Gibson Fooked

rossi

My G Force  battery was dead this afternoon .Crappy Gibson .I mean who knew you had to charge the battery .I had to use these new fangled windy things on the side.I mean it took at least 2 minutes to tune up .Two fucking minutes .

NelsonP

impmann said:

In all seriousness, the Chinese (and other far eastern nations) have some incredible luthiers - most the equal of Western guys. There is a perception (casual racism?)


The current guitars made by Fender Mexico are equally as good as those made in the US factory

All those crappy chibsons have a big effect on my perceptions of Chinese made instruments. 

Agree that the MIM fenders are very good.
MIM Taylor's are good too.

Wolfetone

From the perspective of someone in business, Gibson have made the mistake of not listening to their market but instead, telling the market what it wants.

Take the electronic tuners for example. If you take me as an average guitarist, I didn't know I needed electric tuners on my guitar until Gibson told me so. They were wrong, I didn't.

Take Gibson's QC for example. There is a wealth of feedback on the web regarding mediocre Gibson quality. Did Gibson listen? I have no idea but, they pressed on with unpopular spec changes to decades old classics and silly electrical gimmickry that the market didn't ask for. people would have welcomed a volute to help prevent neck snapping but no, they gave us wider fret boards.

In my view it comes down to arrogance and a disdain towards those that would have kept them right if they'd bothered to listen.

In sales, the most successful are the listeners. God gave us two ears and one mouth....Gibson should use them in that proportion if they wish to survive.

Gibson should listen incredibly carefully for their customers to give them the next compass heading.

TTony

clarkefan said:

The idea that US made guitars are inherently "better" is dead and buried.  Was certainly true 60 years ago, the world has moved on.

You mean, the US was the best at making guitars 60 years ago when only the US was really making guitars in any volume?  

As for the world moving on - most of it has, but there are still many US-based manufacturers who rely on not all of it have done so

Modellista

ICBM said:

modellista said:

blah

I don't think that's true.

What, all of it?

When Fender releases a Chinese-made instrument that sells for as much as their American-made ones your point will be proven.  Until then, not so much.

fandango

Wolfetone said:

From the perspective of someone in business, Gibson have made the mistake of not listening to their market but instead, telling the market what it wants.

Take the electronic tuners for example. If you take me as an average guitarist, I didn't know I needed electric tuners on my guitar until Gibson told me so. They were wrong, I didn't.

Take Gibson's QC for example. There is a wealth of feedback on the web regarding mediocre Gibson quality. Did Gibson listen? I have no idea but, they pressed on with unpopular spec changes to decades old classics and silly electrical gimmickry that the market didn't ask for. people would have welcomed a volute to help prevent neck snapping but no, they gave us wider fret boards.

In my view it comes down to arrogance and a disdain towards those that would have kept them right if they'd bothered to listen.

In sales, the most successful are the listeners. God gave us two ears and one mouth....Gibson should use them in that proportion if they wish to survive.

Gibson should listen incredibly carefully for their customers to give them the next compass heading.

Exactly. How arrogant it is to have a company design and make something that no-one had ever considered, that nobody knew they wanted, yet going ahead anyway? Yet which invention became the biggest game changer in the world of personal communications. So much so it caught EVERY other mobile phone manufacturer on the hop, and ushered in .......

... well you know what I'm talking about, don't you. Released in June 2007. Only eleven years ago. Pretty much everyone has one of them. Kids glued to it like a limpet.

Now consider what that same manufacturer did 14 years before releasing THAT award winner. The "Newton" spent 6 years in development and was revealed to the world in 1993. And this was their first stab at a personal digital assistant tablet-type thing. Tanked so much I bet you never heard of it. But then what did that company do in 2010? Yes, you got it. They released the iPad. Another gadget-thingy that nobody wanted one until it came out. And now everybody's got one.

But remember the Newton. One of Apple's big big failures. And for every success that Apple had there's also a failure lurking in their R&D department. Apple. Constantly pushing the boundaries of technology. We'd never have had the iPhone if they didn't try.

At least Gibson tried. The 2015 range could have been the biggest thing in the guitar world since Peter Green picked up an old unwanted Les Paul and formed Fleetwood Mac. 

