Gibson Crimson shop Quality Control

[Marty Grass]

I feel fortunate. I have a lot more Heritage guitars thank Gibsons, but this L4CES (2013) was quite amazing and I got to play it for an hour before I pulled the trigger. I hope gibson gets back to you.

https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/guita...-wine-red.html

I have the privilege of housing this L-4. I played it this morning and it's a gem. This guitar could be the model on display in the Custom Shop for the workers of what a L-4 is supposed turn out like. The frets and neck are just right. It's set up perfectly for D'Addario Chrome 12s.

It sounds more balanced in the tonal spectrum than the ES-175, at least the ones I've played. The sustain is longer with more brights and deeper lows.

The neck is a thicker C carve but not a '59 bat.

Gibson did a fab job on this one. They often do great work.

[Drifter]

I have three guitars custom built after the specs I wanted. One by Heritage and two by a local luthier. None of them full sized archtops though. But still, it is a wonderful experience, from the first thought to the day you receive the guitar. But it is also a wonderful experience to buy a new L5 CES.

Buying new for me is not about new and shiny as it is often quite disdainfully remarked in this forum, but about actively experiencing the development of an instrument from day 1. I find that very rewarding, even on a solid body. I now am very curious how much a new L5 will improve over the years.

Resale value? Becomes irrelevant as soon as you realize you'll never ever sell it.

[2bornot2bop]

If a custom builder can't build an archtop that meets more of your archtop desires, and exceed those over a mass produced guitar, I'd think that builder wouldn't be in business for very long.

How many guitars does a custom builder create over a year vs. the average worker let's say even in the Gibson Custom shop? One would expect a custom builder to spend more time on the specifics of an instrument build than one being produced by a for profit Corporation.

So to compare any mass produced guitar to a custom built instrument is an apples to oranges comparison to my mind. But what do I know...I'm just a piano player who spends too much time on a guitar forum!

[Thumpalumpacus]

Vinny,
I cannot believe your bad luck. I will say that the dealer(s) must also
bear some responsibility here. Surely a reputable main Dealer must
carry out a thorough check particularly on a top of the range L5 before
the customer receives it either personally or by a shipping method.
It is a very unsatisfactory affair, and suggest that you contact Henry J to
make him aware of the current situation, and that there are approx
47,500 + members here who read of these instances, to their dismay, which
will have a serious detrimental effect on Gibson's reputation. I would
expect the dealer to also tell the Company of their concerns regarding
these unacceptable instances, which have manifested on more than one or two
occasions recently.



Alan

If he takes your good advice, he can also mention that a significant proportion of MLP's 90,000 members seem to share the same gripes about Gibson's current QC standards.

I'm not a basher -- there are new Gibsons I've played I'd loved to have bought had the scrilla been handy -- but I made my own decision a while back that I won't buy a new Gibson until they redevote themselves to superlative quality. HJ is banking on brand and forgetting Business Basics 101 (quality product at acceptable price), and I don't see the need to support that sort of bs. I've seen too many new Gibbys with overspray, orange peel, bleeding in the binding, and, especially, crummy fretwork to swallow any more of it.

Caveat emptor, baby.

No doubt the dealers should be speaking up, too. But delegating QC outside the factory is not what I consider economical business-wise. Automakers work to avoid recalls, appliance makers work to avoid warranty servicing; the farther up the line QC happens is a big controllable in business, and it's surprising Henry doesn't get that.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I've had a few Plek'd Gibsons since 2010 that were in desperate need of a fret leveling, 2 were 2010 ES-335's that were unplayable. Either the Plek was set to 'roller coaster', Gibson doesn't know how to program/operate a Plek, Gibson is not really Plek'ing, or Gibson is using wood that hasn't dried and settled yet.

A couple Gibson's I have from 2002/2003 have me believing Gibson isn't properly drying and storing their fingerboard wood: The ebony shrunk slightly in width at the wide end and lifted from a maple neck in the first year.

My tech got a good laugh out of the 335's and said he's "glad to see that technology can't approach the quality of a hand done fret leveling by a competent tech". The guitars were all fixed and now play great.

A buddy of mine visited me a couple of years ago from Florida with his new 339 in tow. I hadn't played an electric in a few years and was looking forward to it. About five minutes into it I handed it back to him and picked my 80s MiT Yamaha acoustic up, because it played better, if quieter. Plekked or not, those frets were speedbumps, and may as well have been made of asphalt for all their smoothness; I could feel every goddamned divot on them, and there were plenty.

[skiboyny]

I have seen countless examples of Gibson guitars over the years with significant quality issues very much like poor Vinny has encountered. To be fair, I had a custom Heritage guitar made with significant fingerboard and nut issues that pass through a well respected dealer's bench to boot. It frankly was not repairable but could be made "playable" with $400 of repairs. Yes, both companies can and have made some great ones, but sight unseen you will need to cull through some lemons.

I will no doubt be in the minority here, but there are a number of custom builders who can build you a flawless guitar. It can be taylored to be more acoustic or electric, depending on the player's needs. No, it won't have a "Gibson" logo or be the guitar that your hero played, but it will be a killer guitar. As scary as it sounds, I am an advocate of having the instrument made custom for you instead of buying one you have auditioned at a shop. A skilled archtop luthier will adjust the build to suit your playing needs. Many impressions of a builder's work are based on either spec guitars at stores or used guitars at retailers made to another player's needs. Yes, there is resale risk should you choose to sell it but no risk, no reward.

My $.02

The thing is for me at least, is I've had lots and lots of guitars. I have loved them all but only for a little while. If it didn't say Gibson on the headstock, I lost money when we parted company. The private builders can make a flawless guitar and when you get it if your like me (hopelessly addicted to archtops) you will love it! That love doesn't last a lifetime though, and when you decide to fall in love with another, you will take the beating of your life on resale. That's not to say that money is the only reason though. When I fell in love with the sound of the archtop the players that I looked up to most, or were mentored by, all played Gibson. That sound it seems is whats is stuck in my head. I can be swayed easy enough but the endless circle always comes back to Gibson. It's funny my Journey could have ended almost at the beginning if I had known what I know now. I guess every story could end that way.

[iim7V7IM7]

Have you personally commissioned a custom built archtop from a luthier and fallen out of love with it, and sold it and took the "beating of your life"? I am curious, because as I said in my prior post, it is the vast minority of original owners who ordered the guitar who find themselves in this position. Those are the guitars we see for sale privately and with resellers for sale at great discount as you rightly pointed out. Perhaps I just don't share your level of passion for archtops, or I was lucky, but I just don't see selling my custom archtops until I can no longer play.

I know that many enjoy the recreational cycle of the "search", "acquisition" and "sell" when it comes to guitars. That is much of what this forum is about. If that describes you, your advice is wise to limit your world to Fender, Gibson and Martin to bask in the protection of decades of brand equity. However, that brand protection does not come for free. It comes the heartache that Vinny has just experienced and compromise of putting up with some aspects of an instrument not being optimized for YOU.

The private builders can make a flawless guitar and when you get it if your like me (hopelessly addicted to archtops) you will love it! That love doesn't last a lifetime though, and when you decide to fall in love with another, you will take the beating of your life on resale.

[skiboyny]

Have you personally commissioned a custom built archtop from a luthier and fallen out of love with it, and sold it and took the "beating of your life"? I am curious, because as I said in my prior post, it is the vast minority of original owners who ordered the guitar who find themselves in this position. Those are the guitars we see for sale privately and with resellers for sale at great discount as you rightly pointed out. Perhaps I just don't share your level of passion for archtops, or I was lucky, but I just don't see selling my custom archtops until I can no longer play.

I know that many enjoy the recreational cycle of the "search", "acquisition" and "sell" when it comes to guitars. That is much of what this forum is about. If that describes you, your advice is wise to limit your world to Fender, Gibson and Martin to bask in the protection of decades of brand equity. However, that brand protection does not come for free. It comes the heartache that Vinny has just experienced and compromise of putting up with some aspects of an instrument not being optimized for YOU.

I have owned Luther built guitars. One of them was new. I have not personally commissioned a build from start to finish. I really don't feel that that would make a difference. Each builder has a personality built in to his guitars. The ones that don't build by the numbers, can fine tune a bit toward a customers taste but that personality, I feel is still there. The ones that I owned were excellent in their own rights. I played and cherished them for a long time. Selling was difficult and I did loose money. I don't think that I fall in to the camp of the "search" "acquisition" and "sell". I really love the archtop guitar. In the end what I seek is inspiration! I'm not looking for a piece of furniture either. I have pretty much settled on 3 Gibson guitars. They each have a very different voice with the Gibson personality. All great players. That seems to work well for me. I understand that you have to "weed" through Gibsons to get a great one. I feel that the great ones are on par with any luthier built instrument, with the Gibson personality. If that's the voice you have in your head Gibson seems a logical choice.

It's great that you remain happy and inspired with your custom builds. If their voice inspires you, any time or money you put in to them was well spent....

