Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Has anyone taken the time to really look at this?

daveinspain

By daveinspain
in The Gibson Lounge

Recommended Posts

daveinspain

daveinspain

Posted
Posted

Have you gone through the 20 pages of pics and explanations of what this is all about... Traditionalists and anti technology people wont like it a bit but if you take the time to see what this does it's really a very well thought out guitar.... Just sayin'.... I'm not a Firebird fan but how about doing this to a Les Paul? Check it out if you haven't already...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pippy

pippy

Posted
Posted

Well; I've just gone through the twenty pages and can say (with the possible exception of a 'six-storey-fall-safe-case') there is nothing new there that I require from a guitar.

 

I'm sure others will find otherwise but it's not for me.

 

I'm certainly not against advances in technology but I really, really don't need pretty much everything that guitar has to offer.

 

If I want to play an electric I'll pick one up. If I want to play an acoustic I'll pick one up.

 

2,000 pickup combinations?

 

I don't own an effects pedal so there's no appeal from that department.

 

No. I'm happy with what I have.

 

P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
daveinspain

daveinspain

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well; I've just gone through the twenty pages and can say (with the possible exception of a 'six-storey-fall-safe-case') there is nothing new there that I require from a guitar.

 

I'm sure others will find otherwise but it's not for me.

 

I'm certainly not against advances in technology but I really, really don't need pretty much everything that guitar has to offer.

 

If I want to play an electric I'll pick one up. If I want to play an acoustic I'll pick one up.

 

2,000 pickup combinations?

 

No. I'm happy with what I have.

 

P.

 

 

I hear you Pippy... Good point, specially the 2000 different sound combinations [scared] !! But... I do like the idea of not having to bend down to the floor to adjust distortion, compression, chorus, eq....etc. What i don't know is if the quality of the built in FX on the guitar are as good or come close to what you might have on the floor. One would have to sit down and play the guitar to know that. Sounds good on paper but does it sound good??? I'd be interested in trying it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Versatile

Versatile

Posted
Posted

Cans of worms at dawn !!

I admit to being quite prejudiced against this guitar concept...it seems to epitomise the computer/mobile/apps/digital age we are in

I enjoy effects where appropriate and go for mostly analogue pedals

I believe there is a danger of losing human touch and feel in guitar playing where digital models are the order of the day

 

I know it is exciting for engineers to push the envelope and beat the competition...and we will see more and more of this regardless

But I, at least for the present, will happily remain 'traditional'...... [biggrin]

:-({|=

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Silenced Fred

Silenced Fred

Posted
Posted

Read through everything, some of it seems cool, but....nah. If it wasn't 5500, they might sell more. It seems cool for recording, if thats what you do. For live, I live by the KISS acronym. Hell, I use that for recording too.

 

I'm not a luddite, but I'm a caveman and play like one. I'll admit it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shnate McDuanus

Shnate McDuanus

Posted
Posted

Oh yeah, I keep forgetting, because for me any guitar purchase is hypothetical...

 

$5,500 is way too much for my wallet. Oh well, the early adopters can have the first-run Firebird X's. Once they figure out what works and what doesn't, run the tech through a few more generations, develop the product further, etc., they might release the tech on a more affordable platform. That will be when I spring for it--maybe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ShredAstaire

ShredAstaire

Posted
Posted

Consider all the technology built into that guitar....$5,500 sounds resonable to me since many Les Paul's without that technology are in the $3,000-$4,000 range.

 

Technology costs money...I'm not gonna buy one but I don't think its an unfair pricepoint. They need to attempt to make a profit on this "revolution". :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky4

Rocky4

Posted
Posted

It doesn't look like a Gibson to me. Seems gimicky. It kind of reminds me of the old B.C Rich Bich, but with more doo hickeys. I like simplicity. I'm trying to remember the guitar Leslie West played in the early 80s that had effects modules you could plug into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky4

Rocky4

Posted
Posted

No, I most definitely meant the band... I want face paint, makeup and platform shoes [flapper]

 

It was a question on Jeopardy. This band got it's name from the acronym knights in the service of satan.

The answer.....what is Kiss

 

meanwhile.....back to the thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pippy

pippy

Posted
Posted
The answer.....what is Kiss

 

I don't know but "Keep It Simple, Son!" would fit.

 

And Dave; I wouldn't mind having a go with one but there's much too much for the likes of me to remember how to find it!

 

I'm certain for someone who uses multi-tones/effects/playing styles it might be a very versatile and useful tool of the trade but I'm just a mere amateur playing for fun.

 

P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Duende

Duende

Posted
Posted

I love these type of modifications and developments we are seeing in musical instruments. I am not sure about the Firebird (I haven't looked into it's specs yet), but am open to any technological advancements to the electric guitar in general.

 

This is just my own way of seeing it; but if i want purity, then I have my classical guitar. It doesn't get any more basic set up wise. You can turn up to a recital just with you and your guitar...

When I hold an electric guitar I go into a different mind set. I basically think i am holding a bastarized acoustic, so bring on any further advancements. msp_thumbup.gif

 

 

Matt

 

ps I love the idea of Q from James Bond walking Bond around the Gibson factory showing him all technology LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FAT BOY

FAT BOY

Posted
Posted

I have nothing against technology,but one day down the road kids will playing guitar's, like they play guitar hero. The Firebird X is more like the guitar of the future. And I think we are going to see more and more of these changes with in the guitar company's. After all it's the computer age. I'm an old man, and I like to sit on the porch and strum my guitar becuse that's what every body was doing when I grew up. I have a nine year old grandson who play's pretty good violin and fiddle, but when it comes to playing out side or on the computer he'd rather play on the computer. I think a guitar like the Firebird X would appeal to him,I think young kids now day's would eat that technology up. If their parent's could afford them?...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badbluesplayer

badbluesplayer

Posted
Posted

Its a concept guitar. Like a concept car. Its not supposed to be commercially viable.

 

Gibson needs to spend some money dreaming up futuristic guitars because they have a duty to the public to push the technological envelope. When you're at the top of your industry you need to do stuff like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChanMan

ChanMan

Posted
Posted

I'm not interested, really. The more whistles and bells, the more there is to go wrong. I'd hate to have the electronics go for one of the features I don't even use, and it take the whole guitar out.

 

Besides, I think it's ugly, and life is too short for ugly guitars (and bad beer). [flapper]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
djroge1

djroge1

Posted
Posted

I would say initially that this guitar is NOT for me.

 

However, we must remember that Les Paul himself was an innovator always searching for something new to add to his sound and guitar configuration.

 

Has anyone seen Les Paul use his guitar that had a built in 4 track recorder or loop or whatever? I don't think that hit on very big... come to think of it, I don't think gibson ever produced one for the consumer market (correct me if I'm wrong).

 

While I don't like this guitar personally, I think there can be a certain market. Also I believe that a company should take risks once in a while. I'm not sure about the timing on this one but that's their decision.

 

Go big or go home is a phrase that comes to mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
milod

milod

Posted
Posted

I wish I could afford one. I have guitars that fit most sorts of performance "needs," but... Gee, how many do I wanna haul?

 

Yeah, I think the new guitar would be excellent for a versatile sort of performance. It'd be neat to hit an open tuning for some stuff I've done for years, but haven't performed in public for years 'cuz it takes a bit too much to retune. Robot sounds good for that.

 

In ways I think a whole buncha variations on pickup/tone is overkill. That's assuming "pure" amplification. My only "objection" is that every amplification system will handle things differently and every room will deaden or reverberate differently and... but it does give some excellent general options and is, as I understand it, sufficiently programmable so a performer could have his schtick ready to go. For me... let's see, a 335 sound, a jazz box sound, a 12-string sound, a classical guitar sound, an acoustic six sound... and that plus robot tuning would pretty well cover my needs. But you'll likely prefer something other than my choices

 

I don't think this sort of guitar will replace anything current, per se. I do think it's an excellent additional option for performance. As for looks... not my thing in general, but I think you can't ignore that it's light enough to play all night standing up. And the LP isn't my thing, either. Never cared for it at all. I much prefer the SG, so go figure. <chortle> Actually either a 335 type or an LP type weigh enough as is.

 

BTW, RE: Les Paul himself... Les was such a great tinkerer that he could do darned near anything with anything to add stuff he wanted to his sound that nobody else could do. But... I've a hunch that in those days anybody else would find themselves in trouble trying to make the stuff work at all, let alone what he could do. Computers can do now for anyone what it took a master tinkerer like Les to do 55 years ago. That's why his "stuff" as a whole never made it onto the general market. But his ideas did.

 

m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...