-
I noticed some changes to the much maligned Heritage headstock in some Instagram posts they made of their new Custom Core 150 line. They dropped the "The" and it looks a lot cleaner. Given the changes in branding that the new ownership has made, I'm wondering if this will be implemented on all their models sometime in the future? Since the film 'The Social Network' came out, everytime I see their headstock I think of the scene where Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake) says the company should just be called Facebook.
-
01-01-2021 05:40 PM
-
"The" remains on the headstock of vast majority of Heritage's models for sale as well as those seen on their own website. I've only seen the pictured version a couple of times on custom orders (as an up-charge option) and it always included the optional double-arrow inlay as shown in the photo above.
I recently purchased a custom Heritage H-137 direct from the factory and the headstock read "The Heritage" on it.
-
There was something somewhere where Heritage was asking about
A symbol H with a Circle I think ONLY .
I called them and said hell yeah and put historical info or HERITAGE on the BACK of the Headstock...
AND SHORTEN the Headstock - you will sell twice as many Guitars.
I know 'Branding ' I wrote and produced Jingles in the 1970's .
I said keep the same shape ...use the H symbol on the front BUT shorten the shape ( snake thing ).
It was a younger guy - he said he'd mention it ...but did not think they would - and they didn't.
-
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion. Personally I don’t see anything wrong with the Heritage headstock shape, or the “The Heritage” label. Yes I do own a “The Heritage” Golden Eagle. And would buy another Heritage in the future. I would hate to see them change it. They’re great guitars. Just my opinion.
-
Yes they make some great sounding Guitars ....but some people can't live with the headstocks ...more than a few.If a guitar sounds great or excellent I could live with it.
Last edited by Robertkoa; 01-09-2021 at 11:51 AM.
-
I’d also offer that there are more than a few that do like them. If it was that much of a problem they would change it. Apparently it’s not. Especially since the have relatively new owners.
Originally Posted by Robertkoa
-
I like "The"
The "Heritage" only headstock looks like something from China sold in a small music store.
I used to work at a music store that sold guitars with random English words emblazoned on the headstock like "Kansas" "Arbor" and "Canvas."
-
I dunno, between The Loar and The Heritage it's only a matter of time before guitardom runs out of "The"s . Heaven forfend they resort to indefinite articles.
John
-
Who cares what the headstock looks like when one of these monstrosities will probably be clipped on it anyway...
Last edited by BickertRules; 01-08-2021 at 11:24 PM.
-
-
It’s always awkward telling people I have “a The Loar” archtop. They say “a what? a Thelour?”, like “Velour”? Originally Posted by John A.
-
Sorry, but I couldn’t help myself, honestly ,really just kidding . Do you have a problem with saying “The Beatles” ?
-
I really like the "The" on Loar, because it is named after the great guy. However this is not the case in case of Heritage, so I think it is more appropriate to leave the self promoting "The". I am not talking about quality, just a feeling about naming conventions.
-
But would you ever say. "I was just listening to a The Beatles record." Originally Posted by fasteddie
-
I like "The..."
But I don't know about "The Fender." (But I think "The Guild" actually makes more sense than the others.)Last edited by Woody Sound; 01-09-2021 at 05:37 PM.
-
This Heritage headstock discussion never grows old, it started old.
The original owners chose the neck angle at 17 degrees with a straight pull to the tuners. The wanted the headstock to be light. That determined much of the headstock shape. These considerations were for functional reasons.
Like Gibsons, Heritages are prone to headstock breaks. They could have gone Norlin to protect the necks but didn't. I would have seriously considered it or a scarf joint. Likely the Heritage owners decided against it because it costs extra and there was a bias against volutes from the earlier Gibson days.
The neck and headstock decisions were discussed and decided on. Guitars were then produced. Some guitarists didn't like the design of the headstock. For years Heritage would let the buyer design his own headstock and Heritage would build that. Some did just that.
I am aware of some heated discussions at Heritage in the late 1980s about changing the headstock design. The original owners held firm that their design was better for the function of the instrument. To be candid, they believed that anyone who cared more about the shape of the headstock than the function of it was not from their world. These were not corporate executives scheming to make more profit. These were salt of the earth guys who began working at Gibson to get an indoor factory job and who excelled in their craft.
