Bad News for 2010?

[peach64]

I've been told that this coming year 2010 up to 20% of music stores will be closed or closing. Guitar Center is not as solvent as they appear. Even guitar shows attendance and sales are on the wane. And if you go on Ebay right now, how many Historics are actually selling close to their reserve price? Considering our present economic conditions, what is the going rate for a Tom Murphy `59 ? I've also been told Gibson doesn't spray 100% nitro, that they use a polyesther base. I hope O clarified myself. If that is true, know I know why Dave Johnson can't handle any new customers.

Peach

[Ride on a Pony]

I'm confused... what are you actually asking? What the hell does the price of an aged Tom Murphy have to do with the first four sentences?

[bootlegboy1]

Originally Posted by peach64

I've been told that this coming year 2010 up to 20% of music stores will be closed or closing. Guitar Center is not as solvent as they appear. Even guitar shows attendance and sales are on the wane. And if you go on Ebay right now, how many Historics are actually selling close to their reserve price? Considering our present economic conditions, what is the going rate for a Tom Murphy `59 ? I've also been told Gibson doesn't spray 100% nitro, that they use a polyesther base. I hope O clarified myself. If that is true, know I know why Dave Johnson can't handle any new customers.

Peach

Its such a shame to hear this, however they are sometimes over priced for a piece of wood, you have to point the finger at the main manufacturers, you dont tend to hear of them going bust.

[delawaregold]

That claim regarding the Nitro is a huge revelation,
if in the context of the Custom Shop and the Historic
Reissue series of guitars. Are you able to cite any
credible sources for this information?

[Led Zep Fan]

I few respected luthiers have said that the nitro mix was changed sometime in 05. It doesn't check and is a nightmare to work with.

Maybe Hillbilly will chime in.

[delawaregold]

Yes, I know that has been the rumor for quite some time,
and due to the many reports of difficulty in working the
guitars since 2005, I don’t doubt that it is a fact. But, Gibson
has not listed this as an official Specification change, I was
asking if they have officially made that announcement somewhere.
If indeed, Gibson were to call out a Poly based Nitro as a spec
change, you have to admit, that would be News worthy!

[Led Zep Fan]

It took them forever to reveal the chambering that they were doing, as well....

[R9.]

I thought they were pretty straight-forward about chambering from day one. Not swiss cheese holes, though.

As for the nitro - do you really think Gibson would have to make it public knowledge that they changed their nitro formula? I don't. If they switched to something else, then maybe, but a simple change in the formula, no. As LP fans, it would be nice to know but I doubt they're actually required to tell us.

[SKATTERBRANE]

I have no proof, but I too suspect there is a lot more plastic in the nitro since 2005-2006 or so. In fact it is thicker and some of my custom made backing plates, that fit on pre 2006 Les Pauls, do not fit in the 2006 or 2007 Les Pauls I had. I was told by the person who makes these plates, it is becaue Gibson changed the formula and it is thicker.

[delawaregold]

This is from the Gibson Website
LINK:
Gibson - Gibson Guitar: Electric, Acoustic and Bass Guitars, Baldwin Pianos

Nitrocellulose Finish

Applying a nitrocellulose finish to any Gibson guitar is one of the most
labor-intensive elements of the guitar-making process. A properly applied
nitro finish requires extensive man hours, several evenly applied coats,
and an exorbitant amount of drying time. But this fact has never swayed
Gibson into changing this time-tested method, employed ever since the
first Gibson guitar was swathed with lacquer back in 1894. Why? For
starters, a nitro finish dries to a much thinner coat than a polyurethane
finish, which means there is less interference with the natural vibration
of the instrument, allowing for a purer tone. A nitro finish is also a softer
finish, which makes it easily repairable. You can touch up a scratch or ding
on a nitro finish, but you can’t do the same on a poly finish. In addition, a
nitro finish is very porous in nature, and actually gets thinner over time.
It does not “seal” wood in an airtight shell—as a poly finish does—and
allows the wood to breathe and age properly.

It would be nice to know if this was fully accurate,
or is this artfully crafted wordsmanship?

[RevaD]

It's marketing, and only marketing. Same paragraph is all over the website, for many guitars, and I can tell you, even though the same paragraph is under DarkFire, the finish on my DarkFire is far different than is on my 2002 Studio.

And the tidbit about the bottom being polyesther makes alot of sense, given how the finish on the neck is nearly gone, and the guitar had been in my hands for about 2 months...not even. Seems to me the nitro isn't binding well to the poly.

This finish has me quite worried about how well the neck would last...a soggy neck from tonnes of palm sweat would not go over well, but a poly layer under the crap nitro would prevent that problem, wouldn't it?

UNfortunately, unless we get some aspiring student to take the guitars into a university lab, and analyze the chemical composition of the finish of Gibson's currently, everything is just supposition. I do not see Gibson making an official comment on this issue, due to possible lashback.

[Daeborn]

This debate has been going on for more time than the last couple of years. Even some folks on this forum have accused Gibson of using plasticizers in their finishes since the 90s. As for myself unless someone is actually wanting to put their reputation on line and prove Gibson is using plasticizers then I think it is all BS.

[RevaD]

Originally Posted by Daeborn

As for myself unless someone is actually wanting to put their reputation on line and prove Gibson is using plasticizers then I think it is all BS.

While I tend to agree with you, could you explain the finish disappearing on my DarkFire?

Not that I am accusing Gibson of false claims, but this finish on DarkFire is definately not hte norm, although the webpage lists the same info as any other product page...and I've also got a robot Studio, that has not worn as much over hte course of a year, nevermind a couple of months.

If you'd like pics of what I am talking about, let me know, and I'll snap some and upload them. I have pics from when I got the guitar, just need to take some to show how it is now...

[brimay]

Rumers: 1. A piece of unverified information of uncertain origin usually spread by word of mouth 2. Unverified information received from another; hearsay.


Hey! someone told me gibson is making a new line of popsicle shaped les pauls!!!!!

See... i can do it to its not hard.

[Daeborn]

Originally Posted by RevaD

While I tend to agree with you, could you explain the finish disappearing on my DarkFire?

Not that I am accusing Gibson of false claims, but this finish on DarkFire is definately not hte norm, although the webpage lists the same info as any other product page...and I've also got a robot Studio, that has not worn as much over hte course of a year, nevermind a couple of months.

If you'd like pics of what I am talking about, let me know, and I'll snap some and upload them. I have pics from when I got the guitar, just need to take some to show how it is now...

Honestly I have no idea why it would be of it the Darkfire guitars even use the same formula. Most talk is about their Historic models. I know mine smells like Nitro as I have had other vintage instruments in the past which had the same smell as my R9. Now I know the Gibson's I have played at GC, the new Standards not the R8s and R9s don't smell like that. I have no idea either if their Nitro is real of hype, I just have read so much speculation and no real facts. That's my main issue. Gibson has said they don't use additives like plasticizers but others say they do and conjecture seems to be king in these discussions.

[delawaregold]

Originally Posted by Daeborn

As for myself unless someone is actually wanting to put their reputation
on line and prove Gibson is using plasticizers then I think
it is all BS.

I believe you will find it is more complicated than; do they,
or don’t they.
If you research Nitrocellulose Paint, you will see that some
type of plasticizer has always been added. The original
plasticizer used in the 1950’s was not stable, and eventually
dissipated. This would leave the paint unable to expand and
contract with the wood from humidity and temperature.
This is why the Vintage Gibson’s would check so easily.
Gibson viewed this as a defect, and corrected it when a more
stable plasticizer was invented. As better and better plasticizers
have been invented through the years, they were (in all probability)
incorporated in the formulation of the paint, and seen as
improvements.

[RevaD]

Originally Posted by Daeborn

Honestly I have no idea why it would be of it the Darkfire guitars even use the same formula. Most talk is about their Historic models. I know mine smells like Nitro as I have had other vintage instruments in the past which had the same smell as my R9. Now I know the Gibson's I have played at GC, the new Standards not the R8s and R9s don't smell like that. I have no idea either if their Nitro is real of hype, I just have read so much speculation and no real facts. That's my main issue. Gibson has said they don't use additives like plasticizers but others say they do and conjecture seems to be king in these discussions.

My studio, my robot, and my darkfire smelt like nitro. But then, I happened to get a replacement cheap case, as well as a legit Gibson case, for my DarkFire.

It's the cases that smelt like Nitro, not the guitar. In fact, the cheapest case, makes my guitar smell like nitro from about 6 feet away, while the others aren't quite as offensive. Before getting these cases, the smell was gone from my DarkFire. To me, no smell, and then finish wearing off noticbly after 6-8 weeks, says something about DarkFire isn't the same as other Nitro-finishes that Gibson produces, and the fact that the exact same listing is there about the finish, turns me off a bit.


In the end, while all this conjecture may be classified as rumour, I can guarantee that while Gibson puts standard claims on thier webpages about the Nitro they use, the actualy products vary greatly, even in those I personally own. All I know is that it's not poly-covered, like my Ibanez guitars, but also, it's not the same as older guitars I've played either. So there is definately some difference in the Nitro that is applied; there is no rumour in that; however, the differences, and why there is a difference, is not clear.

The only rumour to it is what these different finishes may contain. I don't know what the difference is, but you bet it's different.

[LongBeach]

They were not up front about the chambering.
I purchased my first LP, Studio, last quarter of 06.
Nothing on the websites noted it was chambered at
that time. No biggie, I loved the guitar, but it would have
been nice to know prior to.

[LiveOak]

Following this thread with interest. However, as already mentioned, Gibson does not have all that stellar a track record for prompt, full disclosure regarding the current specs of their LP's.

