will Gibson have Tom Murphy do this cool thing with their basses too?

[Iristone]

I just want a diode equipped Jack Bruce signature EB-3 bass, for God's sake! Do it, Gibson!

I tried it at home, and found it's barely audible unless I really dig in. Maybe the output of a real mudbucker helps.

 

[foal30]

Gibson Tobias Growler are a very cool bass

 

[jamro217]

I just wish they'd come out with a line of instruments we could all fall in love with.

 

[40Hz]

If “yesterday’s instruments at tomorrow’s prices”, and faking a worn finish is cause for yet another breathless “we’re excited to announce” press release, then Gibson may be in far more trouble than they realize.

That or their marketing director is drinking way too much coffee.

 

[two fingers]

Gibson had better do the same thing Fender had better do. They better start marketing a guitar to people who don't give a rat's behind how they did it in 1959. Most of the people who really care about that stuff are retiring and/or moving on to the afterlife.

 

[40Hz]

Yep. The music world recycles everything and does it constantly. The older generation celebrates that it happens. The newer one feels threatened and gets all defensive whenever it’s pointed out they’re doing the same.

So maybe it’s time for Gibson to start ‘doing the Vulfpeck’ by putting their old wine in newish looking bottles. But this time around maybe be a little smarter about it by insisting they’re doing no such thing.

Fender, on the other hand, doesn’t have anything to worry about. The gravity well Leo created abides - and is stronger than ever.

 

[bassplayer9512]

I don't see Gibson figuring anything out soon. They are such a great example of a company getting by on it's name only. To me Gibson is so focused on reproducing historic guitars they forgot how to make good guitars and basses at affordable levels. I've only ever played one Gibson bass I thought was worth buying over an Epiphone and it was the Ripper.

 

[40Hz]

I don't see Gibson figuring anything out soon. They are such a great example of a company getting by on it's name only. To me Gibson is so focused on reproducing historic guitars they forgot how to make good guitars and basses at affordable levels. I've only ever played one Gibson bass I thought was worth buying over an Epiphone and it was the Ripper.

They’re too hung up on peddling their largely imagined “Gibson experience” rather producing instruments your average musician can afford and actually wants.

Their big problem is they want to be perceived as a boutique company like Fodera, but they also want to have the sales volume of a mass manufacturer like Fender. And that is simply not going to happen.

So rather than deal with that reality Gibson’s management has decided to retreat into a magical realm of their own imagining where everyone experiences a profound joy that was hitherto unknown to mankind. And these happy souls were able to get that “experience” by the simple expedient of buying themselves a Gibson instrument.

And that imagined “experience” is their entire vision for the company, and now what Gibson is mainly trying to sell. The actual products are just getting dragged along for the ride since most people aren’t willing to pay actual money for completely incorporeal goods. But that has yet to stop Gibson from insisting their new emperor actually is wearing clothes.

So be it. As Euripedes so wisely put it: ”Whom the gods destroy, they first make go insane.”

 

[wmhill]

As much of a joke as Gibson's bass line has become, they might better get Eddie Murphy to do his thing.

 

[MoeTown1986]

Gibson needs to bring back the cool basses they used to make. Bring back the Ripper, the Grabber, the Midtown hollowbody, and bring back the EB model from 2013-2014.

 

[PWRL]

I'd rather see them concentrate on doing what they do best than giving people more robot tuners, weird chromed-out things and computer guitars that get run over by bulldozers. They'll probably still be expensive, but so is any pro-level guitar.
Anyway, I'm just more curious than anything else. I can't see myself spending anything more than Epiphone money anytime in the near future, anyway.

 

[M.R. Ogle]

40HZ... exactly!
Whenever I hear any company exec's trying to push the "branding" (or worse, re-branding) angle, I throw up a little in my mouth.

 

[40Hz]

Take this lackluster year-end press release once again touting how “excited” Gibson (as opposed to anyone else) is about some organizational change they’ve made. Now contrast that with Fender’s Ultra series product roll out, complete with videos, artist endorsements, and actual products in stores.

