djw171 Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Watched a couple of videos from Summer Namm showing these and see Sweetwater now showing one model (HP635W). Been thinking of a cutaway to add to the collection and was looking at Taylors actually. What a coincidence!. Will wait until Gibson have them up on their site to see the full range and specs. I guess this is part of the 2017's already! http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/HPSS635NH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorrisrownSal Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Looks like a Songwriter cutaway except: Walnut back and sides instead of rosewood Richlite fretboard instead of rosewood Baggs Element pickup instead of the better Baggs VTC Maple neck instead of mahogany Different rosette Different pickguard Silver grovers instead of gold Less ornate dots on the fretboard instead of parallelograms Savings of about a grand. Much more interesting to me is this all hog J45! http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/RS4TGMG17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jalex Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Watched a couple of videos from Summer Namm showing these and see Sweetwater now showing one model (HP635W). Been thinking of a cutaway to add to the collection and was looking at Taylors actually. What a coincidence!. Will wait until Gibson have them up on their site to see the full range and specs. I guess this is part of the 2017's already! http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/HPSS635NH Im sure they are good sounding guitars. But I wished they hadn't used richlite finger boards, I guess it's less expensive and perhaps more durable than rosewood or walnut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly campbell Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 I agree with Sal that hog looks really nice and also I agree in that I wiish they would not use the richlite board, it feels too sticky to me I have and entry level Martin that is not bad but I can not warm up to the fretboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vacamartin Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 IMO, the big change is in the radius.......from the traditional Gibson 12 radius to the flatter ubiquitous 16 radius. I like my Gibsons with the 12... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Much more interesting to me is this all hog J45! http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/RS4TGMG17 Very interesting to me, as well. I'd love to hear one. Red 333 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev Roy Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Much more interesting to me is this all hog J45! http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/RS4TGMG17 Oh, yeah....would love to spend some quality time with one of those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuanCarlosVejar Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 I posted this before but I guess people are losing interest either in what I think is interesting or in gibson acoustics in general: JC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldCowboy Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 The J-45 hog top gets my attention, too. Wondering, of course, about the tone and response. Wondering also how remote the similarity is to Martin's current hog tops (hopefully very) and how close the similarity is to Gibson's wartime hog top '45s (hopefully very). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pesh Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 An interesting move; shame they're not yet up on the site so we can review their information properly! Like the look of the unmentioned small jumbo / folk style they had in the PG video; on the right towards the end of the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 I just so very much dislike these models, they look like cheap 114ce Taylors, that pickgutard is abhorent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slinky1 Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 me no likey! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hall Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 I posted this before but I guess people are losing interest either in what I think is interesting or in gibson acoustics in general: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yd4awpoXKlE JC Not you, JC. It's just these particular Gibsons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse_Dylan Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 The J-45 hog top gets my attention, too. Wondering, of course, about the tone and response. Wondering also how remote the similarity is to Martin's current hog tops (hopefully very) and how close the similarity is to Gibson's wartime hog top '45s (hopefully very). Me too, and I'd love an all-mahogany J-45 or LG-2 AE. But the price is a far cry from where Martin prices theirs. :( Been thinking for years about a Martin all-mahogany but have been turned away by the nut width. Now they have some with a wider nut, but sadly they also include a cutaway I don't want and electronics I don't like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissouriPicker Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 I'm hoping these guitars work well for Gibson and that they go a long ways in appealing to a younger generation of guitar players. They're definitely not for me, as I'm more into the traditional style of guitars. To me, all of these guitars I've so far seen (no matter what wood is used) look-alike. I think they have a very generic look with nothing about them that says "Gibson," aside from the name on the headstock. Take the name off of the headstock and they'd look like the majority of other guitars hanging in a guitar store. Martin and Taylor have numerous models that have that generic kind of look. To my eyes, Gibsons have always looked, as well as sounded different and each has a persoinality. We all like different things and I suspect that generational changes make those differences even more obvious. I'd be shocked if I heard one of these call my name. Has nothing to do with the quality of the instrument. It has to do with what I identify with and how I feel it goes with my music. Beyond that, I'm sure these are fine guitars.....Now watch me play one of these things and be blown-away by it...lol....although I sincerely doubt it will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bassetman Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 They may appeal to some but as a recent buyer of another Gibson model I passed these over as they just don't look like Gibsons. At least to me they just "look" like they are not worth the price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pesh Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 Having looked at them in further detail since my last post; I'm slightly more intrigued by these, yet also slightly put off at the same time. Due to the unfortunate use of Cheaplite, these are certainly not worth the asking price from Gibson. Consider a J15... Maple neck with the Walnut stripe, and a Walnut fretboard. Walnut body and a Sitka Spruce top. LR Baggs Element pickup. UK price of £1099 (Andertons as of 29/07). Then consider what seems to be the lowest-grade model in the the HP range, the HP415W. The specs show this to be the same guitar with a cutaway - the same materials in the same places, and the same pickup system. UK price of £1399 (Andertons as of 29/07). Three hundred