Quality control: Gibson vs the Rest

[rob taft]

I suspect a lot of what is taking place is an effort to meet payment obligations pertaining to Gibson Brands senior secured debt of $375mil which is due I believe in July 2018. Gibson made a 16.6 mil payment on that debt on Friday of last week. The senior secured notes are at from what I read 8.75%.

Gibson Brands is in terrible financial shape and needs to raise cash as quickly as possible. Hence the sale of real estate such as their Memphis factory, Valley Arts building, Baldwin piano warehouse and guitars regardless of condition.

[Longways to Go]

Regarding Gibson Fanbois nonsense,

I guess I resemble that accusation, as I now own 4 Gibson guitars -- 2 flat tops, a new CME archtop, and a really old archtop.
I don't feel any particular brand loyalty, but over time I have gravitated toward a guitar collection that has more Gibson than anything else.

I started with a Fender strat. Let me correct that -- Squier strat. Later, when I first discovered an interest in jazz, I did Ibanez for a while. Lovely QC -- just lacking a tone I was looking for. I stumbled onto Eastman for a while. But over time, I've acquired a few Gibsons and they have stayed while other guitars come and go. Not because I have their brand tattooed on my arm, just because I have found that I like them better over time.

I'm an enthusiastic flattop player and I love my 2 Gibson flattops. That business about "they were just designed wrong" is hard for me to fathom. I have a beautiful 20+ year old Martin D-28, but I'll still pick up my J-45 more often. I think it's because I prefer the short scale. My experience has been that Gibson Montana puts out a quality product.

BTW, I still own a tele and a strat too. Great guitars. Seems like they might be a little easier to make than a 175.

[Philco]

My experiences as of the past couple of years is that Fender isn’t much better than Gibson in the QC dept. They’re both more concerned with their numbers than their customers. There are too many guitar manufacturers to choose from than to settle for poor quality. My days of buying because of the name on the headstock are over. They won’t change until they start losing sales. It’s all quite a shame.

I ordered a Custom Shop Closet Classic !959 Jazzmaster in January 2016. I played one when in Japan visiting my daughter. I totally fell in love with it......one of the nicest feeling guitars I've ever picked up. I ended up paying $4900 and it was delivered to Australia in November 2016. It had to be built because they are no longer in the catalog. I didn't buy the one I played in Japan because even with a discount it was way too expensive and I was also concerned about the importing rosewood issue.

The first problem was the special design Fender Custom Shop bridge which allowed no real fine tuning adjustment. and no real height adjustment....without screwing up the other strings height. My luthier could not make it work properly with heavier gauge strings. Just a poor design really.
It cost me close to $300 to replace that bridge with Mastery replacement. Guitar Bridges | Guitar Parts + Luthier Supplies in MN | Mastery Bridge

Next, I noticed that the strings were out of alignment. Probably the case had been knocked on the long journey (but no one at Fender Australia checked it)

Ok, that was an easy fix.
Next was the fret dress I had to pay for. That guitar buzzed like a.......well I won't go into it.

So much for the magic setup at the magic "Fender Custom Shop". Bollocks to that.

Ok, now it's a great guitar ....but Fender quality control? I don't think so......and that's the "Custom Shop"

Why didn't I send it back? Because it would take another 9 or 10 months and I wasn't convinced it would be any better.

Oh I forgot about the dreaded sticky back of the neck. I can only play the guitar for half an hour before having to lightly sand the back of the neck.
I will eventually get my luthier to remove the finish.

I mean.......that really is pathetic.

[jazzjames]

I don't post much and I missed the last explosion...
I am a professional Jazz musician with a degree in music. I play 250+ Jazz gigs yearly. I don't make the kind of money that allows me to buy new Gibsons because CME has them on sale. I think many Gibsons are purchased by rich guys who always wanted a Gibson and will probably never really play well. As a result they wouldn't notice many of the REAL QC issues aside from the cosmetic finish flaws. The "Gibson" on the headstock literally is good enough.

