Gibson, how does thou suck, let me count the stripes....

[alex1fly]

Is anybody surprised? I started on gear forums in 2005 and saw the same complaints then. It's a constant. Same thing comes up with Fenders. It's like American made Fenders and Gibsons are expected to be "the peoples'" musical instrument. They ain't, y'all.

 

[Bogner]

That's exactly of my point. They're just making them the way they always have, for the most part, and why I made the statement below...

A lot of guitars are not like the Page guitar. The book matching is far better in most cases. I have solid color guitars that have nicely flamed tops. A 5A flamed maple top that is an American flag painted top.

 

[jeremy]

I like wood in all it's many flavors. It's not a manufactured material, so I don't expect perfection or conformity. I find beauty in the variations and differences.

thats my thoughts as well. dont like the top on one, find a different one you do like. i really like the different ones sometimes

 

[Adieu]

The tiger actually looks OK, just a bit expensive.

The spot-missing-flame one could have been OK if they just reversed it and hid the spot behind the controls

And the half-flame is just ridiculous

 

[NegativeEase]

I'm gonna go full luthier here, and say I like wood in all it's many flavors. It's not a manufactured material, so I don't expect perfection or conformity. I find beauty in the variations and differences. You don't like it, God will grow more.

thats where I'm at too -I don't really think granular symmetry is something I care about -and whoever's growing it..... I'm thankful.

So question to everyone -in the store are you picking the guitar that has that has more of:

a) special sound,
b) that special feel and playability
c) or the one with the perfectly matched flame maple finish?

and sure, it's possible to have multiple elements, but I'm saying in the store and a different guitar has the clear lead in each category.

If C -I'm guessing you are a collector, reseller, or a Lawyer I'm guessing

 

[nexion218]

I'm gonna go full luthier here, and say I like wood in all it's many flavors. It's not a manufactured material, so I don't expect perfection or conformity. I find beauty in the variations and differences. You don't like it, God will grow more.

I agree, yet we know fully well that there are people who turn their head in disgust when they see a light stripe in an ebony board. Using ehatever wood with whatever aesthetics is not a problem if the instrument is well built. Butbit definitely shouldn't cost premium coin. Premium priced instruments should be well built AND aesthetically perfect in my opinion. Noth8ng wrong with either, but I think the price should be more in line with what is offered for the money.

 

[Aceman]

If the standard isn't there, don't offer it. I think they are selling something they know is sub-par. I know it probably sounds fine- at least as good as a guitar half the price. But I bet the guitars were gonna end up in GC, and not the Gibson Garage or any other specialty shop. They wouldn't get picked for the Nashville Showroom.

I wonder if their goal is to have specialty shops in every major city, and pull them out of chains like GC and SA. It sort of worked for Harley.

Look at the Big Business Brain on Dave!!!!

I'm not sure - but am intrigued by the thought....brilliant!!!

Manipulate the supply to support the high cost given the lower demand anymore.

 

[NegativeEase]

Look at the Big Business Brain on Dave!!!!

I'm not sure - but am intrigued by the thought....brilliant!!!

Manipulate the supply to support the high cost given the lower demand anymore.

I think Dave's correct -I've worked a lot with private equity held musical brands -I would consider this an eventual goal of any big private equity held music brand

-as your product for a big box seller like GC or CME is just one of many options they can push or one of many tools in their toolkit -you are not their sole focus

 

[GuitarStv]

I'd play this guitar quite happily. It looks cool.

 

[Masta' C]

 

[Aceman]

That was shopped.

Right?

 

[Aceman]

Premium priced instruments should be well built AND aesthetically perfect in my opinion.

The problem is at $2500 and up, they are ALL premium instruments. Maybe not according to Gibson....

 

[jeremy]

i think you hit the nail on the head. $2500 is a standard gibson, if you want a premium instrument then you spend $5k and up. how much was your budokan?

 

[Masta' C]

That was shopped.

Right?

Yes. I couldn't resist

 

[AlexR]

Hey - noted that opinions vary.

That said, let's all be honest; If you are buying flame, you want flame. I don't think anyone would argue that they

a) Want the flame to be symmetrical. Either all the way, 75% across or whatever, but symetrical
b) They may prefer tighter or larger flame. Obviously flame is rated loose to tight A, AA, AAA, AAAA etc...

So, yes - IMO, based on those two very simple criteria, these are fails. Waiting on someone to say "Hey - I like really random, non-matched, different tightness flame tops".

I can see the appeal of the dirty Bengal or whatever it is. I have seen way better versions. The bottom line is a lot of companies do a while lot better (without making them veneers) for less than $1500.

I believe my "opinion" reflects that of the majority of buyers. But please - do explain your opinion and how it is different. Remember - I am a fan of the Plain top for full disclosure. I believe I only have three flame tops in my stable - all veneer, and I'm OK with that. Especially since they were all under $300.

