Gibson really tries hard...

HeadCrusher

HeadCrusher

Member
Mar 20, 2002
2,819
2
38
Visit site
...to make some shit-looking guitars.

And they succeed: http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/Explorer/Gibson-USA/Holy-Explorer.aspx

There's more but there seems to be a technical problem with the Gibson-page atm so the product-pages won't load. Might be better anyway... :erk:

I don't get it. It can't be that hard to market a bunch of successful models (LP, SG, V, Explorer, ES) and gradually improving them by adding little details from time to time. But instead they are releasing useless overpriced guitars (see above, Dark Fire, Robot, ...) that no one would want to buy/play anyway every once in a while.

What a shame. :ill:
 
I actually like the idea behind the Robo guitar...

These other abominations... well, it surely gets people talking... but that's about it. Especially that inverted Flying V... good goat.
 
Yea, I have no idea who at Gibson had the Idea of carving massive holes into the Explorer and Flying-V. I love their guitars, but it almost looks like they are getting desperate for new ideas. They need to stick with their bread and butter . The Robot guitars are a great innovation though.
 
I was actially talking about their les pauls which don't have much more wood left than that exploerer:
bfgxray.jpg
 
I was actially talking about their les pauls which don't have much more wood left than that exploerer:
Click to expand...

Yea, there is that problem too. The only new Les Paul I would buy nowadays is the VOS (Vintage Original Spec) guitars, specifically this one, which are not chambered. It's ridiculous that they chamber all of their modern Les Pauls.
 
my mate has a gib. robot limited edition guitar and she says every time two strings touch it short circuits and messes up with the tuning so she has to take off the strings and restring it from scratch every time she does a string bend.

i've seen it happen

and fuck me thats an ugly guitar on the 1st post

still happy with my gib. menace - such a savage shred machine
 
Nitsuj said:
Gibson is seriously overrated. Time to move on. Its 2009 and not the fucking 50's.
Click to expand...

Bahahaha, wow that is funny. While they quality control lacks in certain areas, they are still great guitars.

How are they overrated exactly?

It comes down to personal preference my friend.

Your logic confuses me a bit. The fact that they were around in the 50's means that they are no longer good?

hmmm.

Oh, and my Les Paul standard is the heaviest sounding guitar I've played. It's sexy looking, thick, heavy, nice fret work, versatile, and sustains for days.

I've played pretty much every type of shred axe around, and the Gibson is still the thickest and heaviest sounding. Gibson is making some questionable and retarded looking shit lately, but NOTHING beats a GOOD Les Paul with the right pickups and setup.

...in my well informed opinion of course. :)

-Joe
 
I've also accepted that some people just can't jive with the Les Paul neck and scale. I have the fat 50's neck and it's way comfortable to me. Yeah, it sure is fun playing an Ibanez neck, but the Gibson is way more comfy to me.

With this being true, I still fail to see how they are "overrated." I'm sorry, but the high end LTDs still do not beat out Les Paul standards and up. Yeah they look cool, have spiffy looking finishes, but the wood quality really doesn't compare. Every single LTD I'v played has felt plasticy and cheap to me. I'm making this comparison because people usually suggest an Eclipse as an alternative.

I do believe that some of the Japanese Les Pauls like Orville are comparable in quality though.

-Joe
 
The Robot guitar might be cool idea but I'll happily keep on tuning my guitar myself if I have to pay 413 EUR more for one that does it itself.

(The cheapiest Robot-equipped guitar at Thomann is a SG Special for 1.290 EUR. A non-Robot SG Special runs for 877 EUR. Hence the difference "Robot-prize" mentioned above.)
 
HeadCrusher said:
The Robot guitar might be cool idea but I'll happily keep on tuning my guitar myself if I have to pay 413 EUR more for one that does it itself.

(The cheapiest Robot-equipped guitar at Thomann is a SG Special for 1.290 EUR. A non-Robot SG Special runs for 877 EUR. Hence the difference "Robot-prize" mentioned above.)
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree with this. I think it's retarded. We have been tuning our guitars ourselves for years, why change now?

-Joe
 
J.DavisNJ said:
Oh, and my Les Paul standard is the heaviest sounding guitar I've played. It's sexy looking, thick, heavy, nice fret work, versatile, and sustains for days.
Click to expand...
Well, your certainly not alone with that opinion.

From 0:08. ;)
J.DavisNJ said:
With this being true, I still fail to see how they are "overrated." I'm sorry, but the high end LTDs still do not beat out Les Paul standards and up. Yeah they look cool, have spiffy looking finishes, but the wood quality really doesn't compare. Every single LTD I'v played has felt plasticy and cheap to me. I'm making this comparison because people usually suggest an Eclipse as an alternative.
Click to expand...
Even if you don't like LTDs an ESP Eclipse is still roughly 200 EUR cheaper than a 2008 Les Paul Standard.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mickrich
Gibson LP Custom Lite
Replies
10
Views
806
Backline
zirkonflex
Z
M
FS: Gibson Les Paul Traditional Mahogany Satin
Replies
0
Views
512
Merch Stand
Markdude
M
MetalAges
DEAN GUITARS Responds To GIBSON Lawsuit: 'We Will Vigorously Defend Ourselves'
Replies
0
Views
78
Metal News 2
MetalAges
MetalAges
MetalAges
GRETA VAN FLEET's JAKE KISZKA Celebrates 61st Anniversary Of GIBSON's Iconic SG Guitar
Replies
0
Views
81
Metal News 2
MetalAges
MetalAges
MetalAges
HALESTORM's LZZY HALE Joins GIBSON As First Female Brand Ambassador
Replies
0
Views
101
Metal News 2
MetalAges
MetalAges
Top Bottom
Back