Page 1 of 2
#1
well, back from my ban. i got one question to ask. In what ways has Gibson QC declined? IM looking for specifics.
#2
what were you banned for?

Awhile back I was reading on some forum how this one guy decided to X-RAY his Les Paul and discovered many holes in the body. Not the pickup cavity but random circular ones. I guess this is used to save weight but I guess this can be seen as a qaulity control decline? and no i do not have the picture. i wish i did. it was pretty intresting actually.
My Gear-
Schecter 006 BlackJack
Ovation Tangent T357
Fender Hot Rod Deluxe
Roland Cube 60
Boss NS-2, CE-5, DS-1
DiMarzio Pedal Couplers
#3
ok, we're making progress here. In order to fully understand the reasons of QC decline is to blame it on Gibson lab rats that mistake Mahogany as cheese. o yea, i was banned for spamming the forum during the "no new thread" time.
Last edited by Supern00b at Jul 27, 2006,
#4
Now dont get me wrong I do not have any beef with Gibson and their quality. I personally like them. I dont want to be seen as a Gibson basher now.
My Gear-
Schecter 006 BlackJack
Ovation Tangent T357
Fender Hot Rod Deluxe
Roland Cube 60
Boss NS-2, CE-5, DS-1
DiMarzio Pedal Couplers
#5
I just think the new guitars look cheap, I don't know why/how but they do
All Hail! The Kala-Kala Chieftain!
#6
naw, i like gibsons as well, but if i was to buy one now over a used one from the 80's O YEAA FUNKY TOWN idk which one i should buy.
#7
It has and it hasn't.

It seems to have falled, but at the same time, the same grievances have been aired since the beginning; it's just that now, anyone can find out about the problems that the minority have.
Posers are like punks, except they do it for fashion

notUG PUNK FORUM PRESIDENT!
#10
Quote by StaggHound
It has and it hasn't.

It seems to have falled, but at the same time, the same grievances have been aired since the beginning; it's just that now, anyone can find out about the problems that the minority have.


I agree, I own Gibsons and Fenders, love 'em both. All manufacturers have guide lines they follow, but no matter what you do every now and then you are going to have one get out that shouldn't have. When you buy a guitar (or anything else) you should inspect it thoroughly for anything you think is an issue. If you don't think it's up to snuff, keep looking, and find one that is.
#11
ANY guitar company makes some faulty guitars. There always are lemons out there, if it's a Gibson, a PRS, an Ibanez, a Schecter whatever! (though I think Gibson and PRS let less lemons reach the people)
I haven't seen or played a single low-quality Gibson yet.

threadstarter : some time ago there were quite a lot of topics about this, try to search them for more answers to your question.
#12
o...ok. one more question before i start a search quest for more questions similar to my original question. So there is absolutely NO difference between a '06 LP standard to a '80s LP standard.
#13
Quote by Supern00b
o...ok. one more question before i start a search quest for more questions similar to my original question. So there is absolutely NO difference between a '06 LP standard to a '80s LP standard.



You have to compare guitar to guitar, Not year to year
#14
Quote by El Codyo
I heard that their bad years were 98-02, and that they got a little better in 03.

I have a 2000 LP Classic and I love it. Wouldnt have guessed that it was a bad year guitar...lol
#15
Quote by Supern00b
o...ok. one more question before i start a search quest for more questions similar to my original question. So there is absolutely NO difference between a '06 LP standard to a '80s LP standard.

Yes there is a diference.
The wood for the body, neck and fretboard was different for one. Some people rave about the run of wood from those years and how it affects the tone.
The pickups were different.
The hardware was different, same model, but definitely different.
The pots are different.
Case is different, if that matters.
#16
Gibson quality has gone up and down over the years, particularly since the early 80s. There's no real 'modern' period that you can say guarantees you a good guitar. For those, you'd have to look at early 70s models and back, and you'll pay several thousand dollars for one of these vintage instruments. And the shoddy QC seems to affect the Les Paul and to a lesser extent, the SG line. Generally, other models such as their Vs and Explorers tend to be pretty decent guitars all around. It's the more complicated models like the Les Pauls that have most issues.

Anyway, Gibson quality has declined in many ways. That doesn't mean that you can't get a «perfect» new Les Paul. These mythical guitars exist, but are rare. Most Les Pauls you'll get will range from average to poor.

One big bone I have to pick with Gibson is their inconsistency in materials. the 'formula' for a Les Paul is a Honduran mahogany neck, 2-piece center-joined Honduran mahogany body with a 3/4" maple cap. However, when the premium woods are in low supply, Gibson will often use lower grade heavy African mahogany instead, or make multi-ply bodies with a slab of maple in the middle. This tends to make Les Pauls extremely heavy, and contrary to popular belief, weight does NOT make a Les Paul better. The 'perfect' LP should click in at about 8 lbs tops, not the 10+ lbs most LPS are. I'd heard that they would often covertly bored out holes inside the body to lighten their guitars made of the lower grade heavy mahogany. This is the first time I hear of someone x-raying the guitar. But the story is consistent. Anyway, bottom line is that altering the formula for the LP changes its tone, and Gibson are concerned with their bottom line. They will do whatever is necessary to cut their production costs, even if it adversely affects their instruments. After all, it's a Gibson, and the name on the headstock means everything, right?

Other areas to look out for are fretwork. I've seem some truly deplorable fretwork on some Les Pauls. It ranges from minor problems like sharp edges or unevenly crowned frets, to frets being too tall. I've even seen a brand new $3600 Cdn LP Custom at a local shop whose 3rd fret was VISIBLY not parallel with the other frets. Essentially, that renders that fret useless, as it will never play a note in tune no matter what. My LP Studio had 2 very sharp fret edges, and the 17th fret was too tall, causing severe buzzing on all notes from the 12th to 17th frets, even with ridiculously high action (that was the reason the former owner sold it). Luckily, fret work is not that difficult if you know what you're doing, so I was able to fix those problems easily.

Other problems to look for are mostly cosmetic. I've seen many new Gibson with really rough-looking neck binding. It can range from uneven binding work all the way to binding peeling off. Inlays are another issue. I've seen some LPs with inlays that weren't fit properly or so thin that they cracked easily.

But in the end, there's only one thing that should really matter with a Les Paul - its sound. The «grail» models with incredible tone are rare to the point you'll probably only find one after playing dozens of LPs. There are a lot of above average ones too, and the best way to find them is to compare a bunch of Les Pauls unplugged. The ones that are bright in their entire tonal range will stand out from the others. And you'll also notice that these tend to be the lighter ones. So if you lift a Les Paul off the rack and it feels like you're picking up a concrete guitar, then chances are it won't be the best sounding of the bunch.
Guitars: Custom Lado Earth 2000-3, Custom ESP Explorer, BC Rich KKV, Gibson LP Studio, Greco SG, El Degas Stratocaster, Agile AL-3000, LTD EX-351

Rig:Marshall JVM410H + Marshall 1960A, Boss Noise Suppressor
Last edited by Crunchmeister at Jul 28, 2006,
#17
^that was a lot to read

Where did you get this information? Is it trustworthy?

May I add that my new '06 Gibson SG Special Fadeds fretwork is the best I've ever seen.
And that's on a cheap Gibson!
#18
Quote by JorisBlack
^that was a lot to read

Where did you get this information? Is it trustworthy?

May I add that my new '06 Gibson SG Special Fadeds fretwork is the best I've ever seen.
And that's on a cheap Gibson!


The info is a combination of almost 20 years' experience and info I've acquired from various sources over the years. If there was anything that I believed was speculation, I would have noted it as such. I'm not one for being a purveyor of myths. If I feel in any way that the info I'm giving could be incorrect, I'll usually mention it.

