Why do so many assume Gibson doesn't take bass manufacturing seriously? They have designs unique to them, several of which have been in and out of production for nearly 70 years.
I believe the primary reason for their unappealing reputation (generally speaking) comes from what differentiates them from Fenders (or FSOs). Some observations off the top of my head:
- They are usually ergonomically quite different than a typical FSO (shape, balance points, where they "hang" etc)
- They have a distinctive tonal pallette very different from the typical FSO
- Most models (a couple exceptions) historically are through-neck or set neck which means replacement or swapping is very difficult or impossible limiting repairs/customization
- Model pricing has been all over the map from year to year without perceived justification in the eyes of the consumer
However, the following qualities are generally favored by the average FSO style player, and Gibson has been offering these features for a long time:
-Most of their bass models are nitro lacquered (a big deal for many FSO lovers)
- They use high end hardware (Grover, Hipshot, Babicz, etc)
- They typically use "perceived as premium" woods (mahogany, ash, maple)
- Most bass models come with a very nice plush lined hardcase with vintage styling (again, another big deal for some folks)
- All Gibsons are made in the USA (yet again a big deal for some)
So, it's strange to me that Gibsons have garnered such unfavorable reviews with so many bassists over the years. They seem to have been everywhere in the '60s and '70s (perhaps due to the lack of available options?), but are admittedly less commonly seen nowadays. But with a list of perceived favorable qualities at least as long as perceived unfavorable ones, it just doesn't add up IMHO. And to be fair, there are lots of players who enjoy and seek out some of the qualities mentioned in the first group. Sound, ergonomics, uniqueness, and nostalgia are actually reasons that some folks want a Gibson bass in the first place. I guess you could say they march to the beat of their own drum.
I enjoy the Gibsons in my current stable, and can honestly say that I've never owned one that wasn't well built in my eyes. I currently own or have owned:
1979 Thunderbird
2013 Thunderbird
2015 Thunderbird
2013 Midtown Std
2013 EB4 (sometimes called an EB13)
Two 2014 SG Anniversary Specials
2019 Les Paul Tribute DC
-So, a decent sampling of their basses, albeit missing out on those '60s, '70s and '80s icons like the original EB series, Ripper, Grabber, RDs, Victory, etc.
Have I absolutely LOVED every one I've owned? No. But to be honest, they've all been well made, solid offerings even if I wasn't completely enamored by a couple. I could say the same thing for every brand of bass I've owned multiples of in terms of likeability, but not for consistency in quality. In my experience, Gibson has probably been the best in terms of "quality across the board." I realize this may not be the same experience for everyone. And perhaps I've just been lucky, lol.
Having said that, I'm definitely no Gibson fanboy. I simply enjoy them as one of many brands that I've appreciated and been blessed to play over my relatively short tenure in the electric bass world.
So, if I'm missing some huge sticking points/observations on Gibson basses, I'd love to hear from anyone who would be willing to share. I only ask that we try and keep it civil, lol. I know I may be "flirting with disaster" with my title. I certainly mean no harm, and am well aware that there have been many similar threads over the years (most of which I've read through). But, hey....if ya don't ask, ya won't know, right?!
I believe the primary reason for their unappealing reputation (generally speaking) comes from what differentiates them from Fenders (or FSOs). Some observations off the top of my head:
- They are usually ergonomically quite different than a typical FSO (shape, balance points, where they "hang" etc)
- They have a distinctive tonal pallette very different from the typical FSO
- Most models (a couple exceptions) historically are through-neck or set neck which means replacement or swapping is very difficult or impossible limiting repairs/customization
- Model pricing has been all over the map from year to year without perceived justification in the eyes of the consumer
However, the following qualities are generally favored by the average FSO style player, and Gibson has been offering these features for a long time:
-Most of their bass models are nitro lacquered (a big deal for many FSO lovers)
- They use high end hardware (Grover, Hipshot, Babicz, etc)
- They typically use "perceived as premium" woods (mahogany, ash, maple)
- Most bass models come with a very nice plush lined hardcase with vintage styling (again, another big deal for some folks)
- All Gibsons are made in the USA (yet again a big deal for some)
So, it's strange to me that Gibsons have garnered such unfavorable reviews with so many bassists over the years. They seem to have been everywhere in the '60s and '70s (perhaps due to the lack of available options?), but are admittedly less commonly seen nowadays. But with a list of perceived favorable qualities at least as long as perceived unfavorable ones, it just doesn't add up IMHO. And to be fair, there are lots of players who enjoy and seek out some of the qualities mentioned in the first group. Sound, ergonomics, uniqueness, and nostalgia are actually reasons that some folks want a Gibson bass in the first place. I guess you could say they march to the beat of their own drum.
I enjoy the Gibsons in my current stable, and can honestly say that I've never owned one that wasn't well built in my eyes. I currently own or have owned:
1979 Thunderbird
2013 Thunderbird
2015 Thunderbird
2013 Midtown Std
2013 EB4 (sometimes called an EB13)
Two 2014 SG Anniversary Specials
2019 Les Paul Tribute DC
-So, a decent sampling of their basses, albeit missing out on those '60s, '70s and '80s icons like the original EB series, Ripper, Grabber, RDs, Victory, etc.
Have I absolutely LOVED every one I've owned? No. But to be honest, they've all been well made, solid offerings even if I wasn't completely enamored by a couple. I could say the same thing for every brand of bass I've owned multiples of in terms of likeability, but not for consistency in quality. In my experience, Gibson has probably been the best in terms of "quality across the board." I realize this may not be the same experience for everyone. And perhaps I've just been lucky, lol.
Having said that, I'm definitely no Gibson fanboy. I simply enjoy them as one of many brands that I've appreciated and been blessed to play over my relatively short tenure in the electric bass world.
So, if I'm missing some huge sticking points/observations on Gibson basses, I'd love to hear from anyone who would be willing to share. I only ask that we try and keep it civil, lol. I know I may be "flirting with disaster" with my title. I certainly mean no harm, and am well aware that there have been many similar threads over the years (most of which I've read through). But, hey....if ya don't ask, ya won't know, right?!
