PSA - Gibson To Revive Archtop (and Mandolin) Production

[Midnight Blues]

Good News ! I will always love Gibson archtops.

Me too Vinny!

[Midnight Blues]

And if we want to wait for prizes to normalize and not be thru the roof, we're talking 2026?

Still good news

I'm going to hold out hope that it'll be before then, but I won't be holding my breath.

[jzucker]

who's going to teach them how to make these? Do they have the original luthiers, molds, plywoods, equipment, etc? I'm skeptical based on some of the 335s I played made after 2016. I mean ... Just because their signage and logo says gibson on it doesn't mean they can magically make the same guitars. Others have tried and failed. What makes them special?

[Marinero]

who's going to teach them how to make these? Do they have the original luthiers, molds, plywoods, equipment, etc? I'm skeptical based on some of the 335s I played made after 2016. I mean ... Just because their signage and logo says gibson on it doesn't mean they can magically make the same guitars. Others have tried and failed. What makes them special?

Hi, J,
Hire seasoned luthiers, use quality tonewoods, maintain strict quality control. The buyers will come at the top of the market. Artist model Classical guitars start at 10K and go up to 25K for name luthiers. Most have a 3-5 year waiting lists. EG's should be no exception at the top end. Bentley automobiles are flying off the shelves* etc, etc,
Marinero


*The news comes amid other wild successes for Bentley. Global retail sales for the first six months of 2021 increased by 50% over pre-Covid levels, up to 7,199 vehicles sold, compared with 4,785 sold in 2019.Jul 29, 2021

[jzucker]

Hi, J,
Hire seasoned luthiers, use quality tonewoods, maintain strict quality control. The buyers will come at the top of the market. Artist model Classical guitars start at 10K and go up to 25K for name luthiers. Most have a 3-5 year waiting lists. EG's should be no exception at the top end. Bentley automobiles are flying off the shelves* etc, etc,
Marinero


*The news comes amid other wild successes for Bentley. Global retail sales for the first six months of 2021 increased by 50% over pre-Covid levels, up to 7,199 vehicles sold, compared with 4,785 sold in 2019.Jul 29, 2021

You can't compare an automobile to a guitar. Automobiles are largely built using robots and computer controlled machinery. The gibsons we know and love from the '60s were all hand made. I'm sure gibson can engineer a well made and manufactured instrument but "tonewoods" is a myth. The supply of well seasoned woods is very scarce these days. Many of the woods cannot be harvested and have to be artificially dried and not dried naturally over years of natural de-moisturizing as many original gibsons were. And despite the CNC machinary, my luthier tells me that he says way more necks improperly set on new les pauls and 335s than he's ever seen in years past.

And even if they manufacture a well-engineered instrument using automated computer control, what will make it a gibson ? How will it be different than what Ibanez is doing? Yes, it may look like a 175 or L5 and have a lacquer finish but I'm not buying that they will just automagically be the same as the instruments of yesteryear just because they have the gibson logo.

And just because people may line up to buy them doesn't mean they are any good.

[jazzkritter]

Agree Jack.
But the magical price of a master built classical guitar is due to the master him/herself. Robert Ruck, Greg Smallwood, Antonio Marin-Montero. No one is going to pay 12,000 for a Kenny Hill that’s made in Kenny’s shop. First Kenny is not making every signature model, he has spread his name out to Cordoba and his Chinese line (nice guitars BTW), and there are already too many of his out there to reinforce exclusivity. So it’s a 7,000$ guitar that resells less than 5,000. As will be GIbsons once the cachet is gone, and Mr CNC is the luthier. Just hiring good luthiers in Gibson wont do it. Not unless you turn around the business model away from a mass up market product to a very limited, non factory single builder model. They will not make KKR’s objectives doing that.

Mark my words, it’s not a guitar company anymore, it’s an investment vehicle.

Interesting to look at Taylor. Identical perfect CNC creations separated by design, size and wood. Yet they command a high selling price by adding wood, cosmetics and the Taylor ‘we are saving the earth story. Taylor is at least as good a marketer as a guitar company.
Not a 100% comparison to Gibson, but it does get the idea across I think.

