Epiphone Texan from Bozeman. Good idea for Gibson?

[island texan]

Is this going to work? A recent ad touts this Epiphone model as now coming out of Montana. It costs $2700, but it's an Epiphone brand, not Gibson. True it has a nitrocellulose finish and no laminated parts, but won't most buyers push back on spending this much for a brand known to be more or less Asian Gibson knock-offs with laminated backs and sides? It a cute idea in nostalgia, but I just wonder what Gibson is thinking? Nothing against Epiphones, by the way. I own one. Your thoughts...

[jpd]

This must be a case of mistaken identity

[beatcomber]

They're obviously going after the Beatle wannabe market, targeting those with deeper pockets who don't want a made-in-China budget guitar.

The guitar that was used on "Yesterday"...

[zombywoof]

Interesting. Basically a long scale J50. The very first Texans were leftover Epiphone necks grafted onto J50 bodies. It looks like this is going to be a stock version rather than a limited run. Bozeman, of course.has issued limited run Epis for decades. Most notable was the McCartney Texan in 2005 with signed and unsigned labels. They also came out with limited run versions of the Texan, Frontier and Excellente around 1991.

[Steve DeRosa]

Originally Posted by island texan

...won't most buyers push back on spending this much for a brand known to be more or less Asian Gibson knock-offs with laminated backs and sides?...Your thoughts...

Unfortunately most buyers these days aren't aware that Epiphone has a long history of first-quality instruments, predating the move to Pac-Rim production in 1970; they were in fact Gibson's fiercest competitor in the 1930-1950 heyday of the acoustic archtop guitar (well known among jazz players for their substantial volume and cutting power - I personally prefer them to their Gibson counterparts), and it was their highly-regarded double basses that prompted Ted McCarty to initiate the buyout process in 1957. Although they were considered "not-quite Gibsons" by some players their overall quality was IME on a par with that of their Kalamazoo contemporaries, and in many respects they were more innovative when it came to design (the 3-PU thin-body Emperor favored by Carl Perkins - at the time the most expensive production guitar on the market, beating out the better-known Gretsch White Falcon - the Al Caiola sealed-body semis that would foreshadow the B.B. King Lucille of twenty years later, the Professional guitar/amp combo, the Excellente acoustic, among others); frankly, I'm glad to see USA Epiphones back even if on a limited basis - and if one of the many rumors surrounding the discontinuation of the MIC Masterbilt archtop line is true I'd love to see a revival of the iconic non-cutaway New York comp boxes (Emperor/Deluxe/Broadway/Triumph), made in the USA to circa-1939 specs...

[pagedr]

I love Texans so if I didn’t already have a guitar that covered that sound I would be pretty interested in these. That said I think most people out there consider Epiphone as a budget brand because that’s what it’s been for a long time now. So despite the fact that this specific model is being made with the same materials as you’d find on a J45 or J50, and by the same people who make those guitars, it’ll probably be tough to convince most that they should shell out the same amount of money as those models for what’s perceived as a cheaper brand.

[GoneTroppo]

The Texan is pretty iconic and the originals are great sounding instruments, Wizz Jones is wonderful - he's played a Texan from the 60's all these years as his main guitar.

I am fortunate to have picked up a '66 that is honestly one of my favourite guitars, something very special about it with a big warm sweet tone, seems to love being played with fingers and nails.

The brand is iconic as well and I'm glad Gibson are paying the respect to the Epiphone name. After all, Gibson made most of the early Texans in Kalamazoo anyway..

[lowrider]

I think it's a great idea for Gibson to start making some decent guitars under the Epiphone name. The have spent so much time ruining that iconic name they should try to revive it with something good.

I don't understand the price though, $2700? I can get a d-18 for around 1900 any time, why would I spend 2700 for the Epi?

[SpruceTop]

Originally Posted by beatcomber

They're obviously going after the Beatle wannabe market, targeting those with deeper pockets who don't want a made-in-China budget guitar.

The guitar that was used on "Yesterday"...

And now we know why Paul has managed to accumulate almost a billion dollars over his career: He doesn't get GAS!

[Mark Stone]

Originally Posted by Steve DeRosa

Unfortunately most buyers these days aren't aware that Epiphone has a long history of first-quality instruments, predating the move to Pac-Rim production in 1970; they were in fact Gibson's fiercest competitor in the 1930-1950 heyday of the acoustic archtop guitar (well known among jazz players for their substantial volume and cutting power - I personally prefer them to their Gibson counterparts), and it was their highly-regarded double basses that prompted Ted McCarty to initiate the buyout process in 1957. Although they were considered "not-quite Gibsons" by some players their overall quality was IME on a par with that of their Kalamazoo contemporaries, and in many respects they were more innovative when it came to design (the 3-PU thin-body Emperor favored by Carl Perkins - at the time the most expensive production guitar on the market, beating out the better-known Gretsch White Falcon - the Al Caiola sealed-body semis that would foreshadow the B.B. King Lucille of twenty years later, the Professional guitar/amp combo, the Excellente acoustic, among others); frankly, I'm glad to see USA Epiphones back even if on a limited basis - and if one of the many rumors surrounding the discontinuation of the MIC Masterbilt archtop line is true I'd love to see a revival of the iconic non-cutaway New York comp boxes (Emperor/Deluxe/Broadway/Triumph), made in the USA to circa-1939 specs...

This is basically what I was going to type in --- however Steve's post here says it all. The name Epiphone has a wonderful heritage.

[DukeX]

Originally Posted by lowrider

I think it's a great idea for Gibson to start making some decent guitars under the Epiphone name. The have spent so much time ruining that iconic name they should try to revive it with something good.

I don't understand the price though, $2700? I can get a d-18 for around 1900 any time, why would I spend 2700 for the Epi?

1) You are comparing a retail MSRP (Epiphone) to a 40% discounted price (Martin). The MSRP on the D-18 is $3,149.
2) It's coming out of Bozeman, same place as Gibson.
3) It's a Texan, an iconic guitar just as the D-18 and J-45.

[beatcomber]

Originally Posted by SpruceTop

And now we know why Paul has managed to accumulate almost a billion dollars over his career: He doens't get GAS!

It is interesting how he's retained and continues to use most of his signature instruments from the Beatle days. About the only important one that's gone is his first Hofner bass, purchased in '61 and retired in '63, after he bought a new one. He briefly used it during the "Let It Be" sessions, and then it disappeared from storage, never to surface again.

[rokdog49]

Originally Posted by lowrider

I think it's a great idea for Gibson to start making some decent guitars under the Epiphone name. The have spent so much time ruining that iconic name they should try to revive it with something good.

I don't understand the price though, $2700? I can get a d-18 for around 1900 any time, why would I spend 2700 for the Epi?

Yeah but then you wouldn’t have an Epiphone Texan. $2700 is the price for an Epiphone Texan, buy it or don’t.
Sorry man ....I don’t get your point at all.

[semolinapilcher]

The original Epiphone Texans (before Gibson added the name in 1958, Epi just used the model number, FT-79) were made in Kalamazoo along with the Gibsons.

So I think it’s great that these are being made in Bozeman.

[Wade Hampton]

It’s all about what the market will bear. If Paul McCartney hadn’t used an Epiphone Texan to record “Yesterday,” one of the most popular and widely-covered pop songs in history, nobody beyond a devoted cult following would be any more interested in that particular model than they would be about any other good guitar from the past: yes, there’d be fans out there, but not enough to convince Gibson to start making them in Bozeman.

But since McCartney did anoint the Epiphone Texan with his blessing and “Yesterday” remains a worldwide favorite more than fifty years after its release, that makes this a viable business proposition.

Personally, I’ve tried to get enthused about these guitars and have played several originals from the era in question. But I honestly don’t care much for the neck profile - at ALL - and wasn’t all that impressed by the tones I could coax of any of the Texans I’ve played.

Which probably reveals more about my limitations as a guitarist than anything else. However, I don’t think it’s accidental that in the concerts that Mr. McCartney has played in the past twenty or thirty years he brings out the Epi Texan for “Yesterday,” but plays all of his other acoustic pieces on a Martin.

Hope that makes sense.


Wade Hampton Miller