I own a Standard J45 with a Sitka top and a D18. Both are relatively new. The Sitka top on the Standard J45 is warmer than the Addy in this comparison. Both are superb sounding guitars and of course, very different. I really like the neck and short scale of the Gibby. Very easy to play. I agree with most of what they are saying here. If I had to choose between them it would be very difficult. Luckily I don’t.
I went to guitar center to purchase a d-18 and came home with a j-45. I made my own comparison. I respect the video and everyone don't have the ability to go to a music store to make this comparison. The d-18 I played was new off the rack and needed a set up. The j-45 was also new and needed no set up. I've had a martian since 1971 so I was biased towards martins but now also have a Gibson. You owe it to yourself if at all possible to make this comparison without the expensive audio equipment but what you hear is a fair comparison. It's not the same as having the guitar in your lap and actually feeling it when you play it plus all guitars of the same maker and model don't sound and feel the same.
I’m a Gibson guy, but respect Martin for the great guitars they make. My only real knock on Martin is their $3000 guitars look just like their $1000 guitars. I tend to like the Gibson tone, though could be perfectly happy with a Martin tone, but visually... no comparison. Gibsons sound terrific, and look amazing.
I agree. It's how it sounds overall and grabs you but visually it is a nice feel and perk to have a sweet looking guitar. Martins tend to be drab and boring looking compared to Gibsons. Martin would probably sell even more guitars if they offered more alternate finishes and fret inlays.
I purchased a Martin D18 a few months ago. It is amazing how the strings bring out the guitar's natural sound and differing tones. There was a comment by the presenter that the Gibson was more punchy, but I put Martin Nickel Monel strings on my Martin, and it is extremely punchy opposed to how the Phosphor Bronze and 80/20 strings made the Martin sound. They are both great guitars, and I recommend playing both, and paying attention to the strings that are on the guitars when you demo.
Problem with the gibson is it sounds more like a cross between an electric guitar & acoustic guitar. Does not have that true acoustic flavor, woodiness, etc On the other hand the Martin rules acoustically
For the people who are checking this out based on their recording needs; J45 would be my choice for the sections that need extra character (intro arpeggios, Supporting melody lines, etc..) (Suggested string gauge: 13) D18 would be my choice for the sections where you need the instrument to blend into the mix without overwhelming the rest of the mid frequency elements (especially verse vocals, under solo rhythms, etc..) anything that needs support without too much attitude. (Suggested sting gauge: 12. Especially for mixes where 13 might sound two sterile) Hope this helps!
both absolutely Pale in comparison to the Martin D-28. That said, the D-28 has solid Rosewood for the Back n Sides. The problem I have with Gibson is their quality control....their necks are Really hit or miss, and when they miss...they fly off a cliff. Those necks are Painfully bad to play. Martin models, whether made in USA or Mexico ALWAYS have Great playing necks and sound Fantastic.
@@dmar3651 I mean a mahogany guitar serves a different purpose than a rosewood, I dont see how it could "pale in comparison". Its like saying a guitar pales in comparison to a bass.
@@endocry not true. It is a valid issue to compare tonewoods. Spruce vs. Cedar vs. Mahogany. Rosewood vs. Mahogany vs. Koa etc. But also, Playability is a major factor in whether you will enjoy your guitar or not.
Surprising to hear a $3000 Sitka topped Martin D-18 hold it's own against a $5000 Addy topped Gibson True Vintage. It certainly validates those who purchase a D-18. Even so, I have also played the Gibson J-45 True Vintage and it is an amazing guitar with a gorgeous tone.Truly, both are wonderful icons worthy of anyone's collection.
Mathews Halon 6 I own 2 j 45 and one 1962 j50....and 2 d-18s. I luv all them for what they are..... I would say that the Gibson has a very colorful tone but the Martin has more concise tone.... please don't knock Gibson their guitars are wonderful for Blues and country and is the most widely recorded guitar in the history of guitars. But the Martin sounds good for what you need it to do
Rosewoods are nice for fingerpickers, but for strummers they drown out vocals, friends and bands. Maybe he is a strummer and prefers the mellow tone? The martin is a big bright cannon, so what? Being the loudest most obnoxious git doesnt make it the best. Maybe a great bluegrass guitar but i find the j-45 is a more flexible instrument and mahogany smooth strummer tone is great for the solo artist or band. D-28 is a lil too much for anything other than fingerpicking in my opinion which limits its use. i own a d-28 and j-50 mahogany and i like the cheap 70s gibson 100x more to be honest.
@@thorn35 In oversimplified way, I don’t like rosewood folk guitars. it feels like has too much oil and butter. Rosewood is the excellent choice for the classical instruments, but not for the steel-string guitars.
Hard go get a gauge based on recordings. The J45 is famous for recording very well. But in my experience a D18 will sound better in your hands. Big, open, clear, 3-D sound.