[Stringswinger]

You can't compare an automobile to a guitar. Automobiles are largely built using robots and computer controlled machinery. The gibsons we know and love from the '60s were all hand made. I'm sure gibson can engineer a well made and manufactured instrument but "tonewoods" is a myth. The supply of well seasoned woods is very scarce these days. Many of the woods cannot be harvested and have to be artificially dried and not dried naturally over years of natural de-moisturizing as many original gibsons were. And despite the CNC machinary, my luthier tells me that he says way more necks improperly set on new les pauls and 335s than he's ever seen in years past.

And even if they manufacture a well-engineered instrument using automated computer control, what will make it a gibson ? How will it be different than what Ibanez is doing? Yes, it may look like a 175 or L5 and have a lacquer finish but I'm not buying that they will just automagically be the same as the instruments of yesteryear just because they have the gibson logo.

And just because people may line up to buy them doesn't mean they are any good.

Automagically is a very interesting word.

Gibson has had the resources to study their old guitars and reverse engineer them to a point where they have put out some superb reissues. I often do a duo gig with San Francisco guitarist Ned Boynton. For the last few years we both use Gibson reissue guitars on those gigs (Ned plays a 59 reissue 345 and I use a 59 reissue 175). The guitars sound great, and we both have owned vintage examples to compare them to. That said, some of the vintage reissues that I have played over the last 20 years had some major quality control issues. Hopefully, the archtops coming out will be better in that regard.

I suspect that when Gibson gets back into the archtop business, it will be about reissues of their classic models and will be done right. The price point will be a turn off to many, but some great guitars will hit the market. They will have the money to buy scarce tonewoods, hire the best luthiers and spend the time getting it right.

When these guitars hit the market, there will be praise and there will be detractors. And that is nothing new.

[Stringswinger]

Here is a picture of Ned and I with those two Gibson reissues from a gig up in Sonoma county, California from 2019.

[citizenk74]

I sense that the future market for high-end Gibsons and other iconic American brands will be well outside North America and Europe and will be primarily very well-heeled collectors/afficianados/investors in places where wealth inequality is starker than we might be comfortable with. Hence the "life-style" angle. Think "genuine worn and ragged American blue jeans going for ridiculous prices" X a million. Ephemeral, perhaps, but sufficiently profitable for the dreams of avarice.
Look for painstakingly detailed counterfeits to become a bigger thing than they already are.

Me, I plan on playing what i can while I can.

[bluejaybill]

While I applaud Gibson returning to the arch top, I too worry that they have lost the luthiers, forms, the institutional memory of the previous great instruments. And I think we have to distinguish between electric and acoustic models.

I really don't believe that the tolerances in electric arch tops are that crucial, in fact in many cases the less resonant they are acoustically the more suited to electrification they are. Hence the popularity of 175 and other laminates. I like those and have owned many. And I think even solid top arch tops are engineered for electric playing, and have been for a very long time- indeed maybe even since the mid '60's. So no problem there in terms of making a really good, even great, electric arch top with plenty of that Gibson "bling" and mojo- and tone.

But acoustic arch tops are a very different matter. I can't say that I have played a decent acoustic Gibson arch top made since the '50's- and I haven't played many, because they haven't made many! They were just following the trends of the artists who were using them, so not really blaming them. But no matter what they do, I cannot see them equalling the great acoustic arch tops being made today by small builder types. I would much rather take my chances on Campellone, Trenier or any other of number of talented luthiers out there- and I have. It is a niche business best filled by niche builders- in fact in some ways that has been true going all the way back to D'Angellico.

Just my two cents as some random internet dude- and I would love to be proven wrong!

[jzucker]

If it was so easy to make a plywood archtop, why is it that none of them - I MEAN NONE - have that 175 tone? I have tried dozens. None of them come close Sadowsky, Holst, Painter, Collings, Eastman, Heritage. Not a single one gets that 175 thunk. So I think there's more to it.

This guy supposedly makes an "exact" copy of a 175 but they are super expensive and none of the clips are convincing to me...

Home | Ken McKay Guitars

While I applaud Gibson returning to the arch top, I too worry that they have lost the luthiers, forms, the institutional memory of the previous great instruments. And I think we have to distinguish between electric and acoustic models.

