-
If this has already been posted then ignore and apologies.
Skip to 18:50
A nice look at some L5 bracing. Looks like a CES pattern type?
An interesting video in general, not too different from the main factory tour, same machines in general, just a smaller area.
Gibson have now moved into full CNC carving for archtops and 3D-scanning (just like my set up). On a side note, it appears I've built my workshop to the standards of the Gibson Custom shop. Great minds etc..
They mention a '1957 L5' in production (although the top plate they show seems braced for two pickups). I can't see them starting with P90's.
For Gibson the money is clearly in late 50's repros, which is very important for Les Pauls but I'm not sure it translates into L5's?
Both men appear somewhat confident that this is all inline with Gibson's historic building techniques, whilst surrounded with the latest computer aided, manufacturing equipment. I think it's ok to be proud of modernity in the pursuit of perfection. Once upon a time, a chisel was far superior to using a sharpened stone and that was superior to using your teeth. The result is what's important.
Lastly one might wonder why Byrdlands are back. Well you've already made the body building an L5. You've done the majority of the work. It wouldn't make sense not too, is my guess.
Interesting times ahead.Last edited by Archie; 11-28-2023 at 08:44 AM.
-
11-28-2023 07:16 AM
-
I am disappointed. I had this romantic notion that Gibson carved archtops were entirely hand built by a handful of master luthiers in a separate location that looked like violin workshops in Cremona. So, as you can imagine, that notion has been quite radically revised after watching this video. I just learned that everything I've been telling to people about my L5 was a lie.
Objectively Gibson L5's making process is much closer to Fender Squire factories in China than how artisan archtops are build. I'm sure there are long haired dudes that hand sand neck cavities in China too.
-
Gibson has been a guitar FACTORY for decades. They've always done the things FACTORIES do - make lots of copies of things using the mass production techniques of the day. The idea that there were at one time a bunch of Jimmy d'Aquistos standing at benches hand-making guitars one at a time is, well, pretty romantic.
Originally Posted by Tal_175
And a nice try at implied opprobrium there, subtly comparing Gibson L5s to Squiers. It's like drawing an equivalence between a Mercedes-Benz and a Kia. Sure, there are similarities between them, but there are large differences as well. And both have yet more differences with something hand-built, which is beyond my experience and knowledge in the car world.
-
Not sure what this adds to what I already said. Originally Posted by dconeill
-
It looks like the L5 top shown in the video has a uniform thickness except the area around the neck foot. I remember that older CES had a larger area of an increased top thickness also around the neck pickup and an area of smaller thickness around the bridge.
Maybe this has been omitted due to more economic fabrication?
Here a pic from a 70s L5 CES. You can see clearly the difference in thickness in the pu cavities.
-
Yes, my 70's Byrdland was also much thinner around the middle of the top (near the bridge pickup) like in the picture in your post. The top is more uniformly thick in my more modern L5CES. It might be because of the increased feedback resistance. I don't know if they also carve the single pickup Wes Montgomery models the same way. Originally Posted by bluenote61
-
I once made the mistake of thinking my 1937 Gibson archtop was 'hand carved.' Ha ha.... Originally Posted by Tal_175
-
Yeah, it looks like they used to use a steam powered machine, now they are using an electric powered CNC machine. Originally Posted by icr
Also, I'm pretty sure that I read on the forum at some point that the carved archtop operation was separate from factory built solid bodies and even the ES laminate guitars. I don't know if it was ever the case that carved archtops were built in a different location (in a smaller workshop) or whether they were always in the same factory.
-
The Crimson Custom shop used to be in a separate small building down the road on Elm Street. Only archtops were built there.
Obviously that operation didn’t survive the bankruptcy.
Even though many didn’t like the former CEO Henry J., he was the reason that Gibson manufactured every Gibson archtop model.
I now wish he was still the CEO.
These new guys just want 30 different Les Paul models.
-
[QUOTE=Tal_175;1300790]Yeah, it looks like they used to use a steam powered machine, now they are using an electric powered CNC machine.
Also, I'm pretty sure that I read on the forum at some point that the carved archtop operation was separate from factory built solid bodies and even the ES laminate guitars. I don't know if it was ever the case that carved archtops were built in a different location (in a smaller workshop) or whether they were always in the same factory.[/QUOTE
It doesnt matter whether the ruff in was done by machine, trolls, or an axe. As it states at the bottom after ruff in is where guitar making starts with hand graduations and the other operations that cant be automated. I was a cabinetmaker for nearly 50yrs. I have the title of "master" craftsman. Ive never made anything by hand...it would hurt to much and pretty sure the skin wouldnt hold up. All great craftsman are just "motors" pushing tools.
-
It would be crazy not to use some power tools for carving bodies and neck. I'm not surprised that they use machines for making the initial rough cuts. A handmade watch doesn't mean all the cogs and springs were made by hand. Machines and tools are always part of the process. The term handmade seems to indicate the degree to which manual labor of highly trained individuals are involved in the process. Originally Posted by Rickco
-
I did chuckle when Lee was being shown around. He was so excited to find some lineage to the original ways of making these ‘reissues’, that he pounced upon what looked like an old dust pan. Only to be told it likely wasn’t that old. Originally Posted by Tal_175
That was about as authentic as it got.
Goes to show the importance of ‘the story’. Sellers and buyers want to believe one thing and they are both happy to encourage each other, to continue doing so.
