics, she's a beauty!

I had no success in dialing out the brightness on an 18" guitar I ultimately was forced to sell because of its brightness.

**2bornot2bop** · 09-03-2012, 01:17 PM

Originally Posted by Patrick2

It seems that you might be confusing bright and loud. Most of the time, an X braced guitar will be on the brighter side . . . and parallel braced (tone bars) will be a bit warmer. I'm pretty sure the Gibson JS is an X braced guitar.

No...as an audiophile, listening to 40 years of every harsh tweeter combo imaginable, my ears know bright.

I don't play out, and sold off my Heritage KB amp because it was too much amp, i.e., too loud for my humble surroundings...volume for the sake of volume isn't and won't ever be my thing. volume is simply that, a louder version of the same tonality.

the opposite was true in my experience, for the SE was parallel braced and the GE is X braced, and yet the GE is a much warmer guitar...but perhaps that's because it has a floater and the SE had a pair of routed hb's...all I know is the GE is the more traditional warm sounding jazz archtop I've been seeking....but then again so was the Vestax NYL2 with the Steve Bistrow floater, which had a pressed top.

**Patrick2** · 09-03-2012, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop

No...as an audiophile, listening to 40 years of every harsh tweeter combo imaginable, my ears know bright.

I don't play out, and sold off my Heritage KB amp because it was too much amp, i.e., too loud for my humble surroundings...volume for the sake of volume isn't and won't ever be my thing. volume is simply that, a louder version of the same tonality.

the opposite was true in my experience, for the SE was parallel braced and the GE is X braced, and yet the GE is a much warmer guitar...but perhaps that's because it has a floater and the SE had a pair of routed hb's...all I know is the GE is the more traditional warm sounding jazz archtop I've been seeking....but then again so was the Vestax NYL2 with the Steve Bistrow floater, which had a pressed top.

If you found the SE, with the older Schallers to be too bright, you might have been having issues with the tone pots. An 18" arch top with Schaller humbuckers should be anything but bright. For a short while a few years back, Heritage was using some really cheap garbage tone and volume pots from China. I think this was when they were at the height of their financial difficulties and some vendors had them on CIA for a while. I'm having problems with roll off on the SE I bought from Dr. Goetting. I'm doing some research right now to see if I want to stay with linear pots, or switch to audio (hog) at least on the tone pot. Looking at RS Guitar works Super Pots 500K . . . also looking at Bourne.

I'm not an electronics type of person . . so anyone who whats to jump in here with some opinions and direction . . . please feel free to do so.

**Spook410** · 09-03-2012, 02:28 PM

Beautiful guitar. Thanks for sharing pictures.

IMHO, I would treat it as a vintage instrument and not change anything. If you find the back pickup getting in the way you can certainly set it aside without having to modify the instrument but I would just play it the way it came from the factory.

Really nice 'burst and back on that one..

**Patrick2** · 09-03-2012, 03:31 PM

Originally Posted by Spook410

Beautiful guitar. Thanks for sharing pictures.

IMHO, I would treat it as a vintage instrument and not change anything. If you find the back pickup getting in the way you can certainly set it aside without having to modify the instrument but I would just play it the way it came from the factory.

Really nice 'burst and back on that one..

That guitar could be set up as a single floating pup with no modifications what so ever. That's the advantage of having all of the electronics on the pick guard. As I said . . . have a new pick guard made for a single pup . . maybe even a Rhythm Chief 1100. Then, you could switch it back to the double pup guard with no tell tale sign of any changes having ever been made. However, I would convert the pin jack under the guard to an end pin jack for either the dual pup or the single pup.

**Spook410** · 09-03-2012, 03:56 PM

Originally Posted by Patrick2

That guitar could be set up as a single floating pup with no modifications what so ever. That's the advantage of having all of the electronics on the pick guard. As I said . . . have a new pick guard made for a single pup . . maybe even a Rhythm Chief 1100. Then, you could switch it back to the double pup guard with no tell tale sign of any changes having ever been made. However, I would convert the pin jack under the guard to an end pin jack for either the dual pup or the single pup.

Absolutely and it will be interesting to see what the OP's eventual preferences are. Still, I'm liking the vibe this particular guitar has. It's an overly busy set up in a good way. I'm curious if the back pup will have something to contribute to the sound without all the drawbacks of a bridge built in.

**ruger9** · 09-03-2012, 07:48 PM

Originally Posted by Lux

I have always thought the brighter, the better...you can dial out brightness, but dialing it in is a bit harder to do.

I've always felt exactly the OPPOSITE, with ALL my gear... guitars as well as amps...and pedals too... I always find my amp treble controls set pretty low... I've always felt like guitars and guitar gear in general already has more than enough treble, and dialing it out can be difficult (I've been known to run my amp's treble control at 0 with my tele.)

Altho I could see where a "boomy" or "dead" sounding archtop might be hard to regain clarity by simply turning up the treble... especially the deep-body all-hollows we're talking about here.

**floatingpickup** · 09-04-2012, 07:33 AM

Originally Posted by Lux

Very nice.

What's the body depth on that one? I see what you're saying about a one pickup situation - and I would want a tone control as well...

My Campellone is the same dimensions as a Gibson JS: 17" short body (21.5" long), 3" deep with a 25" scale and 1 3/4 nut width.
Keith

**floatingpickup** · 09-04-2012, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop

Geez, that Campellone has got to be one of the most beautiful guitars ever produced. I'd sure like to see the remainder of the guitar...she's a beauty!

Here are some more pic's:

**2bornot2bop** · 09-04-2012, 10:33 AM

Thanks for the extra pics. That's one of the most beautiful archtops I've seen. Have you any pics that display the fretboard straight on? I dig how the designer tied the theme of the tailpiece shape into the fret markers. Such detail!

**floatingpickup** · 09-04-2012, 10:26 PM

Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop

Thanks for the extra pics. That's one of the most beautiful archtops I've seen. Have you any pics that display the fretboard straight on? I dig how the designer tied the theme of the tailpiece shape into the fret markers. Such detail!

2bornot2bop:
As you noted, Mark has very nicely repeated the same stairstep motif throughout the guitar - the headstock inlay and truss rod cover, the tailpiece, and the fingerboard inlays. To add to the beauty of the instrument, the inlays are a combination of Mother of Pearl and Abalone. It's beautifully done. I attached some more pics.
Keith