Gibson Lucille

[Rob MacKillop]

Would there be a reason to choose a 1990s over a 2000s, all things being roughly equal? Were there "good years" and "bad or not-so-good years"?

[Hammertone]

They usually weigh a ton. IMO, look for the lightest one you can find.

[nyc chaz]

The 90's was a good time for Gibson in my opinion,the ones i played were all good to great.

[DawgBone]

Putting hands on one before purchase is the way to go especially with semi hollows, regardless of what era you end up with. It can be the difference of a good guitar vs a great one.

[jim777]

I don't have any idea if it matters to the semis, but the Les Paul guys I know all believe (correctly or not) that 90 to 94 were 'magic wood years'. All of them would take a '92 over a new one, for example. I've only owned one Gibson since 1980 (a Hutch built L5 I was afraid to play and ended up selling) but this is what I learned from rock guitar friends who have multiple Les Pauls.

[Stringswinger]

The 90's were a second golden era for Gibson.

[trailmixer]

I was able to play a 2001 model and a 1990s model (maybe 97, don't remember exactly) back to back at two different music shops in FL.

The 2001 model was built and finished much better, played better and sounded better. The 90s model had binding and finish issues, poorly laid headstock inlay and played like furniture. I bought the 2001 unit.

They weigh a shit ton as others have said. The MHS pickups do give a nice fat smokey clean sound without much effort. But they are also not very clear on complex chord and have a tendency to muddy up. Rather different than how some 335s can come across as thin and cutting.

[DawgBone]

The 90's were a second golden era for Gibson.

Your knowledge always carries extra weight with me Stringswinger. Thanks.

[Rob MacKillop]

Not that I am looking to buy one, as I already had one for a week, a ‘65 Reissue, but it wasn’t for me. But I noticed a couple for sale, and it got me thinking if there were quality differences in different decades. Thanks for all your statements.

[Danny W.]

I had an '81 model, when they were still called the BB King Custom. A fine guitar, but as pointed out already, on the heavy side. I gigged with mine after Gibson dropped the ES355 from their catalog, until they started making small batches again.

Danny W.

[Marty Grass]

There may be better and worse time periods for Gibson production, but it always comes down to the individual instrument.

I got a couple of Memphis Lucilles when Gibson was having a "fire sale" on semihollows through a Chicago store. I got two at first. One I sent back because a bad finish. In exchange I got another good one. I also got a 345, which had no Varitone. I still have it, and it's excellent.

When Gibson was in Kalamazoo, we called the bad ones the Monday morning builds. The idea was the workers were hung over. It turns out that "Monday morning" could be any time.

People often have strong opinions about certain years' build quality. There may be some truth to that, especially during the Elvis and Beatles peak periods. At least that's what the workers told me. Most of the instruments were pretty decent. I've had some real treasures from the Norlin era for example.

More recently, Heritage seems to have tighten its standards. That is factory wide. Another quality influence years ago with Heritage was Jay Wolfe. If the instrument was not quite right, he shipped it back. There was a separate set of racks for Jay in the shipping area. Those guitars got close attention. That was my personal observation.

My point is that generalizations may be based on tendencies, but the individual instrument is really the issue.

[John A.]

There may be better and worse time periods for Gibson production, but it always comes down to the individual instrument.

I got a couple of Memphis Lucilles when Gibson was having a "fire sale" on semihollows through a Chicago store. I got two at first. One I sent back because a bad finish. In exchange I got another good one. I also got a 345, which had no Varitone. I still have it, and it's excellent.

When Gibson was in Kalamazoo, we called the bad ones the Monday morning builds. The idea was the workers were hung over. It turns out that "Monday morning" could be any time.

People often have strong opinions about certain years' build quality. There may be some truth to that, especially during the Elvis and Beatles peak periods. At least that's what the workers told me. Most of the instruments were pretty decent. I've had some real treasures from the Norlin era for example.