Lee wanted to prove that these guitars are still being made the old way, to the point he wanted to convince himself, whilst standing amongst CAD/M’s, he was witnessing the original masters at work.
Or was he convincing his customer
This is why I’ve set my workshop up the same way Gibson have set up their custom shop. I don’t claim to be a luthier, I’m not looking to preserve the old ways. I’m looking to refine and repeat something great.
The product is all that matters.
but.. Gibson is being pushed in conflicting directions here. They are increasingly making their business about selling ‘old’ original spec guitars. Murphy lab etc..
The reality however does not support the narrative, as it is increasingly and distinctly not ‘old’. It’s very, very modern.
One for the marketing teamLast edited by Archie; 11-28-2023 at 02:11 PM.
-
I had the good fortune to tour the Gibson USA factory and the Custom shop back in 1994. I was given Nashville NAMM show tickets by a Gibson dealer that I had worked for in high school and college and the Gibson tours came with the tickets.
They were already carving archtops with CNC machines back in 1994.
Before they stood up the CNC carvers, they were using machines for the rough carving as well. Probably a machine called a duplicarver.
I also toured the Nashville factory in 1984 and they had the duplicarver making Les Paul tops on that tour. Archtops were still made in Kalamazoo in 1984.
I'm not convinced there's anything to be gained by having a master luthier do the initial rough carving. What makes them a master is how they finish the tops and backs and other parts and pieces. IMHO
I'm excited to see Gibson openly talking about their archtops now. Although, I don't see myself getting another one anytime soon. I have more than my share already. Maybe if the offer something new and different like a Gibson take on D'Acquisto's Centura.
-
So is the instrument the actual important thing as, well, as it’s actual tonal properties? Or the construction methods used in the process of making it?
Seems to me actual human interaction vs the machine are what are valued, romanticized, and paid the big money for. At least when it comes to Carved Archtops!
-
At this point the CAD designer is the new luthier, when it comes to mass produced guitars. Originally Posted by jads57
Hence why I’m spending so much time learning it
-
There was an interview with John Monteleone where he talked about every piece of wood was unique. So the machine couldn’t tell how to carve it properly. If I remember correctly?
Although with advances in AI, I wonder if that’s a moot point.
-
Originally Posted by jads57
Even with the machines, what makes the difference between an OK guitar and a great guitar is still done by the human luthier. IMHO
The machines may build the parts, but the luthier does the fine tuning and puts the pieces together by hand. This is true even at assembly line builders like Gibson ... even on their solid bodies and laminates.
Even if they don't use CNC they are going to use some sort of machines. Before the machines the rough work would most likely have been done by an apprentice or some other minion.
There is no machine that takes in the raw material and spits out a guitar at the other end probably never will be.
-
Isn't there more to carving a top than dimensions?
Also, if it's just material, a CNC machine, and a program, does it matter where they are made?
-
I’m glad these are being made again, but also know they will be priced super astronomically. I wish more players would be able to have access to guitars of this history and quality. I’m mostly thinking of up and comers, Im all set with my ‘64 L5 that I was blessed to get back when they weren’t as crazy in price as they are now.
as far as top thickness, the early ones are indeed carved thinner. I also had an early ‘80s L5 and it was much thicker. Much more thunky and muted/deadened sounding.
the biggest issue for me though is the neck set suddenly became much higher in 1970 and makes a big divide in L5s before and after. That made them stiffer playing and sounding. If Gibson gets that right it’ll be the first time in many decades and will help make these something special, apart from their recent l5 models.
-
So how many people will actually step up and buy a new Gibson Carved Archtop ? I expect the price to be on rather high side of things.
Especially when Mark Campellone already makes great Archtops in the old Gibson tradition and is doing all the work himself. And they would be half of Gibsons Price as well.
I think Gibson isn’t interested in putting resources with such a limited market. I’m sure the profit margins are way better as they are now.
-
Yes there is but if you’re bracing it for two pickups and and tone controls etc, the finesse of tone is a mute point. Originally Posted by Spook410
What you need is accurate repeatability getting you towards a known ball park sound.
If we’re talking about actual acoustic archtops, that can be another story.
-
You don’t buy a L-5 if you are looking for a acoustic archtop cannon unless you go pre-pickup era.
You buy one for the electric sweetness.
Thick top = thick tone.
-
I think that if Gibson makes something very expensive that they pitch as a limited edition authentic to the original (whether it is or not) people will buy it. The number willing to do so for an L5 is no doubt much smaller than for a Les Paul, but it's probably enough to make it worth Gibson's while. Originally Posted by jads57
-
The Gibson name and their classic archtop designs are still loved by many. Originally Posted by jads57
At least one player on this forum picked up some new Gibson archtops in the last year or two and the prices were about $10,000 each for an L5 and a Byrdland IIRC.
While there are less expensive archtop builders that are making great guitars there are also a dozen or two archtop builders that are selling their guitars for prices way above the average historical Gibson prices. Those high-priced makers tend to have waiting lists to get on their waiting lists.
I suspect that Campellone could be one of those if he wanted to raise his prices.
The markets there. It's just not as big as the market for Les Pauls and 335s.
-
Originally Posted by jads57
At $40K or more for one of his low-end models, he better be paying attention to those kinds of details.
Last I looked he doesn't even list his prices, but his higher end guitars were moving past $100K when he did list them.
That all assumes you could even get on his waiting list.
Reply With Quote
My Gretsch Custom Jet
Today, 09:25 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos