bb Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Recently got my new Alpine White Studio. But when i watched closer i noticed that: 1. Gibson logo is not centered. 2. Serial number and "made in usa 2009" inscriptions are not deep enough, so they are hard to see. It's hard to take a picture in which the serial number would be seen. I found these two aspects a little suspicious. the number is 004291382 This guitar was bought at the musicstore in koln, germany (musicstore.de) Gibson owner's manual and factory checklist were present in the case, when i got my guitar. Right now i cant check its sound, and dont have another guitar to compare with Does it sometimes happen with other gibsons? I mean the logo and the serial number just like in the photos, or it can be fake? Well, i actually doubt that an official dealer would sell a fake, but i just need to know for sure if it is a real gibson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackened Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Could have been a refinished guitar. That would explain both the lack of a logo (painted over) and the numbers not showing up due to the paint partially filling it in... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackened Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I just looked at mine... it looks identical to your larget pic. The numbers aren't very deep and I have the same "orange peel" finish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noshuzbluz Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Ya my new Standard as I mentioned in my thread has the most opaque back and neck finish I remembered seeing before and the serial number is almost filled from finish stain/clear. I figured that's just the way they're doing now?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackened Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Oh, and your logo isn't really that off. Mine also looks similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 the serial# checks out: Your guitar was made at the Nashville Plant, TN, USA February 11st, 2009 Production Number: 82 http://www.guitardaterproject.org/gibson.aspx maybe the angle of the photo is playing a trick? that logo does look a little off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flight959 Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I agree with blackened. Maybe something happened in the finishing off and they redone the finish... From the two pics you posted the guitar looks genuine.. The logo is a bit off but remember the logo on the Studio is more like a transfer than an inlay on the standards. Another quality control issue.... Flight959 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flight959 Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Seriously... Maybe a new guy did yours.... First day in the job... Flight959 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max2343 Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 That's Frick-in unacceptable Workmanship from any Manufacturer. Let alone Gibson who claims they make the Best Guitars in the world, and charge so much. Whats wrong with People now a days. Accepting 2nd and 3rd grade Workmanship and paying for first class Top notch Ideals and Pipe dreams. It's sickening to me what most will get used to. Send that **** Back. Send that Factory 2nd back or Demand at least a 30% discount on your Paided price. It terrible that they let that go out the door and reach the Custmer with the thinking that if someone complains latter maybe we will warranty it. It's bothering you and if you don't do something now, You'll be stuck with it and end up really not liking the guitar. Here is my 2007. The Gibson Sticker logo seems well centered with the "B" and "S" just inbetween the centerline of the headstocks Mustache but the darn les in les paul isn't centered with the centerline of the trussrod covers top screw. That I let go since they didn't have an other one to replace this when it was new, but got a 100 dollars off because of it. As far as Orange peel in the paint. Shoot-in with too high of Presures and laying it on too heavy along with not thinning it right and not buffing it out long enought will get-cha that. But its a good way to paint Quickly when your forced to make a hourly Quota instead of doing good work. I have some that the paint was layed on soo thick, I still can't read the Serial #'s. Quality is just too hit and miss it sucks. You have to really inspect them before you pay and inspect and play many before you finally Decide. If your doing the Mail order thing. I think that where a lot of the small Defects are being pushed now a days, and you really must just stand your ground and be ready to send-em back until you get a good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loco Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 It's bothering you and if you don't do something now' date=' You'll be stuck with it and end up really not liking the guitar[/quote'] Agree 100%. Take/send it back! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bb Posted April 30, 2009 Author Share Posted April 30, 2009 thanks for the replies, seems that it's just that the quality at Gibson nowadays is lower than it used to be. well actually the only thing that was bothering me was to identify whether it is a gibson or not. If i was livin' somewhere near the dealer i would take it back, but there are no dealers in my country so sendin' this guitar back will be troublesome. To get to the dealer i'll have to cross borders of 2 countries. I dont think that these exterior finish flaws are worth sendin' it back if it sounds good. if it was fake or had some big problems, then i would try to get my money back or exchange the gutiar, cause musicstore has a 30day money back. I haven't tested the sound yet, cant do it right now but i will do it soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max2343 Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 thanks for the replies' date=' seems that it's just that the quality at Gibson nowadays is lower than it used to be. well actually the only thing that was bothering me was to identify whether it is a gibson or not. If i was livin' somewhere near the dealer i would take it back, but there are no dealers in my country so sendin' this guitar back will be troublesome. To get to the dealer i'll have to cross borders of 2 countries. I dont think that these exterior finish flaws are worth sendin' it back if it sounds good. if it was fake or had some big problems, then i would try to get my money back or exchange the gutiar, cause musicstore has a 30day money back. I haven't tested the sound yet, cant do it right now but i will do it soon.