<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Gibson Guitars in the 80s	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.preservationsound.com/gibson-guitars-in-the-80s/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.preservationsound.com/gibson-guitars-in-the-80s/</link>
	<description>information and ideas about audio history</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Oct 2013 17:09:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: bafflegab		</title>
		<link>https://www.preservationsound.com/gibson-guitars-in-the-80s/#comment-191165</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bafflegab]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Oct 2013 17:09:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.preservationsound.com/?p=7308#comment-191165</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The history of American production guitarmaking has a common motif: success followed by malaise, bad workmanship and excess, the press and musicians start talking about what a POS they are, then the company loses market share and coolness, then the company either goes broke or there is a corporate come to Jesus meeting and a revival of quality breaks out. The cycle then repeats if sales skyrocket. 

 CF Martin didn&#039;t fall until the others had gone through the cycle, and they still haven&#039;t come back 100 percent although their better guitars are good now-but at those idiotic prices ought to be. Rickenbacker has never gone through the cycle at all because of the close family ownership and a disinclination to change-which has cost them a lot of sales but also kept them at a high quality level. Fender and Gibson have both been through this cycle twice. 

 It&#039;s good for startup guitar companies because it gives them a window of opportunity. It&#039;s bad for guitar players because there a lot of lousy guitars with famous names on them and often going for high sums of money.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The history of American production guitarmaking has a common motif: success followed by malaise, bad workmanship and excess, the press and musicians start talking about what a POS they are, then the company loses market share and coolness, then the company either goes broke or there is a corporate come to Jesus meeting and a revival of quality breaks out. The cycle then repeats if sales skyrocket. </p>
<p> CF Martin didn&#8217;t fall until the others had gone through the cycle, and they still haven&#8217;t come back 100 percent although their better guitars are good now-but at those idiotic prices ought to be. Rickenbacker has never gone through the cycle at all because of the close family ownership and a disinclination to change-which has cost them a lot of sales but also kept them at a high quality level. Fender and Gibson have both been through this cycle twice. </p>
<p> It&#8217;s good for startup guitar companies because it gives them a window of opportunity. It&#8217;s bad for guitar players because there a lot of lousy guitars with famous names on them and often going for high sums of money.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
