-
Dennis D is correct--if you work waiting on people you learn to be much less aggressive with them. You don't miss much about their behavior, though.
-
10-14-2019 02:22 PM
-
Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
-
Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
DB
-
Originally Posted by DB's Jazz Guitar Blog
-
To each his own. I've owned countless 2 pu 175's and other archtops as well. My single pu 175 is the best I have ever owned. I have also owned 2 L5CES guitars that were great but heavy. My favorite guitar is my Wesmo's and I love a dark sound also which I can easily achieve with my tone knob and my Henriksen 312. I also don't like the cluttered look with all the knobs and toggle that I never use. I like simple. Nothing wrong with loving 2 or 1 pu archtops. No wrong choice just a personal one. Just like floaters. Some guys love them which is great. I like a set in humbucker. A archtop with Gibson on the headstock is most likely going to sound pretty darn good.
-
The best 175 type guitar I've played recently (I'm looking for a single pup 175 in Europe btw) is an acoustic 165 of second generation. All electronic was removed and it sounds better than my carved guitars. I hesitate to buy it and put a single Mccarty on it.Do someone know if it fils the 165 ?Sorry if I'm off-topic.
-
Lawson I checked into a single pu Tal Farlow. It was a $2k upcharge. Typical Gibson. I got lucky with the single pu 175. Only a $500.00 upcharge but well worth it being Crimson made instead of Memphis. Hutch or Culberson on the label is significant when it comes to fit and finish.
-
$2000 for not cutting holes for an extra pu, switch and knobs?
they should offer it @ a discount!
-
Originally Posted by wintermoon
Last edited by vinnyv1k; 10-14-2019 at 06:47 PM.
-
Here is something else that makes no sense with Gibson. The huge upcharge for natural finish. A sunburst finish is way more labor intensive and requires very skilled binding scrapers. Yes Gibson claims to use the finest figured woods for Blondes but I have some VSB's that have as nice or nicer figured wood than my Blondes. Currently for carved, a Blonde is a $2K upcharge. About 10 years ago I asked Culberson about this and he said when they do natural nothing in the booth can have any color only Blondes and they must make sure the booth is completely dust free. I still say VSB is way more work. Campellone would much rather do a Blonde then VSB I am sure and no upcharge.
-
When I learned that Gibson had halted production of the 175, I started looking for an alternative. I found this used Eastman 371 a few weeks ago for a fraction of the price of an Epiphone ES175. I am very happy with it.
-
Gibson has always had an upcharge for blonde.
When they started offering natural finishes in the late 30s a sunburst Super 400 was, $400, natural $410
In 1960 it was $650 sunburst, $675 for natural.
Of course that's a small amount compared to the 2K upcharge today.
One thing to consider is the fit of the neck to body joint has to be very clean on a blonde, not so much on sunburst.
-
Vinny,That's a great single-pu ES-175. They were always my favorite.
-
Originally Posted by grandstick01
Well I think the Epi listed for about $800, and was usually available for a bit less than that. If you got it for a fraction of that price, that would be a good deal indeed.
That is a sweet-looking guitar, by the way.
-
Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
Last edited by Jazzstdnt; 10-15-2019 at 12:52 AM.
-
Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
-
Originally Posted by wintermoon
Check out deleting anything on a Porsche, or check out their ' RS ' models...' delete factory a/c, power seats & windows, radio, ' - 400 # weight savings - - usually upcharge, or maybe close to even money............
..but hey, ' if ya gotta ask, maybe you're not a Porsche buyer '.....Last edited by Dennis D; 10-15-2019 at 09:50 AM.
-
Yeah, it may be a matter of these things being modifications to a "template" in a manufacturing line. Gibson has had a lot of models, and it seems to me (from a distance) that any "one-offs" are best conceived by them, at least price wise.
In that sense they aren't really "custom" or truly bespoke. (bespoke - "the man spoke, and the tailor listened").
There are luthiers who are true "custom" guitar makers, but we know the financial implications of that. (Just like with a custom tailor. )
-
And having gone through my employer's bankruptcy and reorganization, the new guys come in and basically say, among other things :
" Are we sure we know what our costs are ? "...." We probably know what our costs aren't, because if these old costs worked, then the previous owners wouldn't have gotten into trouble."
Just my two cents.....Last edited by Dennis D; 10-15-2019 at 01:36 PM.
-
Well the previous owner had a successful guitar business, but got into trouble with diversification of product lines. Henry wanted to diversify Gibson into a "lifestyle brand" with electronic gadgets. That where things went south.
The guitar division had annual sales of $1Billion. A guitar company should be able to make a go of things with that level of revenue, especially considering that some of it was/is built using Asian labor.
OTOH - that doesn't mean that the guitar business was optimized, few businesses are.
-
Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
Gibson guitar maker files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection
Here's the actual quote from the article regarding revenue from guitar sales.
"Gibson’s guitar business has actually been on the uptick, according to the bankruptcy filings, rising 10.5% from January 2017 — $110 million to $122 million during the same 12-month period."
MORE: In fact, according to the Washington Post, the entire guitar market worldwide for all manufacturers for 2017 was only $1.3 Billion
https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/wp-..._2017_full.jpgLast edited by Jim Soloway; 10-15-2019 at 02:08 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Jim Soloway
I would presume that the new owners/bankers either found the guitar division to be profitable, or think that it can be made profitable, otherwise we would have seen a Chapter 7 end to the Company. In today's global economy, manufacturing things in America is expensive. I suspect that the reluctant new owners of Gibson are wishing they had never funded Henry J.'s foolhardy expansion into industries that were beyond his competence.
-
Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
My Gosh Vinny spoken like a real pro...….A Sunburst finish is by far more complicated and the only reason to upcharge a blond is because you might pay more for it have better figured wood. In fact Bill Barker and Bill Hollenbeck sort of liked sunburst finishes because they allow the maker to put the final flourishing mark on the guitar. I have said this many times before than finishing a guitar in nitro is an art in-and-of-itself. Making and carving a guitar are one aspect but the finish is another animal indeed. Requires to me the most experience to pull it off well. Many attempts need to be done and practice to do a great nitro finish. Finishing it the one part of guitar repair that I can do but have not for awhile. I really could make a better mark if I would get at it again but I have enough work just doing other regular stuff.
Right now if I had a request for someone to have there guitar refinished and they wanted the guitar blond...……...I am all in that is pretty basic and straightforward. If you need me to match a sunburst for a 1955 Gibson L5...……...I would do it but I sure would need to go through a high re-learning curve to get a sunburst match. I also would lose money doing if for awhile given the time I would need to get up to speed. I tell you I like a nice sunburst now better than I did 25 years ago when blonds were the king.
Vinny your Gibson are fantastic my I am impressed in fact I believe I may be in the midst of a NGD. Going to pick one up tomorrow...…….
-
Originally Posted by deacon Mark
-
Originally Posted by Tal_175
Jam Session Journal (April 2024)
Today, 02:46 AM in From The Bandstand