Gibson vs. Paul Reed Smith

[heymisterk]

For those who know, do you think your average, off-the-shelf Paul Reed Smith has better consistent build quality than your average, off-the-shelf (non-Custom Shop) Gibson? I like both, but only own a Gibson; am looking at changing that!

[damian]

I don't own a PRS, but have played some....I own Gibbys.................Lots....

 

I have a Carvin ready to order.........FLAWLESS..........

 

I won't slam Gibby, but, QC, not cool...............

[heymisterk]

 

I won't slam Gibby, but, QC, not cool...............

 

That has been my experience. My SG Classic quality I find to be better than my (much more expensive) LP Standard.

[duane v]

Best Les Pauls or Les Paul style guitars I have played:

 

 

Best = GMP PawnShop Deluxe

 

A very close second = The 2007 Gibby R9....

 

Distant 3rd = Heritage Les Paul

 

And in last place the PRS.

 

 

The newer PRS's I have tried left me cold for sound and feel, but the quality is definitely there.... The PRS's from the late 1980's are ones that I would own. To me they feel great.

 

My advice is go by what feels right to you regardless the brand

[Andre S]

Idk about PRS but the fretwork on my Martin, is absolutely flawless. There are no frets sticking out past the side of the neck, with the Gibson, you can feel the frets, not so much to bug you, but you can feel the bumps. Not so with the Martin at all.

 

And the toggle switch on my Les Paul was faulty as well.

[EvanPC]

I can't say I've had dozens and dozens of LP's in my hands, but of those I have, they've been pretty solid in my eyes. That being said, I still believe the accounts of those who state they've experienced shoddy QC. There's one exception to my overall good experiences with LP's, and that happens to be with the very one I own. I have some fret ends which have ever-so-slightly popped out a bit from the fretboard. Not really enough to feel, but enough to distort the finish, and have a bubbling-like appearance at each fret end. However, this could be partly my fault as well, by not keeping the guitar in the proper humidity conditions it requires.

 

Same goes for PRS. Have not had a many in my hands, but those I have, have been great too. As a matter of fact, I just bought my first PRS (Mira) about a week and a half ago. Awesome guitar. Playability-wise, both feel similar. Great setups and sound. However, the one glaring difference I've noticed between my PRS and my Gibson is the responsiveness of my tone controls. On the Gibby, if I dip below 7, I sound like my amp is under water. The tone control on the PRS is much more satisfactory to my ears all the way down the scale.

 

 

Also, and this may not be a good "excuse" in many's eyes, but I think production volume differences almost make the comparison apples to oranges. If I had to grill 3 steaks for one group of people, and 20 steaks for another group of people, I'll bet the group of 3 would be a bit better than the 20 I had to do. Now, if I'm charging the same, though, for each group, per steak, I suppose I should be held accountable all the same to produce the same quality...I don't know.

[rct]

"Build Quality" got real popular in the 90's there. A guy would get a crappy guitar from Company F and all the sudden their "Build Quality" had gone down the crapper while John Suhr or Tyler or Paul Reed or some other booteek maker was making Gods favorite guitars.

 

It's all bunk. A great guitar is wherever you find it, and you can quote me on that, many have. I don't own any Paul Reeds, I could own as many as I want, I've just never found one I liked enough to buy. Quality? Sure. For the money, I guess they should be, and if they aren't the buyer should take it back or never have bought it.

 

I've never returned a record because the players didn't use guitars with great "Build Quality". I've never been turned down for a gig because my guitars didn't have great "Build Quality". I, you, most guitar players, can play around whatever issues the particular guitar has, and the two big American Companies have plenty of issues to play around for the most part. To me that is not "Build Quality" but character, the things that make them great guitars.

 

A great guitar obviously doesn't make Gibson the greatest guitar maker ever, as there have always been and will always be h8tuhs. Same for Fender. Or Paul Reed for that matter. Conversely, you find a crappy guitar from any of them and just don't buy it. If you get it home and find something over looked, take it back. It doesn't, to me, make their "Build Quality" any less, their QC any worse, anything like that. Everything you buy is hit or miss, buyer beware, you get what you pay for, all that. Why should guitars be any different?

 

rct

[EVOL!]

I don't know on the QC question with PRS because I don't like them. Through the nineties I wanted a PRS so badly until I actually played one. Did not fit me at all; like a round peg trying to cram in a square hole. It's the same thing I have with Ibanez guitars. They just don't fit me.

 

In regards to Gibson QC, I have heard from more than a few reliable sources about QC issues ten years ago. Guitars would show up at the stores and be in rough shape. Most needed a full setup, some would need some fret work, before they could even go out onto the floor. I also heard that this is not an issue anymore; that it has been taken care of.

[davidl]

I can't comment too much on the PRS QC from personal experience but they have beautiful finishes.

I've bought 3 new Gibby's in the last year and a half or so. 2 custom shop and 1 Gibson USA and qc has NOT been an issue. All 3 were flawless and not even in need of a setup. Great right out of the box. I've tweaked a little for personal taste but thats it.

 

Dave

[heymisterk]

"Build Quality" got real popular in the 90's there. A guy would get a crappy guitar from Company F and all the sudden their "Build Quality" had gone down the crapper while John Suhr or Tyler or Paul Reed or some other booteek maker was making Gods favorite guitars.

 

It's all bunk. A great guitar is wherever you find it, and you can quote me on that, many have. I don't own any Paul Reeds, I could own as many as I want, I've just never found one I liked enough to buy. Quality? Sure. For the money, I guess they should be, and if they aren't the buyer should take it back or never have bought it.

 

I've never returned a record because the players didn't use guitars with great "Build Quality". I've never been turned down for a gig because my guitars didn't have great "Build Quality". I, you, most guitar players, can play around whatever issues the particular guitar has, and the two big American Companies have plenty of issues to play around for the most part. To me that is not "Build Quality" but character, the things that make them great guitars.

 

A great guitar obviously doesn't make Gibson the greatest guitar maker ever, as there have always been and will always be h8tuhs. Same for Fender. Or Paul Reed for that matter. Conversely, you find a crappy guitar from any of them and just don't buy it. If you get it home and find something over looked, take it back. It doesn't, to me, make their "Build Quality" any less, their QC any worse, anything like that. Everything you buy is hit or miss, buyer beware, you get what you pay for, all that. Why should guitars be any different?

 

rct

 

 

I respectfully disagree. When you are shelling out what Gibson and PRS charge for their guitars, the quality should always be top-notch, in my opinion. It's kind of why I would never buy a Mercedes: they drive wonderfully, but they are very expensive and, according to all surveys I have read, are very unreliable. Bottom line: When you are shelling out a lot of your hard-earned cash for something when you could buy something else just as good for less...well, that doesn't wash for me.

[rct]

I respectfully disagree. When you are shelling out what Gibson and PRS charge for their guitars, the quality should always be top-notch, in my opinion. It's kind of why I would never buy a Mercedes: they drive wonderfully, but they are very expensive and, according to all surveys I have read, are very unreliable. Bottom line: When you are shelling out a lot of your hard-earned cash for something when you could buy something else just as good for less...well, that doesn't wash for me.

 

When it comes to guitars, there is no Just As Good For Less. If you want what Gibson or Fender or Paul Reed offers, you have to buy what they sell. Any car can get you to the next redlight, I wouldn't say the same for guitars.

 

rct

[heymisterk]

When it comes to guitars, there is no Just As Good For Less.

rct

 

Hamer comes to mind, at least used. Maybe Heritage too, though I haven't played one.

[bluzhammer]

Here's my 2 pennies worth...... QC issues with Gibsons, I've had a few, although it was never anything earthshaking, it was frustrating considering the price paid. My PRS guitars have always been top notch QC wise. I own a PRS SE model that is equal to any LP Studio I have ever played, and my Custom 24 is probably my best sounding and versatile axe. That being said I do love my LP Traditional. My guitars are like my babies, they are all different , in voice and feel but I love them all the same.

[fl00dsm0k3]

i never played either

[Silenced Fred]

PRS' off the shelf have better quality, but I don't like em

 

go figure

[rct]

Hamer comes to mind, at least used. Maybe Heritage too, though I haven't played one.

 

No offense to anyone involved with this that knows any of them guys, but Heritage were crap when they started, couldn't give them away once the fingerboards started coming up. Don't know how they are now, but they only do really really custom work, and I don't even know who sells them, so I can't imagine them being cheap.

 

Hamers are nice. They aren't any of the other three, but still nice.

 

rct

[Gibson Artist]

PRS' off the shelf have better quality, but I don't like em

 

go figure

 

 

True dat!

 

Btw, one could probably say that Epiphone has better QC than Gibson, while Gibby does use more superior materials, they often are in more need of a setup while nearly every epi ive ever played was ready straight out of the box.

 

Will that stop me from buying a Gibson? Nope, ill just order from Sweetwater who do free setups on every guitar leaving their shop.

[ne14t?]

True dat!

 

Btw, one could probably say that Epiphone has better QC than Gibson, while Gibby does use more superior materials, they often are in more need of a setup while nearly every epi ive ever played was ready straight out of the box.

 

Will that stop me from buying a Gibson? Nope, ill just order from Sweetwater who do free setups on every guitar leaving their shop.

