Incoming 1968 Gibson Johnny Smith

[Jimmy blue note]

I don’t know, call me dumb but a brand new Cameo is $500.00 cheaper.

Absolutely correct.

Tony D.

I'd rather spend more on something that I feel fits me, than put a bargain compromise for something that has me wondering or regretting 5 years later.
Agreed, a Campellone is an exceptional guitar, but it's got a different voice. I don't say better or worse, or even bang for the buck, but if I had a daughter who wanted a beagle for her birthday and I bought her a basset hound because it was $50 less at the pet store, I think I'd soon realize there was more at stake than the cost at the counter.

In all fairness though, the last Gibson JS I got was hanging on the wall next to a Campy. It was the hardest decision I could have been confronted with. Both were priced identically, both in great shape and both SO different.
Honestly, I'd rather not had to chose. It's not about the money, it was about which guitar would be my partner to making me a better guitarist.

Only holding and playing that JS will confirm whether it's right. Buy what's right if you can.

[deacon Mark]

I bet that economy L7 sounds great acoustically and is light. Frankly it is a world class guitar. Today we might see it as a plain jane L7 not an L5. But remember those plain jane D'angelico Stye A's and B's are considered first class guitars today.

[bluejaybill]

Wintermoon:
I agree with you. My guess is that the X-bracing is a significant factor in the difference in sound, when compared to the L5C. I wouldn’t think that the slightly shorter and shallower body of a JS would make as much difference to the tone as the bracing would.
Keith

Curious, how does the acoustic tone of your Campellone compare? I know you enjoy them all fairly equally. IIRC.

[omphalopsychos]

I bet that economy L7 sounds great acoustically and is light. Frankly it is a world class guitar. Today we might see it as a plain jane L7 not an L5. But remember those plain jane D'angelico Stye A's and B's are considered first class guitars today.

Yes, I have not weighed it but it is insanely light. The other thing I would note is that the neck is one of my favorite necks ever, just the right depth and taper for me. Additionally, I've had it refretted by the best "refretter" in the bay area and the setup is perfect, on par with the work of Norio Imai in NY (and just as expensive). The rhythm chief is warm and deep but is able to cut through the mix when needed. It's a very lively instrument, for sure brighter than the johnny smiths I've played, but quite nice.

[skykomishone]

As much as I’m sad this deal didn’t work out, I can remind myself that it’s not the end of the world. I’ve still got my economy version of the Johnny smith, which I don’t think I’ll ever give up.

Attachment 110789

If you ever do, please PM me!
That's a different scale of economy deferentially with respect to awesome!

[Archie]

That is a nice guitar but that said it would be interesting to compare to an acoustic L5 guitar from the same approx time period. Mostly I find the L5c's acoustically outperform the JS. But like always have come across a few with quite rich sound.

The JS is not supposed to be an acoustic guitar. It is supposed to look like one but the bracing, body size, scale length, top thickness etc.. are designed to resist feedback.

That’s why people are confused by their slightly underwhelming acoustic performance.

This was part of the Johnny Smith’s requirements when spec’ing the guitar. The same is true of the original 'Johnny Smith’ by Guild. It has surprisingly little acoustic performance but that gives it a better electric tone, which is what Johnny is famous for.

[ThatRhythmMan]

The JS is not supposed to be an acoustic guitar. It is supposed to look like one but the bracing, body size, scale length, top thickness etc.. are designed to resist feedback.

That’s why people are confused by their slightly underwhelming acoustic performance.

This was part of the Johnny Smith’s requirements when spec’ing the guitar. The same is true of the original 'Johnny Smith’ by Guild. It has surprisingly little acoustic performance but that gives it a better electric tone, which is what Johnny is famous for.

Hmmmm……I’ve played several from the ‘60s that were quite good acoustic guitars, not loud mind you, but decent volume with great, balanced tone from high to low. I’ve found everyone I’ve tried made after about 1972 to be fairly dead acoustically.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Max405]

I play my 76 ALL THE TIME acoustically.
It’s not jumbo or a dreadnaught loud, but it’s certainly not dead. In fact it’s very much alive and its my baby.
JD

[Woody Sound]

Wow that's nice. I had a tea burst '69.

