Thoughts on Gibson’s new management/direction?

I am also a member of the Gibson forum, and I read what they say of PRS guitars.
Most of the reaction to the new management there is a general bitchiness about price hikes.

I joined the Gibson forum in 2015 and could barely believe the depth of vitriolic hated of the 2015 Nashville models.
It was proof that the Gibson faithful will not permit Gibson to move beyond 1959.

I would like to see Gibson strengthen their headstocks by:
1/ replacing the one piece neck/headstock with a scarf joint. They already use this on certain ES models.
2/ Incorporate a volute.
3/ Use maple necks rather than mahogany necks (My ES-339 Studio has a maple neck with a heat treated maple fingerboard).
*
Redesigned headstocks with a straight string path (like PRS).

Abandon forever nitro finishes. Its filthy stuff that is unfit for purpose. Oil or poly finishes are fine.
*

I hope Gibson continue the HP models. I would like an adjustable titanium nut on all my guitars.
Good food for thought - Maybe you can pass on to the new management team.
 
I’d like an SE594 single cut. If they made one I’d buy it.

THheres a guy close to me selling a new SG Jr and it’s so sweet, so damn desirable
 
My observations and mine only.

When it comes to excellence in pure guitar tone sans pickups, and this is something you can hear playing the guitar unplugged, I’ve found the Gibson Custom Shop reissue LP’s to be top of the charts. As with 11top my experience of this excellence lay with 2013 and later guitars. The consistency Gibson achieve in this regard is remarkable. It is their biggest strength, and what a strength to have. I’m a fan. I own several of them.

Their biggest limitation however, is that carefully cultivated reverence to that “50’s golden era”. While it has undeniably brought success I feel it also hems in their design and product line variability. I feel I cannot commit to any Les Paul that has a say, Northen Lights style stain, because I’ve been conditioned to feel that is not “traditional”. Problem is, how many lemon bursts and tobacco bursts of the same body platform can I buy before feeling they’re all the same? Cue the plethora of fancy names like “Mojave burst”, “Desert burst” etc for what are essentially the same colors.

Whereas a brand like PRS, they do not have that backup from Jimmy Page, but at the same time look at how they are able to vary their lines in so many ways, and make each variation appealing, for instance their many models and their PS program. You could have 50 PRS doublecut guitars and not feel you have 50 of the same. That’s a remarkable achievement.

Cue programmes like Gibson’s M2M. These are all efforts to break out of that shackle. I wish them well and success in doing so. Innovation is never something Gibson will fare well in because it’s the antithesis of their very own nurtured branding point - tradition. They should conserve resources at innovation, double down on that traditional branding, continue what they were doing before the robot tuners. They should brand on tone. Cos perhaps, this is as good as it gets for them. Get into smart phones if you want spectacular sales.

Till such time when people forget the 50’s rock genre. I hope that never happens!
 
Last edited:
The problem I had with Gibson “innovating” was it was usually accompanied by some stupid graphic, design, or inlay decision.

It’s like they had a bunch of old fuddy-duddys in marketing that didn’t play guitar trying to imagine what a younger generation of guitarists might want by watching old Looney-Toons.
 
Gibson should make what they are best known for and quit trying to be innovative. Gibson sucks at innovation.

Disagree. Gibson shouldn’t quit, they should fire the people who suck.

Looking at Fender's long weird history and Gibson's more recent history of weirdness (including how they have been ripping of ideas from PRS), this all reaffirms in my own mind that of "The Big Three", PRS is now number 1. Gibson is #2 and Fender is #3.

I think you’re looking through some rose coloured glasses. When it comes to straight up sales and popularity Fender is blowing everyone else out of the water. In real life most guitarists I interact with still don’t know who/what PRS is. I could pull out a shitty Gibson and get the look of awe and the “is that a real Gibson” response, whereas PRS either doesn’t get a second glance or gets a look of confusion.

