Gibson went bankrupt?

[blueman335]

Originally Posted by Aceman

You know - the pickup thing, Blueman, is a really great point. And the 500/496 in the repro V/explorers is just a glaring tragedy. That points out the brain damage of the company perfectly. I wonder how many of those sold? I'd be dropping Seth's in there faster than you could say Ted McCarty. I guess they couldn't swing it for 8 grand and keep the profit margin.

I don't think the 500T/496R was a cost decision, but rather a blatant disregard of their own tradition. Someone who spends $8,000 on a meticulous 50th Anniversary reissue Flying V and wants it to actually sound like the original (like it's supposed to); what do you do? Replace the PU's with PAF's and reduce the collector value of the guitar, or live with hot ceramic PU's that don't sound anything like an original V? They've created a dilema for any potential buyer. For that much money, it should be as advertised, just like the original.

This is classic 'ivory tower management' out of touch with reality. They can't even do their own history right. These are people who bought the licensing for the name & models; they're not the same 'Gibson' that created the original innovations & masterpieces. Those people are long gone, and a new set of know-it-all 'suits' are calling the shots.

[Jessie Sammler]

Hot ceramics in a '58 reproduction? That's travesty. I think they rock in my Faded V, but that's the right thing for that guitar.

Earth to Henry.

Earth to Henry.

Come in, Henry.

(We lost 'im.)

[Evan Skopp]

Guys, please cool it with the bashing. That's not what this forum is about.

Love or hate Gibson, please treat them as you would another forum member: with respect.

[Jessie Sammler]

I love Gibson; I just like to goof on them once in a while for little things.

Lo siento.

[ksmith63]

I am going to use this space to say that Gibson needs to bring back the Les Paul Double Cut Standard guitars. In cool finishes and NOT gold hardware. Just sayin....

[xxxplorer]

I like gibson's more than any other guitar... for me they feel right... and I am Jonesing for that 7 String Explorer!

[Lewguitar]

Originally Posted by Evan Skopp

Guys, please cool it with the bashing.

Yeah...besides, in the past few months I've just started enjoying Gibson guitars again after avoiding them for about 30 years and with few exceptions just playing Fenders.

I've liked all the ES-335's I've had a chance to check out in recent months but haven't played anything newer than my '00 ES-335. That's pretty much the only Gibson model I'm into but I'm enjoying my '00 ES-335 as much or more than any of the 50's or 60's ES-335's that I once owned.

Lew

[ImmortalSix]

Just to set the record straight, this is all False.



Search Google News for "Gibson Peavey"

[Mincer]

Hey, I have no problem with Gibson, I just can't afford their guitars- and I am a Gibson Artist! It seems the ones I like are the expensive archtops!
I do like that they try new things, while realizing where their $$ comes from - past designs. Fender is essentially in the same boat, although the design of most Fenders (and the fact that there are currently 5000 strat models) really encourages experimentation.

BTW, I tried a Dark Fire and it was cool. The robot tuners weren't as fast as I wanted, but it will get there one day. If it were my company, I'd go more for modeling the tuning more than the physical change in strings- the Line6 Variax does it well, but I hated the actual guitar.

[AudioWonderland]

Originally Posted by Aceman

You know - the pickup thing, Blueman, is a really great point. And the 500/496 in the repro V/explorers is just a glaring tragedy. That points out the brain damage of the company perfectly. I wonder how many of those sold? I'd be dropping Seth's in there faster than you could say Ted McCarty. I guess they couldn't swing it for 8 grand and keep the profit margin. Hard to believe they put PG's in the Gibbons model!?!?!?! I wonder how that happened?

I have a small surprise for you guys regarding Gibson...stay tuned later this week.

I am not so sure that's the case. The Metal guys want the higher output pickups. The PAF crowd will pull the pickups regardless to put their flavor of the month PAF's in their guitars. While I agree its ridiculous to call it a "replica" and use those pickups, it does make some sense in a more practical way

[blueman335]

Originally Posted by Mincer

Fender is essentially in the same boat, although the design of most Fenders (and the fact that there are currently 5000 strat models) really encourages experimentation.

