Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

jingle_jangle wrote:
Nope. Build quality is solid, but so is the build quality on other Gibson electrics of the same vintage.

It's hype; supply and demand, sporadic celebrity sightings.

True that, Paul. That whole era produced some fabulous instruments. My point was that even the entry level pieces are of better quality than those of today. You're spot on about the hype factor, too. Remember when an old guitar was just an old guitar? I remember a friend getting a clean '57 Junior at a yard sale in the mid '70s for $25! My first good bass was a clean '66 Precision that I bought for $200 at a local shop in 1978 and the first "vintage" guitar I had was a dead mint 1954 goldtop Les Paul for $1,200 back in 1984. Man, how I wish those days had never left. Again, they're only worth what someone is willing to pay for them.

I think the build quality is on par or better. CNC and modern technology has taken a lot of the variability out of production instruments.

It's the materials that have taken a dive. Old Gibsons (and other makes) were made with some of the best quality wood, electronics, and finishes they had at the time. I believe that they cut the cost of the components to increase the profit margin, then up the price anyway.

And so much of it is hype. That "guitar of the month" thing was shameless. Not saying it's a bad thing to make money, and I enjoy and play Gibson guitars, but have some class. IMO. Even the guys on the Gibson forums admit that the company has gone a bit off the deep end these days.

I think there's some confusion between inferior models and a loss in Quality control.

While I admit that the quality control of Gibson guitars is as much of a roller coaster as it's ever been, I have no reason to believe their cheap guitars are inherently worse than their expensive guitars, in fact, the worse Gibson I ever played was a Les Paul Standard 59 Reissue, the Flagship of the company.

Nothing wrong with the new SG Specials. I played a few that were nice, and poor sales have knocked last year's leftover worn brown and red ones down to $700. I'm sorely tempted Quality is fine. I mean, it's not a custom but the three or four I played were great.

What made me want to ralph was the new Gibson Eye.

I'd say the most progressive thing Gibson has done in years is the Robot series, if you're into that sort of thing. I think they're pretty cool (even if I won't buy one) and far more inventive than a Les Paul with a maple neck.

I don't blame Gibson for wanting to make money. They need to sell to survive, but I think it can be done with more class and attention to detail.

+1 on the robots. Interesting, and last year's models are also priced to move at around $1400-$1600 (SG and LP). Very tempting, now if the necks were just a little more svelte ...

kiramdear wrote:
What made me want to ralph was the new Gibson Eye.

It's "Limited Run", so it must be both great and worth the cash...

Yeah, right

I fnd Gibson overrated. The SG Classic (with P-90s) and the J-200 are two of my favorite guitars (can anyone guess why?), but other than that, I do not think much of Gibson.

I'm willing to admit that mine is a partially sentimental or nostalgic affinity for Gibson. They're not what they used to be, surely, and you have to work to separate the wheat from the chaff. But to live with the feeling that I had when my new Gibson was clearly the hottest thing on the block, with a new, well built and affordable SG or Les Paul, well, that would be the bee's knees.

Gibson, like everyone else, has made dogs, but continues to try new things despite it's successes and failures. CEO Henry continues to make some of the most unpopular statements in the industry, but as it has been said before, they are trying to make money. Both Gibson and Marshall, IMHO, lost a very large part of their market to Mesa and PRS by resting on their laurels in the early 90s. Since then, Gibson has released some very "different" models to try to expand their market, and some were actually pretty good. The M3 was a great alternative to the Jackson locking trem guitars, but went the way of the dinosaurs like so many other models that they made through the years, like the L6 and S3. At least they give it a shot, and continue to try to come out with new things that the public might warm up to.

I bought a 2 pickup Melody Maker a few years ago for $399, and what a cool little guitar it is. I have owned 60s MMs, and this is the same thing, an inexpensive student model Gibson guitar. I really don't see any other American made guitars for $399, and this plays well, sounds good, and looks cool,IMHO. I was glad to see these come out.

Working for Gibson dealers for years, rarely did a turkey come from the factory, and yes, we had the over $5000 crowd. The biggest problems I think with new Gibsons for people who are not familiar with their workings are the action. Gibson guitars are shipped from the factory with a high nut action with the understanding that the dealer has an on site tech to dial in the guitar for the customer for their needs. Guitars that come out of the box with a super low action are fine if that's the string guage and nut height you want. If you don't like actions set up for "God of metal" sweep picking and want strings that are thicker than human hair, you will need to drastically reset the guitar and maybe even change the nut. With a Gibson, throwing a set of 11s(or flats)and adjusting the action for a bit more room to bite, is a simple fine tuning of the nut and doind a set up. Too many other guitars leave you no room to do this right.

Another little known point to the uninitiated is the fact that a new Gibson needs a good 6 mos of playing to really break it in. Like a good leather jacket, once properly broke in, the guitar becomes an extension of you. I have first hand witnessed this, and didn't believe it myself untill it happened. Wow.

I'm very happy with my Gibsons, and am proud to have been able to put top quality in the hands of my customers who were looking for a great instrument that would be able to provide them with a lifetime of playability and inspiration. I feel the same way about the Rickenbacker instruments I own and sold too

I've two now that I'll never part with, both from the Custom Shop. One is a 2001 '56 goldtop RI that I've since outfitted w/ original 1955 electronics (P90s, Sprague .022mf/400v caps and CTS 250K audio taper pots) and the other is a 2004 Tom Murphy-aged '59 flametop reissue that I found through a private seller in Tokyo. Both of these guitars are probably two of the best Les Pauls I've ever had the privilege to play and own; and that's including the original 1954 goldtop I owned during the '80s and the one I compare all others against.

The '59 is the guitar I spent 20 years looking for and has more than held it's own against the real McCoy - an original 1960 'burst. I have been looking for a great flametop since the mid 1980s and have only found two in that time that could truly be considered "great". I parted with the other one about 2 years ago. The '56 reissue was my main touring guitar from 2002 until 2005 and I just started playing it exclusively again about 3 months ago.

The good ones are out there but you really have to weed through a hellava lot of **** to get to them and if you really want the "cream of the crop", you have to pay for it. I can't believe how much they've gone up every year over the last 7 years - there's no way that I could afford one now on what I'm making as a player in this economy.

JakeK wrote:I fnd Gibson overrated. The SG Classic (with P-90s) and the J-200 are two of my favorite guitars (can anyone guess why?), but other than that, I do not think much of Gibson.

Pete is cool and all, but I don't get your obsession with only liking what he used. Just cause he touched it doesn't make it golden and everything else Gibson has ever done ****. I mean come on, think for yourself a little.

If it came out that I think everything Gibson did was ****, I didn't mean it that way. I like the ES-175 and ES-345 stereos, too. I just simply love Pete. Just because he used the Rose Morris series doesn't make me think all Rickenbackers are ****. Just because he used/uses Strats and Tele's doesn't make all the other Fenders are ****. Just because he used a '59 Gretsch 6120, doesn't make me think other Gretsches are ****.

kiramdear wrote:I'm willing to admit that mine is a partially sentimental or nostalgic affinity for Gibson. They're not what they used to be, surely, and you have to work to separate the wheat from the chaff. But to live with the feeling that I had when my new Gibson was clearly the hottest thing on the block, with a new, well built and affordable SG or Les Paul, well, that would be the bee's knees.

I hear that. I love my '58 LP reissue...it sounds amazing, looks beautiful, has the best neck of any guitar I've owned, and, frankly, it gets noticed. There's a certain undefinable cool factor to a nice Gibson guitar, same as a nice Rick.