PSA - Gibson To Revive Archtop (and Mandolin) Production

[vinnyv1k]

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.

I would pay the $5K……are you listening Gibson ?

[furtom]

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.

Nope. Way less.

If you head on over to the inflation calculator:
Inflation Calculator | Find US Dollar's Value from 1913-2021

You will see that $175 in 1949 is now $2,043.74.

5k for a laminate, even with a great Gibson neck, is not reasonable, IMO.

[Stringswinger]

Nope. Way less.

If you head on over to the inflation calculator:
Inflation Calculator | Find US Dollar's Value from 1913-2021

You will see that $175 in 1949 is now $2,043.74.

5k for a laminate, even with a great Gibson neck, is not reasonable, IMO.

First off, a two pickup guitar with humbuckers and an included hard shell case is not a good comparison with a one pickup guitar with a P-90 and no case. Secondly, inflation calculators do not tell the whole story. Things like technology have allowed mass production to bring the cost of some things way down (remember $4k 286 desktop computers?) while other things have risen quite a bit as the scarcity of materials has pushed up prices (homes are in this category as land has become scarce as well as building materials). Guitars are made of increasingly scarce materials (wood, alnico magnets etc.) and if you compare that 175 to a single family home or a gallon of gasoline, you will find my number more accurate than your inflation calculator.

[furtom]

Sorry man. Don't take it personally, but I don't buy it.

A great luthier can carve you a guitar for $5k or less. Those guys can make 2 or 3 guitars a month and that's a decent living if you are good.

This is a laminate and also has the economy of scale.

$5k is just getting what the market will bear. I don't blame Gibson for doing that. That's what companies should do. Make the most they can.

But you have to realize, they are capitalizing on the name. Good for them, but I won't pay it

[Stringswinger]

Sorry man. Don't take it personally, but I don't buy it.

A great luthier can carve you a guitar for $5k or less. Those guys can make 2 or 3 guitars a month and that's a decent living if you are good.

This is a laminate and also has the economy of scale.

$5k is just getting what the market will bear. I don't blame Gibson for doing that. That's what companies should do. Make the most they can.

But you have to realize, they are capitalizing on the name. Good for them, but I won't pay it

I do not take anything personally on an online forum.

You won't pay it and you won't play it. And that is exactly how a free market should work.

[furtom]

I do not take anything personally on an online forum. You won't pay it and you won't play it. And that is exactly how a free market should work.

Agreed.I suppose my point would be the collectors are skewing the free market, but there is nothing you or I can do about that!

[Alter]

Did the original post say something like they need till 2023 to train new people to make archtops?

[Doctor Jeff]

Sorry man. Don't take it personally, but I don't buy it.

A great luthier can carve you a guitar for $5k or less. Those guys can make 2 or 3 guitars a month and that's a decent living if you are good.

This is a laminate and also has the economy of scale.

$5k is just getting what the market will bear. I don't blame Gibson for doing that. That's what companies should do. Make the most they can.

But you have to realize, they are capitalizing on the name. Good for them, but I won't pay it

I agree with you. I bought a 175--Norlin era, 2 HB, mahogany--in 1980 and paid $800 for the guitar and case. That would be worth $2700 now due to inflation alone.

It is not materially more expensive to make a laminate guitar now than in 1980, in fact should be less expensive due to improvements in manufacturing. The fact that recent 175s were almost twice the price that I paid in 1980 is mainly due to the "collector's/luxury tax"--kind of like a Hermes handbag or something like that.

I don't blame Gibson either, but it's hard for me to justify spending that price.

Of course I did get a used 175 last year--very similar Norlin-era mahogany--and spent a bit less than the inflation-adjusted price I paid in 1980, so I'm happy. This should last me until the Alzheimer's takes over.

[Archie]

Nope. Way less.

If you head on over to the inflation calculator:
Inflation Calculator | Find US Dollar's Value from 1913-2021

You will see that $175 in 1949 is now $2,043.74.

5k for a laminate, even with a great Gibson neck, is not reasonable, IMO.

As far as I thought, the price of everything doubles in 15-20 years.

15 years:

1950 = $175
1965= $350
1980= $700
1995= $1400
2010= $2800
2025=. $5600

20 Years:

1950 = $175
1970 = $350
1990 = $700
2010= $1400
(2020 = $2100)
2030= $2800

If you split the difference between 15 years and 20 years you get $2600 (roughly). Divide that by 2 = $1300 + $2100 = $3400.

So you could argue the price based on the original and inflation is about $3400.

Btw I'm terrible at Maths so please go ahead and correct my workings where needed.

[Doctor Jeff]

As far as I thought, the price of everything doubles in 15-20 years.

15 years:

1950 = $175
1965= $350
1980= $700
1995= $1400
2010= $2800
2025=. $5600

20 Years:

1950 = $175
1970 = $350
1990 = $700
2010= $1400
(2020 = $2100)
2030= $2800

If you split the difference between 15 years and 20 years you get $2600 (roughly). Divide that by 2 = $1300 + $2100 = $3400.

