Page 1 of 2
#2
No Custom Lite or Axcess? Then I DGAF.

EDIT: The new Melody Maker would be really cool if only it didn't have just a wrap around.
Spin 'round carousel when your horse isn't screwed in.

My band:
Fractured Instinct
(For fans of Death/Groove/Prog Metal)

Ibanez RGA42E
Ibanez S420
LTD H-301
Ibanez RG520
Peavey Predator USA
Douglas Grendel 725
Line 6 Pod HD500X
Last edited by Offworld92 at Dec 3, 2013,
#3
Min-ETune

Why?
Ibanez Prestige RG852MPB
Ibanez Prestige RG652KFX
ESP E-II M-1
LTD AW-7
Schecter Loomis NT
EVH 5150 III 50
PRS 212 DB
Line 6 POD HD500X
Deadhorse OD/Boss HM-2
#4
The big news is that they finally fixed most of stuff people have been complaining about for years. Corian nuts are now Graphtech (hopefully they’ll also be cut better). All Gibson guitars now get PLEK fret finishing, which should address the problems with buzz and sharp ends on the low-end models. The tiny strap buttons have been replaced with useful strap buttons. Low-end models no longer come with ugly hardware. And most prices are the same or lower.

So aside from the gross worn/satin finishes Gibson’s low-end is finally on par with, if not better than, similarly priced Korean guitars. If Henry J. can just figure out how to get better finishes on the J and M models he’s going to start selling a lot more guitars.
#5
The Studios are significantly cheaper now. They look like LPJs with upgraded hardware.

This looks like the cheaper lineup people have been begging Gibson for forever has finally filled out. We'll see how the quality is, but at least now there's a reasonable LP progression starting at $600 ish for the LPJ. It wasn't that long ago when the Studios started at 1500, anything less than that and you were a dirty peasant and Gibson didn't want to have anything to do with you.

These look good. I think they'll be competitive. The lower end finishes aren't awesome but if that's the worst you can say about a Gibson under $1000, they've come a long way. I'm looking forward to playing the new models when they start hitting stores.

Dat Custom Classic
#6
All I want is a pre-2008 spec Les Paul standard without a Pickguard and a 60's neck, or more specifically a regular traditional model without a pickguard and a 60's neck profile.
Also a AAA-quality top.

Is that too much to ask?! Apparently it is.
Quote by strat0blaster
This is terrible advice. Even worse than the useless dry, sarcastic comment I made.

Quote by Cathbard
I'm too old for the Jim Morrison look now. When I was gigging I had a fine arse.
#7
I like how they're cleaning up their lines (so they don't have a billion Les Pauls with only tiny differences between them) and how their prices tend to be shifting downwards as a whole. Could do without the Min-ETune though.
I just bought an LPJ and I think it's wonderful.
#8
you know what pisses me off?

im a carvin fanboy...so this may be getting old to some. but go take a look at AA, AAA, AAAA or whatever from other brands. not even carvin, PRS even.

then look at a gibson AAA top.

notice a difference? oh you mean how gibson AAA is like everybody else's standard wood? nor normal joe schmoe stuff? GTFO gibson.

i am sitting with this in my lap right now...this is AAAA. so dont even tell me gibson has anything that should have the letter A associated with it. perhaps F.
https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1615856&highlight=new+carvin+day

gibsons are quality guitars. they have an age old classic tone. but honestly, i think they are worth about 40% what the asking price is. i dont think any gibson made should cost over 1000 bucks.
Carvin CT624
Walden G630ce Acoustic
Carvin V3M, Avatar 2x12 WGS Reaper, vet 30
(crybaby, Fairfield circuitry Comp, GFS tuner, Vick Audio 73 Ram's Head, Xotic AC booster, lovepedal trem, TC Flashback, PGS Trinity Reverb, Walrus Audio Aetos power)
#9
Quote by stonyman65
All I want is a pre-2008 spec Les Paul standard without a Pickguard and a 60's neck, or more specifically a regular traditional model without a pickguard and a 60's neck profile.
Also a AAA-quality top.

