Gibson quality....

[Dave Kerr]

Nice guitar, but this is another animal entirely:
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v4...nt=eastman.jpg

[bob p]

That's really nice. I think that the comparison does provide a good illustration of the principles we've been talking about. At the same price point you can get a nice Chinese archtop or a nice American solidbody, but not a nice American archtop like a Heritage Eagle. Keeping things in perspective, $2000 still won't buy you a nice car.

[corduroyew]

if anyone thinks that American guitars aren't any good, the problem is that they're shopping at the wrong price point with inflated expectations about what they are going to get for their money. the cost of labor here is significant and quality materials are expensive. at the top tier, demand outstrips supply. prices go up. if anyone wants an LP that's built on a thick one-piece slab of quarter sawn Honduran mahogany with a thick bookmatched 4A flame maple top and a fretboard that's made out of tight-grained, chocolate-colored, tight, linear-grained Brazilian rosewood, then Agile and Gibson USA aren't the right places to shop. this type of guitar can be bought from a custom shop, but it will not be "affordable." a critical shopper with a thick stack of $100 bills will have no problem finding the American guitar he wants.

Very true.

People also don't realize how the wood changes the tone. People go on and on about how "good wood" make a guitar sustain better and it makes it more dynamic. Truth is that a 4A flamed maple top kills sustain. If you want sustain you want plain maple. Tight grain kills dynamics too. What people have convinced themselves that the tone from nice looking wood is that is best but in bind tests they almost always go for the plain wide grain guitars.

My point is that people have to decide what they want. Do they want the nicest looking guitar to hang on the wall, or do they want a plain guitar to actually play? A good luthier can make a great sounding guitar out of highly figured tight grain woods, but they could make better guitars with the cheap stuff.

If people would stop being so worried about how it looks and actually listen to the thing we might find that good guitars aren't that expensive after all.

[jonson]

Echo your thoughts there Corduroyew made a straty style about 15 years ago out of pine. Arse of a job to paint without building up to much on it but the bloody thing was alive. Light as a feather and full of life but as soon as I said what it was everyone backed off. Spect it didn't look good in the mirror but in surf green who knows.

[bob p]

right on about the maple caps! if people spent more time listening to guitars instead of looking at them, people would start lusting after goldtops instead of the lawyertop 'bursts. my flametop is a lively, dynamic guitar, and i spent an entire day hand-selecting the best player out of 30. but my goldie has the plain maple cap and a more open, swirly grain on the fretboard, and the difference in tone and liveliness between the two "identically built" guitars is striking. even though it was not the most expensive, the goldtop is definitely the best playing and sounding guitar that i own.

back to the imports, i think that many people are familiar with the fact that even though the imports have great fit and finish, the inexpensive imports suffer from marginal electronics, and pretty much require an electronics upgrade to help them to be all that they can be. (this thread is in the pickup forum after all.)

i agree that many people tend to discount the subtle effects that premium wood has on tone. some of the less expensive imported guitars may have outstanding fit and finish and playability, but they just don't use equivalent materials. setting aside the effects that grain variations have on tone within the same species of wood, the asian wood that is sold as "mahogany" and central american mahogany just aren't equivalent. they're not even the same species. the guitars made with them feel different and sound different. the difference is not subtle. these are the kinds of differences that exist between the top shelf instruments and their corner cutting counterparts. no matter where your guitar is made, its of paramount importance to start off with the best materials.

[SkinnyWire]

You can yap about it all you want ... and that's common here in the "clique". Either way, you can't polish a turd and when you get close it smells like what it is. Anyway, I'm done with this thread. I see it all too often here ... the endless blather in an effort to get the last word and prove oneself "right" above all others.

[David Schwab]

Just for comparison, my Gibson Custom Art & Historic 1956 LP Goldtop reissue cost $1750 -- less than the Chinese archtop.

http://www.gibsoncustom.com/flash/pr...56Goldtop.html

But Gibsons are entirely made on CNC machines. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing, but for the price of some Gibsons (including that gold top) you can have a real hand made guitar. I'd guess the Chinese guitar is hand made.

$4000+ for a factory made Las Paul is ridiculous. The fact that they are able to make so many, so quickly makes the high prices even more absurd!

So an Epiphone and a Gibson are basically exactly the same quality wise, but one is made in Asia.

[David Schwab]

I once approached a luthier about making a neck-through LP copy with a black finish, to be named the "Thru-Paul".

He scowled, was silent for a few seconds, then asked what I really wanted.

Robert Fripp plays a LP copy that has the neck extending to the bridge.

I could make you a neck through LP... that's not much more work than a regular set neck! That's how I'm going to make my LP Custom. That Gibson neck tenon is pretty weak.

right on about the maple caps!

Yeah, plain maple tops are hardrock maple. Curly tops are usually hard maple and quilts are big leaf maple, which is a lot softer. Curly tops be from soft maple as well.

If you want a tiger top that sounds like a plain top, use sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) instead of maple.

[David Schwab]

Echo your thoughts there Corduroyew made a straty style about 15 years ago out of pine. Arse of a job to paint without building up to much on it but the bloody thing was alive. Light as a feather and full of life but as soon as I said what it was everyone backed off. Spect it didn't look good in the mirror but in surf green who knows.

Parker Fly guitars have douglas fur or sitka spruce bodies and basswood necks. There's nothing wrong with conifer wood for bodies. The very first tele was made from pine!

People get hung up on preconceptions and tradition. Mahogany is a great sounding wood. Limba (korina) sounds a lot like mahogany. So does primavera. Honduras mahogany is wonderful, but the African stuff sounds great too.

My partner made a LP Junior out of alternate woods. It's a Lima body, with purpleheart accent, and a curly red oak top! The neck is poplar (like the Danelectros) with an EI Rosewood fingerboard.

This guitar sounds better than any LP I have heard. It sings! Has a very vocal tone. Purists might cringe at the woods used, but they can't deny the tone!

[kevinT]

Very true. Truth is that a 4A flamed maple top kills sustain. If you want sustain you want plain maple.

that makes sense. the wood in the grain areas is denser and therefore can dampen the vibrations/resonance of the instrument. Oak is a really dense hardwood. That's probably why not many guitars are made out of it.

I tried to buy a Les Paul Custom (Randy Rhoads style model) from musician's friend a year ago. The first one that they sent me had what looked like specs of saw dust in the paint finish...so i returned it. The second one that they sent me had other paint issues (thin and faded painted areas where you could see the wood) when it should have been solid white....i sent that one back too. These were $3200 guitars. If i'm paying that much, it's going to be 99.9% perfect or it will be returned.

I settled for a Dean Michael Schenker Signature Flying V #93/100. It plays and sounds great. However, I am still determined to acquire a Les Paul to replace the one that i sold years ago.

[David Schwab]

that makes sense. the wood in the grain areas is denser and therefore can dampen the vibrations/resonance of the instrument. Oak is a really dense hardwood. That's probably why not many guitars are made out of it.

Hard dense wood is brighter. It absorbs less of the string's energy. Soft woods are warmer sounding because they absorb more top end.

Plain maple is harder than figured maple, because figure occurs in softer lighter maple spices more often. So on a quilt top, you have a pretty soft piece of wood, as far as maple goes.

Real Les Paul Customs didn't have maple tops. They were all mahogany.

Les Paul had specified that the Custom would have a maple top, and the Gold Top wouldn't. Gibson either mixed it up or switched it. They also messed up the original trapeze bridge, which is why they went to the stop tail piece so you could palm mute, which was one of Les' signature techniques. They ran the strings under the bar.

My partner's LP collection. (not all of them)

[bob p]

as i said before, i agree that there is no substitute for the quality of a handmade instrument. but even in the 1950s gibson used a "duplicarver" to make the original LPs, so its not as if the process has changed all that much with the advent of computerized numerical control. is it bad that the duplicarver has been replaced by Hurco machines? probably not. computers perform repetitive tasks accurately and uniformly, and uniformity in product quality is a good thing. it also makes Gibsons more affordable than they would be if they were made by 100% by hand. i thought that this is what everyone wanted.

David, as a luthier i'm sure you're aware that there is more than one type of gibson LP neck tenon. the Epi and Gibson USA made guitars have a much smaller mortise and tenon than was used by Gibson in the 1950s (and is used on the historic custom shop guitars). still, a neck through would be a totally different animal. no comparison there.

just to add another point of reference, my Historic 4A flametop did not cost over $4k. everyone knows that list prices on guitars and real transaction prices are two different things, and somebody would have to be a pushover sort of buyer with poor skills of negotiation to pay those astronomical prices. there's a LOT more room for dealers to move on price with the higher end guitars than there is on the lower end guitars, and its important for a buyer to know that.

regarding Epis vs. Gibsons, i think that the fit and finish on Epis is outstanding, but there is still a difference between them materials wise. the last time that I looked at them the Epis didn't have one piece mahogany bodies like the Gibsons. the Epis used 2 and 3 piece body blanks of riftsawn or flatsawn mahogany laminated to alder. the historic Gibsons are made just like the originals, with 1 piece quartersawn mahogany bodies. these differences are significant in terms of tone, feel, cost, etc.

