How bad were they

[b.pat]

Just how bad were the 70s and early 80s Gibsons ?
I've heard about them being "over built" but were they really so bad that this is all they are worth?
F5 (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=10179&item=3761431325&rd=1)

B. Pat http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[Lane Pryce]

I have heard the same thing too re the 70's and 80's Gibbys. Although I have never heard models from the two eras played side by side with the later stuff for an honest comparison either. Lp

[Bob A]

I can't speak for the mandolins, but the guitars became increasingly horrible; thick nasty finish, crummy attention to detail (finish bubblesm hairs, needing neck sets straight from the factory) and such incredible stupidities as double X bracing. Sure cut down on warranty claims, Sure cut down on sales. Sure trashed their reputation for years. But saved a buck somewhere. Of course, they were also making refrigerators at the time!

[davestem]

They were so bad...

"...that Bill Monroe paid me to play one for New Grass Revival!"

"...that I finally sold mine as a snowshoe!"

C'mon now, you don't get an open invitation to make up jokes too often, do you?

[Clyde Clevenger]

I saw a late '70s F-5 with a brass sound post installed to keep the top from caving in more. Sounded like Dave's snowshoe. BUT the guy who owns still thinks it sounds great, I kept my mouth shut about the sound and marveled at his engineering. Makes me wonder how a top so thick could cave in like that?

[kudzugypsy]

i think the period in question should be studied by every business school management / production department in the country. a perfect example of a corp taking a great product and doing everything in its corporate bean counting power to destroy it. people say 70's martins & fenders were bad, but gibson really took the whole thing to another level.
as was stated earlier, the bracing, the finish, the fit, heck, they were bolting on the bridges.....basicly everything to kill the tone of an instrument and increase production they could do was done. absolutely no concern for the final product. a 60's-70's banjo, you can sort of "fix" with upgrades, but most of the other acoustic stuff isnt even worth the effort.
that was the reason that the pac-rim instruments were so well received. there really wasnt that much difference in a Ibanez than a gibson. the ibanez probably the better of the two.
of course, gibson banjos and mandolins were going downhill since the 50's, so by the 70's they really were merely stage props.

modern day opinion
i worked at gibson when i graduated from school for a while (this was 1992) and the nashville plant was a really nice production facility, and the people were really into the product. i gained a whole new respect for gibson then, they really were putting out a great product. you truely would be amazed at the hands-on work that goes into a gibson...even the entry level stuff. a great place to work.

[jim simpson]

I played one 70's F5 a couple of years back that shocked me. By that I mean that it actually sounded good. I didn't expect it too as all others previously played did not. I would still avoid them if possible.

[Django Fret]

I don't think that the 70's were a great time in American manufacturing for just about any product I can think of. #And that sure gave rise to a lot of Americans buying Japanese automobiles, motorcyles, instruments, and electronics as a result.

One good thing about the 70's though, is that I don't think mandolins were involved in too many Disco songs...

[siren_20]

To paraphrase Matt "Guitar" Murphy---"Yeah, they're all pretty bad!"

[kudzugypsy]

i just checked out that listing:
one look at that awful sunburst job should clear up any doubt about their quality at the time. probably got a good dousing of laquer on it too.

of course, i mean no ill will toward the seller, it may be a decent mandolin, and is in good shape, but it sure is ugly to me, although i've seen worse. i do like that purple case interior, and the seller is gonna throw in a braided leather strap..........

[Charles Johnson]

I recently had a very rare mandolin - a 1981 Kalamazoo built F5L that sounded good! Most late 60's until 1987 Gibson mandolins are of very poor quality in fit, finish, and sound. I had a neck reset on a 1968 F5 that turned out to have 12 shims and mostly wood filler in the neck pocket. There are good Kalamazoo built post war mandos, but they are an exception.

Why 1987? Thats when Gibson bought Flatiron and shifted production to Bozeman, MT. I'm still of the opinion that the Bozeman built mandolins, and specifically the Carlson era mandolins, are the best Gibson has built since the early 30s.

Best regards,
Charles Johnson
Mandolin World Headquarters

[mad dawg]

i think the period in question should be studied by every business school management / production department in the country. a perfect example of a corp taking a great product and doing everything in its corporate bean counting power to destroy it.
Sounds like you could also be talking about AMF-era Harleys. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[GTison]

I don't think they were as bad as MOST Pac rim mandos of today. They were tight mostly, overbuilt I guess. I have seen them regraduated to be fine instruments. but that cost alot and for the differnence you could just buy a newer better one. I don't see many late 70's and 80's model F5Ls at the time I thought they were very nice. I do see some mid 70's models along for some reason They are OK to me. The current pricing reflects my feelings about them. 2500 for a mid 70's , 4000 for a 90's and newer model. That's about right considering binding and inlay etc. Not to compare with F9's etc. which is not really (green) apples to (red) apples.

