Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Posts 1 to 50 of 56
  1. #1
    Jazzarian Guest
    Norlin was some kind of beer and cement conglomerate from Equidor as I recall. They bought Gibson Guitars in 1969 and didn't sell Gibson until 1987.

    Some of the guitars of the era were weird tinkerings on the old formula. Ever see a Les Paul "Recording" model with slanted "low inpedance" pickups? Or how about the funky "volute" behind the nut at the headstock joint? There were things like the L5S, a solidbody L5 with 3 piece top. Don't forget the L6S too, with maple 24 fret neck. Regular Les Pauls now sported 3 piece tops as cheap Gibson spliced together more scraps to make a top.

    Even the arcthops of the era were kind of plain. No flashy flame maple backs.

    Not all the guitars of this era were turkeys. Your chances of getting a turkey increase though if you do buy a guitar from the era.

    In terms of "collectability", were not talking about a Mickey Mantle rookie card either.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    My ES175 falls squarely in the Norlin period, with the serial number dating it between 1971-72. It is a gem. I wouldn't trade another for it. I guess some were fine from that time.

  4. #3
    Jazzarian Guest
    I've got a '97 ES175 blondie, fancy maple all over. I tend to like 1990s era Gibsons in general.

    My Super V CES hails from 1991-1992, a so called "Master Model". I think Jim Hutchins and Jimmy Triggs made it, when Triggs was at the Gibson Custom Shop.

    Triggs now makes his own archtops under his name.

    My SG is a '93 (korina wood limited edition "Standard") and my doublecut LP is from '98. More really good Gibsons from the 90s.

  5. #4
    Jazzarian Guest
    For the most part I think Norlin left archtops out of it's "design improvement" movement.

  6. #5
    I've played a couple early '80s Les Pauls that I would kill to have.
    I take particular enjoyment when I come across one.

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    Prior to the Fusion model, Gibson put out the Howard Roberts Custom archtops in '74, which actually were an upscale update on the older Epi' H. Roberts. I've played one, a '74, and it's a great, great guitar. Oval Sound hole and a volume, bass and midrange controls. I think they only put 'em out from '74 to '81 or so. A winner of a jazz box, if there ever was one!

    You can see Gilad Heckelsman playing a mid 70s Gibson Howard Roberts Custom on youtube, performing *Prelude to a Kiss*.


  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Norlin sold out in 1985, after trying to peddle Gibson since 1982. Their history is a remarkable saga of misreading markets (when they deigned to read them at all), counterproductive business decisions, and overall stupidity. They took Gibson and a bunch of other robust, healthy companies, ran them into the ground, then sold them off for a song when they couldn't sustain the self-inflicted losses. Norlin ended up printing stock certificates, until Pitney-Bowes bought them out. Once they had Lowrey organs, several band instrument companies and peripherals like reed makers, several guitar lines, pianos, you name it. Norlin never saw a company they couldn't destroy. When they sold, they got around a third of what Fender went for, and the Fender deal included only inventory and some machinery, not the factory. Gibson sold lock, stock and barrel.

    But as Jim Deurloo famously said, guitars aren't made by management. The workers on the line kept doing what they did best, which was to turn out the best guitars they could. Granted, given the corporate suspicion of craft costs, and various tooling and material habits they developed, it was no doubt a challenge.

    And yet -- my favorite Gibson (and the only Les Paul I've ever played that I even liked) is my Norlin-era pancake body, neck volute, mini-humbucker Deluxe. I wouldn't trade it for any other I've ever picked up.

    One issue is that it isn't worth what a flame-top Standard is, but that's not an artifact of in-utility, rather it's a reflection of the inflated "vintage: market.

    As a person who buys instruments only to play, I have to say it's a hell of a guitar.

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    I give them a bonus point for managing to squeeze two 'buckers around the sound hole on some models:


  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    I owned a couple of the models mentioned here. Les Paul Recording bought new in 73-74, Howard Roberts Custom (used) , and an L5 CES (used) which did not have a fancy flamed maple back. But it sounded fine. I also had an ES175 that I will assume was made during this time as I bought it used.

    I also bought a used ES Artist, the one that had the active electronics. I swapped them out because the guitar had more treble bite than Roy Buchanan's telecaster.

    They were all ok guitars. some better than others but no real dogs. NO QC issues.

    Meanwhile my 2000 Super 400 had to go back to the factory because the laquer on the neck started to peel off. And the p/up selector switch had to be changed or modified because it kept falling into the hole. So either the hole was routed too big or the rubber shrunk. They never said which

  11. #10
    Jazzarian Guest
    I had a '74 Les Paul Standard and it was the worst guitar I've ever owned. It had a 5 piece greenwood neck, aged over an hour in a 90 degree kiln.

  12. #11
    Jazzarian Guest
    The '92 Super V "Master Model" is doing just fine! It turned a lovely yellow, as did all the binding. The finish is still utter perfection. I don't know if Triggs or Hutchins built it, it is from Nashville. They sure did a fine job.

    I'd bet Campellone would agree.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazzarian
    I'd still avoid a Norlin era guitar if possible.
    Sorry, that's still a meaningless generalization. Any one of any sense will not buy a guitar without personally inspecting and playing it.

    Had I followed your advice, I'd not own a Les Paul (not that I ever had that as a goal). I fell in love with it -- note, in contrast to "thinking it wasn't half bad" -- long before I knew anything about Gibson's history, or Norlin, or very much of anything. I'm amused by dogma, if anything. I know guys who "have to have" some iconic Kalamazoo-made, perfect-top, PAF pickup ridiculously expensive guitar, and I have to pray for their souls.

    They are music instruments, and deserve to judged on those terms, as entertaining as it can be to gasp over the ineptitude of Norlin management. When all is said and done, management didn't build the guitars. The ones that are bad, well, I think you should be able to distinguish those without making sweeping statements. For the ones that are good, I just hope that this Norlin bashing continues to the point where I can buy one or two at a bargain price.

    Tell ya what, the music doesn't know who owned the company that made the guitar it's being played on.

  14. #13
    Jazzarian Guest
    Well, any kinks in Norlin guitars should have manifested themselves by now, that's a good thing. It was buyer beware back in the day, like my '74 Les Paul who's neck kept constantly warping.

    Glad they got rid of 3 piece tops.

    PS: My GB10 has a volute. I love that neck.

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    The one unforgivable thing that Norlin did was to institute the skinny neck. The idea of a Super 400 with a thin neck is somehow revolting.

    I think you're right about the probability of structural problems having surfaced. I hadn't thought about it that way. The same could be said for '70s CBS Fenders, of course, another emotional issue for players.

    I enjoyed the debate, but I don't have anything more to add. You're comfortable with your way of doing things, and I with mine. It's a fact that Norlin was so consistently wrong about everything that one feels all they touched must have been tainted -- but I think the craftsmen were better than that. Let's be grateful that Gibson didn't end up with the ignominy of yet another respected American name on Chinese guitars.

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    Proud (?) owner of an L6S here. All black with ebony fingerboard. It really is an underrated guitar. The problems I see in this guitar: Problem #1: The varitone is a pain if you need to switch on the fly, which is possibly a reason why it didn't do well, and it's a little noisy. Problem #2: It looks like a Les Paul that got squashed by a truck. Problem #3: The damn thing hasn't increased in value since I bought it in 1981 for $550!

    However, this guitar has stood the test of time with me. It has really nice solid body jazz tone, the neck is great, okay SG-style tones, hasn't needed much in the way of adjustment in 29 years of playing sometimes every day, and has only seen the inside of a case for about 2 or 3 of those 29 years. The rest of the time it's been ready to play. This one is a Norlin rarity, a real keeper. And to think the only reason why I bought it was because the new Gibson dealer in town was forced to take it with their initial order. It was a discontinued model from 1980, and I bought it in 1981.

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Speaking of the L5S...this is a gorgeous guitar. I can't find one today for less than $3,500.00...If I could find a nice L6S (which hasn't been "modified") for $700.00, I'd buy it.

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    I think it is ironic that in the Norlin era, Epiphones built in Japan for US import by Gibson were very high quality.

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    And not to forget the Lab Series Amps also produced by Norlin and distributed through Gibson. They were very good trannys, BB King played one of those for a pretty long period...

    Cheers,
    Chris

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    I'm looking at some Byrdlands from the 70s.
    Has anybody had any experience with them?
    I'm tainted by what was produced during the Norlin era and was wondering whether any of it seeped into the archtops of the era.
    Thanks

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    There's a lot of exaggeration about the Norlin era IMO; it's true that many of the changes of that era are unpopular with players and/ or cosmetically less attractive, but it's important to separate those from the changes ( if any, in some cases) that made them less usable guitars.

    I'd say there are some perfectly good guitars from that era, especially amongst arch- tops. The may not look as cool, or might have unattractive ( for some) volutes, but might well represent better value, and play well and sound good. It depends on the individual guitar, and the individual's preference.

    From memory, the transition to the 19/16th nut started before Norlin; certainly they moved back to 1 11/16th during Norlin's time. That might not be an issue with the byrdland anyway

    I remember having what might have been an early 80s model, in wine red; it was a fine guitar, although cosmetically rather understated. But, i didn't mind that at all.

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    I have a 76 Byrdland that I play often and it is definitely a well made and beautiful guitar. It is also one of the best sounding guitars I've played. I also own a Sadowsky and an L5 and it is as good as either of them (just for comparison). The "norlin quality hype" certainly can't apply to all of the guitars of that era. Certainly, it doesn't apply to mine which I think is a really fine instrument.

  23. #22
    The woods used are clearly less spectacular, particularly on the backs. Also, I have noticed that there are issues with binding cracks with Norlin 70s archtops, supposedly more frequent than with guitars from the 60s or later 80s. The pickups are very good though, I have a 70s s400, and it sounds excellent.

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    Apparently they changed the nut width in the 70's as they also made changes to the scale length on the 305T

    What year that is I don't know. I know later 80's and 90's models have an increased nut. Although its all a bit up in the air.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    teleman . . . Just a quick word of advice, as requested. IMO, if you're looking at some Byrdlands from the 70s, judge them only against themselves, for their individuality, build quality, playability, appearance, condition . . . and what they feel like and say to you when you see them and play them. Judging guitars based upon the year, or era they were built in is just stupid. There were some really great guitars built in the '70s. I and many others here played and owned some great Gibson arch tops made during the Norlin years. We've also seen some real turds as well. Just pick up any Birdland you come across . . check it out thoroughly . . . and don't let your mind wander into the foolishness of what year . . or during what era it might have been built . . . unless it's true vintage and you're a bonifide collector. Byrdlands from the '70s are pre-owned (used instruments) . . they're not vintage collectibles. Gibson made . . and makes great, very good, good, not so good, bad guitars in virtually every year of their existence . . heretofore, and hereafter.

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    Wasn't Bruce Bolan the designer of the BJB pickup in charge of R&D during the Norlin era?

  27. #26

    User Info Menu

    Patrick's advise is spot on. The best guitar I ever owned was a 1978 Gibson Super 400. Plain Jane wood but build quality, sound, and playability was the best ever.

  28. #27

    User Info Menu

    I had a fabulous mid-70's walnut 335 with the normal 11/16 neck, bought it new. Gorgeous wood, perfect fit & finish, rock solid neck.

  29. #28

    User Info Menu

    I'm in the minority I suppose, but the volute doesn't bother me. I'm not sure it has saved any guitars from decapitation, but that was the hope.

    Many guitarists don't like anyone changing the designs of their traditional guitars. The addition of the volute created a lot of wailing.