[Woody Sound]

Nothing gets past Wintermoon Won't be fooled again!

[JazzNote]

Maybe, but a blonde JS is relatively rare even in the 70s. I doubt you'll find one for less than say 9k from a dealer these days.

When i was hunting for a blonde JS i ended up buying a 76 which is great, actually my main giging guitar right now. At the time (around 2017) there were quite a few blondes from the seventies around. I paid about 7k for it, condition very good.

[Archie]

Hmmmm……I’ve played several from the ‘60s that were quite good acoustic guitars, not loud mind you, but decent volume with great, balanced tone from high to low. I’ve found everyone I’ve tried made after about 1972 to be fairly dead acoustically.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think in a way that answers the point. If an acoustic guitar is not very loud, it’s not very acoustic.

We could debate ‘good’ and granted, I’d prefer an even tone to a loud one but in general, a ‘good’ acoustic guitar should be loud, responsive, with a broad spectrum of peaked frequencies.

What we would consider ‘good’ in bebop language is, 'slightly less responsive, not so loud and a preference for an even tone that translates well when amplified'.
We’ve all played fantastic acoustic archtops that sound awful, when amplified. Ime the better the acoustics, the worse the amplified tone.

All JS signature guitars, bar the Benny JS Award, are subdued acoustic archtops.

[deacon Mark]

I think in a way that answers the point. If an acoustic guitar is not very loud, it’s not very acoustic.

We could debate ‘good’ and granted, I’d prefer an even tone to a loud one but in general, a ‘good’ acoustic guitar should be loud, responsive, with a broad spectrum of peaked frequencies.

What we would consider ‘good’ in bebop language is, 'slightly less responsive, not so loud and a preference for an even tone that translates well when amplified'.
We’ve all played fantastic acoustic archtops that sound awful, when amplified. Ime the better the acoustics, the worse the amplified tone.

All JS signature guitars, bar the Benny JS Award, are subdued acoustic archtops.

Not exactly true. My Heritage Johnny Smith Rose from 2001 is quite a powerful acoustic guitar and louder than many good 18-inch guitars. It is as loud as my Heritage 18 inch Ghost built D'angelico NY. It is as loud as my Barker guitars but brighter in sound and not as much bass response. That is exactly what Johnny Smith wanted. It is louder than any Gibson JS I have played however; pure volume power is not an indicator of a fine sound archtop. There is much more involved than simply loudness.

To top it off when I got the Heritage JS the person, I got it from had a blond Benedetto AA guild too. In direct comparison it was no contest the Heritage sounded much better acoustically and electrically too, otherwise I would have got the Guild Benny. I think it sounded better electically because of the Bartonlini floating PU a winner to be sure.

[Stringswinger]

Not exactly true. My Heritage Johnny Smith Rose from 2001 is quite a powerful acoustic guitar and louder than many good 18-inch guitars. It is as loud as my Heritage 18 inch Ghost built D'angelico NY. It is as loud as my Barker guitars but brighter in sound and not as much bass response. That is exactly what Johnny Smith wanted. It is louder than any Gibson JS I have played however; pure volume power is not an indicator of a fine sound archtop. There is much more involved than simply loudness.

To top it off when I got the Heritage JS the person, I got it from had a blond Benedetto AA guild too. In direct comparison it was no contest the Heritage sounded much better acoustically and electrically too, otherwise I would have got the Guild Benny. I think it sounded better electically because of the Bartonlini floating PU a winner to be sure.

