Ibanez LGB 30 vs. Ibanez LGB 300

[Alex Beauroy]

Anyone here have heard about an Ibanez LGB 30, made in China, cheaper than the Ibanez LGB 300????
Thanks for your feedback, on this and on the Ibanez Artstar AF155!!!
Best regards
@lex
 

[David J. Littleboy]

"Alex Beauroy" wrote in message news:kt0urv$4rr$1...@dont-email.me...

The made in China Ibanez instruments that I've seen (and owned) have been
really nicely made, and can be improved by replacing the pickups. YMMV, of
course.

--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

[Tony Done]

Me too. My mate sells them, and I've played a few. As you say, the
pickups tend to be ordinary, but this is generally true of inexpensive
Asian guitars. - I was looking in the hock shop yesterday, Samick,
Magnums and the like for $60-200. They all seemed like decent bits of
wood, and I bet I could turn most of them into good sounding and playing
guitars with a set up and hardware change.

--
Tony Done

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=784456

http://www.flickr.com/photos/done_family/

[Alex Beauroy]

On 27/07/2013 23:40, Tony Done wrote:

On 28/07/2013 6:06 AM, David J. Littleboy wrote:

"Alex Beauroy"  wrote in message news:kt0urv$4rr$1...@dont-email.me...

Anyone here have heard about an Ibanez LGB 30, made in China, cheaper
than the Ibanez LGB 300????
Thanks for your feedback, on this and on the Ibanez Artstar AF155!!!
Best regards
@lex

The made in China Ibanez instruments that I've seen (and owned) have
been really nicely made, and can be improved by replacing the pickups.
YMMV, of course.

Me too. My mate sells them, and I've played a few. As you say, the pickups tend to be ordinary, but this is generally true of inexpensive Asian guitars. - I was looking in the hock shop yesterday, Samick, Magnums and the like for $60-200. They all seemed like decent bits of wood, and I bet I could turn most of them into good sounding and playing guitars with a set up and hardware change.

I just saw this on Facebook : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIDjfQGUkw4&feature=youtu.be
Enjoy
Best Regards
@lex

[Bill Williams]

Tempting!
http://www.thomann.de/gb/ibanez_lgb30_vys.htm

[Tony Done]

My mate has had a couple of the expensive version, very nice. Based on
my experience with in-store Ibanez, I would be happy with the Chinese
one if I wanted that style of guitar, keeping in mind I might want
different pickups fitted. - But that, for me, is true of any guitar
regardless of price.

[van]

The main difference betwixt the 30 and 300 is that the 300 has an all maple neck, and the 30 has a combination maple and mahogany neck.
That GB is some salesman- I don't know if I'd buy a used car from that guy...; - )

[Tom from Texas (The Tom Risner Fund for Deserving North Texas Guitarplayers is not liable]

Yep, I got an Ibanez AK86 from a pawnshop for $200 a few years back and put some Vintage Vibe pickups in it. Now, it's a very good guitar.

Tom from Texas

[Alex Beauroy]

Yes I understand your point about the "Salesman" from which you would not buy a "used car".......
but to tell you the truth I bought a Guild artist award previously
owned by GB at "Rudy's" guitar shop in NYC in 2010 and it is a jewell and I still keep it safe at home
 and play that guitar at very very secured gigs. she plays like "Butter"!!!!
I think that Guild, by designing this guitar for him, may have tried to get him back for endorsement or
advertising purposes after he went doing business with Ibanez.
I have also an Ibanez GB20 improved by changing the original floating pick-up with a Seymour Duncan
inside the top..... I did that after seeing this done by Doug Raney ......
Isn't it funny that on arch-top guitar changing the pick-ups change everything..........
Best Regards
@lex

[Alex Beauroy]

On 28/07/2013 17:46, Bill Williams wrote:

Tempting!
http://www.thomann.de/gb/ibanez_lgb30_vys.htm

As you just said!!!!
Tempting!!!!
Best Regards
@lex

[Alex Beauroy]

Mr. Tony Done is the "T Bone Walker" of Usenet!!!!
Do you remember he had a three pick-ups arch-top guitar at a time, and he was playing it quite
in parallel alongside the floor and the top facing the selling, like pedal-steel guitar players do on their knees!!!
Best Regards
@lex

[Tony Done]

On 30/07/2013 3:31 AM, Alex Beauroy wrote:
>>
> /Mr. Tony Done is the "T Bone Walker" of Usenet!!!! //
> //Do you remember he had a three pick-ups arch-top guitar at a time, and
> he was playing it quite //
> //in parallel alongside the floor and the top facing the selling, like
> pedal-steel guitar players do on their knees!!!//
> //Best Regards//
> //@lex/

Yeah, T Bone had some good sounds. I have a Lollar Chicago pickup
sitting in my parts box. According to him it was inspired by old
National pickups and TBW, hot and nasty. Huge honky output.

