Schecter’s negative Gibson headstock
- Thread starter DankStar
- Start date
80's_Thrash_Metal
Slightly_Glazed_Believer
Sticking it to the man
Chris Pile
Well-known member
Never noticed that before. Clever as hell.
80's_Thrash_Metal
Slightly_Glazed_Believer
.
That's actually pretty funny
Inflames626
New member
Gibson builds nice guitars but they remind me of GM/Cadillac in the 1950s with their fanbase cult. PRS might even be worse (I think Gibson needs to sue PRS more than anyone else).
Gibson's exorbitant prices for their guitars new only generate profit margins to pay legal fees for Gibson to sue their competitors, creating less competition and allowing Gibson to charge even higher prices.
I respect them as an historical company that crafted iconic body shapes for heavy metal music decades before the world was ready, mainly the Explorer.
When newer companies innovated the Explorer in the 1980s it was a good thing. They did this mainly by increasing the scale length to 25.5" and adding a Floyd Rose bridge. I do not see a problem here because, while the shape is similar to a Gibson, the guitar design is fundamentally different due to the scale length increase and floating bridge.
Further, I do not understand how so many people can continue to remain loyal to a company like Gibson that overextended itself, went bankrupt, got back on its feet when it didn't deserve to based on its business practices, and now is suing people as an additional revenue stream. It's like Gibson's customers are choosing to reward bad.
Moreover, I don't see any of these lawsuits slowing down nearly exact (visually) Gibson copies made in the People's Republic of China and sold on Ebay, Alibaba, DHGate, etc. A U.S. court can rule in Gibson's favor to stop production and the Chinese Communist Party can just say, "No," because their entire point is to weaken U.S. companies. Nothing will happen.
In that light, Gibson is only hurting other American companies by trying to destroy Dean, IMO. And I say that when I don't like Dean designs much at all.
Gibson's exorbitant prices for their guitars new only generate profit margins to pay legal fees for Gibson to sue their competitors, creating less competition and allowing Gibson to charge even higher prices.
I respect them as an historical company that crafted iconic body shapes for heavy metal music decades before the world was ready, mainly the Explorer.
When newer companies innovated the Explorer in the 1980s it was a good thing. They did this mainly by increasing the scale length to 25.5" and adding a Floyd Rose bridge. I do not see a problem here because, while the shape is similar to a Gibson, the guitar design is fundamentally different due to the scale length increase and floating bridge.
Further, I do not understand how so many people can continue to remain loyal to a company like Gibson that overextended itself, went bankrupt, got back on its feet when it didn't deserve to based on its business practices, and now is suing people as an additional revenue stream. It's like Gibson's customers are choosing to reward bad.
Moreover, I don't see any of these lawsuits slowing down nearly exact (visually) Gibson copies made in the People's Republic of China and sold on Ebay, Alibaba, DHGate, etc. A U.S. court can rule in Gibson's favor to stop production and the Chinese Communist Party can just say, "No," because their entire point is to weaken U.S. companies. Nothing will happen.
In that light, Gibson is only hurting other American companies by trying to destroy Dean, IMO. And I say that when I don't like Dean designs much at all.
Rex_Rocker
Well-known member
I don't like Gibson as a company, but I love the Les Paul shape sooooo much, LOL.
Inflames626
New member
I'll put it this way. The Kirk Hammett Greenie model is about $20k.
Meanwhile, I met with a foundation guy who looked at my house today. It's an older house built on a slope around 1960 with a slab foundation. Maybe 1,600 sq. feet.
Over the decades, there's been some settling--about 1 inch. Some interior waterproofing, landscaping, and a piering system could shore up the part of the house that's sinking slightly.
He quoted me a price of just under $24k to do it. (I said no for more reasons than cost, but that's another story.)
When a guitar costs more than the combined knowledge needed to drive steel piers into the ground, lift a house's foundation without breaking anything, installing the plumbing and electrical needed for a sump pump and drainage, and then putting it all back so it looks normal...
...it's an understatement to say that guitar costs too much.
Meanwhile, I met with a foundation guy who looked at my house today. It's an older house built on a slope around 1960 with a slab foundation. Maybe 1,600 sq. feet.