So you could argue the price based on the original and inflation is about $3400.

Btw I'm terrible at Maths so please go ahead and correct my workings where needed.

That's why god invented sites on the internet like the inflation calculator LOL...

[John A.]

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.

"Fair" is in the eyes of the buyer. If people are happy with the value they get out of a $7500 L5 over a $5000 Campellone or $2500 Eastman, or of a $4000 (or more) ES 175 or 335 over similar guitars selling for half that (or sometimes a lot less), then good for them. But Gibson's prices for new instruments are benchmarked against the collector's market for their vintage instruments, not contemporary manufacturers. They're trading as much on perceived cachet of the name and its connection with the history of guitar music as they are on objective quality of the instruments. So it doesn't really make sense to compare their pricing to that of a low-production custom luthier. Also, it doesn't make sense to compare guitar prices to other instruments'. Very high quality, professional-level guitars of most styles can be made very inexpensively. It's the nature of the instruments and their susceptibility to mass production, not hacks' and amateurs' low expectations that drives this. Guitars are popular with hacks for host of musical/cultural reasons, but also because you can get a good one for a pretty painless amount of money, which is not the case with most other instruments.

[Marinero]

"Fair" is in the eyes of the buyer. If people are happy with the value they get out of a $7500 L5 over a $5000 Campellone or $2500 Eastman, or of a $4000 (or more) ES 175 or 335 over similar guitars selling for half that (or sometimes a lot less), then good for them. But Gibson's prices for new instruments are benchmarked against the collector's market for their vintage instruments, not contemporary manufacturers. They're trading as much on perceived cachet of the name and its connection with the history of guitar music as they are on objective quality of the instruments. So it doesn't really make sense to compare their pricing to that of a low-production custom luthier. Also, it doesn't make sense to compare guitar prices to other instruments'. Very high quality, professional-level guitars of most styles can be made very inexpensively. It's the nature of the instruments and their susceptibility to mass production, not hacks' and amateurs' low expectations that drives this. Guitars are popular with hacks for host of musical/cultural reasons, but also because you can get a good one for a pretty painless amount of money, which is not the case with most other instruments.

Well said, J,
That's how the "Free Market" works.
Marinero

[Donplaysguitar]

But Gibson's prices for new instruments are benchmarked against the collector's market for their vintage instruments, not contemporary manufacturers. They're trading as much on perceived cachet of the name and its connection with the history of guitar music as they are on objective quality of the instruments.

Quality alone, or grade too? Also, are they allowed to make a profit on an American made instrument? What margin would you like to restrict them too?

So it doesn't really make sense to compare their pricing to that of a low-production custom luthier.

You mean like Monteleone or Manzer?

Very high quality, professional-level guitars of most styles can be made very inexpensively.

American made, 17-inch carved archtops?
And again, of high quality and high grade?
Are we to compare the price of an L5CES to the price of an instrument made in a country where people work at what we consider to be slave labor rates? Why would we do that?

[Doctor Jeff]

"Fair" is in the eyes of the buyer. If people are happy with the value they get out of a $7500 L5 over a $5000 Campellone or $2500 Eastman, or of a $4000 (or more) ES 175 or 335 over similar guitars selling for half that (or sometimes a lot less), then good for them. But Gibson's prices for new instruments are benchmarked against the collector's market for their vintage instruments, not contemporary manufacturers. They're trading as much on perceived cachet of the name and its connection with the history of guitar music as they are on objective quality of the instruments. So it doesn't really make sense to compare their pricing to that of a low-production custom luthier. Also, it doesn't make sense to compare guitar prices to other instruments'. Very high quality, professional-level guitars of most styles can be made very inexpensively. It's the nature of the instruments and their susceptibility to mass production, not hacks' and amateurs' low expectations that drives this. Guitars are popular with hacks for host of musical/cultural reasons, but also because you can get a good one for a pretty painless amount of money, which is not the case with most other instruments.

Totally agree.

I was going to say about guitars and saxes: apples to oranges.

I play guitar and my kids played piano (Yamaha baby grand), cello (expensive German higher-end “student” model), saxophone (Yamaha student model), and drums (decent used Pearl set). All different price points and all kinds of manufacturing situations. Only the guitar can be made at a very low price yet reasonable quality IMO.

(Maybe drums—my son’s kit was $500 used—not as cheap as a starter Ibanez git, but not horrible either. OTOH we rented the sax because the cost was ~$1500–pretty pricey if you’re not sure your kid will turn out to be Charlie Parker Jr.)

[John A.]

Quality alone, or grade too? Also, are they allowed to make a profit on an American made instrument? What margin would you like to restrict them too?

Huh? Any guitar maker can charge whatever they like for their products.

You mean like Monteleone or Manzer?

What about them? You mean that their instruments are more expensive than Gibson? Does that somehow invalidate the reality that some luthiers are less expensive than Gibson but make products that sound and play as well or better in some people's view?

American made, 17-inch carved archtops?
And again, of high quality and high grade?

