Need Advice On New Martin Acoustic

Are there any major differences between the Martin D-18, D-28, or D-35 model acoustics? From the specs they seem pretty similar. Didn't know if there is something I'm missing... And do you guys that have played/owned these models have a preference??? I've saved up and am looking for my life long acoustic. I really would prefer Martin because I've had a hard time finding a Gibson, Taylor, or Takamine that has the low end that Martin's do without too much high end.

Also is the bracing what makes the difference when it comes to loudness? I have an A braced acoustic that is on the quiet side. Hoping the X-braced acoustic will project more

I went into GC a couple years ago to demo a D-18, and tried several...then I tried a DC16RGTE-Aura...I wound up not getting the D-18 that I was sure I wanted when I got there. The 16 series has "Hybrid X-Bracing", and for what it's worth, I just couldn't pull the trigger on the full gloss 18. For a little less cash (price wasn't at all the issue, but saving a few bucks is always nice), I wound up with an acoustic that I actually like to plug in. I've never been big on onboard electronics for acoustics, but they did it right on this one...

Really, I'll be the first of many that will tell you go to the store and play until you find *that* guitar. All of the three that you've mentioned are great guitars (I've tried them all), and you'll probably just have to go and play them, then get the one that likes you best.

I've never played a D-18, so I have nothing to offer there. However, the D-28 has been the standard Martin Dreadnought for decades. It has a rich tone with a nice mix of lows and highs. The D-35 has more bass and makes a great rhythm guitar. the 3 piece wood on the back is extremely pretty as well. Before I purchased my Martin a decade ago, I couldn't decide between the D-28, HD-28 and D-35. I finally went with the HD-28 because it just sounded a little better than the other two. So, I'll second what boilerup said and suggest you get down to the guitar store and try them out before you decide.

Boilerup... I seen the 16 series but didn't take much notice cuz I felt I needed the full X bracing. At the moment I have a Martin D-15 which has great tone but I feel I'm sacrificing on the loudness because of the A-bracing. I jam with my friend who has an X-braced acoustic and it just seems like I'm constantly fighting to be heard.

and yeah I know that I'm gonna have to sit down and play them but the problem is that Guitar Center is the only store in my area with much of a selection, and at the moment they only have the 28 model which I really like, but I don't want to pull the trigger without trying a couple of the other models cuz I'll be afraid I'll be missing out on a better guitar.

Kd... I seen your pic of your HD-28 and it's a beauty. Have you jammed with some other people to see how it holds up volume wise? Cuz I've heard some Martin's are great recording guitars cuz of tone but lack some volume when just playing with other guitars?

Mahogany back and sides in the D-18 give that model a sound that is less boomy than a
D-28. I currently play an HD-28 as my main stage guitar, chosen from a pile of dreadnaughts at Dave's Guitars in La Crosse, Wisconsin. For several years I played a D-21 that I wish i still had, and later a D-35 that I never bonded with. The three piece back and slightly different tone of the D-35 have earned it a reputation as a guitar for finger picking. I hammered one in a Bluegrass band for awhile, and I guess it was OK, but for depth, volume and power the D-28 is a good bet.

Having said that, I'll acknowledge that there are a few D-18s out there I'd love to have. A band mate of mine has a great 1950s 18 that has plenty of punch and low end that are missing in some 18s. That band mate's sister owns a 1936 D-18 that, true to it's reputation, beats just about anything I've played.

Edit: Some will disagree with me, but I've owned and played some Gibsons that really seemed like work to get much sound out of them. I ditched them when better (Martin) guitars came my way. You'll also notice that the high end acoustics that sell for big bucks are, more often than not, recreations of great Martin guitars. I'll go for the Martin every time if I can get a good one.

Go someplace where you can test a bunch of guitars. Not all D-28s sound the same.

You might want to think used as well. I had a 2000 Gibson Songbird that I would put against any Martin out there. Played great too. I currently have a D-28 and as nice as it is and as good as it sounds, I haven't ever really bonded with it. I have big hands but the neck on it feels uncomfortable to me. Not big so much as square. It was a gift from a friend of mine so I keep telling myself to just keep playing it and it'll conform or I'll get used to it. The Gibson acoustic guitars that I've played seem more to me like the guitar that you'd pass down to your kids rather than just tools. Taylors I absolutely think are great but don't really seem to have any soul. Like they are just tools. Albeit, very nice ones. Either route you decide to go, I don't think you could pick a bad one. Best of Luck.

