Bob Isaac Posted July 26, 2013 Share Posted July 26, 2013 Has anyone ever seen these marks around the bridge of a Gibson acoustic? You are looking at the dot like marks around the bridge. This photo is of a BJA J-180, but I know a shop that has the same marks on a few other models. I was told by a luthier this indicates a post production refinish where the masking has been removed from around the bridge. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duluthdan Posted July 26, 2013 Share Posted July 26, 2013 I have those on my Custom Shop Southern Jumbo, figured the clamp was a bit tight, not from masking tape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted July 27, 2013 Share Posted July 27, 2013 . Normal. Sometimes the finish gets sucked in between the grain lines under the bridge causing this visual where the finish is a tad lower between the grain lines right next to the bridge. You'll notice no finish dimples on the bridge sides parallel with the grain. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrorod Posted July 27, 2013 Share Posted July 27, 2013 A deal breaker! I would raise Holy Hell ! Just kidding! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modoc_333 Posted July 27, 2013 Share Posted July 27, 2013 . Normal. Sometimes the finish gets sucked in between the grain lines under the bridge causing this visual where the finish is a tad lower between the grain lines right next to the bridge. You'll notice no finish dimples on the bridge sides parallel with the grain. . This is it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Isaac Posted July 27, 2013 Author Share Posted July 27, 2013 . Normal. Sometimes the finish gets sucked in between the grain lines under the bridge causing this visual where the finish is a tad lower between the grain lines right next to the bridge. You'll notice no finish dimples on the bridge sides parallel with the grain. . These marks were all around the bridge; all 4 sides. None of my SJ have these marks. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted July 27, 2013 Share Posted July 27, 2013 . Can't see it on the side in the posted pic. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuitarLight Posted July 27, 2013 Share Posted July 27, 2013 Unacceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted July 27, 2013 Share Posted July 27, 2013 I got them too....no big deal...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobouz Posted July 27, 2013 Share Posted July 27, 2013 . Normal. Sometimes the finish gets sucked in between the grain lines under the bridge causing this visual where the finish is a tad lower between the grain lines right next to the bridge. You'll notice no finish dimples on the bridge sides parallel with the grain. Normal? Maybe the 'new normal' for Gibson. This wouldn't keep me from owning a Gibson that was stellar in tone & playability, but it looks like something you'd expect to see on one of those Fox guitars! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Isaac Posted July 27, 2013 Author Share Posted July 27, 2013 . Can't see it on the side in the posted pic. . No because of the angle I took the photo, but I assure you they were all around the bridge. The guitar went back. If they leave the factory like this then I put it down to poor QC. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogeye Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 No because of the angle I took the photo, but I assure you they were all around the bridge. The guitar went back. If they leave the factory like this then I put it down to poor QC. Bob It's probably best you sent it back. Someone that knows a good guitar will enjoy it. When Gibson finishes a guitar they do it without the bridge attached. After the top is buffed then they place the bridge on the top and score the lacquer around it with a very sharp blade. Then they take the bridge off and remove the lacquer from the top so the bridge gets a wood to wood surface. Then they glue the bridge down. What you are looking at is just the edge of the lacquer that has been removed for the bridge placement. This is not a result of faulty workmanship or poor quality control. Most Gibson guitars will show this or something similar. If you don't see this on your guitar then the bridge is slightly covering the edge of the lacquer score and that is no problem either. You should see what they have to do to glue down a J-200 bridge. It's quite a process. A trip to the "Homecoming" would let you see this process and you would understand what you are looking at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 It's probably best you sent it back. Someone that knows a good guitar will enjoy it. When Gibson finishes a guitar they do it without the bridge attached. After the top is buffed then they place the bridge on the top and score the lacquer around it with a very sharp blade. Then they take the bridge off and remove the lacquer from the top so the bridge gets a wood to wood surface. Then they glue the bridge down. What you are looking at is just the edge of the lacquer that has been removed for the bridge placement. This is not a result of faulty workmanship or poor quality control. Most Gibson guitars will show this or something similar. If you don't see this on your guitar then the bridge is slightly covering the edge of the lacquer score and that is no problem either. You should see what they have to do to glue down a J-200 bridge. It's quite a process. A trip to the "Homecoming" would let you see this process and you would understand what you are looking at. And other manufacturers do it differently ? I'm sorry but this shouldn't be seem outside the factory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuitarLight Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Normal? Maybe