skinny, this isn't about having the last word. my purpose is to point out why some guitars cost a lot more than others -- the reason for this is not always because somebody is trying to rip somebody off. in the end, its good for people to have all of the facts so that they can make an informed decision when it comes to making the decision how to part with their hard earned money. if the process of discussing this out in the open helps to clear up some FUD, i think that's a good thing.

in the big scheme of things, it doesn't matter if we're talking about Gibsons vs. Epis or USA Hamers vs Hamers, or expensive vs. inexpensive PRS guitars. There's a reason that more expensive guitars cost more than less expensive guitars, and its not always due to cosmetics or labels.

[bob p]

wow, lots of additions to this thread while i was typing. thanks David for your insights.

its funny that you mention the tailpiece wrap. that was a big topic of discussion at the LPF for quite some time, and people are still debating which is better.

in regard to getting hung up on tradition, that is a very real phenomenon. sometimes its just because people get used to thinking inside of the box. to a large extent i think that the reason that so many people want traditional guitars is because they want to play the guitars that their heroes played. kind of a monkey-see monkey-do sort of thing. as far as new ideas go, bass players have always seemed much more eager to embrace new ideas than guitarists. its taken quite some time for guitarists to accept new materials, while bass players took to the idea like ducks to water.

[David Schwab]

There's nothing wrong with a duplicarver... I plan on getting one soon, and I'd get a CNC router if I could afford one.

My point was that the only reason an American made Gibson would cost more is the cost of living. It's not made better craftsmanship wise. If Gibson decided to use cheaper woods, it's to maximize their profit margin. Alder is a very nice sounding wood.

I might charge $2200 for a hand made instrument. If I could have it CNC'd, charging the same price is for doing less is a bit greedy, isn't it? But it is the American way.

Gibson over charges for their guitars. A LP Studio, with no binding, and solid finish is $1,908.00 - $2,018.00 list. At Musician's Friend they are selling for $1,199. The Standard is $3,448.00 List, retail $2,299.99 - $2,329.99.

How about the Custom Shop guitars? Zakk Wylde LP? $12,235.00! Retail, $7,999.99!

Limited Edition Les Paul Standard Goldtop? $9,412.00 List! $6,099.00 retail.

Gibson Custom Shop 1954 Les Paul Custom.. List Price: $7,299.00, $4,499.99 retail.

They make you think the "Custom Shop" guitars are different... but just like at Fender, they use the same parts as the regular models. Maybe they pick a nicer top wood. But look at the Zakk Wylde LP. It's painted!

This is paying collector's prices for new guitars. This and the whole fake relic guitar thing is just to drive up prices on the vintage market, by introducing new fake vintage guitars. I saw an old Strat in GC for $20,000! No guitar is worth that money. Especially one that sold for $200 new!

It's greed, that's all it is.

[corduroyew]

that makes sense. the wood in the grain areas is denser and therefore can dampen the vibrations/resonance of the instrument. Oak is a really dense hardwood. That's probably why not many guitars are made out of it.

The real reason has to do with strength to weight ratio, type of strength, and the length of grain.

Figured wood (not just maple) is bad for tone because the grain is cut short. Short grain decreases the strength between the wood fibers and lots of energy is lost that way. It’s like a trampoline. A big trampoline bounces you higher than a small trampoline because you have more connected surface to generate energy. A figured top is like having a small trampoline for sound.

The density of the wood doesn’t hurt tone at all as long as the strength to weight ratio is good. Back the trampoline analogy. If a kid jumps on a big trampoline with stiff springs and a and the mat is woven out of wire they won’t really move around. It’s the same thing with wood. If the wood is too strong and but still light (like balsa wood) it wont generate a good sound. If the wood is heavy and strong, like rock maple, then you can get a very nice sound. When the wood is light but flexible, like spruce, then you get a good sound too because it's still got a good balance of strength to weight. The sound is different, but it's good. Then you have the case where the person is too heavy for the trampoline. When a Grown up plays on a kids trampoline they can still get a good bounce but they bottom out and get kind of a plunk. This is what ebony is like. Ebony has a percussive tone to it but overall it deadens the tone because it’s got the wrong kind of strength.

There are a few things I could bring up about growth rings, cut, and runnout but they don’t fit into my trampoline analogy so I’m gonna leave those along.

Bottom line is that what we think makes a good sounding guitar is really more about looks. That is why Gibson is for the collector and Epiphone is for the player. Although both tend to need a visit to a tech before they are actually playable.