Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums


All Access
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About S.Ustain

  • Rank
  1. Back to the OP. Yes, unfortunately, many makers are trying to emulate the (godawful) automobile industry by making model year changes, and limited editions, special runs, etc., so that they can goad/force the consumer to buy something either to stay current or because they think it's special. To me, this is all nonsense. It does translate into closeouts, etc., once a model year is ending and the undesirable guitars remain. I never think of these as savings, or even good deals -- it's just that the final price is closer to what the guitar was really worth. If it were worth more, someone would have paid more. I buy used, not because I have to, but because there is a vastly greater selection of used guitars, and it is generally easy for me to identify which used ones are the great ones because they've had time to settle in physically, and become stable. I have bought new, but rarely. I usually find that all the NAMM specials, year-end closeouts, and GC specials are not guitars I want, and not worth more than the discount/sale/special price... which is really just the going price. To me, it's all about homework and patience.
  2. Yes -- the issue w/ the '15s has not been the quality of the build, but the bad design choices and bogus features. The adjustable nut is an undesirable, tonally deficient substitute for a properly cut nut. I'm guessing Gibson went to it because a good nut job requires expert handwork (= less profit) and can be a problem in the aftermarket if the owner changes string gauges. It's easier to just adjust the lousy metal nut that get a new one made -- something few can do properly. So it's a compromise design -- a step down for the sake of ease. On the other hand, I don't know why the wider fretboard got so much hate, as it's a small deal, well within the general ballpark, and I like it as much as the traditional width -- maybe more. The robot tuners are great if somehow tuning is difficult for you -- and let's face it, most players do a crap job -- but for a proficient player, they are a terrible joke. Don't people have tuners on their board, or a clip-on? And then there's the Les Paul signature... an insult to Les, and an eyesore. What were they thinking? I don't ming the '15s as I can reverse all of the above (except the signature), but why buy a guitar that is so compromised?
  3. II often wonder who buys the really ugly paint jobs. I guess there are enough people with weird/bad taste out there so that they end up somewhere... Personally, I like inventive colors and finishes; the problem with a large % of Gibson's attempts is that they just aren't much good, visually. I don't know who does their color designing (or that of some other makers), but they're not good at it. Taste is individual, ultimately, but reliable, effective color schemes are pretty possible to develop rather than just using the "do something weird/anything" approach. I'm actually tired of the old school finishes, now that every lousy Epi can duplicate the look with a paper-thin veneer. But most of Gibson's other color schemes are just bad. And there's a reason why you don't see blue finishes widely used on anything but guitars. Blame Scott Chinery, RIP, for making this ugly combo (wood/blue) "cool."
  4. Gibson notches its saddles. Sure, maybe some make it through un-notched, but they are exceptions. No, having strings find their own spot is not the way to go. It is generally the case that an exact straight pull from tailpiece to nut, which is what strings will do on their own, will not be optimum given polepiece location and/or fretboard edge, and spacing w/ other strings. It's easy to notch saddles properly, though easier to do it wrong, which is what will happen if you take the strange advice some have posted here. Just do the hammer method described in many places, and deepen the bass strings a tad, if needed, with a small file. Yours should have been done at the factory, and Sweetwater should have caught it, but there's a general level of carelessness, and this stuff happens.
  5. Hi

    I am looking for a gentle and SEXy man

    My profile is here https://sex-gibson.tumblr.com

    Kisses S.Ustain

  6. Poorly made ABRs have long been a reason doing an upgrade, but I think the newer ones are properly made and solid, so that may not be necessary. Kluson tuners have long been just plain terrible, but I believe that they are now pretty decent and so not longer require swapping for functional reasons. The one change I always make is from chrome to nickel (if the guitar is in chrome) because chrome is glinty and ugly, and nickel is lustrous and ages nicely. So my view is that Gibson now installs pretty decent hardware, so there is no need to swap it out. I think most people change parts because they can, and they often do it seeking results that may or may not actually accrue. Practicing is a more promising mod (that is, modding your playing by actually improving) than swapping out Gibson hardware.
  7. Sorry that I don't know if the G Force holes are big enough for good Grovers or Gibson or Kluson or Schaller vintage lookalikes. That's the question you asked. You can easily find the specs for specific tuner sets on the web, since everyone (who is halfway careful) has the same "does it fit?" question. I'm sorry not to have that info, but you can easily find it. Now, how can I turn your question into a post about me...?
  8. I don't know if it's a refret or a leveling/crown job, but whichever it is, it's very poorly done -- a classic "hack job." From the varying top contours of the frets --some are rounded, some flattish -- to the extremely poor job dressing the fret ends, it really looks like one of the really terrible fret jobs I did when I was learning how to do it right. I'm sorry to be so critical, but those pics show some really lousy frets. One reason why so many companies and shops are going to PLEK is because there's a real scarcity of people who can install and maintain frets properly. I think robots installing stainless steel will be the standard pretty soon, since human beings just cannot do this job (or, while we're at it, cut a proper nut) anymore. Sorry to see that. Hope you can make it playable without having to do a whole refret.
  9. Yup. They color-matched when new, and then aged to different colors. They're not the same plastic.
  10. People are quick to say they "hate" something when it's really merely preference. There are a few features of the 2015 models that I do not like (automated tuning, and the awful Les signature), one that I think is truly terrible (adjustable nut), but that's it. The slightly wider neck gets lots of criticism for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, since it seems just fine to me. That's the only feature of this year's production that is not easily changed, and it doesn't seem to be an issue. My guess is that most players have never really used a Deluxe and so think of them as inferior to HB models (rather than somewhat different, but great) and simply never give them a chance. Too bad. These are excellent guitars!
  11. S.Ustain


    Well, the word "torrefied" sounds classier than "baked" (or "roasted," which is also common) and therefore should cost more. Tonally, torrefied wood has a tighter bass, while baked wood has a more prominent midrange, and roasted wood his high-end chime... depending on tenon length, of course. Just kidding. I wonder if there really is an industry standard for this process. Now, back to my experiments on torrefied Richlite and fossilized walrus Corian.
  12. Can't tell for pix, but it looks like a legit Gibson that someone chose to upgrade/ruin. Unless Paul Gilbert has switched to a belt sander from an electric drill, and to a LP from his Fireman, this is almost surely the result of the Wprst Relic Job Ever Done. Ripe for a refin.
  13. Hard to estimate the UK price based on my experience here in the US where the availability is vastly better, but on the surface of it I'd say that the cost seems reasonable. The headstock break devaluation depends somewhat on the quality of the repair, as a lousy job is even more of a detraction than the loss of value in a well-repaired break. This one sounds like it was repaired well, in which case 1400 seems justifiable.
  14. If the situation in the OP is real, regardless of who write the post, the issue really is with the retailer, not Gibson. Get your money back and find another supplier who has the guitar you want. Delivering the wrong product is inexcusable. As for the heartbreak, well, most of us were way older than 12 when we got our first Gibson, and most of us earned the money we paid for it, and for many of us it was a dream deferred again and again. It's not the end of the world when it's hard to locate and purchase the guitar you really want. They don't grow on trees. I'd be bummed, too, but this is the real world and it's a good time to learn lessons about how to transact business and deal with disappointment on the way to what is a freaking big, big reward -- for a kid! I remember very well what it's like to be 12. You have to stop moaning at some point and swing into action -- that is, if you really want an awesome guitar.
  15. Oh, for under $1K I would check it out for sure. Visible repairs may be hack jobs, but also may be solid repairs needing finish touch up. I would happily pay $1K for a solid Classic that looks as good as that one, and has a good neck repair. If it's a crappy repair job, I wouldn't buy it at all. I think it depends on what you are willing to accept and what work you can do. I can readily undertake a finish repair, etc., so a guitar like this could be a great deal for someone like me. Someone who doesn't want to do their own repair work would want to avoid it.
  • Create New...