The J-45 would be great for blues with the bite and quick decay of sound. I have an old pawn shop 1965 Stella in mint condition and it has the same bluesy characteristics (even though it cost much less). It also joins the body at the 12th fret and I think there's definately something to that.
Very fair example of the Gibson sound and the Martin sound. Im my experience as a previous owner of a GibsonJ45 and now owner of D-18 (and a Martin HD-28, Martin OM Cherry) these clips organically demonstrate the types of voicing to expect
Both beautiful guitars!! Love that burst on the Gibson - man it looks good. I personally liked the Martin for its deeper richer tone not a fan of the mid high tones the Gibson is putting out. What material for the nut, saddle and pins?
I have an older D-18 with an Adirondack Spruce top and I believe it's a significantly louder top than Sitka. So, although the attempt here was a direct comparison, they really should have compared a Martin with the same top. There's a good reason you pay a hefty upgrade for ad "Addy" top and it's not just because the wood is becoming more scarce.
The J45 is considerably more mid range focused, which likely will record better. The D18 sounds more woody and organic with longer sustain in the low end, and a much broader range of tone from low to high end, but more boomy. String type and setup also make a big difference, so we are assuming they are very similar. Preference just depends on what kind of tone and feel you’re going for. If I could only have one I’d choose the D18, but what even sounds much better is the Collings D1A, but that’s an unfair comparison because the price point is considerably higher.
Excellent video. Really good advice about trying guitars for yourself. The irony is that I think the D18 sounds more like a Gibson than any other Martin.
I am a huge Martin fan, but that Gibson sounds really good! However, this is not an apples to apples comparison. The Gibson has a Adi top and the D-18 has a Sitka top. A better comparison would be a D-18 with an Adi top. Gibson wins this by a hair, but I don't think this comparison is really fair.
Charlie Ruprecht a standard D-18 has a Sitka spruce top, but the J-45 TV (true vintage) has an Adirondack top. You can check the stats online. I think that You’re thinking of a J-45 standard. It has the Sitka spruce top.
I have both. The D18 is my primary guitar but I swap back and forth between the two for certain things. Love them both. I do get more volume out of the D18 but the J45 is great for more intricate things. The response of the D18 is insane, particularly in the bass range. You really don't have to hit it very hard.
I have a J45TV and a Martin D28. I love them both and find I play them about the same amount depending on mood and the sound type I'm trying to create. The D18 is great, too.
Would loved to hear the standard Gibson J-45 with Sitka vs Martin D-18...this is kind of an apples to oranges comparison once you add Adirondack spruce to the 45...as mentioned below, not really a fair comparison, but the Martin D-18 stands up just fine from what I can hear!
Biggest issue with a Martin vs Gibson...The woof while recording. I have a D28 and its fantastic live but my 56 Gibson C&W just has something. Its super easy to track with any style you throw at it.
They both sound great but Pop has an early '63 J that I grew up on. He lost it for 15 years and bought 7 different guitars trying to replace it. It truly is one of a kind. Survived a fire that cracked the finish but didn't do anything else. I can't pick out what made it "sing" the best. I just know for his playing, it was the best.
Both of these guitars are outstanding, and I own one of each. This video isn’t a fair comparison. The comparison should be between a Gibson J-45 TV and a Martin D-18GE, both Adirondack Spruce tops and forward shifted bracing. I own a 2016 Gibson Custom Shop J-45 Banner (1942 copy), and a 1999 (First year) Martin D-18GE. Both guitars are superb, and each have their own place on stage. The Gibson is very warm and offers itself well to stage singing and ease of play, but the Martin D-18GE has a depth of tone especially on base side, and due to its age is a great player with awesome tone. Both are 1 3/4 nut width, and wider spacing at 12th fret.
Both sound magical, but I think I would be more inclined towards the J45 just for the more balanced tone. The Martin has a very full tone, but not a lot of definition, whereas the Gibson has very clear definition. To me, you play a J45 on records and smoke-filled bars, and you play D18 on a big stage.
I thought the J45 had a little more base/ midrange clarity and the D18 was a little brighter on the higher strings. I too am curious how much the Adirondack spruce comes into play.
To me, the D-18 is warmer and sounds better (to my ear) on its own, but I think the J-45 might cut through a jam session a little better. Hard to say. Love the comparison and it all comes down to what feels right to the player
I like both of them a lot. The Gibson has a bit unfair advantage being that it has that Adi top. I think you should of used a D-18GE in your review as you mentioned at the end. Good playing but I felt like it wasn't a great comparison.
Both are great guitars no doubt. I guess it depends on what you play and how you play it. For me, playing in an acoustic - centered country rock band, the J45 played thru Fishman Loudbox wins hands down. The tonal response of the Gibson is faster than the Martin, if that makes sense. For acoustic Bluegrass, the Martin may be better. But for what I’m playing now, it’s definitely the Gibson. Plus Gibson has just got the cool factor!
that gibson is much like taylors. i dont wanna hear the strings that much. i want bass sound echo inside the guitar as much as possible so i can hear the wood. much smoother voice imo. id go with martin
rrrrdavid1 I am 65, started playing guitar when I was 11. In the intervening years I have played many guitars, both acoustic and electric. That is my bona fides. And you sir, are correct.
I ordered my first Martin online at myfavoriteguitars. I did not play it before buying it. I ordered it based on its construction and wood types. It sounds amazing and I love it. I cannot find a guitar in a store I like as much. So, if you think it's fate when you pick up a guitar and it's great, perhaps it's fate that this guitar came to me even without playing it first. . . Btw, I had tested multiple guitars before ordering so I had an idea of what I wanted. I ordered a d18ge customs hope btw. Same as Ge but with a mlo performance neck with a wide string spacing.
Two great guitars... D18 got that ramblin jack Elliot sound, "very even",and I've found easier to fit in a mix. Gibson j45, once you figure your personal guitar... More attitudes. (Gibson acoustics not as consistent guitar to guitar, I've found) Side note: Gibson southern jumbo really does it all imoo
Fully agreed , gota play n’ experience an instrument to truly know watchya dig. Ide have both but as for my number one it’s always been a j45. The shorter neck length for example , less string tension makes it feel buttery to play n has a warm dynamic response , fav tone of bass. 1.72 at the nutt works with me as well since i I don’t have thin fingers. Both guitars have their iconic tones , I just wish the d18 had the same playability for me. Someone once recommended a “short scale d18” I searched and I might as well be searching for dinosaur bones man the sh!& is not easy to find.
I’m developing the opinion that nothing beats a Martin for strumming open major or minor chords. But maybe the Gibson is a little more versatile. I liked the J45 better on the finger picking, personally.
I've been hearing lots of complaints over and over about Gibson's quality control. So last year I narrowed my field of desired acoustic guitars to three---- Gibson Standard J-45, and Martin D-28 or Martin 000-18. I chose a J-45 with rosewood back and sides. GC kept dogging me with excuses and could not deliver April, 2020. I settled for a Standard J-45 with mahogany back and sides. It is easy the most easy to play guitar I have ever played, HOWEVER------one of the tuners has no chrome on half of it, AND----There's a nice gouge right on the front of the guitar!!!!! I could go on and on and on and on, but tomorrow I'll order The Martin 000-18 which has a shorter scale length too. Unless GC lowers the price to have a dam good luthier fix the problems.
I have a couple of friends one has 2 old Martin's and the other has an old J-45. The J-45 got damaged and was repaired. I personally like the old Gibson better mainly because I like the darker tone. I like all of them better than any other brands of acoustic. The Martins are brighter with richness. The Gibson is more mellow. Dave
I prefer the much warmer sound of the Martin. However, the Gibson also sounds great in its own way. I would like to have both guitars. For me, the Gibson's 12" fret board radius would be a big plus over the Martin's 16" radius. And the Gibson's shorter scale length would also make for easier fingering. However, the Martin sound just can't be beat, in my opinion.
Closed my eyes before the video started and it turned out that I preferred the Martin. The Gibson is clearer, brighter, louder...all elements that most would say makes a better guitar but for me, the Martin sounded more 'woody' and how I think and acoustic should sound. Horses for courses...
In the world of OMs and dreadnoughts, Martin is king. Having owned both Gibson and Martin, for me, choosing anything other than a Martin, well, I was kidding myself. I was choosing something else for the sake of being a little "different." Martin is like the Glock of guitars; you have it, you trade it, you regret it, you come to your senses and get another Martin. I Have never felt this way about any other guitar.
I prefer the shorter scale, although a Martin was my first nice acoustic .Martin to me looks better or more expensive but can't get over that mid range of the Gibson.
You really can’t choose one for the other. These two are iconic guitars that have been around for over 70 years. If you are a true guitar player, you would own both, just like owning both a Gibson Les Paul and a Fender Stratocaster.
The Gibson just has "that Gibson" sound so prevalent in Beatles' music. The D-18 captures hundreds of artists' music. A great players collection would include both and maybe a Brazilian D-28 for a 3rd sound. After that?
I have a 2016 d18 and the classic way I describe it is warm ……… not overwhelmingly Loud or snappy but warm and smooth …… very easy to play …… the Gibson on here is more snappy …the player description is right I believe ……
Martin all day. But I do like that Gibson sound too. But the Martin sound is my thing. Found what I feel an acoustic should sound like with the martins. At least the right Martin.
Both sound beautiful..great guitars the Gibson has the shorter scale length which I would go for .The Gibson reminds be of the Beatles and Rollin Stones ..Martine the USA guitars sounds ..how can you make a choice ..no better but which one for you
Gibsons can be kinda hit and miss but that particular one sounds fantastic! It’s open and loud. Some of them can sound muffled and weak. When you find a good one they are really good
Both beautiful guitars but are they strung with the same strings? The better the guitar, the more you will hear the difference that strings make. First is the difference between phosphor bronze vs 80-20 bell bronze. After that, each manufacturer will sound different, e.g. d'Addario vs John Pearse. Coated vs un-coated, etc. To my ear, it sounded like the Gibson was strung with d'Addario phosphor bronze (coated or un-coated) and the Martin with Elixer nano-web phosphor bronze (hence the sparkling highs & subdued mids & bass).
My primary acoustic is 1965 Epiphone Texan (made in the Gibson Kalamazoo factory) The same body shape, woods & bracing as the Gibson but with a 25 1/2 inch scale. My favorite strings for accompanying a vocalist or playing bluegrass are John Pearse phosphor bronze. If I were finger-picking instrumentals, I'd choose something else with a bit less mid range...maybe 80-20s, but that's not my style.
BTW, any guitar with a 25 1/2 inch scale will have greater sustain and a slightly brighter sound than one with a 24 3/4 inch scale. It's all a matter of personal taste in the end.
Your son has one, and you have the other, play them together, drink a beer or 3, switch em up, do this as much as possible, you know what the song says, "Nothing else matters" :)
Just because the martin is less on highs compared to j45 it doesn't mean the martin has more bass. Ive tried both of them in store and the gibson is much easier to play compare to martin in my opinion
I have played many of these guitars and have said in the past and again today. If your going to compare these two guitars for sound only then you are not going to be happy buying one over the other. Common sence will dictate that feel or more specificly the way a neck feels under your hands, radius of the fretboard 16" Martin radius or 12" Gibson radius plus your own personal feel or style will dictate which one is made for you.
both Guitars really play the same. it all depends on the players style and how he plays it. but i'm partial too the Martin as i have a 2006 D-28. but would also take the Gibson too. nice Guitars.
![🔴 ฟุตบอลแชมป์กีฬา 7HD แชมเปียน คัพ 2024 [รอบรองชนะเลิศ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zPm8ClLVhoE/mqdefault.jpg)
They both sound great. Some things the Martin sounds better and some things the Gibson sounds better..Get both.
I'm a Martin guy, but that J45 sounded gorgeous, way better to my ears. As they said, a D18GE would have been a fairer comparison.
I own a Standard J45 with a Sitka top and a D18. Both are relatively new.
The Sitka top on the Standard J45 is warmer than the Addy in this comparison.
Both are superb sounding guitars and of course, very different.
I really like the neck and short scale of the Gibby. Very easy to play.
I agree with most of what they are saying here. If I had to choose between them it would be very difficult.
Luckily I don’t.
I went to guitar center to purchase a d-18 and came home with a j-45. I made my own comparison. I respect the video and everyone don't have the ability to go to a music store to make this comparison. The d-18 I played was new off the rack and needed a set up. The j-45 was also new and needed no set up. I've had a martian since 1971 so I was biased towards martins but now also have a Gibson. You owe it to yourself if at all possible to make this comparison without the expensive audio equipment but what you hear is a fair comparison. It's not the same as having the guitar in your lap and actually feeling it when you play it plus all guitars of the same maker and model don't sound and feel the same.
I’m a Gibson guy, but respect Martin for the great guitars they make. My only real knock on Martin is their $3000 guitars look just like their $1000 guitars. I tend to like the Gibson tone, though could be perfectly happy with a Martin tone, but visually... no comparison. Gibsons sound terrific, and look amazing.
I agree. It's how it sounds overall and grabs you but visually it is a nice feel and perk to have a sweet looking guitar. Martins tend to be drab and boring looking compared to Gibsons. Martin would probably sell even more guitars if they offered more alternate finishes and fret inlays.
It’s funny because that Gibson costs $5000 and is just as plain looking.
@@G_Demolished I’m talking about across their entire lineup. And you know it’s true. Martins are not flashy. Gibsons are. Often, anyhow.
In this contest it is the J-45 for me. Jesus, that sounds sweet!
I preferred the J45 in this comparison. amazing how different the two sound.
I purchased a Martin D18 a few months ago. It is amazing how the strings bring out the guitar's natural sound and differing tones. There was a comment by the presenter that the Gibson was more punchy, but I put Martin Nickel Monel strings on my Martin, and it is extremely punchy opposed to how the Phosphor Bronze and 80/20 strings made the Martin sound. They are both great guitars, and I recommend playing both, and paying attention to the strings that are on the guitars when you demo.
Totally agree. I tried a bunch of string sets on my D18 until I put the Tony Rice Monels on it. No looking back. It’s like they were made for it.
I put Monels on my Gibson J185 and it is a Much Bettah guitar for it!
that and the gibson in the video is adirondack top so its going to much louder sounding
how are the electronics - how do they sound plugged in? Also capoed? these things are so important
Can't go wrong either iconic guitars. Have had one of each and both have terrific tone, but I found the j45 a smidge more comfy to play.
