Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Maybe things will return to normal?


Blueblooded

Recommended Posts

Stopped in one of my local GC stores yesterday to pick up a Soul Food pedal and what do I see hanging on the wall? A 2015 Les Paul Standard that is built like they were in 2014, but without the 120 Anniversary fret marker. The two employees that were in the middle of an inventory check were guys that I haven't noticed there before and didn't seem to know guitars well, so I didn't ask questions. I can only assume this means that all the reports of most players displeasure with these features has finally caused some changes for what I think are good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No guys, I know what I saw. It was new on their wall since I was in about two weeks ago. It was a Standard. When I saw the tag they had hanging on it and it listed it as a 2015 Standard and it didn't have the brass zero fret nut or wide neck, I took it down and looked at the back of the headstock. Sure enough it was made in 2015. You heard it here first...

 

Now if we can get them to stop with the crayon scribble on the headstock, put the nibs back on them and return their pricing to something reasonable (like 2013) we'll really have something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't care for the signature or hologram but neither were deal breakers for me. The Gforce should be an option rather than required. I don't mind the zero fret. The wider neck profile doesn't work for me at all since I have small hands, I didn't think it would be THAT noticeable but it was for me.

 

I have never insisted that everything stay traditional, heck, my LP has a Floyd (Shred LP Studio), but the 2015 changes were a bit much. I don't think I'd buy a 2015 with the wider neck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did it still have the crayon scribble and no nibs?

 

No extra width, no brass scrotum, and no creepy hologram, I don't know. More inclined to believe the two yoyo's doing the invetory went and tagged it wrong. Unless they're trying to slip quietly back to the former design with the least amount of controversy.

 

[unsure]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

and return their pricing to something reasonable (like 2013) we'll really have something.

 

If milk is more, gas is more, houses are more, utilities are more, taxes are more, guitars will also be more.

 

Having said that, I am not sure they are actually SELLING for all that much more, are they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A whopping 30 something percent increase?! Brass scrotums, mini me tuners and the rest of the rubbish doesn't cost that much more.

 

No, I fear we're financing a certain persons grandios scheme for the future. And probably yatching holiday as well.

 

(and those diamond collars for the big fluffy white cat cost a fair bit too.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If milk is more, gas is more, houses are more, utilities are more, taxes are more, guitars will also be more.

 

Having said that, I am not sure they are actually SELLING for all that much more, are they?

 

Yes, Gibson USA hasn't really raised it prices for at least 10 years. In fact what they have been doing instead of jacking up prices is to find cost cutting measures that allow the prices to stay about the same. When I first did the price checking and research on the 2015 SG Special I found that when you compare real world prices for a new guitar and case the 2015 SG Special at full price was actually $2 less than a 2014 SG Special and case at blow out price. The guitar I looked at was priced at $1079. Last years 2014 SG Special is selling for $881 on Musician's Friend . They are also selling the case for $199. So the cost to value ratio is about a wash. If you want to be picky, the new 2015 SG Special and case at full retail price is two dollars cheaper than the 2014 SG Special with Gibson Hard Shell Case at blowout price.

 

Along with the case, now even the SG special has a really deep lustrous finish instead of a cheap satin finish. Love it or hate it (I love it) you also get the G-Force tuner system. There is also a new brass adjustable nut and zero fret instead of cheap injection molded plastic. A fully polished fingerboard that thicker and wider and made of higher grade rosewood. The body is now made of one slab of mahogany instead of two or three cut offs glued together. Titanium bridge saddles. and real mother of pearl inlays instead of cheap plastic. There is no doubt in my mind that material costs are way up for Gibson 2015 line.

 

And all for $2 less than last years SG Special on sale...

 

Curse you Henry J!! :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If memory serves, weren't the cheapy Sears Harmony guitars plagued with a zero-fret? When I see zero-fret I think of the big hunk of wire between the nut and the first fret, they always used to call that a zero-fret, but it appears the Gibson variant is a different kind of nut? I know nothing about it, but when someone says zero-fret I think back to those old Harmony Strat-things every kid had...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If memory serves, weren't the cheapy Sears Harmony guitars plagued with a zero-fret? When I see zero-fret I think of the big hunk of wire between the nut and the first fret, they always used to call that a zero-fret, but it appears the Gibson variant is a different kind of nut? I know nothing about it, but when someone says zero-fret I think back to those old Harmony Strat-things every kid had...

 

A zero fret isn't a negative in and of itself. My Hofner 500/1 has one, as did McCartney's. Seems to help the intonation (the bass has a floating bridge with limited adjustability) without having to futz with the nut too much.

 

I don't like the combination zero fret/nut on the new Gibsons. IIRC, scottpaine has had issues with wear already and that was one of my biggest concerns. Again, IIRC, it's made if brass, a comparatively soft metal. The Hofner has a zero fret made of nickel/steel same as the rest of the frets.