[WilliamScott]

Re-selling a custom build does not always end in losing your shirt. It depends. I had a custom Bill Moll guitar made for me. He talked me into a 19 inch body. The guitar was great but too big for me. I sold it a couple of years later for more than I paid for it, though less than a new one would have cost at the time. If the luthier is a rising star, you won't lose money.

[Stringswinger]

Re-selling a custom build does not always end in losing your shirt. It depends. I had a custom Bill Moll guitar made for me. He talked me into a 19 inch body. The guitar was great but too big for me. I sold it a couple of years later for more than I paid for it, though less than a new one would have cost at the time. If the luthier is a rising star, you won't lose money.

Anyone who bought a D'Angelico, D'Aquisto, Stromberg, Benedetto or Monteleone early on and sold it later, came out as well or better than folks who bought Gibson, Fender and Martin guitars.

With other luthiers it is a crapshoot. Those of us who like to try different guitars are simply better off buying used, no matter the maker, so the big depreciation hit has already happened.

Not caring about resale value is not looking out for our heirs, as these are big investments (for most of us). Gibson, Fender and Martin is the safest bet for resale. And at the end of the day, Gibsons have that certain sound and vibe.

For all of their QC issues, Gibsons still rule.

[jads57]

So a couple of comments. Tal Farlows are laminate archtops and shouldn't cost $8K unless it's an original in great shape.
Secondly, while I'm a huge fan of the newer Gibsons, I would buy either a used Tal Farlow or even a Heritage H-550. , While I'm not a Heritage fan in general,you'll end up just as happy w/ the used Heritage at one third of the price.
And yes I know they are slightly different construction. But I've owned a H550 and it's a great gigging guitar. I sold mine because I went to a smaller body Benedetto Bambino.

[agentsmith]

So a couple of comments. Tal Farlows are laminate archtops and shouldn't cost $8K unless it's an original in great shape.
Secondly, while I'm a huge fan of the newer Gibsons, I would buy either a used Tal Farlow or even a Heritage H-550. , While I'm not a Heritage fan in general,you'll end up just as happy w/ the used Heritage at one third of the price.
And yes I know they are slightly different construction. But I've owned a H550 and it's a great gigging guitar. I sold mine because I went to a smaller body Benedetto Bambino.

Sorry, but I disagree. The heritage 550 doesn't use traditional bracing. It uses waffle bracing like the ES150DC. This is a thick brace running along the center of the instrument and sounds completely different than parallel bracing such as the tal farlow.

here's a picture of the waffle bracing.

[vinnyv1k]

I am done buying new Gibson's as it is not working out. I had a friend that owned my local music shop for 45 years. He retired in 2014. I bought all my Gibson's through him. He is also a great guitarist. If the Gibson I ordered was a turd he would just send it back. He wouldn't even let me see it. He would just tell me it didn't meet Vinny spec and we need to order another. When he called me and said your Gibson is here I knew it was going to be at least a pretty good player.
I will always be a Gibson boy as that is my sound but going forward will buy my Gibson's from people like Danny W.
Known good Gibson's.


Marc you may know him, Kevin Jarvis of Gelb Music. He lives in Santa Cruz also. He was my man !

[jads57]

Again I said they are different but similar in spec. They both are similar tonality wise when used in a live gig situation.
The Tal Farlow is not a carved top and has a thicker top to support the 2 p/up and controls like a L-5CES. If we we're comparing floating p/ups I can see your point, but it's pretty moot when plugged in. Not trying to be disagreable just posting my actual gigging experience.

[Marty Grass]

i asked jay wolfe once for a 4" thick body and he said they didn't have body molds thick enough.

Holy mackerel!
Four inches! I don't know if I could handle that, but I'd love to try.

[rlrhett]

As a luthier who hand builds instruments, I tell prospects two things:

1) it's not a Gibson (the day Gibson makes a CF soundboard strung with nylon string, then maybe).

2) it's not an investment. It's a musical instrument.

A lot of people turn away.

I fully understand the gigging musician needing to buy a Gibson. It's a tool of the trade, and relative to earnings is a very pricy one. It makes economic sense to buy a tool with little depreciation. If you need a different tool, you can fold over your investment.

I also get that there are many people for whom collecting and trading instruments is a passionate hobby. Unless you are a Wall Street Oligarch, you aren't going to play that game too many times unless you can be assured you can roll over your collection with little loss. Makes sense to only trade in items with huge collectible demand.

That said, not everybody falls in those categories.

