pippy Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 I'd buy The Gibson. No question at all. An analogy; Here's a pair of paintings. The one on the left was a computer engineered clone exactly replicating the one on the right. It costs $1,200. The one on the right was painted by someone called Rembrandt. It costs $5,000. I'd spend the extra and buy the Rembrandt. P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damian Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I am, and have always been with Pippy on this.............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versatile Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 So a guy (or girl or you) walks into a guitar store with around $5,000.00 and has his heart set on buying a Gibson Les Paul Custom. What he doesn't know is that the shop owner has a "Cloning machine" and is able to clone an exact replica of the Gibson Les Paul Custom that you want. The Only difference is that the Gibson Logo (on any branded part) turns out saying Gibsum instead of Gibson. We have all seen enough science fiction to know when you're cloning some little quirk happens. The Gibson LP Custom is hanging all nice and shiny behind the counter with a price of $4200.00 and the Gibsum is sitting on a stand somewhere in the store connected to an amp. The guy tells the salesman that he wants to buy the LP hanging behind the counter. The salesman knowing he will make a killing off the clone tells the customer all about the Gibsum LP clone and that it only costs $1200.00 (with cloned Gibsum case of course). What do you think would happen? My answer honestly would probably be that I might try the Gibsum, say it plays really nice but would probably go ahead and spend the money on the Gibson. Why???? This is a very interesting topic It involves Ethics,Taste,Honesty,Philosophy,Shinyness Tone It will take me some time to give a considered opinion V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bender 4 Life Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 The Bobcat also came standard with a 2300 CC engine, that you'd have to special order for a Pinto, they normally came with 2000s. The Bobcat had a different air conditioning system, upgraded interior package and optional leather seats. An odd and slightly frightening side-note......the Mustang and Cobra II used the Pinto Wagon frame, and the exact same rack & pinion steering sector......a 302 powered Cobra II with the same exact steering as a Pinto I know this because in my youth I worked in a mechanic shop and actually replaced a broken Cobra sector with one off an old Pinto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damian Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 It is, and has been hysterical and hypicritical that the two initial posters said and claimed that they would without question buy the Gibsum without any thought or doubt...And yet in previous threads have said with sincere conviction many times, again and again, in previous threads....." Never buy a fake, only a Gibson will do etc etc blah blah blah." And then, it's, " Gotta impress the new guy, um, duh, of course I'd buy the Gibsum, I mean, hello." HA Ha HA Ha......... They said and claimed this in regardless of the fact that their history shows that in the past that they VEHEMENETLY slammed ALL copies, fakes, and the like...Both also slammed ANYONE even thinking about buying or owning one.......But it was SO important for them to kiss the 'new guy' who is so smart that they ingnored their previous stated values in order to fit in with the thread.....and / or remembered their stated history....To lie in order to fit in ????? HAHAHAHAHAHA........Both posters admit they aren't even real guitar players...!!!! HAHAHAHAHA........They wouldn't be caught playing dead on stage or in front of friends holding a Gibsum...HAHAHAHA !!!... One said; " I guess I never understood the whole pay more for the label mentality. I've heard people fighting over Lee vs Wrangler vs Levis. They're all made in the same place, using the same denim on the same machines. They change the tags and the stitching pattern on the pockets." And this same poster says ' ONLY a GIBSON will do." HaHaHa !!! .............. ............ ..................................... .......................... ............................................................................. Ignorance is bliss for idiots..Anyways, no, Levis and Lees and Wranglers are made in DIFFERENT factories.....And NO, they do not use the same denim.....And NO, they are NOT made in the same place.......Ignorance is bliss, but is no excuse for sprouting drivel as facts...And NO, the factories making denim and jeans DO NOT use the same machines... Nor do the denim they use have the same THREAD count.....or post count..... My Gibson guitars are Gibsons. My Fenders are Fenders. Each and every guitar I own in my collection is made by who it is made by, and it says so. I own NO fakes, copies, and I would never own one. I pay what I need to for brand name recognition, but never more, and when I do, I know why.......I have more guitars than I can count, and none are fakes... IMO, it is insulting for one to buy a copy as stated in the thread, as it is insulting to me for one to admit that they would do so, and at the same time say that to do so is wrong...It is hypicritical, and a joke... And in that much, I find it funny to laugh at the few hypicrites who have posted thus far.....A COMEDY THREAD......Of course, the above does not apply to the posters who answered with REASON.......Go figure.. Ethics and honesty; to lie with intent is stupidity with intent....To be ignorent with intent is stupid....To buy or to admit that one would buy a Gibson fake, clone, or intentional copy is ignorant, stupid, unethical, and dishonest...IMHO....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted December 7, 2010 Author Share Posted December 7, 2010 It is, and has been hysterical and hypicritical that the two initial posters said and claimed that they would without question buy the Gibsum without any thought or doubt...And yet in previous threads have said with sincere conviction many times, again and again, in previous threads....." Never buy a fake, only a Gibson will do etc etc blah blah blah." And then, it's, " Gotta impress the new guy, um, duh, of course I'd buy the Gibsum, I mean, hello." HA Ha HA Ha......... They said and claimed this in regardless of the fact that their history shows that in the past that they VEHEMENETLY slammed ALL copies, fakes, and the like...Both also slammed ANYONE even thinking about buying or owning one.......But it was SO important for them to kiss the 'new guy' who is so smart that they ingnored their previous stated values in order to fit in with the thread.....and / or remembered their stated history....To lie in order to fit in ????? HAHAHAHAHAHA........Both posters admit they aren't even real guitar players...!!!! HAHAHAHAHA........They wouldn't be caught playing dead on stage or in front of friends holding a Gibsum...HAHAHAHA !!!... One said; " I guess I never understood the whole pay more for the label mentality. I've heard people fighting over Lee vs Wrangler vs Levis. They're all made in the same place, using the same denim on the same machines. They change the tags and the stitching pattern on the pockets." And this same poster says ' ONLY a GIBSON will do." HaHaHa !!! .............. ............ ..................................... .......................... ............................................................................. Ignorance is bliss for idiots..Anyways, no, Levis and Lees and Wranglers are made in DIFFERENT factories.....And NO, they do not use the same denim.....And NO, they are NOT made in the same place.......Ignorance is bliss, but is no excuse for sprouting drivel as facts...And NO, the factories making denim and jeans DO NOT use the same machines... Nor do the denim they use have the same THREAD count.....or post count..... My Gibson guitars are Gibsons. My Fenders are Fenders. Each and every guitar I own in my collection is made by who it is made by, and it says so. I own NO fakes, copies, and I would never own one. I pay what I need to for brand name recognition, but never more, and when I do, I know why.......I have more guitars than I can count, and none are fakes... IMO, it is insulting for one to buy a copy as stated in the thread, as it is insulting to me for one to admit that they would do so, and at the same time say that to do so is wrong...It is hypicritical, and a joke... And in that much, I find it funny to laugh at the few hypicrites who have posted thus far.....A COMEDY THREAD......Of course, the above does not apply to the posters who answered with REASON.......Go figure.. Ethics and honesty; to lie with intent is stupidity with intent....To be ignorent with intent is stupid....To buy or to admit that one would buy a Gibson fake, clone, or intentional copy is ignorant, stupid, unethical, and dishonest...IMHO....... Wow man don't hold back tell us what you really think! Now I feel bad as I assume by "The New Guy" you mean me. This has really taken a bad turn as I didn't intend for this to be a thread where people start attacking each other. The scenario I proposed was not supposed to be a question of buying a fake, clone, copy, knock off etc... and or the ethics of buying one. I just couldn't think of a way to set a level playing field between 2 different products without getting the one would be "inferior to the other because" reasoning. It also wasn't really meant to be specifically about Gibson but since I assumed most here own a Gibson I thought it would be the best to compare it to. Your feelings about ethics and honesty are valid and honorable. I think your point that "you pay what you need to for brand recognition is good, but never more, and when I do, I know why" Is an excellent example of if you're going to pay more know why you are paying for it and not just blindly doing so because something has a logo on it. Again, the intent of this thread was really to question if there were two equally well made guitars that magically sounded exactly alike and played equally as well but one was an off brand would you spend 3K more to buy the brand name. I think I caused a lot of confusion as to the point with my example and will be more careful how I state things in the future. * I think some good points so far are - If I was going in to buy a Gibson and I had my heart set on it that's what I would buy... I think this is the category I would fall into and think I have through watching this thread determined why I would. This was my goal overall to answer a personal question to myself as to why I would. * It seems to make a difference concerning if you were really more interested in buying a nice guitar and not a Gibson in particular. Also please take into consideration that the people you are calling out were following a scenario with parameters I set and there was nothing mentioned about knowingly buying an illegal instrument. Again, this was my bad as I should have been more careful of how I worded this. In closing I want to say sorry for those who are being flamed and ask everyone posting to please not start attacking each other. If this turns into something that is not productive, thought invoking or inspiring I will ask that Duane close it and remove it. Regards, Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChanMan Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 The Bobcat also came standard with a 2300 CC engine, that you'd have to special order for a Pinto, they normally came with 2000s. The Bobcat had a different air conditioning system, upgraded interior package and optional leather seats. An odd and slightly frightening side-note......the Mustang and Cobra II used the Pinto Wagon frame, and the exact same rack & pinion steering sector......a 302 powered Cobra II with the same exact steering as a Pinto I know this because in my youth I worked in a mechanic shop and actually replaced a broken Cobra sector with one off an old Pinto. /chuckle My dad worked for Ford. He enlightened me with the differences between the two models after the rear-end explosions on the Pinto's. He was not real happy as he "explained" (read: ranted). Interesting to know the inner details... might explain some of the price difference, but..... .... it was still a Bobcat/Pinto Andy, you'll likely find some folks haven't quite grown beyond the tantrum and name calling stage. Hang out here long enough, and you'll learn who the quality members are, and who are not. And to be sure, we have some awesome folks here. (I think you're gonna be one of them) You already know who the smartass is :D! There is a handy "ignore" feature you can use to raise the IQ and age level when you need to... Happy Tuesday man... and what a GREAT thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChanMan Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 I'd buy The Gibson. No question at all. An analogy; Here's a pair of paintings. The one on the left was a computer engineered clone exactly replicating the one on the right. It costs $1,200. The one on the right was painted by someone called Rembrandt. It costs $5,000. I'd spend the extra and buy the Rembrandt. P. Hmmmm I don't think it's a good analogy, as a Painting is an "only one on the planet" type of item, but your post HAS given me pause for thought..... change the guitars in question from a multiple run RI or something to a OOAK Gibson Custom ..... Hmmmm.... I'm not entirely certain that wouldn't change my mind, and I'd get the Gibson. Excellent post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Sorry Chan, but an original Rembrandt would likely go for well over $5,000,000, not $5,000, unless it was signed by Rembrunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 OK. An analogy; Here's a pair of prints : The one on the left Blah...blah...blahhh...$1,200 The one on the right is a silk-screen printed, dated, numbered and signed by the artist and originator of the original artwork, Andy Warhol. It costs $5,000. I'd spend the extra on the Warhol. Better? LOL! P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChanMan Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Sorry Chan, but an original Rembrandt would likely go for well over $5,000,000, not $5,000, unless it was signed by Rembrunt. Yeah, ZZ, I think Pippy was using it for illustrative purposes only. I'm pretty sure a OOAK Custom Shop Lester would top 5k too! Puts a different slant on it, for me, anyway. Comes down to exclusivity, perhaps. I've said I'll pay for tone and playability, and don't care about the brand... but in the case of a rare object, I'd rather have the real deal than the copy. Does that make me duplicitous? Hmmmm.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Yeah, ZZ, I think Pippy was using it for illustrative purposes only. Sorry, I confused the originator of that post. And I'm with you on wanting to have the original, maybe both! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 I guess I'll go back to the "patent infringement" deal of the 1970s. The guitars in question were virtually identical specifications to American guitars but clearly had their manufacturer/distributor name on the headstock and anywhere else such as stickers. There was no question one was purchasing a "Bleep" guitar rather than a "Fender" in terms of branding. They were sold as "Bleeps" that met Fender design specifications. In terms of the Gibson lawsuit of the era, without checking, there wasn't a question of illegal trademarks but rather that "look and feel" of the instruments was part of Gibson's patent - i.e., intellectual property. That same argument, by the way, came in big during the initial steps of the computer age as we know it in terms of software. It appears that in the guitar world that pretty well has ended; obviously some offshore companies functionally cloning U.S. guitars with impunity - often up to obviously illegal use of the corporate name with intent to scam ignorant consumers. In the computer world, it appears there are some companies that have gone the opposite direction, in effect having nonfunctional and non-marketed software of various sorts (e.g., for cell phones) that is there only for the purpose of a possible settlement in a lawsuit against a company that has functional software that is marketed. I dunno. I think clone makers and distributors that steal the actual trademark, whether jeans or guitars, are committing a national and/or international crime. The issue of "patent" in the area of "look and feel" has something of different issues involved. I don't think anyone with a '70s "patent infringement" guitar should feel at all guilty given that an Ibanez "Les Paul" of the era clearly sez "Ibanez." The issue is one of legal detail at the corporate level rather than a scam directed to distributors and end users. That's pretty much the same as a