the 'new normal' for Gibson. This wouldn't keep me from owning a Gibson that was stellar in tone & playability, but it looks like something you'd expect to see on one of those Fox guitars! I couldn't agree more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rar Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 And other manufacturers do it differently ? ... Yes. For example, Martin extends the finish significantly under the bridge. The result is a weaker joint, and it is also the ultimate cause of the finish checks at the rear corners of the bridge that are so common on new Martins. Take a few factory tours and you'll see lots of differences in manufacturing techniques at the big three. Gibson's bridge fitting technique is much more expensive than what is done at Martin and Taylor, and the result is a much superior joint. If the cosmetics bug you, you will have to take your business elsewhere. Luckily, there are plenty of other options. -- Bob R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuitarLight Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 No because of the angle I took the photo, but I assure you they were all around the bridge. The guitar went back. If they leave the factory like this then I put it down to poor QC. Bob Good move. Guitars with defects such as these should go back. I've yet to see a $99.00 Epiphone with this defect. Sending defective product back signals the company to improve quality control. Without this consumer reaction, improvements are seldom made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogeye Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 And other manufacturers do it differently ? I'm sorry but this shouldn't be seem outside the factory. Sigh.... Yes, other makers do it differently. Very few use nitrocelluose lacquer. Those that do attach their bridges over the lacquer or they glue the bridge on and then mask it and apply the top finish. Gibson chooses to do it their way as it is far supperior to the other methods. It is very time consuming and costly. It is sad that a few that don't understand the difficulty with working with lacquer and it's benefits don't just take the time to enjoy playing their guitar instead of finding fault with it where there is none. I know. I know. Why chose to do it this way? If the bridge ever needs to come off for whatever reason. Oh, I don't know maybe the wood was dried out and it cracked or it was exposed to extreme heat and the glue gave out. Something silly like that- then you would appreciate the way Gibson does this. If the guitar has the bridge masked and then sprayed, then when the bridge needs to come off the repairman needs to score the finish and then remove the bridge. This can cause the finish to flake off and chip. Then you will have real problems. They will have to refinish the whole top or build a bigger bridge to cover the damage. It's easy to criticize something you don't understand or appreciate. Believe this. All repair people appreciate the extra effort Gibson makes in attaching their bridges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuestionMark Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Sounds like a case of old world manufacturing clashing with the influence of Taylor Guitars' on-going marketing (to sell their instruments) about asthetics resulting from their mixing cost efficient technology...plus, the overall affect of overseas mass market guitar manufacturing now having been raised to a higher quality control level. In other words, in the 1800 or 1900's no one would have ever criticized old world hand crafted manufacturing marks of a fine instrument. Wherein today's world, anything that doesn't look like a sterile perfect machine made manufacturing job now can potentially come across as an unacceptable manufacturing flaw or blemish. I shudder to think where this will lead to in terms of the future of fine guitars and their making. Seems to me, Asian import car makers made blemish free cars and with them, American factory made cars began competing untile they virtually destropyed all the cool vibe that used to be in American made cars and that's when they really began to financially struggle and all cars began to look kinda the same and cell phones became more cool to own than American made cars. Just some hopefully thought provoking comments to toss out on this Sunday afternoon... QM aka Jazzman Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogeye Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Good move. Guitars with defects such as these should go back. I've yet to see a $99.00 Epiphone with this defect. Sending defective product back signals the company to improve quality control. Without this consumer reaction, improvements are seldom made. You will never see this on a $99.00 Epi because they finish them by dipping them in a bucket of plastic. That's why they cost $99.00. If you like the way they sound and their cost then you need to buy them and save the Gibsons for people that appreciate quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Sigh.... Yes, other makers do it differently. Very few use nitrocelluose lacquer. Those that do attach their bridges over the lacquer or they glue the bridge on and then mask it and apply the top finish. Gibson chooses to do it their way as it is far supperior to the other methods. It is very time consuming and costly. It is sad that a few that don't understand the difficulty with working with lacquer and it's benefits don't just take the time to enjoy playing their guitar instead of finding fault with it where there is none. I know. I know. Why chose to do it this way? If the bridge ever needs to come off for whatever reason. Oh, I don't know maybe the wood was dried out and it cracked or it was exposed to extreme heat and the glue gave out. Something silly like that- then you would appreciate the way Gibson does this. If the guitar has the bridge masked and then sprayed, then when the bridge needs to come off the repairman needs to score the finish and then remove the bridge. This can cause the finish to flake off and chip. Then you will have real problems. They will have to refinish the whole top or build a bigger bridge to cover the damage. It's easy to criticize something you don't understand or appreciate. Believe this. All repair people appreciate the extra effort Gibson makes in attaching their bridges. I hope you're not getting me wrong. I love my Gibson as much as the next guy in here. But this is a flaw in the finish. And the marketing plan seems to be that if you want something handmade and not mass produced then you should accept these flaws . everyones entitled to their opinion but any guitar over a grand shouldn't have any flaws. Regardless of anything . Edit: if all the guitars had this defect / character mark then I would bend my opinion a little , but everytime someone has a defect then it's ' that's what happens with handmade instruments' . not in a million years would you see a blemish on a lowden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 No need to attack this guy because he doesn't like these marks. If he doesn't like it, just return it, and wait for one that doesn't have these marks...It is no big deal for me, but others have different fit and finish requirements when they lay out this kind of bread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuestionMark Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 not in a million years would you see a blemish on a lowden. Can't resist this one...Tommy Emmanuel sure makes sure if a Lowden has no blemishes before it reaches him, it sure does as soon as he plays one in his phenomenal holistic manner (as a guitar, scratchboard, a drum.) QM aka Jazzman Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuitarLight Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 You will never see this on a $99.00 Epi because they finish them by dipping them in a bucket of plastic. That's why they cost $99.00. If you like the way they sound and their cost then you need to buy them and save the Gibsons for people that appreciate quality. There's no need to run down an Epi just because it has a perfect poly finish, ultra thin, --if your going to be honest,not dipped in plastic... sweat proof, with perfect transmissions of sound. I say again, ANY guitar costing $1000 plus should NOT have this or any other consistent and repeated flaws. And if they do, then it is the manufacturers OBLIGATION to correct the manufacturing process to fix the problem. Gibson sticky necks are an example of an unwillingness to change for the better. Anyone who has ever played a Taylor poly neck...or a Martin modern poly neck ---(YES Martin DOES use poly necks since the year 2000, with the lacquer body on all models---per Martin to improve neck stickiness)..which is an example of logical improvement. To manufacture guitars refusing to adhere to proved modern improvements is not a good thing. And if this Gibson bridge picture is an example of REPEATED problems..as others have stated on this thread..then Gibson should change the process to something more perfected in an attempt to better its quality control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 . These tiny dimples, more noticeable on some examples than others, are not a flaw, defect, or bad QC. Most Gibson acoustics will show these tiny dimples in the "right" light at the "right" angle to a certain extent. I've got a J-200 and a Southern Jumbo TV and if you get a look at them in a certain light and angle you can see the same tiny dimples (a tough pic on the J-200, but I got one). Regardless, they look great to me. This kind of concern also crops up once in awhile about the end of the fretboard deck area that doesn't get buffed on some acoustic and hollow body models - members that have been around a while know about that one. I thought that one was questionable until the finishing method Gibson uses was explained to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobouz Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 It's probably best you sent it back. Someone that knows a good guitar will enjoy it. I had forgotten about this thread since previously posting on it, but something made me think about it again & I went back to see what else might have been posted. Lo & behold I discover the unnecessary dig above, and justifications for the markings in question which promote the virtues of the process, along with the fact that Gibson finishes in nitro while many others do not. A lot of BS, imho. I've looked at many high quality nitro finished guitars in the last 40+ years, and so have many of you. In particular, lots of vintage Gibsons, Martins, and Guilds from the '50s, 60s, and '70s. Never have I encountered the kind of scored marks surrounding the bridge on the OP's guitar. Does Gibson's process make for a good gluing surface? Maybe so. Is it necessary to achieve a high quality bridge installation? Obviously not, as witnessed by all the high quality instruments that do not display these marks. This reminds me a bit of the bridge plate placement-hole issue. It's a building process decision for Montana that on some instruments has resulted in a less than ideal outcome. If they want to build & release them that way, it's their product & they can do whatever they believe works best for them. Does that mean this method is necessary or ideal? No. Does it visually impart high build quality? Absolutely not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.