WTH Gibson?

[Securb]

- different headstock
- thru body strung
- different neck joint
- different cutaway where the neck meets the body
- different input jack location
- three knobs, not two
- different strap location
- no pickguard
- different selector switch location
- binding

. . . but you're probably right.

Walk over to the closest non-guitar player near you right now and ask them to explain the difference between a stop tailpiece or a string through body or the difference in neck joints. I would argue a lot of guitar players could not explain it to you.

 

[GuitarStv]

Walk over to the closest non-guitar player near you right now and ask them to explain the difference between a stop tailpiece or a string through body or the difference in neck joints. I would argue a lot of guitar players could not explain it to you.

8 in 10 Americans believe in angels, but less than 40% accept the concept of evolution . . . critical thinking is not a strong point for our species.

 

[JB_From_Hell]

That's why the Tele and Strat bodies are copied so much. At the time they were released they were such an out there design Fender didn't need to enforce their ownership of the design so then it became generic

If only Fender had followed Gibson's example of suing over IP the ship already sailed on, perhaps their fate would've been less tragic than being the biggest guitar company in the world.

 

[GuitarStv]

If only Fender had followed Gibson's example of suing over IP the ship already sailed on, perhaps their fate would've been less tragic than being the biggest guitar company in the world.

Heh. Remember the Gibson Jimi Hendrix signature strat?

 

[zionstrat]

I usually jump into these threads wishing that Gibson would stop the insanity and focus on quality guitars.

Instead I will admit that I'm completely confused by their actions. Can anybody explain why Gibson goes after some companies but seem to ignore Harley Benton and Sire like organizations that make great guitars on the low end?

Of course there is a great price difference, but if 10 Sires sell for every Gibson, that is a tremendous negative impact on mindshare or even wallet share.

 

[treyhaislip]

Heh. Remember the Gibson Jimi Hendrix signature strat?

This type of crap from Gibson is what really turns me off about the current state of Gibson USA. They are so litigious and yet pull crap like this...will Mark Agnesi say the Gibson Hendrix Strat is "playing authentic"?

I'm not 100% up to speed with DiMarzio and the Double Cream issue and all of their cease and desist orders but from what I have seen at least they have been somewhat consistent in defending it over their company life span (if I recall, they even went after builders who offered custom shop double cream under a humbucker cover.)

Gibson on the other hand waits until AFTER they file bankruptcy to supposedly protect their brand...maybe if they made a decent product with bare minimum quality standards for a USA made (and priced no less) guitar they wouldn't have gone bankrupt in the first place?

 

[Mincer]

To be fair, the Gibson Strat was what, in the late 90s? Different management then.

 

[JB_From_Hell]

An unrelated reason that, despite how much I love my Les Paul, Gibson sucks:

I’m trying to swap pickups in my Les Paul. Thanks to their awesome dumbass pcb control assembly, my swap didn’t work and now the stupid stock pickups don’t work.

We really need quick connects? For all the people swapping other Gibson pickups into their Gibsons?

 

[Mincer]

An unrelated reason that, despite how much I love my Les Paul, Gibson sucks:

I’m trying to swap pickups in my Les Paul. Thanks to their awesome dumbass pcb control assembly, my swap didn’t work and now the stupid stock pickups don’t work.

We really need quick connects? For all the people swapping other Gibson pickups into their Gibsons?

I think the quick connects are for ease of manufacturing, not swapping pickups. Gibson thinks there would be no reason to swap their stock pickups. They don't want to slow up production with soldering. (I am actually pro-quick connect. but it should be universal).

 

[treyhaislip]

To be fair, the Gibson Strat was what, in the late 90s? Different management then.

Well, it was 2009. Still...they went bankrupt and are now trying to "protect" their brand. That play authentic ad campaign followed by a string of lawsuits AFTER filing bankruptcy is just such a turnoff to me. Their quality sucks and MANY makers both in the USA and outside make better guitars for less.

 

[JB_From_Hell]

I think the quick connects are for ease of manufacturing, not swapping pickups. Gibson thinks there would be no reason to swap their stock pickups. They don't want to slow up production with soldering. (I am actually pro-quick connect. but it should be universal).

I’m sure you’re correct.

Maybe they’re angry that nobody is copying their stupid shit like the PCB or robot tuners.

 

[GuitarStv]

I'm not 100% up to speed with DiMarzio and the Double Cream issue and all of their cease and desist orders but from what I have seen at least they have been somewhat consistent in defending it over their company life span (if I recall, they even went after builders who offered custom shop double cream under a humbucker cover.)

Dimarzio didn't invent the double cream humbucker though . . . here's Eric Clapton playing a Gibson double cream humbucker with Mayall's Bluesbreakers in the mid '60s:

Since Gibson made them first, it's super bullshit that Dimarzio was able to patent double cream humbuckers as though they came up with the idea. That's like if Gibson patented all black guitars - total bullshit, and not something they invented.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

I'm not pro Gibson in this case, but...

Oh man, this guy's days were number for sure

Close to exact copies.. with some gold bling.

That headstock design kinda looks like one of those Aliexpress copies, and that logo looks like they hired the same designer from fucking Donner, LOL.

