It does take a while to find a good Gibby. I was in GC the other day checking them out and the quality was appalling. We had a Martin CEO-7 in the shop recently. A slope shoulder hog. It looked to be a Martin attempt at producing a Gibson, and it sure sounded like a good Gibson should. Unfortunately, it was as ugly as a mud fence.
Gibson coming to their senses?
- Thread starter dapmdave
- Start date
It does take a while to find a good Gibby. I was in GC the other day checking them out and the quality was appalling. We had a Martin CEO-7 in the shop recently. A slope shoulder hog. It looked to be a Martin attempt at producing a Gibson, and it sure sounded like a good Gibson should. Unfortunately, it was as ugly as a mud fence.
Neal
Senior Member
I played two Gibson acoustics at GC last week. One was a J-45, and the other a Hummingbird. They were OK (the J-45 was the better of the two).
What surprised me was how tender the finish on both was. Significant surface scratches on the back of both instruments, like they had been dragged across the room (which is certainly not out of the realm of possibilities at GC!). None of the Taylors or Martins I played looked as beat up. Either they had been there a while, or they are just more susceptible to scratching.
None of the Martins did a thing for me. Interestingly, if money were no object and I could have walked out with anything hanging within reach, the best guitar in there was a fairly inexpensive mahogany Taylor 320.
Neal
What surprised me was how tender the finish on both was. Significant surface scratches on the back of both instruments, like they had been dragged across the room (which is certainly not out of the realm of possibilities at GC!). None of the Taylors or Martins I played looked as beat up. Either they had been there a while, or they are just more susceptible to scratching.
None of the Martins did a thing for me. Interestingly, if money were no object and I could have walked out with anything hanging within reach, the best guitar in there was a fairly inexpensive mahogany Taylor 320.
Neal
SFIV1967
Venerated Member
What was so ugly on that small guitar? Sounds and looks not bad to me? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsoYwY1BoLE
Ralf
Well, this will most likely be unpopular but I used to be really Gibby heavy on acoustics and personally, I thought they were great. I really did. I did not see any of the fit/finish issues, sloppy workmanship etc. They were fine guitars built well that sounded great. Now granted, most every Gibson I had was a vintage piece but I'm not jumpin' on the Gibson is crap bandwagon.
Now, that being said, I sold them all. 100%. I did so to get heavy into both Guild and Martin. Guild, because they are undervalued IMHO and sound great as well and Martin just because I've always liked and respected Martin.
What I see as an issue for Gibson though are the poor folks that bought basically the same guitar 1 or 2 years too early and seeing the same thing sell for 25+% less than what they paid. That wouldn't set too well with me for sure. I'm sure they probably thought that through but I think that's a touchy one.
Now, that being said, I sold them all. 100%. I did so to get heavy into both Guild and Martin. Guild, because they are undervalued IMHO and sound great as well and Martin just because I've always liked and respected Martin.
What I see as an issue for Gibson though are the poor folks that bought basically the same guitar 1 or 2 years too early and seeing the same thing sell for 25+% less than what they paid. That wouldn't set too well with me for sure. I'm sure they probably thought that through but I think that's a touchy one.
It was the color of the sunburst, Ralf. Kind of a nasty hot pink center. But it did sound pretty good.
But looking again, I think the one we had was a CEO-4, rather than a CEO-7.
Bikerdoc
Senior Member
I still have a yearning for a vintage Gibson J-45.
SFIV1967
Venerated Member
Ah! That makes sense! The CEO-4 was a slope shoulder guitar and had some kind of strange sunbursts! I mean, look at those various versions of sunbursts, all are CEO-4 models! Did they have different guys spraying them??? The left one is especially odd and the middle one is missing the yellow paint.
Ralf
jcwu
Senior Member
Ralf
I can't believe they let those things out of the factory...
That's just about exactly our comments on looking at the guitar. But... it did sound good.
Neal
Senior Member
Geez, they would have been better off just painting them all black. The one on the right is particularly putrid.
Neal
Neal
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2007
- Messages
- 13,660
- Reaction score
- 3,092
- Location
- Philly, or thereabouts
- Guild Total
- 11
Somebody has problems sourcing decent Sitka tops or what?
fronobulax
Bassist, GAD and the Hot Mess Mods
- Joined
- May 3, 2007
- Messages
- 24,790
- Reaction score
- 8,921
- Location
- Central Virginia, USA
- Guild Total
- 5
Training that went wrong? I'm sure that somewhere there are black finished guitars that started out as sunbursts....
davismanLV
Venerated Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2011
- Messages
- 19,419
- Reaction score
- 12,319
- Location
- U.S.A. : Nevada : Las Vegas
- Guild Total
- 2
Ralf, thanks for the vid on the Martin CEO-7. What a sweet little guitar!! Now I want one...... :boxing:
Yeah, I never noticed the wide variation before and not trying to be a contrarian or anything like that, I gotta say this. I own a CEO 4R, a CEO 7 and just this a.m. picked up a CEO 5 and I think they sound really and I mean really nice. 2 of them are burst and I'll need to go back and revisit their looks but certainly nothing jumped out at me when I received them. I've heard other non LTG members comment on some of their burst finishes as well.
adorshki
Reverential Member
HA! That's the first thing that occurred to me, too.
Or maybe they were having a problem sourcing CITES-compliant lacquers.
bobouz
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,287
- Reaction score
- 1,888
Gibson slamming has always been an easy target due to wide variations from one sample to the next, but I've historically found a good Gibson acoustic to be overwhelmingly more interesting to me, both in terms of tone & playability, than any other brand.
Yes, you've got to work to find a good one, but that's similarly true of Martins, Guilds, and others.
As for Gibson electrics, my 2012 ES-330 VOS will be with me till the end. An absolutely stellar instrument.
Yes, you've got to work to find a good one, but that's similarly true of Martins, Guilds, and others.
As for Gibson electrics, my 2012 ES-330 VOS will be with me till the end. An absolutely stellar instrument.
Last edited:
gibsonjunkie
Member
I have 7 Gibsons - only one "vintage" (if 1972 qualifies as vintage). Three Lesters and an ES-335. They are all "gems".
bluesypicky
Enlightened Member
I can relate to that.
Of all the acoustics I've owned in my life (and I'm pushing the old fart mark) there is not one that beat the neck of my Dove in terms of comfort.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a Guild nut job all the way, and should I get to pick only one guitar to take with me on a desert island for the rest of my life, it would be the DV-72, because of the way that thing sounds, but Gibson neck profiles usually get my preference.
OK, but Gibson is probably the one that will make you work the hardest.
I'd probably agree with you there Pascal. My WM45 might not be the best guitar I own (or even the second best), but it has my favorite neck of the lot.
The one Gibson I've owned, a '00 ES-135, was very nicely built. And as some of you are saying, the neck was very comfortable, too.
Hey, bluesy, what exactly is the age for the "old fart mark"?
walrus
Hey, bluesy, what exactly is the age for the "old fart mark"?
walrus