spreadsheet program that used the same quick keys as Lotus 123 but clearly was marketed as "George's spreadsheet program." Bottom line... If a guitar company clearly marks its instrument as a "George," and advertising sez "Our 'George' guitar is identical with Martin guitar specifications" and can prove it... I can see where Martin may have a patent lawsuit, but that consumers are not being scammed. I wouldn't feel at all guilty with a "George" guitar whether or not Martin wins a patent lawsuit. Where I see potential problems nowadays is long the lines not so much of a Les Paul "copy" illegally with a Gibson trademark, but rather in future "look and feel" lawsuits over robots and electronic guitars reverse engineered and sold as "works to Gibson specifications." For example, let's say I read what the new Firebird guitar can do; then reverse engineer software to come up with the same effect... where am I legally in selling a guitar that "does everything the Gibson does, but at half the price?" I do think the electronic guitar is a good idea. But it's only a good idea if it's on a playable frame that's basically a traditional guitar. That, for example, was kinda my objection to the Variax concept. My understanding was that the idea was fine, but the framework wasn't, so... it's still sold but not well. A Gibson electronic still should have Gibson playability and therefore more value. So... I dunno. <grin> Marketing is not inexpensive. HenryJ and company are in a difficult marketplace. Andy and Milod probably have about the same value as packages of chemicals were we to be melted down, but I certainly hope that our friends feel that our value somewhat exceeds that.... even as guitars I've kept over the years certainly have more than the value of wood and metal... at least to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zonkers Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Somehow the Rembrandt comparison doesn't exactly fly. Maybe if it was Jimmy Page's lost(stolen) Black Beauty, and a clone of it. How about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Somehow the Rembrandt comparison doesn't exactly fly. O.K... O.K....No-one likes the Rembrandt analogy. I didn't think we'd all be so pedantic...(he said, despite he himself being just about the most nit-picky person here!................ LOL!). What about the Warhol, though? One (a laser-scanned full-colour lithograph, say) is machine-made with the possibility of a near-infinite number of units made. The other is a limited-run hand crafted by the creator of the original design. One, surely, is more desirable regardless of the fact that they are both, to all intents and purposes, identical - visually speaking? (And an analogy is only intended to serve as an illustration of an IDEA, not an exact replica of a real life scenario). P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artie Owl Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Regardless of what we decide about clone vs original I think we need to see the bigger picture here. In 50 years there's going to be a bunch of people logging on to forum.gibson.com to ask about their 2010 Gibsum and asking about it's origins and how they think it's worth a fortune because it was made in 2010. I doubt Gibson customer service will be able to have much info on them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoConMan Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Ford Pinto and Mercury Bobcat... exact same vehicle, except for the grill and the Bobcat had a chrome strip around the back window. Pinto carried a Ford sticker price, the Bobcat carried a Mercury sticker price.... Why drop thousands more for the same vehicle? Was the name "Mercury" worth thousands? I stayed outta this thread for a reason - and I see it developed anyway without my input... Anybody remember the Cadillac Cimmaron? They took the Chevy Cavalier and added a "moonroof" power windows, locks, air conditioning, and power steering. They added leather seats and fancy aluminum wheels, along with fancy badges and pinstripes. They KEPT the pathetic 88-horsepower four-cylinder engine – which was Cadillac’s first since 1914. They also kept its clunky, cable-shifted piece-of-sh!t four-speed manual transmission - and marketed it for fuel economy. Doubled the price. Oh, and ANY thread that mentions Ed Roman is a HOOT!!! His rants are a blast to read - and I'll have to say I've been inspired to rant myself a time or two... http://www.edroman.com/rants.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zonkers Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 O.K... O.K....No-one likes the Rembrandt analogy. I didn't think we'd all be so pedantic...(he said, despite he himself being just about the most nit-picky person here!................ LOL!). What about the Warhol, though? One (a laser-scanned full-colour lithograph, say) is machine-made with the possibility of a near-infinite number of units made. The other is a limited-run hand crafted by the creator of the original design. One, surely, is more desirable regardless of the fact that they are both, to all intents and purposes, identical - visually speaking? (And an analogy is only intended to serve as an illustration of an IDEA, not an exact replica of a real life scenario). P. That's why I tossed in the actual guitar that got stolen from Page, the Black Beauty A one of a kind guitar that has some historic significance, like that Rembrandt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG FAN Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Oh, and ANY thread that mentions Ed Roman is a HOOT!!! I just think it's funny that he slams any guitar not made in the USA, then he slams the US made ones, except for the ones he endorses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted December 7, 2010 Author Share Posted December 7, 2010 I just think it's funny that he slams any guitar not made in the USA, then he slams the US made ones, except for the ones he endorses. Yes I noticed that too. Again, I never said I agreed with everything he has to say but at least he has something to say. Regardless of if you agree or disagree he at least speaks his mind and can make you think about something. If anything, it's entertaining if taken with a grain of salt. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SG FAN Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 More like a packet of salt;) Anyway don't take it personal when I talk about Ed Roman, I get carried away sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted December 7, 2010 Author Share Posted December 7, 2010 Conclusion to this thread: As I said this post was really a question to myself posed out loud. I hoped it would get some contributors and it did. I hoped it would make me think and it did. I hoped it would also make other people think and it seems to. I also hoped it would bring out the personalities of the people who contribute to this forum and I would say it has. So the answer to myself given the constraints of the scenario I created is:...... If I had $5000.00 and had my heart set on buying a new Gibson Les Paul Custom I wouldn't probably even bother to play the Gibsum. I would check out every Les Paul Custom they had, probably hit every other dealer in an hour or two radius and buy a Gibson. Why? Because that's what I wanted. Pretty simple. My minds made up. If I did try the Gibsum by chance even though it was completely identical in every way (except the brand chanman) I would most likely say yeah this is nice but the Gibson sounds better, feels better, is made better. I know this because that's what I would make myself believe. It's how I would justify it to myself. I think I would probably subconsciously make the Gibson sound better and physically play better. Now as far as reality goes If I were to ever spend 5K on a guitar (which is highly unlikely) and I was going to purchase a brand name guitar I can't think of any other guitar that I would want more than a Les Paul Deluxe BUT I wouldn't buy a new one. If I were in the 5K territory I would be finding the oldest coolest Custom I could find for the money. It would definitely be a Kalamazoo pre 1980's. Why? because they were made by the original Gibson people that had been doing it for years. They weren't CNC'd, they each had there own little quirks. They were made with old growth woods. They were fairly limited in number. It would most likely be played to death and broken in. Have some battle scars. Unknown history. Voodoo, Mojo and such. It would sound and feel better to me because that's the way I want it to be! That being said to this date the most I've spent on a new guitar was about $1100.00 for a Gibson SG 62 reissue. Surprisingly enough it was and still is one of my least favorite Gibson guitars concerning looks. I just have never dug the look of them but man it plays and sounds good! I wasn't even looking for a guitar when I bought it and if I were I definitely wouldn't have been out to buy an SG. (No offense to the SG Fans) I picked it up as a flook just to pass some time and ended up being so blown away by it I bought it that night after work. Out of all my guitars it gets played the most. It's a great guitar and at a reasonable price point. Up to that point I had never in my life spent over 500.00 on a guitar ever. That was about 5 years ago. The most expensive guitar I own I paid $1700.00 for and it is a Gibson Walnut E2. It's the guitar I wanted for many years. Honestly I don't play it that much but I think its cool and I felt like I got a decent deal and it's something you don't generally see hanging in Guitar Center every day. I pretty much have a personal limit on what I would pay for a guitar. It's my own limit because it gets very hard for me to justify. Everyone has there own limit in one way or another and their own justifications and reasoning. As long as they feel good about what they got. Finally, (yes there is an end to this) What I really learned from this post is how important communication is and how things can be misconstrued or taken in a complete opposite direction just from how you state something. This is valuable to me because I have to communicate via-emails to people I work with everyday that are spread out across the globe. With that I say thanks to all who have contributed and continue to do so in the future. I will be starting a new post that I believe will be a bit more fun. Hope you guys contribute there as well. Regards, Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duende Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Ed Roman is right in my opinion, if the info is accurate in his rant about what is deemed as 'hand made' by these brands... http://www.edroman.c...ts/handmade.htm Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted December 7, 2010 Author Share Posted December 7, 2010 More like a packet of salt;) Anyway don't take it personal when I talk about Ed Roman, I get carried away sometimes. Not at all. Like I said I don't know the guy or owe the guy. Your welcome to your opinion and I'm glad you shared it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djroge1 Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 He would go visit the Gibsum forum and ask "is this a real of fake Gibsum?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.