+1. I still don't understand how Fender manages to get 5,000 models of Strats, or whatever the number is. They all look the same to me. At least I can tell Les Pauls apart. Maybe I'm getting old.

[Mincer]

Well, you see, change the pickguard screws to a slot head, and BAM, it is the 'Slot Rod' model!
Imprint an F on the neck plate, and it is the Leo Fender Initial series. Or how about a special series of pickguard colors, like Bone, Ecrew, Vintage White, and Off-white but not cream....sell it with a pane of glass so it can look like the Strat you saw in the music store window in 1962. Call it the 'One Day' series.

[FBloke]

Originally Posted by Mincer

Well, you see, change the pickguard screws to a slot head, and BAM, it is the 'Slot Rod' model!
Imprint an F on the neck plate, and it is the Leo Fender Initial series. Or how about a special series of pickguard colors, like Bone, Ecrew, Vintage White, and Off-white but not cream....sell it with a pane of glass so it can look like the Strat you saw in the music store window in 1962. Call it the 'One Day' series.

Exactly. This is what happens when Marketing people get too much power in a business and the luthiers and players have little influence over the running of things. It happens in many businesses that grow very big - it's all management meetings and think tanks - Head Office grows, the shop floor is marginalised and everything becomes a new product or an initiative. It becomes a game of keeping back office jobs and empires, not connecting with the passion that created the desirable products in the first place. There's a big paradox here - ambition, love of money and career are the big drivers. What do we know about most musicians? - little ambition that is non-musical, always without money as desperately avoiding anything that could be called a "career"! It's just not cool! So, the guitars lose the resonance that goes with creating instruments because you just love music so much. My theory is that this passion goes into the wood from the luthier and you hear it when you plug in, see it and feel it when you pick it up.

[Empty Pockets]

Originally Posted by ibanezrocks

I partially agree with the blue man... where I disagree is about the robot guitars. I think the robot guitars, if the technology was perfected, could be big sellers in the future.

It would be possible to make a very classic looking and sounding guitar that automatically tuned itself at the push of a button, to whatever tuning you wanted. It might also be possible to make this technology fairly cheap (>$200). If they made it available as an upgrade feature and it didn't ruin the look of the guitar and worked as it should, I think people would go for that.

To me thats useful innovation. I don't consider anything else they're doing innovation, as making a backwards version of a guitar doesn't help anything.

That's so crazy because I'm looking at two completely normal-looking SG Specials that have six preset tunings that are activated by the push of the button and they both work exactly how they should.

They cost just as much as my normal SG Specials that don't tune themselves.

So are you saying the current production run of Robots is good useful innovation?

[DLT]

Originally Posted by Empty Pockets

If we lost Gibson, we'd be losing a huge part of guitar culture in general.

We still have Heritage Guitars to fall back on. Made right here in Michigan in the former Gibson factory.

I just wish they would change the shape of that ugly arsed headstock. I swear everyone I have talked to dislikes Heritage guitars because of the ugly headstock! I know it is just a design, but man...it has to look cool to make one happy!

[blueman335]

Originally Posted by DLT

I just wish they would change the shape of that ugly arsed headstock. I swear everyone I have talked to dislikes Heritage guitars because of the ugly headstock! I know it is just a design, but man...it has to look cool to make one happy!

They're not as ugly as PRS headstocks!

[DLT]

Originally Posted by Empty Pockets

The Zoot Suit is not a stupid idea. It IS a straightforward guitar worth the money. It's like a thousand bucks and it's a real Gibson that is impossible to warp or break the neck on -- meaning it's gonna last these next 50 years AT LEAST...

I seriously doubt they are pressing the birch-ply laminate themselves.

It's really funny to talk **** on Gibson for their price points, when Fender needlessly raised their prices 20% across the board last year and PRS only start getting good around the $2000 mark.

It's just a business...it costs money to build guitars and it costs more money the bigger your company is...everybody in the country is on hard times right now, and GGC is one of them...but to wish or hope that they go bankrupt or out of business means you want to see one of America's oldest and most respected companies fail and all their employees without jobs. Why? Just cuz you can't afford a $6000 limited edition collector's reissue?

Please. If you don't like their guitars, that's one thing, but until you've run your own successful guitar manufacturing business i don't really think you have any experience to say what things should cost or how they should do business.

I think Gibson does a good job of doing what they're known for (the vintage-correct guitars) while still trying to innovate and improve the guitar game. A lot of people talked crap on the Robot tuners without even trying them...I've spent a lot of time with the ones at my shop and it is a **** COOL system to have on a guitar...it works really well and makes PLAYING easier because you're not constantly checking your tuning...

Same with the Zoot Suits...they directly addressed one of the biggest problems EVERY guitar manufacturer has...warped or damaged necks...then they took a lead from Martin and tried using birch-ply laminate. The guitars sound and feel great and are pretty much indestructible...if a small independant company like Composite Electrics had made it, y'all would've thought it was this hip new idea but Gibson did it so it's stupid and destined to fail.

Guess that's why all the Robots at my shop sold out in less than a week and we can't even keep Zoot Suits in stock because young kids who down-tune love the fact that they can't bend the neck on 'em.

After a year at that shop, i've seen probably 50 Gibsons come and go through my doors. I've sold three Paul Reed Smiths and still have the same 6 plastic-wrapped no-tone $3,600 chunks of mahagony on the wall that were there when i dropped off my application. I spend at least nine hours a day, every day, in a place with hundreds of guitars, and the Gibsons from the custom shop are almost always the best-built and best-sounding in the building.

If we lost Gibson, we'd be losing a huge part of guitar culture in general.

I just checked out the zoot suit guitar. First time I saw it tonight! I think it is lovely. Some of the color combos I can pass on but there are two that strike my fancy.
I think these will be short lived, but will be a collector item in the future, just like the RD Artist.

[DLT]

Originally Posted by blueman335

They're not as ugly as PRS headstocks!

Dat is troo!

I just am not a PRS person. Either you love them or don't. They just do not feel right to me.

[beandip]

Nothing beats the Fender Musicmaster and lately, the Starcaster headstocks.

Makes me want to run around going "THIS IS SPARTA!!!"

[Zhangliqun]

Gibson's pickups are subpar to me, except for the P90's which are still quite good I think. There have been stretches of QC problems, particularly with fret dressing in my experience, but there's nothing quite like a Gibson that's right. Their customer service is often just bizarre, and really, really slow.

But the criticisms about price are silly. My understanding is they make most of their money off the Epiphones (that's where all the volume is) and thus can afford to use the Gibson line as the big shiny light to bring you into the tent. Part of the brightness of that light is the very fact that the price is so high -- people assume that at such a price it must be one helluva guitar, and far more often than the naysayers think, they're exactly right. More dogs than ought to make it out the door, but they STILL make a lot of VERY fine guitars. From there they move to what they see as the poor man's version, the Epiphone line, some of which are actually pretty good, especially if you replace all the electronics. They use the Gibson line to sell Epiphones, and believe it or not, part of that appeal is the price.

That Gibson could "afford" to sell them cheaper doesn't mean they HAVE to. People talk about that like it's some sort of moral imperative, and I could see their point if we were talking about food or medical supplies. But we're talking about luxury-level guitars.

While we're at it, let's apply that same philosophy to ourselves: Most of us could afford to work for less pay than we get, no matter how much we might protest otherwise (would you really jump off a bridge if you got a 20% pay cut?) but I doubt anyone in here has walked into the boss' office and said, please pay me less money, it's morally wrong for me to be paid this much since I can live on less. Why do we hold Gibson to a different standard?

On innovation -- they've never stopped innovating, just not every innovation they've come up with has been a winner in the market. They get bashed when they try something new and bashed when they don't. While we're on the can't-win-with-'em thing, if Gibson prices started dropping, the same people complaining now would say this is proof of how much trouble they're in and how bad the QC is, etc., etc., etc. It's enough to give a company a complex...