I don't know what that distinction means.

Are we to compare the price of an L5CES to the price of an instrument made in a country where people work at what we consider to be slave labor rates? Why would we do that?

Anybody can do any comparison they like. All I said is you can buy a great guitar for a lot less money than a Gibson and that Gibson's pricing is based on their branding strategy more than their costs. I don't think either of those thoughts is especially controversial. But thank you for teaching me that Japan, Canada, and South Korea have slave-labor wage bases. I did not know that before.

[jazzkritter]

citizen74
back to KKR for a moment.
they pioneered the tactic for airlines to sell off all their engine leases on 12/31, get them off the balance sheet, then return them 1/2.
legal, sure. Immoral, obscene, but eminently helpful to the main shareholder: KKR lol
My advice is to just trust nothing coming out of Gibson. You’ll see.
Unless of course you want an LP.
Archtop market is just too small.

[Donplaysguitar]

Huh? Any guitar maker can charge whatever they like for their products.




What about them? You mean that their instruments are more expensive than Gibson? Does that somehow invalidate the reality that some luthiers are less expensive than Gibson but make products that sound and play as well or better in some people's view?





I don't know what that distinction means.



Anybody can do any comparison they like. All I said is you can buy a great guitar for a lot less money than a Gibson and that Gibson's pricing is based on their branding strategy more than their costs. I don't think either of those thoughts is especially controversial. But thank you for teaching me that Japan, Canada, and South Korea have slave-labor wage bases. I did not know that before.

Those countries don’t have anything comparable to Gibson’s best.

And you didn’t address “grade”. We ARE talking about pricing policy, right?

Gibson has value factors that you have not listed herein. (Turn rate, or the time it takes to sell (resale actually) along with the resale price stability)

And yes, Gibson is a relative bargain when compared to most of the top custom luthiers.

[John A.]

Those countries don’t have anything comparable to Gibson’s best.

In carved archtops perhaps not. In other styles, they definitely do. I

And you didn’t address “grade”. We ARE talking about pricing policy, right?

I did actually. I said I don't understand the distinction you're drawing. And at this point I have less and less of an idea of what we're talking about.

Gibson has value factors that you have not listed herein. (Turn rate, or the time it takes to sell (resale actually) along with the resale price stability)

And yes, Gibson is a relative bargain when compared to most of the top custom luthiers.

By some analyses, a particular Gibson may indeed have a lower TCO than some or many non-Gibson(s). The converse is also true. But that matters much more to people who sell guitars than to people who keep them.

The way I look at it, I paid $1500 for a MIJ guitar that is in some ways better and in no ways worse than any 175. I'll likely keep it for decades. The delta between that and a 175 is a summer vacation for my family in the year I bought it. The greater appreciation and ease of sale of a 175 matter is a concern for my executor, not for me.

[Donplaysguitar]

[Christian Miller]

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.

Amen to that. I did try one with f holes (prototype apparently, not sure if they ever produced a LP studio ES?) a couple of years ago and fell for it a lot harder than the ES275 I have to say. One that got away!

[Doctor Jeff]

Regardless of who makes a better guitar and is Gibson worth the money, the bottom line (see where I went there) is that if Gibson/KKR thought they could make money selling archtops, they would. That seems pretty simple.

Too bad they don’t make what we want at a price we want. That’s life. A time and a season for everything.

[vinnyv1k]

One thing about Gibson archtops is they sure get nice wood.

[Midnight Blues]

Funny I just asked Gibson to build me a ebony L5 and Gibson told me we are no longer
building any archtops at this time including no more L5's.

Hi Vinny,

I posed a question to Mr. Koehler paraphrasing your comment and here's his response:

"We are absolutely building them -- BUT we're not taking any orders right now. We have well over a year of backorders for archtops already. And we are planning a re-launch in 2023 which includes a capacity increase and an all-new Historic Reissue L-5CES. Lots of big things to come but it will take a little time to navigate. Thanks for the question! -Mat"


Merry Christmas!
MB

[Doctor Jeff]

One thing about Gibson archtops is they sure get nice wood.

There is some good wood on THOSE guitars!

Can’t argue with them, and I’m sure they’re worth every penny you paid for them. And will probably be worth quite a bit more in the future.

My Gibsons are nice but more ordinary. Just honest workingmen’s guitars without too much ornamentation. The important thing to me is how they feel and sound, and they are wonderful. I wish there was a way Gibson could offer the 175 and 135 at prices geared more toward everyday musicians than collectors, but as has been said looks like that ship has sailed.

[vinnyv1k]

Hi Vinny,

I posed a question to Mr. Koehler paraphrasing your comment and here's his response:

"We are absolutely building them -- BUT we're not taking any orders right now. We have well over a year of backorders for archtops already. And we are planning a re-launch in 2023 which includes a capacity increase and an all-new Historic Reissue L-5CES. Lots of big things to come but it will take a little time to navigate. Thanks for the question! -Mat"




Merry Christmas!
MB

Good News ! I will always love Gibson archtops.