-
Vinny
Like isn't right. I am disappointed that Gibson is not building archtops.
I am intrigued by the post.
GT
-
12-21-2021 05:45 PM
-
I would have thought Gibsons biggest problem is not opening up a Mexican or Oriental manufacturing base, like Fender and nearly all other makers do.
Gibson think it would dilute the brand but you would have though poor quality control and robotic tuners, have done a good job of that.
How can so many companies rise up without a name and yet Gibson can't seem to get it together whilst having the biggest and most prestigious name in the business. Mind boggling really.
-
Depends on your doctor or lawyer I guess...
Originally Posted by furtom
This doctor could have bought a brand new Gibson archtop at recent prices, if I put off home maintenance and stuff like that, but instead got about 10 used ones (a couple of them Gibsons) over the years, which has been a lot of fun, as well as more cost effective.
I think Gibson kind of shot themselves in the foot with their long-term strategy. They did offer an Asian-made product, which was under the Epiphone brand. Some of them even had the same model names as popular Gibsons. Unfortunately, Epiphone never got the respect that the Gibson name got, and they were undercut by the many foreign factories putting out reasonably quality products--Ibanez, Gretsch, D'Angelico, etc., which didn't have the stigma of being "bargain brand." Even though some of them were made in the exact same factories... Originally Posted by ArchtopHeaven
OTOH, Gibson USA has kind of priced itself out of the archtop market, IMO, as the interest in their boutique and collector's products has waned, and luthiers and other manufacturers both here and abroad are able to offer competitive products at better prices. Similar to what has happened to Harley Davidson, in a way, as they became a "lifestyle" product.
I can't gauge the sincerity or lack thereof of the pledges to bring back archtops, but until there are actual archtops on the shelves and on their website for sale, it must be regarded skeptically.
-
The Japanese made Epiphone Elitist Byrdland and Broadway was extremely successful till Gibson saw it hit their big dollar L5 and Byrdland market. They discontinued those models quickly.
Though the archtop market is small it is still profitable.
With today's machining, plek machines, etc. not a huge amount of hand crafting is needed for a big company to build archtops and make a substantial profit.
Laminate archtops take very little hand work to produce.
2014 Gibson built a huge amount of archtops. In fact it was one of the most built in a year and they all sold. 2015 started the big decline as they were in deep financial trouble. They also started the big price increases with 175's costing more than $5k.
I believe their is still a serious market for Gibson archtops but most players just don't have deep enough pockets. The demand is there just not the affordability.
Gibson has forgot that the archtop guitar is what made the company famous long before the Les Paul.
-
Gibson hasn’t really cared about their Archtops due to expense and bang for their buck. Les Paul is the bread and butter for them and has been for some time due to the trends in music.
We are really lucky there are a plethora of small luthiers available like Mark Campellone ,etc to build us a Gibson replica that’s equal to if not better. And at reasonable prices to boot.
-
You know, in the back of my mind when I was posting that, I thought I should ease up a little, but it's a subject that gets my blood boiling. Originally Posted by Doctor Jeff
I did not mean to imply that anyone who buys a Gibson, doctor, lawyer or whoever, isn't a good musician, although I'm sure it's true in many cases.
I just very much lament that I can't buy the guitars I want!
I'm sorry.
-
I'm actually not sure that Gibson is capable of manufacturing an archtop that is the equal of a Campellone. Especially as regards fit and finish, Mark's guitars really are flawless. Gibson has difficulty turning out LP's without flaws, much less arch tops. I would love to be proven wrong about that. Originally Posted by jads57
Sometimes I wonder if the institutional memory that resided in Kalamazoo was lost during the move.
-
Watch em put Bigsbys on 'em.
-
(All of this is based on a hunch and my own bias). Originally Posted by Lobomov
I'm going on the fact that they were bankrupt only some years ago and seem to be going through another reorganisation.
Young ppl seem to have a lot of money but their generation is 1/2 or a 3rd the size of the Boomer generation. To top it off, there's likely more cool factor in getting something by the frank brothers, or some obscure builder making noise on Instagram.