That being said, I have owned Gibsons my whole life. They feel like home to me. The neck shape and radius of an ES-175 just feels good. Having played 1950s 175s, I think they sound great and feel great as far as resonance but my 2007 175 plays better and allows me to play things older 175s don't seem to. I play the best guitar I can afford and the 175 is an excellent platform for a great Jazz guitar sound. I completely rewired mine, got rid of the 300k pots, replaced them with 500k pots and a 1950s style wiring harness, as well as changing the value of the tone cap. I feel the pickups need to be matched to the particular guitar and I don't care for 57 classics in this guitar. I like the Benedetto A-6 because when I play the guitar acoustically and gradually turn up the amp, it sounds like the guitar...just louder. My guitar has some paint not scraped off the binding, the finish seems thick, and it is not as acoustically live as the old Gibsons...but the guitar is greatly resistant to feedback in the smaller stages I play on and allows me to pay with freedom in the moment and respond to the upright bassist and drummer without thinking about the instrument itself. I have made a TON of money with this guitar. I honestly have a difficult time relating to all of the complaints about binding paint not scraped (like mine) and other cosmetic issues. To me its not about the finish, etc...Its about feel and sound. If I had the guitars that get sent back by guys on here I would take it to gig and play the shit out of it. I don't own guitars to look at them admiringly or to "show off" the brand as has been suggested here (actually said outright). I make music and have found very few quality control issues that would get in the way of expressing myself on an instrument. It either feels good to me or not. And if it feels good, I have the frets worked on, change electronics, whatever to make it work. The old Gibsons are great. But they have aged out some and if you buy vintage you WILL have to have some work done. One thing I do know is if it is a 16" or 17" Gibson archtop, I generally will find it acceptable. I have played beautiful Benedettos and the necks don't feel right to me and the guitars sound a little too neutral for my taste. I want that Gibson "Thump". I also love the mid-century look to the Gibson models. They just do it for me. I hope the company recovers from the financial issues, quits focusing on numbers of guitars turned out daily, and they start taking care of their craftsman so that pride in workmanship can return to the factory floor in making these iconic designs sans finish issues, etc...but I will keep buying them as I find a better instrument, or a deal, etc. They just work for me and they don't have to be perfect cosmetically.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I've seen a lot of clownbursts, and owned one myself for a loooooong time ... I didn't realize Gibson made clownie acoustics. That thing is just ... phew. The fade's about as smooth as gargling broken glass.

[Thumpalumpacus]

[...] I'm of the opinion that it's purely a status thing - there are a multitude of guitars out there that sound better and are made with more care than the current Gibson offerings but if you show up at a jam or gig with some lowly brand (which happens to be a dynamite instrument), you don't get the 'ooohs and aaahs' from the other players that you would with an L-5 or JS or whatever.

Of course it's status. That's the reason Gibson charges hand-made prices for CNC instruments.

As an aside to your last point, I used to gig an 89 Epiphone SG, small open-book headstock, and during breaks between sets would often get compliments on how my "Gibson" sounded. Not being a brandboi, I'd tell 'em "it's an Epi" ... and you could watch their faces deflate in real-time.

So as for the point, if Gibson did start shipping guitars that shouldn’t have been shipped in the 70s, what caused that change? Higher output with less scrutinization at various points of the production process?

I get your point about the older dogs having been weeded-out, and it's fair. But another thing is that the "2nd" program got killed. They used to sell Gibbys with cosmetic flaws with a "2" stamped under the SN, at cut-rate. I don't have an argument with that program, in principle or practice -- it gets Gibsons in the hands of those who want one but cannot afford perfection. But I think what happened is that rather than simply cutting them up, those sorts of guitars are still being shipped out the door without having the "2" -- or the discount -- being applied. This is only a guess and I'm sure amenable to correction from members more knowledgeable than I am.

[Cicero]

Guitars are a matter of taste, but I just bought a 2002 James Hutchins Wes Montgomery L5 foor 5000,- and was cleaning it yesterday after playing it a long time and the chrome and-or nickel from the madailion in the tailpiece just wiped RIGHT off.

Unacceptable for any guitar in this price range imo.

[Hammertone]

Guitars are a matter of taste, but I just bought a 2002 James Hutchins Wes Montgomery L5 foor 5000,- and was cleaning it yesterday after playing it a long time and the chrome and-or nickel from the madailion in the tailpiece just wiped RIGHT off. Unacceptable for any guitar in this price range imo.

Silver-plated.
Neat trick! What kind of cleaning product/cloth were you using?
I'd love try it on some items from whch I want to remove the silver plating.

