Gibson acoustics

[eded]

Absolute heathen post...  On a whim, I went to give a couple Gibson Generation guitars a try today.  A G-00 and a G-45.  I have to say, I was truly amazed.  I liked to 00 more than the 45, though with some time in finding the way it needs to be played, the 45 could be a really great one.   

Ed

[Silence Dogood]

I have never owned a Gibson product, but have admired many of them over the years while in shops.  Every now and then I'll pick up a J-45 and when you find a good one, there is really nothing like it.  They have a sound all their own.  However, most of the Gibsons I've ever picked up were duds that looked pretty.  But the great ones really are great. 

[B0WIE]

I like most of their acoustics. More than Martin or Taylor. I think the idea that they make duds is a bit dated, as that's not really been the case for a while. But, it was certainly an issue before and the rep still haunts them.

Their higher end instruments (both acoustic and electric) use really nice woods and you can hear it in the way they resonate.

[Silence Dogood]

I like most of their acoustics. More than Martin or Taylor. I think the idea that they make duds is a bit dated, as that's not really been the case for a while. But, it was certainly an issue before and the rep still haunts them.

Their higher end instruments (both acoustic and electric) use really nice woods and you can hear it in the way they resonate.

Out of the thousands of acoustic guitars Gibson has ever made, I've only played a handful in shops over the years.  But having said that, I've never picked up one of those pretty jumbos that sounded good.  Ever.  They all sounded muted and I'd not have paid the price tag for one.  I've also never played one of those pretty Gibson cutaways with the fancy pickguards that sounded good.  But I have played a few old-school J-45s that were flat-out amazing.  That's just been my experience. 

[eded]

These are (price wise) low end guitars, $1000 (00) and $1100 (45).  Walnut back and sides, and spruce top, all solid wood.  They have a funky sound port in the side.  Like I said, I was taken by how nice they sounded and how well made they look.  That was one thing about the sound port, it gave a great view into the body you don't usually get without a mirror.

As far as older Gibsons...  some are truly spectacular.  Some meh (as the youngsters say).  At one guitar gathering I went to, there were several J-45's.  My Blueridge J-45 clone sounded better than a bunch of them, but a few were really really great.  I played a "Doves in Flight" (some sort of riff on the Dove) several years ago that was incredible.  It had an incredible price at the time too.  LOL

It's funny, not many folks talk about the bum years for Martin, or not as many as trash Gibson.  In the 70's, one (or more) of the bridge placement templates had worn down and hundreds of guitars were made with the bridge in the wrong place.

And, fwiw...  I didn't mean for this to be a brand bashing thread.

Ed

[Denis]

Out of the thousands of acoustic guitars Gibson has ever made, I've only played a handful in shops over the years.  But having said that, I've never picked up one of those pretty jumbos that sounded good.  Ever.  They all sounded muted and I'd not have paid the price tag for one.  I've also never played one of those pretty Gibson cutaways with the fancy pickguards that sounded good.  But I have played a few old-school J-45s that were flat-out amazing.  That's just been my experience. 

There used to be a local shop that carried tons of great vintage gear and I remember going in one time and they had 2 early/mid 50's J-45s.  Both had plenty of dings, scratches, worn finish...quite possibly two of the best guitars I've ever played.  Beautiful tone, volume and feel.  The shop is long gone and I miss it.  Was a great way to waste a couple of hours on a Saturday afternoon. 

I usually pick up their new instruments when I go into the shops these days, just to give them a spin.  Some are good, some aren't.  It's hit or miss. 

[Silence Dogood]

Wasn't my intent to bash.  Apologies if it came off that way. 

[lackstone]

Coming up (pre-Taylor period), Gibson was not a product that sat as well in my ear as a Martin or Guild did so, after a certain point, I stopped trying out the Gibson product altogether. I guess I didn't have the ear for the so-called Gibson sound. That said, no one I knew owned one. That was also a time when no one really talked guitars. They just went out an bought what they bought. Having bought my last guitar in 2007, I haven't checked out anything since. I'll have to get out more and see what Gibson is up to these days.

[eded]

I usually pick up their new instruments when I go into the shops these days, just to give them a spin.  Some are good, some aren't.  It's hit or miss. 

That works for almost every brand.  In my experience at least.

Ed

[StringPicker6]

A few years ago I went into a guitarcenter and picked up a new model, their J-15. Basically a J-45 with walnut back and sides for a very affordable price.  I was so impressed with the sound that I went back a few days later and bought it.  But it's now for sale in a guitar store, because I traded it in for my Larrivee OM-40R. 

[Denis]

That works for almost every brand.  In my experience at least.

Ed

Agreed.  And a lot of guitars in the shops just need new strings and a set up

[B0WIE]

Out of the thousands of acoustic guitars Gibson has ever made, I've only played a handful in shops over the years.  But having said that, I've never picked up one of those pretty jumbos that sounded good.  Ever.  They all sounded muted and I'd not have paid the price tag for one.  I've also never played one of those pretty Gibson cutaways with the fancy pickguards that sounded good.  But I have played a few old-school J-45s that were flat-out amazing.  That's just been my experience.  

That's called personal taste. If they all sound bad to you, then it's not meant for you. That has nothing to do with quality control and it's weird to me that people think others are spending thousands on guitars that are mostly duds.

[Silence Dogood]

That's called personal taste. If they all sound bad to you, then it's not meant for you. That has nothing to do with quality control and it's weird to me that people think others are spending thousands on guitars that are mostly duds.

