Gibson Acoustic Guitars
Wednesday, March 30 2011 @ 10:31 AM CDT

Well I admit it. I'm an addict! One that is in remission and controlled. I do not buy a new guitar every month as I would be inclined to do if I gave into my addiction. Of course, not having any money has something to do with it also. But anyway I do dream a lot. Of the two guitars I play today, one is my Martin 1964 D-18 which is battered, chipped, scratched and is generally hard to play unless you know how to hold it, talk to it and stroke it. I came into possession of this guitar in 1972 for the then royal sum of $150.00. It already had the above mentioned physical damage. Well maybe I have put a few scratches on it. My other guitar is a Dean acoustic/electric that I got on eBay for less than a hundred bucks. I did have an Alvarez-Yari which was a nice guitar but in a moment of weakness I gave it to my son.
But anyway, now on to the topic of which i wish to discuss. In my day dreaming I decided to check out Gibson acoustics as I saw an Epiphone(Gibson's cheap stepbrother) for $150.00 new. It was the Hummingbird model and I remembered playing a Gibson Hummingbird at a guitar show a dozen years ago and liking it a lot.
I thought, why not see what the Gibson is going for these days and maybe if I only eat pork and beans for a year I can buy one. Nope, it would be more like put a second mortgage on the house. Going out to Musician Friend's website I put in a search for all the Gibson acoustic guitars. Well get this folks. The cheapest guitar was an Arlo Guthrie 3/4 size which went for $1,999.00. There was a "used" Hummingbird acoustic/electric for $2,949.00. The most expensive, excuse me I have to take a deep breath here, was a J-250 that went for $19,999.00.
Good golly Miss Molly and I know Peggy Sue couldn't afford one. Who buys these things? Who buys any of them? I mean here we are in the greatest recession of modern times. Threatening anyday now to slip into a Great Depression and they are charging these prices for guitars? Most folks I know are having a hard time buying gas and groceries and it will only get worse.
I repeat who buys these? Collectors? Are they art works now that non-musicians buy and hang on the wall as an investment to offset inflation? How does Gibson sell enough of these to justify having a factory to produce them? Someone please help me understand.

Re:Gibson Acoustic Guitars
Wednesday, March 30 2011 @ 10:45 AM CDT

Quote by: bronco ...The cheapest guitar was an Arlo Guthrie 3/4 size which went for $1,999.00. There was a "used" Hummingbird acoustic/electric for $2,949.00. The most expensive, excuse me I have to take a deep breath here, was a J-250 that went for $19,999.00.... Who buys these things? Who buys any of them? ...

Re:Gibson Acoustic Guitars
Wednesday, March 30 2011 @ 12:39 PM CDT

i used to have a hummingbird. played in a band with a guy that worked at a really great vintage guitar/amp/keyboard store. he would buy stuff cheaply off people that came in (usually drug addicts who needed some quick cash). that guy had all kinds of great gear.but that's a special circumstance (and I ended up losing my Hummingbird when i was a drug addict who needed cash quick).

I used to work at a guitar shop and the people who bought the really nice stuff were rock stars, rich guys, and surprisingly we sold a lot of stuff to the LA street maintenance crew (they are union and make bank). those guys were all middle aged, single and loved ZZ Top. occasionally you would sell something to someone who put it on layaway forever, or to someone's wife who was buying her husband a nice 25th anniversary gift.

why don't you take the Martin and spend some cash getting it set up really nice? you'd be surprised at what can be done. I have a 1950's Harmony archtop that plays better than my Tele. I bought it for $35 at some hillbilly store while on tour, it used to be a beast too.

Re:Gibson Acoustic Guitars
Wednesday, March 30 2011 @ 12:55 PM CDT

Quote by: bronco Who buys these things?

Lawyers with rock star fantasies?

Of course $20k is a reasonable price (probably cheap) for a decent violin. A good bow if probably half that price. A Steinway-D goes for 100k or so. A friend of mine has a used one. My flute teacher probably paid 20k for his gold instrument. It sounded amazing too.

I wonder why we think that 20k is a lot, when for classical notions it's perfectly normal?

Victor.

Re:Gibson Acoustic Guitars
Wednesday, March 30 2011 @ 01:24 PM CDT

My Takamine was £320 new prob about $600 equivalent?? And I love her she is my baby. I don't see why people spend a fortune on guitars, money to burn I suppose!!

One day I will own my own Martin though ;-)

Re:Gibson Acoustic Guitars
Wednesday, March 30 2011 @ 01:41 PM CDT

My wife is the original owner of a J50 1968 Gibson. The binding has yellowed along with the tuning knobs. The nitrocellulos varnish has darkened and the bracing has caused a shadow appearance across the top. Kind of hard to explain that... there is no cracking and other than a bridge repair a few years ago the guitar is in mint condition.
The current pricing on that guitar is around $5000. I can see spending that much on a guitar like that if I understood and appreciated the full history. Went to a guitar show a couple of years ago. People there are really into the vintage aspect of the instrument and like to be around folks that have like knowledge of such things. Braggin rights comes with a hefty price.