[Tony Done]

On 30/07/2013 3:31 AM, Alex Beauroy wrote:
>>
> /Mr. Tony Done is the "T Bone Walker" of Usenet!!!! //
> //Do you remember he had a three pick-ups arch-top guitar at a time, and
> he was playing it quite //
> //in parallel alongside the floor and the top facing the selling, like
> pedal-steel guitar players do on their knees!!!//
> //Best Regards//
> //@lex/

Yeah, T Bone had some good sounds. I have a Lollar Chicago pickup
sitting in my parts box. According to him it was inspired by old
National pickups and TBW, hot and nasty. Huge honky output.

[van]

Yes, I changed out the Seymour Duncan/Seth Lover p/u for the Kent Armstrong p/u specially made for my B120, and it completely changed that guitar.
I can't make up my mind what to do with the SD/SL- put it on one of my solid bodies, or put it on a budget archtop, like the ones we're discussing.
I read a little more about the LGB 30, and some people compare it to the spruce top Ibanez archtop that they recently put out, which I played and didn't like.
I still haven't tried the new Comins GCS ES-1 archtop- anybody check it out yet?

[Alex Beauroy]

I don't know this guitar yet!!!! it is nearly 1499 USD with a laminated top!!!!!
http://www.cominsguitars.com/comins-craft-series/gcs-1es

[Tony Done]

> //Isn't it funny that on arch-top guitar changing the pick-ups change
> everything..........//
> //Best Regards//
> //@lex/

*The guitar is just a fancy bit of wood*, the amplification chain is
damn near everything.

I've just started fixing up a Peavey Raptor Plus I got for $75 at the
hock shop. The electronics don't work, but those will get chucked
anyway. I'm confident it will be a ripper when I've finish with it.

[Gerry]

On 2013-07-29 22:05:21 +0000, Tony Done said:

> *The guitar is just a fancy bit of wood*, the amplification chain is
> damn near everything.

I agree with that; but the specifics of the fancy bit of wood sure have
to "feel" a certain kind of way before I can consider the "damn near
everything" else part.
--
Those who wish to sing always find a song. -- Swedish proverb

[van]

Well, there are laminates and there are laminates;
http://liutaiomottola.com/PrevPubs/Plywood/Plywood.htm

[Tony Done]

On 30/07/2013 10:17 AM, Gerry wrote:
> On 2013-07-29 22:05:21 +0000, Tony Done said:
>
>> *The guitar is just a fancy bit of wood*, the amplification chain is
>> damn near everything.
>
> I agree with that; but the specifics of the fancy bit of wood sure have
> to "feel" a certain kind of way before I can consider the "damn near
> everything" else part.

Yeah, we all like nice things, me included. But best not to confuse what
is pretty with what produces good sounds. - A common mistake among new
chums.

[Gerry]

On 2013-07-30 03:54:09 +0000, Tony Done said:

> On 30/07/2013 10:17 AM, Gerry wrote:
>> On 2013-07-29 22:05:21 +0000, Tony Done said:
>>
>>> *The guitar is just a fancy bit of wood*, the amplification chain is
>>> damn near everything.
>>
>> I agree with that; but the specifics of the fancy bit of wood sure have
>> to "feel" a certain kind of way before I can consider the "damn near
>> everything" else part.
>
> Yeah, we all like nice things, me included. But best not to confuse
> what is pretty with what produces good sounds. - A common mistake among
> new chums.

True enough, and difficult to separate for the novice. That's the
reason I stressed "feel" about the guitar. Neck, action, length,
tuners, etc.

[Alex Beauroy]

Some old jazz players used to say to me that if Gibson decided to go on with laminated top on the ES 175
it was just to reduce the feedback effect!!!!!
Nowadays after the further adventures of the great Jimi Hendrix using the feedback as a way to express himself,
followed by Van Halen, Satriani and Steve Vai we can hardly find drummers softly playing with brushes.
Gigging with young musicians========>>>> you need to play loud, we are playing for deaf people.
Jimi knew it for sure!!!
That is the reason why I never sold my ES 335!!!
 

