Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Ouch...


egoidealmusic

Recommended Posts

I watched both the videos on the G-45.

I agree with some of the criticisms, which have been discussed here with regard to other Gibsons. Most notable to me are issues with the bridgeplate, such as alignment dowels and holes that may actually overlap bridgepin holes. My pet peeve in this regard is the lack of using a caul under the bridgeplate  when drilling the pinholes, so that you end up with grain tear-out and damage to the pinholes before the guitar is ever strung.

Gibson has always been notorious for glue squeeze-out--"only a Gibson is glued enough"-- but this guy really obsesses about it.

I won't comment on the G-45 or others of these lower-priced models, since I'm not a marketing guy, and I don't generally buy lower-end guitars.  The plastic sheetrock anchor in the endpin hole for the G-45 was a bridge too far for me, however.

Right now I have four Gibson acoustics--two 1950 J-45s, a 1943 SJ re-issue, and a 1937 L-OO Legend,  I am satisfied with the workmanship on all, and love the way they play and sound.

Your experience may vary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My nearby GC has two of the G45 models.  I know very little about the inside of a guitar.  All I know is what I like and I didn’t like either of these guitars.  To me, they sounded light and airy and that’s not what I’m looking for.  They remind me of the composite Martins.  ……….Just my opinion.  That doesn’t make me right and someone else wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YT is or became a mostly platform for people who like to hear themselves talking. I saw the first part and while it had some good (critical) points it was exhausting. This second part I stopped watching after about 10 minutes. This guy was only justifying what he is doing and I‘m not interested in that at all. 

What he forgot to mention in the first video and the first half of this one is that Gibson seems to have a lot of handwork also in that G line. It’s quite cheap and therefore a bit more sloppy but still an american handmade guitar that shouldn’t be compared to another product produced mostly by machines.

I’m not saying what is better, just what a buyer wants. Maybe the invisible sloppiness inside the guitar is acceptable for many. Maybe Gibson saved costs on the right place in the few of many customers. I mean, look how old, expensive and well played Gibsons look like. Who would care about some glue inside the guitar? Maybe all of that is covered in the second half of this boring video. I will not know.

I’m not interested in buying a G-series Gibson but I appreciate that Gibson makes those guitars. Just more offers to select from. If customers don’t like them, they will disappear from the marked quickly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mourn the day that folks started judging guitars by how much glue is visible on the underside of their tops.

Some of this criticism is legitimate. That big hole in the bridgeplate that only Gibson needs? Yeah, sad. But the bracing not being tucked under the kerfiing? I'd tuck it, but one of the things that most folks think makes those 1930s Ls (L-00, L-0, L-1, etc.) so powerful given their diminutive size is that the top braces are not tucked into the kerfing.

And back to that glue squeeze out. It simply does not affect the guitar's tone. Cleaning it up would add what, $50-$100 to the guitar's price? I say leave the glue on the lower prices models. Maybe on all models.

A few years ago I was at the annual music trade show/concert in Cremona, Italy (pre-pandemic, the Italian Trade Agency flew me each year to the show to give talks and pick a few tunes). I spent some time observing guitar players and violin players trying out instruments. The guitar players carefully inspected the guitars, including observing the miters/exterior decoration and almost always peering inside the instruments, sometimes using mirrors (anyone who has been to the fancy guitar shows at Woodstock, Healdsburg, etc. has seen this). After inspecting the guitars, the players would sit to play those that they found visually acceptable.

The violinists did the opposite. They'd walk up to an exhibitors booth and proceed to pick up violins and play them without doing more than glancing at the instrument. They chose instruments by sound and playability. Maybe after playing several they might quickly look the instruments over. But nobody in that community cares if the instrument is less than visually perfect. Indeed, the makers are careful not to make them look like they were built by CNC machines.

Some in the guitar community, imvho, have lost their way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps we could cut one of his base priced 15K guitars in half and try to justify it's cost. I'm sure all that fancy decorations make it sound great. I'm I the only one that made a monetary donation to them so they could continue their important research?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don’t much care for long talks about glue squeeze out and craftsmanship.

No need for the over dramatic guitar surgery and construction critique.

Play it. The sound is my top concern. Playability next. If it looks good that’s a bonus. If the guy isn’t hitting on these topics he isn’t worth my time.

Over the years I’ve had a coupla “low end” guitars - because their sound and playability were so good, way beyond expectations.  On the other hand, over the years I’ve played a coupla gorgeous, well crafted, expensive guitars that I passed on because they definitely didn’t please my ear.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, zombywoof said:

 About two weeks back I got to play some newish Gibsons -  a couple of J45s, a J200 and a Keb Mo Signature.  And there I was without a inspection mirror, light or anything.  Drats.  Only thing I had to go by was sound and feel. 

I was once led to believe that you went by the sound and the feel, and cosmetic concerns kicked in after that. Now a guitar seemingly should be framed and hung on a wall as an object of visual admiration. Just play the durn things and be happy with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, zombywoof said:

 About two weeks back I got to play some newish Gibsons -  a couple of J45s, a J200 and a Keb Mo Signature.  And there I was without a inspection mirror, light or anything.  Drats.  Only thing I had to go by was sound and feel. 

A nightmare! No way could you even begin to determine whether they were good guitars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've played a few of these, so maybe I just got bad ones...but I was pretty disappointed for the price. I didn't expect them to be as well made as the regular Bozeman output, but I thought the Epiphones (and Guilds) at the same shop felt better. These felt almost plastic-y and the sound was dull. It feels like Gibson is playing on the reputation of Bozeman and their brand rather than making the best guitar for the price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, gossmanster said:

I watched the other videos where he tore into a Martin, a Taylor,  and a PRS, all less expensive than the G45. Judge for yourself, but Gibson is not doing great work for the money…it goes far beyond excess glue

That guy doesn't has a hair on his a-ss if he doesn't cut into a D-45. Any one can slice a 1k guitar up. Lets see you man up to a 8k guitar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more extreme and inflammatory his opinion is, the better it serves his YT channel. The G45 is not the model that made Gibson what it is, and is certainly not the highest of quality.  But all of his hoopla and exasperation about it is marketing for himself.  

Edited by Kwlsky
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...