Official Luthiers Forum!

" Henry settled out of court and paid a $300,000.00 fine for poaching mad rose..."

"You'll recall the Madagascar folks were fine with the sale, but the Feds tried to twist the terms concerning "finished" boards, versus unfinished."

Both of those statements seem somewhat suspect and a bit off the mark as I understand it. In the first case it concerned Madagascar ebony bought through a middleman, and although the company paid a fine, Gibson was never prosecuted and didn't admit to wrongdoing. In the second case the material was Indian rosewood from the second raid that was later returned to Gibson.

"Get your facts first, then distort them as you please. - Mark Twain" -

Ah well, it was an interesting thread while it lasted.

_________________
Bryan Bear PMoMC

Take care of your feet, and your feet will take care of you.

I had a high-end Martin, a John Sebastian model, in the shop the other day.
It had a Martin "script logo" that looked just like a Gibson.

_________________
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100008907949110

Many of us unabashedly copy designs from the major makers, yet we are aghast when they do the same. Like tail fins on cars, what one maker does another will also do if they think it will sell.

I'm not the least bit aghast. The only thing I like to see is the copier do a better job than the originator. In this case, Martin copy of Gibson, I would imagine the Martin probably IS better.

I would be interested in hearing if the "established" repair persons agree that Gibson made some mighty fine flat top acoustic guitars in the 30's and 40's -- my limited adventures inside Gibson guitars from this era revealed some not so fine craftsmanship and the reason they were in my shop was they were falling apart. Is this the norm or exception?

_________________
Ken Cierp

http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/

Not sure if I qualify as "established", "established", or perhaps just plain established, but Gibson absolutely made some mighty fine flat top guitars in the 30's and 40's. I'd take an AJ or SJ, or J-35, J-45, L-00, Roy Smeck, etc, over about any equivalent Martin model made at the same time.

Good to see Martin finally learning how to shape an attractive upper bout and do a good burst! It's never too late to refine your sense of style.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

_________________
Steve Smith
"Music is what feelings sound like"

Well, I've been repairing and building since 1977, and if I had to choose a flattop guitar between Martin and Gibson... it would be Martin all the way.

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince

Ken if I could have one, only one guitar and had a choice in the matter my choice would be a 1937 Gibson L-OO in black.... If I could have two the other one would a 1939ish OOO-18 Martin..... What a pair... they would be, eh!

Regarding the workmanship Gibsons were manufactured for working class folks and musicians. They were not heavy hitters in the high-end world of guitar production back in the day. Gibson was also a toy company as well as a manufacturer of private label instruments under more than 20 brands that were often sold at early department stores. Gibson's back in the day were less expensive than Martins to a fair degree and often found high levels of acceptance in the south with different communities. Robert Johnson comes to mind.

Gibson had their moments though with Lohr and later with Les Paul and the results made history as some of the most collectable and desirable instruments of their type ever produced and pretty much unrivaled to this very day depending on one's perspective and personal preferences.

During some periods the work was rough, visible saw marks, lots of squeeze-out from copious amounts of HHG, etc. There were some periods for Martin as well where the insides of the boxes were not all that neat either. Likely most of the time with the Gibson company that once existed in Kalamazoo Michigan, our stomping grounds, quality was important but so too was production.... Gibson was a company that struggled much of their earlier existence and as such likely dealt with the issues that they faced as anyone might, cost cutting....

The book "Kalamazoo Gals" by John Thomas is highly recommended and can shed a lot of light on the wartime period of Gibson as well as other aspects of the Gibson story.

If one has the perspective that on balance a guitar is a tool for musicians, and that's my view, glue globs and saw marks do not a bad instrument make.

One of the things that we do is provide formal appraisals for valuable, vintage instruments. A quick look at Elderly instruments in the vintage Gibson section will likely help one forget about glue globs and saw marks pretty quickly....

I'll never advocate doing shoddy work mind you but I have said before on this forum that some of the things that folks seem to stress over here such as semi-hemi- fret ends really don't mean a hill of beans in terms of value for the prospective client if the things sounds like wet cardboard and plays like a smith corona typewriter..... There's my obsession with that stinkin typewriter again.... time for my meds....

There are other sites where a select few people get a pass to inject politics, religion, personal slurs and insults into the conversation then claim to be an innocent bystander when the thread goes bad. I hope that's not the case here. Everyone knows the rules. Easy enough to follow them or go elsewhere to post.

_________________
A constellation only takes shape when one maps the whole.
- Beth Brower

Exactly.

Yep. I've played very few Gibson flat tops that I actually liked.

My question had nothing to do with voting for favorite guitars (that is totally subjective) but rather asking for info regarding the integrity, quality and craftsmanship of Gibson flat top guitars manufactured in the 1930's and 40's. Thus the question was directed at those who have actually serviced many of them.