Re:Gibson Acoustic Guitars
Wednesday, March 30 2011 @ 02:16 PM CDT

For years I had one acoustic, a Guild G37 that I bought off the rack new in 1975 for somewhere around $400 which was a fortune to me the time but I traded in my 1968 Tele for it. I loved that guitar and took it everywhere. I had it refretted a couple times and set up even more times. I broke the headstock off and had it repaired. Guitar repairs are always worthwhile and I would recommend having a good guitar tech take a look at the Martin since that's a quality guitar. Currently on ebay there's one that is selling for $1525 with 2 days to go, and that's one that needs some repairs as well.

After I broke my left elbow a while ago and my left arm got weak, I decided to get something that was easier to play. I got a new Taylor GA3 for around a grand and that really changed my perspective on quality acoustic guitars. That's sort of the low end as far as a professional grade Taylor goes but it's still a beauty. It's got a very balanced sound and a nice sweet resonance, and I think it was worth every penny. I'd had the same one acoustic guitar for the majority of my life so I figured why not splurge a little on a better quality instrument. Everytime I settled for a cheaper instrument it's always been a matter of settling for less. As it is, off the rack the Taylor is undeniably a superior instrument. So much so that I gave my Guild to my son since he was starting his touring life as a musician and could use a good quality guitar that takes a licking and keeps on ticking.

Since then I bought a second beater guitar so that I could play it in the band and not worry about dinging it, and I got a nice sounding used Seagull S6CW acoustic electric for $200 since is pretty well broken in in the ding department. The trouble with an expensive instrument is then the music gets all precious and you get worried about every little nick! That said, I just decided to pop a better pickup in the Taylor (a K&K pure mini) and start playing it in the band again to once again get the upgrade in sound that I've gotten used to.
I do think that the current crop of USA-made Gibsons are overpriced, though.

Re:Gibson Acoustic Guitars
Wednesday, March 30 2011 @ 05:06 PM CDT

Quote by: VicDiesel Quote by: bronco Who buys these things? Lawyers with rock star fantasies? Of course $20k is a reasonable price (probably cheap) for a decent violin. A good bow if probably half that price. A Steinway-D goes for 100k or so. A friend of mine has a used one. My flute teacher probably paid 20k for his gold instrument. It sounded amazing too. I wonder why we think that 20k is a lot, when for classical notions it's perfectly normal? $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Well let's see? Possibly because my bank accounts, savings and checking or doing good to have over $2,000 in them at the end of the month. Good thing I never wanted to take up violin. Victor.

Re:Gibson Acoustic Guitars
Wednesday, March 30 2011 @ 05:38 PM CDT

Rather than try to answer each individual point that has been brought up I will answer them all in one post.
1. I have had the Martin in a Luthier shop four times over the years. The first two were a disaster that probably made the guitar worse than it was but the final two have been good. It takes an artist to work on a guitar as old and beat up as mine. For some reason Martin did not put truss rods in the necks of their guitars until some time in the 70's I think. I was exagerating how hard it is to play and it probably plays about as well as anyone can get it. At least the neck is straight now and it plays and stays in tune. Those old Martins were just not designed to be played up the neck or with bar chords. That's what is difficult. And as Jim said I am not the man I used to be. Arthritis in the fingers, carpal in the wrists and it is about me as much as it is the guitar.
2. The Martin is too sentimental for me to ever sell it. I realize that I could sell it and get a nice new guitar but my addiction is not about getting rid of guitars but getting more of them. Besides the tone is great if I manage to fret it correctly.
3. I was just day dreaming I never seriously thought about buying a Gibson, just was shocked at how expensive they were now. Made the same discovery with the new
Alvarez-Yari's. Taylors do have great easy to play necks and action. I used to think they were over priced before I found out how much the others were going for these days.
4. What I am now thinking, as I head into true old age, is that a nylon string guitar maybe the way to go. I have been in love with that steel string tone but nylon is so much easier to play. Anyone heard anything good about Cordoba's?

Re:Gibson Acoustic Guitars
Wednesday, March 30 2011 @ 05:44 PM CDT

Rather than try to answer each individual point that has been brought up I will answer them all in one post.
1. I have had the Martin in a Luthier shop four times over the years. The first two were a disaster that probably made the guitar worse than it was but the final two have been good. It takes an artist to work on a guitar as old and beat up as mine. For some reason Martin did not put truss rods in the necks of their guitars until some time in the 70's I think. I was exagerating how hard it is to play and it probably plays about as well as anyone can get it. At least the neck is straight now and it plays and stays in tune. Those old Martins were just not designed to be played up the neck or with bar chords. That's what is difficult. And as Jim said I am not the man I used to be. Arthritis in the fingers, carpal in the wrists and it is about me as much as it is the guitar.
2. The Martin is too sentimental for me to ever sell it. I realize that I could sell it and get a nice new guitar but my addiction is not about getting rid of guitars but getting more of them. Besides the tone is great if I manage to fret it correctly.
3. I was just day dreaming I never seriously thought about buying a Gibson, just was shocked at how expensive they were now. Made the same discovery with the new
Alvarez-Yari's. Taylors do have great easy to play necks and action. I used to think they were over priced before I found out how much the others were going for these days.
4. What I am now thinking, as I head into true old age, is that a nylon string guitar maybe the way to go. I have been in love with that steel string tone but nylon is so much easier to play. Anyone heard anything good about Cordoba's?