More recently, Heritage seems to have tighten its standards. That is factory wide. Another quality influence years ago with Heritage was Jay Wolfe. If the instrument was not quite right, he shipped it back. There was a separate set of racks for Jay in the shipping area. Those guitars got close attention. That was my personal observation.

My point is that generalizations may be based on tendencies, but the individual instrument is really the issue.

Regarding Norlin, my take on it has been that actual product quality in the sense of the factory having executed the build according to spec was fine. The issue was more that they changed specs/features in ways that people didn't like. I can't say that I've ever run into a Norlin-era Gibson that was put together so poorly that actually playing it was compromised (though some features made me dislike them). In contrast, CBS-era Fender was much more a problem of execution and materials quality, and I have encountered CBS guitars that were borderline unplayable without major modifications/repairs. I will say, though, that in the year or so leading up to the bankruptcy and into the transition to the current owners I played several Gibsons that were unbelievably bad, and my impression is that they were dumping defective products on the market as the company fell apart.

[Stringswinger]

Regarding Norlin, my take on it has been that actual product quality in the sense of the factory having executed the build according to spec was fine. The issue was more that they changed specs/features in ways that people didn't like. I can't say that I've ever run into a Norlin-era Gibson that was put together so poorly that actually playing it was compromised (though some features made me dislike them). In contrast, CBS-era Fender was much more a problem of execution and materials quality, and I have encountered CBS guitars that were borderline unplayable without major modifications/repairs. I will say, though, that in the year or so leading up to the bankruptcy and into the transition to the current owners I played several Gibsons that were unbelievably bad, and my impression is that they were dumping defective products on the market as the company fell apart.

I agree with this, but I would say in the last decade before they were "foreclosed" (2007-2017), I think quality control issues were there. There are some great Gibsons from that era (from both Memphis and Nashville) but watch out, there are some dogs that never should have been sold, or at least should have been marked as seconds.

Players have different expectations. I once bought a Guild acoustic from John Bernunzio. He told me that there was no saddle left, but it played great. I got the guitar and the action was too high for my taste, and with the low saddle could not come down. It did play well if you like a medium action. I put it on my local Craigslist for $200 more than I paid for it (expecting to be talked down that $200 if anyone could tolerate the saddle issue) and a guy cam over, played it (it sounded great) and paid my price. That taught me a lesson that some of us are WAY more picky than others when it comes to guitars. And I suspect that the guys running Gibson while Henry J was too busy chasing his other (mostly losing) ventures that caused him to lose Gibson, knew this. So they made a decision to allow substandard (IMO) Gibsons to go into the stream of commerce.

I have two Gibsons from 2017 made at the Memphis plant that I bought during the great blowout. One is a Blonde Figured 175 that I paid $2200 for and the other is a Blonde 59RI 175 that I played $2600 for. Both are outstanding and I consider those two of my best guitar deals ever. But a friend loved my 59RI 175 and ordered one from CMI and it was unplayable and had to be returned. All proving the very good advice that each guitar needs to be judged on its own merits.

[John A.]

I agree with this, but I would say in the last decade before they were "foreclosed" (2007-2017), I think quality control issues were there. There are some great Gibsons from that era (from both Memphis and Nashville) but watch out, there are some dogs that never should have been sold, or at least should have been marked as seconds.

I defer to you on "Foreclosed" vs bankruptcy. Regarding timing, the roughly 2017-19 period caught my attention due to my being a more active guitar seeker/buyer around then than somewhat earlier. Definitely agree that there were guitars hanging on shop walls that shouldn't have left the factory.

Players have different expectations. I once bought a Guild acoustic from John Bernunzio. He told me that there was no saddle left, but it played great. I got the guitar and the action was too high for my taste, and with the low saddle could not come down. It did play well if you like a medium action. I put it on my local Craigslist for $200 more than I paid for it (expecting to be talked down that $200 if anyone could tolerate the saddle issue) and a guy cam over, played it (it sounded great) and paid my price. That taught me a lesson that some of us are WAY more picky than others when it comes to guitars. And I suspect that the guys running Gibson while Henry J was too busy chasing his other (mostly losing) ventures that caused him to lose Gibson, knew this. So they made a decision to allow substandard (IMO) Gibsons to go into the stream of commerce.