[Tony Done]

I'm not very sensitive to feel, because I've been playing an old reso
for a long time, and anything else seems easy compared with that. A
guitar has got to look nice enough that you want to pick it up, but once
you start playing it you can't see much of it anyway. What I am very
sensitive to in electrics is evenness of response, across and along the
strings, and almost all of this comes down to careful choice of pickups.
Could be because I was playing acoustics for a long time before I
started playing electric

Gotta say though that this Peavey I've just fixed up feels nice though,
with a sleek neck and a flattish-radius board -good for slide. Total
outlay $75 price, just over a day's work, assorted bits and pieces from
my spares collection. I used a buffing pad on the body, so it looks
pretty too.

[Larry Hogan]

I've owned one of these since January, the ES model. Superb guitar, quite versatile. Gorgeous, great sounding and playing, super-well-built guitars, not a flaw anywhere. In email communication with Mr. Comins, I learned that the laminate plates were made to his exact specifications as well as the KA pickups. Then the MIK guitars are set up in his shop here.

[van]

Sounds good- thanks!

[van]

On Sunday, August 4, 2013 9:08:18 PM UTC-4, Larry Hogan wrote:

Larry- What gauge strings do you use on it? What gauge strings is it possible to use on it?

[Larry Hogan]

According to Bill, 'it comes strung with D'Adarrio .011 - .049 with a plain 3rd but whatever you prefer will be fine.' So far, I've stuck with that—works for jazzier tones, plus it also still wails for fusion/rock. Very versatile.

Since you're interested, I'm betting you've already seen this... but if you want to hear it with the original string gauge, check out this video at YouTube from SoundPure Studios. (BTW, it's *my* exact guitar being played here. I'm the second owner.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bReYCrD5VA&feature=player_embedded

Just to experiment, I've been thinking of throwing a heavier set of either D'A Chrome 12s or Half-Rounds on it and heading more in that direction. I can always go back. (Still have my '65 ES335 and '83 Ibanez AM205 if I want to rock out some more.)

[thomas]

That Comins is a sweet box. Me want.

[van]

Time to head out to Rudy's and try one of these. It seems like the perfect second archtop. Thanks for the info.

[van]

No, me want!; - )

[thomas]

I can't help notice that the Comins is less than half the price of the Sadowsky semi -- for what seems to be a very similar product. Any thoughts or comparisons that would explain this?

[Larry Hogan]

On Tuesday, August 6, 2013 3:15:04 PM UTC-4, thomas wrote:
> I can't help notice that the Comins is less than half the price of the Sadowsky semi -- for what seems to be a very similar product. Any thoughts or comparisons that would explain this?

IIRC, before I got mine I read two reviews from guys who actually owned both guitars and judged them to be about equal overall (one preferred the Comins actually). Each noted that the Comins was probably a bit more versatile with the four knobs and split-coil ability. Quality, tone and playability were pretty equal, though, according to those guys.
Now, I've not managed to try a Sadowsky, but... in the grand scheme of pricing stuff, I feel that the Comins is probably a bit underpriced for the quality you're getting, and it might just be that the Sadowsky is priced a bit over. Given all their rave reviews—Sadowskys are surely great guitars—of course, pricing 'helium' happens with PRS, Gibson, etc. so... Obviously, YMMV.
In the end, if possible try them both out and decide for yourself.

[David J. Littleboy]

Made in Japan vs. made in Korea.

Interestingly, there's a Japanese company that's doing Gibson ES-175
knock-offs for Comins-level prices. With a near-infinite range of model
variations*. Click the "Archtop Tribute" link at the left on the following
page and then click the tiny pictures.

http://www.walkin.co.jp/

I like this one: http://www.walkin.co.jp/guitars/290127.htm

One pickup, wood bridge. Hard case sets you back another US$125.

*: Dots vs. trapezoid fingerboard markers, at least four different finishes,
one vs. two pups, buckers vs. P90, wood vs. metal bridge, normal vs. thinner
(2.5") body, right vs. left handed. A seriously crazy number of options.

--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

[thomas]

On Tuesday, August 6, 2013 5:18:46 PM UTC-4, David J. Littleboy wrote:
> "thomas" wrote:
>
> >
>
> >I can't help notice that the Comins is less than half the price of the
>
> >Sadowsky semi -- for what seems to be a very similar product. Any thoughts
> >or comparisons that would explain this?
>
> Made in Japan vs. made in Korea.

Interesting observation. I'm not sure what to make of that difference. How significant do you think that is?

[Tony Done]

I think that most place more importance on provenance than is justified
these days - a historical hangover - at least between J, K and China. I
personally wouldn't put Korea very far behind Japan in terms of quality,
and then related just about exclusively to hardware, and well ahead in
terms of value for money. But we all get beguiled by what it says on the
headstock, eh?

