Gibson Last straw...

[Benjy_26]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

Compressed gypsum for nuts?

I would have never thought sheet rock would be suitable for musical instrument construction.

[KeeperOS]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

Apparently it is not so suitable after all

[Zhangliqun]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

And, to put it simply, I'll repeat myself and say that if there is one man, ANY man that can do/build something then there is AT LEAST one other (and in truth, numerous others) that can in fact do/build the exact same thing AT LEAST as good (and in fact, more than likely, BETTER).
This, in my mind, is a UNIVERSAL TRUTH, a part of human history, nay, of human nature.
Trust me when I say that once you've fully accepted that fact as an undoubted truth the entire world takes a new shape in your eyes and you're anyone's "ho" no more...

I got kind of dizzy reading through all that and trying to understand it. Still don't totally.

FWIW, I didn't say nobody else could build a righteous guitar. Just that a righteous Gibson has a flavor nobody else can duplicate, and if you gotta have that flavor, there's only one game in town. Other guitars can be and often are quite righteous, just not in the same way.

[Robbyk]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

My first Gibson was 250 Bucks It was a SG with the low impedance pickups.
My last was an Epiphone Les paul. I refuse to shell out the bucks for something that fits me as well as a Gibson would. I could afford to purchase a gibson, but why?

[KeeperOS]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

I got kind of dizzy reading through all that and trying to understand it. Still don't totally.

FWIW, I didn't say nobody else could build a righteous guitar. Just that a righteous Gibson has a flavor nobody else can duplicate, and if you gotta have that flavor, there's only one game in town. Other guitars can be and often are quite righteous, just not in the same way.

Ok, put simply, the Kalamazoo guys built Gibsons and I'm pretty sure that at least some of them had that "unique" flavor.
Now I'd find it EXTREMELY hard to believe that when they resumed building the exact same guitars under the Heritage moniker their guitars suddenly acquired a different flavor. I'd be willing to bet that at least some of them are identical in every good way (including that "flavor") to the best axes they had built while being a part of Gibson. I mean, other than the politics (and that name on the headstock) NOTHING else changed.

So, if there are at least some people other than Gibson that can build a guitar that looks, feels and sounds EXACTLY like a Gibson then I don't see a reason why there couldn't be other people as well that could duplicate that, retain all the GOOD things about them, all the "flavor", and even improve on where Gibson falls short.

[Robert Delahunt]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

Look just stop bashing Gibson guitars !
Who is going to respect you and think your cool if you own a less expensive brand ?
How do you think I feel reading these hurtfull comments after just having paid out thousands of dollars for my Gibson only for you guys to tell me that there are equal or better guitars for a lot less ?

1) They're not going to stop bashing Gibson. I won't bash, but I'll still point out that for what I paid for my Schecter C-1 Classic versus a comparable Gibson (which there isn't one since none seem to come stock with Jazz/JB and 5-way switching), I paid less for more. My friend and jamming partner owns both an American Stratocaster Reissue (forgot year) or American Standard (forgot which), and also a Gibson. He paid four figures. I can't see why, and he said that he actually appreciated my Schecter, but oh well. To each his own.

2) Who's going to respect me if I own a cheaper but equally good (or better) guitar? A lot of people. You'll find a lot of them here on this forum, and some also on this thread bashing Gibson. Why would you ask such a question? Personally, I play what I like, not what other people respect. Both my axes, for example, are made in (south) Korea. I don't care if they're not hand made: they sound great, feel great, work for me, and aren't four figures in price. To each his own.

3) I'd think that if you paid four figures for your Gibson and you're reading these comments, you'd reconsider why you chose your instrument. I don't know why you chose it, but the main point is play what you like. If you truly bought your Gibson because you wanted it, and it rocks your world, then more power to you. But Gibson isn't for everyone, just like Fender, Schecter, etc, are not for everyone. For example, I practically worship Fender, but not every guitar they make rocks my world. In fact, I just got done telling a friend today that when Fender picks humbuckers, it seems that usually they're horribly warm, to the point of being muddy, as if Fender is trying to compensate for something. That doesn't mean I don't still love Fender, it just means that not every guitar they make is right for me.

While I can say I got a good deal, Schecter C-1 Classic compared to a comparable Gibson Les Paul, Les Pauls are nice. They're just too rich for my blood, and too much money for what I'm getting. In short, they're not right for me. But they must be right for other people. You need to stop caring about what people think about your favorite products. For example, not everyone likes Seymour Duncan, but the important thing is that I do, therefore I buy their stuff.

