ANNOUNCEMENT: Gibson styled products

You could be right. Probably are, actually. Most of these people were too young to be familiar with the real thing. Hell, most of them thought Leslie West was Rod Stewart's girlfriend once I planted that idea <grin>
 
I still think that Gibsons are great products. Going after Warmoth is stupid, but if that means that they'll make something new, that's OK to me.
 
drewfx said:
TonyFlyingSquirrel said:
I wonder what they'll replace the Les Paul with.

Wow, what da ya know, another Les Paul!!!

Fender and Gibson have done nothing to expand their product line other than by simply re-branding the same instruments.  Sure, perhaps they've revised some of their building techniques, but it's still Strats, Tele's, LP's, Short Horn's, and 335's.  The Ultra 339 is one of the few recent advances, but that's about it.

A lot of the electronic stuff they've come up with in the last years are nonsense. I think that most people are still after either something that's 60's style or something that's more for Metal.
They've tried at times without much success. It seems not many people really want to buy anything but traditional guitars from any of the traditional companies.
 
Bagman67 said:
Mayfly said:
I really should not jinx this, but I wonder if Heritage has been approached in a similar way.

Just fuel for the fire.  :evil4:


My guess would be that when the Heritage dudes bought the Kalamazoo factory and fixtures, they probably also negotiated a license to manufacture Gibson-esque guitars.  Wouldn't surprise me to learn that Gibson relies on an income stream from Heritage, or at least wangled a nice lump sum at the front end.

I've got an H-535 ... and I love it. It's the only "Gibson" I own and The Heritage make the only "Gibsons" I'll ever own.
 
You know what? Who cares. I just sold my Les Paul Standard at half it's value because the headstock was repaired. That company can kiss me you know where. I will never by anything with a Gibson name on it again in my lifetime (esp after this). You know, they refuse to make a slight adjustment to there headstock design to combat the problems with dropping them. I just recently was in the market for an acoustic guitar amp. Gibson made a very nice one and I almost pulled the trigger. I kept going back over the problems I have had in the past with Les Pauls and their stubborn stance on design. I shyed away from that amp and found a used SWR Strawberry Blonde II. It destroyed the Gibson in terms of sound quality. It's a good thing I don't play rock n roll anymore. Tele's are my new found love!! The whole imported wood lawsuit tells me how shady of a company they have become anyways.

GOOD BYE to a horrible company !!! The problem is, Warmoth's quality destroys that of Gibson for less than half the price.
 
That's hilarius! Yeah they suck because you dropped your guitar and broke it.  :dontknow:    BTW you really can't build a comparable Warmoth for half the price.
 
The late Ed Roman was big on slamming Gibsons for their "frequent" headstock and neck/body joint failures. Damn Gibsons. You can't afford them, and you can't drop them.

 
Cagey said:
The late Ed Roman was big on slamming Gibsons for their "frequent" headstock and neck/body joint failures. Damn Gibsons. You can't afford them, and you can't drop them.
That's why you don't see the usual "rock gods" smashing them on stage. They bust apart so easy that it wouldn't be that exciting... :icon_biggrin:
 
DangerousR6 said:
Cagey said:
The late Ed Roman was big on slamming Gibsons for their "frequent" headstock and neck/body joint failures. Damn Gibsons. You can't afford them, and you can't drop them.
That's why you don't see the usual "rock gods" smashing them on stage. They bust apart so easy that it wouldn't be that exciting... :icon_biggrin:

I have known 3 different guys who've broken Gibson necks - two from dropping off the strap, and one fell off a stand. They do break fairly easily. But, I'm not sure everybody else with that headstock or neck/body joint design is without sin. It's just that Gibson is one of the largest suppliers of guitars in the world, so you're naturally going to see more of them broken. If 2% of them fail from abuse, then the folks who build 100,000 units are going to see 2,000 incidents, while the supplier who makes 10,000 is only going to have 200. It may seem to someone who's not thinking about it that Gibson failures are more numerous, but really the failure rate is the same across all manufacturers.
 