[David J. Littleboy]

"Tony Done" wrote in message news:ktrv3c$vso$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

>
>On 7/08/2013 8:42 AM, thomas wrote:
>> On Tuesday, August 6, 2013 5:18:46 PM UTC-4, David J. Littleboy wrote:
>>> "thomas" wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> I can't help notice that the Comins is less than half the price of the
>>>
>>>> Sadowsky semi -- for what seems to be a very similar product. Any
>>>> thoughts
>>>> or comparisons that would explain this?
>>>
>>> Made in Japan vs. made in Korea.
>>
>> Interesting observation. I'm not sure what to make of that difference.
>> How significant do you think that is?

It's significant economically, because Japan has higher wages than Korea and
thus can't make things as cheaply.

>I think that most place more importance on provenance than is justified
>these days - a historical hangover - at least between J, K and China. I
>personally wouldn't put Korea very far behind Japan in terms of quality,
>and then related just about exclusively to hardware, and well ahead in
>terms of value for money. But we all get beguiled by what it says on the
>headstock, eh?

I'm not sure how the Korean industry operates. Japan in general started out
doing cheap and crappy, and then got religion about quality control, and
beat up on a lot of competitors in a variety of industries by
out-quality-ing them. My impression is that Japan produces a phenomenal
number of guitars, and that the quality is very high, and that the major
Japanese companies (e.g. Ibanez) have taken their quality control techniques
to their factories in China.

As far as guitars are concerned, though, there's more* to a guitar than
quality control. Martin and Gibson's quality control is poor compared to
Ibanez China, but the guitars are way better.

*: Some of that is that cheap guitars have bright, harsh, ugly pickups;
there might be a reason for this. In mass-producing violins, carving away
too much (leaving the top too thin) is way worse than leaving too much wood
in, so mass produced violins are heavier. Something similar, maybe? Or maybe
folks looking for a cheap guitar tend to be impressed by bright? Who knows.
A friend was looking for a cheap Gretsch-like guitar. We played a bunch of
cheap Ibanez MIC look-alikes, and they were harsh and ugly. Nicely made,
though. The real thing had a really gorgeous sound.

[Tony Done]

Where electrics are concerned I'm in the "just a fancy lump of wood"
school of thought, and a CNC router and UV-cured poly robotic spraying
booth work well anywhere. I still have reservations, however, about QC
and timber curing in India and Indonesia. IMO, hardware, in particular
the pickups, maketh (most of) the guitar, and those are easily changed
if you don't like them - A hobby of mine, I just turned an ugly ducking
$75 hock shop Peavey Raptor into something of a swan, mostly by
replacing the pickups.

Martins might be well made, but the variation in tone from guitar to
guitar is enormous. They are top of my list of guitars I wouldn't buy by
mail order. Many Gibson acoustics sound lousy, and attention to finish
seems to be uniformly poor, but they do seem to pay attention to the
quality of their materials, little things like brass inserts for P90
pickup screws and CTS pots.

I guess that all factory acoustics overbuilt as a warranty precaution,
but that has been changing over the past few decades, particularly with
the advent of Taylor. Gotta admit I tend to go for bright and punchy in
acoustics, as it suits my genre, acoustic blues, - note separation is a
major issue for me. However, I am paranoid about non-resettable necks on
flattops, so I wouldn't buy Asian-made unless I knew for sure that the
neck was resettable. FWIW, my favourite flattop for fingerpicking has a
plywood top, but it wasn't particularly cheap.

[thomas]

On Tuesday, August 6, 2013 8:38:43 PM UTC-4, Tony Done wrote:
>
> booth work well anywhere. I still have reservations, however, about QC and timber curing in India and Indonesia. IMO, hardware, in particular
>

Yeah, but that's where even the high-end factories in the US get their wood. Remember Gibson getting popped for illegally importing fingerboards from India a few years back?

> the pickups, maketh (most of) the guitar, and those are easily changed if you don't like them - A hobby of mine, I just turned an ugly ducking $75 hock shop Peavey Raptor into something of a swan, mostly by replacing the pickups.>

The USA-made Peaveys from the late 80s and 90s are first-rate guitars, really good bargains on the used market. I have two Peavey solid-bodies from that era.

[Tony Done]

True, timber is imported from places like India and Indonesia, but I
think/hope the odds are in favour of fairly rigorous QC on the imported
stuff.