That and a big chunk of Gibson's customer base is people who buy guitars as status symbols but don't really play them (so don't know how messed up they are). Where I am (NYC), there also are (or were, anyway) a lot of Europeans snapping up new Gibsons because they're so much cheaper here than ther, either ignorant of quality or aware of it and factoring in the cost of remediation. You also had stuff like Sam Ash being in the throes of business failure themselves, and paying no attention to the quality of what they had hanging on their walls (or having any compunctions about selling it people who didn't know any better).

I have two Gibsons from 2017 made at the Memphis plant that I bought during the great blowout. One is a Blonde Figured 175 that I paid $2200 for and the other is a Blonde 59RI 175 that I played $2600 for. Both are outstanding and I consider those two of my best guitar deals ever. But a friend loved my 59RI 175 and ordered one from CMI and it was unplayable and had to be returned. All proving the very good advice that each guitar needs to be judged on its own merits.

Yeah, I bought a 2013 Les Paul '50s Tribute a couple of years ago, and it's a fantastic guitar (despite being near the bottom of the LP line).

[bluejaybill]

I don't have any idea if it matters to the semis, but the Les Paul guys I know all believe (correctly or not) that 90 to 94 were 'magic wood years'. All of them would take a '92 over a new one, for example. I've only owned one Gibson since 1980 (a Hutch built L5 I was afraid to play and ended up selling) but this is what I learned from rock guitar friends who have multiple Les Pauls.

I have a '94 R8, it's a great guitar and year, but I'm not sure I buy the "magic wood years" argument.

The magic wood years IMHO ended in the '60's with the end of Brazilian rosewood fingerboards, very light weight mahogany on the LP's etc.

If the '90's were magic wood years, I suspect it was in comparison with the '70's and '80's, the "not so magic, boat anchor" years.

[jads57]

I guess being old enough to own many of the Magic Wood instruments,I have a different opinion.
We tend to debate ad nauseam the finer points,while disregarding
it’s purpose in the first place.

These are tools to make music,and a couple of the best sounding solid or Thinline versions I have owned have been totally panned by critics. One was a 2014 ES-339 Studio made with a baked maple fingerboard,Lol!
Just saying we tend mythologize things a bit too much!

[stevo58]

These are tools to make music,and a couple of the best sounding solid or Thinline versions I have owned have been totally panned by critics. One was a 2014 ES-339 Studio made with a baked maple fingerboard,Lol!
Just saying we tend mythologize things a bit too much!

I had a 2016 335 Studio which was a fabulous guitar. I loved it in every way except one, and that finally caused me to sell it. I really hated the baked maple fingerboard. But the workmanship, the feel, and the tone were just exactly what I was looking for.

[Rickco]

I have a '94 R8, it's a great guitar and year, but I'm not sure I buy the "magic wood years" argument.

The magic wood years IMHO ended in the '60's with the end of Brazilian rosewood fingerboards, very light weight mahogany on the LP's etc.

If the '90's were magic wood years, I suspect it was in comparison with the '70's and '80's, the "not so magic, boat anchor" years.

The trick is to find the "good" guitar from the "bad" years and enjoy the discount. The Norlin BS is great for buyers but blown out of proportion and full of urban legend, those able to get great Gibsons because they were Norlin years are very happy, or comparing a reish to a Loyd Loar is just as unrealistic. I dont buy the good and bad year claims but I know from experience theres definately good and bad days in every year. Weve all heard good and bad everything and can only guess at the reasons. I guess in Kalamazoo they said made on monday if it was bad, in Jersey we said made on a weds if it was good!

[jads57]

We’ll just to show how we all relate differently to these instruments.
I loved the tonality of the baked maple fingerboard on the ES-339 Studio, and didn’t bond with higher priced CS 339 with rosewood fingerboard,lol!

I also for the most part never like Norlin Era Gibsons, sans a few Johnny Smith guitars. I think this also why I’m fond of the earlier Heritage Guitars as well. For me the neck shape and aesthetic is not to my tastes. As well as their Schaller pickups and hardware were not to my liking either.

I guess it’s a good thing we have so many choices for different tastes.

[2bornot2bop]

Back around 2014 or so someone traded me 2 Gibson Lucille's for an arch top I had. One black, one red. The red sure did stand out. Yes, they were heavy, but they seemed to be put together extremely nicely. I eventually blew them both out, but I enjoyed having them around for a bit.

[Marty Grass]

I said this before but I think it is worth repeating. I briefly worked with Bobby Vinton, a crooner whose peak had passed and was on the traveling one-night circuit in smaller venues. I personally did not really care for his music before meeting him, but he was a lovely, friendly person.

What really impressed me is that he played well quite a few instruments: trumpet, clarinet, saxaphone and piano. He didn't complain about the state of the instruments. He was not fussy. He played them joyfully.

I worked with others who were tempermental and very fussy. Bobby was the happiest of the lot.

We've probably all have had the experience of seeing a truly talented musician pick up a new instrument, not complain and sound great.

I recently gave an archtop to my 15 year old grandson who is in a rock group playing a LP with 10s on it. The archtop had GB strings, 14-55s. I asked him a week later if he changed the strings. He asked me why should he? He liked them.

I mention all of this because it is my observation that a lot of the nuance in preferences is a function of personality, not necessity. I have to tell myself this from time to time. I can spend a lot of time and effort for small gain when I could make greater gains with the drudgery of the fundamentals. This is true with life in general.

I writing this so I can read it myself.

[2bornot2bop]

I said this before but I think it is worth repeating. I briefly worked with Bobby Vinton, a crooner whose peak had passed and was on the traveling one-night circuit in smaller venues. I personally did not really care for his music before meeting him, but he was a lovely, friendly person.

What really impressed me is that he played well quite a few instruments: trumpet, clarinet, saxaphone and piano. He didn't complain about the state of the instruments. He was not fussy. He played them joyfully.

I worked with others who were tempermental and very fussy. Bobby was the happiest of the lot.

We've probably all have had the experience of seeing a truly talented musician pick up a new instrument, not complain and sound great.

I recently gave an archtop to my 15 year old grandson who is in a rock group playing a LP with 10s on it. The archtop had GB strings, 14-55s. I asked him a week later if he changed the strings. He asked me why should he? He liked them.

I mention all of this because it is my observation that a lot of the nuance in preferences is a function of personality, not necessity. I have to tell myself this from time to time. I can spend a lot of time and effort for small gain when I could make greater gains with the drudgery of the fundamentals. This is true with life in general.

I writing this so I can read it myself.

I can relate to this story. Because being a piano player, I simply play the guitar. Never had one I couldn’t bond with.

[Woody Sound]

I remember reading an interview with LC, who said the best way to pick one out is to find one that really sustains acoustically, before even plugging in. Take it for what you will.

[Woody Sound]

I had an '81 model, when they were still called the BB King Custom. A fine guitar, but as pointed out already, on the heavy side. I gigged with mine after Gibson dropped the ES355 from their catalog, until they started making small batches again.

Danny W.

Nobody rocks shorts like DW.

[Rob MacKillop]

Oh, that’s a real thing, Woody, and one of the problems these days as guitar stores are closing down everywhere. Still, all the best stores have a good returns policy if you don’t like it, although that is still a hassle. The first thing I do is play it acoustically, see if it can respond to subtle nuances of my right hand. If not, I’m not likely to enjoy it when amplified.