Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

[Aceman]

Had to grab a slide at Sea Ash tonight....and saw that there is THIS out for 2019. I may have found my Bonus reward for Christmas gift!!!!!

I am ALWAYS on the prowl for a decent one of these.

[BTMN]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

Got a real '79 over here if ya wanna try it.

[Sirion]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

Pray let us know what you think! There is a thread about it already, and opinions are, well, sharply divided.

I used to have a ca. 79 Firebrand (the same guitar, but in mahogany rather than walnut). I quite liked it, but the frets on my were extremely low, and that, in the end, made it impractical for me.

[Dave Locher]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

I believe you can buy a nice original one for less than the list price. Might want to wait for the blowout sales to come.
Cool to see it back, though. Did not expect that one!

[Sirion]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

The ones on Reverb at present are $800+. At that point, one might question whether one would like a nice, new guitar or an old one with 40 years of grease, grime and dents on it. (I have no idea about the build quality of these vs. the old ones, which is one of the reasons why I ask Ace to give us his opinion if he decides to get one.)

[Chistopher]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

I'm really starting to dig the folksy look of the 70s/80s models. It reminds me of my old kitchen table.

[Dave Locher]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

Grease, grime, and dents?!? That, Sir, is called "MOJO!"

[chadd]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

The ones on Reverb at present are $800+. At that point, one might question whether one would like a nice, new guitar or an old one with 40 years of grease, grime and dents on it. (I have no idea about the build quality of these vs. the old ones, which is one of the reasons why I ask Ace to give us his opinion if he decides to get one.)

As much as people online knock Gibson, the guitars are consistently better than the Norlin product ever was.

[Sirion]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

That is what I suspect, too, and it might work to the advantage of these reissues.

[AlexR]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

As much as people online knock Gibson, the guitars are consistently better than the Norlin product ever was.

Just don't include QC amongst these 'consistently' aspects.......that was 10x worse than any other period by the end of Henry's black years.

And opinion is even divided on the rest of the aspects. I know a lot of people who'd rather a Norlin than Henry era guitar.....if you're talking production specs and not reissues.
I have 2 Norlin era LP's that made me sell everything I had from the Henry years as they just killed them tonally and were more easily playable. But small sample sizes (like any individual's opinion) always need to be taken with a grain of salt.

[chadd]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

I've owned at least a dozen norlins over the years and played dozens more. QC was awful during the Norlin era, but nobody was searching for pin prick finish flaws to share on the internet back then. Comparing standard to standard, the new ones are much more consistent. As for the people that would take a Norlin over a Henry, I remember buying Deluxes for $300-$500 Because people in the 90s didn't consider them "Real Gibsons" . There is a lot of revisionist history and rose colored glasses being worn now, just as there was unfair bashing back then.

[AlexR]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

Well, even with 'dozens' that still counts as a very small drop in the ocean. I look at people over various internet forums as well as my own experiences.

There are a LOT of people involved in revisionist history to be sure, especially those wanting to defend a point that relies on coarse generalisations........but one thing is guaranteed - if the guitars that come after are more complained about, and people do testing back to back and prefer them in a lot of cases then it doesn't get more 'current' and personal than that.

Case in point - pickups. Every man and his dog seemed to ripping out minis and T-tops as they were 'crap' according to people. If I believed the old timers without first trying them myself then I would be missing out on some of the better pickups that I have in guitars.

Of course not everybody can appreciate low output pickups, and my point is certainly not espousing that. Its just to tar everybodies opinion with the same brush as yours is indeed doing this forum's ideals a great dis-service.

[Jeff_H]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

Isn't saying that Gibson's QC is 10x's worse now than during the Norlin years taring everyone's opinion with your brush? I don't know what the actual number is, but it's likely that Gibson doesn't even know. Regardless, I do doubt that it's 10x's worse. We just have the ability now to hear about every complaint vs. like back in the Norlin days. There were few if any resources back then to hear about customers with QC issues.

Also, you should factor in that for every positive review posted there will be 10 negative ones. That's about the ratio that you can expect for any product. People generally only take the time to speak up when they're unhappy. So, it's hard to know what the real number of QC issues are, but like in any argument or disagreement, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Any extreme opinion is usually skewed a fair bit to one side or the other.

Just my $.02

[eclecticsynergy]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

The originals have three significant features that the new reissue doesn't:
Real ebony fretboard
Long tenon neck joint
T-tops

I'd look for an old one rather than paying more than it's worth for a so-so modern copy. The originals (that's The Paul, not the Firebrand or the The Paul II) play well and sound massive.

[Jeff_H]

Re: Well crack my walnuts!!!!!!

^^ Now that's some solid info there.