Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Tell me about the Gibson Gospel


EuroAussie

Recommended Posts

I know Gibson changed the headstock inlay on the 1994...wasn't aware if they changed the bridge, though. I'm not sure if they changed the pickguard, but I will say that the 1994 one in the photo in the e-bay link at the very beginning of this thread appears to possibly have a slightly larger pickguard than mine does...

 

Nice job on Classical Gas!

 

Here's a large picture of my 1993. You can see the pickguard is smaller and the curved side of the bridge is on the soundhole side (or backwards as I like to say.) Dove headstock inlay also.

 

Btw, I enjoyed your comments on the Gospel. It's gratifying to hear someone with so many different guitars say the Gospel is one of their favorites.

 

gospel2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting...you're right, they changed the bridge between the two years from what is cmmonly referred to as a top belly bridge (facing the soundhole) to a bottom belly bridge (facing away from the soundhole.) Didn't notice that one before. FYI, Gibson has variated using the top belly and the bottom belly bridge design over the years on a number of model year designs. Not really sure what the difference in placement, if any, results in. I always took it to be kinda like the way cars in the 60s would change some minor detail between model years. If someone can chime in on any potential structural or tonal changes with either a top or bottom belly bridge design being use (or is it just a cosmetic thing) it'll be interesting to learn or speculate on. Also, if there is any actual difference with a square shaped non-bellied bridge when it is used, as some models and model years of different guitars have.

 

QM aka Jazzman Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really sure what the difference in placement, if any, results in. I always took it to be kinda like the way cars in the 60s would change some minor detail between model years.

 

Pure speculation on my part but I assumed Martin came up with the belly bridge design first and used the bottom belly approach. Gibson, recognizing the superior adhesion properties from the larger surface area, but not wanting to copy Martin (or maybe to avoid patent infringement), just flipped it around.

 

From a structural standpoint, the bottom belly approach makes more sense to me since there is more area glued down behind the saddle to react against the strings as they try to lift up the bridge. I have no data to suggest there are any structural issues with either approach assuming a properly glued bridge. Soundwise, I seriously doubt there is any difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

I don,t know anything about the newer reissue Dove .Some of the older ones made in the seventies with maple back and sides sounded great. My friend had one and it always impressed me.I was playing a very good Martin D35 at the time and that is what I was comparing it with. If its laminated and it sounds good who cares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...

Hi everybody,

 

I recently did a lot of researches to know a bit more about the 1995 Gibson Gospel I just bought (here in Canada). I mostly found that... a lot of messy and false informations are written.

 

So, yesterday, I wrote to Gibson Talk 2 Us platform, asking if the '90s Gospel reissues have solid mahogany or laminated back and sides. I had an answer 12 hours later!

 

Here's:

 

"Hello Hubert,

 

They have solid mahogany back and sides. The 70s version is laminated.

 

Best,

 

Jordan Hall

Gibson Customer Service"

 

So, the search is over. The Gospel reissues are all solid wood guitars!

 

Keep on playin'!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi everybody,

 

I recently did a lot of researches to know a bit more about the 1995 Gibson Gospel I just bought (here in Canada). I mostly found that... a lot of messy and false informations are written.

 

So, yesterday, I wrote to Gibson Talk 2 Us platform, asking if the '90s Gospel reissues have solid mahogany or laminated back and sides. I had an answer 12 hours later!

 

Here's:

 

"Hello Hubert,

 

They have solid mahogany back and sides. The 70s version is laminated.

 

Best,

 

Jordan Hall

Gibson Customer Service"

 

So, the search is over. The Gospel reissues are all solid wood guitars!

 

Keep on playin'!

 

You are getting fake info, though it may be well intended. The book, Gibson's Fabulous Flat Tops as well as the annual Vintage Guitar Guide and Gruhn's Guide to Vintage Guitars documents the back of the reissue is laminated as was the original. The difference being the original had a maple arched lam back while the reissue has a mahogany arched lam back. The lack of any bracings on the inside of the arched back further demonstrates its laminated on the arched back as does the lower price of either when it was new. There is no way Gibson could sell a carved piece of solid wood in the shape of an arched back and sell it for the price it was sold at new. They legendary story is Gibson had an oversupply of laminated arched backs sitting around in Nashville for the ES175 and decided they could put them to use on the Gospel. Might be a true story or a legendary myth...

