OldCowboy

My priest is cool, but the music director fancies himself to be the 'star' of the service and no pickers or strummers need apply!

Wish mine would ask me to play guitar!😇

With winter coming, you might consider which Taylor would burn longest in an emergency. Just joking, of course😄

👍

Hell, I feel like I'm ALWAYS a rambling mess. The D-25b is one I've not encountered or heard of previously. Something to watch for, now that I know there's such a thing out there. I'll try to give you a heads-up if I fall across an early 70's that might work for you. Personally, I tend to prefer mid-late 70's, and none of the hog tops lend themselves to what I do - though if they fit your needs, you can't do much better. And I agree that the hog tops with ply are better than the all-solid mahogany: it's gotta be that arched back!

Then, I wouldn't worry. It was produced at about the same time as my D-35 and that's the only guitar I ever bought new that I esteemed highly enough to keep. People who are playing newer Guilds have told me that they wish theirs sounded like mine - I always advise 'em to keep playing theirs for nearly 40 years and they won't be disappointed😁

When I looked for info a few minutes back, one thing I DID find stated that minor anomalies of that sort aren't uncommon within that time frame. My guess is that the logo isn't wrong, just not typical.

VERY cool! In your position, I'd be inclined to go for it👍 Was unable to locate any further information that would apply. Be sure to keep updates coming😐

I've seen maybe one other hog top/arch back D-25, but don't recall from which part of the 1970's it hailed. The idea of the D-25 was originally to use spruce tops that didn't measure up to Guild's usual cosmetic standards by staining them to a dark mahogany or cherry shade. Same notion by which Gibson used to separate J-45 and J-50 tops. Later, the hog top D-25 emerged, interspersed with the occasional maple. Nothing wrong with either variety, but the hog sound and the spruce sound can be subtly different (consider the difference with vintage Martin 15 series guitars and 18 series guitars when both used standard bracing). This isn't a bad thing, necessarily, depending on what sound potential you prefer. The white logo, to my knowledge, wasn't used on D-25 models in the 1970's. My '78 D-35 has one in MOP, but that's part of the custom inlay I had done a year or so after purchase. So the D-25 pictured could be wearing either anomaly or aftermarket headstock inlay. I can't imagine that either would be at all negative. On a whim, I'm going to check for Guild serial number info and such and will report back with whatever I can or can't find. Hope this helps!

Appears to be a hog top; unusual to see in combination with the arched back; also, most have decal headstock logo in gold.

All I've played have had fairly robust necks.

Just thought to add a bit to my other post. The Guild is a long-scale guitar, if that matters. Also, a good'n will be very solidly built and give you an amalgam of J-45 and D-18.

The model you mention actually exists in three 1970's incarnations. Two are more common: the archback mahogany b/s with very dark-stained spruce top, and the all-hog flat-back version with conventional back struts & hog top. There's also a D-25c which doesn't show up as often identical to the archback D-25m, but with more of a dark cherry stain. I owned a hog top model briefly and would agree with the earlier post that it leaves a lot to be desired. Either spruce model with the arched back is far better-sounding, as far as I'm concerned - fine volume, strong (but not boomy) bass response, clear trebles with a moderate ring. I've played several, and found them to be on a par with my Guild D-35.

Mirrors and smartphones. Today's my day in school for sure!

😒😮😄😂😅😋

Mirror! Ah, hell, I've been trying to get my head inside the soundhole😦

Elderly even has a collection from various acoustics de-balled by their repair dept.!

I see the wisdom. It's not unlike removing a 'vintage tone ball' from the instrument. Sure to affect a change and not always for the better. I believe in treating my tone balls well!

Other than a mass exodus from this thread, I can offer only one final positively-intended thought on this matter: since return and warranty are not viable alternatives, since accepting the guitar as it is does not appear to be a viable alternative, since selling it to someone else and moving on - losses counted and lesson learned - a suggestion I made in the form of a riduculous joke offer earlier in this thread - hasn't met with any notice from the OP, how about a complete refin and glue dribble eradication performed by a luthier of the OP's own choosing? Failing that, I have a few TRULY negative ideas I would prefer not to contribute and likely won't.

And, bless us all, we keep on tryin'😩

I have unbounded respect for those who have added their thoughts to this thread. That holds true for other members and their contributions as well. As SBP observed, being blunt doesn't mean being rude. It can, of course, but that's far from the case in the present circumstances. What I read in this thread is a group of concerned individuals trying to lend support and becoming frustrated by the OP's inability or unwillingness to consider what is being or has been said. Put a different way, I believe most of us would have walked away from this pity party a ways back if our motivation was to be rude. As it stands, we're all trying our best to lend support and find a way to make clear a point that the OP manages to miss no matter how it's presented.

True. Please don't misunderstand: I didn't mean to come off sounding negative about Buc's post - quite the opposite. Short of suggesting things that'd likely be deleted by the authorities, I don't believe it could be said any better.

Can it be stated more clearly than that? Maybe we should get a contest going to see who can be the most blunt and brutal. Kudos, Buc👍👍👍 I hope I don't have to try topping that one😄

OMG! I can't stop laughing 😃😄😂😅

You own a very nice guitar, and if I may presume to speak for many here at the forum, we are happy for you and are glad you and your new Gibson are now among the rest of us. I'm sorry if you're not 100% happy with your purchase, but the best we can offer here is a sense of belonging, reassurance if you need it, access to whatever knowledge/information/ experience that we collectively hold, and whatever advice individual members are able to provide. You seem to be saying that, when you buy something, you expect it to conform to your personal standard of perfection. There's nothing wrong with that, but it goes to say that you therefore won't make a purchase that doesn't meet your standards. I have no idea what to tell you beyond what has already been said. All I can think to ask (and it's a question that has already been posed here) is why did you buy it in the first place knowing what your standards are and realizing there was no possibility of return?