I understand taste and see where you are coming from.  But many of the Gibsons I've ever picked up were muted and lifeless, not in comparable to a Martin, Taylor, etc, but in comparison to the other Gibsons hanging on the wall next to them.  I honestly believe a lot of people buy them and have bought them simply because of the name.

[B0WIE]

I understand taste and see where you are coming from.  But many of the Gibsons I've ever picked up were muted and lifeless, not in comparable to a Martin, Taylor, etc, but in comparison to the other Gibsons hanging on the wall next to them.  I honestly believe a lot of people buy them and have bought them simply because of the name.

And, a lot of people find Martins muddy, Taylors shrill. I'm not a big Gibson fan or anything. I just don't like that people think it's cool to bash on expensive instruments. Enjoy what you enjoy.

[eded]

And, a lot of people find Martins muddy, Taylors shrill. I'm not a big Gibson fan or anything. I just don't like that people think it's cool to bash on expensive instruments. Enjoy what you enjoy.

Yeah, this. 

But it's hard to be objective and honest without using negative descriptions sometimes.  One persons articulate is another persons thin.  One persons muddy is another persons overtone filled.  And for the record, Taylors are "thin and reedy" not shrill.     Over the years that has been the term I have heard most when people downtalk Taylor.  FWIW, I like them, I just like my Larrivee's more.

Ed

[lackstone]

Yeah, this. 

But it's hard to be objective and honest without using negative descriptions sometimes.  One persons articulate is another persons thin.  One persons muddy is another persons overtone filled.  And for the record, Taylors are "thin and reedy" not shrill.     Over the years that has been the term I have heard most when people downtalk Taylor.  FWIW, I like them, I just like my Larrivee's more.

Ed

That's the problem with any (common use) product in a growing global culture, when an awareness is publicly raised about a lack of product quality, that has come to categorize such a raised awareness as bashing. The sensitivity today has gone overboard to an extent that no one can A/B a product and (dare) give reasons for not choosing one over the other without being criticized for it.

Gibson, to me, was never a contender for my money. I can't say why for reasons given above so I refrain from blunt honesty. Let those who find them rewarding give glowing reports, which simply means we have divergent impressions of quality instruments. Such glowing reports must also be perceived, and understood to imply to those who would be outwardly oppressed for saying so, that their own reports of polar opposite impressions lurk between the lines of glow. It's that unspoken reality that the agents of altruism won't tolerate without bashing when aired. That is the character of the AGF to such extent that I banned myself from the latent dishonesty at work there. 

[Silence Dogood]

That's the problem with any (common use) product in a growing global culture, when an awareness is publicly raised about a lack of product quality, that has come to categorize such a raised awareness as bashing. The sensitivity today has gone overboard to an extent that no one can A/B a product and (dare) give reasons for not choosing one over the other without being criticized for it.

Gibson, to me, was never a contender for my money. I can't say why for reasons given above so I refrain from blunt honesty. Let those who find them rewarding give glowing reports, which simply means we have divergent impressions of quality instruments. Such glowing reports must also be perceived, and understood to imply to those who would be outwardly oppressed for saying so, that their own reports of polar opposite impressions lurk between the lines of glow. It's that unspoken reality that the agents of altruism won't tolerate without bashing when aired. That is the character of the AGF to such extent that I banned myself from the latent dishonesty at work there. 

I understand people being sensitive to "bashing," but I agree, we as a society are getting to the point where it's hard to have meaningful conversations anymore. 

On topic and to be absolutely clear, there have been Gibson J-45s that were among the best guitars I've ever put in my hands.  I believe them to be worth every penny on the price tag.  But there have also been many Gibsons I've played that were simply underwhelming and mediocre at best.  But all of them have been beautiful. 

[Mikeymac]

On topic and to be absolutely clear, there have been Gibson J-45s that were among the best guitars I've ever put in my hands.  I believe them to be worth every penny on the price tag.  But there have also been many Gibsons I've played that were simply underwhelming and mediocre at best. 

This has been my experience with Gibsons as well (new ones in shops; I've never touched an older, "vintage" Gibson, but some of those are highly regarded instruments.

I think recent Gibsons *may* be getting better in terms of consistent quality. For some years, they were producing a lot of dogs (both acoustics and electrics).

[teh]

Two Gibson models that I would like to try are an L-00 and a Gibson B45 12 string, the model Gordon Lightfoot has played for almost his entire career. Call up any you tube video from his prime and listen. Start with Early Morning Rain.

On the flip side, I have rarely seen or played a newer Gibson that stopped me in my tracks. The last one I remember playing was a new Gibson that had lacquer that had been sprayed on top of a fine layer of sawdust powder from a final sanding. Not sure how that would have passed through final inspection with Quality Control or the dealer when they opened the box, but it did.

Having said that, they have sold a lot of guitars and instruments over the years starting with the Les Paul models on the electric side and Mandolins so you can't argue their success.

In closing, the two major companies I have always been drawn to are Martin and Larrivee. I do think having your family's name on the head stock has made a difference. Fifth generation C.F. Martin III took his grandson Chris under his wing at an early age and Jean Larrivee did the same with his two sons John and Matthew.  That may be part of the reason that I  have purchased and been a repeat buyer from both companies.

[eded]

The sensitivity today has gone overboard to an extent that no one can A/B a product and (dare) give reasons for not choosing one over the other without being criticized for it.

Much of what you said, I agree with.  This part I disagree with. 

That the sensitivity today allows the complete dismissal of civility is what bugs me.

Ed