I was chatting to a guitar tech today about Gibson guitars

Teacherphil

I have a 2006 SG Classic, a 2014 SG Standard and a 2016 Firebird. They are all great guitars and I'd buy another new Gibson anyday. Now eyeing up a Les Paul tribute t.

Freebird

Some interesting views on here, which seem to be heading in opposite directions. Do we respect the opinions of professional luthiers who have had years of experience working on thousands of different guitars, or are they just biased fanboys the same as the rest of us?

I'm inclined to blame the internet, suddenly everybody became an expert in everything (me included) 

usedtobe

We're all human. Well, most of us! And we all have our favourites, and our prejudices.

richardhomer

Freebird said:

Some interesting views on here, which seem to be heading in opposite directions. Do we respect the opinions of professional luthiers who have had years of experience working on thousands of different guitars, or are they just biased fanboys the same as the rest of us?

As I pointed out in my earlier post - even 'Golden Era' Gibsons are not faultless.

My personal view is that their Custom Shop models are more consistently 'good' than lower priced ones - but in truth there isn't a universally accepted period where Gibson 'always' got it right.

It is a brand where you need to judge each instrument on its merits.

dindude

richardhomer said:

Freebird said:

Some interesting views on here, which seem to be heading in opposite directions. Do we respect the opinions of professional luthiers who have had years of experience working on thousands of different guitars, or are they just biased fanboys the same as the rest of us?

As I pointed out in my earlier post - even 'Golden Era' Gibsons are not faultless.

My personal view is that their Custom Shop models are more consistently 'good' than lower priced ones - but in truth there isn't a universally accepted period where Gibson 'always' got it right.

It is a brand where you need to judge each instrument on its merits.

I think that's a pretty good summary.

Sassafras

I had a '59 burst that was so bad I ended up chucking it in a skip.

Funkfingers

A major part of the disillusionment with Gibson guitars must be unrealistic expectations. We hear famous recordings. Some customers expect to be able to replicate those recorded sounds by purchasing an example of the same guitar design. That is not necessarily going to work.

GoldenEraGuitars

Freebird said:

And he said the modern Les Paul's are "overpriced rubbish", and the 80's & 90’s produced some of the best models he has worked on.

I was quite taken aback, as I thought the new plekked stuff was supposed to be good?

This is not meant to be a Gibson bashing thread, I'm just sharing what a very experienced luthier who is working at the coalface had to say.

I read your post again....

It seems that you are saying the tech has worked on enough vintage AND modern ("modern" to within the last year or two... I wouldnt class a 2002 LP as "modern" tbh) Gibsons to have the opinion that an older Gibson in need of work is better than a new Gibson in need of work. Im assuming then that an older Gibson may need a fret job more than anything? So, what are the new ones going to him for? A setup? Surely most chaps buying a £2,000 guitar would know how to do a basic setup?

Strikes me as odd tbh. Im guessing hes between 40 and 50 years old? Sounds like hes having a nostalgic moment about the "good ol' days"... 

For the record, the last few Gibsons ive payed were 2016 models and they were great. I also played a Fender CS Strat (rrp £3299) and imo it was no better than a Mexican one hanging next to it. This is all subjective and what gets really tedious is reading so many anti Gibson threads in a short space of time. I think this is number 3 inside 10 days. 

Heres an idea... lets pick on Stagg/Westfield/SX Guitars or even Hohner. Mmmmm, I suppose its easier to pick on a brand that half the guitar playing nation own, isnt it? 

Yawn.

Hoof

I've got a 90s Les Paul Custom which is very nice, but I bought it used and have had it refretted and a new nut fitted since then but the original fretwork wasn't great. The frets were very flat in profile and they had quite large gaps between them and the binding. When it was refretted the new frets ran to the edge of the fretboard so it plays much better now than it ever did before. That said, it may have had a bad fret dress before I got it.

I also have a 2016 SG Standard Trad Spec which has fantastically levelled and profiled frets due to the PLEK machines. But....the nut is cut too high so I've had that recut so it plays properly at the lower frets. The frets were also not really polished properly so it felt a bit rough until I sorted it. The fretboard also felt a little rough and dry. Intonation was nowhere near either. Not huge hassles but it's a £1000 guitar and my £600 Fret-King came set up and finished flawlessly. A less technically minded owner might have just sent it back or just suffered the issues. 

underdog

Freebird said:

Some interesting views on here, which seem to be heading in opposite directions. Do we respect the opinions of professional luthiers who have had years of experience working on thousands of different guitars, or are they just biased fanboys the same as the rest of us?

I'm inclined to blame the internet, suddenly everybody became an expert in everything (me included) 

I indeed trust luthiers, even more so if they one of the best in the business, that's why @FelineGuitars opinion carries weight with me, it just so happens its also the same view as mine, if his view was different then I would question my belief.

Freebird

lonestar said:

What gets really tedious is reading so many anti Gibson threads in a short space of time. I think this is number 3 inside 10 days. 

I'm hardly anti-Gibson, I own a Les Paul which is my most expensive guitar, and I'm looking for a few more too (J-45 & 335). I am trying to find a good one, so are you saying that Gibson has had consistent quality across all their product lines from their inception to the present day?

underdog

Freebird said:

lonestar said:

What gets really tedious is reading so many anti Gibson threads in a short space of time. I think this is number 3 inside 10 days. 

I'm hardly anti-Gibson, I own a Les Paul which is my most expensive guitar, and I'm looking for a few more too (J-45 & 335). I am trying to find a good one, [b]so are you saying that Gibson has had consistent quality across all their product lines from their inception to the present day?[/b]

Has anyone?

I think what is being said is that you can't put a blanket "such and such were great guitars between 1972 and 1994 only", and while the guy you had convo with sees a lot of Gibson's, the fact they are with a tech suggests he's seeing the "bad ones" which isn't a fair representation of the whole picture.

If he sees a 20 Year old Gibson it's likely that it's been played in and had any creases ironed out decades ago, so would be an unfair comparison to a new one Simone has taken to him for a set up 

Jack_

underdog said:

Freebird said:

lonestar said:

What gets really tedious is reading so many anti Gibson threads in a short space of time. I think this is number 3 inside 10 days. 

I'm hardly anti-Gibson, I own a Les Paul which is my most expensive guitar, and I'm looking for a few more too (J-45 & 335). I am trying to find a good one, [b]so are you saying that Gibson has had consistent quality across all their product lines from their inception to the present day?[/b]

Has anyone?

I think what is being said is that you can't put a blanket "such and such were great guitars between 1972 and 1994 only", and while the guy you had convo with sees a lot of Gibson's, the fact they are with a tech suggests he's seeing the "bad ones" which isn't a fair representation of the whole picture.

If he sees a 20 Year old Gibson it's likely that it's been played in and had any creases ironed out decades ago, so would be an unfair comparison to a new one Simone has taken to him for a set up 

Yeah, I've met Simone and he treats his guitars like shit, so I agree.

Voxman

You get the same nonsense statements with Fenders - all pre CBS Fenders are wonderful with a mojo you can't get nowadays, and everything else is rubbish!  I just don't know how the likes of Jimi Hendrix, Eric Clapton, Buddy Guy, Ritchie Blackmore, Robin Trower, Nile Rogers, Jeff Healey, John Mayer, Bonnie Raitt, Robert Cray, Yngwie Malmsteen, the Edge, etc etc ever had the barefaced gall to go on stage without a pre-CBS Fender round their neck - it's obviously why they all sound such absolute crap and never made anything of themselves! 

GoldenEraGuitars

Freebird said:

lonestar said:

What gets really tedious is reading so many anti Gibson threads in a short space of time. I think this is number 3 inside 10 days. 

I'm hardly anti-Gibson, I own a Les Paul which is my most expensive guitar, and I'm looking for a few more too (J-45 & 335). I am trying to find a good one, so are you saying that Gibson has had consistent quality across all their product lines from their inception to the present day?

Of course I'm not. But when a tech uses the phrase "overpriced rubbish" it doesn't sound like a very well thought out argument. Especially when he could have offered a number of reasons to substantiate his comment. If he's as busy as you say ask him what he thinks of other brand too. I've owned countless Gibsons from the age he believes isn't very good (mainly SG standards) and tbh I enjoyed every single last one of them. I've also just refinished a LP Junior 2015 and apart from changing parts for my own needs the basic guitar was flawless. 

stickyfiddle

The Edge is playing a couple of brand new off-the-shelf signature Strats these days, plus his Gibson CS-replica of his old 70's Les Paul Custom (which must be shit because it's not from the 50's). But he's only playing to about a million people this summer, so they must all be shit guitars

Surely we're all grown up enough to get past this "old is best and everything modern sucks" thing? Some old guitars are great, some were awful and have been modded and made better, and some are still shit. The same is true for modern guitars.

My own Gibsons are fantastic, but all the 2016 LPs I played in Japan last year were missing a certain special something - that last 1% that makes a guitar really special. That said, they were also really really good and really really consistent, which is a big step forward compared with Gibson of 10 years ago.

dindude

I don't think anyone's saying post CBS Fender is rubbish, yes Fender had there dodgy period in the 70's / early 80's but anything Fender from about '85 on is pretty damn consistent. 

The luthier in the OP also isn't stating that you must have a 50's Gibson, he's saying that new stuff compared to 80's / 90's Gibsons isn't as good.

Right or wrong, anyone who thinks Gibson are on the right path at the moment needs their head testing IMO. It's a company on its knees. 

stickyfiddle

dindude said:

I don't think anyone's saying post CBS Fender is rubbish, yes Fender had there dodgy period in the 70's / early 80's but anything Fender from about '85 on is pretty damn consistent. 

The luthier in the OP also isn't stating that you must have a 50's Gibson, he's saying that new stuff compared to 80's / 90's Gibsons isn't as good.

Right or wrong, anyone who thinks Gibson are on the right path at the moment needs their head testing IMO. It's a company on its knees. 

Absolutely, but I don't think overall quality of the core stuff is the issue, it's everything else - model range, super-cheap crap to feed the USA-made obsessives who can't afford "real" Gibsons, the endless model-year churn, unnecessary tech innovations answering questions nobody asked...

dindude

stickyfiddle said:

dindude said:

I don't think anyone's saying post CBS Fender is rubbish, yes Fender had there dodgy period in the 70's / early 80's but anything Fender from about '85 on is pretty damn consistent. 

The luthier in the OP also isn't stating that you must have a 50's Gibson, he's saying that new stuff compared to 80's / 90's Gibsons isn't as good.

Right or wrong, anyone who thinks Gibson are on the right path at the moment needs their head testing IMO. It's a company on its knees. 

Absolutely, but I don't think overall quality of the core stuff is the issue, it's everything else - model range, super-cheap crap to feed the USA-made obsessives who can't afford "real" Gibsons, the endless model-year churn, unnecessary tech innovations answering questions nobody asked...

Yeah that's true. Of the recent Gibbos I've had the 2016 SG was prob the cleanest overall build, but I did hunt for it, my issue there was more to do with the inherent SG design.
But the lower end stuff, they really are built down to a low base these days, and you've still got to search at the upper end to find the right one.

fandango

stickyfiddle said:

... unnecessary tech innovations answering questions nobody asked...

Hang on! We'd never have got the Apple iPhone ...

I think Gibson are to be applauded if they are trying to offer something new. Nobody was "asking" Fender for the Statocaster back in 1950-ish after Leo produced the Telecaster, but he went ahead made it anyway.

Just because someone likes the traditional heavyweight Les Paul doesn't negate Gibson's work in developing the weight relief to make their Les Paul's more comfortable to play for longer periods, which makes the LP more accessible to a wider variety of players.

What I would like to see EDIT: fender gibson do is introduce a volute to mitigate the head/neck joint issues, and to also strengthen the neck body joint, by reintroducing the long neck tenon across all their set neck guitars.

Like the Porsche 911, Gibson should have got the LP sorted by now. So having a range of 'modern' versions should be the pinnacle - with the innovations to make it the best playing tone machine on the planet - alongside the 'original' versions for those traditionalists. Oh, and Gibson have done that this year (2017) to give exactly that. Albeit without my volute suggestion. Now if they can nail those QC issues ...