I really don't believe that the tolerances in electric arch tops are that crucial, in fact in many cases the less resonant they are acoustically the more suited to electrification they are. Hence the popularity of 175 and other laminates. I like those and have owned many. And I think even solid top arch tops are engineered for electric playing, and have been for a very long time- indeed maybe even since the mid '60's. So no problem there in terms of making a really good, even great, electric arch top with plenty of that Gibson "bling" and mojo- and tone.

But acoustic arch tops are a very different matter. I can't say that I have played a decent acoustic Gibson arch top made since the '50's- and I haven't played many, because they haven't made many! They were just following the trends of the artists who were using them, so not really blaming them. But no matter what they do, I cannot see them equalling the great acoustic arch tops being made today by small builder types. I would much rather take my chances on Campellone, Trenier or any other of number of talented luthiers out there- and I have. It is a niche business best filled by niche builders- in fact in some ways that has been true going all the way back to D'Angellico.

Just my two cents as some random internet dude- and I would love to be proven wrong!

[deacon Mark]

If it was so easy to make a plywood archtop, why is it that none of them - I MEAN NONE - have that 175 tone? I have tried dozens. None of them come close Sadowsky, Holst, Painter, Collings, Eastman, Heritage. Not a single one gets that 175 thunk. So I think there's more to it.

This guy supposedly makes an "exact" copy of a 175 but they are super expensive and none of the clips are convincing to me...

Home | Ken McKay Guitars

This may sound simplistic but I believe it completely fits.

Some brewery in Europe could get exact recipe for Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. It is an American classic beer. However it will not taste exactly like the beer brewed in Chico California. It is house character that cannot be duplicated.

Neither will Sierra Nevada make a Belgian Ale in California like the Monks in Chimay Belgian.

But you are correct a 175 is a 175, is a 175, and nothing quite the same.

[jzucker]

This may sound simplistic but I believe it completely fits.

Some brewery in Europe could get exact recipe for Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. It is an American classic beer. However it will not taste exactly like the beer brewed in Chico California. It is house character that cannot be duplicated.

Neither will Sierra Nevada make a Belgian Ale in California like the Monks in Chimay Belgian.

But you are correct a 175 is a 175, is a 175, and nothing quite the same.

I agree and the guitars that stringswinger plays was made by a different group of people using different woods, maybe different molds, etc. Not convinced that what they do today will sound the same as his or vintage era 175s...

[Stringswinger]

If it was so easy to make a plywood archtop, why is it that none of them - I MEAN NONE - have that 175 tone? I have tried dozens. None of them come close Sadowsky, Holst, Painter, Collings, Eastman, Heritage. Not a single one gets that 175 thunk. So I think there's more to it.

This guy supposedly makes an "exact" copy of a 175 but they are super expensive and none of the clips are convincing to me...

Home | Ken McKay Guitars

JZ. I agree completely. There are variations of the 175 and many of them are duds. But IMO. a good 175 is all the guitar a competent jazz guitarist needs.

[jzucker]

JZ. I agree completely. There are variations of the 175 and many of them are duds. But IMO. a good 175 is all the guitar a competent jazz guitarist needs.

agreed. It's the best guitar in history but I also think that the older ones are largely bad in terms of needing planing, refretting, etc. At least that's been my experience. The '59 reissue I played was way more resonant than the '70 or '83 or '88 I had. I kind of like the sound of the deader ones. Sadly, with all the variations in them, there's still nothing close. The ibanez, greco and tokai 175 copies sound nothing like a 175, neither does the FG100, aria herb ellis or anything else I've tried. I do like some of them for what they are but if you're looking for any variety of 175, I don't think any of them really sound right. I heard a clip of a guild CE-100 that sounded in the ballpark. Moreso than anything else i've heard.

I have the feeling this is the mahogany neck version. Guild also made this with maple neck which is much more prevalent. They don't specify in the video and the guitar is long gone.

[Marinero]

You can't compare an automobile to a guitar. Automobiles are largely built using robots and computer controlled machinery. The gibsons we know and love from the '60s were all hand made. I'm sure gibson can engineer a well made and manufactured instrument but "tonewoods" is a myth. The supply of well seasoned woods is very scarce these days. Many of the woods cannot be harvested and have to be artificially dried and not dried naturally over years of natural de-moisturizing as many original gibsons were. And despite the CNC machinary, my luthier tells me that he says way more necks improperly set on new les pauls and 335s than he's ever seen in years past.

And even if they manufacture a well-engineered instrument using automated computer control, what will make it a gibson ? How will it be different than what Ibanez is doing? Yes, it may look like a 175 or L5 and have a lacquer finish but I'm not buying that they will just automagically be the same as the instruments of yesteryear just because they have the gibson logo.

And just because people may line up to buy them doesn't mean they are any good.

O.K. J,
Forget the car reference. I only mentioned them to illustrate that if you build quality and a name, the buyers will come . . .irrespective of price.. Of course, there is a difference in manufacturing. But, Bentley's still have a hand/bench built engine.
Marinero

P.S. If you've ever driven a Bentley or inspected them from a mechanic's perspective . . . they are a work of Art as far as automobiles. But, now were drifting . . . M

[jzucker]

O.K. J,
Forget the car reference. I only mentioned them to illustrate that if you build quality and a name, the buyers will come . . .irrespective of price.. Of course, there is a difference in manufacturing. But, Bentley's still have a hand/bench built engine.
Marinero

P.S. If you've ever driven a Bentley or inspected them from a mechanic's perspective . . . they are a work of Art as far as automobiles. But, now were drifting . . . M

I haven't but the parts of a bentley, even if hand-assembled are made via CNC machinery. The point is that gibson isn't buying tonewoods and hand-making plywood like they did back in the day. They are a lifestyle company trying to come back from bankruptcy and trying to automate their processes to make manufacturing more efficient. That's not necessarily conducive to making great archtops. They may be well engineered guitars and may even be great but until I play one that sounds like even an '80s 175, I will remain skeptical. I don't see it much differently than playing an Ibanez Pat Metheny guitar which was engineered to be a 175 style instrument. They use great manufacturing techniques, the best wood that they can spec within the particular budget they are aiming for and yet, they sound nothing like a 175. I often wonder if Gibson has the expertise to know what a great L5 or 175 is? I know lots of folks have tried and still, the best 175 and L5 style guitars I've ever heard were made by Gibson but decades ago...

I hope I'm proven wrong but I bought a series of 335 guitars in 2016/2017 time frame and they were horrible. Not even close to the quality and sound of a yamaha or ibanez semihollow...

[Donplaysguitar]

Gibson was a lifestyle company under Henry, or at least that was the strategy. Now they’re a guitar company, and yet are only a shadow of what they were under Henry.

Gone are the days when you could see lines of gorgeous brand new archtops on Wildwoods web page with the most incredible wood figuring, and that was right up until the end almost.

Listening to the way Jack tells it, they should have stopped making archtops decades ago? I think Danny sees it a bit differently, as do I. I bought six of the crimson shop archtops after 2005.

[silverfoxx]

who's going to teach them how to make these? Do they have the original luthiers, molds, plywoods, equipment, etc? I'm skeptical based on some of the 335s I played made after 2016. I mean ... Just because their signage and logo says gibson on it doesn't mean they can magically make the same guitars. Others have tried and failed. What makes them special?

I had a number of Crimson Custom Shop Gibsons, built between 2013 & 2015 . all were superb, In late 2017 I was diagnosed with PMR a very Painful
condition , rendering me unable to sleep, with pains from the neck to fingertips and unable to play guitar at all. The prognosis was it would last for possibly
3 to 5 years duration. I put up for commission sale several Gibsons . including an :L5CES blonde , Wesmo Ebony .Tal Farlow, and Byrdland and two others
The two L5's sold in the blink of an eye. My friend ,Vinny1k, persuaded me to withdraw the TF and Byrdland from sale, the rest sold. Fortunately for me the
recovery began after six (?) or so months. A great relief as after a while I could play ( and sleep) This long winded reply to JZ;s assertion bears out the remark
that post 2016 the Crimson Custom models were not of the same quality as the earlier models. Despite being delighted at the quicker recovery I kicked
myself for unnecessarily selling the Crimson Custom guitars , and not easy to replace.

