Red 333 Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Really, Gibson Marketing Department? A guitar that will retain in excess of $3500 with "Value" in the name? My link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bram99 Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 I was thinking you were just looking at a seller site that got the name wrong, but sure enough..... http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Acoustic-Instruments/2014/1932-L-00.aspx I would love to have it, but too rich for me. I think Gibson could match the success of the J-35 if they came out with a similar priced L-00. I would like to see a Blues King with an adi topped, mahogany body, 1 3/4"nut, and NO Grover rotomatics (never on a Gibson IMHO) at a J-35 price point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 On the L-1, didn't they have had H or "Lazy H" (as our friend JT dubs it) bracing in 1928? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuanCarlosVejar Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 I think that's a reference to the sonic value . There's a story about Woody Guthrie buying his son Arlo a 3/4's LG when he was a little kid and he spent $70 on that guitar back in those days that was an expensive guitar so I guess paying that price for an L00 is reasonable taking into consideration the times we live in. JC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 There's a story about Woody Guthrie buying his son Arlo a 3/4's LG when he was a little kid and he spent $70 on that guitar back in those days that was an expensive guitar so I guess paying that price for an L00 is reasonable taking into consideration the times we live in. Not as much the price as it is the top of the Gibson food chain price for what was a near the bottom of the food chain guitar. A $70 guitar in the mid-1950s would sell for something like $600 today. So not all that reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuanCarlosVejar Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Not as much the price as it is the top of the Gibson food chain price for what was a near the bottom of the food chain guitar. A $70 guitar in the mid-1950s would sell for something like $600 today. So not all that reasonable. The thing you are not taking into consideration is that back when the L00 and LG's were made they weren't built as as top of the line guitars ... now gibson montana tries to build each guitar the best way they can and as a result people shouldn't regret paying more for a well built guitar. I think gibson montana is building great guitars and I can tell you these L1 and L 00 reissues are worth every penny. I played a L1 at Namm and Fuller's sent my lefty L00 to california and both were astounding guitars. JC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Because they were a near the bottom of the line guitar does not mean Gibson did not build them well. I would say the quality then was as good as it is today. If they had not built them as well as they did there would be far fewer still out there kicking around today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted April 23, 2014 Author Share Posted April 23, 2014 I think gibson montana is building great guitars and I can tell you these L1 and L 00 reissues are worth every penny. I played a L1 at Namm and Fuller's sent my lefty L00 to california and both were astounding guitars. JC I don't doubt that it will have the potential to be a great guitar, and worth the price. I just think Gibson could have chosen a better name. I guess it's supposed to mean it's a "value" in comparison to a Legend L-00, but I think that will likely be misunderstood by most without that context. Thus the name will become fodder for derision by many, and especially among all the Gibson haters on other forums. That's not especially astute marketing. Red 333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuitarLight Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 I tend to agree with Red on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluesKing777 Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 I don't doubt that it will have the potential to be a great guitar, and worth the price. I just think Gibson could have chosen a better name. I guess it's supposed to mean it's a "value" in comparison to a Legend L-00, but I think that will likely be misunderstood by most without that context. Thus the name will become fodder for derision by many, and especially among all the Gibson haters on other forums. That's not especially astute marketing. Red 333 Yep, the name is awful, unless you are an accountant intern who would probably never buy anything so expensive! And a Graphteq nut isn't very vintagy......vintagish..... I guess we will see how sales go for it, I am rarely right with these things. BluesKing777. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.