St James Posted November 25, 2010 Share Posted November 25, 2010 I gotta tell ya this is NO FIREBIRD I EVER SAW !!!! AND IS ALSO NO FIREBIRD I WOUOLD WANT !!!! There's is a thing called Nostalgia nd why is that ALL GIBSON Newest ideas in the past few years have been just old guitar's with NEW CRAP on em. These remind me of the OLDER RD's with the moog electronics but ya added even more useless crap on em Gimme a 60's 335 and a 50's PAUL and REAL FIREBIRD or TWO and I'll be set...ONCE AGIN along with the ROBOTS, DUSK TIGERS, MENACES, VIXEN's, NEW CENTURIES and the ZOOT SUIT SG;s this may be the worst idea since DROPPING THE REAL LES PAUL in 1961 and calling it an SG a LES PAUL CUSTOM. Call me old school or what ever but I prefer 40-50 year old wood , great old PAFS or P-90's a 50's or 60 Blackface Fender amp and the TONE of a REAL GIBSON will take you away to another world. What guitar player needs an ax that tunes itself, or has some many effects it doesn;t matter what kind of wood ya use? Sorry HERNY NOT FOR ME..... Just my 2 cents St James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versatile Posted November 25, 2010 Share Posted November 25, 2010 I gotta tell ya this is NO FIREBIRD I EVER SAW !!!! AND IS ALSO NO FIREBIRD I WOUOLD WANT !!!! There's is a thing called Nostalgia nd why is that ALL GIBSON Newest ideas in the past few years have been just old guitar's with NEW CRAP on em. These remind me of the OLDER RD's with the moog electronics but ya added even more useless crap on em Gimme a 60's 335 and a 50's PAUL and REAL FIREBIRD or TWO and I'll be set...ONCE AGIN along with the ROBOTS, DUSK TIGERS, MENACES, VIXEN's, NEW CENTURIES and the ZOOT SUIT SG;s this may be the worst idea since DROPPING THE REAL LES PAUL in 1961 and calling it an SG a LES PAUL CUSTOM. Call me old school or what ever but I prefer 40-50 year old wood , great old PAFS or P-90's a 50's or 60 Blackface Fender amp and the TONE of a REAL GIBSON will take you away to another world. What guitar player needs an ax that tunes itself, or has some many effects it doesn;t matter what kind of wood ya use? Sorry HERNY NOT FOR ME..... Just my 2 cents St James Hi Saint I do believe I and many others will totally agree with you V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oringo Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 I think Gibson trying out new ideas isn't a bad thing in itself, and this forum is one way they can guage the public's response to their new ideas. On the other hand, they ought to look back at their own history and see what happened over the years to some of the innovations they tried. When you come across an RD Artist, Firebird 2 or other guitars from their '80's built-in effects period, how many still have their original gadgets intact? Most of the time I come across them with the active electronics either ripped out or disabled, turning them back into "normal" passive electric guitars. That's got to mean something! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isettakurt Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 Gibson made in '81-'82 a Firebird II ARTIST CMT with MOOG top of the line electronics.In it's day it is what the X is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doctorbonkers Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I am in agreement with others on this board regarding the Firebird X. While I love innovation Henry, and am aware that the Triumph Bass and LP Recording Custom Guitar were ill received in their time but became beloved years later, this Firebird X has a big problem. It made the effects awkward to change settings while playing. It looks like Gibson did not study the fatal design flaw of the Westone Electra and other "effects guitars" that have come out over the years. Also, since the effects chain is locked in a certain configuration, it less versatile than any rack effects or bunch of stomp boxes. I love the Robot technology. But it is time for Gibson to make affordable real wood and not plywood/pressboard guitars at an affordable price for the average player made in the USA. How about some innovative body shapes that have class too? There are amazing things that may be done with PCB's and IC's when it comes wiring & pick-up configuration that Gibson could be doing. Spend your R&D money wisely on instruments for players, not on Baby Boomer investment grade, stuck in a case, models from the 50's, 60's, & 70's. Less signature guitars are needed too. We don't need guitars that are "pre-aged" as most of us taht actually play them will put plenty of mileage on them on our own, thanks. Figure out a way to bring down the price point of the Robot technology for a $600-$1,000 range guitar. That's my two cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmnc Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 Didn't Line 6 and Fernandes release guitars with such REVOLUTIONARY features many years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matbard Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 Didn't Line 6 and Fernandes release guitars with such REVOLUTIONARY features many years ago? NO. You completely missed the difference between the models, being too much busy(as you are) in bashing the product in multiple threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enzo Heavenly Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 I would still (and will) buy a Line 6 James Tyler Variax over this fire-thingy :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ne14t? Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 I totally agree I would agree for it to a certain extent, except the Robot Tuners at Epiphone cost, that's just dumb because now your outsourcing the parts to the cheapest bidder in order to turn a profit off the guitar, which means its going to be sub par for Gibson standards, thus leading to everyone complaining about there $600 robot guitar breaking. Its like adding a bunch of chrome decals and crap to a honda, its still a honda in the end no matter how much closer you made it look like a Mercedes, if you want the best you have to pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Barton Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 I would agree for it to a certain extent, except the Robot Tuners at Epiphone cost, that's just dumb because now your outsourcing the parts to the cheapest bidder in order to turn a profit off the guitar, which means its going to be sub par for Gibson standards, thus leading to everyone complaining about there $600 robot guitar breaking. Its like adding a bunch of chrome decals and crap to a honda, its still a honda in the end no matter how much closer you made it look like a Mercedes, if you want the best you have to pay for it. The new X definitely is not for me. I want the guitar to be a sweet player that won’t become obsolete the next time society changes the nature of computer technology. We have amps, pedals etc for all of that. Just give me a sweet guitar with great tone, playability, that will be as good 40 years from now as it is at present. However, Gibson has a lot of customers besides those who feel like me. I could see how the new X would be a great investment for certain kinds of players, members of cover bands that play a wide range of material, worship bands etc. For those people an X might be a good investment even if it is obsolete after 10 years of good faithful service. Those who love guitars, like me will probably hate the X (the fact it’s so ugly certainly doesn’t help either), but for some practically-minded working players, it may be the answer to their dreams, so for Gibson (as long as the quality remains as high as they claim) it may turn out to be a great thing. Only time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.