Silverfoxx

[wintermoon]

Glad you're on the mend sf!

[Donplaysguitar]

There’s always a new generation of young guys that want to be luthiers. Somehow great guitars continue to be made.

I agree that Gibsons aren’t perfect, but they’re pretty damned good and they still cost less than the top luthiers instruments.

I also agree with Jack’s note about tone woods. (Not that I really have any way of knowing). The “aged and seasoned” part that is. That’s not a “volume product” kind of setup.

But if we think they suck so hard, why are we worrying about how they will carry on?

[furtom]

I clobber Gibson for the price, but I am not really worried they have forgotten how to make archtops.

The 175 VOS's they made a few years ago were great. The L7 was pretty good, too. I'm sure they will be able to carve an L5 just fine and they will have the good woods for such a high priced model.

Quality control is probably never a problem of luthiers being off, it's more a matter of bean counters pushing production faster than it should be. Even in this, I'm hopeful they have learned their lesson. The LPs and such coming out now seem to be consistently better than in previous years.

Vintage instruments had better woods, this is true. They also had older construction methods. That's why, any Gibson made before the Norlin era is very collectable. They don't make 'em like that anymore. This, unfortunately, will not change. You'll need a hand made guitar for that.

But for what they will do, I have no doubt the archtops, laminate and caved, that will come out of the custom shop in the future will be very good instruments, on par with what they were making from the 90s to a few years ago. It's just that few of us will be able to afford them.

[Stringswinger]

Gibson quit making the 175 in 2017 (pretty soon 5 years will have passed). While I am sure that many different hands made that model in the 67 years of it's production, they were produced all of those years without interruption. There were always trained luthiers who knew the "special sauce" that could pass that on to the new luthiers. JZ's skepticism regarding whether they will come back with the magic of the past is valid. Time will tell.

I have owned and played 175's made in Kalamazoo, Nashville and Memphis that were/are great. I have also owned and played 175's made in all three factories that were duds. Of the three 175's that I have now, my favorite is a Nashville build that was made for a German guitarist named Peter Busboom (I traded him a Norlin Les Paul Deluxe for it). She weighs in right at 7 pounds, has incredible woods, plays like butter and has a thick, creamy tone. I have a 2017 that is heavier (7 pounds 10 ounces) and brighter and also sounds and plays great (This one is a Memphis build) My 59 reissue sounds exactly like a 57 I played recently that is owned by a fellow forum member.. It is more "acoustic" sounding and is quite light (6 pounds 7 ounces). I prefer the other two, but find the 59 reissue useful for duo gigs where a lot of traditional rhythm guitar is needed. I am sure glad I had three of them when production ceased. I will be keeping them for the long haul.

They are indeed the best guitar in history as JZ wrote. Don't take our word for it. Find a competent medium and ask the spirits of Joe Pass, Herb Ellis and Jim Hall. I am certain that they will confirm this.

[jzucker]

My repairman says that an unusually high number of new gibsons have the necks glued on at an improper angle. Just saying'...

I clobber Gibson for the price, but I am not really worried they have forgotten how to make archtops.

The 175 VOS's they made a few years ago were great. The L7 was pretty good, too. I'm sure they will be able to carve an L5 just fine and they will have the good woods for such a high priced model.

Quality control is probably never a problem of luthiers being off, it's more a matter of bean counters pushing production faster than it should be. Even in this, I'm hopeful they have learned their lesson. The LPs and such coming out now seem to be consistently better than in previous years.

Vintage instruments had better woods, this is true. They also had older construction methods. That's why, any Gibson made before the Norlin era is very collectable. They don't make 'em like that anymore. This, unfortunately, will not change. You'll need a hand made guitar for that.

But for what they will do, I have no doubt the archtops, laminate and caved, that will come out of the custom shop in the future will be very good instruments, on par with what they were making from the 90s to a few years ago. It's just that few of us will be able to afford them.

[furtom]

My repairman says that an unusually high number of new gibsons have the necks glued on at an improper angle. Just saying'...

Well, that's a shame. Sorry to hear it.