And the SGs that have problems have tendency to be the higher end ones with fretboard binding like the SG Supreme, although I have seen bad fretwork on low end models too. But generally, they're much better than Les Pauls.
Guitars: Custom Lado Earth 2000-3, Custom ESP Explorer, BC Rich KKV, Gibson LP Studio, Greco SG, El Degas Stratocaster, Agile AL-3000, LTD EX-351

Rig:Marshall JVM410H + Marshall 1960A, Boss Noise Suppressor
#19
Quote by JorisBlack
^that was a lot to read

Where did you get this information? Is it trustworthy?

May I add that my new '06 Gibson SG Special Fadeds fretwork is the best I've ever seen.
And that's on a cheap Gibson!

Dude, just listen to Crunch, and you'll be fine.
#20
Damn Crunch, thanks for that info. I've been after a Les Paul for a while and now I'm going to know what to look for and might even go for an Agile
All Hail! The Kala-Kala Chieftain!
#21
^ thanks!

I should add something to reply to the posts saying the 80s Les Pauls are best. I used to own an 88 Les Paul Standard. It was without a doubt the worse LP I've ever laid hands on in my life. I was fairly new to guitar at the time, and like many, MANY young players, I too was taken by the Gibson name on the headstock.

The dude who was showing it off to me at the store had me believing it was the best guitar in the shop. When I got it home and compared it to my shìtty old Raven LP copy and my Westone Raider II, I realized this Gibson sounded like it had a wet blanet wrapped around it. My bands' other guitarist's Gibson Les Paul Jr and Jackson sounded SOOO much better.
Guitars: Custom Lado Earth 2000-3, Custom ESP Explorer, BC Rich KKV, Gibson LP Studio, Greco SG, El Degas Stratocaster, Agile AL-3000, LTD EX-351

Rig:Marshall JVM410H + Marshall 1960A, Boss Noise Suppressor
#22
just proves your really do need to try before you buy.
All Hail! The Kala-Kala Chieftain!
#23
That rings especially true for Gibson. You know, I'd have absolutely no qualms about ordering a Fender Strat (USA model) without playing it first. Ditto for an ESP or high end LTD or any Carvin. Their quality level is so consistent that your chances of getting a lemon are next to nil, and their prices are fairly reasonable. With Gibson, you pay an arm and a leg, and you're still not guaranteed a good guitar.

And BTW, if getting a Gibson, get one loaded with Grover tuners. Those Kluson Gibson «Deluxe» tuners are about as shìtty as they get. It's inconceivable that they would put such sub-par tuners on such an expensive guitar when Grovers cost so little to start with. I mean, $35 (retail price) is a small price to pay when you're looking at a $1500+ guitar...
Guitars: Custom Lado Earth 2000-3, Custom ESP Explorer, BC Rich KKV, Gibson LP Studio, Greco SG, El Degas Stratocaster, Agile AL-3000, LTD EX-351

Rig:Marshall JVM410H + Marshall 1960A, Boss Noise Suppressor
#24
Oh yea, that was another reason I think Gibson has always been sub-par. You have a chance to get lemons, a BIG chance, and they don't use materials worthy of a 2000 dollar instrument. I would almost rather get an ESP Eclipse for that price. All in all, even though they look the sex, it's all about Gibson on the head
All Hail! The Kala-Kala Chieftain!
#25
let's not forget that not all Gibson LP's suck!
Crunchmeister I know that's not what you're saying, but that's what Cody thinks you're saying (looking at the previous post).
Gibson LP's are still used extensively by guitar players around the entire world and there's still a reason for it.
#26
If buying new, I would choose and ESP Eclipse or even an LTD EC-1000 over any Gibson Les Paul. The only reason I bought my Gibson was because it happened to be one with exceptional tone, and because it was really cheap. To illustrate Les Paul problems in detail, let me explain to you what mine was like when I got it.

