Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Gibson's quality control: has the mojo gone?
- Thread starter andreluckman
- Start date
-
- Tags
- gibson
No worries - and you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but the way you presented it reminded me of people who make the claim that "their Squier smokes any US Fender", that's all...
People who buy Epiphones are poor or cheap. Nice. We need more posts like this on talkbass.
I've owned two Gibson LP basses over the years, as well as a LP deluxe and SG (both guitars).
The two LP basses (purchased in '93 and '10 respectively) both had quality issues. Go figure.
The two LP basses (purchased in '93 and '10 respectively) both had quality issues. Go figure.
People who buy Epiphones are poor or cheap. Nice. We need more posts like this on talkbass.
I suppose I could've worded that a bit differently - sorry if I hurt anyone's feelings...
I own instruments ranging from several thousand to under a hundred bucks, from US Fenders and Japanese Ibanez's to Indonesian Squiers and Chinese Epiphones. I can afford high-end brands, yet I keep choosing Epiphones over high-cost Gibsons because Epi's have just been kicking butt lately in quality. They're not necessarily better than the Gibsons but definitely comparable and a much better value. I also don't have to worry about damaging them or getting them stolen like I would with a $3k Gibby.
I don't know about any US Fender, but all three of my Squier basses do hold their own against my Am Std. Does that bug you? Honestly, it bugs me a little but that doesn't mean its not true. I still don't know if the cheapies are just unnaturally good or if the Fender is a lemon. What I do know is my little J-Bass makes me smile when I pick it up, while the Fender tries to slice my fingers on the sharp fret ends that have appeared since the air got dry. And that's just the latest development with the Fender (btw, no sharp frets on the Squiers even though they're all kept in the same room).
Personally speaking, I haven't come across a Gibson that was worthy of the name, since about 1990.
Even the basses they were putting out in the 60's & 70's, whilst fun, and functional, were more about the sound than the playability (being closer to well made furniture, than finely crafted instruments).
It's a real shame, that whilst the likes of Fender & EBMM can reissue their vintage models to great acclaim, Gibson seems content to churn out half baked "sort-of-but-not-quite" relaunched versions of icons like the Grabber.
If you're trying to tap into the 2nd hand market, do like Fender & EBMM, and give people damn good reasons to go with a new reissue, rather than release something that only serves to drive people towards the 2nd hand vintage instrument, and in the process increasing their value.
Or do as Rickenbacker does, and essentially make the same instrument, virtually unchanged, forever.
Sadly, the Gibson of today is not the Gibson of yesteryear, at least with regards to bass (I haven't really quizzed any guitarists on this recently).
But as bad as it is that Gibson seems to trade purely on it's former glories, it's primary tactic for staying alive seems to be buying up other iconic brands, and destroying them.
The list of instrument manufacturers, amplifier brands, and software companies that Gibson have bought, and subsequently killed, is shocking (most recently the DAW Cakewalk).
And that's not to mention the armed raids by the FBI, to seize illegal stocks of wood from Gibson warehouses.
The brand just seems toxic these days.
Old Ripppers, Grabbers, Firebirds etc are terrific, as are old Steinway's - but nobody in this day and age would dream of buying a new piano that used real Ivory : it's morally bankrupt, just like a certain brand.
Even the basses they were putting out in the 60's & 70's, whilst fun, and functional, were more about the sound than the playability (being closer to well made furniture, than finely crafted instruments).
It's a real shame, that whilst the likes of Fender & EBMM can reissue their vintage models to great acclaim, Gibson seems content to churn out half baked "sort-of-but-not-quite" relaunched versions of icons like the Grabber.
If you're trying to tap into the 2nd hand market, do like Fender & EBMM, and give people damn good reasons to go with a new reissue, rather than release something that only serves to drive people towards the 2nd hand vintage instrument, and in the process increasing their value.
Or do as Rickenbacker does, and essentially make the same instrument, virtually unchanged, forever.
Sadly, the Gibson of today is not the Gibson of yesteryear, at least with regards to bass (I haven't really quizzed any guitarists on this recently).