HD-28's are cannons. I have played a 1987 HD-28 as my main acoustic guitar since 1998. Many, many bluegrass jams, and 3-4 years playing in a bluegrass band, including lots of lead playing, and it has always excelled. It is a lifetime acoustic for me.

Check out the specs on Martin's website. You want a guitar with scalloped (lighter) bracing. The lighter bracing allows the top to vibrate more, giving you more volume. D28's don't have the scalloped bracing; HD-28's do.

For what it's worth, every Gibson acoustic that I have ever played has sounded really dead to me compared to Martins. Are the tops on Gibsons a lot heavier, or what's the deal?

I don't think you'd ever go wrong with a D-28 or an HD-28. I prefer mahogany acoustics, but even I like the 28s better than the 18s. And my bassist has a D-35 that I've played a lot and never wowed me at all. The only thing I like better about the 35 is the fingerboard binding, but that of course doesn't affect the sound.

I would try and find a used D-28 or HD-28 myself. There nothing wrong with a D-18 either if that's all you can afford. I had a D-35 and they are fine too but don't have the resell value a 28 does. If you come across one that has not been played much, you will be surprised how much playing the crap out of it will bring it back to life.

Try one of these first - no kidding.... www.rainsong.com

Are there any major differences between the Martin D-18, D-28, or D-35 model acoustics? Yes there are. I play Gibsons now but have owned a number of Martins (vintage D-18, D-28, modern D-18V, HD-35, some others) and played hundreds. My thoughts:

The D-18 is a straight-braced mahogany back/sides, 5/16" braces, spruce top dreadnaught. It is an old standard. The mahogany is perhaps 'warmer' than rosewood with very nice note clarity. Some people prefer mahogany guitars for recording & studio work. Both vintage and new D-18s can be very nice. Some old ones can be very loud with excellent bass.

The D-28 is basically the D-18 with rosewood back/sides. Rosewood has a different sound coloration and can provide more 'bark' and a very 'boomy' bass with lots of tonal richness. Martin changed from Brazilian to East Indian rosewood c. 1969 and the Brazilian ones are highly sought after--they do sound nice--and command a big price.

The D-35 is like a D-28 but with a 3-piece rosewood back. The bracing is also 1/4", giving them a bit different sound (perhaps mellower?). Some people prefer them to D-28s for that difference.

The HD-28 is a basically a scalloped braced D-28--plus some cosmetic differences--and is IMO one of the nicest readily available guitars Martin makes. It was introduced back in the '70s as kind of a 'reissue' of old prewar D-28s & has been very successful. I've never played one that was anything but 'very good to great'. Very consistent. The scalloped bracing has perhaps a less 'tight' sound than the D-28, very nice bass plus good note articulation like the D-28.

The HD-35 is basically a scalloped braced D-35--plus some other differences--and is a very loud, bassy, yet mellow guitar, if that makes sense.

There are a whole host of other models that have different appointments, bracing thickness, bracing shaving, bracing X placement (more towards the soundhole like prewar ones) etc. these days but those are kinda the standard X-braced Martins. Of these four I'd say the HD-35 is the only one that is quite unique as with it's thin/scalloped bracing it sounds different than many other Martins IMO.

There are a high number of used recent Martin guitars out there for sale & if you shop wisely you can save some $. There are major stores that carry a huge number of used/new Martins that will talk with you on the phone, give you an 'in hand' description, play a guitar on the phone for you, etc. and ship anywhere. I've worked with Elderly Instruments and Gruhn, check out their websites & call 'em. They have excellent return policies.

dkbemb10--I was only mentioning the 16 to illustrate the importance of actually trying out lots of different guitars to see what it is that you really want--for me, it turned out to be something that I wasn't even considering...

However, the rainsong suggestion just made me cringe. On the day that I was referring to earlier, some dumb kid at GC kept trying to get me to try out Breedloves and other brands after I specifically told him (several times) that I was going to buy a Martin. Needless to say, he didn't get the sale. Same goes for people suggesting Gibsons, or Taylors. Sure, they're great guitars, but this thread is titled, "Need Advice On New Martin Acoustic"--give advice on Martins!

Having said that, I agree with the comments on Mahogany-vs.-Rosewood. Although I still recommend trying both, I suspect that rosewood back and sides will probably give you more of what you're after. Even on the "little" 16 series, the sound difference is very noticeable. Even if you're not planning on buying a 16, maybe try picking up one with rosewood back and sides and compare the sound to one with mahogany back and sides. They should have the exact same bracing pattern, so you might be able to hear the difference...

