Gibson Factory Tour video.

[Nadz1lla]

Anyone else seen the Premier Guitar "Gibson USA Factory Tour" video?

Is it just me or is there a LOT of waste going on there? I was cringing at some of the stuff I saw and heard the guy say.  :(

Quite upsetting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbU1R4KDymw&feature=g-high-rec

[gwEm]

only watched the first five minutes so far, but its been pretty interesting. maybe the upsetting stuff is to come.. i'll check it when i get home.

[WezV]

iuts a pretty normal factory tour - nothing to particularly knock about it

[Nadz1lla]

The thing I didn't like was the fact that the slabs of Maple for the tops is about an inch thick, which is quite hefty. I don't understand why they can't have it supplied at a reduced thickness for less waste? I mean, they're Gibson, surely whoever supplies them the timber can do a "custom" thickness for such a huge client? The amount of Maple that must get left on the factory floor could be quite considerable!

[WezV]

the tops are rather thick anyway - up to about 3/4" finished  (PRS are closer to the inch if i remember correctly). and its a domestic wood that is in no real danger. that is probably the least wasteful bit of Gibson's production

single piece necks waste at least 50% of the volume of a neck blank.  much harder wood to get hold of too

[Nadz1lla]

Ah for some reason I thought their caps were thinner! Well that's ok then, heh. But yes, I get what you mean about the neck blanks. The problem is it's too odd a shape to really get more blanks out of a piece of timber. I was watching the Crimson guitars video and, although he acknowledged his wastage and it was a "speed build", I really cringed when he cut a huge chunk out of some rather nice wood and chucked the rest away.

But then I hate seeing any wastage in any form!

[bucketshred]

Ah for some reason I thought their caps were thinner! Well that's ok then, heh. But yes, I get what you mean about the neck blanks. The problem is it's too odd a shape to really get more blanks out of a piece of timber. I was watching the Crimson guitars video and, although he acknowledged his wastage and it was a "speed build", I really cringed when he cut a huge chunk out of some rather nice wood and chucked the rest away.

But then I hate seeing any wastage in any form!

Hippy.

[gwEm]

Well, I quite enjoyed that. I guess there is quite a bit of wastage, but hard to see how they'd reduce it without using more smaller pieces of wood.

[itamar101]

Very nice video in my opinion.
Obviously there is some wastage and I wish the wouldn't chamber their guitars. Most people prefer it unchambered and they don't achieve any sort of advantage, cost or quality-wise by chambering it. That said, chambering is not a bad thing, like many people make it out to be.

What I cannot stand... is not the video... It's the stupid top comments that seem like they come from 12 year olds.
"Blah! why iz dis so much money. epihone is wayy better then giibsun!!"
Okay, well done. Thanks for your stupid opinion. Now go home, you're drunk.

This is the top comment from this video:

so why am i paying 2.5k for this shitee?

midnightoilers 3 days ago

2.5k?? what on earth are you talking about? Unless you're buying a black beauty or some other les paul custom they cost half that price. And then... what do you expect??? Since when was MSRP the actual price? Obviously, still expensive, but if you're gonna criticise do it accurately. Not with stupid exaggerations.

Rant Over.

[gwEm]

I was actually moderately impressed about how much stuff is still done by hand.

Obviously the advantage of chambering is weight.

[itamar101]

I was actually moderately impressed about how much stuff is still done by hand.

Obviously the advantage of chambering is weight.

I mean for them as a company. It seems that most customers prefer solid, unchambered bodies and I don't see why Gibson don't listen to them.
Anyway, I don't mind chambered although I prefer the new weight relieved system. It leaves more wood in the middle whilst still reducing the weight and I prefer it over a hollow middle and wood left on the sides. That said, I would prefer weight relief over a solid body and the big chamber doesn't bother me much either. In fact, come to think over it, It makes the guitar far louder acoustically and seeing as I playing unplugged A LOT it's a big help and I'm thankful for it.

Therefore, I take back my comment. I wish they'd weight relieve all there guitars rather than chamber them.
Business-wise, though, I still don't understand why gibson would relieve their guitars.


Anyway, I was also impressed by how much the do by hand.

[Nadz1lla]

Hippy.

Tree killer! :lol:

Back to serious mode, though, I too was impressed at how much was still done by hand, considering how many units they must churn out in any given day. Obviously the technology they have built up and refined makes a huge difference, especially the fret-slotting and fret dressing machines. Those on their own must be an absolute godsend!

I guess there was less wastage than I initially thought, I was mistaken in my original thoughts on top thickness etc, so that's set my mind at rest a wee bit. And that guy's speed when he was spraying that burst was pretty impressive, but obviously he's been there for years and it's probably second nature to him by now. No less jaw-dropping, though!

[itamar101]

Hippy.

Tree killer! :lol:

Back to serious mode, though, I too was impressed at how much was still done by hand, considering how many units they must churn out in any given day. Obviously the technology they have built up and refined makes a huge difference, especially the fret-slotting and fret dressing machines. Those on their own must be an absolute godsend!

I guess there was less wastage than I initially thought, I was mistaken in my original thoughts on top thickness etc, so that's set my mind at rest a wee bit. And that guy's speed when he was spraying that burst was pretty impressive, but obviously he's been there for years and it's probably second nature to him by now. No less jaw-dropping, though!

When they were finishing that silverburst Les Paul it was incredible. I love silver bursts :)

[TheyCallMeVolume]

In terms of weight, they could just seek out more high-quality, lighter woods to use so chambering wasn't necessary. I don't expect companies like Gibson to do that though, unless it's for their Custom Shop.

[WezV]

In terms of weight, they could just seek out more high-quality, lighter woods to use so chambering wasn't necessary. I don't expect companies like Gibson to do that though, unless it's for their Custom Shop.

there just are not the stocks of mahogany available to make that a viable option.  as a small builder i can find good mahogany when i want it, i can even occasionally get light pieces.   but gibson use a fair bit more than i do.   The mahogany they use varies massively, but that isn't gibsons fault, that is mahogany.   Just look at the wood piles in the video - you can see massive colour variation in each pile, which indicates a lot of density/weight variations too


But what they could do quite easily is weight and categorise each body blank  as light/medium/heavy.   then chamber each appropriately.   it would just be 3 slightly different programs for the CNC but they are run in batches anyway

the end results would be a more consistent weight range on les pauls and if they were clever with the chambers (which they are being with the new style)  it wouldn't mean much of a tonal difference