I owned two Guild-Benedetto Artist Award guitars, both made in Westerly. The first one was very quiet acoustically and frankly was a bit underwhelming. I sold that one on EBay. The second one was much better. I sold that one to a forum member in Europe after I decided that a 1971 Artist Award that I had obtained was a better guitar for me. The 71 went to a forum member to help finance one of my genuine D'Angelicos. There are still days that I miss the 71. I do not miss either of the Guild-Benedetto examples. I know that Johnny Smith endorsed the Guild-Benedetto model after requiring that it be made with a full contact neck, but I do not think he ever played that guitar with it's 25 5/8 scale length. Of course, it is well known that he never played the original Guild Johnny Smith either because he did not like how they constructed it or possibly because of it's 24 3/4 scale. Johnny Smith liked a 25 inch scale and that is what Gibson made for him with the Gibson Johnny Smith. We do know that he played the Gibson and that he recorded several albums with it on the Verve label. The tone on those recordings is second to none.

Johnny Smith left his association with Gibson owing to the quality issues and inconsistencies with his namesake guitar. I have played some Gibson Johnny Smith examples that were seriously underwhelming and I have played others that were seriously impressive. The thing is, the dogs sell for as much as the gems (which is pretty much true of all guitar models). Caveat Emptor applies when purchasing any guitar.

[Archie]

Not exactly true. My Heritage Johnny Smith Rose from 2001 is quite a powerful acoustic guitar and louder than many good 18-inch guitars. It is as loud as my Heritage 18 inch Ghost built D'angelico NY. It is as loud as my Barker guitars but brighter in sound and not as much bass response. That is exactly what Johnny Smith wanted. It is louder than any Gibson JS I have played however; pure volume power is not an indicator of a fine sound archtop. There is much more involved than simply loudness.

To top it off when I got the Heritage JS the person, I got it from had a blond Benedetto AA guild too. In direct comparison it was no contest the Heritage sounded much better acoustically and electrically too, otherwise I would have got the Guild Benny. I think it sounded better electically because of the Bartonlini floating PU a winner to be sure.

"volume power is not an indicator of a fine sound archtop.” -
Volume is an indicator of a well made acoustic guitar. A balanced range of frequencies denotes the tone and ‘fine sound’, that I think you're commenting on.
Laminates have a nice balance of tone because in part, the top does not move as much and so everything is more even. They are also quieter for the very same reason.

My Heritage Johnny Smith is not loud and certainly not nearly as loud as my Guild Benny JS Award but we have to factor in irregularities.
If we take simple build physics into account, a reduced size 17” body (The Rose) being louder than an 18” body? Would that that would lean to the 18”, being the one that is slacking (for want of a better term)?
It’s about moving air right? Surely all things being equal, the 18” should be the louder more ’acoustic’ guitar?
I understand that smaller guitars can be brighter and project more directly but..

Happy to take advice from yourself. You’re a very knowledgeable person but the Gibson Johnny Smith is a reduced size 17” guitar. Therefore it is not as ‘acoustic’ as an L5C. If the L5C or the L7 is the standard acoustic for a 17” guitar, then the JS is a designed to be less acoustic and deliberately so.

[Archie]

I owned two Guild-Benedetto Artist Award guitars, both made in Westerly. The first one was very quiet acoustically and frankly was a bit underwhelming. I sold that one on EBay. The second one was much better. I sold that one to a forum member in Europe after I decided that a 1971 Artist Award that I had obtained was a better guitar for me. The 71 went to a forum member to help finance one of my genuine D'Angelicos. There are still days that I miss the 71. I do not miss either of the Guild-Benedetto examples. I know that Johnny Smith endorsed the Guild-Benedetto model after requiring that it be made with a full contact neck, but I do not think he ever played that guitar with it's 25 5/8 scale length. Of course, it is well known that he never played the original Guild Johnny Smith either because he did not like how they constructed it or possibly because of it's 24 3/4 scale. Johnny Smith liked a 25 inch scale and that is what Gibson made for him with the Gibson Johnny Smith. We do know that he played the Gibson and that he recorded several albums with it on the Verve label. The tone on those recordings is second to none.

Johnny Smith left his association with Gibson owing to the quality issues and inconsistencies with his namesake guitar. I have played some Gibson Johnny Smith examples that were seriously underwhelming and I have played others that were seriously impressive. The thing is, the dogs sell for as much as the gems (which is pretty much true of all guitar models). Caveat Emptor applies when purchasing any guitar.