 

This is just wrong in SO many ways, My explorer was made at the end of 2010 and its impeccable we opened up the box at L&M the day it came in from Gibson, and it was PERFECT to a T all I needed to do was retune the strings and go, as they were offering to setup the guitar at no cost (as any store selling you a $1400 guitar should do) but it didnt need anything except some fingers to tickle its wood, hehehe. Almost every Epiphone I have seen has needed its intonation and action setup, some are off by a lot and some are off by a little, then again its a $500 guitar cant expect a Cadillac for the price of a Pinto. People need to remember that when you walk into a music store and pick a guitar up off the floor or off the wall (regardless of the make or model) and go play it, chances are its in need of a setup. How many kids do you think go into music stores pick up these guitars and muck around with them pretending to be the next Jimi or something, I know I used, makes me wonder why they never kicked me out for going all violent windmill style on there display guitars. If you walk in and its a commission based sales atmosphere they will sell you a display guitar without hesitation if it means cash in the till that day, which is why I NEVER deal with any salesman who is on commission they are cut throat basturds only intersted in getting your money.

[dem00n]

Not this **** again.

[Gibson Artist]

This is just wrong in SO many ways, My explorer was made at the end of 2010 and its impeccable we opened up the box at L&M the day it came in from Gibson, and it was PERFECT to a T all I needed to do was retune the strings and go, as they were offering to setup the guitar at no cost (as any store selling you a $1400 guitar should do) but it didnt need anything except some fingers to tickle its wood, hehehe. Almost every Epiphone I have seen has needed its intonation and action setup, some are off by a lot and some are off by a little, then again its a $500 guitar cant expect a Cadillac for the price of a Pinto. People need to remember that when you walk into a music store and pick a guitar up off the floor or off the wall (regardless of the make or model) and go play it, chances are its in need of a setup. How many kids do you think go into music stores pick up these guitars and muck around with them pretending to be the next Jimi or something, I know I used, makes me wonder why they never kicked me out for going all violent windmill style on there display guitars. If you walk in and its a commission based sales atmosphere they will sell you a display guitar without hesitation if it means cash in the till that day, which is why I NEVER deal with any salesman who is on commission they are cut throat basturds only intersted in getting your money.

 

So many ways? Each person's experience is different and therefore unique. I do not claim that 100% every epiphone is set up better than Gibson but i say that in MY experience and that is mine alone, that they have been setup a little better. If your Gibby was setup perfectly straight out of the box im happy for ya but ive talked to several friends of mine who own both and they almost all say their Gibsons required more setup work than the Epiphone's did.

 

I recently purchased a Martin and it was exquisite right out of the box with factory strings, but ive purchased Ibanez and Yamaha (and even Ovation) acoustics in my teens that really needed setups badly.

 

Gibson also does that pleck thing to help with setups on their Traditionals but each Gibson is unique, as is each Epiphone, but Gibson doesnt need a full perfect setup everytime to sell their guitars, their name brand alone does that for them.

[Duende]

Not this **** again.

 

+1

 

Gibson are not perfect of course not, but I have never played a sterile sounding Gibson, ever! So for being constantly organic, they are my favourite humbucker brand of guitar. I would rather the inconsistencies be cosmetic than the other option, having said that there are things they could probably tighten up on.

 

Also, to their credit, in recent times they are producing more guitars youngsters can (at a push) afford.

 

Matt

 

 

 

[rct]

Not this **** again.

 

 

[BigKahune]

.

Yet again . . . . . .

 

Off the shelf quality - PRS.

 

Gibson likes the historical accuracy of handmade errors.

 

I'll still take a good Gibby. B)

[ne14t?]

+1

 

Gibson are not perfect of course not, but I have never played a sterile sounding Gibson, ever! So for being constantly organic, they are my favourite humbucker brand of guitar. I would rather the inconsistencies be cosmetic than the other option, having said that there are things they could probably tighten up on.

 

Also, to their credit, in recent times they are producing more guitars youngsters can (at a push) afford.

 

Matt

 

Nothing is perfect just like the way the comment was initially stated it seemed very biased towards Epiphone

 

"one could probably say that Epiphone has better QC than Gibson"

 

Its really hard to read emotion that would otherwise be conveyed through your voice, so its easy to quickly draw conclusions. But after reading the second post I understand that he was just saying in general from his own experience that it would appear that Epiphones have better quality control. For me a Gibson is made by hand, the human eye and hand can only get within a certain tolerance; however a Epiphone is probably made on a CNC machine which has retardedly high tolerances to the ten thousandths of an inch or something crazy. This is how I see it, a handmade instrument is as much as a piece of artwork as it is an instrument, you get the idea.

[jnastynebr]

I don't care for Basswood. Many of the Mira/Starla models have Basswood bodies, which lack the sparkly, punchy mids that I so love. I fell in love with a Korina Mira last year, but the thing was $1400 used, and is basically PRS's stripped, entry level USA model. It just did not have the features to justify the price tag. There carved top models are too rich for my blood.