[Leveller]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

Look just stop bashing Gibson guitars !
Most people I know think your really cool if you own a Gibson and they respect you for it !
Who is going to respect you and think your cool if you own a less expensive brand ?
How do you think I feel reading these hurtfull comments after just having paid out thousands of dollars for my Gibson only for you guys to tell me that there are equal or better guitars for a lot less ?
I feel like a fool and I don't like it and whats more I don' believe you !
Gibson have got to be the best otherwise they wouldn't be so famous and have respect from a lot of people right ? - and besides famous people play Gibsons right ?
If you walk into a guitar store to buy a guitar the sales staff will all tell you that Gibsons are better than the cheaper brands !
If you buy a Gibson it means your committed to playing music and that your a serious musician !
The wood , the pots and caps, the switch and jack are all better on a Gibson !
Give us serious musicians a break and stop trying to make us feel like fools for having paid a lot of money for a famous Gibson brand guitar.
Zak Wylde doesn't play a Heritage or whatever cause he's serious about music !
You guys are just so jealous cause you can't afford a Gibson or your not really into music like I am.

Brilliant!

[Robert S.]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

I guess I am a big dummy for buying Gibson guitars.

I guess I am a big dummy because I can afford Gibson guitars.

I honestly don't care what anyone else can afford, what anyone else chooses to buy or what anyone else thinks about what I do with my time and money. This entire thread is pretty silly IMHO.

What I do know is that it takes a lot of emotional energy to get a thread to 8 pages and I am wondering what is the catalyst for all of this energy from some of you. I cannot afford to date a supermodel or drive an Italian sportscar but you don't see me filling up the internet with complaints about it. I am happy with the average woman and vehicle that I have so I don't complain that the "good stuff" is too expensive.

People that are happy rarely complain about anything.

[BloodRose]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

I guess I am a big dummy for buying Gibson guitars.

I guess I am a big dummy because I can afford Gibson guitars.

I honestly don't care what anyone else can afford, what anyone else chooses to buy or what anyone else thinks about what I do with my time and money. This entire thread is pretty silly IMHO.

What I do know is that it takes a lot of emotional energy to get a thread to 8 pages and I am wondering what is the catalyst for all of this energy from some of you. I cannot afford to date a supermodel or drive an Italian sportscar but you don't see me filling up the internet with complaints about it. I am happy with the average woman and vehicle that I have so I don't complain that the "good stuff" is too expensive.

People that are happy rarely complain about anything.

Robert,
Good points.
My purpose of the thread was not to bash Gibson owners, I own 2. And Ill admit that they are magic when you find the right one. My whole point is why the prices are jumping so much, when the consistency seems to be waning. (Ill use the word consistancy here instead of quality.) IMO, anything over $1000 should be top notch. and when you are talking the $3000-on up that Gibsons are becoming, there should NEVER be a clunker on the wall. Then when Gibson runs ads like what I saw, where it is emphasizing only collectible value, rather than great playability and tone, it saddens me.

I still want to believe that Gibsons ARE the standard of which a hundred knockoffs strive to be, but when I pick them up and find blemishes, then pick up other brands for MUCH less and note that the frets seem better, they have tonepros, duncans and better features and better fit and finish, topped off by the ad that seems the only interest is milking the name, I felt compelled to say something..

Im an honest guy, so yeah, I'll admit that I wish I had the financial resources for some top line gear. (my most expensive axe was $800) Ive worked 2-3 jobs for many years to keep food on the table for my 5 kids. So yeah, the high prices discourage me. BUT.. I have enough guitars, that if I found a piece of magical wood, I could sell some pieces and fund it.. Ive not been impressed by the expensive offerings of this brand.
Again, I have 2 Gibsons, and am fond of both, but LOVE one. So my points are not sour grapes as some have mentioned. My points are just wondering why they keep climbing so rapidly and why they push only the investment properties.

One last point and then I will conclude my ranting here..

I was reading the def lep interview in the new Guitar World and Viv Campbell said this when asked about his gear:
(Ill edit so I dont get banned but he used expletives)

"Ive been playing Les Pauls, but I hate to give any press to the *freaking Gibson *freaking guitar company because they're a pain. Gibson as a guitar company is just really on the slide. They're not really supportive of their artists, but I just happen to really love playing Les Pauls."

I love mine too, and to me, there is nothing much better than a paul thru a cranked Marshall. (I grew up a major Kiss fan) I love the paul tone and playablity. Again, Im just saddened by the actions of the company.

Ok, rant over.. thank you...

Ill stop fueling this wildfire

[wanmei1]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

Robert,
Good points.
My purpose of the thread was not to bash Gibson owners, I own 2. And Ill admit that they are magic when you find the right one. My whole point is why the prices are jumping so much, when the consistency seems to be waning. (Ill use the word consistancy here instead of quality.) IMO, anything over $1000 should be top notch. and when you are talking the $3000-on up that Gibsons are becoming, there should NEVER be a clunker on the wall. Then when Gibson runs ads like what I saw, where it is emphasizing only collectible value, rather than great playability and tone, it saddens me.

I still want to believe that Gibsons ARE the standard of which a hundred knockoffs strive to be, but when I pick them up and find blemishes, then pick up other brands for MUCH less and note that the frets seem better, they have tonepros, duncans and better features and better fit and finish, topped off by the ad that seems the only interest is milking the name, I felt compelled to say something..

Im an honest guy, so yeah, I'll admit that I wish I had the financial resources for some top line gear. (my most expensive axe was $800) Ive worked 2-3 jobs for many years to keep food on the table for my 5 kids. So yeah, the high prices discourage me. BUT.. I have enough guitars, that if I found a piece of magical wood, I could sell some pieces and fund it.. Ive not been impressed by the expensive offerings of this brand.
Again, I have 2 Gibsons, and am fond of both, but LOVE one. So my points are not sour grapes as some have mentioned. My points are just wondering why they keep climbing so rapidly and why they push only the investment properties.

One last point and then I will conclude my ranting here..

I was reading the def lep interview in the new Guitar World and Viv Campbell said this when asked about his gear:
(Ill edit so I dont get banned but he used expletives)

"Ive been playing Les Pauls, but I hate to give any press to the *freaking Gibson *freaking guitar company because they're a pain. Gibson as a guitar company is just really on the slide. They're not really supportive of their artists, but I just happen to really love playing Les Pauls."

I love mine too, and to me, there is nothing much better than a paul thru a cranked Marshall. (I grew up a major Kiss fan) I love the paul tone and playablity. Again, Im just saddened by the actions of the company.

Ok, rant over.. thank you...

Ill stop fueling this wildfire

+1
I too own a Gibson and love it but some of the the asian guitars are getting awfully close and the quality of Gibsons has been going down hill for quite a while now. Gibsons are now way, way overpriced.
I also own an Epiphone that with a few standard mods ( including pickup change ) is just about on par with the Gibson and I consider my Gibson to be a lot better than most being produced today .
And that my friends is the frightening reality of todays Gibsons.

[KeeperOS]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

IMO the problem (kinda what Vivian Campbell tried to say) is that A LOT of people confuse (today's) Gibson with their offerings (particularly the Les Paul).

I think the Gibson of today has nothing to do with the guys that some fifty (or so) years ago designed and built those guitars. Today's Gibson does nothing more than to milk on those designs and the name those guys made because of them.

I mean, if someone thinks that by bashing TODAY'S Gibson, the company, you bash the Les Paul or whatnot then there's obviously been some kind of a misunderstanding.

[The Golden Boy]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

IMO the problem (kinda what Vivian Campbell tried to say) is that A LOT of people confuse (today's) Gibson with their offerings (particularly the Les Paul).

I think the Gibson of today has nothing to do with the guys that some fifty (or so) years ago designed and built those guitars. Today's Gibson does nothing more than to milk on those designs and the name those guys made because of them.

I mean, if someone thinks that by bashing TODAY'S Gibson, the company, you bash the Les Paul or whatnot then there's obviously been some kind of a misunderstanding.

I think the guitars being made in the past 15 years or so are generally "better" than the guitars made 20-35+ years ago.

[Iron Horse]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

I think the guitars being made in the past 15 years or so are generally "better" than the guitars made 20-35+ years ago.

But what about those made about 48-52 years ago?

[The Golden Boy]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

But what about those made about 48-52 years ago?

Generally, the Gibson electrics made 43-57 or so years ago are generally regarded among the "best" for a variety of different reasons. I'd tend to agree with what I've had my hands on and owned. Since even student model guitars from that period are prohibitively expensive these days- I'd prefer a "newer" Gibson than most anything produced in the Norlin era.

That's generally speaking.

[Zhangliqun]

Re: Gibson Last straw...

I think the Gibson of today has nothing to do with the guys that some fifty (or so) years ago designed and built those guitars. Today's Gibson does nothing more than to milk on those designs and the name those guys made because of them.

A super-popular design that the guitar-buying public still can't get enough of, and they're milking it? You think they should stop making Les Pauls?

People do tend to continue to use successful formulas, like eating and breathing. Over the years, Gibson has tried newfangled designs but the public keeps saying, no, give us the classics, that's what we know you and love you for. The market has spoken, and any business ignores it at its peril.

I mean, if someone thinks that by bashing TODAY'S Gibson, the company, you bash the Les Paul or whatnot then there's obviously been some kind of a misunderstanding.

I don't think there's any confusion at all because some of the Gibsons today are every bit as good as the originals, I don't care what anyone says. And hey, some of the originals were dogs too.