My last bass player started calling my McCarty the Santana guitar because whenever I said PRS he didn’t know who I was talking about.

I love PRS... but my love can’t change reality.
 
Does anyone have any thoughts (not feelings) on the management's decision in the last few years? The 2015 super wide neck? Robot tuners?

Has anyone thoughts or comments on decisions made at the top?
 
I own guitars from 4 different brands (Fender, Gibson, Gretsch and PRS) and there are the things I like about each of them, and things I dislike too.
But, ultimately I love having choices.
And those that keep bitching about gibson have the freedom to buy whatever else they want, once they figure out what it is. Those that complain no matter what are those that will never be satisified.
If you don't like it, dont buy it

And BTW, if I was forced to sell all my guitars but one, the one I would keep is my 2008 LP Traditional
 
[/QUOTE] I think you’re looking through some rose coloured glasses. When it comes to straight up sales and popularity Fender is blowing everyone else out of the water. [/QUOTE]

When I look at Gibson’s signature model rundown, artists, etc, it doesn’t read well. Slash isn’t up to much really. I know he’s an A list celeb, and I grew up on GnR, but that was 25 years ago, and they had already broken up.

PRS has modern Artists, I don’t listen to many other than Opeth who are one of my fave bands, but not much else. That said, the artists are modern and doing things NOW, not talking about what they did, X time ago.

Fender also has modern artists are more of them are female than in previous years. Warpaint, etc. They seem to be more in tune with the times.
 
My observations and mine only.

When it comes to excellence in pure guitar tone sans pickups, and this is something you can hear playing the guitar unplugged, I’ve found the Gibson Custom Shop reissue LP’s to be top of the charts. As with 11top my experience of this excellence lay with 2013 and later guitars. The consistency Gibson achieve in this regard is remarkable. It is their biggest strength, and what a strength to have. I’m a fan. I own several of them.

Their biggest limitation however, is that carefully cultivated reverence to that “50’s golden era”. While it has undeniably brought success I feel it also hems in their design and product line variability. I feel I cannot commit to any Les Paul that has a say, Northen Lights style stain, because I’ve been conditioned to feel that is not “traditional”. Problem is, how many lemon bursts and tobacco bursts of the same body platform can I buy before feeling they’re all the same? Cue the plethora of fancy names like “Mojave burst”, “Desert burst” etc for what are essentially the same colors.

Whereas a brand like PRS, they do not have that backup from Jimmy Page, but at the same time look at how they are able to vary their lines in so many ways, and make each variation appealing, for instance their many models and their PS program. You could have 50 PRS doublecut guitars and not feel you have 50 of the same. That’s a remarkable achievement.

Cue programmes like Gibson’s M2M. These are all efforts to break out of that shackle. I wish them well and success in doing so. Innovation is never something Gibson will fare well in because it’s the antithesis of their very own nurtured branding point - tradition. They should conserve resources at innovation, double down on that traditional branding, continue what they were doing before the robot tuners. They should brand on tone. Cos perhaps, this is as good as it gets for them. Get into smart phones if you want spectacular sales.

Till such time when people forget the 50’s rock genre. I hope that never happens!

I almost bought a collectors choice Ronnie Montrose guitar, it was just incredible. I've never played a LP that was so warm, that resonated so much through the neck and body. You could feel when strings were out of tune through the palm of your hand, that wobbling feeling. Amazing. But it was a ludicrous amount of money.

I agree 100% on the 'vintage is best' shtick also. It makes me think that I shouldn't waste money on anything other than a reissue as nothing else will be the 'real deal'.

When there's always a step above, you're always a step below. It just feels like that, I don't like that feeling. I have a core PRS and you feel like 'I'm there', Private Stock is just the really fancy stuff, but I never felt like the Core guitar was a middle of the line model or anything, same with my 64 telecaster reissue - it feels like this IS what you got in 1964. I wouldn't want to be told; 'Oh you want it EXACTLY how it was..? Well for this much extra...'