Of course, if your local GC is like mine, it's filled with complete morons playing heavily distorted power chords at high volume, and staffed by complete morons that are only slightly less intelligent...in which case you'll be lucky if both of the guitars that you want to compare have six strings on them...

Good luck!

Thanks for all the great advice stubee and boiler. These are great posts, you've given tons of information I was curious about and things I didn't even know about... Thanks for all the help. Its very much appreciated

I posted this in a previous thread, but it's worth repeating:

First of all, pretty much any of the Martin standard series (-18 and over) are excellent guitars, the difference is pretty much flavoring.

I have a D-35, D-18, and an OM-21, and I've played D-28s and HD-28s. Besides the obvious three-piece back of the D-35, it has 1/4" straight bracing; the D-28 has 5/8" straight bracing and the HD-28 has 5/8" scalloped bracing.

Generally, the D-35 has more bass than the D-28. I would characterize the D-35 as having a richer, warmer sound, while the D-28 has a tighter, more focused sound. The HD-28 is somewhere between the two.

The D-18 is almost another animal altogether, since it's mahogany; I would characterize the D-18 as a woody, drier, much more fundamental sound than the rosewood guitars. Rosewood seems to have more overtones, which is great for strumming.

I think a D-35 is great as a solo guitar, especially for singer-songwriters; the thick, rich sound compliments the human voice nicely. If you're playing in a group, though, the D-35 can get lost in the mix sometimes. The D-18 really cuts through the mix and sounds great with other instruments! The D-28 and HD-28 again is somewhere in-between the two.

Individual instruments can vary, so you should play both before deciding; even Martin makes the occasional dud. A killer D-35 vs. a mediocre HD-28 makes the decision easy, and vice versa. Also, you may find that you just prefer one sound over the other.

Another thing that not many people mention is rosewood seems to be more affected by humidity and other environmental factors than mahogany. On a humid day, my D-35 can sound like someone stuffed wet rags in the soundhole, but on a dry day it sounds like a choir of angels

Also bring along a guitar-playing friend when you try out guitars; acoustic guitars can sound very different when you're standing in front of them than when you're playing.

And don't discount the smaller-bodied Martins. I got my OM-21 a month ago and have been loving it for it's fingerpicking tone, as well as the way it handles light strumming and light flatpicking. The OM style handles a lot of different playing styles really well, and has a more balanced sound than the dreads (and is also more comfortable to hold IMHO). The dreads are more of an in-your-face sound; the OMs can sound more delicate, which is good for some songs. The light-gage strings are very easy to play compared to the mediums typical on a dread. On the other hand, if you're doing a lot of flatpicking, heavy strumming, bluegrass, or Neil Young style guitar, you can't beat a dread!

Personally, if I was only to have one Martin dread I would probably go with an HD-28 or D-28. Since I'm fortunate to have more than one, the D-35 and D-18 offers more contrast than one of them and a D-28.

(left: 2002 D-18, right 2005 D-35)

http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u215/nelsod32/HPIM0688.jpg

DK
Stubbee does a nice job of outlining the differences among the various Martin models.
There are also scalloped D-18s as well, the D-18 V which has a sitka spruce top and the D-18 GE which has an Adirondack spruce top. Honestly, the top woods make more of a difference than back and side woods.

On a dollar for tone basis, I'd probably go for a used D-18GE for around $2k or so. The UMGF martin forum has classifieds where well-kept guitars come up for sale frequently.

But you said you've got a D-15. I've played 15 series Martins and I honestly think they're fabulous guitars and a good one can compete with just about any other new Martin. (Leo Kottke and Bill Frisell both play 000-15S slotheads) I'd probably take a good D-15 straight up over most standard D-18s or D-28s.

So before you spend a lot on a new guitar, I'd try a few things with your D-15 with an eye toward increasing volume and projection. First thing is new strings. If you're not playing mediums (13s) you should be. If you're looking for a slightly brighter tone, you might try 80/20s instead of phosphor bronze.

If that helps, but maybe not enough, I'd take it to a good luthier (not Guitar Center) for a setup. Make sure he hears you play so that he can adjust the action to your style. For more volume, you might have to *raise* the action a little.

Finally, you might think about your own technique. If you want to play louder, then just play louder. Using a heavier pick (1.0 or thicker) can help a lot on single note runs and bass lines--that's why bluegrassers use them.

Trade off guitars with your friend and see if it's really the guitar or the way you (and he) play.

