#1
Is Gibson (specifically the LES Paul line) really going down the toilet, especially in the past few years? Like every big name in the guitar business (cough Marshall cough), I have really discovered that are following suit and utilising their name to endorse sub-par products.

For example, I had the undeniable privilege to play a couple of Orange amplifiers last weekend (they sounded pretty impressive, great amps for rock and great cleans, especially the AD30) and I played this amp with a number of different guitars including:

5 higher end ($3500AUD and up) Gibson Les Pauls
2 Epiphone Les Pauls (one Elitist, and the other, a Black Beauty)
2 Fender Stratocasters (American and Mexican)
1 Fender Telecaster (American)
1 Gibson SG (high end)
1 Ernie Ball Music Man guitar.

I found that out of all these guitars I played (granted the time it took for tubes to warm, but I played the Les Pauls later), the Gibsons, as well as being the most expensive, were actually the worst guitars all around. They had a crappy, muddy sound quality to them, had shoddy craftsmanship (evident by fluctuations on the controls), and played like a baseball bat. Honestly, they felt horrible, like playing a tree trunk.

I played two of them through a Marshall JCM 2000 DSL ( an amp I am quite familiar with) and they retained the same muddy, undistinguished sound quality. I put down because I couldn't stand to play it anymore.

I think its ridiculous they are pricing their products so high for such a undeserving product. They should really take a good, hard look at themselves.

Before, I establish myself as a Fender supporter, which I am not (I am a PRS man through and through), the Fenders I played shared a similar drop in the sound quality I have experienced previously with pre 1999 Fender Strats and Teles. However, they played well and were well-made. The sound was lacking though.

I don't know, are we seeing the descent of the two largest guitar manufacturers. I'm not sure, but I was appalled by the quality of the Les Pauls.

Anyway, discuss.
Quote by dannyniceboy
I consider myself to be really intelligent and I've gotten into a fight coz this kid thought it was nasty to put sour cream on enchiladas.


Quote by Minkaro
The fact that I went TOO high singing a Darkness song on Singstar


DARK RED TEAM
#2
Goes to show you that the big brand names are mostly hype. You should just play what feels right for you and ignore headstock names.
#3
Quote by IncubusMan999
Is Gibson (specifically the LES Paul line) really going down the toilet, especially in the past few years? Like every big name in the guitar business (cough Marshall cough), I have really discovered that are following suit and utilising their name to endorse sub-par products.

For example, I had the undeniable privilege to play a couple of Orange amplifiers last weekend (they sounded pretty impressive, great amps for rock and great cleans, especially the AD30) and I played this amp with a number of different guitars including:

5 higher end ($3500AUD and up) Gibson Les Pauls
2 Epiphone Les Pauls (one Elitist, and the other, a Black Beauty)
2 Fender Stratocasters (American and Mexican)
1 Fender Telecaster (American)
1 Gibson SG (high end)
1 Ernie Ball Music Man guitar.

I found that out of all these guitars I played (granted the time it took for tubes to warm, but I played the Les Pauls later), the Gibsons, as well as being the most expensive, were actually the worst guitars all around. They had a crappy, muddy sound quality to them, had shoddy craftsmanship (evident by fluctuations on the controls), and played like a baseball bat. Honestly, they felt horrible, like playing a tree trunk.

I played two of them through a Marshall JCM 2000 DSL ( an amp I am quite familiar with) and they retained the same muddy, undistinguished sound quality. I put down because I couldn't stand to play it anymore.

I think its ridiculous they are pricing their products so high for such a undeserving product. They should really take a good, hard look at themselves.

Before, I establish myself as a Fender supporter, which I am not (I am a PRS man through and through), the Fenders I played shared a similar drop in the sound quality I have experienced previously with pre 1999 Fender Strats and Teles. However, they played well and were well-made. The sound was lacking though.

I don't know, are we seeing the descent of the two largest guitar manufacturers. I'm not sure, but I was appalled by the quality of the Les Pauls.

Anyway, discuss.



there are some people who dont like the sound and feel of les pauls. gibson cant make guitars to suit every person and playing style. and where one person would say that les pauls are muddy, others would say that they are fat sounding, versatile guitars and have balls.

same goes for other guitar models. it just depends on your personal preference -- i dont think the quality of gibsons is declining, but that is because i love the sound and feel of a les paul.

some people like really clear, twangy sounds, and would maybe prefer telecasters, for example, and other people may prefer the really big, fat sound that les pauls are known for. and then there are people in between (perhaps not unlike yourself) who like prs guitars the best.

different people have different tastes, and what may sound good to one person ay sound bad to another.
Does anyone remember laughter?