I ended up choosing the Peavey out of 3 or 4 reasonable candidates
because they have a good reputation here in Oz, and this one had a lot
of strong points, discussed in another group. In fact the only minus was
the electronics, which didn't work and in any event were destined for
the junk box. I've no idea how old the guitar is, but the bit of
research I have done suggests it is recent and MIK. I'll likely end up
doing a universal pickup rout on it, and making a 2xP90 or HSH pickguard
- when I get tired of cleaning up my neglected garden.

[Jonathan]

On Tuesday, August 6, 2013 3:15:04 PM UTC-4, thomas wrote:

> I can't help notice that the Comins is less than half the price of the Sadowsky semi -- for what seems to be a very similar product. Any thoughts or comparisons that would explain this?

I'm curious how Eastman stacks up to Comins.
Are they similar in terms of price and quality?

[thomas]

We need Jack Zucker. He would be all over this.

[TD]

No 'fencing.'

[David J. Littleboy]

"thomas" wrote:
>
> I'm curious how Eastman stacks up to Comins.
>
> Are they similar in terms of price and quality?

We need Jack Zucker. He would be all over this.
<<<<<<<<<<

ROFL. Yeah, these are his kind of axes. I don't see them as being jazz
boxes; the stop tailpiece implies a block down the middle pretty much
killing any but very minor acoustic response. He really sounds sweet doing
electric blues on those sorts of axes. But that says more about me than the
guitars. And they'll feedback a lot less than a real jazz box. (I'm being
_REAL_ happy with the amplified sound of my 16" Holst. Just gorgeous. A real
insult to the instrument that the player is so bad. Sigh.)

I'm looking forward to the 16" thinline I'm getting from Jim Soloway. Even
if the top is a laminate, it's a wood bridge, real (not stop) tailpiece, and
floating pup. Heritage has a new bunch of Kenny Burrell signature guitars,
in both 16"* and 17", and this may have been a prototype therefor. Sheesh,
the damn thing even has the controls on the pickguard the way I like them.

*: With the ugliest finish in the history of musical instruments:
http://www.walkin.co.jp/guitars/125183.htm
(The regular sunburst finish is as good as the blue is bad. Go figure.)

One other thought: Comins and Sadowsky are playing the game of doing a
custom setup and guaranteeing quality control. I owned an instrument from
the factory that makes the Sadowsky instruments, and it looks to me that
fit, finish, and setup on the Sadowsky ones are significantly better. Comins
is playing the same game and undercutting Sadowsky on price. More power too
them, I say. (Me being me, the 17" Sadowsky is the only one of all of these
that's interesting. But, they all look real nice. Other than the John Pisano
model, the Eastmans don't do anything for me.)

-- David J. Littleboy
Suffering from GAS, in
Tokyo, Japan

[Jonathan]

You must be thinking about the El Rey.
The Uptown series are pretty traditional jazz archtops.

[Jonathan]

Yeah. For sure. It's funny how his 10 year old posts seem to mysteriously bubble up from time to time :)
I have an Eastman archtop, and I like it quite a bit, but I have not yet come across a Comins.

[Alex Beauroy]

Jack Zucker is still alive and well but much more into Photography artistry, & has been selling some guitars..........recently..... He is on Facebook!!! I'm one of his "friends" there....................
Best Regards
@lex

[thomas]

On Wednesday, August 7, 2013 12:13:35 PM UTC-4, David J. Littleboy wrote:
>

> *: With the ugliest finish in the history of musical instruments:
> http://www.walkin.co.jp/guitars/125183.htm
> (The regular sunburst finish is as good as the blue is bad. Go figure.)

If you're gonna go blue guitar, you gotta fully commit.

[David J. Littleboy]

"Jonathan" wrote:
On Wednesday, August 7, 2013 12:13:35 PM UTC-4, David J. Littleboy wrote:
> "thomas" wrote:
>
> > I'm curious how Eastman stacks up to Comins.
> > Are they similar in terms of price and quality?
> We need Jack Zucker. He would be all over this.
> <<<<<<<<<<
>
> ROFL. Yeah, these are his kind of axes. I don't see them as being jazz
> boxes; the stop tailpiece implies a block down the middle pretty much

You must be thinking about the El Rey.
The Uptown series are pretty traditional jazz archtops.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

The Comins instruments that were linked to earlier in this thread were
stop-tailpiece instruments of the type Jack Z. was fond of. I only recall
Jack making negative comments about instruments without a block. I realize
that Eastman makes a lot more real archtops than stop-tailpiece instruments.

[David J. Littleboy]

"thomas" wrote in message
news:e872d4e5-9996-4314...@googlegroups.com...

The blue is fine, it's the sick sunburst that's the problem.