[mrkenny]

I'm a finisher, have been for 45 years. I use nitrocellulose lacquer 99.9% of the time unless a customer asks for something else.
Gibson claim to use nitro may be stretching things a little. There are different brands of clear nitro, each being a bit different, some better than others. Because Gibson uses a large amount of clear lacquer I'd guess they do not buy "off the shelf", but have their nitro made to their specifications. I own a '06 CR4 "VOS". The finishing job was fine but the actual material used was really unpleasing to me. The finish was a bit thick, and kind of sticky. I refinished the guitar in the nitro that I use and now the guitar feels correct. I used real bronze powder for the gold. I don't know for sure but I'd say that Gibson does not use real metal powder in their gold mix. My guitar now feels so much better and seems to have opened up sound wise. The original light honey color of the neck and back got a darker as well.
I've stripped a lot of things finished in nitro, when stripping the guitar I found finish on my CR4 did not respond like true nitro.
It takes more time to finish something in Nitrocellulose Lacquer. To keep costs down and production up additives can be mixed into your finishing material.

[SKATTERBRANE]

Thank you mrkenny. You have confirmed my suspicions. I too am a spray painter, but I paint cars and airplanes. The newer Gibson finishes seem rubbery to me. Their Nitro has seems to have synthetic additives, plasticizers.

[Daeborn]

Originally Posted by delawaregold

I believe you will find it is more complicated than; do they,
or don’t they.
If you research Nitrocellulose Paint, you will see that some
type of plasticizer has always been added. The original
plasticizer used in the 1950’s was not stable, and eventually
dissipated. This would leave the paint unable to expand and
contract with the wood from humidity and temperature.
This is why the Vintage Gibson’s would check so easily.
Gibson viewed this as a defect, and corrected it when a more
stable plasticizer was invented. As better and better plasticizers
have been invented through the years, they were (in all probability)
incorporated in the formulation of the paint, and seen as
improvements.

Good info. So in other words there really is nothing wrong with their finishes.

[delawaregold]

Originally Posted by Daeborn

Good info. So in other words there really is nothing wrong with their finishes.

Nothing…unless you were hoping your Historic Reissue
would sound and check like a real Vintage Les Paul.
They will look great for many, many years.

[Daeborn]

Originally Posted by delawaregold

Nothing…unless you were hoping your Historic Reissue
would sound and check like a real Vintage Les Paul.
They will look great for many, many years.

Actually no and even if it were an original the way I take care of things the checking would have been minimal anyway. I am pretty anal. Age doesn't mean beat to crap like some folks think. Some checking is OK. I had an old National lap steel from the late 30s that was so bad it didn't just check it flaked. Really sad. I refinished it because it was completely gone. You couldn't even play it without leaving a trail of flakes behind you.

[Liam]

Originally Posted by bootlegboy1

Its such a shame to hear this, however they are sometimes over priced for a piece of wood, you have to point the finger at the main manufacturers, you dont tend to hear of them going bust.

You're being ironic or something, right?

[delawaregold]

The Vintage 1950’s Les Pauls used Hot Hide Glue to
attach the Maple Top and Rosewood Fretbord to the
Mahogany Body and Neck. The Hot Hide Glue was a
granular powder that was mixed with water and heated
to a gelatinous mass. As it cooled, it not only dried, but
“sets” into a crystalline structure that was very hard.
This hard glue provided very little resistance to the
vibrations as they transferred from the fretboard and top
to the body and neck. Today’s Les Pauls use a Polymer
based glue, that remains flexible. Unfortunately, this acts
as a sound deadener, blocking the transfer of
vibrations between the fretboard and top and the body
and neck.
The Vintage 1950’s Les Pauls did not have anything
covering the Truss Rod. Today’s Les Pauls have a rubber
sheath over the Truss Rod. The Truss Rod provides tension
on the neck, opposite of the string tension. The strings are
allowed to vibrate freely, but the Truss Rod is prevented
from doing so, by the sheath. (Sympathetic Harmonics)
The Truss Rod used to rattle inside it's route, so the Truss Rod
Sheath was added to stop the Rattle.
Many people say that along with the rattle it also dampened
the tone. Lastly the Nitrocellulose Paint. Although I have
not seen Gibson say what plasticizer they used in the 1950’s.
The typical product used in that era was Castor Oil. Castor
Oil was very good, but volatile, and would dissipate rather
quickly, allowing the Nitro to become more brittle as time
goes on. While the checking that occurred appeared unsightly,
the brittle nature of Nitrocellulose was excellent for the
unrestricted transfer of vibrations into the wood. You will
often hear it said of Vintage guitars that they sound better
as they got older.
Historic Makeover has made a business out of correcting these issues.

[Daeborn]

Again great info.

I guess a even better finish to nitro would have to be a French Polished. I wonder why and if anyone much uses this method. Now that is what I call labor intensive.

[hillbilly]

YouTube - hefty bag

YouTube - hefty bag

[cryptozoo]

Love the vid, I think that says it all!

[ossie]

I dont know if this is the case with all the R models, but when I stripped down my 05' R7 goldtop there was definitely something under the top coat of nitro lacquer that was not nitro. I stripped the guitar using lacquer thinner and cotton balls. The clear and the gold came off easily, the stuff under that, on the top, was not soluble with nitro thinner, alcohol, or straight acetone. I was actually quite surprised. In the end I had to sand it off, and it was tough, it came off SLOWLY and left behind a bright white powder. The mystery substance was only on the top, the back and sides were nitro all the way to wood.

The good news was that under all that gold and plastic was a nicely figured top. Needless to say the guitar is now a burst.