Is that too much to ask?! Apparently it is.

I mean, if you don't mind the weight relief the Standard Plus and the Standard Premium are exactly that. Otherwise you could just buy an old LP Standard Plus. They made the guitar you're asking about for 15 years, funny that you want one now

Quote by ikey_
gibsons are quality guitars. they have an age old classic tone. but honestly, i think they are worth about 40% what the asking price is. i dont think any gibson made should cost over 1000 bucks.

I get the part about the maple not being the prettiest girl at the prom, but are you trolling with that last part? You think a LP Standard or a Historic should cost a grand? In what magical fairyland should everything that Gibson make cost less than a USA Standard Strat?

Gibson charges a premium for sure but saying that nothing they make is worth over a grand seems absurd. If Gibson charged a grand for the Standard people would start moaning that it didn't have lasers on it.

I just. That doesn't even begin to make sense.
#10




I think this is doing it for me. It also doesn't have the unnecessary tuning system.

Better pic under different lighting.





Ibanez Prestige RG852MPB
Ibanez Prestige RG652KFX
ESP E-II M-1
LTD AW-7
Schecter Loomis NT
EVH 5150 III 50
PRS 212 DB
Line 6 POD HD500X
Deadhorse OD/Boss HM-2
Last edited by lemurflames at Dec 4, 2013,
#11
Quote by ikey_
you know what pisses me off?

im a carvin fanboy...so this may be getting old to some. but go take a look at AA, AAA, AAAA or whatever from other brands. not even carvin, PRS even.

then look at a gibson AAA top.

notice a difference? oh you mean how gibson AAA is like everybody else's standard wood? nor normal joe schmoe stuff? GTFO gibson.

The tops you're talking about don't naturally look like that. They're stained then sanded to make the figure of the wood pop out more. That process has nothing to do with the wood figure grade. If you don't do that, the figure isn't as apparent and some can be lost in the finish more or less depending on the color but that doesn't mean the wood is a worse grade.

You can see the process here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dmwqsU_DlA
#12
Quote by JELIFISH19
The tops you're talking about don't naturally look like that…


People make wood look like that on purpose? I thought Paul Reed Smith just invented a way to sell ugly wood to people with bad taste at an absurd markup.
#13
Quote by jpnyc
People make wood look like that on purpose? I thought Paul Reed Smith just invented a way to sell ugly wood to people with bad taste at an absurd markup.


i don't like fancy tops. i would be more likely to get a PRS with solid colored top than any of PRS AAAA ugly tops, but the fact that the gibson tops are more mellow makes them look more attractive.
WTLT 2014 GG&A

Quote by andersondb7
alright "king of the guitar forum"


Quote by trashedlostfdup
nope i am "GOD of the guitar forum" i think that fits me better.


Quote by andersondb7
youre just being a jerk man.



****** NEW NEW NEW!
2017-07-07 2017-07-07 Update and a Chat On Noise Constraints *** NEW FRIDAY 7/7
2017-04-13 RUN AWAY from COMPUTERS!!! TCE? RANT ALERT!!!
2017-03-02 - Guitar Philosophy 1001- Be Prepared For the Situation (Thursday 2017-03-02)
2017-02-21 How to Hot-Rod the Hell of your Stratocaster for $50! (Tuesday 2017-2-21)
Resentments and Rambling from a Guitar Junkie
---> http://trashedengineering.blogspot.com/
#14
I wish I had a Min-E tune system on my Partscaster. I use that for math rock, and I'm constantly flopping tunings. I'd actually consider the LPM because of it.


