Jump to content
Heritage Owners Club

Gibson and Heritage agree to end trademark and antitrust legal battle


Gianluca

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, davesultra said:

I believe Gibson found out that Heritage has deeper pockets than originally thought. A case of “Going along to get along”. 

I'm not a lawyer, and I don't play one on TV, but, from what I read, I figure Gibbons effed up when they decided not to fulfill their contract with Swee Lee because "Heritage."  Seems to me that opened the door to the monopoly counter-suit. Which seemed to have legs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, skydog52 said:

From Heritage sight. Well the lawyers made some money.........................

Lawsuit.jpg

They lost me here.  Everything was fine until the "over 30 years, known for its attention to detail and quality".  I would go along with beautiful.  The wood sourcing was really good.  The concepts also were excellent (maybe not Little One).  But for a long time detailed work ranged from perfect to out of specs.  The quality now seems excellent.

I've known a number of people who worked at Heritage in the lean years and who stayed until better paying work opened up elsewhere.  Some of them filed frets, put on hardware, masked for stingers, did routing, binding scraping, and soldering.  They were decent laborers but not committed craftsmen, and some said they were under time pressure.

If we are to be honest, it was common in the earlier years to have tuners not lined up, filing marks on the fretboard (often abundantly), stingers off center, binding not fully scraped, and sloppy soldering.  I've had several guitars, very good guitars, that I had Pete Moreno straighten the tuners because they were weirdly rotating in a few of them.  I had him recut the routing on a Super Eagle because the pickup routes were cut at an angle compared to the fretboard.

Ren Wall was telling me one day at Heritage that he would inspect the Jay Wolfe rack of guitars with a close eye because of the high rejection rate by Jay.  I saw some of the rejects with Jay's comments on why he was sending them back.

I don't think it is disloyal to speak the truth.  Heritage has come a long way in terms of great consistency.  Having said all of this, all of my Heritages are from the earlier days.  They are among the most beautiful instruments out there.  The archtops equal or best Gibson and Guild from any era.

So I'm posting this knowing some will take offense.  Those who were around in the first few decades will recall the growing pains Heritage had.  Yes, it is true they made some flawless instruments, many of them, during that era.  But it is deceptive messaging to imply that Heritage was known in the earlier years for attention to detail.  It was better known for the shape of its headstock, no long tenon, great value, and traits of being handmade (in other words minor flaws).  To pretend otherwise negates the efforts of the older HOC members to support Heritage in its early years. 

 

 

  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand your post and have owned some of those less than perfect guitars.

I have also owned the same not so perfect guitars from Gibson.

I wish I had a dollar for every time Jim or Marv said to me there is no perfect guitar.

I am absolutely on board with the Original Heritage owners. Love the story and the people involved. 

We've lost one of the original owners, JP Moats and the other founders are getting up in age and starting to show the signs of it.

I'm just glad we have this Forum to share some of their stories to the people who didn't get to know them like some of us do.

The new Heritage is a different animal from what we were used to.  I still try to support them. Until I don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The consistency of quality really is way up now. I too have some vintage Heritage archtops, which are amongst my favorite ones I own. The crooked tuners drives me crazy because it's so easy to avoid. Most of the old headstocks were off center, giving a slight broken nose effect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The story of Heritage is for many of us a journey.  The original company owners were not sophisticated businessmen and marketers.  I have the sense that Gibson saw them as no threat and sold them the factory and much of its contents.  Decades later, Heritage is taking market share away from Gibson.  Of course almost everyone involved in the decision to sell 225 Parsons to them is retired or dead.

Heritage broke it's own rules back in the day and did a lot of one-offs without heavy fees.  They were wild men (and a few women).

 

 

51552598147_c2d78441b9_c.jpg

50464963831_baac4653ec_c.jpg

51484648741_a35288f394_c.jpg

51857240456_b8a8029875_z.jpg

50978103622_0d03dc3170_c.jpg

51155693674_3cf9a08ae3_c.jpg

51154239492_634a0495c8_c.jpg

51714109866_02d438dafc_c.jpg

51493583073_3a630b0c02_c.jpg

51494289265_7ae3e78945_c.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We wouldn't all still be hanging around HOC for this many years if we didn't love the essence of Heritage, the history, and many guitars bought, sold, traded, loved, the occasional disappointment and the journey.  Something about the history, the people, and the underdog story....

Some of the best and most beautiful guitars I've ever played and or owned have been Heritage (mostly purchased from fellow HOC members).  Currently 2 out of 3 electrics in my stable.  Neither will ever be sold.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had a couple bad Heritages, my first H150 had a twisted neck.  Most of mine were used and reworked several times to suite the tastes of the previous owners or just myself.  Later models were much nicer right off the bat.  I've had no issues with my 535, my son loves his 150.  My 137 is having the electronics swapped out for a microphonic issue that isn't the manufacturing process fault.

The first agreement Heritage had placed restrictions on some models and shapes.  

What I am curious to know the impact of the current production models.

Doesn't look like anything changed, so perhaps it was Gibson settling with Heritage, meaning Heritage won their case not Heritage compromising to meet Gibson demands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, DetroitBlues said:

Doesn't look like anything changed, so perhaps it was Gibson settling with Heritage, meaning Heritage won their case not Heritage compromising to meet Gibson demands.

agreed, same as I thought

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/29/2023 at 8:50 AM, MartyGrass said:

"They lost me here.  Everything was fine until the "over 30 years, known for its attention to detail and quality".  I would go along with beautiful.  The wood sourcing was really good.  The concepts also were excellent (maybe not Little One).  But for a long time detailed work ranged from perfect to out of specs.  The quality now seems excellent. .......

 

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said, but "Half assin' it for over thirty years" doesn't make for good copy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...