[rpguitar]

...2002...and was cleaning it yesterday...just wiped RIGHT off.

So it lasted 16 years and then this happened. Definitely Gibson's fault!

[grahambop]

The volume and tone pots on my 1976 ES-175 sound as good as new, whereas those on my 1978 Ibanez Artist solid have degraded to the point where I can hardly get a sound out of it (I have bought replacement pots, just haven't got round to installing them yet).

So Gibson got that right, at least.

[Stringswinger]

I don't post much and I missed the last explosion...
I am a professional Jazz musician with a degree in music. I play 250+ Jazz gigs yearly. I don't make the kind of money that allows me to buy new Gibsons because CME has them on sale. I think many Gibsons are purchased by rich guys who always wanted a Gibson and will probably never really play well. As a result they wouldn't notice many of the REAL QC issues aside from the cosmetic finish flaws. The "Gibson" on the headstock literally is good enough.

That being said, I have owned Gibsons my whole life. They feel like home to me. The neck shape and radius of an ES-175 just feels good. Having played 1950s 175s, I think they sound great and feel great as far as resonance but my 2007 175 plays better and allows me to play things older 175s don't seem to. I play the best guitar I can afford and the 175 is an excellent platform for a great Jazz guitar sound. I completely rewired mine, got rid of the 300k pots, replaced them with 500k pots and a 1950s style wiring harness, as well as changing the value of the tone cap. I feel the pickups need to be matched to the particular guitar and I don't care for 57 classics in this guitar. I like the Benedetto A-6 because when I play the guitar acoustically and gradually turn up the amp, it sounds like the guitar...just louder. My guitar has some paint not scraped off the binding, the finish seems thick, and it is not as acoustically live as the old Gibsons...but the guitar is greatly resistant to feedback in the smaller stages I play on and allows me to pay with freedom in the moment and respond to the upright bassist and drummer without thinking about the instrument itself. I have made a TON of money with this guitar. I honestly have a difficult time relating to all of the complaints about binding paint not scraped (like mine) and other cosmetic issues. To me its not about the finish, etc...Its about feel and sound. If I had the guitars that get sent back by guys on here I would take it to gig and play the shit out of it. I don't own guitars to look at them admiringly or to "show off" the brand as has been suggested here (actually said outright). I make music and have found very few quality control issues that would get in the way of expressing myself on an instrument. It either feels good to me or not. And if it feels good, I have the frets worked on, change electronics, whatever to make it work. The old Gibsons are great. But they have aged out some and if you buy vintage you WILL have to have some work done. One thing I do know is if it is a 16" or 17" Gibson archtop, I generally will find it acceptable. I have played beautiful Benedettos and the necks don't feel right to me and the guitars sound a little too neutral for my taste. I want that Gibson "Thump". I also love the mid-century look to the Gibson models. They just do it for me. I hope the company recovers from the financial issues, quits focusing on numbers of guitars turned out daily, and they start taking care of their craftsman so that pride in workmanship can return to the factory floor in making these iconic designs sans finish issues, etc...but I will keep buying them as I find a better instrument, or a deal, etc. They just work for me and they don't have to be perfect cosmetically.

@jazzjames I play about 200 paid jazz gigs a year and have had other (more lucrative) careers in the past that have given me the financial freedom to be a guitar collector. I own 16 guitars including three genuine D'Angelicos and a vintage ES175. But my "number one" gigging guitar is a 1997 ES-175. She just sounds right, feels right and looks right. And feedback is never an issue. She was in mint condition when I got her, but after a thousand gigs or so, she has a few dings. And she is still my "number one". I have said it here before and will say it again (and your post reinforces my proclamation). All a jazz guitarist needs is a good ES-175.

[rpguitar]

In general, one will find the gamut on this forum (or any guitar forum!) from people who play multiple weekly professional gigs with one guitar and have no other income; to those who mostly look at their 30 guitars and are doctors, lawyers, and bankers.

Those are the extremes - but in between lies a huge range of other folks representing just about everything else in the continuum.

Best not to generalize too much, or even to draw definitive conclusions from what people write. Sometimes they just don't mention aspects of their lives because it's irrelevant unless someone is judging, and then it's to set the record straight, not to gloat.

(A good life lesson, actually.)

