Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

bobouz

All Access
  • Content Count

    3,810
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

bobouz last won the day on February 9 2018

bobouz had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

251 Good

About bobouz

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It’s simply another option from Gibson, and I think that’s great! Anyone with enough money to spend on this will inevitably consider it a Montana Gibson, just like anyone looking to buy a ‘60s Kalamazoo-made Epiphone knows, in reality it’s a Kalamazoo Gibson. And quite correctly, market values reflect just that. Bravo to Gibson for experimenting with the revival of USA-made Epis.
  2. I bought a brand new J-150 in 2001 for $1850. Also bought my 2000 J-100xtra new for $1500, and still have that one. Doubt I’d be able to bring myself to pay today’s prices!
  3. This is very typical of Guitar Center. Once something hits the floor, it can suffer terribly, but they’ll still ask full price for it. Then it becomes a matter of negotiating with them at the point of sale, or as in this case, after you’ve received it via an internet sale & threaten to return it. One thing to consider: Traditionally, GC has run 15% discounts a number of times per year. Things may have changed, but I’ve never purchased an instrument from them without getting 15% off. They also will price match any sale price from another retail entity on regular stock items, inclu
  4. Gibson's adjustable truss rod first appeared on a few production instruments in late 1921. It was officially in regular production and touted as a structural selling point in 1922. I have an early 1922 Gibson 'A' mandolin with an adjustable trussrod - a very early trussrod example. It works perfectly to this day, and the ebony fingerboard is straight as a arrow. In fact, although worn with ample signs of player use, the entire mandolin is free of cracks and 100% structurally sound. Not bad for an instrument that'll be 100 years old next year!
  5. First, let me qualify this by saying I’m a fingerpicker almost exclusively. What I look for is a balanced tone from low to high notes, with relatively little sustain or overtones - but I do need a reasonably strong bass that doesn’t get lost in my drop-thumb style. This particular Martin does that well, with a rich but direct delivery. It’s actually a long-scale, and although I prefer short-scale, the neck has a slim profile combined with a 1-11/16” nut width which makes it an easy player (however I still don’t care for the 16” fingerboard radius!). It is not harsh in any way, and projects
  6. I haven’t looked at Martin’s lineup in a long time, so I checked it out and yes, they’ve currently returned to ebony on the 16 Series - nice to see. Now if these had a 1-11/16” nut width and 12” fretboard radius, they would indeed have a significant slice of my attention. I played a 1970 00-18 for over twenty years, and currently have a 2000 000-16 (spruce/mahogany w ebony B&B), as well as a 2001 custom dread (spruce/rosewood w ebony B&B) structurally based on the 16 Series, but with a number of Style-45 appointments. Looks to me like the 16 Series once again is offering a solid
  7. Actually, the 16-Series has long had models with solid rosewood back & sides. I considered them a great buy until Martin started slapping Micarta (and then Richlite) on their fingerboards & bridges in 2001 (just a personal thing). Edit: Prior to the above change in ‘01, the board & bridge was striped ebony, a wonderfully smooth wood.
  8. A vote here for keeping it as is if you like the tone. The adjustable saddle changes how string vibrations are transferred to the body - in effect creating more of an archtop bridge relationship. Typically, this results in a slightly metallic quality that many players enjoy, including myself. Frank Ford’s comments in the link above are common luthier-speak. They always rip this design to shreds from an ideal-construction perspective. But in creating this goofy design, Gibson also created a wonderfully unique tone. So if it is structurally stable & you enjoy the tone, I would
  9. Although most folks prefer Klusons for appearance, I greatly prefer Grovers for functionality. I installed similar Grover tulips on my 2002 J-45 Rosewood, but with a nickel finish. And most of my other guitars have regular or mini Grovers, sometimes with swapped out buttons.
  10. Glad it all worked out for you. Enjoy the new guitar!
  11. Fun to compare, in particular the 00-18 & L-2. Thanks for sharing!
  12. Martin trails a wee bit at my house by a score of 17 to 2.
  13. These are relatively minor quibbles of course, but I typically prefer headstocks that are wider at the top, and have a distinctive shape. Gibson, Guild (not Gruhn’s snakeheads), Gallagher, and some Epiphone, Breedlove, & Ibanez shapes are to my liking, in particular the Guild Chesterfield & Gibson flowerpot. Martin’s shape is terribly boring, but it does widen towards the top & the script logo is nice. The Iris headstock doesn’t work well for me on any level, but it certainly is not the worst. To brush up against the other end of the spectrum, the Seagull headstock would be
  14. Hope you’re continuing to enjoy that lovely guitar!
  15. Started riding in 1969 after graduation from high school. The bike was a Honda 305 Superhawk, followed by a 305 Scrambler & another Superhawk. It was all about handling & twisty roads for me. A Kawasaki & another Honda followed - but those 305s were near & dear to my heart, as I took them on some very long trips & never had a breakdown. Also moved on one from Arizona to Oregon with all my worldly possessions! Worked for five years in Honda-Yamaha / Harley-Kawasaki shops in the late ‘70s & early ‘80s, and finally quit riding after years of bundling up to ride to
×
×
  • Create New...