  30. #29

    User Info Menu

    Some 95 plus archtops, I've never owned a better looking archtop than the early 70's S400. Zero binding cracks or nitro checks...nada. I enjoy photo bombing it.




















  31. #30

    User Info Menu

    Well, if Norlin era Gibsons are good enough for Russell Malone...

    .Gibson's Dreaded Norlin Era-russell_lamar_malone-jpg

    Gibson's Dreaded Norlin Era-1-jpg

  32. #31

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Marty Grass
    I'm in the minority I suppose, but the volute doesn't bother me. I'm not sure it has saved any guitars from decapitation, but that was the hope.

    Many guitarists don't like anyone changing the designs of their traditional guitars. The addition of the volute created a lot of wailing.
    Not at all in the minority about the volutes. There was quite a lengthy thread devoted entirely to volutes.

    Why the dislike for volutes?

  33. #32

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Marty Grass
    I'm in the minority I suppose, but the volute doesn't bother me. I'm not sure it has saved any guitars from decapitation, but that was the hope.

    Many guitarists don't like anyone changing the designs of their traditional guitars. The addition of the volute created a lot of wailing.

    I like volutes. As pointless as they are, they break up the long line from the neck to the headstock which is nice.

    Some people love living by the sea but I think its depressing. Nothing changes, no seasons etc. The volute is my tree at sea.

    Jesus I talk some bollocks.

  34. #33

    User Info Menu

    Have anyone know about notorious years of Gibson belong to Norlin from late70' to early 80'?

    They have the bad reputation for les paul;but I'm not sure about L5 Archtop that made during these periods

    Thanks

  35. #34

    User Info Menu

    Les Pauls are good. I got a 75 Les Paul Custom and it is an extraordinary guitar.
    The controversy is due to changes in the design, introducing maple neck, volute, pancake body. But none of them is actually wrong, it is just a different design.
    Arch tops are a different matter, they started using non flamed tops, which is quite unimportant related to sound. But they introduced as well kerfed bracing which is a major "no go" if you're planning buying the guitar.

    Personal experience, solid bodies are good, concern with kerfed bracing. Not all archtops had this issue, if the one you're checking has normal parallel bracing you should go for it.

    Another thing to keep in mind in the Norlin period, from 1969 to late 70s the pickups were T-Tops, considered he best pickups ever Gibson has made (except the original PAF in the 50s). From late 70s to 1986 the pickups were the Tim Shaw, also known as Dirty Fingers, not so many fans here...

  36. #35

    User Info Menu

    The Dirty Fingers pickups were but one type of full size humbucking pickup produced by Gibson during Tim Shaw's stay at Gibson. I own a 83 Heritage Flying V that came stock with his PAF pickups. These are very good PAF replica's and can produce a very good jazz tone. The Dirty Fingers were wound to be hot.

  37. #36

    User Info Menu

    There are some great Norlin archtops out there.

    Judge each guitar on it's own merits ....



    That said ... most of us would prefer to have something made after 1988 or 1992 or so ...

    or something made before 1960

  38. #37

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by paco1976
    Arch tops are a different matter, they started using non flamed tops, which is quite unimportant related to sound. But they introduced as well kerfed bracing which is a major "no go" if you're planning buying the guitar.
    That's not quite right. Try reading this thread for forum info on when kerfed bracing was introduced:

    Kerfed Bracing on ES 175

  39. #38

    User Info Menu

    Didn't know it was already used in the 50s. Very interesting.

    In any case it is not a general rule, there are ES175 with and without kerfing in the same decades.

    As usual with Gibson, there is a lack of consistency.

  40. #39

    User Info Menu

    My point was that you can't call every arch top guitar with kerfed bracing a ''major no go''..

  41. #40

    User Info Menu

    Not exactly guitar you are looking for but i have a 74 335 purchased it in 1981. It has Ttops, sounds great, people who play it love it. Think there is something valid to the bad rap 70's Gibsons get but bet it is over blown because most people buying vintage guitars are collectors really.

  42. #41

    User Info Menu

    My '77 L-5C is one of the best guitars I have ever played.

    Other than the plain maple, no short cuts were taken on these guitars. Mine stacks up well against my '46 and against all other L-5 that I've compared it to.

    The conventional wisdom is that L-5 s from the era maintained their quality extremely well, even with the plain maple backs.

  43. #42

    User Info Menu

    Thanks for all comments

    I have 1982 L5 comparing with 2011 L7. Sound wise, it proves that it's not inferior for Norlin period archtop except Norlin year don't have the flamed back&side.

    Last edited by parker1713; 02-19-2015 at 12:44 AM.

  44. #43

    User Info Menu

    Interesting - I see your 2011 L-7C has bound f-holes, which is a custom feature.
    Could you please post pix of the guitar front and back?

  45. #44

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Franz 1997
    My point was that you can't call every arch top guitar with kerfed bracing a ''major no go''..
    Right, I can't generalize.
    It is a major no-go for me at this price level, personal opinion. Sorry if it sounded otherwise.

    The sound amplified will not be affected by this.

    As a general approach, if the kerfed bracing is something you can accept and the guitar sound and feels good to you then go for it.

  46. #45

    User Info Menu

    kriesberg uses one. 'nuff said.

  47. #46

    User Info Menu

    My 175 is Norlin-era (1976). Sounds ok to me. Here's something I recorded recently on it.


  48. #47

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by parker1713
    This is the pictures . I look through it; I think there is not post-production for F-Binding.
    Thanks. That is a lovely-looking instrument.
    What year was it built?
    I have a Bozeman-built L-7C as well, built in 2004, and it is an excellent acoustic archtop guitar.
    Does yours have a label in it?
    I have seen several of them that do not have labels, mine included, which strikes me as odd.




    Regarding Norlin guitars and wood selection, Gibson didn't simply decide to use plain maple for these guitars during the Norlin era. They decided to go from using slab-cut maple to using quartersawn maple. It so happens that the quartersawn maple they used was plain. They subsequently started using quartersawn figured maple, which they have now been using for over 25 years.
    Last edited by Hammertone; 02-20-2015 at 03:55 PM.

  49. #48

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Hammertone
    Thanks. That is a lovely-looking instrument.
    What year was it built?
    I have a Bozeman-built L-7C as well, built in 2004, and it is an excellent acoustic archtop guitar.
    Does yours have a label in it?
    I have seen several of them that do not have labels, mine included, which strikes me as odd.

    Regarding Norlin guitars and wood selection, Gibson didn't simply decide to use plain maple for these guitars during the Norlin era. They decided to go from using slab-cut maple to using quartersawn maple. It so happens that the quartersawn maple they used was plain. They subsequently started using quartersawn figured maple, which they have now been using for over 25 years.

    this is true of the later Norlin era, but in the early Norlin era ['70-'73 ish] you'll see some of the most figured flat sawn maple from any Gibson era. last year I sold my '72 L-5CES and the wood was off the charts flamed....

  50. #49

    User Info Menu

    A while ago Graham and I talked about doing another virtual duet here. We have done one earlier years ago.

    This time we went for a Raney vibe and I like the result. Graham is the right channel.

    It's a Norlin duet actually ... Graham is playing a 1976 ES 175 and I a 1982 one.

    Hope you like. I do!

    DB


  51. #50

    User Info Menu

    Excellent playing and excellent guitars.

    Over the years I owned three Norlin 175's (1970, 1977 and 1982). All were superb. I liked them way better than the pre Norlin 175's I have owned (a 1963 and a 1967).

    I also owned a 2008 model which was the worst of them all.

    I currently own three (a 1997, a 2017 Figured and a 2017 59 Reissue) 175's and all three are superb, but if I could go back in time, I would not have sold my 1982 175.