New Jazz players who reject the traditional Jazz guitar, become more prevalent, essentially cutting off Gibsons cache of historically patented Archtops. The boomer generation is hoovering up Gibsons and historical Archtops at a rate likely never before; the Gibson VOS being typical fan service, but I think even they're getting to saturation.
Still you likely could have said all of this in the 70's when the Japanese came along. Gibson can't die but they're having a tough time working out the future, since their plans for the future seem based on the past.
Funny how their best adverts for Jazz guitars are now 70 years old and didn't cost them a thing (YouTube video of jazz greats playing their Gibsons).Last edited by Archie; 12-21-2021 at 09:24 PM.
-
By not making archtop guitars for the last 4 years, Gibson has let the free market appreciate the price of Gibson archtops that are extant. When they get back in the game, the nightmarish prices that they will charge will not seem outlandish to many, as we are all being inured to some crazy prices for a Gibson archtop today.
Glad I bought my Gibson archtops back when I did. I feel the same way about my California real estate. I won't be buying any more of either in this lifetime it seems.
-
No problem. I don't take it personally. I'm in a field where one can make a good living, but not superrich. The official car of my specialty (ID) is a Subaru Outback. It's the plastic surgeons and CV surgeons that drive the Austins and Lambos and can buy any guitar they want without looking at the price tag. Originally Posted by furtom
Truth to tell if it weren't for my unfortunate divorce awhile back, I could afford a very good decent archtop on a monthly basis! But that's another story.
I agree about the house and also cars...bought 2 this year just before the current supply crisis and price insanity hit. Originally Posted by Stringswinger
I don't think Gibson can easily get back into the game. There are too many competitors these days, and I just don't think the market is broad enough to accommodate them. I agree that the market is probably fairly saturated at this point.
BTW, what kind of car do lawyers drive? My fiancee's 2 kids are in law school, and I need to know this. Of course, her daughter wants to become a public defender in a small town in western NE, so I'm thinking a well-used Nissan Altima might be her future for awhile.
-
Can't say about lawyers cars. I am long retired from that gig and don't hang out with any lawyers. With the exception of big firm partners, I don't think lawyers do all that well these days, especially for a gig that requires 7 years of post high school education. Originally Posted by Doctor Jeff
-
As to Gibson, y’all have to accept it’s no longer a guitar company. Seriously.
Its a KKR investment vehicle. Told ya before I worked along side KKR for a year on their sale of a company (Our group was trying hard to keep it afloat, or in the air actually.) This is all documented in a book I can’t remember lol.
JC, the craftsman, even the CNC machine))) mean nothing. WE mean nothing.
Somewhere is a covenant document with specific profit (or loss, that’s got value too) and some day it will be triggered and poof. The Chinese own it. Or maybe Elon Musk lol. Or, ‘assets disposed to maximize investor return’.
They will not move on arch tops until some obscenely paid marketing consultants say… OK it’s time, do xyz. They will not care what we want, they will market and sell what they think we want. Like a 10,000$ Chuck Berry ES. The guy in the banjo meetings is cute. I bet he has no idea there’s a brick with his name on it ready to convince him his product direction was ‘adjusted to meet the needs of our corporate sponsors’.
If you have not had your morals besmirched in high level corporate venture finance as I did its Hard to relate just how cold, exact and frankly immoral those bastards can be. Kill or be killed. I walked out and lost a shit ton of $ once I realized what was coming down. But I can look back and feel I did right. Maybe not, I’d have a bunch more guitars. Porsche not Mazda. And a nice big Johannus 4-manual organ in my house.
Oh, we make guitars? Huh, didn’t know that.
-
Wow. I thought I was pissed....
-
A lot of pvt and institutional investors are on the scene. A lot of older Gen X and Boomers with money to put into something. Better than a bank giving you 1% with 4% inflation. Originally Posted by Lobomov
I've sold to some real collectors (compared to me). They never touch or even have the guitar on display.
Sad really.Last edited by Archie; 12-22-2021 at 06:26 PM.