Also, Gibson needs to give up making basses. They all sound like muffled farts.
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
Last edited by JustRooster at Dec 4, 2013,
#16
I would love the Butterscotch or the Walnut SG.
Gear:

Gibson 2005 Les Paul Standard
Fender Road Worn Strat w/ Noiseless pickups
Marshall JCM 2000 401C
Marshall Vintage Modern 2266
Marshall 1960A cab (Dave Hill from Slade's old cab)
Ibanez TS9DX
EHX Little Big Muff
Freshman Acoustic
#17
Okay, now I am really interested on LPJ or LPM. The price is right and they look exactly like I want my guitars to look like. Minimalistic, no bullshit pickguards, just a sexy shape and a nice color and preferably transparent finish.

If Gibson has fixed the issues they had in lower priced units I think I may be ready for my first Gibson. Not that Gibson is some god send or anything but I'd like to have one. Just one.

ESP LTD F-50 + Tonezone
Cort EVL-Z4 + X2N
Cort EVL-K47B

Marshall Valvestate 8100
Randall RG1503
Bugera 333
Peavey Rockmaster preamp

Line6 Pod X3
#18


*drools*

That looks so slick...
Quote by lemurflames
Min-ETune

Why?

Because unlike Robot Tuning, Min-E-Tune actually works. While it wouldn't be too useful at home, it definitely has its place in a live situation where your setlist uses different tunings.
Quote by Axelfox
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
I also have to do that. Cottaging this weekend
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Dec 4, 2013,
#19
Quote by T00DEEPBLUE
Because unlike Robot Tuning, Min-E-Tune actually works. While it wouldn't be too useful at home, it definitely has its place in a live situation where your setlist uses different tunings.

Having never used it, it just looks like another thing on a guitar that might break. But if it actually works, then cool. That makes me feel better, because this caught my eye first.



Don't think I'd choose it over a Studio, though. Maybe in the future.
Ibanez Prestige RG852MPB
Ibanez Prestige RG652KFX
ESP E-II M-1
LTD AW-7
Schecter Loomis NT
EVH 5150 III 50
PRS 212 DB
Line 6 POD HD500X
Deadhorse OD/Boss HM-2
#20
Quote by lemurflames
Having never used it, it just looks like another thing on a guitar that might break. But if it actually works, then cool. That makes me feel better, because this caught my eye first.

Well its going to be a lot more reliable than the old Robot Tuning system simply because it uses way fewer parts. The vast majority of Min-E-Tune is the electronics, and electronics are maintenance free. And on the Min-E-Tune, they're positioned in a place that's generally out of harms way. Even if the motors do break (which doesn't seem likely since they're not really under heavy load), at least you can still use the tuners just like regular tuners. The batteries to power the whole thing are a lot cheaper than they used to be as well.

So even though I might not personally use the system, mentally I'm giving Gibson credit because they've really thought this self-tuning malarkey through. They've actually made what was initially thought to be solving a problem that didn't exist into a viable product. It's just a shame that the Robot Tuning system stigmatized the concept.
Quote by Axelfox
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
I also have to do that. Cottaging this weekend
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Dec 4, 2013,
#21
Quote by T00DEEPBLUE
Because unlike Robot Tuning, Min-E-Tune actually works. While it wouldn't be too useful at home, it definitely has its place in a live situation where your setlist uses different tunings.

I thought the robot tuning worked quite well
What didn't you like about it?
#22
Quote by Roc8995
I thought the robot tuning worked quite well
What didn't you like about it?

I didn't like the idea of having the controls for the system being at the control knobs at the body. It meant that wires have to be channeled into the neck for the system to reach the tuners, which overcomplicated the design.

Mine-E-Tune feels more intuitive to use as well. If I wanted to adjust my tuning, naturally my left hand wonders towards the headstock, and that's where the Mine-E-Tune system happens to be at. On the Robot, you'd need to move your right hand town towards the control knobs. And as a guitar player, it feels a bit strange to do the exact opposite motion of what has been ingrained into my head when I want to adjust tuning.

Another thing is cost- Robot costs way more than Min-E-Tune and the batteries were notorious among customers for being expensive to replace.

