Gibson Super 400?

[Jabberwocky]

I saw that Super 400 and wished I could have afforded it ....

Me too. I was hoping that nobody would buy it until I could find the money for it. No such luck.

I think that was another new Gibson listed as used .... so they could move it quickly for cash without breaking Gibson's rules against advertising below MAP ..

Just my guess, though.

Yeah, I thought so too.

[Greentone]

Owing to shifting tastes and preferences, and to the shifts in the focus of the Gibson Guitar Corporation, the high end of the Gibson archtop market is becoming more expensive in real (inflation-adjusted) terms than in the past. Some of you have correctly pointed out that a $400 1934 Super 400 would correspond to about a $7,000 Super 400 today. Well, they are more expensive than that (MSRP) now.

There was another point in the past, 1981-83, when Gibson prices surged for high end instruments. I remember the MSRP for L-5, Super-V, Super 400 and Kalamazoo Award instruments _doubled_ overnight. The KA, for example, went from a MSRP of $2,800 to $5,000 in a single bulletin from Gibson.

I think that what Gibson was "saying," at that point was "we are sort of backing out of so big an emphasis on archtops because the market just isn't there any more." We will fire up production and have the "boys" (men and women) in Kalamazoo churn out a Super 400 for you, but it's going to cost a pretty penny.

Well, we saw what happened. Bam! Move to Nashville...offer to bring the archtop shop to Nashville, too. Those guys said "no." Heritage is born. Get Triggs and a couple of other guys to put out the odd archtop on demand in the late 80s for Gibson.

With the current pricing, we are getting precious close to this situation, again. The Boomers are aging out. The next couple of generations haven't really taken to archtop guitars. The 80s were the era of the synthesizer. It was tough for the guitar business...except for "Strat-style" guitars. It may be like that now. To Gibson, if it isn't a Les Paul, STFU.

So, for the time being, Gibson will make you a Super 400...for about double what $400 1934 inflation-adjusted dollars would cost you. In the history of the Super 400, never has the instrument cost more in constant dollars than it does now. (Although the price jump in 1981 briefly took real prices of Gibson's high-end instruments _almost_ up to where they are now...not quite, though.)

[teleman3726]

I would love to buy a S400 with no issues.
I find the prices for new ones a little nutty, and I don't trust dealers anymore.
I can't tell you how many guitars I've sent back over the years that have arrived with issues not disclosed or - in the case of my latest (almost) purchase - advertising that bordered on fraud.
Maybe I'll switch to the sax.

[Greentone]

Some Selmer Mark VI Tenors will set you back over $20K. Makes archtops look affordable.

[Greentone]

50s examples of the Selmer are now "unobtanium." The 60s examples are within reach--barely. Guys who wouldn't have given a second look at a Series VII are now having to reconsider.

On another note--ba da bomp--I used to work for an outfit that rebuilt grand pianos. It was a serious business. Good pianos need rebuilding about every 25 years. Pianos are seriously overstrung. They generate tremendous sound and tone, but slowly collapse under the pressure. The crown of the soundboard falls, pinblocks delaminate, actions deregulate, etc. Work, work, work.

There was, and is, a brisk trade in vintage pianos. The great European instruments (e.g., Bechstein, Bluthner, Bosendorfer, Steinweg) all stay in repair and rotation (sales and re-sales). There is a market for the top US pianos, too (e.g., Steinway, Baldwin, pre-Aeolian Chickering, pre-Aeolian Knabe, etc.). By "piano," of course, I mean "grand" piano. A few vertical pianos--Steinway and Baldwin--may be interesting to some people as studio instruments.

By the way, if you have ever wondered what a Steinweg sounds like versus a Steinway, to me it's like the difference between a Martin D-45 and a Gibson Super 400. A Steinway D often reminds me of the D-45. Big, lots of overtones, chords and intervals sound magical. The Steinweg equivalent sounds more like the 400. Big, more fundamental in the note, extreme clarity of individual notes and chords/intervals, less showy envelope--i.e., no exaggerated, reverby slow decay...just a big BOOM followed by a reasonable decay. The Steinweg seems more precise, more analytical; whereas, the Steinway seems more operatic, somehow. Mind you, I am not a professional pianist...just somebody with a lot of bench time behind lots of grand pianos.

[Jerry Tubb]

I recently acquired this Super 400, the huge tone is magnificent, even with pu’s mounted to the top!