Would they not simply return flawed instruments to the supplier? Although some manufacturers require flawed products to be destroyed.
Gibson, also under terrible ownership had them destroy, not return. Then GC employees got happy and destroyed anything and everything - at times it seemed like they did it for sport. Word got out that you could put together some nice guitars from the parts in the dumpsters and they slowed down on the practice.
Then Gibson filed for for chapter 11 bankruptcy. Then Guitar Center filed for for chapter 11 bankruptcy.
Never heard of it, really. When I was still playing drums, Iād frequent local music store. Guitar Center never heard of it. From the sub-thread above it seems just as well. I thought they pssibly were some musical gear icon dealing with custom product.
Itās just a very large chain of music stores dealing with guitars, keyboards, drums, mics, etc. Every decent sized metropolitan area has at least one.
When I was young, I would always look for Gibsons that were labeled on the back of the headstock, ā2ndā, meaning there was an imperfection, usually cosmetic. Those were sold at a significant discount and from out in the audience, no one knew. In fact, the flaw was often difficult to find.
1 Like
Watched the trailer, looks like a fascinating overview of the New York scene in the 60ās-70ās. This is supposed to be a ācinematic correctiveā to the Ken Burns jazz series, which apparently completely ignored this ābranchā of the music.
1 Like
Ken burns thinks jazz died in 1960, sixty years ago.
3 Likes
I wasnāt even sure if he was aware of it until an opportunity to do a documentary on it presented itself.
Artificial intelligence and shipping BOTs at their finest.
1 Like
What is āit?ā You mean you are unsure if Ken Burns even knew of jazz? This seems unlikely.
I must be misunderstanding what you mean.
The first is signature class, the second drop off. 
1 Like
Even Ken can be wrong.
Thereās still creativity in jazz. I donāt like much of it, but itās there and it has a pulse.
Iām sure Burns was aware of jazz but not really deeply conscious of its scope and heritage. I think Burns was simply following his āguiding lightsā in the series who were proponents of āfusion and beyond was not jazz.ā And . . . at 19 hours they excluded a lot that many would have liked to be included but good Gosh man. ā¦ 19 hours of jazz history on television! How could they have gotten more into the programming!
Over time Iāve begun to retrogress perhaps to much of the viewpoint that fusion and many types of ājazzā afterwards really did stray far enough from the jazz tradition I love that I myself donāt think of it as jazz as much as I think of it as experimental or improvisational music or further fusions. I can enjoy it more if I donāt think of it as jazz oddly enough. I more enjoy innovations within the tradition as say Douglas or Osby or Moran or even Galper have done. There is so much in a more mainstream jazz to listen to. . . a lifetimeās worth it seems.
3 Likes
I found odd how jazz just stopped in the Ken Burnsā view of things. An hour exploring where jazz led would have been well worth the effort.
1 Like
āItā as I referred to is jazz. Kenās documentary leans too hard on the Marsalis/Crouch understanding of jazz and its marketing at the time the documentary was assembled. It ignored a considerable amount of creative music associated with and around the genre. So my take is that Kenās understanding or presentation of jazz lacked depth. The documentary primarily leaned on top sellers within the genre. So Kenās take on jazz an art form leaves me wanting as well as wondering how well he understood it.
2 Likes
Haha yes. I was surprised there wasnāt much on Blue Note or hard bop for that matter.
1 Like
Thanks!
Fully agreed