The owner was really, REALLY pissed with this LP. It had been bought as a surprise high school graduation gift 2 years ago by his well-meaning father, but musically-ignorant father. Of course, it was a $1500 Gibson, so it HAD to be a good guitar, right?

Wrong. The frets were an issue. Dude had no idea that the sharp edges on the fret were a problem. He considered them an annoyance, but not really a problem. He'd only been playing a couple of years, so he didn't really know better. He just knew his 17th fret was a problem, and our local Gibson dealer kept telling him there was absolutely nothing wrong with the guitar. Now, this sounds pretty low, but most small Gibson dealers don't want to deal with warranty issues. I know this since a good friend works at this store. If it's a part that's needed, they'll order it without problems, because Gibson sends them the parts for free, and then pays the shop for the time required to repair. However, when it's things like shoddy work that required work only, Gibson question the dealers about the work done, etc. Gibson work under the assumption that their guitars don't have flaws, so if the repair doesn't involve parts and is due to a 'factory defect', it's a real pain in the ass for these small Mom & Pop guitar shops that sell a modest number of Gibson in a year to get paid for the work they do. I'm sure Guitar Center who sell thousands of Gibsons a week don't have this problem...

Anyway, all this dude knew is that if the action on this Les Paul was set to an acceptable level, any note you fretted from the 12-17 fret would sound the pitch of the 17th fret, since the 17th fret was too tall. And most notes under the 12th fret would still buzz against the 17th fret. This problem required him to raise the action significantly to compensate for the tall fret. That made the upper frets very difficult to play (and they still buzzed) and threw off the intonation. Even with the saddles all the way back, the intonation on the E and A strings was always sharp.

This fret problem was EASILY fixed. I borrowed a fret file from a friend and sized and crowned the fret myself. I also smoothed out the sharp esdges on the other 2 frets. It took me less than an hour to do, and could have easily been done at the factory by the eprson installing the frets.

The only other imperfections on my LP are cosmetic only, and are in the finish. On the sides of the headstock and on the sides of the body, there's traces of orange peel. In case you don't know what that means, it's a flaw in the paint job where you see 'pitting' in the finish, making it look like the surface of an orange. This typically occurs when the painter applies coats of pain too thick. This is usually easily sanded out of the finish and flattened, but you can tell they didn't put much effort in repairing the orange peel. They just sanded it down as much as possible. Because of that, at one spot, you can start seeing the grain of the wood thru the pain because it was sanded too much. It's in a pretty inconspicuous location, but it's still there.

This is the type of problem that arises with Gibson most of the time. And really, it's a often a matter of laziness on the part of the person building the instrument, or the person doing the QA. The fret problems on my guitar was just plain inexcusable, even if it was a $400 Korean guitar. Unless someone REALLY wasn't doing his job, there's NO WAY this could have made it out of the Gibson factory without someone noticing it. I suspect that was the case. In the case of the paint job on my guitar, the painter got lazy and cut corners to get the job done fast rather than get it done right. It's certainly not a show stopper, but again, not the type of workmanship that you'd expect on a $1500 guitar.
Guitars: Custom Lado Earth 2000-3, Custom ESP Explorer, BC Rich KKV, Gibson LP Studio, Greco SG, El Degas Stratocaster, Agile AL-3000, LTD EX-351

Rig:Marshall JVM410H + Marshall 1960A, Boss Noise Suppressor
#27
Quote by JorisBlack
let's not forget that not all Gibson LP's suck!
Crunchmeister I know that's not what you're saying, but that's what Cody thinks you're saying (looking at the previous post).
Gibson LP's are still used extensively by guitar players around the entire world and there's still a reason for it.


