Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
- Thread starter Captain Tightpants
- Start date
AudioWonderland
New member
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
How do you figure? No one else is doing this in this industry. Gibson makes 1 guitar and suddenly its the direction of the future?
How do you figure? No one else is doing this in this industry. Gibson makes 1 guitar and suddenly its the direction of the future?
MojoMonster
New member
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
Man, you need to get out more.
Lots of stuff out there that ain't '59 LPs and '56 Strats.
Seriously.
Slowly, but surely, the mainstream guitar player, not the lawyer/doctor/investor/cork sniffer, are buying into the concepts represented by that guitar.
Built-in tuners, add-on effects, piezo/hex pups... eventually, there will *be* guitars you attach to your smart phone to play your amp app, download tab onto to help you learn the latest Slash solo.
And the purists and Luddites will wail and gnash, as usual.
MM
Suddenly? No one else?
Man, you need to get out more.
Lots of stuff out there that ain't '59 LPs and '56 Strats.
Seriously.
Slowly, but surely, the mainstream guitar player, not the lawyer/doctor/investor/cork sniffer, are buying into the concepts represented by that guitar.
Built-in tuners, add-on effects, piezo/hex pups... eventually, there will *be* guitars you attach to your smart phone to play your amp app, download tab onto to help you learn the latest Slash solo.
And the purists and Luddites will wail and gnash, as usual.
MM
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
"What will this look like 30 or 40 years from now?" Probably like another Edsel. There's plenty of things from the past that have not stood the test of time. Just because something is 40 years old doesn't qualify it for 'classic' status. There's been other guitars with built-in electronics and other 'technological breakthroughs' that were going to revolutionize the industry, which totally flopped. That's not what players want from a guitar. Company's start believing their own marketing hype.
Electric guitars were perfected in the 1950's, and everything since then has been a minor modification of something that's already existed. Acoustic guitars were prefected a couple hundred years ago. There's no shame in that. Eventually you run out of worthwhile changes, and then have more appreciation for those before you and what they accomplished. Maybe you can't top them. Seems like this is driven by egos more than anything else.
"What will this look like 30 or 40 years from now?" Probably like another Edsel. There's plenty of things from the past that have not stood the test of time. Just because something is 40 years old doesn't qualify it for 'classic' status. There's been other guitars with built-in electronics and other 'technological breakthroughs' that were going to revolutionize the industry, which totally flopped. That's not what players want from a guitar. Company's start believing their own marketing hype.
Electric guitars were perfected in the 1950's, and everything since then has been a minor modification of something that's already existed. Acoustic guitars were prefected a couple hundred years ago. There's no shame in that. Eventually you run out of worthwhile changes, and then have more appreciation for those before you and what they accomplished. Maybe you can't top them. Seems like this is driven by egos more than anything else.
Red_Label
New member
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
I kind of had the same thoughts. Looks like a small plastic toy that got left in the sun and melted a little.
I kind of had the same thoughts. Looks like a small plastic toy that got left in the sun and melted a little.
AudioWonderland
New member
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
Name one that is remotely in the ballpark of this monstrosity
Name one that is remotely in the ballpark of this monstrosity
KeeperOS
New member
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
I'll follow the advice of only saying good things.
I like Maple boards (granted abalonde doesn't suite them, perhaps MOP or just the ol' black)
I like mini-buckers.
I think that the shape of the truss-rod cover would make for an interesting headstock.
The general shape ain't bad, just that horn is at the wrong side, put it the other side, Explorer-style and now you're talking.
If not then just make it smaller, right now it's disproportionally big compared to the rest of the body's contours/shape.
There, I've done it! I commented on a GIBSON without saying one bad thing!
I feel so good about myself right now
I'll follow the advice of only saying good things.
I like Maple boards (granted abalonde doesn't suite them, perhaps MOP or just the ol' black)
I like mini-buckers.
I think that the shape of the truss-rod cover would make for an interesting headstock.
The general shape ain't bad, just that horn is at the wrong side, put it the other side, Explorer-style and now you're talking.
If not then just make it smaller, right now it's disproportionally big compared to the rest of the body's contours/shape.
There, I've done it! I commented on a GIBSON without saying one bad thing!
I feel so good about myself right now
dmandude123455
New member
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
Gibson needs to get its head out of its @$$ :smack:
Gibson needs to get its head out of its @$$ :smack:
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
Boy are the comparisons and logic flawed. Electric guitars are low-tech, organic, mostly wood, and were perfected decades ago. They have little in common with high-tech synthetic devices that are discarded every few years. Some of the best sounds ever produced by electric guitars were '58-'60 LP's thru Marshalls. How many guys are spending thousands of dollars trying to faithfully recreate the sound quality and features of 50-year old rotary dial phones? Those LP's are the world's most valuable model of guitar, and age is only part of it; there are many older guitars (like '52 Gold Top LP's) that are only worth a fraction of an LP Burst. Tone quality is what makes Bursts so valuable. You can't duplicate that with a battery-operated guitar.
Same thing with amps: tube amp technology is hopelessly obsolete; they were predicted to be completely replaced by solid state amps many years ago. Do we want technology or tone quality? Give us a nice piece of wood and frets with rudimentary passive PU's, and we're happy. We do not want circuit boards or a state-of-the-art entertainment and communication center guitar. We want reality, not some simulated, virtual instrument. That's the one thing that is true. Maybe some guys live in the pretend world of Guitar Hero, but we play real guitars.
Boy are the comparisons and logic flawed. Electric guitars are low-tech, organic, mostly wood, and were perfected decades ago. They have little in common with high-tech synthetic devices that are discarded every few years. Some of the best sounds ever produced by electric guitars were '58-'60 LP's thru Marshalls. How many guys are spending thousands of dollars trying to faithfully recreate the sound quality and features of 50-year old rotary dial phones? Those LP's are the world's most valuable model of guitar, and age is only part of it; there are many older guitars (like '52 Gold Top LP's) that are only worth a fraction of an LP Burst. Tone quality is what makes Bursts so valuable. You can't duplicate that with a battery-operated guitar.
Same thing with amps: tube amp technology is hopelessly obsolete; they were predicted to be completely replaced by solid state amps many years ago. Do we want technology or tone quality? Give us a nice piece of wood and frets with rudimentary passive PU's, and we're happy. We do not want circuit boards or a state-of-the-art entertainment and communication center guitar. We want reality, not some simulated, virtual instrument. That's the one thing that is true. Maybe some guys live in the pretend world of Guitar Hero, but we play real guitars.
Desert
New member
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
http://4henry.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/723-long-firebird-x-demo-video/page__pid__7615#entry7615
Um...I'd settle for one great sound than 500 lames one. Seriously, would you rather have that onstage, or your fav guitar/amp with NO effects?
http://4henry.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/723-long-firebird-x-demo-video/page__pid__7615#entry7615
Um...I'd settle for one great sound than 500 lames one. Seriously, would you rather have that onstage, or your fav guitar/amp with NO effects?
guitfiddle
firstlessonologist
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
And so, Gibson must continue it's march into the future facing backward.
**** all this...I'm going to go play my Tele.
And so, Gibson must continue it's march into the future facing backward.
**** all this...I'm going to go play my Tele.
F
Funkfingers
Guest
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
Last Monday, I attended a concert at which a certain Mr. Beck extracted **** knows how many different sounds out of one well-known design of electric guitar. 'Nuff said.
Last Monday, I attended a concert at which a certain Mr. Beck extracted **** knows how many different sounds out of one well-known design of electric guitar. 'Nuff said.
J
Jessie's ghost
Guest
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
Yes, and at least they're giving us choices. Expensive replicas. Expensive new things where they're just throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks. Somewhat expensive replicas. Somewhat expensive new things. Cheap replicas. Cheap new things. You can have the same thing that ten million other players have used, and you can have something weird.
It's their R&D money, I guess.
Yes, and at least they're giving us choices. Expensive replicas. Expensive new things where they're just throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks. Somewhat expensive replicas. Somewhat expensive new things. Cheap replicas. Cheap new things. You can have the same thing that ten million other players have used, and you can have something weird.
It's their R&D money, I guess.
John_L
New member
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
I think it would have been great if Gibson had reissued the Les Paul Personal and Professional as a tribute to Les, as these models were based on the guitar that he played for the last 40+ years. Had they done so then it might have opened a few peoples eyes to innovation and paved the way for the electronics in this.
That said the Les Paul personal and professional were far more useful than this.
I think it would have been great if Gibson had reissued the Les Paul Personal and Professional as a tribute to Les, as these models were based on the guitar that he played for the last 40+ years. Had they done so then it might have opened a few peoples eyes to innovation and paved the way for the electronics in this.
That said the Les Paul personal and professional were far more useful than this.
Empty Pockets
BadHairDayologist
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
none of the "guitar guys" i talk to about this thing like it
tons of studio / recording musicians i know love it in concept
none of the "guitar guys" i talk to about this thing like it
tons of studio / recording musicians i know love it in concept
John_L
New member
Re: Check out Gibson's so-called "Game Changer"...
Like the RD and the MIII the concept is good but it is the execution that is as always Gibson's problem.
The RD electronics for the era were great and worked well live and in the studio. But the RD Artist guitar wasn't easy to sit with and didn't balance well on the strap. By the time they got around to putting the electronics into a Les Paul the concept had been discredited but those RD Les Pauls are useful. Although other things perhaps got in the way the Artist was launched at the height of the Disco boom but by the time the Les Paul version came out Disco had given way to punk.
The MIII is a great guitar and the electronics are both simple and useful. Now I like the MIII body style but it is a little 80's (it was launched in 91) and the timing was wrong. The super strat era was coming to an end and even the ergonomic MIII was soon out of fashion (around this time even EVH dropped the stripes for a curly top Music Man) so Gibson put the electronics in a Les Paul and created a great mix of traditional and modern and helped revive the brand in the mid 90's.
What they should have done here imo is put the electronics in a double cut Les Paul.
Like the RD and the MIII the concept is good but it is the execution that is as always Gibson's problem.
The RD electronics for the era were great and worked well live and in the studio. But the RD Artist guitar wasn't easy to sit with and didn't balance well on the strap. By the time they got around to putting the electronics into a Les Paul the concept had been discredited but those RD Les Pauls are useful. Although other things perhaps got in the way the Artist was launched at the height of the Disco boom but by the time the Les Paul version came out Disco had given way to punk.
The MIII is a great guitar and the electronics are both simple and useful. Now I like the MIII body style but it is a little 80's (it was launched in 91) and the timing was wrong. The super strat era was coming to an end and even the ergonomic MIII was soon out of fashion (around this time even EVH dropped the stripes for a curly top Music Man) so Gibson put the electronics in a Les Paul and created a great mix of traditional and modern and helped revive the brand in the mid 90's.
What they should have done here imo is put the electronics in a double cut Les Paul.
Similar threads