Manuel, please try to understand before one of us DIES.

my gear:

Gibson LP Standard
Epiphone SG
Classical guitar
Peavey ValveKing 112
Marshall MG15
BOSS ME-50
#4
i don't think gibson is on a decline at all...i work at a music shop and our top sellers are gibson and epiphone...
#5
Quote by Shadowplay13
i don't think gibson is on a decline at all...i work at a music shop and our top sellers are gibson and epiphone...


they may not be declining in sales but the quality of them has decreased. i think the main reason people are buying them nowadays would be because of all the hype around gibson being "the best guitar maker in the world"
#6
but is it necessarily Gibson's fault if the quality declines? i mean, the wood that they use in one year may be of a better quality than in another year. and in every manufacturer's output there is inevitably going to be some "bad" products, regardless of the quality of the rest of them. so maybe the Les Pauls you tried belonged to a "bad batch".
Does anyone remember laughter?

Manuel, please try to understand before one of us DIES.

my gear:

Gibson LP Standard
Epiphone SG
Classical guitar
Peavey ValveKing 112
Marshall MG15
BOSS ME-50
#7
I've never been a Les Paul guy (nor a PRS guy for that matter but hey it's an opinion, I'm not questioning their quality) but I do agree that Gibson is dropping in quality and in ideas, did you see the reverse Explorer? Monstosity. I recently went on a guitar hunt and decided I was gonna give Gibsons another shot (not that I could afford one if I wanted to). So I picked up a Les Paul Standard and plugged into the closest amp, it was a VOX but I don't know what model, I just like VOX clean tones. Like you said, it was like catgut stretched on a ball bat. I didn't know whether to play Centerfield by John Fogerty or play it like Andy Van Slyke. The pickus sounded muddy even on clean and on the treble pickup! So I put that down and tried an SG. Same issue. I also noticed that the finish was not upto par, it wasn't bad, but it wasn't $2000.00 good. I didn't play any fenders as I already have one that I totally love, if it ain't broke don't fix it right? So eventually I let my love of superstrats kick in, grabbed an Ibanez RG4EXQM let loose for a little bit and said "That'll do pig, that'll do". I love my new Nez but it is a total shame that I can get a guitar from Korea for $500.00 that plays and sounds better than a $2000.00 guitar made in America. They gotta up their standards, seriously...
Out here you've gotta know where your towel is!
#8
I wanted a Studio, before I tried one... horrible crap. Now I'm going for a Yamaha SBG1000 or 2000 or a Esp Eclipse, haven't decided yet, I'm leaning against the Yamaha now because of that I don't think I really want active p'ups because I realised I don't want to play that heavy music.
"Your signature can not be longer than 250 characters."

How you know you have too many guitars...

Apparently once also known as PonyFan #834553.
#9
I'm sure there are hundreds of Gibson fanatics that will disagree, along with bandwagoners and vintage guitar supporters who will agree.

I don't think they're quality has decreased, I believe the false stigma of piss poor quality assigned to any products built on an assembly line today is to blame for the belief.

Some fail to understand that in earlier decades, businesses adopted policies of planned obsoletence. That is, they would build their products to last a specific time period, forcing the consumer to buy a replacement later. This is no longer the case as raw materials are becoming cheaper, modern equipment is allowing complex designs to be built faster with better quality and developed countries are using entertainment goods for longer periods of time.

Note: The Fender Stratocaster was designed to be produced in mass with little cost to the manufacturer.
Schecter C-1 Classic (Antique Amber)
Ibanez JEM 7VWH
Crate Palamino Class A tube combo
Digitech RP80 Multieffects pedal
Ibanez TS9 DX Tube Screamer
#10
I played a Gibson Les Paul Custom which as you know is made in the US and I own a Jackson RR3 which is made in Japan, the Gibson looks royal and everything, but in terms of playability I liked the RR3 more. My opinion.
TESTAMENT, SCAR SYMMETRY......SELF EXPLANATORY


ALEX SKOLNICK, PER NILSSON........ADULATION MANDATORY


Gear: JACKSON RR3


Member#25 of the IRON MAIDEN ARE GODS CLUB. PM Revelations to Join
#11
to me the fretboards usually aren't as fast or comfortable as some other brands...but the sustain and depth of the tone make up for it
#12
When i first started playing guitar i was hell bent on getting a Gibson Les Paul [in gecko burst...], but after i played one i was dissapointed. My epiphone was far more comfortable to play and this was before i had much knowledge about guitars having different necks. I guess it does just come down to personal preferences.
"Swim in a lake of death, eaten by crocodiles!"

