onewilyfool Posted March 10, 2013 Author Share Posted March 10, 2013 What seemed strange to me at the time, you could get Epiphones with solid bridges and fretboards.....lol...go figure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponty Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Sorry guys, but that's totally cheesy. I could understand something like this if Gibson was trying to bring these guitars to market for around a grand, but obviously that's not the case. In addition, they should not be allowed to advertise such guitars as "all solid woods". A laminate is a laminate, regardless of what parts of the guitar it appears in. If I had a choice, I would go for non layered wood. But really, it is no different than a winged headstock - Gibson has done that for years, and Martin have recently started doing this. It is merely solid wood stuck to solid wood. Rosewood fret board stuck to mahogany neck - Ebony bridge stuck to spruce top - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 . There are archtop players that will only go with solid carved tops. Really expensive. In most of those you've got rosewood or ebony bridges sitting on the top, not glued. Just sayin' . . B) . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 In theory though would say adding a flatsawn layer of rosewood to the bridge make it more stable and stiff and if nothing else prevent cracking/splitting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 The 2012 Hummingbird Std. I had on test in Jan/first Feb did have the laminated bridge. But, , , , and this is a detail I never mentioned : It had the dot missing over the I . . . ! Well the round little mob-point was there under the black lacquer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rar Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 I could understand something like this if Gibson was trying to bring these guitars to market for around a grand, but obviously that's not the case. Some people still seem to be under this impression this was a cost-cutting move. As was pointed out in the original discussion, it was not. The laminated bridges and fretboards were more expensive, not less. (This should be obvious if you think about it for a minute: extra cuts to make the boards thinner by the supplier and extra work by Gibson to glue the thinner boards back together make for increased costs.) The lamination was due to a supply problem: they didn't have the materials required for non-laminated bridges and fretboards and could not obtain them. (The U.S. federal government seized all the rosewood thick enough to make non-laminated bridges and fretboards, and would not allow Gibson to purchase more, claiming Lacey Act violations. Now that the government has given up and effectively admitted that there was no Lacey Act violation by returning the wood.) Gibson was, and still is I assume, exploring alternatives looking toward the day when traditional materials are no longer available, but that has nothing to do with current production in Bozeman. -- Bob R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 The 2012 Hummingbird Std. I had on test in Jan/first Feb did have the laminated bridge. But, , , , and this is a detail I never mentioned : It had the dot missing over the I . . . ! Well the round little mob-point was there under the black lacquer. Pardon - I meant didn't ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Some people still seem to be under this impression this was a cost-cutting move. As was pointed out in the original discussion, it was not. The laminated bridges and fretboards were more expensive, not less. -- Bob R But it's safe to say that any laminate is viewed as less than ideal typically, just as it's unlikely that anyone would sell a Lacey Act model as being more desirable because of a laminate bridge/board construction. Someone coined it earlier when they said 'seems to be a bigger deal to non-owners than owners' and I would agree with that, owning two myself, but I can also see the point of the criticism, a guitar in the 2k and up realm of pricing quite simply, by general market standards, should't be sporting a laminate construction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guth Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Like I said, I could find it easier to understand if this was part of an effort to produce a lower priced product. It might have cost them more in labor, but they saved money by using the equivalent of scrap dimension wood to create these parts.. The idea that this stemmed from Gibson's own supply problems is not my problem as a consumer. Similar decisions being made while the country was at war are more understandable. The fact that they substituted lesser quality parts and charged the same for their guitars is what I have a problem with. I'm critical of this as a non-owner due to the fact that I wouldn't buy such a guitar for that kind of money to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 . The one thing that really bother's me is the laminated fretboard. I would've like to see the top layer thicker, not thinner that the bottom. You can see in the pic, once the fingerboard is fretted, it appears that the fret tangs cut the thinner top layer into what I would call 22 little pieces of wood glued to the bottom layer. I just don't think that's desirable construction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyearspickn Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Like I said, I could find it easier to understand if this was part of an effort to produce a lower priced product. It might have cost them more in labor, but they saved money by using the equivalent of scrap dimension wood to create these parts.. The idea that this stemmed from Gibson's own supply problems is not my problem as a consumer. Similar decisions being made while the country was at war are more understandable. The fact that they substituted lesser quality parts and charged the same for their guitars is what I have a problem with. I'm critical of this as a non-owner due to the fact that I wouldn't buy such a guitar for that kind of money to begin with. Suggest you read the 9 pages of posts from last April. http://forum.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/85975-threes-a-crowdon-a-bridge/page__hl__laminated+ This will get you up to speed on what many here think is a dead horse issue. Yes, many felt as you do. And, yes, many did not feel as you do. But I'm guessing all feel that everything that could possibly said about this issue has been. Ad Nauseum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted March 12, 2013 Author Share Posted March 12, 2013 Yeah, I just wanted to know if they stopped doing it???? Am I to assume this is a thing of the past? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guth Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Suggest you read the 9 pages of posts from last April. http://forum.