The real-world volume difference between even the best off-the-rack Martin and a particularly dull D-15 would be maybe 5 percent, tops.

$2000 will buy a lot of guitar lessons, which will make every guitar you play for the rest of your life sound better.

+1 on the idea of a used Golden Era model. They are great guitars. The D-18GE and 000-18GE are good bets. But a basic D-18, D-28, or HD-28 are also great guitars and you won't go wrong with them.

I prefer an acoustic with scalloped braces, such as the HD-28 or the Golden Era models. The scalloped braces to my ear make the guitar have more overtones and sustain. I had a straight-braced D-28 for awhile and never bonded with it. Now I play a Martin dread with scalloped braces and I love it. You should play a bunch and see what you like. Plenty of players prefer straight braced guitars.

Consider going over to www.umgf.org (http://www.umgf.org) if you seek more info on Martin guitars on the web.

Another thing that not many people mention is rosewood seems to be more affected by humidity and other environmental factors than mahogany. On a humid day, my D-35 can sound like someone stuffed wet rags in the soundhole, but on a dry day it sounds like a choir of angels Nice informative post and I forgot about the 'wet rag' humidity connection but as my main guitar is a RW Gibson AJRI, you are quite right!

I posted this in a previous thread, but it's worth repeating:

I have a D-35, D-18, and an OM-21

Hey dude, how do you like that OM-21? I was looking at those, and then played a 000-16 that I liked better!

I ended up buying a J-45, but I would still like a nice smaller body guitar someday, but with the J-45 I don't think I can justify a standard series Martin.

The OM-21 is awesome. It's my first smaller body acoustic, and I'm really enjoying the different sounds I can get from it verses a dread. It's by far the easiest-playing acoustic I have, no doubt due to the wide 1 3/4" neck and light gage strings (I string my dreads with mediums, when I tired lights on them they just lost too much of the boomy bass that I expect in a dread). I tried several of the OM/000 size guitars, and the -21 stood out as the best value IMHO. It's a lot of fun switching between the OM and the dreads and getting different sounds; with a pick I find I need to lighten up on my strumming with an OM to get the best sound.

not to be that guy, and martin is the only instrument brand that i brand snob at all about, but a lot of other builders make really great martin style guitars. i've played a couple of collings, and they've been uniformly great and incredibly responsive guitars, for example.


dkbemb10--I was only mentioning the 16 to illustrate the importance of actually trying out lots of different guitars to see what it is that you really want--for me, it turned out to be something that I wasn't even considering...

However, the rainsong suggestion just made me cringe. On the day that I was referring to earlier, some dumb kid at GC kept trying to get me to try out Breedloves and other brands after I specifically told him (several times) that I was going to buy a Martin. Needless to say, he didn't get the sale. Same goes for people suggesting Gibsons, or Taylors. Sure, they're great guitars, but this thread is titled, "Need Advice On New Martin Acoustic"--give advice on Martins!

Having said that, I agree with the comments on Mahogany-vs.-Rosewood. Although I still recommend trying both, I suspect that rosewood back and sides will probably give you more of what you're after. Even on the "little" 16 series, the sound difference is very noticeable. Even if you're not planning on buying a 16, maybe try picking up one with rosewood back and sides and compare the sound to one with mahogany back and sides. They should have the exact same bracing pattern, so you might be able to hear the difference...

Of course, if your local GC is like mine, it's filled with complete morons playing heavily distorted power chords at high volume, and staffed by complete morons that are only slightly less intelligent...in which case you'll be lucky if both of the guitars that you want to compare have six strings on them...

Good luck!

No one has mentioned the differences in neck shape and nut width on the various Martins.
It can be a BIG deal, depending on your hand size, feel, and style of play. Many can't bond with modified V, many can't bond with low oval. Then there's the nut width, 1 11/16, 1 3/4, and wider in some models. Add in the different string spacing options at the bridge and there are worlds to explore. Whatever you get, get you hands on one first. Also, you only mentioned dreds. There's a whole world of 000 and OM sizes to explore.

Hey guys... Just an update... I went to Pittsburgh Guitars with every intention of coming out of there with either a martin D-18, D-28, or D-35 but I just couldn't pull the trigger on any of them... The closest I came was a 1985 Martin D28 but the only thing that kept me from getting it was the fretboard was so narrow... Far too narrow for my giant hands (seriously my hands are like Hendrix size). I just couldn't get comfortable with the narrow neck. But I do want to thank all you guys for all your info... I really took all of it into consideration but just couldn't find a martin that spoke to me there.