As a person who is studying product design at uni, every single factor of a design has to be considered. The simple fact is that the new system makes the old one pretty redundant.
Quote by Axelfox
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
I also have to do that. Cottaging this weekend
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Dec 4, 2013,
#23
Those are all legitimate complaints, but it seems like the problem was just that it wasn't refined enough. Of all the complaints about the robot system, I don't think you could fairly say that it didn't work. It worked great, it was what you had to give up for it that was the issue. That's a very different argument than "the new one actually works."
#24
Maybe saying that it didn't work was a bit harsh, but I don't think it worked as a viable solution at that time in the market, we never considered not being able to tune our guitars as being an issue. There were too many compromises that had to be made with the old system, it just didn't work very well.
Quote by Axelfox
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
I also have to do that. Cottaging this weekend
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Dec 4, 2013,
#25
Just wanted to clarify. There are lots of legitimate issues with the robot but that seemed like a criticism in need of explanation.

I don't think it was harsh - I got rid of my Robot for a few of the reasons you mentioned. It's just that when you say it didn't work, that implies that it didn't actually tune well, or properly, or reliably, when that was the one aspect that it did get right. If you just said that it sucked I think that might have been a more accurate description of the problem
#26
I think a deep flame can certainly look

But a deep quilt gets me a little wet, depending on the piece (especially if it's a burst with black edges).
Spin 'round carousel when your horse isn't screwed in.

My band:
Fractured Instinct
(For fans of Death/Groove/Prog Metal)

Ibanez RGA42E
Ibanez S420
LTD H-301
Ibanez RG520
Peavey Predator USA
Douglas Grendel 725
Line 6 Pod HD500X
#27
Quote by Roc8995
Just wanted to clarify. There are lots of legitimate issues with the robot but that seemed like a criticism in need of explanation.

I don't think it was harsh - I got rid of my Robot for a few of the reasons you mentioned. It's just that when you say it didn't work, that implies that it didn't actually tune well, or properly, or reliably, when that was the one aspect that it did get right. If you just said that it sucked I think that might have been a more accurate description of the problem


Interesting. I have never tried the Robot-system and I haven't run into many players with experience of it. There is another thing they got right though, and that is the name Robot. Unfortunately, if the new system is better - it doesn't sound as exclusive in the name of the product and since they don't put it only on guitars with finishes like the very first Robot it doesn't get the same type of attention.
"Your signature can not be longer than 250 characters."

How you know you have too many guitars...

Apparently once also known as PonyFan #834553.
#28
Quote by ikey_
i dont think any gibson made should cost over 1000 bucks.

You need to share that good shit you're smoking.

A standard gold or tobacco top kicks the shit out of those PRS/Carvin turquoise liquid flame tops or whatever the **** kids think is cool nowadays.

These new 2014 Les Paul Studios look awesome. Finally, Gibson giving the customer what we're asking for. Getting rid of those extremely ugly finishes was a step in the right direction. I could never see dropping even $400 on a used Studio before now, because those guitars look like complete ass.
#29
Quote by samuraigoomba
A standard gold or tobacco top kicks the shit out of those PRS/Carvin turquoise liquid flame tops or whatever the **** kids think is cool nowadays.

What about a natural claro walnut top?
Join the 7 String Legion!

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

Messiaen is Magical


Official Approval
This message has been approved by:

Mister A.J.
Head of the Department of Redundancy Department
Mister A.J.
#30
Quote by T00DEEPBLUE
Mine-E-Tune feels more intuitive to use as well. If I wanted to adjust my tuning, naturally my left hand wonders towards the headstock, and that's where the Mine-E-Tune system happens to be at. On the Robot, you'd need to move your right hand town towards the control knobs. And as a guitar player, it feels a bit strange to do the exact opposite motion of what has been ingrained into my head when I want to adjust tuning.


Whether or not Min-E-Tune is good is irrelevant to people accepting it. The problem with Min-E-Tune is that it will become obsolete and hard to get parts for. I think most experienced players have seen a lot of hardware trends come and go like this and don’t want to eventually end up with an expensive electronic tuning system that can only be replaced by paying high prices on eBay.
#31
Quote by jpnyc
Whether or not Min-E-Tune is good is irrelevant to people accepting it.