So as not to insult any sacred cows, let's pretend we are talking about Taylor guitars. The construction techniques used in the Taylor factory are not magic, or even trade secrets. They use a lot of industrial techniques to assure fast and reliable duplicates that minimize the amount of actual craftsmanship required. However, there is no "special sauce" in the guitar itself.

When Taylor sends production to China (ok, Taylor doesn't do this, but play along) it is the same tooling, same process, same guitar. What changes is that for cost saving reasons the materials are cheaper, production lines run faster, workers are trained less, paid less, corners cut, etc.

So now imagine the opposite end of the spectrum. You have a craftsman building the same Taylor, same construction technique, same wood choices. Only this time the craftsman can take the time to select only the best woods. They will spend 100 man hours on each instrument (compared to 15, or so at the Epi factory in Quingdao"). They will be personally involved in the QA every step of the way.

Will the luthier built "Taylor" sound exactly like the factory Taylor? Does a hand built NASCAR Fusion drive like a factory Fusion? Heck, for that matter do two Taylors sound exactly the same?

Having a luthier hand build you a guitar is a luxury. It's about the musical instrument for the love of the instrument. It's not a practical tool for the professional musician, and it isn't for someone who's thrill is in the collecting (or GAS, or whatever.) It's is not for most people.

But comparing it to buying a Factory Gibson is apples to oranges. Buying a Gibson is dealing with a corporation run by bean counters for the benefit of a pampered, arrogant, self absorbed CEO who makes more in one month than 100 of his craftsmen make in a year. It's a corporation that mostly makes good fungible products with a great used market, but that is still a modern corporation none the less. There are lots of reasons why you may want/need to do that.

Buying from a luthier is the opposite. Not fungible, one off, with no used market. But you are dealing with a craftsman trying to make you as close to art as they can.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[agentsmith]

Again I said they are different but similar in spec. They both are similar tonality wise when used in a live gig situation.
The Tal Farlow is not a carved top and has a thicker top to support the 2 p/up and controls like a L-5CES. If we we're comparing floating p/ups I can see your point, but it's pretty moot when plugged in. Not trying to be disagreable just posting my actual gigging experience.

Yes, you could make a point that a solid spruce top is similar to a lam maple top on a loud gig with glasses clinking and 100 people laughing and carrying on. The tonal response of the waffle bracing is extremely different than a 175. I have compared them side by side with a similar era ES150dc, heritage 550 and 175 and the es150/heritage share a tonal response but it is very unlike the 175.

[sgcim]

Anyone who bought a D'Angelico, D'Aquisto, Stromberg, Benedetto or Monteleone early on and sold it later, came out as well or better than folks who bought Gibson, Fender and Martin guitars.

With other luthiers it is a crapshoot. Those of us who like to try different guitars are simply better off buying used, no matter the maker, so the big depreciation hit has already happened.

Not caring about resale value is not looking out for our heirs, as these are big investments (for most of us). Gibson, Fender and Martin is the safest bet for resale. And at the end of the day, Gibsons have that certain sound and vibe.

For all of their QC issues, Gibsons still rule.

I agree with this in relation to the two D'As and maybe Stromberg, but because the price of Benedettos and Monteleones were originally so high, they've had to see a great deal of depreciation occur only twenty years into their existence.

I've seen many ads for Benedetto guitars where the guitars are being sold for about half of what they sold for when new. Jack Wilkins, Jimmy Bruno and Frank Vignola aren't playing them anymore (I don't know what Alden is playing
nowadays), so they don't have the endorsement appeal they once had. I won't even talk about Monteleones here, for fear of being lynched...

I do agree that Gibsons, Fenders and Martins are still a safe bet for resale; even a con man who once approached me asked me if I had any Gibson guitars when he found out I was a guitarist. I made sure I told him that i didn't have any...

[Bluedawg]

I agree with this in relation to the two D'As and maybe Stromberg, but because the price of Benedettos and Monteleones were originally so high, they've had to see a great deal of depreciation occur only twenty years into their existence.

I've seen many ads for Benedetto guitars where the guitars are being sold for about half of what they sold for when new. Jack Wilkins, Jimmy Bruno and Frank Vignola aren't playing them anymore (I don't know what Alden is playing
nowadays), so they don't have the endorsement appeal they once had. I won't even talk about Monteleones here, for fear of being lynched...

I do agree that Gibsons, Fenders and Martins are still a safe bet for resale; even a con man who once approached me asked me if I had any Gibson guitars when he found out I was a guitarist. I made sure I told him that i didn't have any...

One of my dream guitars is the Benedetto La Venezia .... I was considering one back in 1993 ..

