Hello friends.
Being chasing non-reverse firebirds for months now, I've noticed a difference on what "studio" usually means. Les Paul and Reverse Firebird studio guitars are clearly not as "aesthetically luxurious" as the standard models. I've seen Studio versions for those 2 models that are absolutely minimalistic and plain, or if there are a few elegant details, the guitars are never as nice as their standard counterparts. The 2011 non-reverse Firebird is another story though. To me, it looks as gorgeous as a Non-reverse Firebird III from the sixties, and even its MSRP, at $ 2200, is not as affordable as the studio versions of other Gibson models. Isn't studio supposed to mean that the guitar sounds the same for studio purposes, but is not as flashy as a stage guitar? Thanks in advance for any input on this!