My New Gibson 60s J45 --

[RvrDxn]

That’s not true. I’d return it just for them lying to me.

[bobouz]

On 2/3/2022 at 7:17 PM, Sgt. Pepper said:

None of my new or used Martin’s have ever arrived like that, but let’s hear the neck reset and binding pop BS about them.

Glad you brought that up again.  And feel free to get about a bazillion testimonials on UMGF’s “Technical Info” section as to how problematic that “BS” has been for Martin owners, while Martin’s corporate heads ignore it all.  Then read a bit further to find stories about Martin screw ups along the lines of this finish blip.  Most recent one I recall was about four blemished areas on an otherwise beautiful rosewood back, most likely caused by an assembly line machine that holds the instrument stationary during an automated buffing process.

You opened this door once again, all on your own, to create another Martin vs Gibson thing.  We get that you love your Martins & that’s great - but in today’s world, they’re just another automated USA production line instrument, and screw ups will sometimes happen.

Far from not liking Martin’s, I had one of mine out last night & thoroughly enjoyed playing it.  They do indeed build fine instruments.  But for a variety of reasons, I like playing my Gibsons even more.

 

[RvrDxn]

I’d take the bridge in that photo any day over binding coming loose.

[Sgt. Pepper]

39 minutes ago, bobouz said:

Glad you brought that up again.  And feel free to get about a bazillion testimonials on UMGF’s “Technical Info” section as to how problematic that “BS” has been for Martin owners, while Martin’s corporate heads ignore it all.  Then read a bit further to find stories about Martin screw ups along the lines of this finish blip.  Most recent one I recall was about four blemished areas on an otherwise beautiful rosewood back, most likely caused by an assembly line machine that holds the instrument stationary during an automated buffing process.

You opened this door once again, all on your own, to create another Martin vs Gibson thing.  We get that you love your Martins & that’s great - but in today’s world, they’re just another automated USA production line instrument, and screw ups will sometimes happen.

Far from not liking Martin’s, I had one of mine out last night & thoroughly enjoyed playing it.  They do indeed build fine instruments.  But for a variety of reasons, I like playing my Gibsons even more.

 

How many come here complaining of their Gibsons and the s-hit that gets through QA to make the man money. It goes both ways. You know it, and others do to yet look the other way cause my guitar has Gibson on the headstock. I’ll take your s-hit, but I’ll give it back when need be. I’m pretty sure if you look in all the different section there are threads with QA issues. Go look, and you  know there there.
Had my one of mine out too today. I only had to push the binding back in place 3 times.

Edited February 6, 2022 by Sgt. Pepper

[sbpark]

12 hours ago, 3mar67 said:

I emailed the store about the missing warranty card/QC checklist, and was told Gibson does not include those with the acoustic guitars, just the electrics. 

Anybody here buy a new Gibson acoustic (2021) and can verify this?

 

I've bought new J-45's over the years and they all came with the checklist/warranty pamphlet. Never received a warranty card though. Even found the warranty card with the QC checklist in the case of several used Gibson acoustics. 

Had a crack develop  in one of the J-45 bridges a couple years later. Took it to a Gibson authorized repair shop and had a copy of the receipt when I bought the guitar and it was repaired free of charge under warranty no questions asked. 

Also got the checklist (Gibson checklist) and Gibson case candy with my new Epiphone USA Frontier acoustic. 

Edited February 6, 2022 by sbpark

[Sevendaymelee]

It's clear by now that the OP was lied to, so my advice is to send that thing back and find another dealer for future purchases. 

[bobouz]

5 hours ago, Sgt. Pepper said:

How many come here complaining of their Gibsons and the s-hit that gets through QA to make the man money. It goes both ways. You know it, and others do to yet look the other way cause my guitar has Gibson on the headstock. I’ll take your s-hit, but I’ll give it back when need be. I’m pretty sure if you look in all the different section there are threads with QA issues. Go look, and you  know there there.
Had my one of mine out too today. I only had to push the binding back in place 3 times.