So it brings me to what I did get...

I ended up buying an original 1957 Gibson J-50... I'll be the first to admit that I don't like the newer Gibsons acoustics at all... But the old ones have tone to die for. This thing is built like a tank and sings like a bird. Strong bass end with sparkling treble even after 53 years. I just couldn't pass this up... I knew the second I strummed the first chord that this was my guitar.

Here are some pics

http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu190/har_monica/2010-09-18215428.jpg


http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu190/har_monica/2010-09-18215649_Nanty-Glo_Pennsylvania_US.jpg


http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu190/har_monica/2010-09-18215507_Nanty-Glo_Pennsylvania_US.jpg


http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu190/har_monica/2010-09-18215532_Nanty-Glo_Pennsylvania_US.jpg

nice. that Gibson is a sweet lookin' old girl. she's been around for over 50 years...there's lots of mojo in that instrument.

The OM-21 is awesome. It's my first smaller body acoustic, and I'm really enjoying the different sounds I can get from it verses a dread. It's by far the easiest-playing acoustic I have, no doubt due to the wide 1 3/4" neck and light gage strings (I string my dreads with mediums, when I tired lights on them they just lost too much of the boomy bass that I expect in a dread). I tried several of the OM/000 size guitars, and the -21 stood out as the best value IMHO. It's a lot of fun switching between the OM and the dreads and getting different sounds; with a pick I find I need to lighten up on my strumming with an OM to get the best sound.

I love my OM21.

Its so easy to play has super low buzz free action and sounds awesome.

The plain strings just ring out so clear and long and to me its a more balanced sound than the D models.

nice. that Gibson is a sweet lookin' old girl. she's been around for over 50 years...there's lots of mojo in that instrument.

Beautiful. A very special guitar. I love the way that sometimes, no matter how carefully we try to plan what guitar we're going to choose, a guitar chooses us and there isn't a doggone thing we can do about it. I only wish that guitar had picked me instead! :lol:

What's the body wood on that? It looks kind of light in colour on my monitor.

That was a very nice pickup.
40s and 50s Gibson slope shoulders are really fine guitars and a relative bargain.
This should hold its value nicely too.

Take a look at a D-18 Golden Era, I have one and I use it to kill banjos. It's got a totally different sound than a standard D-18, and it's LOUD. Since I got that I rarely touch my D-35.

dkbemb10--I was only mentioning the 16 to illustrate the importance of actually trying out lots of different guitars to see what it is that you really want--for me, it turned out to be something that I wasn't even considering...

However, the rainsong suggestion just made me cringe. On the day that I was referring to earlier, some dumb kid at GC kept trying to get me to try out Breedloves and other brands after I specifically told him (several times) that I was going to buy a Martin. Needless to say, he didn't get the sale. Same goes for people suggesting Gibsons, or Taylors. Sure, they're great guitars, but this thread is titled, "Need Advice On New Martin Acoustic"--give advice on Martins!

Having said that, I agree with the comments on Mahogany-vs.-Rosewood. Although I still recommend trying both, I suspect that rosewood back and sides will probably give you more of what you're after. Even on the "little" 16 series, the sound difference is very noticeable. Even if you're not planning on buying a 16, maybe try picking up one with rosewood back and sides and compare the sound to one with mahogany back and sides. They should have the exact same bracing pattern, so you might be able to hear the difference...

Of course, if your local GC is like mine, it's filled with complete morons playing heavily distorted power chords at high volume, and staffed by complete morons that are only slightly less intelligent...in which case you'll be lucky if both of the guitars that you want to compare have six strings on them...

Good luck!


Evansville?

Thanks Guys...

Dan German... I'm not exactly sure what kind of wood it is. I'm taking it to my luthier today. I dont know if it helps identifying what kind of wood it is but you can really smell the wood from the guitar when you open the case...

And you're correct. It is a lighter color. To me it looks like a honey color... I was going to ask tho if any of you could identify what that deep scratch is along the neck (last picture)? Is that some kind of repair done or just a scratch from being knocked over? Seems like a weird place to get such deep scratch...

It's mahogany back and sides (and neck), with a sitka spruce top. It was finished without stain and with clear grain filler. Mahogany martins and many other vintage Gibsons tend to be darker because the company uses dark grain filler.

Old mahogany guitars smell great. And old Brazilian rosewood guitars smell otherworldly.

As for the scratch, it's very hard to tell from that pic. Could it be glue residue? Guitars will tend to develop cracks along the side of a fretboard, but it's not usually a big deal.
Try taking some shots outside without the flash.