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/85975-threes-a-crowdon-a-bridge/page__hl__laminated+ This will get you up to speed on what many here think is a dead horse issue. Yes, many felt as you do. And, yes, many did not feel as you do. But I'm guessing all feel that everything that could possibly said about this issue has been. Ad Nauseum. Thanks for pointing that thread out to me. I had no idea they were using more than two layers per bridge. Within that thread I found this gem: Gibson's FAQ on "Tone Woods" What an utter load of bullshit. Gibson finds their a$$ in a sling and tries to pawn their freaking plywood parts off as innovation and forward-thinking. Give me a break. If you guys are tired of people discussing this here, there are other places to vent about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Thanks for pointing that thread out to me. I had no idea they were using more than two layers per bridge. Within that thread I found this gem: Gibson's FAQ on "Tone Woods" What an utter load of bullshit. Gibson finds their a$ in a sling and tries to pawn their freaking plywood parts off as innovation and forward-thinking. Give me a break. If you guys are tired of people discussing this here, there are other places to vent about it. It does seem that creative writing classes has paid off for someone. I think back at the time it was pointed out other sources and third parties were having no issue to get / sell bridges of one-piece for as low as $18, now that's customer price... I'm sure there were alternative options open to them, but bean-counters will be bean-counters. But in the interest of balance, I own two Lacey act models, one I bought, one issued as a replacement for a faulty model I had. Both sound great and are in fact the guitars I use to play live with. So it's all about small cosmetic details, but then again luxury elitist products are sold on the basis of small details are they not? I think the irony at the time was if you wanted a solid one piece bridge model guitar from Gibson you had to buy an Epiphone. Really made me laugh that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyearspickn Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 What seemed strange to me at the time, you could get Epiphones with solid bridges and fretboards.....lol...go figure! For those who don't know, Korea and Japan don't have the stringent Save The Planet /Lacey restrictions we have here. Plus, they do use laminates in the backs and sides on most of their models, and less desirable glues, and less desirable finishes thannitrocellulose, etc. So it isn't really possible to just compare bridges and ignore other macro and micro differences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guth Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Gibson might have spent more money on labor to glue up thinner pieces of wood (which if it wasn't their scrap wood would certainly cost less than the thicker stock used to carve the bridges and fretboards out of), but overall I'm guessing that they must have saved a bundle. I could see it costing them extra if they were to have to located some new temporary suppliers and pay them more so that they could match the build quality of the other american guitar manufacturers. For those who are happy with the sound of their guitars, that's great, it really is. But sound quality and build quality are two different things in my opinion. Sorry guys, but I don't remember reading much about all of this the first time around. Maybe a few years down the road someone will write a book titled "Bozeman Guys, A story of the plywood Gibsons". I would not be at all surprised if this real reason Ren Ferguson left Gibson. For Gibson to have the audacity to throw out a marketing piece stating that they "haven't passed along the additional costs to the consumer" is the final straw for me. That FAQ definitely strikes me as some kind of high grade BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 For those who don't know, Korea and Japan don't have the stringent Save The Planet /Lacey restrictions we have here. Plus, they do use laminates in the backs and sides on most of their models, and less desirable glues, and less desirable finishes thannitrocellulose, etc. So it isn't really possible to just compare bridges and ignore other macro and micro differences. True, but it was a rather amusing factoid at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdd707 Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 When the future history of Gibsons is written, this whole thing will only get a footnote*. * if that much attention! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 When the future history of Gibsons is written, this whole thing will only get a footnote*. * if that much attention! Or twenty years from now they will be the hottest Bozeman collectibles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Nilppeznaf Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Or twenty years from now they will be the hottest Bozeman collectibles. Yeah. ".it seems Gibson went through a magical period starting sometime in late 2010. This New Golden Age, as it is sometimes referred , lasted only three years and the guitars produced by the Bozeman factory in Montana are some of the most sort after instruments in modern times. Some speculate the, at the time slightly controversial Lacey Act builds..with their layered bridges and fingerboards, actually improved the strength an tonal characteristics of these guitars, and these models are among the most highly regarded and sought after." Guitar Guitar Guitar 2033 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted March 12, 2013 Author Share Posted March 12, 2013 SOOOOOO......if all the hypothetical speculations are through with, has Gibson STOPPED using laminated bridges and fretboards????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 . Back in post #10 I commented that I thought Gibson Acoustic stopped in the second half of 2012. Next post, from Del, he agreed. I recall Jeremy posting on one of the laminate threads back then that Montana had stopped using the layered rosewood. And, I haven't seen any threads about 2013 acoustics having layered rosewood. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guth Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 OWC, my apologies for ranting on your thread requesting specific info. Sincerely, Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guth Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Sorry, meant OWF. No post edit function on the mobile interface as far as I can tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted March 12, 2013 Author Share Posted March 12, 2013 OWC, my apologies for ranting on your thread requesting specific info. Sincerely, Bill Hey Guth, not a problem, just glad they stopped this practice, not good for image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.