What do you think about current Gibson ?

[Flamed Froggy]

I'm a fan of Gibson since I'm a kid. I started to listen to AC/DC in 80s then all heavy metal band and that's why I have a SG and two LP (a Custom and a R9). Well, I don't wanna to spend your time with my poor life, I just show to everybody that I love Gibson guitars. But, some people around me have noticed that quality is lower than before and I have to say that it's probably true. I just wanna know if it's just a feeling or if this point of view is present anywhere else.

 

Please, don't send me any bomb. I repeat, I'm a real fan of Gibson, I'm just anxious about Gibson's reputation. I hope I will get many replies not only in bad sense. Be honnest and give your point of view.

[vmaster38]

Hey there Flamed Froggy. Well, I've purchased 2 brand new out of the box LP Customs this year (an '08 Oxblood & an '07 Silverburst) and I have to say that they are fantastic!! I really love 'em. Both are pretty much flawless cosmetically & playability wise. They are much better than the 2 Gibson's I bought in the '80's (an '81 Flying V & an '89 Les Paul Custom that I don't have anymore). Then again, both of my new guitars were from the Custom shop, so I can't comment on the recent quality of Gibson USA or any of the others. Keep on rockin'!!

[canon_mutant]

I don't think it's any big secret that there are some QC issues with Gibson. Though I didn't pay full price, even the $3700 AL ES-355 I just received had 4 problems not including the volute issue that has bugged the crap out of so many others. I've been a big Carvin junkie most of my guitar playing 20+ years and just recently got my first Strat. Did not have a single issue with either Carvin or Fender. All this said, I absolutely love this AL ES-355 not for what was wrong with it but for what it is . . . a gorgeous and extremely versatile musical instrument. It may well become my new favorite because of it's wide range of uses and tonal quality. Just wish it wasn't white and a guitar this expensive shouldn't have any problems when you get it, much less 4.

 

Real hard to keep a white axe clean . . .

[Plank_Spanker]

I'm also a big Gibson fan. The four that I own are superb in very way. Gibson is a mass producer, so they're going to turn out a few turds like any other mass producer. Gibson is a benchmark brand and the problem with Gibson is that the bar is set so high that any little flaw becomes a major issue with some guys. Add to that that they are commanding premium prices.

 

It's been my experience that most of the Gibson nay sayers are jealous and just parroting the internet noise of "Gibson QC Issues".

 

I could not be happier with the four Gibbies I own.

[vmaster38]

Well said, Plank_Spanker!!

[ChanMan]

I love my LP, bought in March of this year. Doesn't mean there aren't some QC issues, as others who have posted here will attest to.

 

 

 

I think they have a ways to go still yet before they ruin their rep, though.

[Murph]

My newest Gibson is an '03 J45 Rosewood acoustic from Bozeman, Montana that is the finest acoustic I've ever touched. My two electrics would be 75 years old, combined. (ones 46, ones 29).

 

But I'm looking, and played a new ES-335 last weekend (unplugged) that was a very fine guitar. The color was not my choice, but it was perfect in every way, acoustically ( I was on a schedule that day).

 

That dealer didn't have an R8, or a Traditional Plus, so my other two options are off the table there.

 

I like what I've played. That's why I'm looking.

 

Murph.

[NeoConMan]

Plank Spanker speaks for me.

 

The turds that escape are inexcusable, they are very obvious exceptions to the rule.

All it takes is a couple turds to convince somebody Gibson sucks, I guess they see it as a numbers game.

 

I had two Standards ('86 and '93) that had minor issues and I was a little bummed, but since then I'm good.

[cvansickle]

I have always loved Gibson guitars, but I'm not happy with some of the recent changes like the chambered bodies and electronics on the new Les Pauls. Then again, I'm not exactly in the market for a new one right now.

[Bluemoon]

Froggy,

 

I don't think anyone will flame you for your comment. In fact, many people will probably agree with you.

 

I can't really comment since I've never owned a Gibson before this year. I love my Standard. However, I can see why people get upset when their guitars are not perfect. Gibson charges a ton of money and for that kind of money one would expect their guitars to be perfect.

 

In a way, though, that is what makes their guitar so interesting. None are "perfect" because they aren't mass produced by machines. There is still a lot of artistry involved in their making. That is what makes them Gibsons. I have played a number of Fenders and there doesn't seem to be a ton of difference between the guitars. Gibson is another story. Each is very different.

[Plank_Spanker]

None are "perfect" because they aren't mass produced by machines. There is still a lot of artistry involved in their making. That is what makes them Gibsons. I have played a number of Fenders and there doesn't seem to be a ton of difference between the guitars. Gibson is another story. Each is very different.

 

 

That is part of the Gibson mystique - which is a double edged sword. Every Gibson guitar has it's own character. Gibson is notoriously tight lipped about their construction techniques and other tech info, and that leaves people to guess and present a sea of bad information about them.

 

No two Gibsons sound alike..................

[ChanMan]

 

That is part of the Gibson mystique - which is a double edged sword. Every Gibson guitar has it's own character. Gibson is notoriously tight lipped about their construction techniques and other tech info' date=' and that leaves people to guess and present a sea of bad information about them.

 

No two Gibsons sound alike..................[/quote']

 

 

Perhaps I can solve the construction mystery:

 

How It's Made- Gibson Guitars

[saturn]

I also think Plank-Spanker was pretty right-on. The bar is definately set higher for Gibson. Their prices add to this fact. But, it's supply and demand. It's no secret that people, like us, will pay more money just to own a guitar with Gibson on the headstock. Quality wise, there are plenty of guitars that are made just as well as Gibsons. But, they're not Gibsons. So they sell for less. This inevitably leads some people to start publicly complaing that Gibsons are overpriced, and has quality control issues, blah, blah blah. But, their great tone and looks keep people coming back regardless of these issues.

 

Also, consider that the Les Paul is a pretty tricky guitar to build. The carved back with a maple cap that has to be fitted perfectly on top. A set neck. Binding on most. On many other guitars, there's less that can go wrong.

[Plank_Spanker]

 

 

Perhaps I can solve the construction mystery:

 

How It's Made- Gibson Guitars

 

Ah, but that doesn't delve into the mystery of "weight relief". Gibson released the weight relieved guitars with pretty much zero press................and took major heat for it. There's a hundred different stories about which models are swiss cheesed or chambered.

 

Then there are the stories about which quality woods go into what models.........................

 

Lots of conjecture - little solid fact.

 

I'm definitely not slamming Gibson, but I can see where the noise comes from based on the lack of solid facts.

[UnGauGeD]

I totally agree with Saturn. Gibson is pretty much the face of rock. Every guitarist would want to own a Gibson in general. But I've come to realize that it's quality assurance might have suffered due to over-production over the recent years.

 

Having to pay so much for a guitar with the Gibson brand, I've found Paul Reed Smith to have better quality for money as of late. Sometimes even it's distant cousin from the East(Japan), Greco and Orville have proven to be of better quality at a fraction of the price.

[fingers galore]

I feel the quality has gotten better over the last couple of years. Even though some real crappy guitars still leave the plant. That is inexcusable. QC needs to step it up.

[surfpup]

Having owned a few over the years I don't think the quality is lower. It sounds like some guitars are slipping through QC that shouldn't. I guess I don't buy enough of them to have encountered it! Or maybe it's kinda like shark attacks - not very common but very noticeable when it does happen.

 

Anyway, assuming the thread is about current Gibson quality. The two I have now had no problems except for minor set-up issues. And I've yet to buy a any guitar without setting it up myself the same day so that isn't really a criticism. (Maybe the Plek machine will solve this).

 

Finally, price is a factor here as well. People have VERY high expectations for a guitar that costs $2k-$4k! But at the end of the day it's still hand made - and people are, well, human.