I like random flame. As do many others.
I post and hang around the most popular LP forums - there are just as many who like mismatched flame (and completely different wood like some of the vintage bursts) as those who like the mirror image stuff. But even if the vast majority think a certain way, it still doesn't make a viewpoint anything more than that. Its the height of entitlement to expect a company to produce only things that suit your aesthetic likes.

So your premise a) is wholly flawed.
Quite frankly I don't think you did anything more with this than say 'I think its so, and therefore I can't imagine (nor accept) than anybody else could feel anyway different'.
But its business as usual for you here, seemingly no matter how often you get called on it.

 

[eclecticsynergy]

"The Rule is perfect: In all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane" - Mark Twain

 

[Aceman]

I like random flame. As do many others.
I post and hang around the most popular LP forums - there are just as many who like mismatched flame (and completely different wood like some of the vintage bursts) as those who like the mirror image stuff. But even if the vast majority think a certain way, it still doesn't make a viewpoint anything more than that. Its the height of entitlement to expect a company to produce only things that suit your aesthetic likes.

So your premise a) is wholly flawed.
Quite frankly I don't think you did anything more with this than say 'I think its so, and therefore I can't imagine (nor accept) than anybody else could feel anyway different'.
But its business as usual for you here, seemingly no matter how often you get called on it.

See Alex, that's not true though. I will absolutely agree that the stuff I posted is crap for that price, IMO. Now, we have had a couple of people say they liked it. But here in page 4, I think the majority (by a lot) prefer it the other way. I'm not saying no one does - that would be foolish and wrong. As for Les Paul forums, the main one I'm thinking of is for fanboys only. They wouldn't say anything bad about an unfinished Les Paul stained with dog crap.

To really know, we need a survey. But yes - I think that for $3k not have the flame matched and symmetrical is pure BS.

I get if you want to think I'm spouting, but honestly, there re more than enough show that a) I do acknowledge people's opinions vary (far more often than some I can think of) and b) I absolutely spout, and do for entertainment value. That everyone can't tell when I'm doing is their problem. This might be you.

I'm saying we can look at an awful lot of $3k guitars, and Gibson is the ONLY brand that would put anything the likes of what we saw here out for sale. As always - I could be wrong. If so, I'll update the mental database. Go find me some...Seriously; Walk into the local GC and take pics of EVERY PRS from $2k and up. Find me an Ibanez over $1000 that's like that or a USA Charvel or Jackson.

I dare you. I double dog dare you! Better have a lot of time on your hands....

 

[Mincer]

I think Dave's correct -I've worked a lot with private equity held musical brands -I would consider this an eventual goal of any big private equity held music brand

-as your product for a big box seller like GC or CME is just one of many options they can push or one of many tools in their toolkit -you are not their sole focus

Well, they might keep Epiphone in places like GC, but I bet they could get more for the Gibsons if they were in a specialty Gibson shop...and sell you a $50 T shirt at the same time.

 

[beaubrummels]

Well, they might keep Epiphone in places like GC, but I bet they could get more for the Gibsons if they were in a specialty Gibson shop...and sell you a $50 T shirt at the same time.

With palm trees and blues sunglasses??? NOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

 

[AlexR]

See Alex, that's not true though. I will absolutely agree that the stuff I posted is crap for that price, IMO. Now, we have had a couple of people say they liked it. But here in page 4, I think the majority (by a lot) prefer it the other way. I'm not saying no one does - that would be foolish and wrong. As for Les Paul forums, the main one I'm thinking of is for fanboys only. They wouldn't say anything bad about an unfinished Les Paul stained with dog crap.

To really know, we need a survey. But yes - I think that for $3k not have the flame matched and symmetrical is pure BS.

I get if you want to think I'm spouting, but honestly, there re more than enough show that a) I do acknowledge people's opinions vary (far more often than some I can think of) and b) I absolutely spout, and do for entertainment value. That everyone can't tell when I'm doing is their problem. This might be you.

I'm saying we can look at an awful lot of $3k guitars, and Gibson is the ONLY brand that would put anything the likes of what we saw here out for sale. As always - I could be wrong. If so, I'll update the mental database. Go find me some...Seriously; Walk into the local GC and take pics of EVERY PRS from $2k and up. Find me an Ibanez over $1000 that's like that or a USA Charvel or Jackson.

I dare you. I double dog dare you! Better have a lot of time on your hands....

It really doesn't matter what other brands do or don't do. Its a wholly irrelevant argument. I really hope you aren't deluded into thinking it was - that would indeed be sad.

Essentially you are trying to make an objective point using subjective arguments - most with little to no actual relevance. I'll go back to ignoring your posts, they simply have no value.