Oops. I'm a liar. The other Heritage Kenny Burrell is an 18" monster. Oops,
again. There are a zillion Heritage Kenny Burrell models.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34khVOQhZo4

Sheesh, there's a buzz in the amp (or room). Ouch.

[John A.]

On Tuesday, August 6, 2013 7:38:14 PM UTC-4, David J. Littleboy wrote:

> I'm not sure how the Korean industry operates. Japan in general started out
>
> doing cheap and crappy, and then got religion about quality control, and
>
> beat up on a lot of competitors in a variety of industries by out-quality-ing them.

Cheap, yes, but it I think it depends on what you mean by crappy. There's crappy in the sense of "high rates of manufacturing defects" and crappy in the sense of "badly designed and/or doesn't suit the purposes or aesthetics of its users." My sense is that the early wave of Japanese guitars imported to the US were mostly crappy in the latter sense, but well put together. Over time, they got better and better in both senses, but I think it's the latter sense that mainly distinguishes, say, a 60's odd-ball from a late 70's-80's model that compares favorably to its contemporary US competition.

I think you see pretty much the same pattern in other industries (especially steel, electronics, and cars), for a similar set of reasons. Nearly every Japanese industry was rebuilt from the ground up post-war based on QA/QC/QM principles (which were developed within US industries, but abandoned by them in the 50s and 60s). This positioned them to beat up all sorts of other industries once they got a handle on product development and design, and became technological innovators. I think there's a slight difference with Korean industries in that early exports were cheap and more crappy in the "badly manufactured" sense than the "badly conceived" sense. There's also a different set of historical circumstances behind why Korean manufacturing developed the way it did. However, Korean manufacturers have wound up in a very similar end state (i.e., their steel, cars, electronics and instruments are now as good as anybody else's in terms of both defect rates and design/utility).

>
> My impression is that Japan produces a phenomenal
>
> number of guitars, and that the quality is very high, and that the major
>
> Japanese companies (e.g. Ibanez) have taken their quality control techniques
>
> to their factories in China.

In the US, we see much smaller numbers of Japanese-made instruments than we used to, and none (at least legally) of the high-end Gibson clones that are sold in Japan, so it's tough to get a sense of how many are made in Japan. There's lots of Japanese-branded stuff, but it's mostly not made in Japan. You're right about Japanese companies exporting their manufacturing methods as part of their off-shoring (again, famously, with cars and electronics before guitars). Korean instrument companies seem to be following this pattern as well.

> As far as guitars are concerned, though, there's more* to a guitar than
>
> quality control. Martin and Gibson's quality control is poor compared to
>
> Ibanez China, but the guitars are way better.
>

Depends on what you mean by QC. If you mean it in the restrictive, technical sense of control mechanisms built into the production process intended to minimize defects and maximize consistency, then you may be right. I have my doubts about this, though. There are cognitive biases built into the way people talk about the defects they perceive. There's an expectation of zero defects in expensive products, and an expectation and tolerance of more defects in lower cost products. I don't know how different the defect rates actually are, though, and I haven't seen any systematic reporting of this.

In the broader sense of quality -- i.e., one that encompasses not just QC, but quality assurance strategies, materials/sourcing, systematic alignment of product design with end-user requirments, feedback loops, corporate philosophy, etc -- if the end product is consistently "better" (even though it may not have a better defect rate), then you can't really say that its "quality" isn't as good. Ultimately, I think the main thing driving dissatisfaction with Gibson "quality" is price. Gibsons are very expensive, and the company has followed a strategy of pushing their products further up the price scale over time (and squashing discounting). Given this, the existence of a small number of products with defects has a disproportionate effect on the brand's reputation for quality.

I can't speak to Martin's quality, though. I've never come across a lemon, but I've never owned a Martin, and haven't played all that many. I don't particularly like the lower-end ones I've played -- I think there are much better sounding guitars for $500-$1200 than the Martin in this range -- but they do seem well made. The higher-end ones I've played have all been great.

John

[Tony Done]

>>
>> My impression is that Japan produces a phenomenal
>>
>> number of guitars, and that the quality is very high, and that the
>> major
>>
>> Japanese companies (e.g. Ibanez) have taken their quality control
>> techniques
>>
>> to their factories in China.
>
> In the US, we see much smaller numbers of Japanese-made instruments
> than we used to, and none (at least legally) of the high-end Gibson
> clones that are sold in Japan, so it's tough to get a sense of how
> many are made in Japan. There's lots of Japanese-branded stuff, but
> it's mostly not made in Japan. You're right about Japanese companies
> exporting their manufacturing methods as part of their off-shoring
> (again, famously, with cars and electronics before guitars). Korean
> instrument companies seem to be following this pattern as well.
>

The guy who owns Tym Guitars here in Oz, Tim Brennan, used to specialize
in importing used guitars from Japan. He once told me that Gibson sell
more guitars in Japan than they do in the US, and that their QC is
better for that market than for the domestic one. I don't know whether
either statement is true, but it is credible enough to make you think
about the size and demands of the Japanese market.