[NeoConMan]

Quality wise' date=' there are plenty of guitars that are made just as well as Gibsons. But, they're not Gibsons. So they sell for less. This inevitably leads some people to start publicly complaing that Gibsons are overpriced, and has quality control issues, blah, blah blah. [/quote']

Well, PRS was mentioned.

The one I own, and several owned by friends convince me they are second to none in build quality, but they will NOT replace my Les Pauls.

 

Carvin builds very good guitars from the few high end ones I've seen, but resale on them is sh!t.

 

Gibson is the KING of guitars, with Fender being up there close, due to the markets they OWN in their respective product lines.

Add the sheer numbers they sell, the popularity of the brand name, the pop culture knowledge of non-players, etc....

 

Nobody else is even close where a "legend" is concerned, and they are able to keep that going.

Lotsa great alternatives out there, some built much better, many priced better, but there's no "mystique" to prop up their values.

 

Gibson is doing a good job overall, I think much of the sour grapes is simply from people buying the wrong guitar.

Turds are out there, but a savvy buyer would identify and pass on 90% of them.

 

Pay attention before you open your wallet.

Buying mail order? Good luck!

[Thundergod]

Im happy with mine... and both are standard USA sh¡t... I dont own any custom shop stuff (yet).

[Flamed Froggy]

Thank you so much for your replies. I'm very happy that you understood I was a real fan. Actually I would like to buy a new one and I was wondering if it could be the moment. Thanks to you I know I won't be disapointed. I think you're right : some people are jealous and they tell bad things about our favorite guitars. Keep on rockin' guys ! And thank you again.

[saturn]

Well' date=' PRS was mentioned.

The one I own, and several owned by friends convince me they are second to none in build quality, but they will NOT replace my Les Pauls.[/quote']

 

Exactly. Living as close as I do to where the PRS factory is, I was among the first to become aware of them in the mid 80's. I've known several people that worked there and have known more than a few PRS owners over the years. I've never personally seen a higher quality production guitar. You'll almost never find a flaw in any one you pick up. But, after all is said and done, I still prefer the tone and character of a good Les Paul as do many others.

[Old Deadhead]

I think the QC on current Gibsons, and all guitars for that matter, is much better than a few years ago. I got one of Neo's buddies flamed up about a month ago on the SG site on that very matter. Most of us old geezers who've been around since the 60's remember some of the pieces of sh!t that was sold in the mid 60's up through the 70's. Finding a nice guitar was a lot harder than it is now. Crappy finishes, crappy frets, horrible setups from the factory, crappy electronics was pretty much standard fare. QC was not very high on any of the manufacturer's priority list back then. No doubt there were good ones out there, but you really had to dig deep to find one of them.

 

Overall, today's guitars are built pretty good. You can pick up a cheap Epi, Squire, Ibanez, Dean, or any number of others that will play decent, look decent, and sound decent for well under $400.00 these days. No, they are not the equal of a Les Paul, SG, 335, or even a Fender. However, they have caused Gibson and the others to put out much improved instruments today.

[retrosurfer1959]

I agree with much of what has been said here I think the quality overall is good it's a real icon and people are very particular about their guitars. IF somebody buys a new lawnmower they don't panic about any minute flaw they cut the grass. I think people have been complaining for decades about the quality and it's a real point of contention because it's a optional purpose. we all like to get a good deal and be able to make choices.

 

People are getting strange though how many times have you been filling the gas tank and seen people with a starbucks 5.00 coffee or a two dollar bottle of water complaining about the cost of gas. we expect perfection at low cost and wood doesn't always cooperate. if you want every guitar perfect and perfect wood thats what the custom shop is supposed to do and that's what a flying v 58 remake is 8500 dollars.

 

After defending Gibson they do need to improve quality assurance especially in the custom shop where handmade is part of the higher cost Gibson needs to have a quality check in place that works. The new Warren Haynes I bought had one Schaller straplock in silver and the other straplock was a gibson standard post in gold, I don't know how anybody doing set-up could miss that.