Most of us care about the aesthetics of a guitar. Certainly Heritage put a lot of effort on outstanding woods and finishes. Over time, the Heritage headstock doesn't get a second thought from me, no more that my other guitar brands. Gibson is my favorite, probably because I saw it all the time growing up. Fender would be the ugliest to me most likely if I didn't grow up with their headstock.
So the new Heritage headstock shown above doesn't have the straight string pull and is heavier. That's a concession to those who place appearance to be a higher priority. I'm all for choice.
Note these other headstocks. They also were designed to be lighter with a straight string path.
This one has a straight string course but extends the headstock length, which could favor a neck dive.
The point of this post is that these newer designs (newer that 1900) address the fact that guitarists bend strings a lot more and should favor a straight string line to the tuner to maintain a proper pitch.
Change is hard. There were those who thought that putting pots on the guitar top was horrifying. But there's no point in rehashing the argument about a 35 year old headstock design.
-
The Heritage
Seems almost by definition the name shouldn't be changed. It was a great story and for me they are the real Gibson. I would buy The Heritage and not Gibson, if I was ever willing to pay that much for a guitar. Probably short of winning the lottery that will never happen.Last edited by fep; 01-09-2021 at 03:02 PM.
-
In the 1970's a guy I knew in a big regional Pop / Rock band who bought this incredible instrument called a Mandocello - a longer scaled Mandolin you might say , it had incredible resonance and tone - it was about 50+ years old .He used it in some Rock Tunes on stage a la Jimmy Page ....
It said 'The Gibson ' on the headstock but was not the only one.
I tried to find the small 'notice' or 'announcement ' where Heritage was soliciting opinions and not saying they were going to change anything - but they wanted opinions on the possible new Logo - I could not find any evidence of it at all.
I think it was sort of like the script H they use but simpler .
As I said earlier - I was inquiring about a longer scale H 125 with stoptail and they weren't doing those kind of custom things any more .
I had heard of people getting H135 longscales for reasonable amounts.
They could have had Heritage with the big H and the rest running vertically down between the tuners, kept the straight pull and shortened the Headstock.
If you look at used Heritages for sale a lot of the main photos crop the headstock off the picture .
The D'angelico Headstocks I think are worse but if something is an excellent tone machine - I wouldn't care.
Another problem no one has mentioned is if you are going to invite someone to tour ...'The Heritage ' factory -
you have to say ;
"Hey , do you want to go and get a tour of the 'The Heritage ' factory today?"Last edited by Robertkoa; 01-10-2021 at 01:30 PM.
-
I like it both ways. I wan t "The" on the headstock. I think it's kind of classy. But then when I talk about it, I leave the "the" off. "I have a Heritage" or "I play a Loar" but I still want "THE Heritage" and "THE Loar" on the headstock.
But then I'm weird.
-
I saw the headline as Heritage finally dropping the headstock. Was hopeful for a bit...Didn't last long.
-
I knew a guy who had one of those. Rugged, and reliable, a working man's LP at a more affordable price point. I wouldn't hesitate to play one on stage. Nice instrument! Originally Posted by BickertRules
-
yes i always liked those as well..particularly the one they are reissuing...the original walnut bodied one...they played nice Originally Posted by citizenk74
I knew a guy who had one of those. Rugged, and reliable, a working man's LP at a more affordable price point. I wouldn't hesitate to play one on stage. Nice instrument!
the great dave edmunds had one-
cheers
-
I mean, the "the" on the Heritage headstock was a nod the "the Gibson" logos of old, which IS their Heritage...so perhaps this is a way to distance themselves further.
-
What’s the big deal? If you want to distance yourself how’s about coming up with a new headstock design, or build a bleeping arch top for goodness sake!
-
"The" or not doesn't matter to me. To me, it's the mismatching aesthetics - like mixing Deco and Gothic.
The bound Heritage headstocks seem more of a match.
The PRS headstock on the Strat body looks odd to me as well.
Reply With Quote
2 new & excellent Jazz Comping Truefire...
Yesterday, 10:22 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions