Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

COming Soon to Music VIlla


JuanCarlosVejar

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't say "flaw", but it's certainly possible they noticed the taper and decided not to do it for some reason. That's the story for why they went with a bone saddle rather than the six little brass saddles on the original -- every agrees that the individual saddles were a big mistake, tonally. (At least that was the story after they got called on it. :) )

 

-- Bob R

Didn't stop 'em from reproducing the adjustable bridge.

 

They just didn't want to go to the expense of doing it right. I have played quite a few guitars with the height adjuatable individual saddles and they sounded fine and looked authentic. I even owned one. It cost Gibson a great deal of money and time to get them machined and the people responsible for making them have moved on.

 

The tapered headstock is just another example of having people in charge that have no idea of what a tapered headstock even is. I asked a longtime employee and he laughed and said the marketing folks don't have a clue. The only reason so many Gibsons have tapered headstocks is because the original programs for the CNC's were written by a person that actually knew what she was doing. That isn't the case anymore. So.... They just don't know seems to be the correct answer here. Just so we are all on the same page... The tapered headstock in not a flaw but it is a design feature.

If you follow the Gibson logic then you will know that the tapered headstock really does sound better as it gives better contact with the fret nut. That's why they did it in the past. Not to do it now must be a cost thing or ignorance. I don't know which is worse. Bob was told information by Gibson's master tap dancer. Pity. It would have been better if the guy just said oops.

 

Just so you know. Gibson has an ad in the Bozeman paper. They are looking for people to man the second shift. They are trying to get production to 90 guitars a day and will have 100 as their goal by the end of the year. They may or may not be using laminated fretboards again. I understand it's arbitrary and depends on their ability to get Rosewood. Don't tell them you heard it from me but I did get it from a reliable source that they even tried some rosewood flooring at one point. I guess it didn't work. They could have pitched it as a fretboard good enough to walk on.I understand that many folks said the double X brace was strong enough to dance on. I say, get the double X back and the use the rosewood flooring and we can have a dance.

 

I think my time here will be limited so I will pass on as much as I can. 90 guitars a day from the same folks that were giving you 65. That's a substantial increase and I hope that the quality doesn't suffer. I went to Music Villa to look at the new stuff and they only had a couple of new Gibsons. The ones I played are just fine. I will be looking for more. I did notice that the top wood was displaying a lot more grain than it did. I have no idea if this is good or bad it is just what it is. I like it myself and the guitars didn't seem to suffer. Maybe more folks out there could comment on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The few Gibsons I have been fortunate enough to play, which had tapered headstocks, really did give the mid-range strings some extra bark - I'd say this is a desirable feature. I wish the folks all the best at boosting production up a notch. It really is a new economic world, where "Grow or Die" has taken hold. Smarter folks than I may be able to pontificate on grain width, its something I rarely pay attention to, perhaps I should? Nah. Just set me down on a bench somewhere, hand me a short-scale Gibson, and I'm good. Especially if there is a host of stuuningly good looking women fliting about like there was yesterday on the Aspen Mall... As good an excuse as there ever was to get home late from work. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...