_________________
Ken Cierp

http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/

Now I get-it.

We have worked on many 30's - 40's Gibsons and Martins and when I think about what we did, how we did it, etc. I would rate Martins and Gibsons as not all that different in terms of build quality.

I can think however of some 30's L-OO's and the half brother KG-11 Kalamazoos where the dovetail was set and then the top was installed.... Not impossible to do resets on but certainly less servicable when the dovetail is burried under the top.

On balance though and IMO not a lot of diffrences in terms of how well they were put together. These days they both need the same sorts of things, neck resets, bridge reglues, fret work, etc. Pickguards that either shrank or are coming off - either brand may need these kind of things fixed.

The insides of Martins do usually look a little cleaner but this is no biggie for fans of these iconic instruments nor would it be for me either.

Kind of steering this thread of course -- but here is a link that points out the diversity of the Gibson factory production system (as a former production manager I know it had to be a nightmare) mixing the vast brands and quality levels on the same production floor even with modern control systems is a major challenge -- its no wonder that final product was not pristine inside and out. Hey maybe this should link into the "Cheap China Guitars" thread

http://www.fox-guitars.com/Gibson-Made_Brands.html

_________________
Ken Cierp

http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/

Pardon me if I was unclear. I was not addressing Mr. Pile's comments.

_________________
A constellation only takes shape when one maps the whole.
- Beth Brower

Thanks Ken for the link it's a great read and I have seen it before but not for a while.

Makes it pretty clear that Gibson was trying to be a lot of things to a lot of people which usually is not a good thing.... As a former production manager I can understand your concerns and would second them.

If you toured the factory and Dave Collins did last summer I believe you can still see the remnants of the various production tooling that they used.

Last week the iconic smoke stack was slated to be torn down but I understand it got a reprieve of sorts but don't know the details... yet.

hummmmmbarf...

Truth is the CEO-8 is a great looking guitar regardless of logo -- the limited production makes all the CEO's models instant collectibles. However the 8 seems a little more pricey than usual. Elderly has one/some so perhaps I'll get to play one if I get to Lansing before they are sold.

_________________
Ken Cierp

http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/

Ok. I'm calling you a liar. . This analysis is incorrect. There were two raids, both of which were legitimate, one of which was a squeeze.

The first raid resulted from Gibson knowingly purchasing Madagascan wood which was illegal, which was traced from the forest to Madinter in Spain, who packed it on a pallet labeled for Gibson and put it in a container headed to the US. US Fish and Wildlife Service and US APHIS were tipped off and they raided and confiscated the wood. There was nothing politically motivated about it. Gibson broke the law and got caught with the goods. They were part of a group of manufacturers who were shown what was going on in Madgascar, including Chris Martin, and Gibson decided to do whatever the hell they wanted. There were emails confiscated indicating their own procurer looking into grey market fingerboards.

The second raid was perfectly legal, but a legal squeeze. Gibson was feverishly fighting USFWS regarding the first raid, arguing that it was political, including arguing that it was because Gibson isn't a Union shop (neither is Martin, btw). Gibson ordered fingerboards from Luthier's Merchantile who drop shipped them to a Gibson warehouse in Texas, where USFWS confiscated them. The reason they were confiscated was because a long standing problem with the importation of fingerboards from India. Since 1976, India has had a rule governing the export of all domestic hardwoods restricting the thickness of any raw, unprocessed materials to under 6mm. Fingerboards are usually 9-10mm, and are unprocessed. The World Trade harmonized code for a processed product is different than one for unprocessed. India has always, with a wink and a nod, allowed the export of guitar fingerboards under the processed harmonized trade code, and USFWS has never said a thing. But this is the incorrect code, because the fingerboards are unprocessed -- they are rough planed, have saw marks, etc. So USFWS confiscated them on the grounds, as permitted by the Lacey Act, of illegally importing materials under the wrong trade code, and under dimensions prohibited by the country of origin's own export rules.

Fingerboards have been, and continue to be exported this way (I've contacted LMII to confirm this, and will follow up), but USFWS used it as legal leverage against Gibson to keep the pressure on them. As far as I know, the manner in which fingerboards from India are imported hasn't changed and neither has the Harmonized Trade Code designation change been requested by the Government of India.

I stand by my post.

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince

David Berkowitz has the correct story on the Gibson raids... he has been working tirelessly along with Chuck Erikson and a few others on this story since the beginning, to get the information to the luthier community with a great deal of integrity.

_________________
"I want to know what kind of pickups Vince Gill uses in his Tele, because if I had those, as good of a player as I am, I'm sure I could make it sound like that.
Only badly."

Truth?

_________________
Once in a while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right - Robert Hunter

I see that the CEO-8 has the new VTS soundboard -- that explains the higher than normal pricing. Looks like the VTS option is not going to be inexpensive.

_________________
Ken Cierp

http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/