Cagey said:
DangerousR6 said:
Cagey said:
The late Ed Roman was big on slamming Gibsons for their "frequent" headstock and neck/body joint failures. Damn Gibsons. You can't afford them, and you can't drop them.
That's why you don't see the usual "rock gods" smashing them on stage. They bust apart so easy that it wouldn't be that exciting... :icon_biggrin:

I have known 3 different guys who've broken Gibson necks - two from dropping off the strap, and one fell off a stand. They do break fairly easily. But, I'm not sure everybody else with that headstock or neck/body joint design is without sin. It's just that Gibson is one of the largest suppliers of guitars in the world, so you're naturally going to see more of them broken. If 2% of them fail from abuse, then the folks who build 100,000 units are going to see 2,000 incidents, while the supplier who makes 10,000 is only going to have 200. It may seem to someone who's not thinking about it that Gibson failures are more numerous, but really the failure rate is the same across all manufacturers.
The failure rate would only be the same across the board of set neck guitar makers. Bolt on's don't seem to have any failure rate as screws are stronger than glue. Unless you count the beatings against stage floors... :icon_biggrin:
 
pabloman said:
That's hilarius! Yeah they suck because you dropped your guitar and broke it.  :dontknow:    BTW you really can't build a comparable Warmoth for half the price.

If you call it dropping it while it was still in the case then yes. They used to be a good company. Now they are garbage. Products are overpriced for breakable china. Like you've never heard of a broken LP. I personally know 3 friends not including myself with repaired headstocks. You pay $2500 and you get a glass guitar. The newer ones are even worse. I'd buy a Heritage or PRS over a Gibson anyday. Both are far superior guitars. I've owned a standard, a studio and still own a "The Paul". Ironically the only one worth keeping is the "The Paul". BTW, 2 of Slash's favorite LP's have repaired headstocks. Watched an interview with him talking about them. Personally, I like a guitar you don't have to treat like an infant.
 
Right. That's why I said "with that headstock or neck/body joint design". As you say, bolt-ons wouldn't have that problem at the neck/body joint, nor would neck-thru designs. Any tilt-back headstock is going to be somewhat exposed, though. For one thing, the headstock is tilted back so the chances of it hitting the floor wrong are higher. Plus, they have a scarf joint, which can let go. Although, typically, glue joints are stronger than the wood itself. Thing is, you use a thinner piece of wood to make the headstock, so a torsional tear is much easier than it is with a headstock that is a continuation of the neck meat like you get with straight headstocks.
 
Les Paul himself hated Gibson guitars. I stuck up for Gibson almost my whole life. But there comes a time when it's just a name and you realize they arn't worth the money. For as openminded most musicians generally are they are as closeminded as it gets when it comes to name brands. "It's got to be the best because Slash only plays LP's" Slash can also afford to replace or fix his LP's on a daily basis.
 
Cagey said:
Right. That's why I said "with that headstock or neck/body joint design". As you say, bolt-ons wouldn't have that problem at the neck/body joint, nor would neck-thru designs. Any tilt-back headstock is going to be somewhat exposed, though. For one thing, the headstock is tilted back so the chances of it hitting the floor wrong are higher. Plus, they have a scarf joint, which can let go. Although, typically, glue joints are stronger than the wood itself. Thing is, you use a thinner piece of wood to make the headstock, so a torsional tear is much easier than it is with a headstock that is a continuation of the neck meat like you get with straight headstocks.

I do agree with a lot of what you say. However, Gibson has admitted there are ways to strengthen the headstock but won't do it because it would slightly alter the feel at the top of the neck. the wood is so thin between the headstock and the top of the neck. That is really the problem. Mine broke when it fell face down while in the case. I didn't even know it till I opened the case the next day. Turns out i'm not the only one to have broken one that way. I had the standard repaired and sold it for $900. The studio went up for sale not too long after. I only keep the "The Paul" for rarity reasons. Use it to play slide now and again.
 
They were easy enough to defend when they were the only game in town for certain iconic designs. But, as soon as others started presenting their take on those units, they fell out of favor pretty quickly except among the fanbois who simply must play what their hero plays.
 
When I get to the point where I have to have a Les Paul again, I'm going to get one of these little lovelies...

al3200flatblackbkhw3.jpg
al3200flatblackbkhw4.jpg
al3200flatblackbkhw5.jpg

Neck-through body design, contoured easy-access heel, tummy cut, solid Mahogany, Ebony 'board, Graphteck nut and saddles, on and on. With hardshell case, $650.
 
Cagey said:
When I get to the point where I have to have a Les Paul again, I'm going to get one of these little lovelies...

al3200flatblackbkhw3.jpg
al3200flatblackbkhw4.jpg
al3200flatblackbkhw5.jpg

Neck-through body design, contoured easy-access heel, tummy cut, solid Mahogany, Ebony 'board, Graphteck nut and saddles, on and on. With hardshell case, $650.
Nice one, they seem to be catching on... I kinda fancy this one... :icon_biggrin:
al2000blackmn5.jpg
 
Back
Top