FWIW, what are you having your luthier do to the guitar? Not all luthiers have a lot of experience with vintage acoustics, and even well-meaning techs can often do more (expensive) harm than good. The value of this fine old guitar is all about maintaining it's originality, so err on the side of caution, and feel free to ask (you can even e-mail me) before you have any invasive work done.

Allen St. John... The only problem is the the high E string at the 3rd fret. When you fret it at the 3rd fret, the string touches the 4th fret so my luthier said the 4th fret and is muted alittle bit by hitting the 4th fret.

So he said this is a very minor fix. The 4th fret just needs to be sanded down VERY SLIGHTLY just to give the string enough room to clear the fourth fret.

Sounds correct right?

Sure, that's fine.
It's just that some luthiers will start buffing the finish, resetting the neck, capping the bridge plate or any number of other things. Which is not to say that these things aren't sometimes necessary, it's just that you don't want them done unnecessarily and if they do need to be done you want them done right.
Congrats again on a very good purchase.
Care to give us a ballpark of what you paid?

I traded in a Gibson '61 Reissue SG that I didn't like at all (just couldn't bond with it) and they gave me ($1200) so I only ended up paying $800 for this acoustic. Which I don't think is too bad.

They were selling the acoustic for $2400 but I got them to come down to $2000 because of the note rattling.

Hope that wasnt confusing... With the trade in on the SG I paid a total of $800 for the acoustic.

That is a sweet Gibson...and you are fortunate to have a good luthier, I've settled several of those fretting issues with a light sanding on the "fret ahead", especially with older guitars,,stuff wears, but yours does not look excessively worn, just perfect...I really prefer those older Gibsons to anything else for acoustic.

When I was looking for a Martin that I would keep for life I found this. It's about $400 to 500.00 more than the D28 or 35 but for the money you get a guitar that very nearly approaches a $4000.00 D40. In fact I like it better. Sounds every bit as good and has IMHO nicer cosmetics. Plus it has an on board Fishman Aura live mic simulator that eliminates piezo pick up quack and gives the sound of playing through 6 different high end mics. It really does sound like a Martin being amplified through a world class microphone. Really cool cosmetics and inlays as well. Triple bound ebony fretboard and even has the Martin logo in pearl.

Glad that you found one for you, although I've now paid for my fanboy-type posts! I only meant in my posts that salesmen (paid or not) should spend more time listening to what someone is looking for and less time worrying about what they want to sell. It sounds like you stood firm and got what you wanted, which is great!

@GtrMan--Actually, I live in Lake Co., near Chicago. My local GC is in Hobart (but most of us still say Merrillville, as the property was annexed within the last 20 or so years).

@Beachbum--is that the same Aura system that I fell in love with? I thought about the all-gloss finish, but couldn't part with the extra $$$$. I honestly think that my 16 sounds better plugged in!

boilerup

Yes it's the same system. The guitar really has an awesome unplugged tone. But, plugged in it's a real treat. All of the benefits of using a mic with none of the hassles.

I ended up buying an original 1957 Gibson J-50 Well, I posted a soapbox monologue on Martins as I've had 'em and they are great, but all I own now are Gibsons so of course I think you made a great choice.

I knew the second I strummed the first chord that this was my guitar. I know that feeling.

Spruce/Mahogany as previously mentioned. Problems sound very, very easy to sort out. Have fun with it.

I traded in a Gibson '61 Reissue SG that I didn't like at all (just couldn't bond with it) and they gave me ($1200) so I only ended up paying $800 for this acoustic. Which I don't think is too bad.

They were selling the acoustic for $2400 but I got them to come down to $2000 because of the note rattling.

Hope that wasnt confusing... With the trade in on the SG I paid a total of $800 for the acoustic.

That's an absolutely insane killer deal. Do a quick search of Gbase, and you'll see that most mid-late 50s J-50s have asking prices closer to $5k and some above. $2K is not a bad price for a Nineteen SIXTY-seven, which is quite a bit less desirable. And yours doesn't have the tone killing adjustable bridge.
Either the market is much worse than even I thought, or someone mis-marked it based on the wrong year or the wrong model.
Congrats.

And those 50s Slope shoulders are really fine guitars. The necks are a little more manageable than the really big 40s baseball bat necks.

You'll note that Bruce Springsteen's main recording/songwriting acoustic is an early 50s J-45 with a reverse belly bridge, in many ways a sunburst version of yours.