michaeljohnr Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 This is funny to me because if this were a feature on a lower price point, or Pacific rim instrument, it would be torn apart as cheap construction, substandard manufacturing methods....but some people are giving Gibson a pass on this? The OP's photo clearly illustrated poor fit and finish of an important, and more importantly, an extremely visible part of the instrument. It was plywood, people. There is no possible explanation that can be provided as to why this was allowed out. Granted, it's a single photo of x number produced, but at this price point, with the Gibson name behind it? Embarrassing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrorod Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Not quite sure I understand your point here, Rod. I think the whole reaction against laminated parts like bridges and fingerboards comes from our common negative response to changes of this type when it comes to our guitars. I think many here--myself included--like traditional woods in our guitars, and don't react well to changes that are made to the way they are built that are sort of "snuck under the radar". You might consider me a "liberal" on most things--whatever that means--but when it comes to my guitars, I'm pretty conservative by any standard. Nick, I may consider you liberal....but I don't consider you 'new generation'! The above statement does not apply to you./// Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 This is funny to me because if this were a feature on a lower price point, or Pacific rim instrument, it would be torn apart as cheap construction, substandard manufacturing methods....but some people are giving Gibson a pass on this? The OP's photo clearly illustrated poor fit and finish of an important, and more importantly, an extremely visible part of the instrument. It was plywood, people. There is no possible explanation that can be provided as to why this was allowed out. Granted, it's a single photo of x number produced, but at this price point, with the Gibson name behind it? Embarrassing. I agree....3-plys or not.....how did this leave the shop with those saw marks??? Where were the inspectors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morkolo Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I think many here--myself included--like traditional woods in our guitars, and don't react well to changes that are made to the way they are built that are sort of "snuck under the radar". That is probably the only problem I have with these bridges and fingerboards, if it was up front and center right from the get go in my humble opinion there wouldn't have been such an uproar. I'm not saying whether one is better than the other but the fact that Gibson doesn't respect me enough as a potential customer to feel it's necessary to tell me the difference is quite frankly disappointing to say in the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I think Gibson is getting more and more out of touch lately. That IS what caused the Norlin era to go down in the first place. The bridge wouldn't affect me too much. On a lifetime guitar, I might think of it more of an expendable piece if it ever needed work. But Laminate fingerbaords? I would NOT buy a high dollar Gibson with that. What is worse, how do you know? It would worry me wondering what was underneath the binding. Alternative woods is a separate deal than plywood. Woodworkers and luthiers know why solid woods are used in some cases and know why plywood is used sometimes. A blog and an E-mail is not going to change that. Plywood is stronger as far as strength and stiffness, but it is not as durable. Regardless of the glue used, thinner wood does not last as long and stand up as well as solid wood does. A high traffic area like a fingerboard with frets that also gets a lot of torsional stresses is not a good place for thin pieces of wood. If Gibson doesn't know this, people are going to question their knowledge of how to build a guitar, or if they have knowledgeable people making these decisions. Where they are out of touch with the public and customer base is that they seem to NOT have a clue what the public thinks or knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisA83 Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Omg I just realised that both my Gibsons are fully laminate! It's not all carved out of one piece of wood?!?! I'm sickened and appalled by this faulty workmanship!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfox14 Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I really am surprised to see Gibson doing this. I can't believe that there is such a shortage of rosewood pieces big enough for a bridge that it's necessary to do these laminations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruffchris Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Hey guy's, I was asking why they don't use tusq(just checked and thats the saddle ) Mine isn't tusq but ebony, so why aren't they using ebony, mine isn't ply. The first thing I did when that guy a month or so ago was originally posting about his, was check my guitar. I do remember reading a post from some dude trying to say how crafter's were built with solid wood for a fraction of the price and him getting shot down on here "the crafters are plywood etc" ( i've got a crafter and tbh, they ain't the best guitar, lol, just making the point though. #036; Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 .... so why aren't they using ebony, mine isn't ply. .... Gibson is running out of ebony too and is using Richlite (synthetic). What a revolting development - drop the cash on a Custom Shop guitar and get recycled paper and phenolic resin for a fretboard. No thanks. . <_< Gibson Archtop fretboards - still ebony?Is the Custom Shop still making the fine carved tops (L5, LeGrand, Super 400, Citation) with 100% ebony fretboards, or is the current hardship related to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife wood raids forcing them to use the new substitute process/materials? Only for the Les Paul Custom, the Custom Shop has changed to Richlite instead of ebony. Please keep in mind however that the archtops that you mention have all been discontinued. Quoted from this thread - http://forum.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/86000-gibson-archtop-fretboards-still-ebony/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Given the numbers produced are far far smaller than for Martin or Taylor why are they finding it so difficult to get the woods the others aren't having difficulties rolling out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I just saw a $400 Cort guitar yesterday, made in Korea.....solid ebony fretboard and solid bridge??????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 And ....no saw marks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruffchris Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 My bridge is one piece of wood weather the fretboard is lam is anyone's guess cause it's got binding on it. I'm hoping that cause there was only 50 made, they've come with the specs listed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I just saw a $400 Cort guitar yesterday, made in Korea.....solid ebony fretboard and solid bridge??????? What's stopping you OWF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 What's stopping you OWF? I don't need anymore guitars.....lol.....just interesting to see it in the same room as a $2400 Gibson with a three piece bridge......the juxtaposition was interesting to me.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old mark Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 This is just one reason why my only Gibson acoustic is pretty old...It's an L3, made around 1930. Ain't no laminations on it anywhere. Cost less than that new "traditional" Gibson, too-by a lot. mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdd707 Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 So all of this begs the question .... especially with the saw marks that were easily fixed by the OP.....Why is the QUALITY CONTROL not better at Bozeman? Of the new Gibsons I've bought recently, one has a problem that requires the dealers attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I don't need anymore guitars.....lol.....just interesting to see it in the same room as a $2400 Gibson with a three piece bridge......the juxtaposition was interesting to me.... It's definitely interesting times, the reaction seen here is only among the real enthusiasts as yet... as this filters out it may start to hurt them a bit. As the owner of a 'Lacey Act' model myself I can appreciate the sentiments of those that say laminate parts don't belong on a guitar of that prestige, I even said so myself last month when the first big debate about it happened. I went so far as to say I wouldn't lay down my money for one and yet that's exactly what I've done just a few days ago. So now I own pre-Lacey Gibson's that get the nod of approval from the most of us and a Lacey model which will no doubt be frowned upon by a large section of the forum community. The most interesting detail is many of them will never have heard as much as a note from any of them... Inarguably Gibson is toying with the brand power and the customer loyalty on details like this, a quick scan of these threads show that quite evidently, however companies only learn after they start hurting. Someone posted a link to solid bridges being sold as low as $18. Would I have paid an extra $18 to have a single piece, yes I would have but not because I think it's better or sounds any different, purely because it's one detail less to hurt any potential resale figures and keep the cork-sniffers happy if I was ever in that scenario. I don't think there are many of us on here yet who own both, I am one... from a tonal standpoint there's nothing to worry about, structurally, well assuming I haven't lost my marbles I'll come back and update the thread in 20 years and 20 years after that again ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buc McMaster Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Boy howdy Gibson's sure taking a thumpin' on this development from the forum. I assume they have made this spec change due to particulars of availability of rosewood of the proper dimensions. While this is understandable from a manufacturer's point of view, it's difficult to cozy up to from a consumer's standpoint. Laminated bridges are certainly structurally sound but cosmetically they are questionable and without notice to the buying public it is quite surprising. Some here have declared they will not purchase a new Gibson with this construction change. My J45 has a solid bridge but does have a laminated fingerboard. While a bit disappointing it's not a deal breaker for me. Without notice in making the change, will Gibson likewise not make notice if they return to the solid bridges and fingerboards to lure the traditionalists back to the fold? While new, uninitiated Gibson shoppers may not notice the laminated parts, old school affectionados seem to be put off by this change and may well shy away from the brand. All in all it's not a good thing, for the brand nor it's adherents for the short run and it could be disasterous for some long time Gibson players in the long run judging by some of the posts made here. Does the forum think Gibson owes us some kind of explaination of the change and perhaps some indication if it is a permenant change in construction? Or, as most manufacturers state, specifications subject to change without notice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 . Buc - I'm not happy about the way this whole laminate/synthetic/alternative-woods switching came about. Announced after the fact on a buried webpage. Gibson should have been up front with the whole situation. Now I find out (in the Lounge) Gibson may be opening up a factory (2,500 jobs) in Fiji - http://www.fijivillage.com/?mod=story&id=180412bb8e6ad9da530ee8bde3002c . WTF?!? . Is this a joke? If they're going to make guitars, will they be stamped - FORMERLY MADE IN THE USA ? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Is this the 'cost' of a 'new' source of woods? Can they do finished parts there to avoid all the current restrictions? Is the 'made in the USA' almost done then? curiouser and curiouser........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 . Yes PM . . . That's where my thinking is at. Geez, what's next? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Can it be that Gibson is approaching a "New Norlin" era? I'm betting that these same discussions were taking place--albeit without the internet--back in 1969. The problem today is that there is no such thing as a corporate secret. You can't hide anything for long when we all have instantaneous access to info of this type. If Gibson really didn't think its loyal, multi-guitar customers wouldn't mind changes like this, they have badly underestimated knowledgeable consumers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I suppose if they're being forced out of normal business by some restrictions that others have this far escaped then they have a duty to make decisions which protect the business, however, as much as I can understand that, if parts then start to be made elsewhere (much much cheaper) I do hope the final product's cost will reflect these 'savings'. Nobody gets it their own way all the time, offshore parts start to demand offshore prices. Maybe we can all have a JB with the amulet if we hold off a while..... ;) As I'm not a US citizen perhaps I'm not as invested in the 'American jobs' angle as some others will be, not that I wish for anyone to lose their job over restrictions faced by the company and countering measures they have to take... you get the drift.... I am however invested in the product, if the product suffers considerably, the guitars become harder to replace. Temporary measures such as the laminate bridges and fretboards will by and large be 'just about' accepted but going off the recipe and going off-shore simultaneously might not be quite so palatable. If they're making a manufacturing tactical decision to appease implementations of current restrictions and the calibre is as good as Bozeman 'glory days' a bit of spin should suffice... but offshore and laminates, ouch!!!! I think they would benefit greatly in both support and sympathy if they decided to do a bit of honest disclosure here. The lack of information, the leaving of the 'main man', the drip-drip effect of continued negative news, paint the situation out clearly, adults can take it on the chin, but the drip-feeding of the twists & turns seems to be working against them. They need only look on here to see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 As far as I know, there are no native (to the USA) stands of Ebony or Rosewood. So let's assume that all comes from foreign sources. I would definitely prefer Gibson to import a solid wood pre-fabricated bridge, made in Fiji, to the saw-marked three piece bridge of the original poster. With CNC made parts on most of American made guitars, the CNC part of origin would not phase me. I read once that 80% of Harley Davidson's parts on an american made Hog, are actually made in the Pacific rim...Still, would rather have a real Harley than a Honda imitation......just saying....and it does SEEM that Gibson tried to sneak one past us...that is offensive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.