The Gibson J-200 sound ... for £250

[JimN]

New guitar arrived today: "The Loar" LH-200 FES VS.

Not a Super Jumbo body, but modelled after the "Robert Johnson" Gibson L-1 guitar (and how it looks the part for da blooz). Fitted with a Fishman transducer unit with volume and tone controls just inside the soundhole. And it has a 25.5" scale-length, just like the J-200...

Fitted with 12-52 D'Adarrio bronzes and played with a light-gauge pick, it's all but right there, acoustically - nailing the sound that launched a few thousand rhythm guitarists. Plenty of bass, but crystal bright in the upper register*.... just maybe a set of 13-56 would be the last small finishing touch...

JN

[* Ching ching a ching-ching ching-ching ching-ching, as Bruce once memorably put it]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSmGs-H4Gus

Not very well recorded, though - for better bass, it would need a different mike, placed closer.

[Bojan]

Looks and sounds great Jim . . . A real bargain for a guitar with such a good pedigree. I looked all over the Internet for it but could not find that model, and then I realized that it was LH-200 FE3 VS, not FES LH-200 FES VS . . . I have a mind to buy one myself.

The only thing is that all of the models I found were LH-200 FE3 SN . . . do you know by any chance what the difference is between the SN and VS model?

[Bojan]

Just found this great text:

http://www.acguitar.com/article/default ... leid=25610

[JimN]

Hi, Bojan,

The "VS" part refers to the finish: "Vintage Sunburst", which I have to say is just like the classic Gibson (and even Kalamazoo) sunburst of the 1930s right through as late as the 1960s. Just think ES-335 or J-200.

I know the same model is available in natural, so assumed that "SN" was a reference to that. I think it may also be available in black, as is the 300-model archtop, but black does not appeal to me at all, even if Les Paul did have a black Loar-era Gibson L-5...

This ought to make it clear: http://www.theloar.com/LH-200.html. But does it? According to that page, "SN" means sunburst and "NA" means natural. And my (sunburst) guitar's label says: "LH-200 FE3 SN". Perhaps I took my cue from the wrong place - the packaging in which the instrument was sent to me.

JN

[Bojan]

Thanks Jim, in any case, the letters denote the color/finish. I should have figured that out myself.

[dave robinson]

Thanks Jim, in any case, the letters denote the color/finish. I should have figured that out myself.

Bojan, they can add as many letters and numbers as they like - it will never sound like a Gibson J-200 in a million years, unless you have dodgy hearing that is.
If you want the sound of a Gibson, the only way is to buy one - trust me I went through it all and it's the ONLY way, I had to save up and accept the fact, but it was worth it.

[Bojan]

Thanks Jim, in any case, the letters denote the color/finish. I should have figured that out myself.

Bojan, they can add as many letters and numbers as they like - it will never sound like a Gibson J-200 in a million years, unless you have dodgy hearing that is.
If you want the sound of a Gibson, the only way is to buy one - trust me I went through it all and it's the ONLY way, I had to save up and accept the fact, but it was worth it.

Believe me Dave, there is no guitar in the world I would like to have more that the Gibson J-200 (especially since my main "vocation" is rhythm guitar), not just because of its tone, but because of the Shadows "vibe" and everything else, but alas, I am not a professional or even an active musician and I simply cannot justify the cost of such a sublime instrument. For me it will always remain an unfulfilled dream. I was thinking about the Epiphone version . . . I know it is not even remotely close to the Gibson, but at least it's got the look . . . but, that's like buying a fake Rolex and a real Rolex . . . That's why I was admiring the Loar . . . at least it's original.

[JimN]

I've played several copies of the J-200 over the years, all of which had one thing in common - total plywood construction. And they sounded like it (to be fair, some were never meant for proper performance and others are meant only for amplified use). That second category includes the Epiphone, which has had some honourable users, including Darrell Higham.

As for the J-200, well, there have long been similar guitars of similar quality which got close to it, eg, the Guild F-models. But it's easy to provide high quality at high price.

On the other hand, I do actually have a J-200 and another Gibson jumbo and this new guitar (which only arrived yesterday) is, in my opinion, capable of giving either of them a good run for their money at one-sixth of the price of a J-50 and one-tenth of the price of a J-200. One thing is for certain - this solid wood guitar knocks massive spots off any plywood J-200 lookalike. No comparison.

JN

[Bojan]

On the other hand, I do actually have a J-200 and another Gibson jumbo and this new guitar (which only arrived yesterday) is, in my opinion, capable of giving either of them a good run for their money at one-sixth of the price of a J-50 and one-tenth of the price of a J-200. One thing is for certain - this solid wood guitar knocks massive spots off any plywood J-200 lookalike. No comparison.

JN

Jim, are you talking about the acoustic sound or the amplified sound, or both?

[JimN]

At this stage, Bojan, I'm only talking about the acoustic sound.

I rarely play any of my electro-acoustics amplified, and I haven't plugged in the Loar guitar at all yet. But it has the same pickup system (as far as I can see) as my J-200 and the Martin 12 string I bought last year.

I knew that The Loar LH-200 was going to be good - I played a couple of examples at NAMM and I already had the experience of the archtop guitar (the first and only genuinely carved-top f-hole guitar I've ever owned).

JN