I just found my old catalog and price list that Benedetto sent me at the time ... the Venezia was $10K even then

I ended up ordering a Le Grand instead .... final price on delivery was $3650 in FEB of 1994 .. and it turned out to be rather wonderful guitar

[Greentone]

Yeah, the last 20 years have seen the prices of archtop guitars (new) rise significantly...while incomes have not done as well.

20 years ago you could have picked up most used archtop guitars--other than D'Angelico and D'Aquisto--for less tan $3,650.

Times have changed.

[jads57]

Yes, you could make a point that a solid spruce top is similar to a lam maple top on a loud gig with glasses clinking and 100 people laughing and carrying on. The tonal response of the waffle bracing is extremely different than a 175. I have compared them side by side with a similar era ES150dc, heritage 550 and 175 and the es150/heritage share a tonal response but it is very unlike the 175.

I guess my point is the OP was feeling victimized by an overpriced instrument that's quality was questionable. And to that end I was proposing some cheaper viable alternatives to help solve the issue. Used Heritage H550"s sell quite often even in Blonde in the $1300-1800 range. They offer about 90% of the Tal Farlows appointments at less than 1/2 the cost of a used one. I know the Tal Farlow might be preferable, but a Lexus is just a dressed up Toyota afterall.

Cheers!

[Stringswinger]

I agree with this in relation to the two D'As and maybe Stromberg, but because the price of Benedettos and Monteleones were originally so high, they've had to see a great deal of depreciation occur only twenty years into their existence.

I've seen many ads for Benedetto guitars where the guitars are being sold for about half of what they sold for when new. Jack Wilkins, Jimmy Bruno and Frank Vignola aren't playing them anymore (I don't know what Alden is playing
nowadays), so they don't have the endorsement appeal they once had. I won't even talk about Monteleones here, for fear of being lynched...

I do agree that Gibsons, Fenders and Martins are still a safe bet for resale; even a con man who once approached me asked me if I had any Gibson guitars when he found out I was a guitarist. I made sure I told him that i didn't have any...

When John Monteleone and Bob Benedetto started out, one could buy their guitars for far less than they will sell for used these days. The window of opportunity with up and coming luthiers is small. And with the vast majority of luthiers, it will end up being a bad deal financially, if not for you, then for your heirs.

Those who bought Benedettos or Monteleones (new) in the last 15 years have not done very well financially, but they have had the good fortune to own some amazing guitars.

[sgcim]

People buy guitars for different reasons. I buy guitars only for gigs; the right guitars for the right situations.

Marc does more gigs than most people in this forum, plus has enough bread to invest in guitars he believes in; a quite enviable position AFAIC.

[Stringswinger]

People buy guitars for different reasons. I buy guitars only for gigs; the right guitars for the right situations.

Marc does more gigs than most people in this forum, plus has enough bread to invest in guitars he believes in; a quite enviable position AFAIC.

I have no problem with people buying whatever guitar they like at whatever price they wish to pay. I will opine that I think it foolish to pay $5,000 for say, a non vintage Telecaster and I think one should buy a custom built guitar with their eyes wide open. IMO, a skilled luthier should be able to get $4,000 to $8,000 for their work. It is great that some folks have the disposable income to be a patron of the arts, and guitars can be art. Custom cars, custom motorcycles and custom guitars are all art and are generally a bad investment. But life is short and if having something custom made is important to you and you can afford it, go for it. But be fully apprised.

But most working jazz musicians, who unlike me, have not had the good fortune of other well compensated careers, need to be very careful with their equipment purchases. I always recommend a Gibson archtop. Bought used, it is like money in the bank. And in the right hands can earn money as well. And I certainly am aware of the QC problems of Gibson guitars (I have seen them my entire guitar playing life, which goes back to 1968). I am certain that for every dud, Gibson has created many gems. I own a few and can say with certainty, if you find a gem of a Gibson archtop, it will inspire your playing for years to come.

I have met some very well to do guitar dealers who have large personal collections of very desirable guitars. They see them as a big part of their investment portfolio. As none of us have a crystal ball, guitars could be as good as anything else out there. That said, I think putting all of your retirement assets into custom 7 string archtops would most likely result in a difficult retirement.

[HeyNow]

Going to be a difficult/interesting 9-12 months for Gibson.

Standard & Poor's has downgraded Gibson's credit rating to CCC from CCC+

"U.S.-based Gibson Brands Inc. entered into an amendment with its lenders on July 14, 2016, to waive a financial reporting covenant default on the
company's $75 million ABL revolving credit facility. As part of the
amendment, the lenders accelerated the ABL's maturity to May 1, 2017,
from Jan. 31, 2018"