Gibson's quality control: has the mojo gone?

[Ronbeast]

I’ve got three “low end” more modern Gibson’s, and I haven’t experienced any issues with quality or playability.

I’ve got a 2011 Melody Maker Flying V, a 2013 SGJ and a 2013 SG 50’s tribute; all three are great instruments and I paid $450 for the most expensive one. All were bought new with all papers and case candy.

There are definitely poor examples of Gibson quality, but there’s also a lot of great instruments.

These days, it’s more like people play a single example of the brand, and if it’s not 100% perfect for them, the flood gates of negativity open. The brand obviously isn’t perfect, but they’ve reached Nickelback levels of “crap on for no reason” on the inter webs. For the record, I hated Nickelback before it was cool...

 

[Felken]

Word around is that Gibson has been suffering lately, especially in the QC department.

 

[Gaolee]

There are all kinds of rumors swirling around Gibson these days. It sucks that the OP got a turkey. I have a 2015 Thunderbird that is just fine. Same with a 2013 EB. Both had somewhat sharp fret ends, but no sprout, no humps, no issues with intonation once set, no playability problems. I got both used, so what few finish issues they had were not likely from the factory.

That said, the sooner Gibson is rid of Henry J, the better off Gibson will be. His reputation as a boss is poisonous. That can't be good for QC.

 

[higain617]

I wanted an LP Custom. After analyzing the cost-to-quality data, I bought a Greco and changed the bridge pickup.

 

[Member8675309]

I have a 2014 EB 5 string that I couldn't be happier with. The only change I made was changing the Vol/Vol setup to Vol/Blend out of personal preference. Other than that, this bass is perfect me. The 7.8lb weight is awesome for my bad back. I paid $850 for it after it was discontinued. Worth every penny. Having said that, I really dislike what they did with the current EB line. The body shape just isn't my thing.

Yeah, agreed, the new EBs are terrible aesthetically. The model like what you have is my next bass when I can get the money and find one used at a good price. I think they are a terrific looking bass.

 

[metron]

Also needed a fretjob. Thats definitely QC - doesn't matter how long it sits on a shelf, if the frets aren't right when the relief is set, its a poor build.

I think fret dressing, crowning, shaping, etc is definitely a QC issue but fret sprout usually isn't. From the OP, I'm not sure which was the case here though.

 

[ajkula66]

That said, the sooner Gibson is rid of Henry J, the better off Gibson will be. His reputation as a boss is poisonous. That can't be good for QC.

Amen.

I hope that 2018 ends up being a great year for Gibson, because they undoubtedly are - love them or hate them - an industry icon and it would be quite sad if they went under, mainly for the sake of their employees but also for the place that the brand in question has reserved for itself in history.

Yeah, agreed, the new EBs are terrible aesthetically.

Tastes differ, and that's a beautiful thing. While I'm not crazy about either 2013 or 2017 design looks-wise, I strongly prefer the latter. Sonically, they are both fine instruments and pretty-close-sounding in most respects.

 

[SirMjac28]

I love how rumors become fact I don't think Gibson's quality control is any better or worse than the rest of the mass producers and my 2015 SG was perfect.

 

[Member8675309]

Tastes differ, and that's a beautiful thing. While I'm not crazy about either 2013 or 2017 design looks-wise, I strongly prefer the latter. Sonically, they are both fine instruments and pretty-close-sounding in most respects.

My problem is with the horn and curvature. That is basically where it ends. There is no denying that it is a beautifully finished bass. It’s probably all a matter of Gibson trying to appeal to a wider audience, and I’m just not that audience when it comes to this particular bass.

 

[ekajnitram]

I've got a Les Paul Studio, and a Les Paul Jr. that were both great from the get go. I of course replaced the tuners with locking Grovers, the bridges with Tone Pros, Pickups were swapped for Duncans and had my luthier do a set up, fret dressing and everything else after I had them for a couple weeks. But they've both been solid work horse guitars.

Sadly I do not have experience with their basses.

 

[Farseer]

I've bought two guitars from Gibson, a 2015 Les Paul and a 2016 Flying V. Both were exceptional when I received them. The Les Paul has thousands of hours on it (my son is the guitard) and no problems at all. The pleking they do is awesome.

 

[edro]

IMHO: There is nothing wrong with Gibson that finding someone with QC knowledge to rebuild QC can't fix, quick, fast, and in a hurry... That mgr would periodically personally eyeball and handle every single guitar on a day's outrack.
Expect what you inspect.

Most Gibsons are great guitars. There are some, however, that seems to miraculously get past QC and out on some store's wall... There is no excuse for that. None. Some that got out blow my mind.