I understand your GBJS or GBAA feelings but it is hands down the finest made ‘mass produced’ archtop I've ever put my hands on. The recurve, the fingerboard extension, the shape of the plates; It doesn’t get better. You would have to go to the highest level of luthiery to find more exquisite examples. It’s basically a Benedetto.

I don't agree with the neck scale length.

[JazzNote]

For me the most astonishing thing about my 76 JS is the difference between unplugged and amplified. I feel that it does not really retain the properties of it's acoustic voice when plugged in, but gets a new, different voice. Unlike my other archtops which have their acoustic properties (more or less) amplified, the JS retains it's clarity when amplified, but the "machoism" which i feel in it's purely acoustic voice, turns into a smooth even sound, which somehow merges astonishingly flexible with the "surrounding music" when amplified. None of my other guitars has this "chameleon-like" quality.

[floatingpickup]

Curious, how does the acoustic tone of your Campellone compare? I know you enjoy them all fairly equally. IIRC.

My Campellone Special has exactly the same specs as a Gibson Johnny Smith. The scale, nut-width and body dimensions are all the same as a JS. Interestingly, the Campellone sounds more like my JS than my L5C. The Campellone sounds warm and mellow, not as bright as the L5C. The Campellone may be the best sounding of the three, but that’s a tough call.
Keith

[guitarcarver]

You won't regret it. I've not regretted it 3 times now!

[Woody Sound]

I owned a HJS and a GJS at the same time. The Heritage blew away the Gibson in acoustic sound, electric sound, and of course craftsmanship.

[deacon Mark]

I owned a HJS and a GJS at the same time. The Heritage blew away the Gibson in acoustic sound, electric sound, and of course craftsmanship.

I have owned 2 GJS's and now I own 2 Heritage Johnny Smiths. No contest the Heritage guitars are by far much better. No even in the ballpark, In fact my 2 are some of the best acoustic archtops for sound I have heard. They have have plenty of volume and play incredible.

[Boze]

I like how everyone is so happy for Oomph and it's not a sixties JS and he's not buying it lol

That guitar is very pretty though. I wish more blondes went butterscotch like that

[nyc chaz]

I have owned 2 GJS's and now I own 2 Heritage Johnny Smiths. No contest the Heritage guitars are by far much better. No even in the ballpark, In fact my 2 are some of the best acoustic archtops for sound I have heard. They have have plenty of volume and play incredible.

I wish i could say the same for the Heritage Johnny Smith i bought last year.Acoustically it was one of the worst sounding guitars i ever heard.Even a well known luthier by me echoed the same feeling and i sent the guitar back for that and other reasons.Every guitar is an individual,even a guitar like an L5 worshipped on this forum by most can be mediocre.

[Stringswinger]

I wish i could say the same for the Heritage Johnny Smith i bought last year.Acoustically it was one of the worst sounding guitars i ever heard.Even a well known luthier by me echoed the same feeling and i sent the guitar back for that and other reasons.Every guitar is an individual,even a guitar like an L5 worshipped on this forum by most can be mediocre.

The only Heritage JS that I ever played was as quiet as a 335. Plugged in, it had a good tone, but it was a disappointment for me. I have yet to play a Gibson JS (I have played three of them) that met my volume requirements for an "acoustic" archtop. Perhaps the Gibson JS is by design, an electric guitar?

[Cunamara]

Tal Farlow pointed out decades ago that, in general, what is good for acoustic guitar tone is detrimental to amplified tone and vice versa. In my experience that is not universally true but generally true- my ES-175 is very good amplified but not all that useful as an acoustic instrument; my 17" Matt Cushman is great acoustically but amplification is always a struggle. And the louder one has to play, the more true it is. I think it is very difficult to have a great acoustic archtop that also amplifies well for a great electric tone.

Johnny designed the GJS as a performing instrument for use with an amplifier, AFAIK. I don't know what if any changes he made for the HJS specs. And I gotta say that I really like the amplified sound of a good GJS or HJS.