pounds more for a cutaway?! Further insult when the next model up, the HP635W, adds a further £100 but has Richlite for a fingerboard. I might be missing something, like finishes or whatever, but I truly feel this takes the piss. I was interested in the HP665SB, but cannot justify the price (£1699) where machined Richlite is being used on a guitar that should have a full wood construction. I don't care if it's more friendly to whatever; if I'm parting with that cash I want tree in the damn thing, not resin bullshit. Rant over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogeye Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 I haven't see the guitars and am not in the market for any new ones at this point but I am intrigued as to their names. I guess I missed the post that explains this but if there is any info on how they named them I would like to hear it. I know how Gibson named their traditional models but have a hard time figuring out what a HP is. Why the number 665? What is the designation SB? So what the heck is a HP635W? Is the 635 a less expensive lower quality instrument than a 665? Is it 30 numbers less? I just can't imagine two folks sitting around the campfire talking about the virtues of their HP665SB and their HP635W. I kinda' miss the old days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hall Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 Aint that the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djw171 Posted July 30, 2016 Author Share Posted July 30, 2016 I haven't see the guitars and am not in the market for any new ones at this point but I am intrigued as to their names. I guess I missed the post that explains this but if there is any info on how they named them I would like to hear it. I know how Gibson named their traditional models but have a hard time figuring out what a HP is. Why the number 665? What is the designation SB? So what the heck is a HP635W? Is the 635 a less expensive lower quality instrument than a 665? Is it 30 numbers less? I just can't imagine two folks sitting around the campfire talking about the virtues of their HP665SB and their HP635W. I kinda' miss the old days. The HP is high performance which is odd I know. HP is a reference they gave to the 2016 Electric range which incorporated the 2015 'improvements' and other stuff. They are also the 2016's that no stores seem to stock given the high price and robot tuners etc...etc..etc.. I think these 'HP' range acoustics will probably sell if priced right to the right market. Hopefully when they get their site updated it will explain the numbering system. Taylors numbers are easy enough to work out once known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse_Dylan Posted July 31, 2016 Share Posted July 31, 2016 Maybe this has all been said and we've all implicitly agreed to just not talk about it and I missed the social cues. If so, sorry! But Richlite is actually a fantastic fingerboard material, costs more than many woods (certainly more than walnut), and shouldn't be underestimated. We wouldn't know it wasn't wood... if we didn't already know. It won't wear, won't expand/contract, and it shouldn't have any influence on tone. (Can't speak for bridges.) Doesn't mean I want it on my guitar, but I don't want any of these guitars in question anyway. I like Richlite on my Martin D Jr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldCowboy Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 Maybe this has all been said and we've all implicitly agreed to just not talk about it and I missed the social cues. If so, sorry! But Richlite is actually a fantastic fingerboard material, costs more than many woods (certainly more than walnut), and shouldn't be underestimated. We wouldn't know it wasn't wood... if we didn't already know. It won't wear, won't expand/contract, and it shouldn't have any influence on tone. (Can't speak for bridges.) Doesn't mean I want it on my guitar, but I don't want any of these guitars in question anyway. I like Richlite on my Martin D Jr. I keep trying to find out if a Richlite board will refret as easily as wood, but nobody responds.... By the way, how is your D-Jr? It's one that has my attention, but haven't played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyearspickn Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 As Hogeye noted - the name would tend to put off a traditional (read 'older') guitarist. Naming a guitar something like a BMW would appeal more to younger players. The looks also would appeal to those who are attracted to the 'look' of the mass-produced, look-alike models from Taylor and Martin. And, I think that target market would also see RichLite as positively as BudLite or Coors Lite. ...... Once RichLite gradually becomes acceptable as a fretboard material, the makers will start using it for bridges, bridge plates and bracing. By then, "Better Living Through Chemistry" will develop a way to make RichLite look like real wood, with grains, bear claws and knotholes - and our grandchildren will never look back. They'll view all wood guitars the way we view aeroplanes with propellors. I think the HPs are as attractive as a "First Act" and would go well with a guitar strap made of duct tape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldCowboy Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 As Hogeye noted - the name would tend to put off a traditional (read 'older') guitarist. Naming a guitar something like a BMW would appeal more to younger players. The looks also would appeal to those who are attracted to the 'look' of the mass-produced, look-alike models from Taylor and Martin. And, I think that target market would also see RichLite as positively as BudLite or Coors Lite. ...... Once RichLite gradually becomes acceptable as a fretboard material, the makers will start using it for bridges, bridge plates and bracing. By then, "Better Living Through Chemistry" will develop a way to make RichLite look like real wood, with grains, bear claws and knotholes - and our grandchildren will never look back. They'll view all wood guitars the way we view aeroplanes with propellors. I think the HPs are as attractive as a "First Act" and would go well with a guitar strap made of duct tape. OK, now what do you REALLY think? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josee Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 I keep trying to find out if a Richlite board will refret as easily as wood, but nobody responds.... As far as a refret job over a Richlite fingerboard is concerned (and I'm no luthier!), I would imagine that it would have to be somewhat "warmed up" in order to work the fret slots. From numerous google searches on the subject, Richlite could be beneficial for those who have extreme weather conditions (very dry environment due to heating during winter and very humid during summer, i.e. in Canada - guitars becoming unplayable at every change of season in need of a 1/8th truss rod adjustment - or residents of Hawaii and Arizona). Durable fret wires would have to be taken into consideration should you need a refret job. I didn't know what Richlite was up until a week ago...as I thought it was a wood specie like Cocobolo, Granadillo and/or Ebony! LOL Some people will prefer "laminated back & sides" guitars too... I prefer to stay away from "laminated guitars" and...Richlite! ;) Best would be to meet with a "luthier" that you trust and discuss what are the Richlite care tips and how much a refret job could cost. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.