 

I have a 1994 Gospel. It has an arched lam back and others I've seen do, too. Sounds great with it! The Fab Flattop book says it makes a good sound chamber!

 

BTW, all 3 books also say the sides are also laminated.

 

You might want to write Jordan back with the 3 source book names and correct info so he can properly respond on Gospels for the next inquiry he gets.

 

Hope this helps.

 

QM aka Jazzman Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, ladies in gentlemen, my bubble did burst.

 

I called directly to Gibson and the guy did few researches for me. He came to the conclusion it is probably laminated but he has an information that some of the reissues have a solid back. But mine, a 1995 model, has probably a laminated back.

 

He told me, maybe he felt my disappointment, that he doesn't understand this fight between solid or laminated back. For him, there's no difference in sound.

 

Anyway, I like my guitar so...

 

Sorry if I seemed pretentious yesterday; that was not my goal. It was enthousiasm!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, ladies in gentlemen, my bubble did burst.

 

I called directly to Gibson and the guy did few researches for me. He came to the conclusion it is probably laminated but he has an information that some of the reissues have a solid back. But mine, a 1995 model, has probably a laminated back.

 

He told me, maybe he felt my disappointment, that he doesn't understand this fight between solid or laminated back. For him, there's no difference in sound.

 

Anyway, I like my guitar so...

 

Sorry if I seemed pretentious yesterday; that was not my goal. It was enthousiasm!

 

 

No prob! No worries! Forum expertise rules! As does the pursuit of learning more about Gibson guitars.

 

Here BTW is some additional documentation for future reference in case this topic comes up, again. Attached are photos in this post and the next few posts of Gospel Reissue research pages (you need to click on them to enlarge them) from Gruhn's Guide to Vintage Guitars, a 2012 VG Guide, the Gibson's Fabulous Flat-Tops Book, and the inside of my guitar. Gruhn's and the VG Guide refer to the Gospel Reissue backs as laminated. The Fab Flat-tops Book calls them multi-ply (same thing as laminated.) You'll note the inside of my Gospel Reissue has no bracing for the laminated arched back.

 

Multi-posts are necessary as the site keeps telling me I can only load one photo at a time due to size restrictions.

 

Hope the photos are clear. No guarantees. Click on them to enlarge them.

 

 

QM aka Jazzman Jeff

post-61-052298500 1505339719_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No prob! No worries! Forum expertise rules! As does the pursuit of learning more about Gibson guitars.

 

Here BTW is some additional documentation for future reference in case this topic comes up, again. Attached are photos in this post and the next few posts of Gospel Reissue research pages (you need to click on them to enlarge them) from Gruhn's Guide to Vintage Guitars, a 2012 VG Guide, the Gibson's Fabulous Flat-Tops Book, and the inside of my guitar. Gruhn's and the VG Guide refer to the Gospel Reissue backs as laminated. The Fab Flat-tops Book calls them multi-ply (same thing as laminated.) You'll note the inside of my Gospel Reissue has no bracing for the laminated arched back.

 

Multi-posts are necessary as the site keeps telling me I can only load one photo at a time due to size restrictions.

 

Hope the photos are clear. No guarantees. Click on them to enlarge them.

 

 

QM aka Jazzman Jeff

 

 

Here's another Gospel Reissue research photo.

post-61-038320900 1505340360_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Ok... All you Gospel haters lol. The 93 reissue is 20 times better than any $300 epi that I’ve ever played also more durable than any guitar I’ve ever owned. Sounds great, Plays great. Sure its not as fancy as some others but my Gospel will hold its on against any acoustic. Ive played mine for over 25 years and I speak from experience. I think theres one too many assumptions on this post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...