We can keep doing this dance for as long as you want to keep going down the same repetitive road.  Of course people come here to ask about Gibson QA stuff, just like they go to UMGF to ask about Martin QA stuff.  And guess what?  For anything similar to these assorted blemish issues, Martin guys typically give the exact same answers:  "Oh, it must be the dealer's fault.....  Decide if you really want to keep that guitar, and if so, try negotiating a discount you can live with.....  I wouldn't keep anything sold as new that isn't perfect - send it back.....  If you want to keep the guitar, it might be covered under warranty, contact Martin."

For the umpteenth time, my point being that these two companies exist on the same playing field.  They both make good guitars, and they both have screw ups from time to time because they are significantly automated production line manufacturers with regular staff turnover.  That said, Martin's systemic & extended binding problem is the most severe example I can recall in recent decades, and their corporate leadership's silence on the matter is disappointing to say the least.  Hopefully their loyal customers will be better served in the future.

And speaking of loyalty, it seems pretty obvious that if ever there was a Martin fanboy, you are it.  Nothing wrong with that at all.  But a Martin fanboy who continually feels the need to elevate Martins above Gibsons on a Gibson forum is rather sadly pathetic.  So why are you here?  Have you torched your bridges with every other forum via your typical calling card incivility?  No problem - you can tout your Martins here all day long, post pictures as you have, and enjoy sharing with everyone how much you like them.  Beyond that, I would refer you once again to Frank's sage advice.     

[sbpark]

53 minutes ago, bobouz said:

We can keep doing this dance for as long as you want to keep going down the same repetitive road.  Of course people come here to ask about Gibson QA stuff, just like they go to UMGF to ask about Martin QA stuff.  And guess what?  For anything similar to these assorted blemish issues, Martin guys typically give the exact same answers:  "Oh, it must be the dealer's fault.....  Decide if you really want to keep that guitar, and if so, try negotiating a discount you can live with.....  I wouldn't keep anything sold as new that isn't perfect - send it back.....  If you want to keep the guitar, it might be covered under warranty, contact Martin."

For the umpteenth time, my point being that these two companies exist on the same playing field.  They both make good guitars, and they both have screw ups from time to time because they are significantly automated production line manufacturers with regular staff turnover.  That said, Martin's systemic & extended binding problem is the most severe example I can recall in recent decades, and their corporate leadership's silence on the matter is disappointing to say the least.  Hopefully their loyal customers will be better served in the future.

And speaking of loyalty, it seems pretty obvious that if ever there was a Martin fanboy, you are it.  Nothing wrong with that at all.  But a Martin fanboy who continually feels the need to elevate Martins above Gibsons on a Gibson forum is rather sadly pathetic.  So why are you here?  Have you torched your bridges with every other forum via your typical calling card incivility?  No problem - you can tout your Martins here all day long, post pictures as you have, and enjoy sharing with everyone how much you like them.  Beyond that, I would refer you once again to Frank's sage advice.     

I've had two (read that again as TWO) Martins I bought new that needed neck resets. One was 4 years after I bought it, the other was 6 MOTHS after I bought it. They refused to do the  neck reset under warranty for the first guitar and only allowed the authorized shop to shave or replace the bridge. Took the second Martin back to the same authorized repair shop and the shop said it would get turned down by corporate so I got a second and third opinion by other Martin authorized repair shops. The second shop (Gryphon Stringed Instruments) said they had stopped taking in these newer Martins that were needing neck resets so early on because it was just too overwhelming for their repair shop, and were only taking in said guitars if they were bought from them at Gryphon. Since I didn't buy the guitar from them I sought out a third shop an hour away from my. They called Martin and really pleaded my case and said this wasn't right and the only way to make it right was to authorize a neck reset, who corporate finally agreed to. Needless to say, I sold the first Martin (000-15M) after I got it back. The second guitar was a D-18 that has been rock solid since the rest and still have it to this day. I also swear the neck reset made that guitar sound better. 

