Epiphone/gibson

[dwtdmiller]

For those of you who don't know.....Epiphone owns Gibson and they both come off the same assembly line w/ different headstocks!!!!!!!!!

[Guitar Chico]

Ummm.... ok.... great. They're not the same if thats what your getting at but I do agree that the difference in quality doesn't make the gibson worth so much more money. I thought I was done with this whole gibson vs. epiphone crap but I guess I still had some left in me lol. Ok I'm officially done with epiphone vs. gibson.

 

GC

 

BTW: Gibson owns epiphone, not the other way around.

[pohatu771]

Also, the only time they came off the same assembly line was from 1958 to 1969. The only exceptions are as follows:

 

Paul McCartney Texan (limited to around 250 made in Bozeman at Gibson Acoustic under Paul's supervision... the rest were made in Japan)

Lennon Casino (made in Japan, but assembled in Nashville)

Made-in-USA Riviera (made in Japan, assembled in Nashville... not sure of the story or how many, but they were priced accordingly)

Spirit, made in Nashville under both Gibson and Epiphone USA titles (with Gibson headstock) from 1982 to 1985

 

I can't think of any more, but there may be someone with more knowledge than me that can.

[Nelson]

Also' date=' the only time they came off the same assembly line was from 1958 to 1969. The only exceptions are as follows:

 

Paul McCartney Texan (limited to around 250 made in Bozeman at Gibson Acoustic under Paul's supervision... the rest were made in Japan)

Lennon Casino (made in Japan, but assembled in Nashville)

Made-in-USA Riviera (made in Japan, assembled in Nashville... not sure of the story or how many, but they were priced accordingly)

Spirit, made in Nashville under both Gibson and Epiphone USA titles (with Gibson headstock) from 1982 to 1985

 

I can't think of any more, but there may be someone with more knowledge than me that can.[/quote']

 

Along with the Nashville-made run of 250 Rivieras in 1993/1994 (NOT Japan) which were priced about the same as a then-current ES-335, there were also runs of 250 Texans (Bozeman), Sheratons and Emperors and there were also some Nashville-made Coronets and Super Strat style guitars ("EM" series? ) in the early 90's. I don't know where these people come up with these ridiculous posts. As you said, from 1958 to 1970 Epiphones were made in Kalamazoo but even with the equivalent models (examples: ES-335/Riviera-J-45/FT-79 Texan) there were often considerable differences in specs.

 

Nelson

[Ricochet]

IMO trolls are better left ignored...

[pohatu771]

IMO trolls are better left ignored...

Tell me about it...

 

After the brilliant composition that was the original post' date=' this is the e-mail I received this afternoon, from one dwtdmiller:

 

Marketing 101, Epiphone existed way before Gibson, do your homework...higher end product same assembly line. In the late 80's they decided to achieve better sale #'s marketing the same product under a different name.

 

Someone I managed to be the one that was wrong...

[RobinTheHood]

That must be one looooong assembly line...

[Nelson]

 

Someone I managed to be the one that was wrong...

 

I wouldn't give that idiot another moment's thought. The longer I hang around this place the more I realize just how many people are in total denial about exactly what it is they own when they own an Epiphone. Not that there's any disgrace in owning an Epiphone but I do wonder if they ever consider how some of the crap they spew sounds to someone who actually knows...and yes' date=' after thirty five years I think I can confidently say ...I know.

 

It's never enough to have an economically viable alternative to a Gibson. There always has to be a comparison and the reason is if there's a comparison then there must be some [i']basis[/i] or criteria to make that comparison. When you are talking about the current Gibsons and the current Epiphone there's not a single area where the quality level of materials or construction techniques are similar or comparable. Of course there are those dreamers who will say "mahogany is mahogany" and that scarf joints and laminated tops are OK but this is all validation bullsh!t perpetrated by the insecure to lessen the gap between the two products. As far as the idea of five Epiphones for the cost of one Gibson there are those mind sets who think the ten buck buffet at Old Country Buffet is a better value than eating a meal in a top restaurant or that veneered furniture isn't any different than the solid stuff or that the Chinese-made clothes at Wal*Mart are the same quality as what one would buy at Macy's. The hardest thing for these people to grasp is the idea that you do get what you pay for....because if there wasn't that difference between Gibson and Epiphones, Epiphones wouldn't be as cheap as they are and Gibsons wouldn't be as expensive....and Gibson is more than aware of that... but as long as the argument exists, Epiphone buyers will buy Epiphones and Gibson buyers will buy Gibsons because the two market demographics are as different as pizza from jello...but the argument increases the confidence in both brands to their respective owners. Cha-Ching

 

That's something else that a lot of people fail to grasp. This entire argument is a product of Gibson marketing. Gibson knows what they're selling and they know how to sell it. They know that 99% of the time the guy walking into a music shop to buy a Gibson is going to buy that Gibson and not even notice the Epiphones but the Epiphone buyer walks in, looks at the Gibsons and then talks themselves into the Epiphone because that's what they came to buy, that's what they can afford to buy and in most instances that's exactly what they should buy. The Gibson was never even a consideration but they feel a lot better if they can on some level equalize the two Not everyone, especially the typical Rec Room Warrior Epiphone owners require a Gibson. Anyone who has seen me golf knows that a $1200 Callaway driver is wasted on me...a rock tied to the end of a stick Fred Flintstone-style would be as much as my skills require...if the most critical playing you're going to do is annoying your neighbours on weekends then you're foolish to even consider a Gibson.

 

Frankly, I don't give a damn about this argument. It means nothing to me because I already own the Gibsons...and the Epiphones...My life isn't defined by either brand. But I have no doubt about the qualitative differences between the two brands, the marketing strategies involved and the psychology of each of the brands appeal. I'm also pretty well-versed on the histories involved with the two brands and it's actually pathetic to see someone reference Epiphone's (or Gibson's for that matter) history to qualify the current product. The current product has absolutely nothing to do with Anatassio Stathopoulo's company...or Chicago Musical Instrument or even Norlin for that matter. About twenty three years ago some Harvard types bought a brand name (or two) and decided to use those brand names on their products knowing the importance of name recognition. That's where any connection to previous histories end...But the current owners of the Gibson and Epiphone brand names will never admit to that because as long as the misconceptions exists there'll be this irrational and displaced passion about these two brands...and that passion breeds brand loyalty and sales... Cha-Ching.....end of story.

 

Nelson

[pohatu771]

As someone who owns Gibson, Fender, Epiphone, Squier, and Martin instruments (equally, at that...), it doesn't really bother me.

 

I'd really like more Gibsons, but when it comes down to it, I don't need them. I'm not nearly good enough to justify spending that money on them. Honestly, I feel a bit silly with a Martin.

[bluesman345]

I owned a Gibson ES-125, an SG, a Les Paul Deluxe and an ES-335TD at different times in the 70's. They were all used and the most I paid was $550.00. I also owned a Sunn Solarus combo, Fender Bandmaster, Fender Twin, Peavey Classic and Ampeg VT-22 at various times during the same decade. The SG was stolen, then later, the Les Paul Deluxe and Peavey Classic were stolen. I sold my ES-335TD in the late 90's (a sad, sad moment) and my Ampeg in the early 2000's.

I currently own an Epi '56 Goldtop, an Epi Zephyr Blues Deluxe, an Epi Valve Standard and a Vox AD100VT. I am very happy with all of this gear. As I get older (54), I lament my declining ability to move around the fretboard and to learn new things, as well as my fading sense of inspiration. My memory is also going, and when I play in church with sheet music in front of me, I really have to concentrate and follow the music, otherwise I can get distracted and lose my place (or worse yet, forget my licks).

But you know, there is an upside of a fading memory...as I play these Epiphones, I honestly feel like I am playing Gibsons, because of the feel, tone and vibe (30+ years ago is a long time). Sure, it would be nice to have Gibsons again, but at two grand a pop and up, I can't afford the negligible overt difference between them and my Epi's!!!

[Freuds_cat]

Gibson = made in USA. Does that automaticaly mean that the quality is top notch?

No, because while most of the Gibsons I've played have been very good instruments, I gotta tell ya I've played some absolute dogs.

 

A particular new Aus$3700 Thunderbird comes to mind quite recently.

 

The whole thing about "you get what you pay for" is garbage.

 

If you payed Aus$3700 for that T-bird then you got screwed.

What you rweally payed for was mostly the name on the headstock and the presteige that supposedly comes with it.

 

I agree comparing a buget concious brand like Epiphone to Gibson is a ridicoulous thing to do but Dont give me that whole "because its made in Asia it must be a lesser instrument" thing.

 

I can honestly say that I got what I paid for when I bought the Chinese Plywood EB-0 that I paid Aus$280 for.

Trying to compare that nice little cheapy to my Allen Woody sig bass is just as silly as trying to compare it to an early 70's Gibson EB-0.

 

Bottom line is this, It doesn't matter what the price is or weather the headstock says Gibson or Epiphone. You play the instrument and make the decision as to weather or not it is a quality instrument.

[Nelson]

 

The whole thing about "you get what you pay for" is garbage.

 

Now, if you paid for an Epiphone and got a Gibson I might agree with you but you pay for an Epiphone and you get an Epiphone...not a Gibson...because if you paid for a Gibson and got an Epiphone you'd be really pissed off and feel very cheated...see? apples and oranges..bargain brand and main line product..If what you're saying is true then everyone who buys a Gibson is foolish in doing so...now, I don't know about you but it doesn't even register if I see a top name preformer using a Gibson but let someone spot an Epiphone by the most obscure performer and someone gets so giddy and their little heart goes so pitty-pat that they have to make an EPI SIGHTING post to announce it. I guess the hundreds of top name professional performers who use Gibsons are all being ripped off paying for more than they're getting and the dozen or so obscure acts using Epiphones have some profound insight...right, keep telling yourself this nonsense..it's exactly what I was saying about the pathetic state of denial some Epiphone owners are in....I rest my case.

 

Nelson

[Freuds_cat]

As I mentioned if I bought that T-bird from that tried and trusted Gibson dealer for that amount of money then yes I would "be really pissed off and feel very cheated".

 

However if I paid $500 for an Epi T-bird and it was crap then I still wouldn't be happy but I wouldn't be as pissed as the first scenario would I?

 

Allen Woody played both Epi's and Gibsons and just supports what I'm saying. There is good and bad in both brand names. Just be intelligent enough to play the damn thing and make an experienced decision rather than be so simplistic as to believe that just because it says Gibson it must be fantastic.

 

No denial here mate, just, a fact is a fact is a fact. Its either good or its not regardless of what it says on the headstock.

 

Another classic example is the bass in my Avatar. Gibson totally screwed up when they tried to cash in on the 80's hair metal thing with their Explorer basses. Not many ppl who have tried both will argue with it. The Gibsons were 32" scale instead of the full 34", the woods were whatever were left from other manufacturing runs. They were hotch potch and are famous for having neck dive and dead spots on the neck. The wrong pups for the wood etc etc.

 

Epi at least did their homework and corrected the scale, neck dive, pups (T-bird + pups) and built them in the Korean UnSung factory which in my experience produces quite high quality instruments.

 

No state of denial, I've got/tried both and the Epi Explorer bass IS a better instrument and I'm not the only owner of these instruments who will argue this point. Have a look in the main bass player forums you will see the same remarks. Even the pro Gibson ones. Just a fact, sorry, nothin' I can do about it.