[jazzjames]

I wasn't out to offend. Guitars are different things to different people. To me it's a tool. Mine get beat up. I know a few guys who buy what they always wanted (I'll bet that is a cool feeling!) and it's perfect...but I liked the one they returned with the overspray better because it would cut through the bass player at the gig! That guy doesn't need the same thing I do. I would never tell them that and crush their dream! I just admire the instrument and talk it up. Anyway, not trying to offend.

[jazzjames]

@jazzjames I play about 200 paid jazz gigs a year and have had other (more lucrative) careers in the past that have given me the financial freedom to be a guitar collector. I own 16 guitars including three genuine D'Angelicos and a vintage ES175. But my "number one" gigging guitar is a 1997 ES-175. She just sounds right, feels right and looks right. And feedback is never an issue. She was in mint condition when I got her, but after a thousand gigs or so, she has a few dings. And she is still my "number one". I have said it here before and will say it again (and your post reinforces my proclamation). All a jazz guitarist needs is a good ES-175.

Man! A real D'Angelico! That must be great!

[rpguitar]

Anyway, not trying to offend.

Right on. Didn't think so! No worries.

Actually what you say is very true. I gig very occasionally but when I do, I can tell you that I do not notice that the high 'E' string requires a 1/4 turn of the polepiece to be perfectly balanced against the 'B', or whether the mineral streak in the back might be hiding a tiny crack, or even that the tone knob is vibrating slightly when I pluck an Ab.

Nope, I just notice those things the other 95% of the time when I'm playing in silence to an audience of myself. Hopefully I sort them out so that when the gig happens, I am free to worry only about the notes!

And I will also admit that in those situations, it becomes a pain to decide which of my guitars to bring. It would be better to have "the" jazz guitar, "the" rock guitar, "the" acoustic, etc. - and frankly I do, but it's taken a long time to reconcile with that.

[ThatRhythmMan]

Some of us are doctors, lawyers, and bankers, and still gig multiple days/week.

I’m not gigging much at the present, but at times I’ve also played 3-4 professional, paying gigs per week.

[Hammertone]

The only thing that really matters is that your guitar be green.
Metallic green is good.
Cadillac Green is best.
Yes...Cadillac Green...
You NEED a 17" laminated archtop w/ 2/75" rims, in Cadillac Green....
With the kind of quality control that only Terada can give you...

[ptchristopher3]

The only thing that really matters is that your guitar be green.
Metallic green is good.
Cadillac Green is best.
Yes...Cadillac Green...
You NEED a 17" laminated archtop w/ 2/75" rims, in Cadillac Green....
With the kind of quality control that only Terada can give you...

Wait!!!!! Even better - a pressed spruce top and maybe even a Bigsby!!

Oh yeah.

[Hammertone]

Wait!!!!! Even better - a pressed spruce top and maybe even a Bigsby!!
Oh yeah.

Now we're talking! Oh, yeah, indeed. And gold plated parts would look fabbo on such an instrument, doncha think? But where could one possibly find such a noble instrument, priced reasonably? Hmmm......

[jazzjames]

The only thing that really matters is that your guitar be green.
Metallic green is good.
Cadillac Green is best.
Yes...Cadillac Green...
You NEED a 17" laminated archtop w/ 2/75" rims, in Cadillac Green....
With the kind of quality control that only Terada can give you...

[vinnyv1k]

That L5 Studio would be a huge hit in the right color.

[ptchristopher3]

Now we're talking! Oh, yeah, indeed. And gold plated parts would look fabbo on such an instrument, doncha think? But where could one possibly find such a noble instrument, priced reasonably? Hmmm......

Possibly to the north, and also for sale here?

I hear that northern tier people have mostly taken a few too many hockey pucks to the head in their youth and this compels them to sell guitars.

And is it true that you are all named Gordon MacGordongordon up there?

[2bornot2bop]

That L5 Studio would be a huge hit in the right color.

Nice to see they finally got the Studio tailpiece right!

[Hammertone]

Chris: We're all named Bob AND Doug Mackenzie, please...
jazzjames: I see what you did there....

[Cicero]

...2002...and was cleaning it yesterday...just wiped RIGHT off.



So it lasted 16 years and then this happened. Definitely Gibson's fault!

Yes, I must have been imagining the whole thing, pardon me.