I've only had to deal with Gibson warranty for relatively small issues, but they never gave any push back and were way easier to deal with than Martin. Had an 2013 SF Standard that had a cracked tenon cover and cracked pickup surround that they didn't even need pictures of and send the parts out to me ASAP. Next was a new J-45 Standard I bought that developed a crack along the grain on the end of the bridge. Took it to an authorized Gibson repair shop. Gibson corporate requested a copy of the receipt as proof of purchase which I had and it was immediately taken care of. 

Not an apples to apples comparison, but I have bought more new Gibsons over the years than Martins but have had more serious warranty issues on the Martins, and Gibson customer service has been easier to deal with for me personally.

[BoSoxBiker]

The ways companies think about CS and customer satisfaction can be extreme. Some CFO decides that it's an area to save $$$ and the whole corporate paradigm changes from good CS to stop the bleeding. A Marketing head gets too much negative feedback from focus groups and crabby dealers beats his fist into the table 5 years later and all of a sudden policy changes to extreme flexibility to stop losing sales.

It's not too hard to imagine the reputations both companies had 10 years ago having big influences on current day policy. Gibson balanced out their negative reputation by making sure if something did happen, it got fixed - one way or another. Martin's rep was far better. Theirs was to stop the $$ leak.

Remember how bad Chrysler was at one point? Lee Iococca came up with that massive warranty to help balance out the negative sentiment with a piece of mind.

I'm not claiming any company did or did not deserve the reputations or lingering common perceptions.

[Sgt. Pepper]

I’ve had 14 Martins no neck rests or binding issues. Yet in your words bazillions have. Well I’m not one of those bazillions of owners. Ever get a Gibson that was flaud? Yet some here have. Stop pretending Gibson is so much better or special. They are both companies that make guitars. Neither is hand made as some claim they are. Both use CNC machines and probably work under pressure filled conditions to get there products to market. Once a guitar leaves the factory, which is more than likely climate controlled who knows what they go through and where whey sit, and in what hot or cold werehouse, truck or store.

Man I can't stand Garth Brooks, lets not do the dance anymore.

See I used to own a Gibson acoustic. Now can I be it the club? Walnut is not a tone wood I like.

 

Edited February 6, 2022 by Sgt. Pepper

[bobouz]

6 hours ago, Sgt. Pepper said:

Stop pretending Gibson is so much better or special. They are both companies that make guitars. Neither is hand made as some claim they are. Both use CNC machines and probably work under pressure filled conditions to get there products to market.

Hello?  Having a little difficulty comprehending?  If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a “bazillion” times, and most recently in the second paragraph of my last post.  Again, these companies both build fine guitars, and they essentially operate on a similar playing field.  Thanks so much for repeating what I just said, which apparently indicates that we are in agreement on that point.

But where the corporate road currently separates is in Martin’s handling of the loose binding and neck reset issues.  Terrific that you have not experienced these problems to date, but the world does not end at your nose.  Thanks to sbpark for being just one of the “bazillions” to share how Martin left him in the lurch with his neck reset issue.  Again, plenty more of these testimonials over at UMGF.

Now if you’d like to get off the dance floor, we could sit a few out & grab a beer.

[3mar67]

I just got home from returning the guitar.

They refunded me without a hassle.

If it was just the little blemish under the bridge, I would've kept the guitar, and this thread would not have existed.

But, like I said in the first post -- the area around the bass side of the bridge appeared to have been sanded and refinished with a less than perfect result.

So I couldn't accept that on a new guitar -- plus it would be a factor if I end up deciding to sell it down the road at some point.

Thanks for your replies and opinions

[bobouz]

1 hour ago, 3mar67 said:

I just got home from returning the guitar.They refunded me without a hassle.

Best of luck to you in finding another guitar that is satisfying in every way.