Gear:
Jackson RR3
Epiphone Les Paul Custom
Stagg C 442
Randall RG100G3 plus combo
Roland Cube 30X
TS9 Tubescreamer
#13
as for the "it plays like a baseball bat" thing, it's supposed to be like that, that's why a lot of people like them. and does not really show a decline in quality since they have always been like that. I personally can't stand the really thin necks that are popular today.
make Industrial and/or experimental electronic music? Join my group!

Last.fm
#14
Personally I can't stand LPs. I've played an LP Classic which was just plain awful, it sounded muddy and undefined plus it was uncomfortable to play (This was through an EVH 5150 II which I tried some PRS, Fender and Ibanez guitars through, that sounded great). I also played an LP Studio which was about the same quality as the Classic, only it was about 1/4 of the price tag. Even the Faded V was better than either of those.

Gibson know that they can sel pretty much anything as long as they put their name on it, and they exploit that. People buy them because they jump on the bandwagon and don't know how to buy guitars.
Xbox Live tag: Dream Away Rain
Add!

Quote by marko'd
dont sweat how quick your progressing, i heard that Jimi hendrix didnt get his legendary guitar skills until he was dead


Quote by Dreadnought
+ MOTHERFUCKIN' 1
#15
This thread kinda reminds me of a experince I had with a Gibson acoustic. My guitar teacher, from time to time, lets me use his Gibson concert jumbo acoustic. I think the thing sounds and plays like ****, but since he payed $2,000 for it, he belives it's the best instrument ever crafted.
#16
Quote by chillrock
there are some people who dont like the sound and feel of les pauls. gibson cant make guitars to suit every person and playing style. and where one person would say that les pauls are muddy, others would say that they are fat sounding, versatile guitars and have balls.

same goes for other guitar models. it just depends on your personal preference -- i dont think the quality of gibsons is declining, but that is because i love the sound and feel of a les paul.

some people like really clear, twangy sounds, and would maybe prefer telecasters, for example, and other people may prefer the really big, fat sound that les pauls are known for. and then there are people in between (perhaps not unlike yourself) who like prs guitars the best.

different people have different tastes, and what may sound good to one person ay sound bad to another.


I know, strangely, I am normally a fan of the Les Paul sound, mainly considering the basis being that I own one. I am quite familiar with Les Pauls, having played models from 1959 (at a vintage guitar shop the other day) to the current. Gibson, i feel, were consistent until I played those ones. I normally am accustomed to the fatter neck designs and tonal qualities of the LP, but this just didn't cut it. It sounded muddy as in notes could not be distinguished from one another and the sound was so watery that it lacked any definition. The only balls that came from this combination was from the amp.

As i said, normally I share your opinion of the sound and feel of Les Pauls (even though they are really too omnipotent in the hands of woeful guitarists as an icon). I think it has begun to decline after that episode. I mean the price tag does not constitute a guitar of that quality anymore.

I normally am also subject to the occasional Telecaster, if used well. But yes, I am a PRS guy, solely because their quality has stayed great for years, they play like a dream, they sound brilliant with anything and they are overall, superfluous in quality in the big name brand area.

I should have done a sound clip for you guys.
Quote by dannyniceboy
I consider myself to be really intelligent and I've gotten into a fight coz this kid thought it was nasty to put sour cream on enchiladas.


Quote by Minkaro
The fact that I went TOO high singing a Darkness song on Singstar


DARK RED TEAM
#17
Quote by Kid_Thorazine
as for the "it plays like a baseball bat" thing, it's supposed to be like that, that's why a lot of people like them. and does not really show a decline in quality since they have always been like that. I personally can't stand the really thin necks that are popular today.


Oh don't get me wrong, so am I normally. I play an Epiphone, which is quite comfortable and, the guitar I am building presently (Jazzmaster/PRS bastard guitar) includes a wide fat neck profile. I love fat necks and I think that necks on metal guitars like Jackson and particularly Ibanez (I hate 95% of Ibanez guitars) are a form of musical cheating. I may be reprimanded for that but it's my opinion.