The great diversity of Japanese models (of anything) reflects their
marketing strategy that more models sell more units. Martin, under the
management of CFM IV, who graduated with a business degree, has gone the
same way.

Given this,
> the existence of a small number of products with defects has a
> disproportionate effect on the brand's reputation for quality.

You can look at just about any Gibson and see finish defects. I remember
one outstanding example a few years ago, a small semihollow going for
well over $5000 here in Oz. It had router chatter marks all around the
binding, so bad a more gullible type might have taken it for part of the
design. More common are finish runs and inadequate cutting back and
buffing.. The binding on my LP Special looks like it was done by a 10yo
whittler with a blunt penknife, but I have cleaned it up a bit myself.

>
> I can't speak to Martin's quality, though. I've never come across a
> lemon, but I've never owned a Martin, and haven't played all that
> many. I don't particularly like the lower-end ones I've played -- I
> think there are much better sounding guitars for $500-$1200 than the
> Martin in this range -- but they do seem well made. The higher-end
> ones I've played have all been great.
>
> John
>

I think that Martin have gone for form over function in the sense that
QC is excellent in most respects, but musical performance is variable.
The most disappointing guitar I have ever played at any price was a new
Martin 000-42, an absolute clunker. The other problem Martins still have
is variable neck angle - a tangible QC issue - so that is the other
reason I wouldn't buy one by mail order. - I called in my music
store-owning mate's workshop a few weeks ago, and he was spokeshaving
the bridge on a new Martin to get enough saddle showing to lower the
action.

[John A.]

On Thursday, August 8, 2013 3:43:27 PM UTC-4, Tony Done wrote:
>
> The guy who owns Tym Guitars here in Oz, Tim Brennan, used to specialize
>
> in importing used guitars from Japan. He once told me that Gibson sell
>
> more guitars in Japan than they do in the US, and that their QC is
>
> better for that market than for the domestic one. I don't know whether
>
> either statement is true, but it is credible enough to make you think
>
> about the size and demands of the Japanese market.
>

I don't know about Gibson selling more units in Japan than in the US, but it's not entirely implausible. I've heard for years that Japanese buyers dominate the collectors' market (e.g., nearly all the real sunburst Les Pauls are in Japan), I've also heard that a lot of the design/feature decisions are driven by Japanese tastes -- e.g., Gibson reintroduced adjustable acoustic bridges (which have a bad reputation in the US) because they love 'em in Japan.

>
> The great diversity of Japanese models (of anything) reflects their
>
> marketing strategy that more models sell more units. Martin, under the
>
> management of CFM IV, who graduated with a business degree, has gone the
>
> same way.

And so have Fender and Gibson. I've completely lost track of all the variants on Les Pauls and 335s, Strats, and Teles

> You can look at just about any Gibson and see finish defects.

That hasn't been my experience, but I don't claim that my experience is representative.

> I remember
>
> one outstanding example a few years ago, a small semihollow going for
>
> well over $5000 here in Oz. It had router chatter marks all around the
>
> binding, so bad a more gullible type might have taken it for part of the
>
> design. More common are finish runs and inadequate cutting back and
>
> buffing.. The binding on my LP Special looks like it was done by a 10yo
>
> whittler with a blunt penknife, but I have cleaned it up a bit myself.
>

That's my point -- you remember one outstanding example. Maybe that's a representative sample, or maybe it weights disproportionately in your assessment. I had a Les Paul doublecut that was flawless (sold it because it didn't suit my needs anymore, not because there was anything wrong with it). So who's right, you or me? Are my positive experiences causing me to think Gibson QA/QC is good? Are yours causing the opposite judgment? Given that Gibson produces 10s of thousands of instruments a year, I'm hesitant to form any broader conclusions on the basis of a few people talking about their experiences and the confirmation biases that come into play in both the talking and the hearing.

> I think that Martin have gone for form over function in the sense that
>
> QC is excellent in most respects, but musical performance is variable.

I think that has always been true. Google "bad pre-war Martin" (or "bad [anything else]) and there are plenty of anecdotes. Guitars are made out of bent trees and glue; it doesn't always come out right.