[/quote'] Wait a Minute bb. From your 2 photo's it does look like a real USA Gibson, and from the real thick paint and serial #'s not being completely visable and the fact that the Gibson decal isn't placed correctly all point to some usual usa labor issues. So if want to cross 2 borders just to exchange it for the misplaced decal, that's on you. Didn't realize your in Russia. If you do cross 2 borders this time at least look it over real good this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TinFish Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 I can't believe thats a 09' date=' that's some serious crappy workmanship. Bring it back Heres my 05 [center'][/center] My SG Special looks just like this, the dot over the "i" is touching the "G". I didn't notice until after I had purchased it and it isn't a big deal, but l see it so often. Why can't they center the dot over the "i" properly? Concerning the OP's Guitar; that is pretty disappointing. A Guitar like that should not make it past QC. I have seen some Gibson's where the finish is so thick it is hard to read the serial number, but how hard is it to center a decal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flight959 Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 I had to send my first LP back because there was a defect in the paint where the pins for the bridge enter the body. It was so minor I never even noticed it when picking the guitar up. I got her home and after several days of playing it that little minor flaw really pi55ed me off, after all I paid alot of money for it. I ended up sending the guitar back and Gibson sent me a new one. That was the biggest "guitar mistake" I ever made as she was the best sounding Gibson I have had played in that price range. The replacement was flawless and she plays nice too but the one I sent back sounded so much better... If I had your guitar I wouldn't worry too much providing she sings well. The guys here are right though, that level of quality should not be accepted, after all Gibson make the best guitars in the world or so they keep telling us! Contact Gibson Europe (Customer Service), they have been very helpful with me and if there are any issues with sending the guitar back to the dealer then they will assist. Even phone them just to see what they have to say about your defects.. Keep us posted Regards Flight959 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TinFish Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 I can't believe thats a 09' date=' that's some serious crappy workmanship. Bring it back Heres my 05 [center'][/center] My SG Special looks just like this, the dot over the "i" is touching the "G". I didn't notice until after I had purchased it and it isn't a big deal, but I see it so often. Why can't they get the dot over top of the "i" properly? Concerning the OP's Guitar; that is pretty disappointing. A Guitar like that should not make it past QC. I have seen some Gibson's where the finish is so thick it is hard to read the serial number, but how hard is it to center a decal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 the dot over the "i" is touching the "G". I didn't notice until after I had purchased it and it isn't a big deal' date=' but l see it so often. Why can't they center the dot over the "i" properly?[/quote'] It's a throwback to one of the earlier 'Gibson' Logo designs; when the "Gibson" script was cut from one piece of MOP (as opposed to having the dot 'free' and inlaid separately) the only way to get the dot over the "i" was to have it attached to part of the main body of the inlay - hence it is, and was meant to be - touching the "G". When they came up with the gold transfer logo they reproduced this earlier design - touching dot included. There have been a fair few different styles of Gibson logo; open 'b' and 'o'; closed 'b' and 'o'; no dot; separate dot (low); separate dot (high); touching dot etc...etc... If you have the time I'm sure you could find out all you'd need on the 'Les Paul Forum' website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noshuzbluz Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 the serial# checks out: Your guitar was made at the Nashville Plant' date=' TN, USA February 11st, 2009 Production Number: 82 http://www.guitardaterproject.org/gibson.aspx maybe the angle of the photo is playing a trick? that logo does look a little off. [/quote'] Cool website! Now I know my guitars birthday! Production #1 Is that the first one for the day?, week? Your guitar was made at the Nashville Plant, TN, USA October 22nd, 2008 Production Number: 1 Gibson: Nashville Gibson’s Nashville plant was opened in Tennessee 1974. All electric models and some acoustic models currently made at this factory. This facility has an average production rate of 220 guitars a day. Each guitar is built by hand and takes about 4 to 6 weeks to complete. Note: Most hollow and semi-hallow body guitars are made at a separate plant in Memphis Tennessee. This facility has an average production rate of 40 guitars a day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TinFish Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 It's a throwback to one of the earlier 'Gibson' Logo designs; when the "Gibson" script was cut from one piece of MOP (as opposed to having the dot 'free' and inlaid separately) the only way to get the dot over the "i" was to have it attached to part of the main body of the inlay - hence it is' date=' and was meant to be - touching the "G". When they came up with the gold transfer logo they reproduced this earlier design - touching dot included. There have been a fair few different styles of Gibson logo; open 'b' and 'o'; closed 'b' and 'o'; no dot; separate dot (low); separate dot (high); touching dot etc...etc... If you have the time I'm sure you could find out all you'd need on the 'Les Paul Forum' website.[/quote'] I see, thanks for enlightening me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esch Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 very informative thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bb Posted May 3, 2009 Author Share Posted May 3, 2009 Again about my LP. A few days ago i tested it's sound with peavey 6505 combo. I like the tone of my guitar, sounds tight and it has character (i don't think it's right to describe sound with words, so i wont be sayin' a lot). Lead chanel of this amp is awesome. But while playing through clean chanel sound seemed a little bit harsh. Also today played with a band through Fender FM 212 DSP. Sound of this amp is no math for a 6505, but still guitar sounds good and can clearly be heard in the mix. Never played a gibson or any other american guitar at that pice range, dont have much to compare with so i'm just telling about my first impressions about it's sound =) I hope it won't dissapoint me in the future =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azouts Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 I just got a Les Paul Traditional (an even more expensive guitar) with the same problem with the letters on the back. It also has other manufacturing problems with the finish at other areas and with the binding. Seems that Gibson's quality is not so good nowadays. I want to send it back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild_Rose Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 That's Frick-in unacceptable Workmanship from any Manufacturer. Let alone Gibson who claims they make the Best Guitars in the world' date=' and charge so much. Whats wrong with People now a days. Accepting 2nd and 3rd grade Workmanship and paying for first class Top notch Ideals and Pipe dreams. [/quote'] well said!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild_Rose Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 I just got a Les Paul Traditional (an even more expensive guitar) with the same problem with the letters on the back. It also has other manufacturing problems with the finish at other areas and with the binding. Seems that Gibson's quality is not so good nowadays. I want to send it back geia! did you order it from an online store? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fool on The Hill Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 This is not the first time i have heard complaints about Gibson, To tell you the Truth Gibson should not charge over 2,000 dollars for crappy workmanship. It has been happening allot lately, Yesterday while i was at Guitar center looking at some Les Pauls i noticed that 2 of the 09's that i played sounded like crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azouts Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 geia! did you order it from an online store? geia, yes from thomann.de Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.