I would have capability in the company software in that a QC scans the serial# of a guitar being examined, scans their OWN SPECIFIC QC ID HANGING AROUND THEIR NECK WITH PIC and then go/no-go on a touch screen with various typical gigs listed, printer prints a label with gigs against the item, QC sticks the label ON the guitar and places on the go-back rack. I would have that rack painted the most horrendous color possible with shoop shoop flags and possibly a red beacon up on a pole. Mount an air horn to be blown on every reject so all can hear it.....

 

[SturmUndDrang]

My Gibson experiences have all been pretty good. I've previously owned a 2012 SG bass, 2013 and 2014 EB basses, and currently own both a 2007 GOTW Money Bass and a 2007 SG Faded, and I only had very minor issues with a couple of the aforementioned models. My 2012 SG's neck pup had a volume dip on the E-string, and the 2013 EB Bass pups had the chorusing effect that some complained about on the 2013 model (and I believe Gibson offered replacement pups under warranty, but I may be mistaken on that). Some of the 2013's had it, and some didn't. My 2014 didn't have this issue. The Money Bass and the 2007 SG have been great, and the 2014 EB was good, too. Just my experience, of course.

I'll back you up on the Money bass. It is a fantastic bass and works great for me in my current band. I will say, I've seen an EB with bad neck bow at guitar center too but who knows what it's been through. There are plenty of people that like and use the recent EBs along with some major artist's bass players like Blackberry Smoke and Robert Plant. People get so worked up about hating on Gibson for some reason. It's like Gibson derangement syndrome. I just laugh at it and enjoy my basses.

 

[Honch]

I am not sure about people being able to tell the QC difference, between say a design flaw and some QC check. Some design idiosyncrasies can't be remedied even with the most meticulous QC. SG and Les Paul especially.

This is were it really has no relation to QC: The Les Pauls are among the most prone to headstock breaking guitars ever. And not to speak of their initial tuning problems, which is remedied with "you just have to change the nut, or file it properly" well there are other 2-3000 dollar guitars that has this right from the start.



One can have a grey area where "out of tune easy" may not be QC of the nut. It is said that all Epiphone fares well and better on this. Regarding headstock breaks, there was some kind of survey among luthiers and repairmens a while back (quite a while) that Gibson Les Pauls was the most broken headstocked guitars that came in for repair. Second to none. Mind you, not even the closest Asian counterfeits, or Epiphones, or other Les Paul copies came in. And here comes the dig : No repaired/glued Gibson headstock has ever came in AGAIN with a broken headstock. It seems that Gibson should deliberately break their headstocks on their new instruments, before shipping, and glue them back on again...will make wonders.

The SGs frail and flexible design, is the culrpit for many of them going out of tune. Once you've bent a string, or bent the neck to produce a bit wavery effect, the strings doesn't come back. I e worse than a floating traditional strat tremolo system that doesn't keep in tune after whammying.

I guess people are starting to slowly detect - like in "it has DAWNED to me slowly" - that Gibson's not the be all and end all of guitars, and both Gibson and Fenders are resting on the laurels, and builds guitars the traditional way, regardless of they're any good or not. I wouldn't mind this at all, but that such a conservative making and traditional making (all patents must've run out) shouldn't cost like 2 K or above. It's just a guitar. I have tried one battered 1953 P90 Les Paul at som Guitar Trade Fair show once. Plugged it in, and didn't get that mojo vibe. It had gone past its past date for wood, and so on. Dried up, and warped things, cracked finish and whatever.

 

[MordBass]

I am not sure about people being able to tell the QC difference, between say a design flaw and some QC check. Some design idiosyncrasies can't be remedied even with the most meticulous QC. SG and Les Paul especially.

This is were it really has no relation to QC: The Les Pauls are among the most prone to headstock breaking guitars ever. And not to speak of their initial tuning problems, which is remedied with "you just have to change the nut, or file it properly" well there are other 2-3000 dollar guitars that has this right from the start.



One can have a grey area where "out of tune easy" may not be QC of the nut. It is said that all Epiphone fares well and better on this. Regarding headstock breaks, there was some kind of survey among luthiers and repairmens a while back (quite a while) that Gibson Les Pauls was the most broken headstocked guitars that came in for repair. Second to none. Mind you, not even the closest Asian counterfeits, or Epiphones, or other Les Paul copies came in. And here comes the dig : No repaired/glued Gibson headstock has ever came in AGAIN with a broken headstock. It seems that Gibson should deliberately break their headstocks on their new instruments, before shipping, and glue them back on again...will make wonders.

The SGs frail and flexible design, is the culrpit for many of them going out of tune. Once you've bent a string, or bent the neck to produce a bit wavery effect, the strings doesn't come back. I e worse than a floating traditional strat tremolo system that doesn't keep in tune after whammying.