>
> The most disappointing guitar I have ever played at any price was a new
>
> Martin 000-42, an absolute clunker.

At any price? If it was $29.95, would it be a clunker compared to another $29.95 guitar? I bet not. I think that knowing that it's something that is supposed to be surpassingly great (and which is priced accordingly) can't help but color your assessment.

John

[Tony Done]

On 9/08/2013 6:45 AM, John A. wrote:
the design/feature decisions are driven by Japanese tastes -- e.g.,
> Gibson reintroduced adjustable acoustic bridges (which have a bad
> reputation in the US) because they love 'em in Japan.
>

I find Japanese mind inscrutable, much more so than the Chinese, Indian,
whatever.

> That's my point -- you remember one outstanding example. Maybe
> that's a representative sample, or maybe it weights
> disproportionately in your assessment. I had a Les Paul doublecut
> that was flawless (sold it because it didn't suit my needs anymore,
> not because there was anything wrong with it). So who's right, you or
> me? Are my positive experiences causing me to think Gibson QA/QC is
> good? Are yours causing the opposite judgment? Given that Gibson
> produces 10s of thousands of instruments a year, I'm hesitant to form
> any broader conclusions on the basis of a few people talking about
> their experiences and the confirmation biases that come into play in
> both the talking and the hearing.
>

I've heard it said that Gibson send there ordinary stuff over here to
Oz, but that is stretching it a bit too far. I do have a good eye for
detail, so maybe after seeing a few scruffy Gibsons I've tended to look
at them more closely than some other makes. However, I don't believe it
is all observational bias; I come from an observational science
background (plant breeding and pathology), so I'm aware of such
shortcomings. I recently set up a friend's 345 that was pretty good <g>
though I find covered humbuckers about as interesting as cold porridge.
(Ducks and runs at this point). Just to be clear, I buy big name guitars
because of mojo, not because of workmanship, performance or
investment/resale value. Just digressing a bit, I think we (guitar
buyers) have gone too far in our expectations of fit and finish. As I
understand it the classical luthiers never went down this road. I have
one luthier guitar (Beltona brass tricone) and one boutique (Bourgeois),
both sound outstanding for their intended use, but neither reach the QC
standards of any reputable factory guitar.

>> I think that Martin have gone for form over function in the sense
>> that
>>
>> QC is excellent in most respects, but musical performance is
>> variable.
>
> I think that has always been true. Google "bad pre-war Martin" (or
> "bad [anything else]) and there are plenty of anecdotes. Guitars are
> made out of bent trees and glue; it doesn't always come out right.
>
>>
>> The most disappointing guitar I have ever played at any price was a
>> new
>>
>> Martin 000-42, an absolute clunker.
>
> At any price? If it was $29.95, would it be a clunker compared to
> another $29.95 guitar? I bet not. I think that knowing that it's
> something that is supposed to be surpassingly great (and which is
> priced accordingly) can't help but color your assessment.
>
> John
>

Well it is true that the price would have coloured my opinion a bit (I
did use the word disappointed), but this one just had no redeeming
features at all. I can usually find something I like in the sound of
plywood cheapos (did I mention that my favourite fingerpicker has a
plywood top?), usually a bluesy honk or good note separation, but not
this one. Come to think of it there was one I thought was even worse,
one of those very early Gibson Style Os, with a curly upper bout like an
F mandolin. Horrible clubby no-truss-rod neck to boot.

[John A.]

On Thursday, August 8, 2013 5:39:00 PM UTC-4, thomas wrote:

> I don't have QC numbers on Gibson, but the evidence is overwhelming that Henry J is a terrible manager and a huge douchebag. The reports at glassdoor almost certainly have a selection bias, but the consistency of the observations is undeniable. Gibson's awful treatment of its dealers is undeniable. And Henry's lies when Gibson was caught smuggling illegal wood were laughable. There is way too much bad karma around this company for me to even consider buying a new or recent guitar from them.

That, and he barbecues kittens and posts pictures of himself eating them on facebook.

John

[Gerry]

Hmm. Okay, I believe it!
--
Those who wish to sing always find a song. -- Swedish proverb

[John A.]

On Thursday, August 8, 2013 8:18:21 PM UTC-4, thomas wrote:

> The better you know Henry, the less you like him.

For sure. I almost unfriended him when I saw those pictures.

John

[TD]

On Friday, August 9, 2013 10:39:47 AM UTC-4, thomas wrote:

> When your mom is Vietnamese and your dad is from Possum Holler, barbecuing kittens is a way of life.

Me ouch...