• 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.

robot guitar (guitar content)

thombo

thombo

Aug 25, 2006
2,027
929
Denver, CO
#1
has anyone seen gibson's new robot guitar?
i realize that this is a guitar, not a bass, but i would imagine that it is only a matter of time before it is offered on a bass.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

i am not as excited as i am intrigued... i have no interest in owing a "robot bass" but i would love to mess around with one at a store.

discus.
 
#3
This is pretty old by internet standards.

It's just stupid I find. The guitar is meant in my eyes for lazy people who can't tune their own instruments. If it was another other company than Gibson it'd cost a whole lot less.
 
#7
Well, in a show, tuning from say Eb tuning to open G tuning is not the fastest switch. Previously the options were

1) Take the time to do it slowing up the show

2) have a 2nd guitar handy for the switch out.


Now you can keep the same instrument and switch pretty damn fast. I played around with one of the robots here and check it up with a nice strobe tuner each time. I can tell you the tuning on it is extremely accurate and fast.


Needed for bass? No.
Nice for guitar? very
 
#8
I think the concept's cool for guitar. If the guys from Sonic Youth started using those, they could probably do away with loads of their backup axes. :D

Bass-wise, they might be cool for detuning, though, I don't think many people will want to tune their basses up!
 
#10
I read the review in Guitar Player mag and the thing that struck me was that (if you analyze their results) the thing worked roughly 40% of the time.

Maybe it's just me, but I think I can tune my bass, on stage, with all distractions toggled to ON, 100% of the time.

Make it pure-D PERFECT and I'd pay maybe a $10 premium for it. Flawed as it is, it ain't worth what it costs.
 
#11
I think it was made more to showcase Gibson's patented ejecting headstock system. I mean really, if you can't trust a top-name company to remedy an inherent design flaw 40+ years after the fact (one piece angled headstock neck design), you REALLY gonna trust them to auto-tune the thing? Suck suck suck. Yeah, let's add more weight / stress to the headstock.

I mean really Gibson. Scarf joint. look into it. It predates any of your iconic designs by many many many decades. You'd save so many people so many repair bills.

"Magic" was a sucky technology for a guitar. So is this.
 
#12
lpdeluxe said:
I read the review in Guitar Player mag and the thing that struck me was that (if you analyze their results) the thing worked roughly 40% of the time.

Maybe it's just me, but I think I can tune my bass, on stage, with all distractions toggled to ON, 100% of the time.

Make it pure-D PERFECT and I'd pay maybe a $10 premium for it. Flawed as it is, it ain't worth what it costs.
Click to expand...

they must have had a pretty crappy one. the one I tried was pretty much spot on.
 
#15
spade2you said:
I don't think it would work particularly well on bass, especially if Gibson did it. Changing tunings on guitar isn't a really big deal, but it's a lot of tension on a bass.
Click to expand...

Maybe Gibson will develop a neck with load and pressure sensors so the yet to be developed Robot Active Truss Rod can adjust the neck to compensate for tension differences with alternate bass tunings:hiding:.

The only thing that would make the Robot interesting is if Microsoft developed the operating system for the computer chip. I can only imagine the fun of watching someone play the Robot live as the system crashes, the tuning and intonations start going crazy and the guitarist would have to reboot the guitar to tune the damned thing. :D
 
#16
dakpluto said:
they must have had a pretty crappy one. the one I tried was pretty much spot on.
Click to expand...

I think the issue is that some times they just broke - it wasn't so much that when they were working they couldn't dial in the tuning. I did hear from a few places the reliability on the first batch left something to be desired. This was not a model you would want to buy without a warranty...
 
#18
It's cool to watch. For about 10 seconds. After that, the novelty pretty much wears off. I tried one in Guitar Center. The blue finish on the limited editions was cool, but that's about it.

I also heard that because the system is based on measuring string tension, you're stuck to the brand and gauge of string that come on the guitar when you get it. Don't know if that's true or not, but I have heard it a few times, and it makes sense.
 
#20
Mon Rominee said:
I think it was made more to showcase Gibson's patented ejecting headstock system. I mean really, if you can't trust a top-name company to remedy an inherent design flaw 40+ years after the fact (one piece angled headstock neck design), you REALLY gonna trust them to auto-tune the thing? Suck suck suck. Yeah, let's add more weight / stress to the headstock.

I mean really Gibson. Scarf joint. look into it. It predates any of your iconic designs by many many many decades. You'd save so many people so many repair bills.

"Magic" was a sucky technology for a guitar. So is this.
Click to expand...

Spit up my coffee. :D
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back