Fender or Gibson?

Sassafras

Sporky said:

Erase both, and see if whoever emerges instead manages to avoid the utter stagnation the two have imposed on the guitar world. 

I think the stagnation has been imposed by guitarists' reluctance to try anything other than the classic formats.

maltingsaudio

Seeing as there are enough better alternatives to either brands these days, I’m going for both, so we can breath some sanity and challenge back into the world of guitars.

TeleMaster

Sassafras said:

Sporky said:

Erase both, and see if whoever emerges instead manages to avoid the utter stagnation the two have imposed on the guitar world. 

I think the stagnation has been imposed by guitarists' reluctance to try anything other than the classic formats.

Yea I think that Fender/Gibson have responded to the market, so consumers have a lot to answer for here. Both companies have come out with new guitar designs and innovations (robotuners anyone), and they've pretty much always been shot down. 

Saying that, I do think the Tele, the Strat, the LP are just perfect designs. Aestheticly I absolutely love them. 

DrJazzTap

dindude said:

Judging by the guitars at Glastonbury, Gibson are pretty much erased anyway, certainly by the younger lot. Happens to be my opinion too.

Just you wait until Gibson release the "Cliff Richard signature Les Paul!" They have their hand on the pulse of the youth, it just happens to be the youths from 1967! 

For my money it would be keep Gibson. No Gibson, no heavy metal. As much as I love fender and the clean tones of Hendrix, and I agree that the QC on fender guitars is far superior. I would just give it to Gibson.

bertie

dindude said:

Judging by the guitars at Glastonbury, Gibson are pretty much erased anyway, certainly by the younger lot. Happens to be my opinion too.

younger lot and "music genre"  I think  - go to any "rawk" slanted shenanigans,  you'll find plenty of HH mahogany based guitars and not much else (thats "not much", not none) -  but not sure they'd be "very new"  

Dave_Mc

Can't do it. I like superstrats. There's a fair bit of both in there.

TTBZ

bertie said:

dindude said:

Judging by the guitars at Glastonbury, Gibson are pretty much erased anyway, certainly by the younger lot. Happens to be my opinion too.

younger lot and "music genre"  I think  - go to any "rawk" slanted shenanigans,  you'll find plenty of HH mahogany based guitars and not much else (thats "not much", not none) -  but not sure they'd be "very new"  

Yeah, plenty of Gibson and other HH guitars at Download. Glastonbury is basically pop and indie which is more the Fender thing. 

Zonular

Fender

Tannin

Sassafras said:

Sporky said:

Erase both, and see if whoever emerges instead manages to avoid the utter stagnation the two have imposed on the guitar world. 

I think the stagnation has been imposed by guitarists' reluctance to try anything other than the classic formats.

Not really. That is certainly a factor, but it is just the pre-condition. The old-school manufacturers - Martin, Gibson, Fender - are, of course, aware of the vague belief among some guitarists that a 1950s Strat or a pre-war D-18  is something special., and they play on that belief for all they are worth. Practically their entire marketing philosophy is based on that simple but effective strategy. Why? Because they see it as their only point of difference, as the one and only straw that they can grasp on to keep them afloat above the sea of other makers - many of them producing better products at a lower price 

And it has been a massively successful ploy: it has been swallowed hook, line and sinker in the Unites States, and pretty commonly elsewhere in the world too. The exact same ploy has also worked well for a whole range of other companies who  never even made old classic guitars but have been somehow able (with varying degrees of success) to pretend that they  are what they are not. Examples include National Resophonic (which has no connection at all with the famous pre-war National String Instrument Company) and Washburn (which is nothing at all to do with the original Washburn, which folded up in 1940). There are many others.

Meanwhile there are successful new companies which don't even try to pretend to be old ones (Taylor, PRS, Furch), and successful old companies which are perfectly happy to develop new ideas and move on from the past whenever good new ideas come along. Examples include Maton (which is older than Fender) and Yamaha (which is older than Gibson). Doubtless there are many others in the electric world (about which I know little).

p90fool

Well I do like a Strat or a Tele, but honestly it says it all right there in the middle.

(pic from my fallen off headstock collection )

Bigsby

Sporky said:

Erase both, and see if whoever emerges instead manages to avoid the utter stagnation the two have imposed on the guitar world. 

You only need to erase Fender to achieve that - without Fender there would've been no impetus for Gibson to produce a solid body until someone else came along and demonstrated the commercial viability of the idea. The fact that Fender got so much right on his first attempt was a significant factor in Gibson's quick development of the Les Paul, if someone else had not had such immediate success Gibson might've joined the party much later.

LastMantra

I always thought fender (bolt on neck etc) were a bit toy-like whereas Gibson were proper musical instruments. Maybe not exactly true but I like them both anyway .

KevS

I can't get it to appear as a picture.. Thought I would use this as an excuse to try and test pictures using Imgur..

https://i.imgur.com/rRfmSzH.jpg                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
But Both......Strats...Tele's Les Pauls,,335 Types..


    https://i.imgur.com/IomJGv3.jpg.  ;

KevS

Sassafras said:

Sporky said:

Erase both, and see if whoever emerges instead manages to avoid the utter stagnation the two have imposed on the guitar world. 

I think the stagnation has been imposed by guitarists' reluctance to try anything other than the classic formats.

I have tried lots of other guitars,,I would say most alternatives..
I tend to modify guitars a bit to make them work for me..
It ends up that Fenders and Gibsons are good templates for modding as many sizes are based around them..
Their copies are now all lawsuit and expensive secondhand buys..
Even with Fender,,I like the Fender Necks with Jumbo Frets..
I like a neck end Truss Rod,,I like a 9.5 Radius..
My taste is limited to what I find works for me..
Often companies copy what I see as the Bad bits of Fender and Gibson too..
People have an obsession with Vintage correct..
The Pickups often end up getting changed in my guitars.
Epiphones can be a good modding platform...
So much of the stuff you can mod with are based around Gibson,,Epiphone and Fender..
I have found the hardware on Squiers getting worse and worse...


I am liking some of the Eastman guitars at the Moment...
These have similar specs to Gibson though,,but with really good build quality..
I find the sweet spot to be the cheapest ,I have an Eastman T386 that is outrageously good..
Better build quality than Gibson.
I sent a more expensive near 2 grand Eastman Les Paul back...
I have owned many Gibsons,,I am not saying that to be trendily alternative,,
or I couldn't quite stretch to one financially...
I'm not rich by the way....

I've tried so many alternatives,,,I found them to have even more problems that the big 2..
Or they just didn't feel good to play...
I find many guitars have very low frets from new etc...
The only trem I can get on with are not locking,,not bigsby etc...

I looked one day and realised,,most of my guitars were Gibsons and Fenders...
It was a long process for that to happen though...

TeleMaster

LastMantra said:

I always thought fender (bolt on neck etc) were a bit toy-like whereas Gibson were proper musical instruments. Maybe not exactly true but I like them both anyway .

Whaaaaa? 

Roundwound

Gibson to keep for me, I find their guitars easier to play and more to my liking tonally. Gibsons lineup of classic models (electric and acoustic) is a bit more exciting.

I think Fender amps have to be viewed separately from the guitars. If included, yes it’s a harder call, although balanced by Gibsons acoustic and archtop range.

bertie

if they're so wrong and "stagnated"   how come so may other companies,  including high end "luthier" brands,  simply copy them or base their "not very far from the template"  originals on them ?  

Surely if you're going to lay "blame"  lay it at the modern builders that still copy Leo and Les' designs and dont change the original formula.................

Perhaps,  and this is the camp I sit in  - if it aint broke, dont fix it.

I love how a strat looks, how it feels and the sounds it make.  I love the looks of the les paul,  how it feels and the sounds it makes, that are different to the strat (and vicky vercky)

I really do not like the look of a lot of newer designed guitars (the new Gordon Smith for example) - thus I'll never try them

usedtobe

I honestly don’t get it.. I’m more a Gibson guy, but I’d hate to live in a world where fenders didn’t exist, anymore!