That matters to me.
 
Last edited:
When there's always a step above, you're always a step below. It just feels like that, I don't like that feeling.

When I got an R9 I thought that I finally made it. I’d spent years climbing my way up from an Epiphone to a used Gibson to a better Gibson, wanting the best Les Paul I could possibly afford. Then once I got there I found out that there were people who were buying two or three at a time and shipping them to Historic Makeovers.... I had no interest in going down that road but it made me realize that you’ll never keep up with the Jones.

I’m kind of the same way as you with PRS. I don’t feel like my Core is lacking because it’s not PS. I also don’t feel like my S2 is lacking because it’s not Core.

Gibson is different. When I pick up a USA Standard I can tell it’s not Custom Shop. Gibson USA doesn’t feel like they’re making the best guitar possible for that price-point.

When I pick up a PRS SE I can tell it’s no Core, but it still feels like the best guitar possible for the money, and there’s a lot of value in that.
 
Does anyone have any thoughts (not feelings) on the management's decision in the last few years? The 2015 super wide neck? Robot tuners?

I was sorry that Gibson was punished for Henry's decision to try to drag the company into the 21st century. I loved the 2015 innovations (they were only applied to Nashville guitars). Though this misfortune did help me. The heavy discounting at the end of the year (when the 2016 sprint runs were arriving) allowed me to buy a LP Less+ for half the original price.

The 0.10" extra neck width is something I love. I play nylon string classical style guitars too and they have very wide fingerboards.
That is on 2015 models only. Its now been halved to 0.05" on the HP models. So I'm glad to have a 2015.

The removable pickguard is good. I always remove them anyway. This way there is no hole in the body.
The adjustable nut is superb. I already said I'd like them on all my guitars. They made it from the wrong material (brass) so we all got titanium replacements later.

G-Force tuners: This I was less keen on, but I gave them a fair go. I had 32 months of perfect operation from them, but one tuner lost its way a few months back and detuned until the string was slack. It was easy enough to remedy but I dont want to risk this playing live, so I will at some point replace with regular tuners. I will admit though that they seem to allow more slippage, so you have to tune more frequently.

The hologram was more of am anti-chibson feature than anything, Its behind the headstock out of the way. The much hated '100 signature' on the front is unnecessary and unattractive but I am less bothered with aesthetics than most.

Nobody complained about the upgraded wiring. I wonder why?

I played a lot of the 2015 range and believe that QC had improved over the previous years. For example I played every single ES-339 in Andertons during a visit and there were problems with all of them (some serious). They were all 2014 models. They were trying to sell these first. I had them fetch over a 2015 model from their storage depot and it played perfectly straight out of the box. I was amazed.
 
I had a 2013 LP Standard that I recently sold and don't miss. The day I bought it I played through 7 or 8 LPs before I found one that was ok. They all had finish blemishes of one kind or another (mostly bubbles in the gloss). Several played like garbage and none of them would stay in tune. I bought the best one of the lot. I monkeyed with the setup for a while but could never get it to play the way I wanted. I took it to a luthier for a setup. He said, "I've got it as close as I can, but at a minimum it needs the nut replaced because the one in there isn't cut properly. It's super-glued in so removing it may cause some damage. The neck angle isn't too bad, but I could improve it. I just don't want to remove the neck from a brand new guitar."

I had a Custom Shop 339 that was very nice. I sold it because I have an AP PRS HBII. The 339 was a great guitar. The LP was not.

I'm not sure I'd give Gibson another go at this point. There are too many alternatives that actually deliver.
 
There are things I would like to see as a player and potential customer. As to what would be best for them as a business, what I think could be totally off, but I’ll probably say what I think anyways, because I have a big mouth.

Number one, they have to nail the “non-negotiables” on all their guitars, at every price point: fretwork, finish, nut, action, intonation up the neck, and resonant woods. Although I don’t try LP’s regularly, I’ve played a couple dozen in the last 6-7 years, and can honestly say that none had it right. PRS does this right, everything from SE to PS is a reliable, quality instrument that works. They hit price points by reducing features that don’t compromise the instrument - bevels instead of full carved, import (but still quality) hardware, poly finishes, etc.

I agree with those saying simplify the product line. Have some vintage spec, some modern spec, but you don’t need every possible iteration in between. Let the tweakers mod their own guitars. And, on that note, for crying out loud, bring back hand wiring the controls! Nobody wants to mess with PCB in their guitar. Personally, I look at a G (or F) guitar, I don’t really care what the specs are, I just start flipping through them to find one that is very resonant. I can change pickups and controls myself later. I think Fender is much better than Gibson in many aspects right now, but their product line is also very cluttered, and the guitars vary wildly when it comes to resonance.

I don’t mind the innovation, even if it misses the mark. PRS has innovated things that turned out to be duds too, in terms of market acceptance. Mastering voice control, anyone? Even some of their more successful innovations aren’t a universal hit, like the 408 pickups. Well liked, sound great, but not universally sought after. The difference is, PRS knew not to put all their eggs in that basket, I think Gibson was guilty of that with G-Force. Innovate, but don’t shove it down everyone’s throat.

I really hope that the DNA of the Custom Shop can filter down to the rest of the Gibson product line. As much as I b!tch about them, I would love to see Gibson return to a prominent place in music.
 
When I got an R9 I thought that I finally made it. I’d spent years climbing my way up from an Epiphone to a used Gibson to a better Gibson, wanting the best Les Paul I could possibly afford. Then once I got there I found out that there were people who were buying two or three at a time and shipping them to Historic Makeovers.... I had no interest in going down that road but it made me realize that you’ll never keep up with the Jones.

I’m kind of the same way as you with PRS. I don’t feel like my Core is lacking because it’s not PS. I also don’t feel like my S2 is lacking because it’s not Core.

Gibson is different. When I pick up a USA Standard I can tell it’s not Custom Shop. Gibson USA doesn’t feel like they’re making the best guitar possible for that price-point.

When I pick up a PRS SE I can tell it’s no Core, but it still feels like the best guitar possible for the money, and there’s a lot of value in that.

You'd have to pay for that kind of attention to detail though. I imagine the $400 paid for an LP standard in 1958 was a shed load of money by today's standards. I know due to more than inflation, it doesn't correlate, but I seem to remember my Grandfather was on £10 a week at the time and was doing well..

I wonder how much it COSTS to make a Custom Shop reissue. Not what they sell for, but cost, could they actually do that kind of quality for a lower price? Maybe; I've seen serious CS LPs reduced from 5500 to 3500 in stores here.... ??? How??
 
The adjustable nut is superb. I already said I'd like them on all my guitars. They made it from the wrong material (brass) so we all got titanium replacements later.

I cringe to think how much that cost to replace every nut with a titanium upgrade. Ti is not cheap to use. Titanium saddles for a strat will cost €100...

Embarrassing revision, shouldn't have been released without some testing.
 
I have a number of warm takes:

1. Robot Tuners were the Apple Newton. Give it 5-8 years, and someone else will "get it right" and we'll flock to that. I just got a Polytune Clip and it's brilliant. If that could tune for me and be low-profile - sign me up. A good start would be a tuner that attaches to those universal mounting plates and tucks between the machine heads.

2. Weight relief is good. If I want to hang something that heavy around my neck, it'll be a bass - not an LP. Which leads me to...

3. Guitar is the wrong place to innovate - do it on bass. The list of things bass players mainstreamed like decades before guitar players includes : extra strings, active on board electronics, fanned/multiscale, solid-state amps.
 
I use solid state pre-amps most of the time now, to be fair. You wouldn't know the difference with some of them.

I think this solves the question of size and logistics, people want to play a guitar, but perhaps can't lug the head and cabinet around or are limited for space.
 
Back
Top