Sitedrifter Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 is Gibson QC department screwing up again? Seems the people at Gibson Montana that work on the bridges seem to do a bad job every so often. My dealer emails me and says, hey I got something for you, a 1934 Jumbo re-issue. I took one look at the pictures and cannot believe Bozeman released the guitar with cosmetic defects. Who runs the show over at Bozeman because that person needs to be removed since this is not the first QC issue I have run across this past year. Albeit it maybe my last because this type of poor craftsmanship bugs the hell out of me, especially for the money Gibson wants for its guitars. I wonder what else is messed up that you can't see? In the picture below you will see the crooked dot inlays on the bridge. How can anyone think that looks good let alone it is accurate and correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffmac Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Considering the quality of the competitors and the price they want you would think that the quality would be perfect or next to it. Its no wonder when the less pricey underlings make top notch they discontinue them eg, the masterbuilt line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sitedrifter Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 Considering the quality of the competitors and the price they want you would think that the quality would be perfect or next to it. Its no wonder when the less pricey underlings make top notch they discontinue them eg, the masterbuilt line I am not even looking at Epi as a competitor, rather Martin and Taylor (oh whom I have experience with). I can say Taylor QC is damn near perfect and once would expect their QC would be lacking compared to Gibson since Gibson does not produce anywhere near the amount of guitars per day that Taylor does. Yet the opposite, Gibson QC is lacking while Taylor's is excellent. I wonder if Martin has QC issues like Gibson? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry K Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 My understanding is that this is one of those limited edition, hide glue specials, which is similar to the Legend series: an attempt at an exact reproduction of a particular vintage example. Apparently the dots were placed in that odd position on the original. The reason they look out of kilter is the line of the saddle is not perpendicular to the neck (as it should be). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 For once Im in agreement with Jerry, Im pretty sure its meant to be like that. Besides, youre going to give up on a guitar because a little dot seems a bit out of place .... lordy .. My understanding is that this is one of those limited edition, hide glue specials, which is similar to the Legend series: an attempt at an exact reproduction of a particular vintage example. Apparently the dots were placed in that odd position on the original. The reason they look out of kilter is the line of the saddle is not perpendicular to the neck (as it should be). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gov Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Have a looksie at an original one: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sitedrifter Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 That is not a good picture of an original so it is hard to tell the alignment. Even if the dots are supposed to be crooked, then another dealer I checked with has the same model and those dots are aligned on his guitar. Here is the same model from another vendor I contacted and the dots are aligned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry K Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 You know it's very hard to tell because the angle of each photo is slightly different. I am not sure how they made these particular guitars but typically at Gibson acoustic the cavity for an inlay like that is created by CNC machine. I suppose something could go wrong but usually the spacing would be identical because machine generated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sitedrifter Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 You can't get a better angle then the two pics I posted. As with my J200 that had defects at the bridge, the CNC machine has issues or was broke down and holes drilled manually? Maybe there is a two part process for carving our the bridge via CNC machines. 1st the shape of the bridge then later on the bridge gets put in another jig and a CNC (or manual operator) drills the holes. No way to tell because I was not there but what I can tell is the 1st guitar is a screw up in my eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry K Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Have a look at the pics on this page: here They are probably all the same instrument. Sometimes it looks lined up, sometimes not. You may be right about that one but it's awfully hard to be certain from a picture. Slight variations in the way the bridge pin is sitting in the hole can also affect the appearance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sitedrifter Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 Have a look at the pics on this page: here They are probably all the same instrument. Sometimes it looks lined up, sometimes not. You may be right about that one but it's awfully hard to be certain from a picture. Slight variations in the way the bridge pin is sitting in the hole can also affect the appearance. I agree that the pins (which don't always sit perfect) can make something look misaligned but I look past that and in the 1st picture I can't see for the life of me how any angle could make that dot look aligned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest J-Doug Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 So how does it sound? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-1854Me Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 For once Im in agreement with Jerry, I'm buying lottery tickets today! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sitedrifter Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 Why buy something that has a defect regardless of the sound? I will find one that looks perfect and sounds perfect (too me) People who ignore subtle or in your face defects just because it sounds good make no sense to me when purchasing brand new at a premium. This lack of QC and worse, the seemingly acceptance of it, is absurd to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Why buy something that has a defect regardless of the sound? I will find one that looks perfect and sounds perfect (too me) People who ignore subtle or in your face defects just because it sounds good make no sense to me when purchasing brand new at a premium. This lack of QC and worse, the seemingly acceptance of it, is absurd to say the least. If you are going to get all wrapped up in that, you might want to consider Taylors (and I'm not knocking them) instead. They are as alike as peas in a pod, usually flawless inside and out. Until I saw the offending guitars in person, I might be a bit less dogmatic about what I think I see. And the great thing is that no one is making you buy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Holy Shades of Pickguard Placement. This kind of quirkiness just endears a guitar to me more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Holy Shades of Pickguard Placement. This kind of quirkiness just endears a guitar to me more. Yip. I like it. I'm a bit wonky myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobouz Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Personally, I don't see this as much of a QC issue. On one instrument they lined the dots up with the saddle, on the other they lined them up with the bridge. Perhaps an original being speced had it one way, and Bozeman later chose the other route. Buy the one you like. It certainly does not impact structural stability, tone, or playability. But FWIW in the discussion of Gibson's overall QC, let me add this: I was strictly an acoustic player until 2001. Since the mid '70s, I've played & owned a lot of Gibsons. In 1999, Bozeman really upped it's game with the re-release of many traditional models, and within the next few years a lot of folks were saying these were some of the best Gibson acoustics ever built. I still have my '00 J100 Xtra, and '02 J45-Rosewood, but had also owned a J150, J50, and two WM-45s from that period. The past ten years or so have been spent immersed in the world of electric Gibsons, and what a ton of fun! But after nailing down what I was after in plugged-in goodness, my attention has turned back to acoustics. Within the past four months, I've purchased a J185 made in late-2012, and a LG-2 AE made in mid-2013. The build quality on both of these instruments is flat out superb, and imho generally exceeds the high quality I was seeing in the early part of the previous decade. So in my book, Gibson is currently experiencing a very good QC run, and this also applies to recent electrics I've purchased, both from the Memphis and Nashville plants. The ES-330 VOS in particular is a stellar instrument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeeterbuck Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Gibson always seems to get some of the smaller details incorrect. I think that they do it on purpose. To the guitar in question…it's my understanding that the freeboard binding wasn't added until 1935, so I would guess that Gibson should have been called it a 1935 Original Jumbo. Also, FWIW the 1934 Jumbo's didn't even have pearl dots on the bridge because there were no bolts used, just glue to hold down the bridge. I'd be more interested it how it sounds. Ask them to knock off a couple hundred for the pearl hole "Mis-allignment". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sitedrifter Posted January 11, 2014 Author Share Posted January 11, 2014 If you are going to get all wrapped up in that, you might want to consider Taylors (and I'm not knocking them) instead. They are as alike as peas in a pod, usually flawless inside and out. Until I saw the offending guitars in person, I might be a bit less dogmatic about what I think I see. And the great thing is that no one is making you buy it. Maybe Gibson should drop their prices if they can't make guitars with fit and finish comparable to Taylor? I am not all wrapped up in this rather this is the second time in 2 months I have dealt with poor QC from Gibson. I don't mind doing alot of leg work to get one I want and I like but rather just search for the tone I like versus the tone and a great finish. No matter, I will buy what I like and leave the loyalists to the expensive (new)Gibsons with imperfections and other issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 No matter, I will buy what I like and leave the loyalists to the expensive (new)Gibsons with imperfections and other issues. I hope you don't ever go looking for vintage Gibsons. You will be sorely disappointed in the lack of QC in some of the Gibsons from the golden age, independent of the ravages of time. No loyalist here, but I may be willing to overlook some small cosmetic imperfections (depending on what they are) on a newer instrument with the right tone and the right pedigree. Any musical instrument made with a fair amount of handwork is likely to have occasional quality glitches, and Gibson is certainly no exception. That doesn't mean their workmanship is shoddy. When you consider the time pressure of the pace of production of these guitars, and the amount of hand detailing, it's a wonder they are as good as they are. A lot of us here buy vintage instruments, which almost by definition are likely to have significant imperfections. Maybe that makes us a bit more flexible in the way we evaluate new guitars as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarrr Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 According to photoshop, the (first) pic in post#1 is skewed 1 degree to the right of center of the photo frame... the second pic in post#7 is dead on center line. fwiw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissouriPicker Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Mark.....It's okay.....relax, be gentle, be calm, and enjoy your metro-sexual-In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida-New Age Music. .....It's all good, no matter what guitars you like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffmac Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 I am not even looking at Epi as a competitor, rather Martin and Taylor (oh whom I have experience with). I can say Taylor QC is damn near perfect and once would expect their QC would be lacking compared to Gibson since Gibson does not produce anywhere near the amount of guitars per day that Taylor does. Yet the opposite, Gibson QC is lacking while Taylor's is excellent. I wonder if Martin has QC issues like Gibson? I did not mean Epi was a competitor simply that they are Gibson's other line of guitars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 I dont know why youre geting all worked up about it mate. You asked us in your thread title if its just you ...and we answered that, yes, its you. And then you get upset about it ... what gives. Maybe Gibson should drop their prices if they can't make guitars with fit and finish comparable to Taylor? I am not all wrapped up in this rather this is the second time in 2 months I have dealt with poor QC from Gibson. I don't mind doing alot of leg work to get one I want and I like but rather just search for the tone I like versus the tone and a great finish. No matter, I will buy what I like and leave the loyalists to the expensive (new)Gibsons with imperfections and other issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.