Gibson article (UK)

Subject: Gibson article (UK)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 13 Oct 11 - 05:00 AM

BBC Website : Are Gibson guitars killing the rainforest?

Subject: RE: Gibson article (UK)
From: GUEST,Fyldeplayer
Date: 13 Oct 11 - 11:40 AM

Maybe I'm getting old but everything these days seems to be a rip-off, banks, guitar makers, petrol and fuel supplies!
I own a Fylde and a Martin which I hope contain legit materials. Why do so many new items have to be made when the world is awash with great 'aged' instruments? - my Martin is 2nd hand and sounds lovely.
Many years ago a Times mag article showing forest devastation led me to write "The Wounded Hillsides"

Chorus
They're taking all the trees down to the river
and melting all the riverbanks away
The soil like blood runs from the Wounded Hillsides
When all is gone who'll be the ones to pay.

More recently I watched Bruce Parry wade through red soil clogged streams that showed little had changed.
I did however see another prog where millions of trees were being planted - if i ever win the Lotto thats where I'll be!

I've always craved a walnut 335 but I would buy old, ( that would be the Lotto balance gone! :-)

Subject: RE: Gibson article (UK)
From: pdq
Date: 13 Oct 11 - 12:15 PM

Indian law requires that certain types of wood be harvested, dried and milled in India so that all the jobs will go to their countrymen.

The imported wood used for fingerboards was slightly thinner than the size that Indian law allows, but that size is routinely approved by Indian inspectors as were the shipments to Gibson.

C. F. Martin, Taylor and other guitar makers import exactly the same material from India and have not been treated the way that Gibson has been treated.

The Indian loggers are more responsible than any other source of Ebony and Madagascar Rosewood and the wood is harvested in a responsible manner.

The whole flap is about the wood from a few dozen trees that were harvested legally and imported legally. Much of the problem comes from the poorly thought-out and poorly written changes to the Lacey Act that Congress made in 2008. From 1900 to that time the law was an attempt to protect endangered birds and had nothing to do with trees.

Gibson was first raded in 2009 and raided a second time a years or so later.

Attempts to link Gibson to the wholesale destruction of rainforests is absolutely absurd.

Subject: RE: Gibson article (UK)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 13 Oct 11 - 02:55 PM

We know why you say that PDQ.

Subject: RE: Gibson article (UK)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Oct 11 - 08:16 PM

Shakespeare wrote, "O, then, I see Queen Mab hath been with Richard Bridge

And it explains, so fully why a bridge ventures to dick...PDQ.

O’er lawyers’ fingers, who straight dream on fees

Subject: RE: Gibson article (UK)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 14 Oct 11 - 05:24 AM

This too shall disappear.
Unfortunately ;-)

Subject: RE: Gibson article (UK)
From: theleveller
Date: 14 Oct 11 - 06:09 AM

"I've always craved a walnut 335 but I would buy old,"

Ah, Fyldeplayer, a couple of years ago I sold a 1974 walnut 325 that I had inherited. With the money I bought a Brazilian Rosewood Avalon which, I was told, was one of the last Brazilian Rosewood instruments they would be making as there was no more wood available.

I know a maker of folk and classical guitars who once showed me his collection of old Brazilian Rosewood that he had gathered from recycled sources over the years. He said, "That's my pension."

Subject: RE: Gibson article (UK)
From: Brian May
Date: 14 Oct 11 - 07:31 AM

Being a Martin man, not that it matters over-much, I have great deal of sympathy with Gibson.

I don't think for a minute that they set out to flout any laws at all. They've ordered from the same place, imported etc the way they always do, paid the market rate and are now being bad-mouthed by someone intent on splitting hairs rather than using pragmatism.

I mean, how dry was the wood when it was measured, when was it re-measured, what was the Relative Humidity change? By how much was the wood under-specced etc etc.

Storm in a teacup, all this does is put another industry in jeopardy for no good reason. If necessary, show the yellow card and carry on with the promise of financial penalty if it's repeated.

Job done.