What’s Going On Now at Gibson?

[christianm77]

Yeah it’s changed though. Back in the day your options for jazz were pretty much an L5 or a 175. And there were two schools of players based on that....

Now, you have loads of cool options.

Love my 175 though. But it’s an old one.

[Stringswinger]

Lol, well I took that risk, good to hear from you.

And OK, I can't really see the small picture in your avatar, and am fully cognizant that a person's avatar means nothing to anyone, but them.

So you're an ES-175 owner and fan? Great.

Yes I already know that I'm entitled to my opinion about them being relatively homely, and am comfortable with that. Now you may think they look like heaven, but I never implied that makes your opinion stink.

On the working man stuff, I'm just a working man too. There are other gigging musicians, some on this very forum, who don't play that axe, and prefer 17-inch carved tops, so let's not pretend it's not a preference by throwing in deflections about people being "well off' and such. It's simply your choice and you like it.

It's not necessarily the fiduciary duty of Gibson to specifically make ES-175s, as such. Time will tell, the market will speak, and they will decide.

As I am not a shareholder in the Gibson corporation, I won't be filing a derivative action against them any time soon to test whether they are breaching their fiduciary duty.

I never implied that your opinion "stinks", but when you make a statement of fact (without qualifying it as an opinion) that can be insulting to some on a (mostly) friendly forum, it does have a "whiff" of unpleasantness to it.

Being somewhat "well off" myself (I own 2 L-5's a Super 400 and three genuine D'Angelicos), I understand the many reasons a player might prefer the carved archtops over the 175. And there will be others who might prefer the Tal Farlow with it's longer scale and larger body as their laminate guitar of choice. But there are top players today (Jonathan Kreisberg and David Reinhardt come to mind) along with the legends of the past (Joe Pass, Jim Hall and Herb Ellis) who prefer the 175 as their main gigging axe. Denigrating such a guitar , from my perspective, serves no useful purpose. YMMV

[va3ux]

Maybe so, but Gibson is a company that was founded upon, and made a success by archtop guitars. Those who do not honor and build on their past may not have a rewarding future.

The 40's and 50's are gone. Archtops may have been a profitable business back then but not anymore. Those who stick with their past may not have a future at all.

[Jazzstdnt]

The 40's and 50's are gone. Archtops may have been a profitable business back then but not anymore. Those who stick with their past may not have a future at all.

Oh. Because you say? Who are you to say?

Show us the model income statement that you're assuming, then name the luthiers one at a time, that it applies to.

[dlew919]

It is looking a lot like Levi-Strauss...Stick to your button-fly 501s.

See, we're starting to miss Henry J. now, aren't we?

No. Lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Spook410]

Oh. Because you say? Who are you to say?

Show us the model income statement that you're assuming, then name the luthiers one at a time, that it applies to.

The poster saying that US labor intensive archtops at the factory level are likely an inefficient application of capital which greatly diminishes the probability of broad pursuit was expressing an opinion. One I happen to agree with. It's not an analysis nor an executable business plan reflecting specific ROI's in a given market. Everyone reading this thread knows this as it is all opinion. We share these amicably (for the most part) among ourselves and enjoy seeing other points of view. Especially since some on this thread have manufactured guitars, some are nationally known jazz performers, and some are experts in the field and actually get input from the primaries from time to time. And pretty much everyone has a keen interest in musical gear, pays attention, is quite bright and they are all reasonably astute observers.

And you need to chill a bit.

[Jazzstdnt]

The poster saying that US labor intensive archtops at the factory level is likely an inefficient application of capital.

No. The fact is that he did not say that.

[jads57]

Well the good news is there are plenty of used Gibson Archtops for all of us.And with the plethora of luthiers no need to worry about Gibson's decision to abandon Archtops for the time being.

[Stringswinger]

Well the good news is there are plenty of used Gibson Archtops for all of us.And with the plethora of luthiers no need to worry about Gibson's decision to abandon Archtops for the time being.

The even better news is that Gibson has not fully abandoned archtops.

[dlew919]

Without weighing in on any arguments, it seems to me that the guitar industry is at an interesting crossroads.

The music industry likes innovation. Audiences tend to like innovation.

Guitarists like the Les Paul, developed in 1954? The Stratocaster, developed in 1957 and the telecaster developed in 1952. And the arch tops, developed in the 1940s. Acoustic guitars. Various other designs, but nothing since when? 1990?

What major innovations have happened to the guitar in the last 10 years? Carbon fibre? Elixir strings? (There May be something that I’ve forgotten or am unaware).



Gibson will survive in some form. It always does.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[christianm77]

I think Jazzstdnt was objecting to the idea that the 40s and 50s are in the past.

[Average Joe]

Innovation is creeping into the guitar world. It's just slow in general and even slower in reaching the jazz world. Fanned frets, 7 strings, headless designs, etc. are making some headway in the metal world, and synthetic wood-alternatives are seeping into mainstream guitarmaking.

Whether they use the range of techniques or not, it's worth noting that players growing up today are growing up in a post Van Halen, Steve Vai, Abasi, Holdsworth, etc world. The range of techniques that younger players are likely to consider within the natural language of guitardom is well beyond what an archtop with flatwounds can accomodate.
As much as I love the sound of say an ES-175, a lot has happend in the world of guitars and guitar music since their heyday. At this point I think they are a niche product. A niche I love, but still.

[lawson-stone]

Innovation in music has not usually meant something is left behind. The violin? How much change in the violin type instrument? The grand piano, or even the not-so-grand piano? Yes, keyboards have gone a long way, but people still love the traditional piano sound. Saxophone? Trumpet? Flute? Yes all have seen innovative applications and extensions, but the basic historic instruments themselves are still loved in their basic form.

Guitar is a kind of basic, primal form of instrument. The core reality of what guitars are and do will always have an appeal, I think. Innovative applications and extensions, yes. But I personally think there will always be an audience for the more centered, basic use of the instrument where the primary appeal is a compelling tone, solid composition, and virtuoso technique.

[Alter]

I agree. Classical guitar has been around for centuries, more or less the same, its evolution being construction techniques and technology advancement recently. The electric guitar is so new, it's still just in the beginning. Its a tricky thing, balancing wood, acoustic and electric properties, plus managing an ever changing music scene..

[Jazzstdnt]

I think Jazzstdnt was objecting to the idea that the 40s and 50s are in the past.

Said the Bird and Django fan to the McLaughlin fan, hehe.But seriously, if archtops aren't profitable then what are all those successful luthiers doing? (you know, like the ones at the festival in the Denver area 10 days ago) There are Apple and Exxon/Mobil profits, and then there are small business profits. Who makes more? Monteleone and Benedetto, or your friendly neighborhood guitar teacher?

[Tatayoyo]

I just found they've issued "modern archtops", small body, carved wood.Someone tried this ?

[christianm77]

Said the Bird and Django fan to the McLaughlin fan, hehe.But seriously, if archtops aren't profitable then what are all those successful luthiers doing? (you know, like the ones at the festival in the Denver area 10 days ago) There are Apple and Exxon/Mobil profits, and then there are small business profits. Who makes more? Monteleone and Benedetto, or your friendly neighborhood guitar teacher?

Hey I like modern music too, my tastes go into the far future of the year 1974.

If I would hazard at how much actual luthiers make I would not imagine it to be terribly lucrative, more a labour of love. Owning and running a guitar company while delegating a lot of, or all of the actual making might turn out to be more so...

But that is somewhat beside the point, we are talking about the market for archtops, which is tiny compared to other types of guitar, very specialist. And I do think largely player-led.

I didn’t find people to be very enthusiastic about new Gibson archtops when they were making them. The brand has kind of become unfashionable. No one really seems to give much of a stuff that they've stopped making them, which is a shame.

Most actual jazz guitarists would buy them used anyway, and in fact would be quite stupid not to. The guitars themselves were no doubt fine instruments - I think most of the criticism directed at Gibson's instruments were generally directed at the mass market solid bodies.

That said, I didn't find any of the Gibson archtops I've tried rock my world as much as the old ones. I liked them well enough. I just miss resonance. But some people prefer heavier guitars.

I might be talking bollocks here as well, but it always seemed like the archtops were built by specialist luthiers who might well move on from Gibson to start up under their own name anyway? So the archtop operation always seemed like it was a separate, small luthiership building guitars under the Gibson brand? Correct me if I'm wrong....

[Jazzstdnt]

Hey I like modern music too, my tastes go into the far future of the year 1974. If I would hazard at how much actual luthiers make I would not imagine it to be terribly lucrative, more a labour of love. Owning and running a guitar company while delegating a lot of, or all of the actual making might turn out to be more so...But that is somewhat beside the point, we are talking about the market for archtops, which is tiny compared to other types of guitar, very specialist. And I do think largely player-led. I didn’t find people to be very enthusiastic about new Gibson archtops when they were making them. The brand has kind of become unfashionable. No one really seems to give much of a stuff that they've stopped making them, which is a shame. Most actual jazz guitarists would buy them used anyway, and in fact would be quite stupid not to. The guitars themselves were no doubt fine instruments - I think most of the criticism directed at Gibson's instruments were generally directed at the mass market solid bodies.That said, I didn't find any of the Gibson archtops I've tried rock my world as much as the old ones. I liked them well enough. I just miss resonance. But some people prefer heavier guitars. I might be talking bollocks here as well, but it always seemed like the archtops were built by specialist luthiers who might well move on from Gibson to start up under their own name anyway? So the archtop operation always seemed like it was a separate, small luthiership building guitars under the Gibson brand? Correct me if I'm wrong....[/INDENT][/FONT][/COLOR]

What?!?!?!? They HAVEN'T stopped making them! Have you guys all forgotton how to read? (see post #72). And no, its not about Asian and the ES-175 etc., it's just about Gibson, and maybe their archtops - which they haven't stopped making - but people have IMAGINED that they have. Some fundamentals for you: If you make archtop guitars "every day" like Gibson is doing, and sell them for a price that exceeds their total cost, then you have a profit. How much profit depends on how many you sell. The more the better, obviously. So, will archtops be the sales leader for Gibson? Nope. They never were and never will be. Seems about right. Finally, WHO they sell them to is important, but not as important as selling them, period.

[christianm77]

ah that's weird can't seem to quote comments.

The number of punctuation points indicates a level of emotional involvement I hadn't reached. OK then. Shows you how much I care TBH... Which itself tells a story.

Beyond that I'm not entirely sure what relevance anything you typed has to my comment.

I just don't think there's a huge market for new Gibson archtops full stop, but maybe I'm wrong. I mean there's one or two people on the forum who probably account for a healthy percentage of their annual archtop production haha. (I jest, please don't take this seriously, I can't take too many more exclamation points.) But short of any actual figures, who cares?

[Tal_175]

If the ES-175 is the issue for many, and it is a "plywood guitar", then what would be the problem with Gibson manufacturing them at their factory in Qingdao in China, which manufactures Epiphone guitars. Reports seem good for the Epiphones and the 175 is not a "high end archtop" requiring skilled luthiers all the way through. Make 'em in the white in China, ship them back to USA for finishing. Works for Eastman.I will now duck and head for the shelter!

Does manufacturing Les Paul's or SG's require more skilled luthiers all the way through than ES 175's?

[DMgolf66]

Did ANYONE read my post? Geesh

[DMgolf66]

I've become friendly with someone on the Product Development & MFG side at Gibson and he said a few things of interest.they are absolutely making Archtops. Every day. Using original templates and carving machines, etc. And are in the process of relaunching a lot of products so the visibility isn’t great right now. Said can order anything through a Gibson dealer. they build to order and have a big backlog so it does take some time but rarely would would they have available inventory of Archtops.The ES-175 didn't have great sales numbers as a core model. Mentioned the used demand curve. And that it took up a lot of opportunity cost as well. it's acustom-order for now, but that could change.I think most of this known, but the mention of the opportunity cost by Stringswinger sparked my memory of the conversation.

Refresher. Fyi, The pic of the Super 400 was taken that day from the factory,

[Tal_175]

I've become friendly with someone on the Product Development & MFG side at Gibson and he said a few things of interest.they are absolutely making Archtops. Every day. Using original templates and carving machines, etc. And are in the process of relaunching a lot of products so the visibility isn’t great right now. Said can order anything through a Gibson dealer. they build to order and have a big backlog so it does take some time but rarely would would they have available inventory of Archtops.The ES-175 didn't have great sales numbers as a core model. Mentioned the used demand curve. And that it took up a lot of opportunity cost as well. it's acustom-order for now, but that could change.I think most of this known, but the mention of the opportunity cost by Stringswinger sparked my memory of the conversation.

Does Gibson officially advertise anywhere on their website that they make any of their past models as custom orders? Will they make an ES 150 if I ordered or an ES 336? Is there is list of Gibson models that they make as custom shop orders? Also I used to be a Zamboni driver on the weekends when I was a university student . If someone called me up and asked me to drive the Zamboni for a day, I'd do it for 3000 dollars. It doesn't mean I'm still a Zamboni driver. Naturally, I don't advertise it.

[Jazzstdnt]

No, and they never did. Gibson is a company that sales their guitars B2B. Their dealers are listed on the site, as they have been for years. If one really wishes to find out - as opposed to tire kick - one should call Wildwood Guitars. Ask for Troy.

[va3ux]

No. The fact is that he did not say that.

That is what I was saying.

I've read some of your other posts; have you been taking your medication ?