I don't think that, I think that Gibson doesn't put all the work they should into their instruments and on many occasions people get a Gibson expecting a perfect guitar and come out of it with much to be desired. People DO play a lot of gibsons this is true, but most of the time they are custom shop guitars. They pay a ton of money and in the custom shop Gibson puts the work into their guitars that they should. All in all it comes down to you need to try any Gibson before you buy it, if you find a very nice one than I think it's probably worth the money you are paying, but if you just run out and buy one without any thought you might end up getting a chunk of wood not worth 500 bucks....
All Hail! The Kala-Kala Chieftain!
#28
ok, so if i was to look for an LP [unless you guys are thinking of me as a dumbass for STILL going after an LP after all things said] i would every to test it without an amp, and feel how bright and light it is? how is testing for brightness possible without an amp?
#29
You just play it. Look into other brands besides Gibson if you just want a LP shape, Agile or ESP dish out good LP shape guitars.
All Hail! The Kala-Kala Chieftain!
#30
I read an article about the guy who took over Gibson, a Harvard guy, and he cuts spending on the guitars, saves dimes for the company, but doesn't understand the effect it has on the tone and such.

The old Gibson, like someone mentioned, were awesome.

The SG's were a hell of a lot better than today's models. I had 2 , one all white, one trans red, that was in the 70's. I try them nowadays and they're just not the same. They just feel and sound cheap, even though you're paying a large pricetag.

Gibson ought to get ther sh!t together because the new companies are giving them a run for thier money.

Fender has sort of cemented itself in as it's place in rock. Not heavy, but beginners and experts alike love them , much like Gibsons, minus the QC complaints lately.
#32
Quote by Supern00b
ok, so if i was to look for an LP [unless you guys are thinking of me as a dumbass for STILL going after an LP after all things said] i would every to test it without an amp, and feel how bright and light it is? how is testing for brightness possible without an amp?


Dude, brightness without an amp is easy. Just listen to what it sounds like unplugged. I'm guessing you don't play acoustic.
#34
So how is the ESP eclipse?? Sorry if im hijacking your thread since im also considering a Gibson LP but i heard that even PRS is beating them now these days. And i might go with PRS..., but later on i want a LP shape guitar so the ESP is good or better??

By the way when i played a Gibson LP early this year, the neck was already out of shape, which im pissed cuz the person took forever to readjust it.....
[img]http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/9672/stevevaisigver24vf.jpg[/img]
Just an influence.
#35
Get the LTD Eclipse man, I'm lusting after the see through red myself *drools*
All Hail! The Kala-Kala Chieftain!
#36
To be fair to Gibson... People complain Gibson and PRS are overpriced because their average guitar is around $2,000. Of course, PRS guitars are the benchmark of quality control in the industry. Imagine how much more Gibsons would be if they had the QC of PRS? Part of the cost in every PRS is the fact that they will destroy - at any stage of production - a guitar that doesn't meet their specifications. That means whatever man hours and materials invested are now gone. It seems, though, that Gibson will do whatever possible to just get an instrument out to the general public for consumption. It's an interesting dichotomy.

Personally, my next guitar is probably going to be built using Warmoth parts...
Hi, I'm Peter
Last edited by Dirk Gently at Jul 29, 2006,
#37
That's just it though, Gibson can charge whatever they want and people will still buy them. Hell they could up the price to an average of 3000 bucks and people would probably think they just started using better stuff or something of the sort. They could build guitars as well as PRS and still keep the same price, they just choose not too
All Hail! The Kala-Kala Chieftain!
#38
The main reason that Gibsons and PRS's are expensive is still that they're made in America.

What's annoying is that the only shop nearby that has real les pauls won't let anyone play one unless they look rich, are famous, or have a parent with them. When I said "well I want to know if a Les Paul Standard really is worth ?2500", the guy said : well you can be sure of that. That shop just plain SUCKS!

Anyway, if you have the cash to get a gibson les paul, don't even look at Agile. Look at the PRS Singlecut and the ESP Eclipse. And if you think the LP is better, don't let us stop you from buying it!
#40
Mine does, though sometimes they don't have them in stock.
All Hail! The Kala-Kala Chieftain!
Page 1 of 2