I guess people are starting to slowly detect - like in "it has DAWNED to me slowly" - that Gibson's not the be all and end all of guitars, and both Gibson and Fenders are resting on the laurels, and builds guitars the traditional way, regardless of they're any good or not. I wouldn't mind this at all, but that such a conservative making and traditional making (all patents must've run out) shouldn't cost like 2 K or above. It's just a guitar. I have tried one battered 1953 P90 Les Paul at som Guitar Trade Fair show once. Plugged it in, and didn't get that mojo vibe. It had gone past its past date for wood, and so on. Dried up, and warped things, cracked finish and whatever.

Soooooo true. I had a 2011 Trad Pro II that would NOT stay in tune at all.

 

[rogerbmiller]

QC has become notoriously bad there as has the working environment.

This is the Alex Lifeson signature guitar. Notice the placement of the volute. This was a mistake that they not only allowed to leave the factory, it was never corrected so every guitar went out like this. That is so beyond piss-poor I didn't believe it at first. But it's real...

 

[MordBass]

QC has become notoriously bad there as has the working environment.

This is the Alex Lifeson signature guitar. Notice the placement of the volute. This was a mistake that they not only allowed to leave the factory, it was never corrected so every guitar went out like this. That is so beyond piss-poor I didn't believe it at first. But it's real...

View attachment 2833031

Ive read some pretty nasty stuff about the working environment like you mentioned. In 2009 they were ranked the worst place to work in America and have consistently been called the worst employer in the Nashville area.

 

[stringthrough]

You got lucky finding a good G3.

Quality plummeted years ago (1970's). I won't repeat some of the accounts of manufacturing shortcuts taken and quality control issues I've heard from resellers I'm friendly with.

 

[ajkula66]

. And here comes the dig : No repaired/glued Gibson headstock has ever came in AGAIN with a broken headstock. It seems that Gibson should deliberately break their headstocks on their new instruments, before shipping, and glue them back on again...will make wonders.

This is a myth that needs to be dispelled. I have personally owned and seen a number of Gibbys that have gone through more than one headstock repair, and not just Les Pauls.

The SGs frail and flexible design, is the culrpit for many of them going out of tune. Once you've bent a string, or bent the neck to produce a bit wavery effect, the strings doesn't come back. I e worse than a floating traditional strat tremolo system that doesn't keep in tune after whammying.

This only holds true for the first generation of SGs (1961-66) and was remedied in the second generation, and stayed remedied from that point on. Take it from someone who has owned a multitude of both over the past 35+ years.

I have tried one battered 1953 P90 Les Paul at som Guitar Trade Fair show once. Plugged it in, and didn't get that mojo vibe. It had gone past its past date for wood, and so on. Dried up, and warped things, cracked finish and whatever.

I've tried several "trapeze tailpiece" units and they were all pretty spectacular sounding instruments but their necks were huge, at least for my hands. They sounded huge as well. Having said that, I'm certain that not all of them were that good, but I have yet to meet a 50s Les Paul that's a complete piece of junk.

Now, realistically, none of this has much to do with the issues that OP is facing with his 335 bass. But it always feels good for some people on TB to pile on and turn every thread about Gibsons into a hate fest. Only Rickenbacker-related threads take a similar route which has been mind-boggling to me ever since I've joined this forum.

Even if I never owned another Gibson for the rest of my days and lived to be 150 years old, I have owned more than my fair share of them (mostly guitars, very few basses) and while they're not perfect - nothing built by human hand ever is - I fail to understand the reasons behind the hate and vitriol that gets spewed at the brand in question. Don't like them? Don't play them. It's really that simple, at least in my book.

 

[Two-Spirit]

Hey talkbassers,
after many years just reading, this is my first post.

All because I'm somewhat desolate: I just bought a 2013 ES-335 (semihollow) announced as "mint, floor model" from Reverb.com. The bass looks really mint and unplayed, but arrived with action VERY high (bridge was almost popping out) and the intonation was terrible. For an instrument promised to be "inspected and setup before it leaves our facilities", I became very impressed (negatively, of course).

Ok, this is not my first Gibson, so lets pick up new strings and make a good setup, but... I realized the scale wasn't good, very poor fret dressing, after 3 days working patiently I'm just unable to get a reasonable setup on this bass. I can't believe I'll have to put a NEW GIBSON in my luthier's hands to work the fretboard.

Do you have something to share about it? I've played vintage Gibsons, I also own a 2012 G3 reissue, bought from a player, with impeccable action. I never thought I would get a poor instrument accompanied by a fancy certificate of authenticity, "gold warranty" checklisted and so on.

If it were not for the problem of living far from the United States (I live in Brazil), I would be considering a return.

Ok, bad vibe outflow completed. Thanks for your time and keep on rocking.

It's the suits, always looking to save money.