Over the decades, there's been some settling--about 1 inch. Some interior waterproofing, landscaping, and a piering system could shore up the part of the house that's sinking slightly.
He quoted me a price of just under $24k to do it. (I said no for more reasons than cost, but that's another story.)
When a guitar costs more than the combined knowledge needed to drive steel piers into the ground, lift a house's foundation without breaking anything, installing the plumbing and electrical needed for a sump pump and drainage, and then putting it all back so it looks normal...
...it's an understatement to say that guitar costs too much.
larryguitar
Active member
It only 'costs too much' for folks who won't buy it. If they sell them, by definition it doesn't cost too much.
YOU think it costs too much (I do too, BTW) but that's not the same thing.
Larry
Rex_Rocker
Well-known member
Kirk Hammet sucks, LOL. I'd gladly pay 20K for Metallica to stop putting records out.
80's_Thrash_Metal
Slightly_Glazed_Believer
i made this.Inflames626
New member
Kirk Hammet sucks, LOL. I'd gladly pay 20K for Metallica to stop putting records out.
I like Kirk. But at the end of the day it was Peter Green's guitar.
Why one would want to play metal on pickups that are out of phase beats me.
My understanding is the magnets are flipped and this isn't easily reversible. I doubt he would want to alter it anyway since he paid $2 million or so for it. Even Het passed on it, so I heard.
Inflames626
New member
Actually, it is the same thing if a company wants to remain in business. Gibson would go bankrupt again if they relied on this business model for the bulk of their revenue. Too few people would buy their products.
If Gibson sells $20k guitars, it just means they sell them. It has no reflection on good business practices because it's all speculative. Lots of people are vulnerable to speculative marketing. And so consumers keep rewarding the foolishness Gibson keeps selling.
Gibson knows this. So, they make a limited number of guitars to 1) keep prices high and 2) they know they won't sell many because the price is too high and hence the market is small.
I guess the takeaway is there's a small number of foolish people with a lot of money. That seems contradictory, and yet true. Or perhaps they simply are wise with their money and would spend $20k the way someone else might spend $200.
That said, again, if they had to run Gibson, Inc. on this business model, they would go bankrupt yet again. They're competing not only against legal and illegal competitors, but also their own used products on the secondhand market. I'd love to see how many LTD LPs are sold per one Gibson, even used.
Gibson is shooting themselves in the foot with all six shots in the revolver, IMO. But people keep drinking the Kool-Aid just because it's Gibson. I much prefer how Fender does business.
I can understand paying a fortune for a guitar with a history--there's only one Peter Green guitar and Kirk owns it.
That said, I'd never buy a reproduction for thousands, especially when I've seen sites that create visual reproductions of famous guitars (rock star guitars of a certain album/tour cycle) for fairly modest prices.
Plus it comes down to the "heritage brand" thing and whether one thinks that's worth anything.
To me, Gibson = Harley Davidson of guitars. I was born in 1980. Gibsons are my parents' generation of guitars. Newer designs have come along with a better value to features ratio. I want black glossy things with angles, points, floating bridges, wiring options. BC Rich/ESP/Jackson/Ibanez territory. Not simplicity and "tone wood," what Gibson is selling.
Meanwhile over the past 3-4 years I've purchased perhaps 50 guitars used and plan to upgrade them for what that one Gibson reproduction costs.
DankStar
Her Little Mojo Minion
They can give each other head, that’s kinda positive
Inflames626
New member
To be fair to Gibson, how much profit margin is made on a Les Paul Custom vs. selling 100 LTD ECs?
Quality vs. quantity, I suppose.
Quality vs. quantity, I suppose.
Rex_Rocker
Well-known member
It's rare to hear Metal on the middle position overall, TBH. I play metal, and I like how the middle position sounds, but it's rare that I ever get to use it. I like it clean 51% of the time more with the middle position than the neck position, but Metallica cleans are all neck always and rhytms... well... it's bridge position or death. And it's not like Kirk has played Metal for like 30+ years now, LOL.
I think it's Kirk's guitar as much as Peter Green's or Gary Moore's. Kirk commands as much sales if not more than either of the other two guys.