 

[treyhaislip]

Dimarzio didn't invent the double cream humbucker though . . . here's Eric Clapton playing a Gibson double cream humbucker with Mayall's Bluesbreakers in the mid '60s:

Since Gibson made them first, it's super bull**** that Dimarzio was able to patent double cream humbuckers as though they came up with the idea. That's like if Gibson patented all black guitars - total bull****, and not something they invented.

Totally think the bobbin color is total BS by DiMarzio. All I was saying is that it at least seems like they have consistently tried to defend the trademark. And again, I could be wrong as I have not followed the double cream controversy so I don't know if there were periods of time that DiMarzio didn't try to protect the double cream trademark...from what I remember, the old PAFs prior to DiMarzio had cream bobbins so not something special to just DiMarzio.

For Gibson, I feel like if they hit Dean and others consistently 50+ years ago then I would be more sympathetic to their claims. The fact that they seem to only be aggressive AFTER filing bankruptcy while putting out a "play authentic" ad that tries to say Gibson invented electric guitars and rock n roll (hyperbole on my part for sure) while their quality is so bad that I compare overseas' Epiphones as equals to MIA Gibsons...rant over. :chairshot

 

[Chistopher]

I’m sure you’re correct.

Maybe they’re angry that nobody is copying their stupid **** like the PCB or robot tuners.

Woah woah woah.

Robot tuners are cool, the problem with them is they put a niche, yet expensive idea, on too many of their guitars thus driving the average Gibson price up.

It would be like if Fender randomly started putting Kahler's on all their guitars.

 

[beaubrummels]

Dimarzio didn't invent the double cream humbucker though . . . here's Eric Clapton playing a Gibson double cream humbucker with Mayall's Bluesbreakers in the mid '60s:

Since Gibson made them first, it's super bull**** that Dimarzio was able to patent double cream humbuckers as though they came up with the idea. That's like if Gibson patented all black guitars - total bull****, and not something they invented.

Those weren't double-cream. They were white, but made of butyrate and aged quickly to a cream-like color. They weren't intended to be exposed like that, but players discovered pickups sounded better through the amps of that time with the covers off. DiMarzio's cream formula was attempting to match what a white, aged Gibson pickup looked like in the early 70's.

 

[Mincer]

Woah woah woah.

Robot tuners are cool, the problem with them is they put a niche, yet expensive idea, on too many of their guitars thus driving the average Gibson price up.

It would be like if Fender randomly started putting Kahler's on all their guitars.

I think the idea of robot tuners is a good one, but Gibson made it clumsy looking and way over-complicated because they wanted the silhouette of the headstock to still look traditional.

 

[Ashurbanipal]

I guess in these instances there's often the moral argument and the legal one, and the two don't always align.

The headstock of the Jericho looks reminiscent of some of those mid-80s Kramer banana ones which were a bit thicker and rounder.

I usually jump into these threads wishing that Gibson would stop the insanity and focus on quality guitars.

Instead I will admit that I'm completely confused by their actions. Can anybody explain why Gibson goes after some companies but seem to ignore Harley Benton and Sire like organizations that make great guitars on the low end?

Of course there is a great price difference, but if 10 Sires sell for every Gibson, that is a tremendous negative impact on mindshare or even wallet share.

It depends on the extent of market jurisdiction, to some degree. I don't know how it works with HB, since they are sold in the US now, I think, though their designs have modifications to the bodies and headstocks so they're not facsimile copies of G. A few years ago they introduced an Ex style guitar, with a different headstock and a 10% smaller body, and more recently they changed it up again with an extra cut out along where bottom strap pin is, either because they got warned, or they did it to mitigate a warning.

In other instances, however, companies if their sales are confined to a specific market, they can get away with it - e.g. Navigators use the open book headstock etc., but they can only be sold in Japan.

 

[donaldr]

Can anybody explain why Gibson goes after some companies but seem to ignore Harley Benton and Sire like organizations that make great guitars on the low end?

I don't think a trademark is worldwide or it could be too costly to reinforce it worldwide. Harley Benton are only sold in Europe IIRC and would probably be sued if they start selling in USA (nothing stops you from ordering in UE and get it shipped in USA). Sire I don't know, they have Fender copies that have a very distinct headstock but Gibson copies are pretty similar, and they can sale in USA.

I'm totally with Gibson, it's their IP under a trademark and they have the right to protect themselves against thieves. I don't think they will sue the local luthier who built you a one-off LP to your specs but if he starts making a production line out of it then he's exposed to getting sued. Or he could first get an agreement and be legal (Warmoth is a good example with their Fender licensed necks).

Wouldn't you do the same if you design and build a product that is recognized worldwide as your product, and not someone else product? A company duplicating your product and stealing your IP under a trademark is a thief and nothing else.

 

[blakejcan]

I'd assume Gibson is suing these guys cuz they also did their weird licensing thing where if a boutique brand pays the almighty Gibson licensing fee then they can continue to use the Gibson shapes. These guys are part of it

https://bankerguitar.com/

So by going after those that don't cough up the dough then they are protecting the guys like Banker who pay them fees