[Scotti Adams]

In my opinion..2 words...Ba-ad...

[rose#1]

While my house was being built I lived at Buddy Davis(father-in-law). A guy brought one in to have a new top puit on it because the old top was caving in as well. after he took the old top off he shaved about 2 pound off of the neck block and put a new top on it after that I would have to say it sounded pretty good.....my point, seems like a lot of work to go through to get a good sounding 70's Gibson

[Greg H.]

Most of the Gibson mandolins from that era that I've played seemed to be just a hair better than a mid-level kentucky (no volume and what tone was there wasn't anything to write home about). Now I did play one that was a fabulous mandolin (of course that fact that Randy Wood had pretty much disassembled it, regraduated the top, and refinished the whole mando might have something to do with that http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif ). They seem to have been going on the corporate theory that if you put a fat top and a thick finish on it then you shouln't need to fix much of anything (the sound wasn't warrentied). Of course they missed the part of the theory that said 'if you use sloppy construction the thing will fall apart anyway.'

[Dan Adams]

I´ll post contrary view on this particular subject. We played an impromtu, unamplified gig on Friday night, and we did fine in a crowded room in a tight grouping on stage, and a respectful audience. The next day we played a much larger room, unamplified again. I made a concious effort to grab my 75´A-12 from the closet because its the only performance mandolin I own that has the volume and tone to cut through the din of a large room, or a noisy audience. I'm fully aware of the history and the reputation of the mid-70's Gibsons, but I have one that is just the opisite of all those conditions. Ole 'Lumpy' was a standout again. Go figure? My perfomance F-5 had the day off.

If a bluegrass band plays in a noisy room and can't hear itself, do we even have to play? Dan

[evanreilly]

An anecdote from a famous luthier who re-graduated & thinned down a '70s F-5. He said they had a huge pile of shavings, enough wood for another instrument.

[Dan Adams]

We played a coffee house in an all acoustic 'formal jam' format last Thursday. Knowing there were high ceilings, cooling fans, people talking, etc... I took the cannon 75' A-12. Several musician friends commented that it wasn't until I played that the could hear the tune, or the lead to a song. Once again, 'Ole Lumpy' cuts through the noise. My regular mic'd performance F-5 was also being used by another mando player that night. No contest, 'Lumpy' can cut through the noise of a loud room, the talking, and all the other instruments. Go figure?

All That Glitters is not Scrolled! Dan

[f5loar]

The really bad years just ran from 1970 to early 1978. In 1978 the F5L was born and while maybe some consider it bad there were quite a few of those that really cut nicely.
The No. 1 F5L in 1978 was given to Bill Monroe as a gift and it's really nice (where is that one?)By the 80's Derrington and Triggs were involved in making them and did a fair job then. I've seen many from the early 80's up to the 1987 models that were top grade pro mandolins. Again hit and miss on many but the good ones were really good.
The late 60's were hit and miss too but you can find some good ones out of those years too.

[Darren Kern]

i think the period in question should be studied by every business school management / production department in the country. a perfect example of a corp taking a great product and doing everything in its corporate bean counting power to destroy it.
Sounds like you could also be talking about AMF-era Harleys. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
Mad dawg, you beat me to it, that's exactly what this sounds like, heh. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[Crowder]

I played a brand new Gibson Alan Bibey signature model yesterday. Based on this and all my recent experiences with new Gibson mandolins, I predict that they may be heading for the same type of "dark age" soon. There was a lot of sloppy work on this $6500 mandolin, and the tone of the instrument was very weak EXCEPT the chop, which was very woofy. It was also difficult to play, though that may be because I don't normally play flat, skinny necks with vintage frets. The woods were unevenly figured both top and back, kind of hard to excuse on such an expensive instrument. I showed a few flaws to the store attendant (in this nationally-known shop) and he said "Gibson only cares about one thing: making money". He handed me an Eastman for kicks, and I must say that while the finish was rough, the tone and playability trumped the Bibey right out of the box. I had exactly the same kind of experience with a Steffey model last year. These are limited editions selling at high prices that just aren't finely crafted instruments. That shows hubris, the same kind of hubris that sent them toward making lousy instruments in the 70's because there wasn't much competition. I guess we'll wait and see.