-
I do believe Gibson is more than capable of making a great Archtop. The last ones made under Phillip Wharton were some of the best Gibsons I ever played. But the price was pretty absurd!
That said Mark Campellone is as good if not better than almost any Gibson I ever played vintage or new. So it’s a no brainer to go that route. There are also other great alternatives so not too get worried.
-
The trick is to want the guitars you can buy. Saves a lot of lamentation (and a few bucks). Originally Posted by furtom
-
Working on it. Originally Posted by John A.
-
Quite a few Originally Posted by John A.
-
What?! You found a Bank that’s paying 1% interest?! I’d really like to know the name of that institution. Originally Posted by ArchtopHeaven
-
Quality build/quality components/quality sound equal a "fair" price for any luthier-built musical instrument. If Gibson can fulfill those elements in a new archtop model, why would $7500. -10,000. be an unfair price? My 1972 Selmer Mark VI tenor saxophone is worth $7,500. plus in the used market. It was the choice of almost every professional saxer then and today. A used L5 brings $7500- $10K. People are used to cheap prices for guitars since they are the one instrument that has been universally played by "hackers" and "bedroom artists." A professional wants to play a quality instrument and is willing to pay for it. Your average "guitar banger" is a different story. Build a quality instrument and it will sell. The fact that not everyone can afford it has nothing to do with the price of cheese in Boston. God, I love Capitalism.
Marinero
-
I feel like I should say again that the $10,000 Chuck Berry guitar was the nicest guitar I'd ever played. It was perfect in every way.
If the new archtops are half as good as that one we should all be thankful.
-
I am very grateful this forum clued me into that CME Gibson blow out a couple of years ago. Wouldn’t have a 175 without it.
-
It was with a great sense of relief that I finally sold my legacy KKR holdings, and thus my financial ties to Gibson, whose products I have used for decades. Their (KKR) tax-time shenanigans were pure BS. A huge amount of paperwork, always late, and a pitiful, nay, insulting, ROI. I saved money, time and endless grief. Our tax lady was grateful. I sleep better. And all my old, used Gibsons are now "vintage!" The apparent transformation of Gibson from a national cultural treasure into a "Lifestyle" gimmick is just pitiful. IMO. Originally Posted by jazzkritter
As to Gibson, y’all have to accept it’s no longer a guitar company. Seriously.
Its a KKR investment vehicle. Told ya before I worked along side KKR for a year on their sale of a company (Our group was trying hard to keep it afloat, or in the air actually.) This is all documented in a book I can’t remember lol.
JC, the craftsman, even the CNC machine))) mean nothing. WE mean nothing.
Somewhere is a covenant document with specific profit (or loss, that’s got value too) and some day it will be triggered and poof. The Chinese own it. Or maybe Elon Musk lol. Or, ‘assets disposed to maximize investor return’.
They will not move on arch tops until some obscenely paid marketing consultants say… OK it’s time, do xyz. They will not care what we want, they will market and sell what they think we want. Like a 10,000$ Chuck Berry ES. The guy in the banjo meetings is cute. I bet he has no idea there’s a brick with his name on it ready to convince him his product direction was ‘adjusted to meet the needs of our corporate sponsors’.
If you have not had your morals besmirched in high level corporate venture finance as I did its Hard to relate just how cold, exact and frankly immoral those bastards can be. Kill or be killed. I walked out and lost a shit ton of $ once I realized what was coming down. But I can look back and feel I did right. Maybe not, I’d have a bunch more guitars. Porsche not Mazda. And a nice big Johannus 4-manual organ in my house.
Oh, we make guitars? Huh, didn’t know that.
-
You can buy a brand new Les Paul Studio for $1600. And having one, I can say that they are great guitars that are well worth the money. You can buy an affordable Gibson that sounds great for jazz, but it won't have F holes.
When I started playing jazz guitar, a new 175 cost $550. In today's dollars, that should be about $5000. People who are used to buying guitars made in countries where labor and the environment are not treated properly would bitch about that 5K 175 if it were available today.
And that is why that new 175 is not available.
Reply With Quote
Knaggs Chena A
Today, 06:19 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos