Brad,
Hey, I appreciate this discussion, it's helpful to me.
I have examined a couple of Tobias signature models priced at $5300. I don't know...I'd never pay that price myself. Not that I found anything wrong with the instrument, but damned if I could see what you're getting for the price that you can't do at least as well for half the price elsewhere. It's possible that the musical value at those price ranges are lost on me - I may lack the critical faculties necessary to appreciate it. I can understand resale considerations, status value, bragging rights, etc. I don't think the high-end Tobias instruments earn any of that. I don't know if maybe any Gibson dealer is required to stock at least one of these things. Wouldn't surprise me.
But what we're saying here is, the resale value in this case depends almost entirely on reputation, and very little on the instrument itself. Maybe I'm wrong, but I get the impression an uninformed buyer (but someone capable of correctly assessing the musical value of an unknown bass) would be willing to pay me a great deal more than an "informed" buyer, who would examine the serial number and "know" all he needed to know.
I think your position is, "this is the way it is, like it or not. Gibson made a lot of crap, and those whose Gibson-made instruments are worth what Gibson charges basically have to eat the resale loss as a result." And while I think you're right, it's also a bit frustrating. Like I said, I could forge a fake serial number and that action ALONE would increase the resale value substantially. This reminds me of people who need to read the sportswriter's review of a game they just watched, to see if they watched a good game!
And again, I understand that WHY they did what they did is of no pressing interest to someone who just paid a fortune for a turd. Gibson's quick-buck recovery scheme is going to (and did) breed a generation of angry, vocal people. Like you, I hope they've turned things around. I know they're using topnotch woods and hardware/electronics. If they've got a handle on their processes, their instruments should deserve their prices (but resale value will suffer for many years to come no matter HOW high the quality.)
Hey, I appreciate this discussion, it's helpful to me.
I agree. I tend to see things from the view of fixing the issues. Which leads me to...
I'm a firmware engineer, and I need to work closely with manufacturing because designs (I'm part of the design team) can be unnecessarily difficult to build if manufacturing processes are disregarded. Which in turn means if the reject rate gets too high (the rate depends on the product, but anything over 10% is painful), I get involved in what's causing this and what I might be able to do to fix it. Yes, I understand that if you get a computer that doesn't work, as a customer you're not going to care exactly where the process solution may lie.
And possibly, some people not noticing defective parts or workmanship helps as well. But this still shouldn't be happening.
I got this information from a discussion that included an actual Gibson employee. But that discussion never mentioned quality; it was a discussion of Gibson's distribution channel policies, which have been, um, less than universally popular. Seems Gibson is cutting off dealers, refusing to permit discounting, restricting internet sales to one or two distributors (who may own more than one outlet), discontinuing the Toby line of overseas-built basses, tying the obligation to stock some lines with the access to others (wanna sell a Less Paul? Well, then you gotta stock N Epiphones, N Tobiases, N Steinbergers, etc.) According to this guy (for what it's worth, again), Gibson's production is consumed by their current channels. But production numbers weren't given. I seriously doubt Gibson releases these.
I have examined a couple of Tobias signature models priced at $5300. I don't know...I'd never pay that price myself. Not that I found anything wrong with the instrument, but damned if I could see what you're getting for the price that you can't do at least as well for half the price elsewhere. It's possible that the musical value at those price ranges are lost on me - I may lack the critical faculties necessary to appreciate it. I can understand resale considerations, status value, bragging rights, etc. I don't think the high-end Tobias instruments earn any of that. I don't know if maybe any Gibson dealer is required to stock at least one of these things. Wouldn't surprise me.
I suppose you're right. Although Carvin prides themselves on being as automated a shop as technology permits. So maybe "hand-crafted" is another meaningless phrase. But as I said, my own Tobias shows care in the matching of wood grains and colors that I don't think a machine could duplicate. Could be an accident too, of course...
I understand. I juxtaposed two ideas so they looked more related than I was thinking. I'd consider a new Tobias six because my 5-string is truly excellent and produces the sound, look and feel I want. But based on these discussions, I wouldn't order such an instrument over the net; I'd have the local dealer stock one and I'd buy it if it met my standards. The trip to the factory would be more a matter of curiosity, to satisfy my own desire to understand what's happening that causes such reported variation in quality to be produced. I don't know if Gibson has a factory retail outlet; I've never read of such a thing. I don't even know if they have tours.
Yes, but how many Foderas has anyone seen? A couple dozen? Really? Out of how many? Even Carvin (I mention them because they produce basses in large numbers) doesn't seem to suffer these anecdotal problems. I know that one can get only arbitrarily close to the issue. If it were part of my job and I were paid for the time, I'd get hold of one of their real lemons and get right to the heart of each flaw. How Did This Happen? Whose job was THIS, and THAT? As a mere customer, though, all of this is basically cautionary. Buy Gibson, run a risk.
That's why I enjoy discussing with you. You seem quite a bit more reasonable. And you're right, perhaps given the line's checkered history, my little advice-summary should have included the observation that "if you have resale in mind, you will almost surely take a bath regardless of the quality of the particular instrument you buy."
This is harder to express than I thought. I understand that the serial number represents a kind of line in the sand - up to number X, the bass is guaranteed to be great. After X, the bass's quality MIGHT be just as high, but it MIGHT blow huge chunks. Since you don't know which without careful examination, of course it's safest to assume the worst and avoid those serial numbers.
But what we're saying here is, the resale value in this case depends almost entirely on reputation, and very little on the instrument itself. Maybe I'm wrong, but I get the impression an uninformed buyer (but someone capable of correctly assessing the musical value of an unknown bass) would be willing to pay me a great deal more than an "informed" buyer, who would examine the serial number and "know" all he needed to know.
I think your position is, "this is the way it is, like it or not. Gibson made a lot of crap, and those whose Gibson-made instruments are worth what Gibson charges basically have to eat the resale loss as a result." And while I think you're right, it's also a bit frustrating. Like I said, I could forge a fake serial number and that action ALONE would increase the resale value substantially. This reminds me of people who need to read the sportswriter's review of a game they just watched, to see if they watched a good game!
Yes. At the time Gibson bought the Tobias name, the company was on the brink of bankruptcy. They sold out to some people who were MBA types, not necessarily musicians. The company suffered under what's called the tyranny of the urgent: Yeah, you want to produce high quality. No, you don't want to sell crap at premium prices until your reputation is trashed. But unless you do so right now, you will go broke right now. The ONLY strategy available is to destroy your reputation today and pay off the wolf at the door for another day, in the hopes that some day in the future, you'll be able to recover. Yes, recovering a bad reputation takes many years of better-than-superior quality without any exceptions. But Gibson was in the position where they had no choice.
And again, I understand that WHY they did what they did is of no pressing interest to someone who just paid a fortune for a turd. Gibson's quick-buck recovery scheme is going to (and did) breed a generation of angry, vocal people. Like you, I hope they've turned things around. I know they're using topnotch woods and hardware/electronics. If they've got a handle on their processes, their instruments should deserve their prices (but resale value will suffer for many years to come no matter HOW high the quality.)
