Watchdogg Posted September 6, 2010 Share Posted September 6, 2010 Just was looking at Gibson.com Accoustic lineup and see they have the Hummingbird Pro listed. Very impressive specs (bone nut, bone saddle, hideglue, LR baggs, ect...) for one of there lower MSRP guitars.Having its predessesor the Hummingbird Artist which is essentially the same guitar in shortscale with tulip tuners I think it is a bargain. What I am curious about is why Gibson calls it a Hummingbird Artist/Pro instead of a mahogany Songwriter which it really is? Regardless, I love mine diffinitely has a different vibe than the rest of the Hog Gibson family, bright, sweet and jangly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jefleppard Posted September 6, 2010 Share Posted September 6, 2010 this is funny. it brings to light the fact that the gibson family tree is one of many branches and more than a bit confusing to follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted September 6, 2010 Share Posted September 6, 2010 I am still pondering the natural top J-45. Isn't that a J-50? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KL Posted September 6, 2010 Share Posted September 6, 2010 I think that they are using the Hummingbird and J-45 name in these cases as these are iconic names, whereas Songwriter and J-50 have never achieved the same level of popularity regardless of how good they might be. It's a marketing issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchdogg Posted September 7, 2010 Author Share Posted September 7, 2010 I think that they are using the Hummingbird and J-45 name in these cases as these are iconic names, whereas Songwriter and J-50 have never achieved the same level of popularity regardless of how good they might be. It's a marketing issue. Good point. The Hummingbird Artist shared a cherry burst with its namesake, so it does share some resemblence to its namesake. But the Pro? Neither sounds anything like the original Hummingbird. A really nice guitar at a great price deserves a more accurate, perhaps marketable name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danner Posted September 7, 2010 Share Posted September 7, 2010 I have sort of given up keeping track of it all. What also confuses me is the disconnect between Gibson's web site models and what the retailers are offering on their web sites. queue scratching head smilie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guth Posted September 7, 2010 Share Posted September 7, 2010 It's a marketing issue. Gibson itself seems to be a marketing issue. Seemingly always has been and perhaps always will be. Gotta love the insanity that is Gibson guitars (and I do at times). All the best, Guth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albertjohn Posted September 7, 2010 Share Posted September 7, 2010 I'm a bit of a simpleton when it comes to these matters. For me, a Hummingbird has to be the traditional cherry sunburst and have the traditional pickguard. I a/b tested an MC against my SWD when I bought it and they were very different guitars indeed. I suspect they are the same shape, bracing, csale etc - correct me if I'm wrong. The Pro looks to be an awesome guitar but I've not played one. But it does not "look" like a 'Bird, not that this matters one jot. I like to think that the SWD was developed from the 'Bird heritage - square shouldered dread etc. But what difference does it make. Most people in the market will base their buying decision on tone, feel, smell, what it says to you when you play it etc. I really don't think the name of the model is that high up on the list. Maybe, maybe not. I will have a Hummingbird one day though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grOOved Posted September 7, 2010 Share Posted September 7, 2010 I'm a bit of a simpleton when it comes to these matters. For me, a Hummingbird has to be the traditional cherry sunburst and have the traditional pickguard. I a/b tested an MC against my SWD when I bought it and they were very different guitars indeed. I suspect they are the same shape, bracing, csale etc - correct me if I'm wrong. The Pro looks to be an awesome guitar but I've not played one. But it does not "look" like a 'Bird, not that this matters one jot. I like to think that the SWD was developed from the 'Bird heritage - square shouldered dread etc. But what difference does it make. Most people in the market will base their buying decision on tone, feel, smell, what it says to you when you play it etc. I really don't think the name of the model is that high up on the list. Maybe, maybe not. I will have a Hummingbird one day though. Another thing is the Pro might have been an adaptation of the Bird. GC might have said, make us x number of Birds but with these appointments for a lower price as an exclusive. I agree though, the Bozeman group is known produces anomalies. The Super Dove is kind of an odd one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchdogg Posted September 7, 2010 Author Share Posted September 7, 2010 Another thing is the Pro might have been an adaptation of the Bird. GC might have said, make us x number of Birds but with these appointments for a lower price as an exclusive. I agree though, the Bozeman group is known produces anomalies. The Super Dove is kind of an odd one. I had a '69 hummingbird the Pro and Artist are a different animals( although I now prefer the later). They do not share many specs except silka/mahogany the lower bout, bracing and even scale and color on the Pro are different. Seems Gibson has many misnomers J guitars that are dreadnaught. SJ that either a jumbo or a dreadnaught, ect , ect. They even have Acknowleged the J/SJ confusion on there homepage. Shame, such a great product. Hopefully many are like me and buy the guitar that speaks to them instead of the name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.