-
If I had to do it all over again... I wouldn't.
What's good about it? A 23.5" neck (hard to find in any guitar). A nice solid C neck profile, not a skinny or narrow or beefy D profile. It really is a 17" guitar - several other Aliexpress sellers show pictures of what appear to be Byrdland-style guitars, but they are 16" guitars dressed up with fancier binding and parts. The woodwork and binding are decent. The fretwork is good.
Minuses: The logo is a problem in many ways, both ethical and practical. The top is a problem because its laminate, not solid spruce. The internal construction is a huge problem because it is not parallel bracing, rather its the ubiquitous-to-cheap-hollowbodies solid block of wood under the bridge from top to back. The construction is a problem because this guitar was intended to be built with the tuneomatic style bridge on posts screwed directly into the top. So the neck angle is too low for a floating bridge. I had to shave down the rosewood base of the bridge to get a low string action. The finish is good but not perfect; there are some minor blemishes.
I actually did order a Yunzhi... and had them put their (anglicized) logo on it. On the plus side it really was solid wood and beautifully put together, and built like a jazz guitar should be. Getting the finish mostly right was a huge communication problem. I tried to rely on pictures and if my intermediary had just sent those to the factory it'd probably have worked out better. I say mostly right, because the clear lacquer on neck back and sides is great but the colour job on the top has some issues. So it was not like I was dealing with an outfit that really cared about their reputation. If you look closely the guitar is built very very well, and sounds OK, but to have a sub-par finish right on the top (front)??? Given the additional expense, and the communication headaches, I regret ordering that one too.
I think if you want an archtop on a budget, look on ebay.de and use a web translator. Some of the DDR-era guitars in solid wood are quite nice. Find one in good condition and you will be happy.
-
01-04-2017 10:35 AM
-
I followed this thread with some interest thinking it was new - the response from this crowd was as I expected. Then I saw it was OLD...
Having bought a number of Mr. Wu guitars and being you all have seen my more recent American acquisitions I think I know a good value when I need it - see it. Many of the Chinese built guitars are amazing - heck the Ibanez guitars they spec out to Chinese factories are very good, and affordable. And if you are young and have a limited budget these Ibanez and other Chinese built guitars will definitely float your boat.
There are many cosmetic features about your Chibson I liked, the huge switch selector tip (looks very Gretsch) was one I really liked. It's a Byrdland knockoff plain and simple. To gig with it won't feedback as much as a real Byrdland will because of the laminated construction. These guitars have their place, you get 'em, have a tech work out the little issues and rock with your bad self.
When guys can afford to buy the real stuff maybe they will - frankly Gibson has been churning out a lot of garbage lately - you want real ebony for a fretboard you gotta go with China. Ask Vinny1K about his batch of Gibsons with problems.
I had Mr. Wu build some amazing guitars for me, very ornate and very functional pieces, great woods. Thanks Mr. Wu... and if you ever do go to have something built go with Ms. Lora who actually gives a damn and works really hard to give you what you are asking for: by never assuming and asking a lot of questions... Yunzhi is more into making a lot of guitars and have a more cavalier attitude toward the client. Ms. Lora is savvy enough to know if you want more business really take care of the customer you are working with.
Now with all that said I'm gonna go play Paper Doll on my '39 L5-P...
Big
-
There can be some justification to this particular point because a lot of guitar makers - not only Gibson - used that headstock shape back then. Gibson was just smart enough (or what one would call it) to trademark it. When I ordered my "Stromberg hommage" from Jim Triggs, he wrote me that he couldn't do the moustache shape of the headstock originally used on Stromberg instruments because Gibson now owned the trademark protection for that design detail.
Originally Posted by ArchtopHeaven
Putting the "Gibson" name and logo on a non Gibson guitar is another matter. That's outright fraud IMHO.
Parallels to the moustache headstock trademark issue are also found with other goods. There's a retired army gentleman in UK who runs a small one man business where he sells boutique recreations in small numbers of long since discontinued military wrist watches. There's a logo in UK called a "Broad Arrow" which is used to mark watches and other items which was the property of the British army. The gentleman in question lauched a couple of such recreations and branded them "Broadarrow" to indicate the connection to the British army. However, Omega had a watch in their line which by the customers was nicknamed the "The Broadarrow". Despite "Broadarrow" was, for all I know, never officially trademarked by Omega, whereas the gentleman had it trademarked in UK, Omega went to great lengths hunting him down with their US lawyers, threatening him with a US law suit, despite he was based in Sheffield, UK, and Omega in Switzerland and very few of his watches, if any, were sold in US. After some writing back and forth and grinding his teeth for some time, he decided that he couldn't afford to defend his case in US and very reluctantly changed the name of the watches. So I guess if you are big enough and have a sufficiently heavy lawyer backing, you can get your way.
-
I just want an affordable ( Epiphone copies are expensive now!) short neck arch top. If real Byrdland's were even in the $3000 range I 'd consider. If epiphone still amde them i'd grab one but i am thinking about a Chibson. I know they differ form byrdlands in many ways. is the scale 23.5 is my main question? If so, upgrtade away and never sell it.
-
Ok $3000 is unrealistic but I know you can get amzing 40's archtops for $1500-2000 cause i just sold one. Can't handle the thick 25.5 neck after tendonitis
-
How would i find Mr Wu? Does he work for a multi brand shop so how do i specify that it is a guitar made by Mr Wu?
-
What is DDR era nd how do i find Yungzi guitars. I do need a 23.5 that i can somehow make a midrangy guitar. I know it won't be like a Epi era Epiphone era or real Gibson but with Byrdland being like $10,000 there are far fewer options. I know a food luthier. If I could buy a neck i'd do that actually...
-
THIS. Originally Posted by Hammertone
Yes. Originally Posted by Dave70
Found this on the web, wonder if anyone actually has it inlaid on a guitar
-
Is this somewhere in the thread? Originally Posted by tomist
In German, DDR = Deutsche Demokratische Republick
In English, GDR = German Democratic Republice
East Germany is the common term, or Ostdeutschland in German.
In the context of this forum, DDR era typically refers to guitars built in East Germany between the late 1940s up until Germany was re-unified in the 1990s, although most of these instruments were built in the 1950s and 1960s.
-
So.. a little off topic but do we think that guitars from Yunzhi and Wu are going to be blocked by our customs for CITES reasons? Has anyone experienced this? Thinking I'm going to start buying used Yunzhi's if that's the case.
-
I think there is a fine line between what the law says and what is ethical. For example, something like my '77 D'Agostino - it has the crown and the open book headstock but it has its own logo and the construction of the guitar is not the same as a 175 since it has no bracing, a soundpost and some other differences like a maple neck. In that case the law says that is wrong only because of the open book headstock (and possibly the crown inlay). This is a grey area for me in terms of my personal morality system. I don't think that it has gone far - sure it sounds like an es-175 but it has enough differences that it is not one. If, however, it had a Gibson logo on it? That would be enough to have me feeling pretty dirty about having it or playing it. And if it still had the d'agostino name on it but the construction were exactly the same as a 175 I would most likely feel just as bad about that. Gibson might be a faceless corporation now but they still deserve to have their intellectual property respected.
I know that some might read this and think that the law is what should dictate where one's moral compass goes but I don't feel that way. There are plenty of laws (drug laws for example) that try to dictate morality and I don't agree with them so it is essential to just think hard about what seems right or wrong to me and have an educated opinion on it. That doesn't of course mean that if someone thinks killing someone who killed a family member is right morally that it is ok - I think that laws definitely serve a purpose and for the most part they are right and there for a reason.
That is just my take on it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
-
For me I just don't want to be a party to fraud. If a guitar isn't made by Gibson it shouldn't be labeled "Gibson" IMHO.
I have assembled a few Fender-type partscasters over the years. One of my favorites is a 12 string Jazzmaster. I sent a Warmoth 6 string the neck to someone that could machine it for 12 tuners. He was "jazzed" (so to speak) to do a Jazzmaster since he mostly does Strats and Teles. He kept emailing me about putting a Fender decal on it at his expense. I just wanted to get the neck back, so I told him to go ahead, but to not shoot a finish over it. First thing I did was scrape it off when it was delivered. None of my other partscasters have labels on them as are my preferences.
-
Jules Winnfield: "What does Gibson look like?"
Guitar Owner: "What?" (table thrown)
Jules Winnfield: "What country are you from?"
Jules Winnfield: "Describe what Gibson looks like!"
Guitar Owner: "What?"
Jules Winnfield: "Say 'what?' again, I dare you!, I double-dare you...Say 'what?' one more time...!" (pointing gun)
Guitar Owner: (stuttering) "It is a big building in Nashville..."
Jules Winnfield: "Go on...!"
Guitar Owner: "There is a sign in front with the Gibson logo.."
Jules Winnfield: "Does it look like a bitch?"
Guitar Owner: (stuttering)"What?" (gunshot)
Jules Winnfield: "Does-it-look-like-a-bitch?"
Guitar Owner: (screaming)"No!"
Jules Winnfield: "Then why are you trying to ... Gibson like a bitch?"
-
This. OP may have known it was counterfeit when he bought it, and will no doubt make that fact known if and when he sells it ... but without a doubt someone is going to be burnt on this guitar someday ... human nature being what it is. Originally Posted by vinlander
-
I must be really stupid or ignorant or both, as I don't get it? Originally Posted by icr
-
Just look at what happened to fender-style instruments with all the fakes/parts mixing out there. Even really knowledgeable people have a hard time figuring what's what in the used market. Set neck instruments, archtops, acoustics etc are more difficult to imitate of course, but it's getting there..
+1This. OP may have known it was counterfeit when he bought it, and will no doubt make that fact known if and when he sells it ... but without a doubt someone is going to be burnt on this guitar someday ... human nature being what it is.
-
LtKojak,
The reference is from Pulp Fiction...
Who loves ya baby...
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Today, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions