So apparently Gibson has made some changes in 2015

[swarfrat]

There's progress and then there's self flushing toilets and all manner of other useless crap that ends up costing somebody a few hundred bucks just because some people are lazy. Looking tuners are progress. Self tuning computerized tuners is more like self flushing toilets

 

[Prometheus]

Hey, I didn't say I was a fan. Actually, I'm pretty much ambivalent. And it certainly is just a "modern convenience" thing, which will appeal to some and not others. But there've been other "advancements" in guitar technology before this, that now live mostly in history books. This have the same fate. Time will tell.

 

[Re-Pete]

There's progress and then there's self flushing toilets and all manner of other useless crap that ends up costing somebody a few hundred bucks just because some people are lazy. Looking tuners are progress. Self tuning computerized tuners is more like self flushing toilets

I'd love a self flushing dunny. Takes care of the times I am late to go to work & rush out the door, then come home 12 hours later to "What died in here?".  :evil4:

It would definitely be 'progress' if you wanna have a steady relationship.  :icon_biggrin:

 

[Cederick]

Why do people not like the E-tune stuff? It's not like it's going to affect the tone of the guitar in any way other than scientific measures...

If it is becuase it don't work, then I understand. But if it works, I don't see the point in NOT liking it.

I would love to have the strat variety of it on a future hardtail Warmoth build

 

[swarfrat]

Because its an expensive complicated solution to a non problem. Its like a robotic nose hair trimmer.

 

[Cederick]

I don't think it's a non-problem.

That's why I got an Evertune bridge guitar (a Warmoth build), but after critical listening it's thinner sounding that a Floyd Rose guitar, really. I still like Evertune for what it is, but from now on I only use it for pre-prods, song writing and a live guitar too, but for recording I use what sounds best.

And a guitar with E-tune sounds like a really good half-way between regular full-tone guitar and Evertune, and would keep the workflow when recording high so that you dont have to spend a few minutes to tune the guitar.

Of course a guitar even without Evertune should hold tune pretty well, but they simply don't, and that's why I think the E-tune sounds like a good compromise.

(E-tune and Evertune is not the same thing :icon_biggrin: )

However, I do agree that it's a bit too expensive for what it is. But still a GOOD thing that doesn't affect the guitar tone like Evertune does.

 

[stratamania]

I think the only thing with the robot tuners is it doesn't look traditional on an LP. It's not a big deal to change them out.

Cederick has a good point on workflow and so forth.

If you want one on your Warmoth http://www.tronical.com

I like the idea of going from Standard to DADGAD or open G quickly. 

 

[musicispeace]

I gave up music for many years and then came back to it a couple years ago as a blues player. It amuses me sometimes how much I just want a VERY basic, good quality board with strings on it and just plug it straight into a tube amp that possesses reverb and play. That is one approach among many and I do think people should pursue what floats their particular boat as a guitarist. For me Warmoth is a fantastic option. If someone wants to save up for 4 years for a new Les Paul or is a techie with an extra ten thousand dollars to throw around  for some signature model Les Paul to play on the weekends more power to them. But when I came back to playing I can tell you I was appalled at the quality vs pricing of what was hanging on the wall of Guitarget and the parts guitar culture had matured a lot since when I last left off. It wasn't hard for me to elect to dive in to very personal instruments made from parts with basically no resale value and only important to the person who dreamed it up. I get to support small business via pickup winders or those who can do a finish Warmoth doesn't do and since I don't work on my own stuff I can support people who are qualified to put it all together. I would buy a used Gibson off someone who needed the money if I decided I wanted a Les Paul but I'll just sit back and observe how Gibson's market strategy plays out. I respect those who still enjoy Gibsons but I'll pass and certainly so at the going rate.

 

[stubhead]

Ridiculous P.O.S. :headbang1:

(I'm going to save that comment and see just how many times and how how many questions I can use it for in the next year :evil4

I'm not as interested in business strategy as I am in a whole lot of other things, but at a guess I'd say it looks to me more like Gibson is trying to attract investors or buyers more than they're trying to sell instruments. If you look at what car dealers are doing now - essentially the Warmoth model, only Toyota or Ford will still kindly screw all your optional little bits together for you - it's OBVIOUS that getting EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANT is the coming norm in guitarland, either git aboard or git out. Bye, Gibson. Don't let the doorknob....

 

[bagman67]

Not sure I agree with you, Stubby.  For experienced players who have some idea what they want, yes - customization at the point of sale is def. going to become more widespread.  But for the vast majority of instrument buyers, I think it's still going to be whatever the retailer (whether e- or brick'n'mortar) can get the marks to buy, which will be whatever the manufacturers can jam into the channel with the most attractive margin from their standpoint.

 

[vtpcnk]

i thought the  new lp double cut with p90s - wrap around bridge, bound neck - was a nice touch and that too at 1000 bucks. but without the pickguard it is ugly. but easily remedied.

 

[stubhead]

Well I like the 24-fret SG with a MAPLE neck, glue that puppy in properly and you fix a lot of the SG's neck wobble and/or neck disaster, and for less than a grand too. But I'd still get ESP's version first.

 

[Jumble Jumble]

Because its an expensive complicated solution to a non problem. Its like a robotic nose hair trimmer.

This is the only post I've seen in the thread that says what the problem is with the electronic tuners, and it's still no stronger than "you don't need it". Like, because all our guitars only have things on them that we need, right? Like, I dunno, a sunburst finish.

Sure, you don't need it. Why would that be a reason to actually remove it from the guitar? You can still tune manually. I can imagine on some of the more cork-sniffing forums people might be saying it affects tone or sustain in a conveniently unquantifiable way. But we're not like that here. How does the fact that you can (not must) press a button to tune the guitar make it a worse guitar?

