Historic Southern Jumbo Fail?

[JuanCarlosVejar]

Folks, 

Unfortunately it appears Gibson is having a hard time getting the Banner Year models true to the prototypes from NAMM.Here’s a Southern Jumbo with 20 frets (Prototype had 19 ) and No parallelogram inlays !!!! .The protype also has binding and this one does not.

 

 

 

Maybe Gibson is just putting together all sorts of combinations at this point.Quirky for sure.

 

 

JC

[Lars68]

Messing up the specs just means it's actually historically correct 😉

On a serious note, this kinds of thing could potentially kill Gibson's reputation fast.  That particular guitar should be replaced by Gibson right away so that it never reaches a customer.  

It makes me wonder if Gibson changed the neck on purpose for whatever reason, or if it was a quality control issue? The later is bad, but the former is even worse...

Lars

[62burst]

21 minutes ago, Lars68 said:

Messing up the specs just means it's actually historically correct 😉

Perfect. And hilarious.

JuanCarlos-  those who've accused you in the past of being an absolute Gibson fanboy need only look at the title of this thread. . . but as much as we all favor Gibsons, you've not been shy about saying "What The _____ ?" when they do something like this. 

So- is Bozeman even making guitars at this point? 'Wonder what the stamp date on the label says (?). Making a natural topped slope short scale & calling it a J-45 might be pushing things, and there were SoJo's made in the 1940's sans bound necks,  but I'd always thought of the split parallelograms as an essential Southern Jumbo feature, recalling Gibson guitars from the 1940's and 1950's. 

The guitar does sound nice and open for a recent issue, not tight, and minimal fresh string noise.

[Dave F]

I wouldn’t be too quick to judge. Maybe he picked up the wrong guitar. 

[Jinder]

Lovely sounding guitar...but not an SJ! I do wonder whether he just grabbed the wrong guitar or didn't do his homework.

[RBSinTo]

I am unclear on the concept.

What is the more important aspect of these re-issued instruments? The appointments or the sound?

It is a re-issued musical instrument, so why would anyone care if it has "split parallelograms" or not? Especially if it sounds wonderful.

RBSinTo

 

[zombywoof]

This is different than the tradition of screwups which were far from uncommon with Banners.  It is not a matter of  different hands maybe using different tools  or having to figure out how to get around lack of materials.    With a few notable exceptions such as the Legend Series or certain limited CS runs, whenever I see Banner,  Historic or a certain year attached to a guitar though I always take it with a grain salt.   But as noted above, this does not mean you will not be getting a great sounding and playing guitar. Just not a dead bang copy of a guitar from a past catalog.

Edited August 14, 2020 by zombywoof

[duluthdan]

That's  a J-45 Rosewood with the wrong label?

[Lars68]

To me at least, this is serious enough of an issue that it could ruin Gibson's positive ”comeback” reputation. We have to see the bigger picture here. If this is the only guitar with this anomaly, and a customer walks in the store, plays the guitar and leaves with it and a smile on his or her face, there is very little damage done. However, if long distance customers start receiving guitars deviating from the specs on the Gibson's homepage AND all the marketing talk from lots and lots of product demo videos since NAMM, those customers will be seriously pissed off and the guitars will go back where they came from. 

I remember from a marketing class I took ages ago that each unhappy customer tells on average nine people about their poor experience. That was before the internet. That number is probably 1009 these days...

Lars

Edited August 14, 2020 by Lars68

[BoSoxBiker]

That guitar is not on their site, at least not when I followed the product link. Could have been sold even before the video was posted or in the 3rd time since. Alas, we'll never know. A quick look on Reverb new Southern Jumbos revealed none of these.

[slimt]

Looks like they threw that one together.    Belly bottom bridge.   No different than the standard run banner 45 from the 90s.       Ive also seen labels from j200s on 45s.  Nothing new there in the mistakes. 
 

also the store owner should of reviewed the guitar and his vid prior to posting.  That would be a  error at times that could be costly   When a store owner does not know what he has. 

Edited August 14, 2020 by slimt

[Barstowsongs]

Wow, that's crazy.  Looks like a J-45 neck was slapped on that "SJ."  I wonder if Gibson is working with a skeleton crew trying to get new guitars out to shops during COVID?

[slimt]

I bet it was formated from this guitar.   I bet Mr Mark had something to do with this as well.  So it could be correct . 

Edited August 14, 2020 by slimt

[JuanCarlosVejar]

Maybe production was affected by the covid slowdowns and they had to put some of these together with what they had at the time. I’m aware Gibson has always had the right to change specs without notice and the original banners came in all sorts of combinations so there is really no harm done. But other less comprehensive people could totally bad talk Gibson because of this.
 

I posted the question mark at the end because I wanted to get other opinions on this and you have all made valid points.

 

It certainly is a great guitar regardless of the changes.

 

 

JC

[slimt]

2 minutes ago, JuanCarlosVejar said:

Maybe production was affected by the covid slowdowns and they had to put some of these together with what they had at the time. I’m aware Gibson has always had the right to change specs without notice and the original banners came in all sorts of combinations so there is really no harm done. But other less comprehensive people could totally bad talk Gibson because of this.
 

I posted the question mark at the end because I wanted to get other opinions on this and you have all made valid points.

 

It certainly is a great guitar regardless of the changes.

 

 

JC

there is alot of things to talk about. And ya. You will get different opinions from different people. Like me for example. I dont want to come across the negative way. But everyone is entitled to opinions of there own.   So never take it as being aimed at you.    Its the item in question.     Ive owned enough of the new ones , to have my take on a guitar.  Unless Im not familiar with where they got there ideas from. There will always be a answer.  

[Lars68]

29 minutes ago, slimt said:

 

 

I understand your point with the video, but those were different times. There was a world war going on and Gibson took whatever pieces they could find in order to produce guitars, but that old SJ (or whatever it actually is) is still an anomaly.

These days it is different when players shop online for ages, comparing specs, reading reviews, listening to sound clips ets etc before making a very informed decision. If I ordered an SJ online and the guitar featured above show up at my door, I would be nothing less than furious and send it back without a shadow of a doubt.

Lars

 

 

Edited August 14, 2020 by Lars68

[slimt]

43 minutes ago, Lars68 said:

 

I understand your point with the video, but those were different times. There was a world war going on and Gibson took whatever pieces they could find in order to produce guitars, but that old SJ (or whatever it actually is) is still an anomaly.

These days it is different when players shop online for ages, comparing specs, reading reviews, listening to sound clips ets etc before making a very informed decision. If I ordered an SJ online and the guitar featured above show up at my door, I would be nothing less than furious and send it back without a shadow of a doubt.

Lars

 

 

I  totally agree.  

[tpbiii]

Hmm..  Point number one: 1942 Banners (ie that had a banner on the headstock) are quite rare.  Many that year had just the gold Gibson.

Point number two: For many years -- before Willi Henkes did his registry -- almost all guitars with early wartime and transitions features (big necks, no truss rod, etc.) were called 1942.  It was ignorance (I did it too -- we did not know) -- almost all those guitars were actually (some early) 1943. 

Point number 3: Essentially all 1943 SJs had some RW -- either RW B&Ss or mixed.  That continued into early 1943 -- then mahogany began to creep in.

Point number 4:  I have more than 50 vintage Gibsons, and I have seen many strange things.  However I am not ready to believe they built SJs with J-45 necks -- that was the feature that defined the model, as well as some RW components in 1942.

Point number 5: Who cares?  Gibson and their customers I guess.

I come down on those guitars being called SJs is just a modern mistake based on a long history of ignorance in this area -- in the tradition of almost universal dating bias on early 40s Gibson guitars.

Let's pick,

-Tom

 

Edited August 14, 2020 by tpbiii

[BigKahune]

Did anyone watch the video Slimt posted? 
“Probably a custom order”.

I agree with Slimt - seems Gibson decided to reissue a 42 SoJo based on a custom order guitar.

Pretty much fits Gibson’s M.O.  😎
 

.

 

[Lars68]

46 minutes ago, BigKahune said:

I agree with Slimt - seems Gibson decided to reissue a 42 SoJo based on a custom order.

 

 

That would have been odd, but okey I guess, but that is not what happened here. Gibson intentionally, or most likely by mistake, seriously messed up the  spec of a brand new series guitar for 2020, a custom shop guitar nevertheless.

Here is the specs the guitar should have had:

New 2020 Custom Shop 1942 Banner Southern Jumbo specs.

Compare the neck of the guitar in the first post and the one in the link above. No parallelogram inlays, no binding, and wrong number of frets.

If I had ordered a pair of custom made black leather shoes during the war, but got a pair of brown shoes instead, I would probably be just as happy because at least I got some shoes. If that happened today, I'd be pretty upset...

Lars

 

[slimt]

Got to remember. Gibson builds guitars for dealers as well. This could be one of those.  
 

Back in the  90s , I seen more than two flavors of SJs  as well.   Ones that were not even in the catalogs.  

[Leonard McCoy]

Wrong guitar.

[Lars68]

36 minutes ago, Leonard McCoy said:

Wrong guitar.

 

I don't think it is the wrong guitar. Everything apart from the neck is consistent with the specs for the custom shop SJ: the rosewood (evident in the close-ups), the belly-down bridge, the rosette, the through saddle, the VOS finish, the Banner headstock, and the white button tuners. No, Gibson put the wrong neck on this guitar, no doubt in my mind at least.

Lars

Edited August 14, 2020 by Lars68

[olie]

It seems from here that after the negative attention the previous regime attracted Gibson would be inclined to go out of their way

to establish trust among the devoted followers that remained and to those who had lost trust in the brand.

A good way to start out would be to at least attempt to explain why they were introducing modifications to a model

and illustrate how a particular guitar harkens back to classic items that are remembered as being historically noteworthy.

So often people forget about how important communication is and how detrimental and confusing the outcome can be without it.

It is a sign of respect to your customers and it creates an awful lot of good will going forward.

Adding  to the dog's breakfast of model lines and names just  confuses things even more.

Just my $.02.

[BluesKing777]

 

An old line when things go wrong is "Who left Barry in charge?'

Bloody Barry!

The other day on AGF, there was a thread where someone wanted either an LG3 or a J50........in the end he came back and had bought a new LG2 Original...but get this - it had the wrong neck.

nchin241  Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2020 Posts: 10

---

Update:

Contrary to popular opinion I've decided to go with an LG! and an lg-2 at that, rather than the previously considered lg-3. While the dreadnought tone has the un****with-able tone, I've found that the smaller LG body was simply more fun to play, and that was the deciding factor in this one.

I got quite lucky on a new Gibson model that had a factory error! The guitar was intended to be a 1959 LG-2 reissue, hence the large pickguard and the wide sunburst. It seems however that a banner headstock and neck found its way onto the body. Definitely a happy accident that I was excited to find. s/o to the folks at Chicago Music Exchange for walking me through weeks worth of deliberating.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BluesKing777.