Great guitar comparison I have to say forme it's the gibson something about j45s that do it for me
Problem with the gibson is it sounds more like a cross between an electric guitar & acoustic guitar. Does not have that true acoustic flavor, woodiness, etc On the other hand the Martin rules acoustically
For the people who are checking this out based on their recording needs;
J45 would be my choice for the sections that need extra character (intro arpeggios, Supporting melody lines, etc..)
(Suggested string gauge: 13)
D18 would be my choice for the sections where you need the instrument to blend into the mix without overwhelming the rest of the mid frequency elements (especially verse vocals, under solo rhythms, etc..) anything that needs support without too much attitude.
(Suggested sting gauge: 12. Especially for mixes where 13 might sound two sterile)
Hope this helps!
D-18 has more articulation, Gibson had more mids and bottom, both good Guitars, no losers here.
long and short scales, respectively.
both absolutely Pale in comparison to the Martin D-28.
That said, the D-28 has solid Rosewood for the Back n Sides.
The problem I have with Gibson is their quality control....their necks are Really hit or miss, and when they miss...they fly off a cliff. Those necks are Painfully bad to play.
Martin models, whether made in USA or Mexico ALWAYS have Great playing necks and sound Fantastic.
- sounds to me like the Martin wins in the low end department, and not the Gibson.
@@dmar3651 I mean a mahogany guitar serves a different purpose than a rosewood, I dont see how it could "pale in comparison". Its like saying a guitar pales in comparison to a bass.
@@endocry not true.
It is a valid issue to compare tonewoods.
Spruce vs. Cedar vs. Mahogany.
Rosewood vs. Mahogany vs. Koa etc.
But also, Playability is a major factor in whether you will enjoy your guitar or not.
Surprising to hear a $3000 Sitka topped Martin D-18 hold it's own against a $5000 Addy topped Gibson True Vintage. It certainly validates those who purchase a D-18. Even so, I have also played the Gibson J-45 True Vintage and it is an amazing guitar with a gorgeous tone.Truly, both are wonderful icons worthy of anyone's collection.
Thanks for sharing this comparaison. video. it's very interresting, but may be you should compared a standard J45...
Very nice a/b. The Gibson is doing the great dry thing that Gibson acoustics do - I'd love to have a J-45, but I'd own it after I have a D18 or 28.
Brent Wade D-18 is incredible in person.
Brent Wade I bought my D18 first and I love it but I wouldn’t be without my J45.
I had a HD-28 sold it to buy a j45, I have 3 Gibson acoustics now love em all :-)
Well shows your stupidity
Mathews Halon 6 I own 2 j 45 and one 1962 j50....and 2 d-18s. I luv all them for what they are..... I would say that the Gibson has a very colorful tone but the Martin has more concise tone.... please don't knock Gibson their guitars are wonderful for Blues and country and is the most widely recorded guitar in the history of guitars. But the Martin sounds good for what you need it to do
Rosewoods are nice for fingerpickers, but for strummers they drown out vocals, friends and bands. Maybe he is a strummer and prefers the mellow tone? The martin is a big bright cannon, so what? Being the loudest most obnoxious git doesnt make it the best. Maybe a great bluegrass guitar but i find the j-45 is a more flexible instrument and mahogany smooth strummer tone is great for the solo artist or band. D-28 is a lil too much for anything other than fingerpicking in my opinion which limits its use. i own a d-28 and j-50 mahogany and i like the cheap 70s gibson 100x more to be honest.
@@thorn35 In oversimplified way, I don’t like rosewood folk guitars. it feels like has too much oil and butter. Rosewood is the excellent choice for the classical instruments, but not for the steel-string guitars.
The J45 is more articulate. The D has that great open sound like a good classical concert guitar
Nice review, especially the bit explaining the differences in attack, sustain etc.
Hard go get a gauge based on recordings. The J45 is famous for recording very well. But in my experience a D18 will sound better in your hands. Big, open, clear, 3-D sound.
Ryan Doyle different, but not necessarily better. I own both and they both sound amazing.
The J-45 would be great for blues with the bite and quick decay of sound. I have an old pawn shop 1965 Stella in mint condition and it has the same bluesy characteristics (even though it cost much less). It also joins the body at the 12th fret and I think there's definately something to that.
Very fair example of the Gibson sound and the Martin sound. Im my experience as a previous owner of a GibsonJ45 and now owner of D-18 (and a Martin HD-28, Martin OM Cherry) these clips organically demonstrate the types of voicing to expect
Depends if ya want a little pop or a little boom. Personally I'd like to have both so I can make that decision over and over through out the day.
Both beautiful guitars!! Love that burst on the Gibson - man it looks good. I personally liked the Martin for its deeper richer tone not a fan of the mid high tones the Gibson is putting out. What material for the nut, saddle and pins?
It is the player that makes th guitar sounds good
I have an older D-18 with an Adirondack Spruce top and I believe it's a significantly louder top than Sitka. So, although the attempt here was a direct comparison, they really should have compared a Martin with the same top. There's a good reason you pay a hefty upgrade for ad "Addy" top and it's not just because the wood is becoming more scarce.
Honeslty, I'd take this standard 18 with Sitka over that Gibson. So warm and smooth yet loud.
both sound great, but I prefer darker tone of the J45
The J 45 SURE SOUNDS SWEET.....Rich , Full - not overwhelming bottom end ...... Fantastic guitar through the years....
The J45 is considerably more mid range focused, which likely will record better. The D18 sounds more woody and organic with longer sustain in the low end, and a much broader range of tone from low to high end, but more boomy. String type and setup also make a big difference, so we are assuming they are very similar. Preference just depends on what kind of tone and feel you’re going for. If I could only have one I’d choose the D18, but what even sounds much better is the Collings D1A, but that’s an unfair comparison because the price point is considerably higher.
Both. I own the J45 so I’m biased of course. But the Martin sounds great too. Both
Excellent video. Really good advice about trying guitars for yourself.
The irony is that I think the D18 sounds more like a Gibson than any other Martin.
The J45 sounds much better to me. But would take either!
Keep making brilliant reviews folks!
I am a huge Martin fan, but that Gibson sounds really good! However, this is not an apples to apples comparison. The Gibson has a Adi top and the D-18 has a Sitka top. A better comparison would be a D-18 with an Adi top. Gibson wins this by a hair, but I don't think this comparison is really fair.
I am also a martin fan and I agree
Are you sure? I think the Gibson too is spruce too
Charlie Ruprecht a standard D-18 has a Sitka spruce top, but the J-45 TV (true vintage) has an Adirondack top. You can check the stats online. I think that You’re thinking of a J-45 standard. It has the Sitka spruce top.
@@HenryPipes I didn't read the true vintage part lol thanks
Agreed, but I still like that Martin sound honestly. Even here
I have both. The D18 is my primary guitar but I swap back and forth between the two for certain things. Love them both. I do get more volume out of the D18 but the J45 is great for more intricate things. The response of the D18 is insane, particularly in the bass range. You really don't have to hit it very hard.
I have a J45TV and a Martin D28. I love them both and find I play them about the same amount depending on mood and the sound type I'm trying to create. The D18 is great, too.
Would loved to hear the standard Gibson J-45 with Sitka vs Martin D-18...this is kind of an apples to oranges comparison once you add Adirondack spruce to the 45...as mentioned below, not really a fair comparison, but the Martin D-18 stands up just fine from what I can hear!
Biggest issue with a Martin vs Gibson...The woof while recording. I have a D28 and its fantastic live but my 56 Gibson C&W just has something. Its super easy to track with any style you throw at it.
They both sound great but Pop has an early '63 J that I grew up on. He lost it for 15 years and bought 7 different guitars trying to replace it. It truly is one of a kind. Survived a fire that cracked the finish but didn't do anything else. I can't pick out what made it "sing" the best. I just know for his playing, it was the best.
This is how all comparisons should be made!!
Both of these guitars are outstanding, and I own one of each. This video isn’t a fair comparison. The comparison should be between a Gibson J-45 TV and a Martin D-18GE, both Adirondack Spruce tops and forward shifted bracing. I own a 2016 Gibson Custom Shop J-45 Banner (1942 copy), and a 1999 (First year) Martin D-18GE. Both guitars are superb, and each have their own place on stage. The Gibson is very warm and offers itself well to stage singing and ease of play, but the Martin D-18GE has a depth of tone especially on base side, and due to its age is a great player with awesome tone. Both are 1 3/4 nut width, and wider spacing at 12th fret.
If one were to buy a NEW Martin like this one, or a Gibson J-45 standard with its Sitka top, which one would it be?
Both sound magical, but I think I would be more inclined towards the J45 just for the more balanced tone. The Martin has a very full tone, but not a lot of definition, whereas the Gibson has very clear definition. To me, you play a J45 on records and smoke-filled bars, and you play D18 on a big stage.
That's a tough one, both are fantastic guitars. I'd take either one. Coming from a Martin owner, of these two, I think I'd take the Gibson.
I thought the J45 had a little more base/ midrange clarity and the D18 was a little brighter on the higher strings. I too am curious how much the Adirondack spruce comes into play.
To me, the D-18 is warmer and sounds better (to my ear) on its own, but I think the J-45 might cut through a jam session a little better. Hard to say. Love the comparison and it all comes down to what feels right to the player
The Gibson sounds just like the early Bob Dylan recordings where he used a J 45. Gibson wins this one to me
I like both of them a lot. The Gibson has a bit unfair advantage being that it has that Adi top. I think you should of used a D-18GE in your review as you mentioned at the end. Good playing but I felt like it wasn't a great comparison.
Both are great guitars no doubt. I guess it depends on what you play and how you play it. For me, playing in an acoustic - centered country rock band, the J45 played thru Fishman Loudbox wins hands down. The tonal response of the Gibson is faster than the Martin, if that makes sense. For acoustic Bluegrass, the Martin may be better. But for what I’m playing now, it’s definitely the Gibson. Plus Gibson has just got the cool factor!
I love the J45 always have, but to my ears the Martin sounds smoother.
The bass on a j-45 that I had many years ago projected better than that of any other guitar.
Yep, it does project.
that gibson is much like taylors. i dont wanna hear the strings that much. i want bass sound echo inside the guitar as much as possible so i can hear the wood. much smoother voice imo. id go with martin
You have to play them....The guitar picks you ........
rrrrdavid1 I am 65, started playing guitar when I was 11. In the intervening years I have played many guitars, both acoustic and electric. That is my bona fides. And you sir, are correct.
rrrrdavid1 That is so true. The feeling while playing is the most important factor
True. And one thing to remember. You don't make something since 1833 and not be doing something right.
I ordered my first Martin online at myfavoriteguitars. I did not play it before buying it. I ordered it based on its construction and wood types. It sounds amazing and I love it. I cannot find a guitar in a store I like as much. So, if you think it's fate when you pick up a guitar and it's great, perhaps it's fate that this guitar came to me even without playing it first. . . Btw, I had tested multiple guitars before ordering so I had an idea of what I wanted. I ordered a d18ge customs hope btw. Same as Ge but with a mlo performance neck with a wide string spacing.
@@adriannasanchez468 Yes but the guitar still picked you.
Great demo! For me the J-45 was brighter and clearer than the D-18. It seems to have more resonance in the kids than the Martin.
J-45 wins for me.
Two great guitars... D18 got that ramblin jack Elliot sound, "very even",and I've found easier to fit in a mix. Gibson j45, once you figure your personal guitar... More attitudes. (Gibson acoustics not as consistent guitar to guitar, I've found)
Side note: Gibson southern jumbo really does it all imoo
There is something about the Gibson’s jangle that I really like. The Martin is more rounded, but has less personality because of it.
Both classics... no losing with either..but to me, the gibson seemed to shine in the mids, and had a more compressed/consistent strum.
i’ve played a j-45 and a custom shop j-45 and believe me, they are the best acoustic you can buy for 3k
Fully agreed , gota play n’ experience an instrument to truly know watchya dig. Ide have both but as for my number one it’s always been a j45. The shorter neck length for example , less string tension makes it feel buttery to play n has a warm dynamic response , fav tone of bass. 1.72 at the nutt works with me as well since i I don’t have thin fingers. Both guitars have their iconic tones , I just wish the d18 had the same playability for me. Someone once recommended a “short scale d18” I searched and I might as well be searching for dinosaur bones man the sh!& is not easy to find.
both nice but i like the martin. yep, no doubt. i like the gibsons nut width though.
I’m developing the opinion that nothing beats a Martin for strumming open major or minor chords. But maybe the Gibson is a little more versatile. I liked the J45 better on the finger picking, personally.
I've been hearing lots of complaints over and over about Gibson's quality control. So last year I narrowed my field of desired acoustic guitars to three---- Gibson Standard J-45, and Martin D-28 or Martin 000-18.
I chose a J-45 with rosewood back and sides. GC kept dogging me with excuses and could not deliver April, 2020. I settled for a Standard J-45 with mahogany back and sides. It is easy the most easy to play guitar I have ever played, HOWEVER------one of the tuners has no chrome on half of it, AND----There's a nice gouge right on the front of the guitar!!!!! I could go on and on and on and on, but tomorrow I'll order The Martin 000-18 which has a shorter scale length too.
Unless GC lowers the price to have a dam good luthier fix the problems.
I would take whichever one felt better in my hands. They are like apples and oranges tone-wise, but both great.
The 45 has quite a bit more character in it's tone. better mids and bottom with a warm top end. Don't think theres really much comparison actually.
I have a couple of friends one has 2 old Martin's and the other has an old J-45. The J-45 got damaged and was repaired. I personally like the old Gibson better mainly because I like the darker tone. I like all of them better than any other brands of acoustic. The Martins are brighter with richness. The Gibson is more mellow. Dave
If you listen on a mobile device, you will have to turn up the volume to hear the Martin. It just doesn't have the projection of the Gibson
Mallory Langford. Year later, but Bose earplugs ,)
Lol
The Gibson is Glassy , the Martin is Classy
Adrianna sanchez lol
I heard the exact opposite!
Fantastic player! Beautiful guitars
I prefer the much warmer sound of the Martin. However, the Gibson also sounds great in its own way.
I would like to have both guitars. For me, the Gibson's 12" fret board radius would be a big plus over the Martin's 16" radius. And the Gibson's shorter scale length would also make for easier fingering. However, the Martin sound just can't be beat, in my opinion.
Closed my eyes before the video started and it turned out that I preferred the Martin. The Gibson is clearer, brighter, louder...all elements that most would say makes a better guitar but for me, the Martin sounded more 'woody' and how I think and acoustic should sound. Horses for courses...
In the world of OMs and dreadnoughts, Martin is king. Having owned both Gibson and Martin, for me, choosing anything other than a Martin, well, I was kidding myself. I was choosing something else for the sake of being a little "different." Martin is like the Glock of guitars; you have it, you trade it, you regret it, you come to your senses and get another Martin. I Have never felt this way about any other guitar.
Purely based on the sound I'm hearing , the D-18 edges it with a sweeter tone and I'm a J-45 fan.
I prefer the shorter scale, although a Martin was my first nice acoustic .Martin to me looks better or more expensive but can't get over that mid range of the Gibson.
And im off to play my 45!
Both nice but the Martin is the one for me, great bass and clear highs
Gibson for me!
Gibson much better articulation of upper mids and highs and also much tighter and deeper bass
Magnus Wickström you just described an Adirondack spruce top. Bingo!
Yep, yep, yep.
They both sound great!
Martin D-18 for sure! Gibson J-45 is cool, nothing against it .... but, the D-18 is my dream guitar
both sound great.
You really can’t choose one for the other. These two are iconic guitars that have been around for over 70 years. If you are a true guitar player, you would own both, just like owning both a Gibson Les Paul and a Fender Stratocaster.
The Gibson just has "that Gibson" sound so prevalent in Beatles' music. The D-18 captures hundreds of artists' music. A great players collection would include both and maybe a Brazilian D-28 for a 3rd sound. After that?
Except The White Album (their most acoustic album) which is all Martins.
@@BookClubDisaster I was thinking classics by Paul mostly, Blackbird and Yesterday
@@douglesw Yesterday was played on a Gibson but Blackbird was played on a Martin D28
The Beatles played Martins on some of their best work
@@el34glo59 Yep. I was mistaken about the Gibson. The video of SPM Demo shows him playing a Martin on Blackbird
Wouldn't a d18ge vs j45tv be more fitting?
I usually like D-18s better than J-45s, but here the Gibson sounds much better.
I have a 2016 d18 and the classic way I describe it is warm ……… not overwhelmingly Loud or snappy but warm and smooth …… very easy to play …… the Gibson on here is more snappy …the player description is right I believe ……
It’s a yes from me for the J-45!
Martin all day. But I do like that Gibson sound too. But the Martin sound is my thing. Found what I feel an acoustic should sound like with the martins. At least the right Martin.
Super guitar comparison by two guys who understand guitars. Simple.
Both sound beautiful..great guitars the Gibson has the shorter scale length which I would go for .The Gibson reminds be of the Beatles and Rollin Stones ..Martine the USA guitars sounds ..how can you make a choice ..no better but which one for you
Do they have the same strings? And how old are they?
Gibsons can be kinda hit and miss but that particular one sounds fantastic! It’s open and loud. Some of them can sound muffled and weak. When you find a good one they are really good
J-45 Bright, D-18 Mellow. I prefer mellow in most cases.
Both beautiful guitars but are they strung with the same strings? The better the guitar, the more you will hear the difference that strings make. First is the difference between phosphor bronze vs 80-20 bell bronze. After that, each manufacturer will sound different, e.g. d'Addario vs John Pearse. Coated vs un-coated, etc. To my ear, it sounded like the Gibson was strung with d'Addario phosphor bronze (coated or un-coated) and the Martin with Elixer nano-web phosphor bronze (hence the sparkling highs & subdued mids & bass).
My primary acoustic is 1965 Epiphone Texan (made in the Gibson Kalamazoo factory) The same body shape, woods & bracing as the Gibson but with a 25 1/2 inch scale. My favorite strings for accompanying a vocalist or playing bluegrass are John Pearse phosphor bronze. If I were finger-picking instrumentals, I'd choose something else with a bit less mid range...maybe 80-20s, but that's not my style.
BTW, any guitar with a 25 1/2 inch scale will have greater sustain and a slightly brighter sound than one with a 24 3/4 inch scale. It's all a matter of personal taste in the end.
D18=Loud J45TV=Warm - Verdict = I'd get BOTH!
Your son has one, and you have the other, play them together, drink a beer or 3, switch em up, do this as much as possible, you know what the song says, "Nothing else matters" :)
One of each, please.
Delta blues- gibson. Bluegrass- Martin. Depends on what you are going for. Nice comparison.
Just because the martin is less on highs compared to j45 it doesn't mean the martin has more bass. Ive tried both of them in store and the gibson is much easier to play compare to martin in my opinion
I have played many of these guitars and have said in the past and again today. If your going to compare these two guitars for sound only then you are not going to be happy buying one over the other. Common sence will dictate that feel or more specificly the way a neck feels under your hands, radius of the fretboard 16" Martin radius or 12" Gibson radius plus your own personal feel or style will dictate which one is made for you.
both Guitars really play the same. it all depends on the players style and how he plays it. but i'm partial too the Martin as i have a 2006 D-28. but would also take the Gibson too. nice Guitars.
Can't choose...get' em both.