You can't knock Gibson for that. If a company doesn't try to innovate, break the mould, create some ripples, they're dead (as in soul). But Gibson. Fvck me they're trying.

Look what everyone's doing. Talking about Gibson. The good, the bad, the ugly. You, me. We're talking about Gibson. Keeping the flame alight.

As a proud owner of a Les Paul Standard, I really hope they stay afloat, and find a way past the bullshit that heads their way. My Gibson LP plays great, sounds great and inspires me to get better. What more could I ask for? Other than people stop dissing Gibson.

Chalky

SimonC said:

ewal said:

So if you were thinking of buying an over-priced 335, would it be a smart move to wait and see?

It would be a smarter move to buy a Collings i35LC instead.

Nah. Can't beat a good Gibson 335. Collings doesn't quite do it.

maltingsaudio

Just pondering on likely buyers if it comes to it, what would the fall out be if Fender actually bought them? ( although my money would be on Uli Behringer)

Legionreturns

Fender wouldn't get the finance. They're already over stretched.

It'll go Chinese

Freebird

Rocker said:

Why are so many here against the auto tuners that Gibson fit to some of its guitars?  If it does not make a guitar too heavy or (especially) neck heavy (Gibson achieved that with their SG), what is the problem?

It takes the fun out of owning one Les Paul for each tuning 

Garthy

guitars4you said:

It 100% excludes the used market - after all Gibson. Fender, PRS, Martin etc have no financial interest in such a market place

Which is mad really. Car manufacturers make bloody fortunes from their 'approved used' stock sold from their franchised dealers.

Boromedic

fandango said:

Wolfetone said:

From the perspective of someone in business, Gibson have made the mistake of not listening to their market but instead, telling the market what it wants.

Take the electronic tuners for example. If you take me as an average guitarist, I didn't know I needed electric tuners on my guitar until Gibson told me so. They were wrong, I didn't.

Take Gibson's QC for example. There is a wealth of feedback on the web regarding mediocre Gibson quality. Did Gibson listen? I have no idea but, they pressed on with unpopular spec changes to decades old classics and silly electrical gimmickry that the market didn't ask for. people would have welcomed a volute to help prevent neck snapping but no, they gave us wider fret boards.

In my view it comes down to arrogance and a disdain towards those that would have kept them right if they'd bothered to listen.

In sales, the most successful are the listeners. God gave us two ears and one mouth....Gibson should use them in that proportion if they wish to survive.

Gibson should listen incredibly carefully for their customers to give them the next compass heading.

Exactly. How arrogant it is to have a company design and make something that no-one had ever considered, that nobody knew they wanted, yet going ahead anyway? Yet which invention became the biggest game changer in the world of personal communications. So much so it caught EVERY other mobile phone manufacturer on the hop, and ushered in .......

... well you know what I'm talking about, don't you. Released in June 2007. Only eleven years ago. Pretty much everyone has one of them. Kids glued to it like a limpet.

Now consider what that same manufacturer did 14 years before releasing THAT award winner. The "Newton" spent 6 years in development and was revealed to the world in 1993. And this was their first stab at a personal digital assistant tablet-type thing. Tanked so much I bet you never heard of it. But then what did that company do in 2010? Yes, you got it. They released the iPad. Another gadget-thingy that nobody wanted one until it came out. And now everybody's got one.

But remember the Newton. One of Apple's big big failures. And for every success that Apple had there's also a failure lurking in their R&D department. Apple. Constantly pushing the boundaries of technology. We'd never have had the iPhone if they didn't try.

At least Gibson tried. The 2015 range could have been the biggest thing in the guitar world since Peter Green picked up an old unwanted Les Paul and formed Fleetwood Mac. 

You can't knock Gibson for that. If a company doesn't try to innovate, break the mould, create some ripples, they're dead (as in soul). But Gibson. Fvck me they're trying.

Look what everyone's doing. Talking about Gibson. The good, the bad, the ugly. You, me. We're talking about Gibson. Keeping the flame alight.

As a proud owner of a Les Paul Standard, I really hope they stay afloat, and find a way past the bullshit that heads their way. My Gibson LP plays great, sounds great and inspires me to get better. What more could I ask for? Other than people stop dissing Gibson.

Apple didn't invent the smartphone, their revolution (if you really want to call it that.... although talk about inflating an achievement), was to drop the physical keypad which most previous iterations were still using. Although notably there were a few others who beat Apple to touch screen only input including LG. The first iPhone wasn't even that smart in comparison to the best at the time, Blackberry phones were the kings in the smartphone realm. The only clever-ish things the iPhone introduced were a cleaner interface (basically like all other computer style icon interfaces lets be honest, not exactly revolutionary), smarter external design, extremely clever marketing, making people part wth exorbitant fees for a phone.....etc etc... The iPad I'll let them have that, though only because everything else before it didn't really work plus I still prefer a laptop/computer, typing on a touchscreen is irritating and for some reason the screen on my wifes iPad doesn't like my ghost fingers.

As for Gibson, their big mistake with the example you used wasn't innovation, rather assuming everyone across the entire range had to have it full stop like Wolfetone said. I wouldn't have bought my LP Standard with one thats for sure. Would I have paid for it as an option on a LP Modern style guitar, probably yes. That's the error they made assuming everyone would want it. As for made in China it makes no difference to me, I've had two and still own one Chinese guitar and they were/are great guitars. As someone pointed out its to do with the price point companies spec them too more than anything else. That being said I think a Gibson that is made in the US will still carry some kudos for a while to come yet, whilst the world overcomes the idea of a genuine Chinese Gibson. Can't wait for The Fretboad 2218 when people will be arguing over whether a (insert really poor country here) Gibson is as well made as a Chinese one.....

tony99

fandango said:

Wolfetone said:

From the perspective of someone in business, Gibson have made the mistake of not listening to their market but instead, telling the market what it wants.

Take the electronic tuners for example. If you take me as an average guitarist, I didn't know I needed electric tuners on my guitar until Gibson told me so. They were wrong, I didn't.

Take Gibson's QC for example. There is a wealth of feedback on the web regarding mediocre Gibson quality. Did Gibson listen? I have no idea but, they pressed on with unpopular spec changes to decades old classics and silly electrical gimmickry that the market didn't ask for. people would have welcomed a volute to help prevent neck snapping but no, they gave us wider fret boards.

In my view it comes down to arrogance and a disdain towards those that would have kept them right if they'd bothered to listen.

In sales, the most successful are the listeners. God gave us two ears and one mouth....Gibson should use them in that proportion if they wish to survive.

Gibson should listen incredibly carefully for their customers to give them the next compass heading.

Exactly. How arrogant it is to have a company design and make something that no-one had ever considered, that nobody knew they wanted, yet going ahead anyway? Yet which invention became the biggest game changer in the world of personal communications. So much so it caught EVERY other mobile phone manufacturer on the hop, and ushered in .......

... well you know what I'm talking about, don't you. Released in June 2007. Only eleven years ago. Pretty much everyone has one of them. Kids glued to it like a limpet.

Now consider what that same manufacturer did 14 years before releasing THAT award winner. The "Newton" spent 6 years in development and was revealed to the world in 1993. And this was their first stab at a personal digital assistant tablet-type thing. Tanked so much I bet you never heard of it. But then what did that company do in 2010? Yes, you got it. They released the iPad. Another gadget-thingy that nobody wanted one until it came out. And now everybody's got one.

But remember the Newton. One of Apple's big big failures. And for every success that Apple had there's also a failure lurking in their R&D department. Apple. Constantly pushing the boundaries of technology. We'd never have had the iPhone if they didn't try.

At least Gibson tried. The 2015 range could have been the biggest thing in the guitar world since Peter Green picked up an old unwanted Les Paul and formed Fleetwood Mac. 

You can't knock Gibson for that. If a company doesn't try to innovate, break the mould, create some ripples, they're dead (as in soul). But Gibson. Fvck me they're trying.

Look what everyone's doing. Talking about Gibson. The good, the bad, the ugly. You, me. We're talking about Gibson. Keeping the flame alight.

As a proud owner of a Les Paul Standard, I really hope they stay afloat, and find a way past the bullshit that heads their way. My Gibson LP plays great, sounds great and inspires me to get better. What more could I ask for? Other than people stop dissing Gibson.

Has your Gibson got G-force?

fandango

Has my Gibson got G-force?

No. Mine is a 2014 year. The shop also pointed me in the direction of a 2015 Les Paul Less Plus. Both had the relatively rare thinner bodies, but the one was/is a Standard with better pickups, a better top, etc and wasnt that much more £££.

I didnt know much/anything about the g-force then and it didnt affect buying choice, but getting a proper LP Standard was the draw in this case. And talking of cases, i managed to blag the 2015-only gold case from that Less Plus, thus condemning that 2015 Less Plus to be less its birthday year clothes and instead to be paired with the traditional case.

For reference:

http://www.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Les-Paul/Gibson-USA/Les-Paul-Standard-120-Light-Flame.aspx

http://www.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/2015/USA/Les-Paul-Less-Plus.aspx#LPLP15DBNH1

ICBM

One of the major problems with the G-force is that it doesn’t work well with a conventional nut, so to fix that they fitted a brass one, but they made that idea too complicated as well and used a clunky adjustable design which meant widening the neck (although not the string spacing), which made the guitars feel very wrong to a lot of people. On top of that the brass proved too soft and had to be replaced with titanium. Just badly thought-through from the start.

It is true that there are a minority of buyers who like the wider neck - as there are a minority who like the gold case! - but even that works better with a conventional nut with string spacing that properly matches the neck. An adjustable nut isn’t a bad idea either, but they couldn’t even get that right.

And on top of all that they put a logo on them, which although intended to be a tribute to Les Paul, unfortunately looked like a small child had been let loose with a gold marker pen...

And as already said, the real problem is that they then applied all this to the whole standard range, whether buyers wanted it or not. The result was an up to 90% drop in sales according to some sources.

iseverynamegone

Wolfetone said:

From the perspective of someone in business, Gibson have made the mistake of not listening to their market but instead, telling the market what it wants.

Take the electronic tuners for example. If you take me as an average guitarist, I didn't know I needed electric tuners on my guitar until Gibson told me so. They were wrong, I didn't.

Take Gibson's QC for example. There is a wealth of feedback on the web regarding mediocre Gibson quality. Did Gibson listen? I have no idea but, they pressed on with unpopular spec changes to decades old classics and silly electrical gimmickry that the market didn't ask for. people would have welcomed a volute to help prevent neck snapping but no, they gave us wider fret boards.

In my view it comes down to arrogance and a disdain towards those that would have kept them right if they'd bothered to listen.

In sales, the most successful are the listeners. God gave us two ears and one mouth....Gibson should use them in that proportion if they wish to survive.

Gibson should listen incredibly carefully for their customers to give them the next compass heading.

But the problems are not down to the guitar business, they are down to servicing the debt for a poor acquisition strategy. 

As as much as we may like to think that this news supports the view that Gibson WC is poor and robot tuners are the devils work, it doesn’t ( noting both may be true regardless ) 

bacchanalian

modellista said:

ICBM said:

modellista said:

blah

I don't think that's true.

What, all of it?

When Fender releases a Chinese-made instrument that sells for as much as their American-made ones your point will be proven.  Until then, not so much

Chinese ownership could be fine. Volvo have improved as a brand since Chinese ownership. 
Both Fender and Gibson have a huge advantage over the opposition as they were there in the beginning. 

Philly_Q

It must be getting serious, they were actually talking about Gibson's problems on 5 Live Breakfast this morning.  They had an interview with Chantel McGregor about it.

richardhomer

Philly_Q said:

It must be getting serious, they were actually talking about Gibson's problems on 5 Live Breakfast this morning.  They had an interview with Chantel McGregor about it.

May be they could get John Humphries to shout at Henry Juszkiewicz on the Today Programme.

Philly_Q

richardhomer said:

Philly_Q said:

It must be getting serious, they were actually talking about Gibson's problems on 5 Live Breakfast this morning.  They had an interview with Chantel McGregor about it.

May be they could get John Humphries to shout at Henry Juszkiewicz on the Today Programme.

It may already be too late....

Perhaps he could adopt his alternative approach, where he tries to be all matey in those cringey interviews on Celebrity Mastermind.