Interesting take on Norlin era

[ParlourMan]

I heard an interesting take on the Norlin era from a fella I chat to on another forum. He's not particularly a 'Gibson man' as such, however the points raised made me think for a bit, it went along the lines of...

 

"By the late 60's the one-man acoustic scene had been replaced with bigger power bands, large venues and huge PAs with tricky monitoring. This was a nightmare for acoustic players and the desk men. These era Gibsons may now be looked over as the acoustic tone is restricted and compressed from being overbuilt. Back then PA's were not as good as they are today, the overbuilt guitar of the 1970s meant you could actually use it at loud volumes in live situations without too much feedback. The gigging guitarist actually liked them back then."

 

Being a slightly younger pup myself, I can't attest to how true this holds but thought it was an interesting perspective.

[EuroAussie]

Fair enough point, but not very credible. If you look at it from a scale and business perspective, what percentage of your market represents gigging musicians that play through PA's ...5% at best.

 

The other 95% do it as a hobby and are couch players, and thats the source of your business, they would be instead hearing an overbuilt, unreponsive Noelin Gibson, which as we know was reflected in the sales decline in the 70's / 80's until Henry and Ren began sorting it out.

[Phelonious Ponk]

Sounds good, but I think corporate master who understood money but not guitars and built them to limit warranty repairs is probably the more credible explanation. The big limitation to amplifying acoustic guitars in that era was pickups, not body resonance. When the early Barcus-Berry contact mics started gaining in popularity things started changing. I had a pre-double X J-200, with a couple of Barcus Berrys in it as a stage guitar in the early/mid 70s. Turn the right way and you could make it howl, but it was pretty easy to control, And acoustic pickups have been improving ever since.

 

P

[BluesKing777]

Good models to buy if you are a hard hitting guitarist:

 

 

 

 

 

Or wanting to practice your Charlie Patton wacks.

 

 

BluesKing777.

[DanvillRob]

Good models to buy if you are a hard hitting guitarist:

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWDZ5OmyWTU

 

 

Or wanting to practice your Charlie Patton wacks.

 

 

BluesKing777.

 

That was very nice..... such an amazing instrument, the guitar......

[capmaster]

Sounds good, but I think corporate master who understood money but not guitars and built them to limit warranty repairs is probably the more credible explanation. The big limitation to amplifying acoustic guitars in that era was pickups, not body resonance. When the early Barcus-Berry contact mics started gaining in popularity things started changing. I had a pre-double X J-200, with a couple of Barcus Berrys in it as a stage guitar in the early/mid 70s. Turn the right way and you could make it howl, but it was pretty easy to control, And acoustic pickups have been improving ever since.

 

P

This matches my experiences, too. Playing big stages in the early 1980s, and mixing FOH, sometimes stage monitoring, sometimes both from the mid 1980s to the mid 1990s, I witnessed these progresses. The best way to start was to stay cool and work together with the acoustic player(s) during soundcheck, and I think it still is. OK, this is valid for every musician on stage...

 

As a player I totally changed to piezo-equipped solidbodies in the recent past that won't cause any trouble with feedback, no matter if in a rehearsal room or on stage.

[Hall]

Thanks 777. I not only enjoyed that , but learned somrthing as well. Much appreciated.

[E-minor7]

Not a bad or unrealistic theory, but, , , , how come then, they are not seen anywhere ?

From the hip I remember 1 acoustic Gibson at Woodstock - J.B. Sebastian's Heritage and I'm not even sure it was that one he brought on.

R. Havens swang his Guild (of course he did). Country Joe played Yamaha and Joan Baez her smaller Triple-O something Martin. Tim Hardin played a riddle ?

CSN&Y was an incarnated Martin dread-group and never touched anything from Kalamazoo apart from a couple of J-200's.

Oh yea, Nash' black double guarded slope from the period was a modified Epiphone Texan, but from long before Norlin.

R. Robinson of The Band played what must have been a D-28, , , and is seen with a Guild during those years.

Apart from that, Stones f.x. never brought a Bird on stage - in fact I've never seen a big act play a Gibson on stage around 1970, , , , untill Cat Stevens (lords bless him) introduced his blonde J-200. Eeeehhh, , , except Bob who strummed the famous Super Jumbo at The Isle of Wight 1969. But it was from '68 and the cherry burst J-45 in Donovans hands at that same fest the following year is the extremely well sounding later stolen ceramic saddled 1964'er.

Ian Anderson used an, , , , , Aria !!! in the early years and Joni swore to her beloved D-28. First saw Paul Simon with a Gibson a few years back. . . .

Okay, let's not forget J. Taylor and his splendid rosewood saddled J-50 - a big hep for that classic pair.

 

I'm sure a lot of Gibsons were used here and there in the studio, but on (the rock'n'roll) stage - extraordinary seldom.

Please correct and teach me if I overlook something.

That would be nice ,-)

[E-minor7]

Then let's take it all a level down and forget about the major league.

Let's see if we can find photos of lesser 70's-bands swinging those Norlins.

Naturally they'll be present and it will be possible to bump into a square Gibson with rectangular fretboard marks in East and Western showbiz, but my bet still is -

 

not many. . . .

 

Another overwhelming reason : The acoustic 70's soon belonged somewhere else - The Ovation Nation.

 

[zombywoof]

The Stones surely did change it all in 1969.

 

But I agree with another post - the change in venues and sound systems had nothing to do with Gibson's way of building guitars and the resulting sound. That, I am afraid, had far more to do with cutting costs, increasing production, and avoiding warranty issues.

[zombywoof]

[/b]Another overwhelming reason : The acoustic 70's soon belonged somewhere else - The Ovation Nation.

 

 

 

You forget Guild - the one oasis in a desert of guitar mediocrity.

[E-minor7]

The Stones surely did change it all in 1969.

 

Pardon, but what did Stones change in 1969 -

, , , apart from introducing womens outfit on frontmen and messing up a surreal cake on the back-sleeve of one magnificent record and thereby introducing/anticipating downright destruction in the aestetics of rock'n'roll.

A theme they already flirted with the year before.

 

[ParlourMan]

I'm certainly not inclined to jump onboard with it myself, the only bit I found to actually consider was if it was actually possible for less resonant instruments to be less feedback prone.

 

Must admit, with the clown bursts, the dodgy specs and whatnot I wouldn't fork out anywhere close to the price tag they go for. But I'm curious if 'the gigging musician liked them back then' as said above the 'faces' of the time didn't seem to be sporting them, they're not remembered fondly. I thought it was quite interesting from a 'non gibson' guy though.

[capmaster]

Then let's take it all a level down and forget about the major league.

Let's see if we can find photos of lesser 70's-bands swinging those Norlins.

Naturally they'll be present and it will be possible to bump into a square Gibson with rectangular fretboard marks in East and Western showbiz, but my bet still is -

 

not many. . . .

 

Another overwhelming reason : The acoustic 70's soon belonged somewhere else - The Ovation Nation.

 

Seems that by the early 1980s the big stages around the world had changed to a huge Ovation Nation. Regardless of a wide range of personal opinions, they were conveniently to handle for the whole PA crew since you just needed a cable instead of a mic. Among all acoustic guitars of that time, stock Ovations were least prone to feedback. However, there were weaknesses in the circuit like a relatively high output impedance when turned down due to relatively high resistance output pot that caused severe treble loss already with the usual 6 meters (approx. 20 feet) cable runs, so the players preferred to keep them cranked up permanently.

[Phelonious Ponk]

It may have been worse for Gibson/Norlin. God knows the double X and the adjustible bridges were ill-advised, but it wasn't a good era for any American guitar company I'm aware of. I've played a lot of guitars from that era; I'm of that era, and I wouldn't pay vintage prices for any of them. Gibsons, Guilds, even Martins...while they all had instruments that turned out pretty good, as a genaral rule, in the late 60s/70s they were heavy, quiet, over-built tanks compared to the $300 Asian Breedlove my bandmate just bought. Electrics? 70s Fenders are considered vintage collectibles and bring prices in the thousands. I owned a couple of them back in the day. My Indonesian G&L is a much better guitar.

 

By the way, I find an exception to be some of the small-bodied Martins of that era. Maybe they just didn't get the corporate attention to get buggered. A buddy of mine has a '71 New Yorker he bought new, had the neck re-set a couple of years ago under warranty! That thing vibrates like a dry leaf in the wind. It is a revelation.

 

P

[drathbun]

I was 21 in 1977. I traded my '72 Yamaha FG140 for a brand spankin' new 1977 Gibson Hummingbird. I wanted THAT guitar because it was the one I saw Gordon Lightfoot with (I was wrong about that). I had only been playing guitar for a few years and wasn't very good but even my untrained ears could tell I had bought a POS. I used to quip at the time that it sounded like it was stuffed with (feminine product). I finally sold it in 1984 for $400 (paid $750 for it). After that I owned Yamahas and Larrivees and didn't touch a Gibson for almost 20 years. I would think that I was the consumer of these products through those times and I was the market... a young, acoustic guitar playing, non-gigging, amateur musician with disposable income.

 

So, as interesting as that theory might be, I don't believe it for a second. In addition, it assumes that Gibson was making decisions about guitar construction based on current live music setups and based on solid research on how an overbraced, unresponsive box of wood would react in a loud amplified environment. I dun thin so Lucy! Money drove those decisions nothing else.

[zombywoof]

Pardon, but what did Stones change in 1969 -

, , , apart from introducing womens outfit on frontmen and messing up a surreal cake on the back-sleeve of one magnificent record and thereby introducing/anticipating downright destruction in the aestetics of rock'n'roll.

A theme they already flirted with the year before.

 

 

 

Guess you were not there. Prior to 1969, cpncerts were still pretty much being held in smaller veues. I actually saw Zep in a skating rink in Central Park. The Stones 1969 tour ushering in the era of arena shows. They quickly found that their Fender Showman amps did not pack the power to be heard. They had Marshalls or Hiwatts sent in from England but found they were wired for European voltage. Ampeg stepped in and supplied them with their brand new SVT amps for the tour.

 

The 1969 and 1972 Stones tours remnain the best.

[DanvillRob]

Guess you were not there. Prior to 1969, cpncerts were still pretty much being held in smaller veues. I actually saw Zep in a skating rink in Central Park. The Stones 1969 tour ushering in the era of arena shows. They quickly found that their Fender Showman amps did not pack the power to be heard. They had Marshalls or Hiwatts sent in from England but found they were wired for European voltage. Ampeg stepped in and supplied them with their brand new SVT amps for the tour.

 

The 1969 and 1972 Stones tours remnain the best.

 

 

The first time I saw the Stones, they were at the San Jose Civic Auditorium.... I think it holds 3,500.

[E-minor7]

Guess you were not there.

You are right and not right – I was there and not there.

 

Got my first Stones single in '65, saw the 1969 Hyde Park concert in tv and definitely was aware when they played an indoor stadium here 3 years after that.

But no, I wasn't into PA-systems and live set-upsat all. I fully believe what you claim regarding magnitude and volume for live-events.

And of course will be the last to underrate their influence in general. They were the first to build their own tent for outdoor shows too.

 

Some claim the band lost its soul in 1969 – and kind of got swallowed by Lucifer himself. It's not totally off.

The demise of Jones, the increasing drug'n'alco thing, the fatal Altamont accident all contributed to a more and more savage spiral.

Both the 69* and 72**US-tour is pretty well documented and it's not hard to see how new standards on different levels would be introduced during that period.

No doubt that Let It Bleed and Get Yer Ya Ya's Out are among the best rock'n'roll records ever released, but I still see Stones' main game-changer comin' a few years before.

In fact when they manifested themselves as the black hats opposed to the white hat-Fabs in 1965 (to use a phrase of Richards').

 

Artistically they exploded in fierce series between 1965 and 73. It was the motherland of Rolling Stones.

 

 

*Jagger remembers this as something special.

 

**Guess T. Capote was hired to write about this trip. Got aboard the circus, but twisted the task into something else, , , there is some sort of readable result though.

[zombywoof]

To get back to the original post, you can spin it any way you want but the Norlin-era Gibson acoustics represented a low point not only in Gibson's history but in the history of the guitar making universe. The electrics seemed to fare better. Gibson R&D folks were coming up with some really interesting instruments.

[E-minor7]

To get back to the original post, you can spin it any way you want but the Norlin-era Gibson acoustics represented a low point not only in Gibson's history but in the history of the guitar making universe. The electrics seemed to fare better. Gibson R&D folks were coming up with some really interesting instruments.

 

Without being too polite, you know I respect your status as a golden age crown-witness overthere and wouldn't spend 30 seconds on disagreeing.

As mentioned many times, I owned 2 of these around 1980. A square J-45 and a square J-50 - one of them a so called de luxe. Both bought and sold within 16 months.

 

Rock on

 

 

Btw R&D folks ?

[Phelonious Ponk]

Regarding the "Ovation Nation," I think Ovations were the electric guitar player's acoustic guitar, with a few exceptions. Serious acoustic players? I went to a lot ot shows in the 70s and I don't think I've ever seen an Ovation in the hands of Crosby, Stills, Nash or Young, James Taylor, Jackson Browne, Joni Mitchell, Dylan, JD Souther, Eagles, Burritos, Pure Prairie League, Poco, Steve Howe, Ian Anderson, anyone in Fairport Convention, Steleye Span, Pentangle, etc, etc....

 

I'm sure I'm forgetting somebody, but the most legit acoutstic musicians I can recall playing Ovations are Cat Stevens and Kenny Logins. And I think there is a really good reason for that; piezos sound like crap. They require feedback suppression and oodles of EQ regardless of what they're installed in. Pros, even then, could afford to have them installed in traditional acoustic guitars and controlled by sound professionals.

 

And as an acoustic guitar, an Ovation is a really good salad bowl.

 

P

[DanvillRob]

Regarding the "Ovation Nation," I think Ovations were the electric guitar player's acoustic guitar, with a few exceptions. Serious acoustic players? I went to a lot ot shows in the 70s and I don't think I've ever seen an Ovation in the hands of Crosby, Stills, Nash or Young, James Taylor, Jackson Browne, Joni Mitchell, Dylan, JD Souther, Eagles, Burritos, Pure Prairie League, Poco, Steve Howe, Ian Anderson, anyone in Fairport Convention, Steleye Span, Pentangle, etc, etc....

 

I'm sure I'm forgetting somebody, but the most legit acoutstic musicians I can recall playing Ovations are Cat Stevens and Kenny Logins. And I think there is a really good reason for that; piezos sound like crap. They require feedback suppression and oodles of EQ regardless of what they're installed in. Pros, even then, could afford to have them installed in traditional acoustic guitars and controlled by sound professionals.

 

And as an acoustic guitar, an Ovation is a really good salad bowl.

 

P

 

 

You missed Jim Croce...who played a Gibson on his recordings, but often used an Ovation during live concerts.

 

But generally, I agree.... you can't expect the same tone from a plastic back as from mahogany or maple, etc.

 

Besides, it's too hard to eat iceberg lettuce through the sound hole.

[zombywoof]

I'm sure I'm forgetting somebody, but the most legit acoutstic musicians I can recall playing Ovations are Cat Stevens and Kenny Logins.

 

For me, Glen Campbell and Melissa Etheridge immediately jump to mind.

 

[E-minor7]

Regarding the "Ovation Nation," I think Ovations were the electric guitar player's acoustic guitar, with a few exceptions. Serious acoustic players? I went to a lot ot shows in the 70s and I don't think I've ever seen an Ovation in the hands of Crosby, Stills, Nash or Young, James Taylor, Jackson Browne, Joni Mitchell, Dylan, JD Souther, Eagles, Burritos, Pure Prairie League, Poco, Steve Howe, Ian Anderson, anyone in Fairport Convention, Steleye Span, Pentangle, etc, etc....

 

I'm sure I'm forgetting somebody, but the most legit acoutstic musicians I can recall playing Ovations are Cat Stevens and Kenny Loggins.

 

No far from everyone converted to Ovation, but I never saw the brilliant Joan Armatrading without one. (Do you know her in US at all ?)

And let's not forget Lennon and McCartney.

Well, the model really represented something new in the 70's - if you entered a room where one of those were present it would be a little sensation.

 

I recall some of them as much better than others - and think they had different nut widths.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcVgAlVSArA