Another Gibson Fail ??

[bagman67]

What boggles my mind is that Gibson lets so many unfavorable comments be posted.  Leaving aside the problems with the guitar, Gibson has a huge PR problem.  They should hire someone left over from the last Bush administration to manage damage control, if they aren't all already making millions in a thinktank or on the public speaking circuit...

 

[Cagey]

Maybe they worry about how much worse their PR problem would get if word got out that they were unfairly censoring their forum. Bad opinions will get posted somewhere, no matter what, so they may as well collect them close to home.

 

[bagman67]

I take your point, but those opinions will still be posted elsewhere (in forums like this one, for example) even if Gibson were to moderate such posts out of existence.  Hell, maybe they do moderate, and the stuff they censor might be just plain obscene or gratuitously abusive.  In any case, the guitar itself is the larger problem.  Whiz-bang technology like that is developed with Moore's Law or some analog thereof in mind, so who cares whether it's not ready to hit the market by Xmas for QC reasons?  The damn thing's electronics will be obsolete (apart from the pickup magnets) in a year anyway.  Maybe you can buy two years if there's a USB port to upgrade the onboard software with.

 

[Panthur]

redonkulous controls

Lmao, I watched Shrek 4 yesterday, redonkulous.  :laughing3:

 

[Cagey]

I take your point, but those opinions will still be posted elsewhere (in forums like this one, for example) even if Gibson were to moderate such posts out of existence. 

I thought that's what I said, but maybe I wasn't clear enough. Bears repeating, anyway.

Good points about the firmware upgrades. Back about 100 years ago, you didn't ship a BIOS or any kind of firmware unless it was dead-nuts predictable/reliable/tested, because there wasn't any easy way to "upgrade" or repair mistakes once they got out in the field. Now, manufacturers will ship any kind of crap because they know they can rewrite the EEPROM almost at will. But, I don't see a port on this thing, so...

And seven processors? Really? What counts as a processor these days? I don't have that many in my desktop, and it's a fairly studly machine.

 

[bagman67]

Sorry, Cagey, your assertion was completely clear.  I am the one who wasn't clear.  To clarify:  The bad opinions about the Firebird X (or whatever other Gibby-produced nightmare comes along next) would appear in non-Gibson-hosted forums even if they were NOT to censor such posts on their own board. 

Maybe I've invented (or at least codified) Bagman's Law: Negative opinion propagates to fill available internet space.  D'oh!

 

[texicus]

Firmware updates are going to be so fun with 3 operating systems involved...

 

[OzziePete]

Seven processors and Three (THREE!!!) operating systems. One operating system is enough...(more than enough ON BOARD a gigging guitar I reckon)......but three, who is master and who is slave, oh the problems when they clash. :doh:

WHAT idiot thought this was in any way a good idea..oh wait, it's Gibson.

I wouldn't mind betting this guitar never really hits the streets, and in 50 years time the company demo models will command "Moderne" type prices. Which would be wrong, because besides the aesthetics, there didn't seem to be much wrong with the Moderne, whereas this 'thing' looks like a cancelled gig everytime you boot it up.

 

[exaN]

Which would be wrong, because besides the aesthetics, there didn't seem to be much wrong with the Moderne, whereas this 'thing' looks like a cancelled gig everytime you boot it up.

Who would play live with this guitar, seriously...

 

[AGWAN]

*Coughs*













No even I think the Firedbud X is to ugly to touch.

and that says something.

 

[Jusatele]

the only reason they could have for 3 operating systems is so it is compatible with any music program out there. Instead of picking a system and trying to force it to be a standard, they are trying to make this adapt to everything. I think that is a huge mistake as there will be a new system out by years end and where does it endPick the most used system and go with it. That thing is going be a nightmare to program and musicians do not want nightmares, they want plug and play.
How many guys want to have to refer to a manual so they can play Sweet child of mine and when finished want to refer to the manual so they can play strangle hold, and then back to the manual for One?
Thing is a failure before I try it for just the thought of having to change settings between songs to me.

 

[tangent]

Just when you thought Gibson couldn't fail any harder, they come out with this:

http://www.axetopia.com/guitars/gibson-firebird-x-guitar-gets-its-own-app-store.html

LOL

 

[Dan025]

Just when you thought Gibson couldn't fail any harder, they come out with this:

http://www.axetopia.com/guitars/gibson-firebird-x-guitar-gets-its-own-app-store.html

LOL

gibson needs to give up on the guitar of the future stuff. really people dont buy gibsons because they want new technology. and if they want to give us something new they should actually make the guitar sound better, like take some note from taylor in there acoustics, even martin seems to be trying new things that are working well, and maybe find ways to improve the resonant properties in solid bodied guitars. maybe headstocks that don't break off, or a new neck joint.

or maybe like fender they can stick to tradition with slight variations because like fender the guitars were so good in the first place that they are hard to improve upon. most guitars today are just copycats of one or the other.

i really dont think the market for computers in guitars is that large and using gimicks borrowed from apple wont help them as much as they think. but if used properly it could be a good tool to some people.

 

[Superlizard]

No no no... they should incorporate PC parts in Gibson guitars.  Soon enough, guitars will
play themselves - just plug guitar into computer.

Then the morons who buy 'em can have their robot Gibson play songs like Yngwie Malmsteen's "Black Star"
automatically - and they can jump on their internet forum of choice and brag about how great a player they are
and what a great tone they get...

 

[labguitar1003]

now i thought the guitar that the guitar that tunes itself was great, but this this is like trying to put a monster truck engine in a vw beetle, it may seem like a great idea and what the heck if we paint it an ugly color it will look unique, but come on are they just having drunk monkeys throw darts at ideas on a wall or something cause this is just god-aweful atrocious how that thing can even be considered a guitar beside the fact it looks like one and has strings. where is the love, the thing that makes each guitar sound unique, that time where guitars where priced by how good they were crafted and not by how much electronical crap you can fit in them.

 

[Cagey]

Not that Gibson needs any excuse to overcharge for their products by an order of magnitude, but I can't see how they'll ever get their R&D money out of this boondoggle, let alone make a profit. I mean, I'm sure the electronics only cost $100 or so. Who knows what licensing fees they have for the software if they didn't use OSS and write their apps from scratch. But, even given that, there's gotta be a big pile of time and money invested in what many, if not most players are calling the most poorly-considered idea they've seen in a long time, even from Gibson.