Martin vs Gibson

[Rambler]

"Why is it that there are so many "crap" periods in Gibson's history" Only one, really (Norlin years, 69-80-something), which, curiously, coincides with Martin's worst years under Frank Henry (who may as well have been outside corporate ownership--diversification, etc) and Fender/late CBS (67-80s). It was a bad time for everyone--though, to CFMs credit they did not try a double-X brace or a 3-screw neck attachment.

 

As for bashing. You can find all kinds, Martin snobs and Gibson snobs/anti-snobs, differentiated only by the degree of arrogance/defensiveness. How much much one encounters probably depends more on the circles that one frequents (real and virtual).

[jaxson50]

To many variables to declare one better then another. Martin and Gibson both make so many different models and styles.

Over the years I have owned more Martin then Gibson's, but I would never sell my old Gibson L-4, I just love it. On the other hand I regret selling my 00-18 I bought brand new in 66, man I miss that guitar.

What year Gibson? What year Martin? The you get into each model! Most die hard Gibson fans would agree that Gibson's made very few good guitars during the Norlin years. Like wise Martin has had some bad years.

I think one thing that Martin has going for it is continuity, the same family has owned that company or been involved in making the product since 1833. No other American guitar maker has that heritage.

Martin has some wonderful models, but even Fredrick Martin IV would admit that they have never made a great electric guitar, and their arch tops have not been big hit's although their new model is pretty nice, but not anything like a Gibson L model.

The best advice is, find the guitar that does what you want it to do and play it=

[onewilyfool]

"Why is it that there are so many "crap" periods in Gibson's history" Only one' date=' really (Norlin years, 69-80-something), which, curiously, coincides with Martin's worst years under Frank Henry (who may as well have been outside corporate ownership--diversification, etc) and Fender/late CBS (67-80s). It was a bad time for everyone--though, to CFMs credit they did not try a double-X brace or a 3-screw neck attachment.

 

As for bashing. You can find all kinds, Martin snobs and Gibson snobs/anti-snobs, differentiated only by the degree of arrogance/defensiveness. How much much one encounters probably depends more on the circles that one frequents (real and virtual). [/quote']

 

 

I have talked to several luthiers who do repairs on vintage Gibsons and Martins, and for some reason the old Gibsons have glue problems on braces and such. Still.....a 1930's Martin, or a 1930-40's Gibson....does it get any better????

[tomwoolner]

I had to jump in.

I went to college in Kalamazoo in the mid 60's, and a few Gibsons passed through my hands that I never would have ben able to afford otherwise (2nds from the factory, etc.). I had a 65 SJN, a 1948 sunburst J200 (a piece of crap - the whispering giant), but my favorite of all time was my 65 blonde Hummingbird, purchased from a friend for $125. Had it for over 20 years , then it was stolen.

Sincce then, I have had several guitars pass through my hands - a B25, late 60's Dove, and several Martins, including a 69 0018, a late 60s 00018, a 71 D41, and my current guiitar, a fairly new OM28V.

 

Thay were all different! Some good, some not so good. But if I could only have one, it would be my old Hummingbird. Maybe it is nostalgia, but I loved the neck, the relatively short scale, and the really even sound.

 

I miss the day when everyone could afford a decent vintage guitar. Or cars (I bought a 1958 Jaguar EK150 for $600 dollars once. The battery was dead, so the owner pt a for sale sign on it.)