The reason, for me, is: I have to pay for it. Sure, it doesn't make it worse, but the guitar is more expensive because it's fitted. I don't need it, and yet I have to pay for it. I don't want to buy things that I don't need. I would rather have a cheaper Les Paul than have electronic tuning.

However, for me, Gibsons have long since moved past the point where I'm willing to pay their prices. Maybe second-hand they might get a look in, but to be honest next LP I want will be made from a PGK kit or similar. I'll pay for the bits I want and no more, and have everything exactly how I want it. All these millions of weird guitars they bring out, and you can't get a normal Les Paul - by which I mean, a 59-style LP, but with P90s instead of humbuckers. If you want P90s, you've got to have some kind of weird satin finish, or no binding, or it has to have fairy lights all over it, or something.

Basically, they've lost me as a customer completely, and they don't seem to be interested in getting me back. Perhaps they're chasing the PRS market, I don't know. Still, it's not my loss, and it's not really theirs either. We've "grown apart" I guess.

 

[swarfrat]

Because its an expensive complicated solution to a non problem. Its like a robotic nose hair trimmer.

This is the only post I've seen in the thread that says what the problem is with the electronic tuners, and it's still no stronger than "you don't need it". Like, because all our guitars only have things on them that we need, right? Like, I dunno, a sunburst finish.

Ah, but sunburst is a simple inexpensive solution to a real problem, hiding endgrain absorption differences. The problem with Rube Golberg contraptions is they bring problems of their own. If your robotic nose har trimmer breaks, you can still use your current favorite method. I actually have a bigger problem with motorized than I do computerized.  Sunburst also has no moving parts and is highly unlikely to fail 20 years in the future.

 

[Jumble Jumble]

Do you wanna try reading the rest of my post? If you get to the end you'll see I'm arguing against the inclusion of the min-e-tune system.

Anyway, without getting off track, sunburst isn't as cheap as solid colour paint, and is equally effective. And I could have said "a flake finish", or binding, or gold hardware, or figured wood tops, or abalone fret markers, or loads of other things. Fact is, we've all got guitars with features that we don't need.

To repeat: you can tune a 2015 Gibson manually, so if the battery is flat etc you don't have an untunable guitar.

 

[Cagey]

I imagine I could care less what Gibson does, but I don't know how. If they want to offer features they think are desirable, then let them. Ultimately, the market will teach them whether those features are desirable or not at the prices they demand.

For myself, Using Gibson as a supplier of guitars stopped being an option a long time ago. To me, it's simply a bad trade. It's not that their products are so incredibly bad that I wouldn't own one (although they could hire a QC guy or two), it's just that what they want from me vs. what they are willing to give me in return are too far out of line for me to agree on a trade. All they want is money, which is fine, and all I want is a guitar, which is fine. But, the value should somewhat match up.

 

[swarfrat]

But if the motor gear strips, or jams, etc... tiny motors don't have the most awesome track record for durability - at least not one appropriate for multi-thousand dollar durable goods expected to last a lifetime.  They're fine for making my son's toy dump truck vibrate. "Catepillar power!" [cue scorpions riff].  He'll outgrow it in a couple years, most likely tire of it before then.

Cars do it too. All the little interlocks and stuff that break when the car hits 100k miles. But cars are consumable goods, not durable goods.  A $4k guitar I expect to pass down to my son and he to his children. A $4k car I might not even remember.

 

[Cagey]

I don't have a great deal of faith in the life expectancy of gimmicky parts, either. But, even more to the point is that even the more or less reliable manual systems we've been using for a bajillion years aren't a panacea, so I don't expect the automatic systems to fare any better.

For instance, I use big, fat frets. Somebody else who picks up one of my guitars who isn't used to such things will play it out of tune almost instantly, and start tuning it to suit their playing style. When they hand it back to me, it's out of tune (for me). Automatic systems have a tough time with those sorts of idiosyncrasies. Strum an open chord, and most modern tuners will tell you within a few cents where it's out. You adjust, and go from there. Next guy's got a grip like Arnold Swartzenegger on meth, so naturally the thing's out of tune. He's sharping everything he touches. Retune, retune, retune, and the next guy is Caspar Milquetoast who can barely fret a note, let along sharp it due to brute strength. Retune, retune, retune... the auto systems never work for such things

So, we're back to the idea that autotuners are a solution looking for a problem. If you have tune to your touch, what good is a system that is unaware of the phenomena?

 

[Slackjaw]

Interesting that they have gone with a much wider nut for all models across the board... 1.79, which is a scosche over 1-3/4. Awesome as far as I'm concerned since I prefer a wider nut with my big hands, but for the majority it might be a tad less comfortable.

I wonder if going wider is a consequence of that new adjustable nut... which I'm sure was brought about due to the standardization of that auto-tune gizmo.

 

[stubhead]

Everybody playing in bands knows to tune a low E string 15 cents flat so you can hit barre chords  and if you play .017" or .016" unwound G's you'd better drop them 5 cents easy, especially for us big-fret fellows. It would annoy me to press the little whir-o-tron I'd paid for and them have to FIX the tuning anyway. :evil4: But again, Gibson seems divorced from anything I understand about wanting guitars. They (and Fender) HAVE GOT to realize that anybody who wants the normal great old normal stuff is going to get it used cheap, or go to any of literally dozens of clone/inspiration companies. So they feel pressed to innovate, on a product that has about hit the wall of what can be done to get better except for personal little wiring and "feel" preferences. Every company that tells you they have "finally perfected" electric guitars is about 30 years late, and lying - and I don't buy from liars, for the most part. :icon_biggrin: