Gibson guitars - Are the negative reviews fair?

Philly_Q

FelineGuitars said:

Philly_Q said:

Gibson's bad reputation is certainly based on fact, but it does get a bit exaggerated, to the extent that some people will say they're all rubbish, probably without even trying them.

It doesn't really make me consider the alternatives - Huber, Knaggs, Eggle etc - because they are hugely expensive and they lose about 95% of their value the moment you walk out of the shop.

Also, although many manufacturers make LP-types there are surprisingly few SG alternatives.

Will people stop it with that shit - it perpetuates the belief when it's not true. 

People who play a "better" guitar and absolutely love it, but won't buy it because of that dumb reinforced trope

Calm down, Jon.  You're right, it is a dumb trope and I wrote the second part of that sentence without giving it enough thought. 

I stand by the first bit, that those guitars are very expensive and I, personally, would have to think long and hard before shelling out that kind of money (with my playing skills some might argue I can't actually "justify" buying guitars at all).  I'm not trying to put anyone else off buying them.

richardhomer

Gibson has ‘always’ had quality control issues - but from any era, their guitars sound like Gibsons. 

Some other makers may have consistently higher manufacturing standards - but this is largely irrelevant if you want a Gibson guitar. Pick a good example and it could well be the guitar of your dreams....

TeleMaster

I’ve never had a single issue. 

Multiple R9’s, Standards, Studios etc. 

Bigsby

johnl said:

Very often the "Gibson QC is awful crowd" are the same people that are trying to convince themselves that they're just as happy with their Gibson knock-off (which is fine, I've got a fair few Grecos and Tokais knocking around the place too) but I rarely hear of anyone who actually owns a number of Gibson guitars complaining quite so vociferously.

I've bought 5 new Gibsons, made between 2014 & 2018. One was really flawless (an HP model), three had small issues which were a bit disappointing on 'Standard' models (i.e. not budget), and the other - the most expensive SG in the USA range that year - was very poor, most notably having glue spillage on the fretboard (but far from being the only issue). It should never have passed through QC like that, and had the worst QC issues I've ever found on ANY new guitar I've bought. 

Over the same period I've bought a dozen guitars from other brands  - not one has had QC issues like those Gibsons.

dbphoto

I have bought 7 new Gibsons over the years, all Les Pauls, and by far the one with the most amount of finer detail quality issues is my current R8 from Peach.  Which happens to also be the most expensive one.

But, I really don’t give a fuck, because it sounds, looks and plays better than anything I have ever owned before.  

Including ‘perfectly made’ PRS’s, Suhr’s, Tom Anderson’s and custom shop offerings from various other brands.

Sporky

TimmyO said:

So if as a brand they have more faults than others that's not an automatic 'avoid the brand' it's a 'don't buy a faulty one' 

For Gibson money - even at bottom-end blow-out prices - there shouldn't be any faulty ones. That's just shit management - every fish rots from the head. 

TimmyO

Sporky said:

TimmyO said:

So if as a brand they have more faults than others that's not an automatic 'avoid the brand' it's a 'don't buy a faulty one' 

For Gibson money - even at bottom-end blow-out prices - there shouldn't be any faulty ones. That's just shit management - every fish rots from the head. 

A good one can't catch bad QC from a bad one. You can still buy the good one. It's good. 

bodhi

dbphoto said:

I have bought 7 new Gibsons over the years, all Les Pauls, and by far the one with the most amount of finer detail quality issues is my current R8 from Peach.  Which happens to also be the most expensive one.

I experienced that trend over the course of owning several Gibson Custom Shop guitars vs. the same number of Gibson USA guitars - 6 of each to be exact.  I found it annoying and unacceptable considering the price difference, and don't own any Custom Shop models anymore (although lately I feel a fancy for one of them Peach dirty lemon R8's coming over me).

I also had a Gretsch Panther, which was just perfect in every way.  I found that quite unsettling in the long run.

Panama_Jack666

octatonic said:

Gibsons are like Tinder fuck buddies.
Mostly look better in photos and don't really do what you want, but the odd one is amazing.

Are you Mark Twain? Because that was magnificent. 

octatonic

Panama_Jack666 said:

octatonic said:

Gibsons are like Tinder fuck buddies.
Mostly look better in photos and don't really do what you want, but the odd one is amazing.

Are you Mark Twain? Because that was magnificent. 

I have my moments...

Sporky

TimmyO said:

Sporky said:

TimmyO said:

So if as a brand they have more faults than others that's not an automatic 'avoid the brand' it's a 'don't buy a faulty one' 

For Gibson money - even at bottom-end blow-out prices - there shouldn't be any faulty ones. That's just shit management - every fish rots from the head. 

A good one can't catch bad QC from a bad one. You can still buy the good one. It's good. 

Good QA would mean no bad ones. It'd probably save Gibson money too. 

Strat54

Philly_Q said:

FelineGuitars said:

Philly_Q said:

Gibson's bad reputation is certainly based on fact, but it does get a bit exaggerated, to the extent that some people will say they're all rubbish, probably without even trying them.

It doesn't really make me consider the alternatives - Huber, Knaggs, Eggle etc - because they are hugely expensive and they lose about 95% of their value the moment you walk out of the shop.

Also, although many manufacturers make LP-types there are surprisingly few SG alternatives.

Will people stop it with that shit - it perpetuates the belief when it's not true. 

People who play a "better" guitar and absolutely love it, but won't buy it because of that dumb reinforced trope

Calm down, Jon.  You're right, it is a dumb trope and I wrote the second part of that sentence without giving it enough thought. 

I stand by the first bit, that those guitars are very expensive and I, personally, would have to think long and hard before shelling out that kind of money (with my playing skills some might argue I can't actually "justify" buying guitars at all).  I'm not trying to put anyone else off buying them.

All guitars once over the £3k mark drop great chunks of money in the short term....Fender Custom Shop and Gibson Custom Shop are in the same boat. I actually think that in more recent times so called 'boutique' guitars have actually made a recovery in residual values as their popularity and brand awareness has increased helped by social media. The weak pound and ever rising prices of new instruments has certainly helped the used market too. 

prowla

I've got an SG and it is exactly what I expected - no issues.

One of the best guitars I've played is an old Les Paul; I'd quite like to have one one day.

I want a Flying-V (I debated buying one a couple of weeks ago) and also an Explorer.

I have an Epi EB0 bass and wouldn't mind a Gibson one.

57Deluxe

Gibsons are Ok - is just the silly prices they charge and then expect careless manufacturing inconsistencies to be accepted as part of 'The Gibson Experience"!

Teacherphil

I have 4 modern Gibsons. 3 brand new, All under £800. All internet buys without playing them. All play and sound great.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/K53yXNyK4s3bWZaCA

Moe_Zambeek

I’ve had lots over the years:

62 ri SG from ‘90 - pretty much fine apart from some over tightened screws on the pickup rings and neck tenon cover. Still have this one.

70sg SG Deluxe: steaming pile of sh*te that was an offence to the SG moniker. Sold it. 

LP R6: OK, intonation screw was bent on the A string so you couldn’t itonate it (and factory didn’t care); GG tech solved the issue by snapping the tip off the screw and leaving it there Returned it.

CS SG: Finish flaking off at neck joint. Sanding marks under the finish on the back. File marks in fretboard. Returned.

AY SG (mk 1): would not stay in tune. Sold.

Captain Kirk SG: Cosmetically very good; sonically dead as a dead thing. Returned.

LP tribute SG with sideways vib: flexing neck / headstock, off centre mounted vibrola, wouldn’t stay in tune, sounded great. Returned for store credit, Gibson said they’d take it back under warranty and try and fix it, but couldnt guarantee it would stay in tune after either...

Then there was the R9 where half the side dots had fallen out, the CS-339 where the neck pickup was DOA, a CS FBIII with vibrola where the neck angle meant there was basically no break angle over the bridge so none of the strings would stay in place. An SG with no bridge saddle slots, and so on.

Also of course a glorious sounding Bonamassa 335.

I’ve given up on them, they don’t even come into it when I’m looking for something, there’s always someone else who does it better. I used to get quite frustrated with the company as I was bought into the brand and wanted it to survive,  now I just don’t care about them anymore, that cultural link has been broken.

meltedbuzzbox

Moe_Zambeek said:

I’ve had lots over the years:

62 ri SG from ‘90 - pretty much fine apart from some over tightened screws on the pickup rings and neck tenon cover. Still have this one.

70sg SG Deluxe: steaming pile of sh*te that was an offence to the SG moniker. Sold it. 

LP R6: OK, intonation screw was bent on the A string so you couldn’t itonate it (and factory didn’t care); GG tech solved the issue by snapping the tip off the screw and leaving it there Returned it.

CS SG: Finish flaking off at neck joint. Sanding marks under the finish on the back. File marks in fretboard. Returned.

AY SG (mk 1): would not stay in tune. Sold.

Captain Kirk SG: Cosmetically very good; sonically dead as a dead thing. Returned.

LP tribute SG with sideways vib: flexing neck / headstock, off centre mounted vibrola, wouldn’t stay in tune, sounded great. Returned for store credit, Gibson said they’d take it back under warranty and try and fix it, but couldnt guarantee it would stay in tune after either...

Then there was the R9 where half the side dots had fallen out, the CS-339 where the neck pickup was DOA, a CS FBIII with vibrola where the neck angle meant there was basically no break angle over the bridge so none of the strings would stay in place. An SG with no bridge saddle slots, and so on.

Also of course a glorious sounding Bonamassa 335.

I’ve given up on them, they don’t even come into it when I’m looking for something, there’s always someone else who does it better. I used to get quite frustrated with the company as I was bought into the brand and wanted it to survive,  now I just don’t care about them anymore, that cultural link has been broken.

Kind of backs up the point that you should go and play them before you buy them

AlexC

To answer the thread title - yes. Because all negative reviews are fair. 
Say I went out and spent a fortune on a luthiered guitar and chose the wood for its grain and stated how many winds on the pick ups, etc and it was the greatest guitar I could ever want or need. Then I hand it to someone else and they shrug and say “I don’t like it.”
The question really is: are Gibson guitars worth what they charge for them... But then ‘value for money’ is also in the eye of the beholder.

Whitecat

Strat54 said:

Philly_Q said:

FelineGuitars said:

Philly_Q said:

Gibson's bad reputation is certainly based on fact, but it does get a bit exaggerated, to the extent that some people will say they're all rubbish, probably without even trying them.

It doesn't really make me consider the alternatives - Huber, Knaggs, Eggle etc - because they are hugely expensive and they lose about 95% of their value the moment you walk out of the shop.

Also, although many manufacturers make LP-types there are surprisingly few SG alternatives.

Will people stop it with that shit - it perpetuates the belief when it's not true. 

People who play a "better" guitar and absolutely love it, but won't buy it because of that dumb reinforced trope

Calm down, Jon.  You're right, it is a dumb trope and I wrote the second part of that sentence without giving it enough thought. 

I stand by the first bit, that those guitars are very expensive and I, personally, would have to think long and hard before shelling out that kind of money (with my playing skills some might argue I can't actually "justify" buying guitars at all).  I'm not trying to put anyone else off buying them.

All guitars once over the £3k mark drop great chunks of money in the short term....Fender Custom Shop and Gibson Custom Shop are in the same boat. I actually think that in more recent times so called 'boutique' guitars have actually made a recovery in residual values as their popularity and brand awareness has increased helped by social media. The weak pound and ever rising prices of new instruments has certainly helped the used market too. 

IME lately the name brand stuff drops almost the same amount %-wise as the boutique stuff but it tends to sell a little more quickly. 

You’re right though that “boutique” isn’t as bad as it was. Some examples do better than your average G or F too - World Guitars prices clean Krautster IIs at only about £400 less than new (£3k for a standard spec variant now) - and they sell super fast every time. 

roberty

All three new Gibsons that I bought blind had blemishes on them (two 2016s and a 2017 ranging in price from £430 to £2.5k).  The deals made it worth the money to me though, and they all play and sound great. Unfortunately you have to love Gibson in spite of themselves.