Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Slagging Gibson Off Seems to be a Global Pastime!


IanHenry

Recommended Posts

I guess that to me a good Epi properly set up and played with a bit of messing around with it sounds better than a Taylor. Again, that's "to me."

 

Martins in ways are increasingly appealing to me even with the particle board backs and sides.

 

But the real deal is "what guitar helps you play and sound like what you wanna do."

 

I don't do that well with an LP; I don't care for Fender necks. (My younger of two brothers, twice my size and 28 years younger, loves his LPs, Gibson and Epi.) If Gibson came out with an updated CF100e I might try to sell my soul if necessary - and frankly until then, I am happier with my inexpensive Epi PR5e and it's plywood everything because it handles weather where I am quite well and "fits" for what I do about half the time. I'm not all that comfortable with a big box, nor with some other shapes.

 

But... in all seriousness, I'm most comfortable with a guitar roughly like a 175. Overall the Gibson concept is about 70 percent of what I like in a guitar. Then 20 percent about any decently designed 12 since I don't try to get half as fancy on 'em for picking, and then 10 percent classical. For what it's worth, I think the basic Gibson design of the 175 - now also on the high-end Epi version, Eastman and a few others, is far more likely to make good music for me than a gold-plated hand-made anything of different shape or concept. That's to me the important thing on a guitar.

 

I think some anti-Gibson commentary about QC may be valid, but I don't care to harp on that unless I'm looking at guitars coming immediately off the line.

 

Criticism that I think more valid is that a new all-wood guitar may be more sensitive to variations in climate and humidity than some others, and Gibson is just that regardless that it's one of the the least expensive or one of the most expensive.

 

In fact, that was basically the "taylor" argument I got some months ago: The bolt on neck is easier to mess with and reset than the Gibson, and this country can get a bit wild with humidity at altitude. I think that may be a half decent argument, but unless well-amplified as an AE, I think Taylors sound tinny.

 

So I keep thinking that some complaints are a matter of unrealistic expectations of a hand finished instrument, unrealistic failure to recognize the effect of humidity/altitude, opposition from those "vested" in other brands, or falling into the appeal of dissing the big guy.

 

You'll notice, for example, you won't hear me saying that all LPs are crap, because I recognize that many folks love them in some or all of their myriad of variations. Ditto Strats, and I actually tend to dislike them as instruments regardless that some folks love 'em. Why? It's because a 90-percent well-designed guitar that meets the playing feel and needs of a decent guitarist can always be refined a bit; a poorly designed instrument is a much greater problem.

 

And... for what it's worth, I happen to tend to prefer many Gibson designs to many of other major quality instruments - and IMHO the Epi Masterbuilt flattops were/are a major step up from Martin fiberboard instruments and/or a bolt-on neck. And the Gibson flattops well above that.

 

m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've owned a few perfect Gibsons, three of which were from the much maligned Norlin Years, believe it or not.

 

The more recent ones usually have a flaw or three but I like them better than anything else that's out there.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've owned a few perfect Gibsons, three of which were from the much maligned Norlin Years, believe it or not.

 

The more recent ones usually have a flaw or three but I like them better than anything else that's out there.

 

Yeah, I have 2 great "Norlin Era" Les Paul's as well. My 1980 Custom, and 1976 Deluxe!

They're both Great gutiars...but, "anvils" weight wise! lol No matter...I have neoprene

bass straps, for both. Those work like a charm. [thumbup]

 

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but aren't real Les Pauls supposed to weigh a ton? What's with this namby pamby weight relief stuff?:rolleyes:

 

I suppose my old Studio has some sort of holes drilled in it but I think they filled them up with lead.

 

You know, Steve, they were always heavy...but, my 2 Norlin Era versions are WAY heavy, even by

traditional "Les Paul" standards, in the '50 and '60's. When I was a lot younger, I didn't

even notice the weight, really. But, I sure do NOW! LOL Still, with the Neoprene

straps, they're quite comfortable, now.

 

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen more QC issues with their acoustics, but their electrics still seem of a very high quality.

 

I've looked at quite a few of their acoustics recently (I was looking to buy) and they've all been perfect. I think tey are turning out some fantastic guitars at the moment.

 

Ian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...