Gibson strikes again!

[Wisebass]

hi folks

Read the thread! It's all here!

he Les Pauls were discontinued by the end of 1960.

"Les Paul" branded SGs came out in '61 and lasted for about a year under that name until Les Paul who didn't like the guitar had his name peeled off of it.

Les Paul and Mary Ford were divorced on December 16th, 1964.

Les Paul's name was officially removed in 1963, but the SG continued to feature Les Paul nameplates and truss rod covers until the end of 1963.

Les Paul was not involved in the new design (and didn' t like it)

He asked to remove his name from the guitar….

Which Gibson did on some models, (Junior, Special and Standard) but...


Here is a Les Paul Custom 1963!!!!:


​

Yeah, something to with his divorce from Mary Ford I think. Dont remember the reasoning behind it.

IIRC it was to eliminate an asset otherwise subject to being included for consideration in their divorce settlement.

At the same time, Paul was going through a public divorce from wife and vocalist partner Mary Ford.

Paul asked friend and former President of Gibson, Ted McCarty, for his $1 royalty per guitar to be withheld.

Les Paul ended his collaboraton with Gibson to avoid trouble.

Things wre already complicated enough for Les.

Just imagine Mary Ford' s lawyers asking for a part of future Gibson royalties (divorce = + )


btw: The single cutaway Les Paul was reintroduced in Summer 1968


greetings

Wise(b)ass

 

[user362432]

There is a time when corporations die. We are watching it live.

 

[NeonVomit]

"See if it sells" is the problem. It doesn't all that well. That's the whole reason why Gibson and Fender themselves are stuck in a loop of always recycling the same old shapes and cluttering half of their product line with "reissues". They have become the real selling item. A significant part of the market is based on replicas with minimal to no deviations to the point that buyers will shun improvements like rounded neck heels for the sake of the clumsy originals. That's why you'll see people moan that they can't buy a P-Bass without an added J pick-up.
Popularity is seldom achieved by originality. Conformity sells best so "owning" it is a key business goal.

Yeah pretty much. What is 'brand identity?' What does one picture when they say 'a Fender' or 'a Gibson'? Not 7-string guitars with super-skinny necks, Floyd Rose bridges and active electronics (Ibanez, Schecter and ESP have that market covered), or sleek 6-string basses with 3-band EQs and exotic wood tops.

The classic brands make classic gear and that's what they're known for. They don't want to alienate their customer base by trying to do anything that's too far out there. When they do try weird things they tend not to work out too well - I'm pretty sure they WANT to do stuff like that but if it's not profitable then why bother? All the new groundbreaking stuff is done by other companies. I don't think we'll see multiscale instruments from Fender anytime soon

 

[Leo Thunder]

I don't think we'll see multiscale instruments from Fender anytime soon

You'll occasionally see new shapes from them, like that Jazz Bass shaped guitar Fender just put out. They'll sell a dozen and it will be gone next year.

 

[Michedelic]

There is a time when corporations die. We are watching it live.

Only SOME corporations. The remaining ones run your life.

 

[NeonVomit]

You'll occasionally see new shapes from them, like that Jazz Bass shaped guitar Fender just put out. They'll sell a dozen and it will be gone next year.

Exactly. Anything out of the ordinary (and that wasn't even that crazy, they just took two existing designs of theirs and stuck them together) is done as a limited run or a 'special edition' or something. Fender and Gibson can't stray too far off their path - the difference being Fender have been continually incrementally improving their designs and manufacturing, while Gibson just tread water coasting on their name until they got completely overtaken.

It was very telling how the new CEO said they were upgrading the lighting in their facility so that staff could properly see what they were doing... did the old management not realise that was a problem?!

 

[-Asdfgh-]

Exactly. Anything out of the ordinary (and that wasn't even that crazy, they just took two existing designs of theirs and stuck them together) is done as a limited run or a 'special edition' or something. Fender and Gibson can't stray too far off their path - the difference being Fender have been continually incrementally improving their designs and manufacturing, while Gibson just tread water coasting on their name until they got completely overtaken.

It was very telling how the new CEO said they were upgrading the lighting in their facility so that staff could properly see what they were doing... did the old management not realise that was a problem?!

The Jaguar and Dimension are newish but there hasn't been that much innovation in the mass market of bass and guitars since about 1994.

 

[Kubicki Fan]

...It was very telling how the new CEO said they were upgrading the lighting in their facility so that staff could properly see what they were doing... did the old management not realise that was a problem?!

Upgrading the lighting... That could merely mean that they'll put some bulbs in some of the empty sockets.

 

[48thStreetCustom]

Be original.

 

[Wisebass]

Hi Neon

It was very telling how the new CEO said they were upgrading the lighting in their facility so that staff could properly see what they were doing...

What did you expect? Original, heritage, tradition!

Gibson builds the same guitars since the 50s.

Gibson workers don' t need to adjust machines.

Gibson workers don' t need to read sketches, drawings and so forth.

Gibson workers know their stuff, they can do their job blindfolded! (sarcastic )

Upgrading the lighting... That could merely mean that they'll put some bulbs in some of the empty sockets.

Bulbs? You must be kidding! It' s all about tradition!

Candles man, candles!


greetings

Wise(b)ass

 

[Herrick]

I'm confused. Why does this matter to me? or you? or anybody?

I've never liked the idea of cloning guitar & bass body shapes, pickguards, etc from other companies who initially developed those shapes.

 

[Mike Whitfield]

I'll be surprised if there's any earth shaking decline in Gibson fanhood among guitar players. Too much good history, too much momentum. Could just end up being a tempest in a teapot, in the end.

Ibanez restored their sullied reputation (and then some) after years of stealing designs back in the day. Any harm done to Gibson's image (by Gibson themselves) can easily be overcome.

By more litigation?

Note to employees from Gibson management: The twice-weekly beatings will now be daily until we seem some improvement in morale.

 

[Picton]

So, HOW many threads about this are there? I can’t keep track.

 

[Wisebass]

Number 1

Gibson “you have been warned”

 

[Wisebass]

Number 2

Gibson Sues Dean and Luna over Infringement

 

[Wisebass]

Number 3

Gibson strikes again!

 

[Wisebass]

Number 2 and a half

Gibson sues…

edit: bashing thread got closed!

 

[-Asdfgh-]

I've never liked the idea of cloning guitar & bass body shapes, pickguards, etc from other companies who initially developed those shapes.

Even Gibson had its Fender alike period.

I'd suggest that a P body but with enhanced neck joint with a smaller heel is probably a good example of form following function as it balances more if less with the long upper horn and sits on a stand well. I'd rather have a form that works for playing and putting on a stand be widely used. A J, which I have several of, works for playing, but less well on a stand. The P electronics and the need to remove 93 screws to fix a cold solder joint is much less well designed than J or MM.

Not so much the headstock in terms of function as it is bigger than required and contributes to dead spots.

 

[Leo Thunder]

I've never liked the idea of cloning guitar & bass body shapes, pickguards, etc from other companies who initially developed those shapes.

These shapes weren't "developed". They just happened to catch on for some uncontrolled reason, most of it being habit. It's like singing someone else's song or taking on a particular slang. It shouldn't be owned by anyone.

 

[James Collins]

Looks like Gibson lost its appeal for a patent on the flying V in the EU. They basically said that Gibson applied for it 60 years too late.

Invalid Link Removed