Versatile Budget - Gibson J-15 Burst or Martin 000-17 Burst

[dimibetan]

Hi Guys,

 

Need some advice on which acoustic guitar will fit a strummer and fingerstyle. I know the best advice is to try them and decide from there, but they are not currently available locally. I have to order them to get them. Also, I know there are other options but they are mostly with a 1 11/16" nut, which is too narrow for my tubby fingers, with 25.5" scale, which is too long for long for my hand.

 

Cheers!

 

P.S.

I also found Simon & Patrick Woodland Pro Folk and Rosewood Concert Hall which are nice since they are only half of my budget.

[Phil O'Keefe]

I've never heard of Simon & Patrick before... but I have played the Martin and the Gibson - both are nice guitars. Of the two, I'd rather have the J-15, mainly for the dreadnought body. YMMV.

 

FWIW, I do a bit of fingerstyle, and a fair amount of strumming too.

[Freeman Keller]

Simon and Patrick is a Canadian manufacture I believe under the Art & Lutherie umbrella (Godin, Seagull, etc). I don't have much experience with them but understand they are well made and considered a good buy. I do like other A&L products.

 

Between the J-15 and 000-17 I've got to say I would choose the Martin - I'm strictly a fingerstyle player and like smaller bodied guitars (and own a couple of vintage dreads that I never play). However I've got a basic problem with the new 000-17 - in the 1930's that designation was applied to an all mahogany small bodied guitar - very simple appointments - that has kind of a cult following among blues players. The new 17 series are completely different - I think they are probably fine guitars but what I really covet is the old ones. I know that doesn't mean anything as far as your choice but unfortunately it does affect my thinking.

 

Frankly, these are enough different that I would not buy one that I hadn't played

[garthman]

Simon & Patrick are good guitars - easily as good as the Gibson and Martin and half the price. You might also have a look at Recording King. Two of their models might suit you (also half the price or even less):

 

http://www.recordingking.com/guitars/rp06

 

http://www.recordingking.com/guitars/ros06

[Mikeo]

I would choose between the Martin and Gibson.

 

The Gibson will have a fuller sound just because of the size. I have owned a J45 for decades and it has served me well.

I like Martins too. The neck is slimmer, more comfy body, great warranty to the original owned.

 

I don't like the color of the sunburst on the Martin.

 

 

I chose the Gibson

 

 

 

 

 

[MePeel]

Consider a Blueridge. I have the BR-143, and it is a jewel.

 

Mel

[DeepEnd]

Talk about apples and oranges and kumquats. I chose the S&P Rosewood Concert Hall but any of them could be an excellent guitar. As Freeman said, they're different enough that I'd want to play them first.

[dimibetan]

Thanks for the response, guys. Hopefully, I will receive more comments.

 

I was eyeing for other brands as well like Recording King and Blueridge before like some of you guys mentioned. Unfortunately, they are not available in our country. It would also be expensive to order online since the New CITES regulations on shipping rosewood overseas... the cost and timetable for taking permits (uugghh).

[Freeman Keller]

It would also be expensive to order online since the New CITES regulations on shipping rosewood overseas... the cost and timetable for taking permits (uugghh).

 

Dimibetan, that should not be true. All rosewoods other than Brazilian were recently added to appendix II of CITES (Braz was previously listed in appendix I). As you know, trade in appendix I materials is almost completely banned (there are a few exceptions under very special cases), but appendix II materials CAN be imported/exported - there is some paperwork involved - but remember that big leaf mahogany, ebony and many other materials used in guitar construction were already in appendix II.

 

A couple of years ago I shipped a guitar to a forumite in the EU which contained ebony, rosewood, shell material, mahogany - I filled out a fairly simple form that probably took all of an hour including my research. The guitar sailed right thru customs. A week ago a friend came from GB to the US with a new classical guitar - again, EIR, ebony, shell - the seller provided the paperwork, he walked thru US customs with it.

 

What I am saying is that buying a guitar with rosewood shouldn't be any more difficult that one with mahogany or ebony - the paperwork is the same.

 

https://www.fws.gov/international/pdf/questions-and-answers-appendix-II-timber-listings-December-2016.pdf

[Glenn F]

My advice is try before you buy. I've played a J-15, and wasn't impressed with the build quality, or the sound. In fact, I've only ever plyed one Gibson acoustic that positively impressed me, a J-29, but the store would not move a penny on the price so I passed. When I ordered one from another store, the QC was, once again, wanting. It went back. I would suggest a Martin D-15M if you want a bigger sound than an 000.

[Idunno]

Kind of an apples and oranges question just because they're priced similarly. This tells me you have a budget but don't have experience to use it to your advantage. To that I can only suggest trying before you buy.

 

Gibson has never impressed me with any acoustic they've crossed my path with in 40+ years. Given the two, Martin would be the only choice there. But, I'm also told I don't have an ear for the Gibson Sound, which is to say my pedigree and it don't agree.

 

The Canadian guitars have my respect for build quality - call it intent - but not my ear. I've played many and owned one with electronics to use plugged. It was a Seagull which is a brand under the same S&P umbrella. I wanted to like it but true to its name, it flew off one day.

 

I'd take a good look at the Breedlove and Eastman line up. I think anything by Breedlove in your budget will second both Gibson and Martin and the Eastman line up will make you ask why it's costs so much less than its contemporaries.

[Glenn F]

No, Seagulls don't impress me a lot, either, with the exception of their S12, which is a very decent 12 string on a lower budget. There are others out there now that I would try first, like a Sigma, but I don't need another 12 string. My experience with Godin made 6 strings is that there isn't a lot of difference in tone between the models with laminated back/sides, and the all-solid models. I also had an Entourage mini-jumbo, which wasn't bad, but tended to be a bit tinny in the 1st and 2nd strings. I called them 'Gertrude & Heathcliff.' And with the one exception, all Gibson acoustics have sounded to me like they had blankets stuffed in them. Both my Seagulls have also flown the roost.

[Mikeo]

Not mentioned for Canadian guitars, the Larrivee Company. They makes some nice stuff. The Toronto plant was closed, and they are now made in California.

 

 

[Idunno]

I had a couple CA Larrivees. Nice guitars.

[Glenn F]

The Larris I played here were not very good. The lower strings were dead, and the frets felt like speed-bumps. I remember getting a L-03R in Feb. 2008, and exchanged it for my Lakewood M-18. My post about may still be here, lol. I remember my wife noting that I was 'damning it with faint praise.' I was trying oh so hard to like it, but.... YMMV on this one, but I've read other people mentioning the dead open A string.

[Idunno]

Odd. I had an OMV-09E and OO-05. They did everything I wanted and if I wasn't such a greedy little twit looking for the Valhalla of sound I might still very happy with the OO-05.

[Glenn F]

I have two theories about it:

 

A) companies ship the runts of their litters overseas;

B) the guitars are damaged in transit overseas.

 

I tend towards A.

 

I've had a few Martins pass through my hands that weren't very good, as well, 3 of them damaged in one way or another. All I know is, I was forced to upgrade to a different make of guitar.