 

All in the execution, but no, I don't think a zero fret belongs on a Les Paul either. Another solution to a problem that didn't exist... [rolleyes]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of us have been using, for a long time now, graphite nuts. They seem to have cleared up many nut problems people have been having with the softer nuts and the brass thing. Why don't they simply change over to them? It's a step foreward and is a viable solution. It was good enough for some of their SG's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of us have been using, for a long time now, graphite nuts. They seem to have cleared up many nut problems people have been having with the softer nuts and the brass thing. Why don't they simply change over to them? It's a step foreward and is a viable solution. It was good enough for some of their SG's.

 

Why should they? That would be a step backwards from what they are using now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should they? That would be a step backwards from what they are using now.

 

Well, I understand the intention of the zero fret nut was to make the action adjustable from both ends of the string's speaking length (for example if you wanted to adjust it for slide playing) among others that Gibson claimed. Admirable, but as they say, "the road to Hell is paved with good intention." Based on my initial concerns, later born out by several players (one right here and 2 others I know and have seen the guitars in question first hand), it appears that the execution was somewhat...wanting.

 

Is it truly a step backward to return to something that was proven and served guitar players well for 100 years or more? Not being a wise guy or putting you down. Seriously just trying to understand the reasoning behind your statement.

 

I honestly don't object to changes that improve upon the tradition, but change simply for the sake of change doesn't really do it for me. Changes that don't work or lessen what came before seem regressive and a "step backward," again...to me. I'm sure given time, Gibson can and likely will resolve the shortcomings, but would it really be such a bad thing to make it an aftermarket item for those who like the idea & want to try it?

 

I dunno...maybe it's me, but I just don't get it. Hard for me to get onboard with something I honestly can't understand the reasoning behind. Especially when it's going to cost me what they're asking for a new Standard. But to the guys who accept these changes, good on ya and I hope you continue to enjoy your guitars for many years to come.

 

I'd just like to see Gibson return to building the guitars that are familiar to most of us, and let us decide what bits & doo-dads we want to put on them, or not (as the case may be).

 

Whatever you play, I wish you many happy, healthy years playing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have only seen two people complain that the brass the zero nut is made from is too soft and wearing too fast. Gibson has sent those people replacment parts to fix the issue and I think both have reported that this did infact fix the issue. The one on my guitar has not worn in this way yet.

 

The hunk of plastic that Gibson used to use for nuts has only been around since the 60's. In the 50's it was a soft crappy hunk of nylon that comprised the nut. But lets assume that it HAD been used for 100 years. Under that logic we should remove the TOM and replace it with a non adjustable hunk of plastic. Works for all those acoustics since the dawn of the guitar, right?

 

I spent a good deal of time last night playing my 2015 SG with adjustable nut. The action is better than any other Gibson I have owned (and I've owned a lot). Much of this is dew to the low frets which are made possible by the adjustable nut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the problem with the Zero Fret was that they haven't testet it enough. Throwing a prototype on the market and let the customers find out what issues it has is not a really good idea. For the other changes I don't know, I don't dig the scribble, I don't care about G-Force but there is no problem can change it in a few minut's and then sell it. Still have to try the wider neck. And well yeah they wan't more cash now but they include a case. That's a big plus for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the problem with the Zero Fret was that they haven't testet it enough. Throwing a prototype on the market and let the customers find out what issues it has is not a really good idea. For the other changes I don't know, I don't dig the scribble, I don't care about G-Force but there is no problem can change it in a few minut's and then sell it. Still have to try the wider neck. And well yeah they wan't more cash now but they include a case. That's a big plus for me.

 

I agree totally with the nut being put out too soon but that does not make it a bad idea. I think a good hard chrome plating will make it look better and wear better. The new wide neck is the reason I bought the guitar. I have always loved the feel of a wider flatter neck and I love the feel of this one.

 

It's funny, I mentioned on here a few years back that I had sold all my Fender guitars because the necks just felt too skinny to me anymore. I was very quickly informed that the difference at the nut between an Les Paul and a Tele was so small that it was a silly thing to be complaining about. Now it's odd to me that many people switch back and forth between skinny Fender and wider Gibson neck but the new Gibson neck is (as I recently read in a reveiw written by a guy who had never played one) "Unplayable!!!!".

 

The LP 100 logo will be gone next year. I suspect you will see some more traditional neck shapes on the 2016 line but I might be wrong. One thing is for sure about Gibson these days. They never do the same thing two years in a row.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect you will see some more traditional neck shapes on the 2016 line but I might be wrong.

 

Yeah...chances are they'll add it to their roster of neck shapes. 50's, 60's, Asymmetrical, and Aircraft Carrier(2015) [flapper] .

 

(Played a bunch of 2015's, not a fan of the new neck personally).

 

-Ryan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have only seen two people complain that the brass the zero nut is made from is too soft and wearing too fast. Gibson has sent those people replacment parts to fix the issue and I think both have reported that this did infact fix the issue. The one on my guitar has not worn in this way yet.

 

 

There were more than 2. I don't remember the replacement "fixing" the issue for the one guy.

 

But of the many that had the nut, it seems about half of them find it fine.

 

Personally, I tried them, and what I found was the nuts do not allow the string to glide easily. The new tuning system worked well, but each bend or stretch of the string made it out of tune.

 

VERY MUCH looking forward to your reports. If I had one, I would be trying various things to make it a good nut, because the concept is great. I don't have one, but you have the same skills I do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...