That's not the point.
Quote by jpnyc
The problem with Min-E-Tune is that it will become obsolete and hard to get parts for. I think most experienced players have seen a lot of hardware trends come and go like this and don’t want to eventually end up with an expensive electronic tuning system that can only be replaced by paying high prices on eBay.

That's actually not true. You can get parts or even the entire tuning system separately from the manufacturer that makes them, so getting parts is not really an issue. And if the parts are expensive, I don't see how that is Gibson's fault since Gibson doesn't make the system.
Quote by JustRooster
I wish I had a Min-E tune system on my Partscaster. I use that for math rock, and I'm constantly flopping tunings. I'd actually consider the LPM because of it.


Also, Gibson needs to give up making basses. They all sound like muffled farts.

http://www.tronical.com/

They make a 6 in line version.
Quote by Axelfox
Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
I also have to do that. Cottaging this weekend
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Dec 4, 2013,
#32
Anyone know why the Les Paul Peace is seperated from the rest of the LP Models? Looks real nice, as does the classic.
Gear:

Gibson 2005 Les Paul Standard
Fender Road Worn Strat w/ Noiseless pickups
Marshall JCM 2000 401C
Marshall Vintage Modern 2266
Marshall 1960A cab (Dave Hill from Slade's old cab)
Ibanez TS9DX
EHX Little Big Muff
Freshman Acoustic
#33
no pink hollowbody LPC with bigsby?

japan is still kicking your ass gibsun.
I wondered why the frisbee was getting bigger, then it hit me.
#34
Why would Gibson sell trash Gregs?
Gear:

Gibson 2005 Les Paul Standard
Fender Road Worn Strat w/ Noiseless pickups
Marshall JCM 2000 401C
Marshall Vintage Modern 2266
Marshall 1960A cab (Dave Hill from Slade's old cab)
Ibanez TS9DX
EHX Little Big Muff
Freshman Acoustic
#36
and ALL OF THEM HAVE MIN E TUNE


****ing ****, gibson. staying away from 2014 models, min e tune ruins everything it touches, it is unholy, the devil himself manifested in new agey tuning technology.


i might cry. that walnut sg, so beautiful, but MARRED BY MIN E TUNE
banned
Last edited by deadsmileyface at Dec 6, 2013,
#37

Of the 23 guitars there, 15 do not have the minetune. In most cases the tuning system is on a guitar with a substantially similar sister model that does not have minetune.

That walnut SG you were whining about being "ruined" is an SGM, which is just an SGJ with the Min-e-tune system. The walnut SGJ is exactly the same guitar without the minetune. So... drama much?
#38
Quote by Roc8995

Of the 23 guitars there, 15 do not have the minetune. In most cases the tuning system is on a guitar with a substantially similar sister model that does not have minetune.

That walnut SG you were whining about being "ruined" is an SGM, which is just an SGJ with the Min-e-tune system. The walnut SGJ is exactly the same guitar without the minetune. So... drama much?



nope, im talkin bout the walnut standard dude

wow, i guess my sarcastic, exaggerated jokey ways are not appreciated outside of the pit.


nope, all seriousness in here yeh?
banned
Last edited by deadsmileyface at Dec 6, 2013,
#39
We've got different standards than the pit, yes. Feel free to go back there if you're going to make stupid posts.
#40
Quote by deadsmileyface
wow, i guess my sarcastic, exaggerated jokey ways are not appreciated outside of the pit.


What's obvious to you is not obvious to anyone who isn't familiar with who you are or what you are like.
Ibanez Prestige RG852MPB
Ibanez Prestige RG652KFX
ESP E-II M-1
LTD AW-7
Schecter Loomis NT
EVH 5150 III 50
PRS 212 DB
Line 6 POD HD500X
Deadhorse OD/Boss HM-2
Page 1 of 2