But this neck was not fit to be played by the largest hands on earth. It was absolutely horrible to play. When I say baseball bat, I mean cricket bat for a more accurate description.
Quote by dannyniceboy
I consider myself to be really intelligent and I've gotten into a fight coz this kid thought it was nasty to put sour cream on enchiladas.


Quote by Minkaro
The fact that I went TOO high singing a Darkness song on Singstar


DARK RED TEAM
#18
Quote by Pizza The Hut
This thread kinda reminds me of a experince I had with a Gibson acoustic. My guitar teacher, from time to time, lets me use his Gibson concert jumbo acoustic. I think the thing sounds and plays like ****, but since he payed $2,000 for it, he belives it's the best instrument ever crafted.

Gibson hasnt made a bad acoustic that I know of. Maybe it isnt your sound. If he likes the sound so be it kiddo.
#19
Never tried a GIbson acoustic, I am more of a Maton and Cole Clark Fat Lady fan
Quote by dannyniceboy
I consider myself to be really intelligent and I've gotten into a fight coz this kid thought it was nasty to put sour cream on enchiladas.


Quote by Minkaro
The fact that I went TOO high singing a Darkness song on Singstar


DARK RED TEAM
#20
Quote by RichieKotzen
Gibson hasnt made a bad acoustic that I know of. Maybe it isnt your sound. If he likes the sound so be it kiddo.



I just didn't think it lived up to the hype that normally comes with the Gibson name.
#21
I really like my dad's 35 year old Gibson acoustic, nice sound. Not as good as his custom Mexican acoustic though.
#22
As much as I try to word this softly, there is no way I can reply to this post without it coming across exactly the way it is...

...The Gibson guitar company is full of themselves. For what they charge, they sell a crap product (And they know it or they wouldn't have attempted to sue PRS over the singlecut), and they'll continue to do so for a very long time because there are a LOT of people who are either not willing to try anything else, or too willing to pay a premium for anything with this logo on it...



/Rant

If you like your Gibson guitar(s)(And your not a fan-boi), good for you, hell even I can admit that I've played a few that I liked (Liked being the operative word. I've never played one I'd ever consider owning). But, if you can justify spending over 3 grand on one of their products because of its outstanding quality, any real friend would tell you to seek psychiatric care.
我会关闭我的耳朵,和我的心; 我会变成一个石头
"I will close my ears and my heart and I will be a stone"
#23
Even though I'm a Gibson man all the way, I'll have to agree. I wouldn't say the quality is that bad, but some Gibson models are not worth it, LP studio for example. I can't say anything about the guitar I bought, $1750, worth every penny IMO. Amazing tone, and versatile too, amazing neck, and a great feel overall. Maybe I got lucky with a good quality model, I don't know, but I'm happy with mine. When I was in the market for a new guitar, I was after the LP studio, and I hated it. It DID feel poorly made ect, and I just didnt like the neck. That's why I got the SG with the slim taper neck.
#24
My next door neighbor used to be an engineer at Gibson. Gibsons aren't what they used to be, and you can certainly find better quality for the same price. Gibson's management changed a few years ago and they seem to be more concerned with sueing everyone lately than making top quality gear. Also in the last few years they have lost some innovative luthiers and engineers. They do still make good stuff, but it's not to the level of quality it was a few years ago and is overpriced for what you get.

I've been playing the banjo a lot longer than guitar, and as Fender & Gibson are to Guitars, Gibson is to banjos ... they are the "prototypical professional quality" banjo. But in the banjo playing community there has been lots of backlash against Gibson in the last few years due to the litigation and lower quality/higher prices. They are a great American icon and eventually I hope the quality goes back up and they quit sueing everyone. btw Epiphones *are* Gibsons ... they are just made in Korea instead of the USA and use lower grade woods and components.
#25
^Yup. It's no doubt that they'll go back. They are obviously aware of the fact that people are starting to realize that they're not the best anymore. They ARE still an icon, and will always be because they were huge innovators back in the day with the humbucker and truss rod ect. And still are today, with the robot guitar (lol), as useless as it may seem.
#26
Quote by one vision
...I wouldn't say the quality is that bad, but some Gibson models are not worth it...
Exactly.
我会关闭我的耳朵,和我的心; 我会变成一个石头
"I will close my ears and my heart and I will be a stone"