But as bad as it is that Gibson seems to trade purely on it's former glories, it's primary tactic for staying alive seems to be buying up other iconic brands, and destroying them.
The list of instrument manufacturers, amplifier brands, and software companies that Gibson have bought, and subsequently killed, is shocking (most recently the DAW Cakewalk).
And that's not to mention the armed raids by the FBI, to seize illegal stocks of wood from Gibson warehouses.
The brand just seems toxic these days.
Old Ripppers, Grabbers, Firebirds etc are terrific, as are old Steinway's - but nobody in this day and age would dream of buying a new piano that used real Ivory : it's morally bankrupt, just like a certain brand.
It's cool, man. No hurt feelings. We musicians gotta keep it positive. Play what you can afford or what you like, and if they're one and the same, then you're fortunate.
I was poor three years ago when I bought my Epiphone Allen Woody bass. Then I had to sell it to buy a cheap combo amp because my 3 year old broke my Hartke 3500. Then I sold the combo amp to pay for my septic system to be pumped. Ah, good times indeed.
My 2015 Gibson SG is fine btw. Definitely worth the $900 it cost me in 2016.
My 2015 Gibson SG is fine btw. Definitely worth the $900 it cost me in 2016.
I am an electronic tech, and worked at a cool store in the late 80's through mid 90's we actually did drum work for Rush, the store is long gone, ANYWAY'S. I remember some upper management Gibson folks coming in, for problems with guitar finishes, what was happening mainly on the white, or cream guitars, the wild colors, there were using, in the case fur back then, such as red, yellow, etc, were actually wearing off, onto the finishes of guitars, causing discoloration on the clear coat.
It's been gone for decades.
I owned a few Norlin era instruments that far surpass Henry era instruments by a long shot.
Norlin-era Gibsons are often trashed in conversations, and many a times for a good reason.
Having said that, there were quite a few interesting instruments that came out of that period, and some of them were actually spectacular IMO.
If I had to pick one guitar to stay with me for the rest of my days, it would be a mid-70s Byrdland that a buddy of mine once owned. Go figure.
I was in a similar boat, although I'd managed to get one of those "faded" SG shorties for just under $700. The bass was well made and had no issue with setup. That said, the neck pickup rattled so much I had to put foam rubber in there to stop it. I ended up flipping the bass because it sounded like poopie. Rounds, flats, goofing around with pedals: It had one usable sound when it was slightly crunched out out. This is of course entirely subjective, but the $180 Squier Jaguar SS was and is a much better and more versatile bass. And that's even with the weirdness with the j-pickup volume issues.
my grabber couldn't deal with the vast humidity shifts of kent, ohio
but i must admit that although the action was easily four times as high as my g&ls, it did have an amazing tone
as far as getting a gibson bass nowadays, i'd try before I buy, i've seen some nice used ones that were pretty sweet at gc for between 500 and 600 bucks
but i must admit that although the action was easily four times as high as my g&ls, it did have an amazing tone
as far as getting a gibson bass nowadays, i'd try before I buy, i've seen some nice used ones that were pretty sweet at gc for between 500 and 600 bucks
I suppose it is all relative, but people who can buy any bass at all and have the time/energy/health to play it do not meet my definition of poor...and since when was that shameful, anyway? Somebody ought to do a study of bass player brand identification and figure out why free citizens of a republic feel the need to defend the sticker on their purchase.People who buy Epiphones are poor or cheap. Nice. We need more posts like this on talkbass.
I'll cop to being cheap, though for me that meant a Squier instead of an Epiphone. I always wanted a Thunderbird, though. Wouldn't die on a hill for its honor, though.
Last edited:
I have owned two vintage Gibson EBO basses and could easily afford to purchase another. That said, my slightly modified Epiphone plays better than either of the Gibsons ever did. So, you'd be wrong.
Or smart enough not to flush $1000 down the toilet in order to impress strangers with our gear choices....but to each their own I guess.
I love when people make deliberately provocative comments and then attach a "just sayin" or "YMMV" on the end. To each their own I guess lol.
My 2013 Future USA SG is my worst guitar, its awful and I can never seem to get the low E not to buzz so I think the neck may be a bit warped. Looks cool atleast