Could it be that, unlike Gibson, Fender actually does have something to show the world - and sell?

 

[SturmUndDrang]

I'm imagining them building a Thunderbird then breaking the head stock off and reattaching it as a part of the authentic relicing.

 

[Chucky Stiletti]

I tried it at home, and found it's barely audible unless I really dig in. Maybe the output of a real mudbucker helps.

what type of diode did you use?

 

[TinIndian]

I am not certain from the press release if this is just an over the top relic job or if they are going to actually try to build instruments exactly like the originals? I'm telling you right now if they could really accurately to the smallest detail replicate a 59 Les Paul That could be magic. And I'm not talking skin deep, all the way to the core.

We'll see.

And yeah, if Gibson really wants to do something in the bass market they need to stop making halfhearted attempts at it. They have made some really cool basses over the years but each time they never build them for more than a few years.
How about an accurate Ripper or RD Artist with some sort of new circuitry to replicate the moog stuff. Even a Victory could be kind of cool. And there are others they could do. Wishful thinking.

 

[Gaolee]

I can't with for a "historically accurate" three point bridge, so we can all endure exactly the same frustration as the kids who played Gibson basses in the 60's. ;-)

I'd be much more excited to see Gibson hiring someone who's focus was on figuring out the science behind why old Gibsons sound so good, and marrying that with modern techniques to make even better instruments in the future.

Without robotuners.

The two point bridges were what Gibson did in the '60s. They work, more or less.

 

[dmt]

Man, a lot of guys down on Gibson here - which is reasonable. They haven’t learned from their mistakes in the bass world and are currently down to a skeleton lineup of just two classic-based models (Thunderbird and SG) that frustrate the purists (principally due to having the wrong pickups in them).

Well, it looks like, at least initially, the new management is focusing on a back-to-basics lineup. Not necessarily a bad move, though I hope they re-engage more with a somewhat more expansive bass lineup after they get their footing established. For guitarists, guitarists do care about how they were made in 1959. Yep, even kids, at least indirectly. They may not know anything about vintage Gibsons, but they know they want a Gibson Les Paul. And when they learn the prices and realize they have to get an Epiphone or other substitute, the frustration begins. And then the saving up. And the wanting of the "real" model, all the details of which can be easily found on the internet.

For most bassists of course, Gibson basses were never the holy grail tone - what appeal there is is generally more about a cool rock look. Heck, me too - the T-bird looks awesome in my book. And, some of us love the old Gibson tones. There’s a lot of good will there from Cream, The Who, Free, Mountain, and all sorts of great, just absolutely classic tunes recorded or played live back in the day.

Anyway, I think it would be cool if they’d do a "inspired by" 60s Thunderbird IV, Thunderbird II and EB-3, right pickups and all, but use the Epi Vintage Pro’s bridge. Bring the prices in around $1,500 and we could be talking! Actually, I could write a book about what Gibson should do, so I’ll stop there and just note:

Epiphone is the same company and they’ve actually got a nice, somewhat quirky lineup of affordable basses. It’s Gibson, just with different branding and using different manufacturing facilities. The basses are there:
Epiphone Bass Guitars

Meanwhile the Gibson brand itself has a wide-ranging, somewhat quirky back catalog and lots to work from going forward. Hopefully someday before too long they get back at it, dig in there, make adjustments and start getting it right

 

[dmt]

And yeah, if Gibson really wants to do something in the bass market they need to stop making halfhearted attempts at it. They have made some really cool basses over the years but each time they never build them for more than a few years.

Yeah, they’ve got to stick with some models for the long haul and let them become classics in their own right. Looks like they just dropped their Les Paul Jr. DC Tribute bass. That was a promising, relatively affordable bass and they dropped it after just one year, I think it was...dang

 

[Gringo Basso]

I'd reckon a reissued non-reverse T Bird would sell well, depending on how crazy they go on the list price.
The millennials go nuts for vintage and relic'd gear. I'd be tempted to drop 2k on one of those as well, just for the halibut.
However, bassists aren't gonna drop 3500-5000 for nostalgia.