Modern Gibson Quality - Advice Needed

Skipped

If Paul Reed Smith - the worlds biggest Gibson Fan Boy - would just buy Gibson, that would be be "perfect".

I would have no doubts whatsoever about this being a good thing.
He completely gets the company and the History.

Jonathanthomas83

They need someone to buy them, by the looks of things recently. Selling workshops etc.

guitars4you

richardhomer said:

Beyond a certain point, I’m not sure how much build quality matters.

Comparing a PRS CU24 to a typical Les Paul will reveal (by and large) that the PRS is ‘perfect’ and that the Gibson has various minor, cosmetic flaws.

The issue is surely that the two guitars are not interchangeable - they sound and feel very different from each other.

If you want a Les Paul, you probably need to buy a Les Paul....

I think that as an overview this is pretty much correct - To be fair to Gibson most negative comments regarding build quality are finish flaws - not extreme and the more fussy you are then the more of an issue - Again as an overview I think there are less 'structural' issues today than in previous era's - In the past I've seen string alignment on a few guitars that is so bad that an E string falls of the edge of the fingerboard - sometimes due to a poor 'roll off' on the edge of the fret - Sometimes due to a badly cut neck - see it less so today

I dare say many of our FB members who run guitar workshops can comment if they are getting more work today regarding such negative structural issues - I dare say any good tech can put any new Gibson on a bench and fine tune the set-up to optimise the playing performance - But that doesn't mean every Gibson needs to go to a tech, depends on your playing ability and the level of set-up that you require that works for you

I dare say that Gibson will argue that the factory set-up can only be offered to a certain criteria, as many of us have a different opinion as to what we prefer regarding slinky/higher action and gauge of strings

Jonathanthomas83

Jonathanthomas83 said:

richardhomer said:

The issue is surely that the two guitars are not interchangeable - they sound and feel very different from each other.

If you want a Les Paul, you probably need to buy a Les Paul....

Absolutely agree.

I'm gonna try a 594 today though and will report back on how close it gets, my assumption is, not close enough.

Tried a double cut 594 earlier and it was lovely, captured a lot of what I love about Les Paul’s. Lovely guitar and I’m sure the singlecut would get closer again, which I’m eager to try. As expected, it’s build and quality control left little to be desired, was impeccable to say the least.

Im more of a modern Les Paul type of guy, so Burstbucker Pro’s and a thinner profile neck are my thing. Neither of which the PRS has, but the thicker neck wasn’t a deal breaker, it’s very comfortable. The pickups can be changed but the low wound 85/15s are great sounding pickups for that guitar.

Anyway, nobody asked for that, but as it’s topical, thought I’d share! Haha

ICBM

proggy said:

I've never owned a Gibson, I can't recall ever playing one to be honest, but if they or so hit and miss on build quality why are they so sought after and expensive?

For me, because when they get it right then nothing else quite compares - not PRS, not any of the high-end 'near copies', not any of the highly-rated 'better than a Gibson' Japanese ones… nothing. Nothing else looks quite right, feels quite right and sounds quite right all at the same time. They are an iconic piece of rock history for a reason.

underdog

ICBM said:

proggy said:

I've never owned a Gibson, I can't recall ever playing one to be honest, but if they or so hit and miss on build quality why are they so sought after and expensive?

For me, because when they get it right then nothing else quite compares - not PRS, not any of the high-end 'near copies', not any of the highly-rated 'better than a Gibson' Japanese ones… nothing. Nothing else looks quite right, feels quite right and sounds quite right all at the same time. They are an iconic piece of rock history for a reason.

Exactly what he says is pretty much spot on. A good Les Paul is lovely but an excellent Les Paul is as good as it gets and nothing I've played is quite the same as one.

Jonathanthomas83

ICBM said:

proggy said:

I've never owned a Gibson, I can't recall ever playing one to be honest, but if they or so hit and miss on build quality why are they so sought after and expensive?

For me, because when they get it right then nothing else quite compares - not PRS, not any of the high-end 'near copies', not any of the highly-rated 'better than a Gibson' Japanese ones… nothing. Nothing else looks quite right, feels quite right and sounds quite right all at the same time. They are an iconic piece of rock history for a reason.

This is why we’re all on this thread. Cos we love ‘em!

impmann

p90fool said:

proggy said:

I've never owned a Gibson, I can't recall ever playing one to be honest, but if they or so hit and miss on build quality why are they so sought after and expensive?

They're not, it's just their attention to tiny cosmetic details got a bit left behind when the likes of PRS came along to up the ante and everyone else started spraying their computer-built guitars with a flawless sheet of glass-like plastic. 

Add about a million internet know-it-alls to the equation and all of a sudden they're rubbish guitars at outrageous prices, even though half the world's favourite records are made using them.  

The truth is that Gibson have been making a tiny number of dodgy guitars and a huge number of fantastic guitars with occasional finish imperfections for well over a century, and your perception of whether that matters will largely depend on whether you're a musician or a collector. 

I can only give one wisdom for this, but I want to give this a lot more.

Thank you.

Schnozz

Think of Gibson like Apple and all the deluded that go with. Look for alternatives like Oneplus, as this will largely depend on whether you're sensible...Or a mug.

underdog

Schnozz said:

Think of Gibson like Apple and all the deluded that go with. Look for alternatives like Oneplus, as this will largely depend on whether you're sensible...Or a mug.

Yup people who have been playing decades purely buy Gibson's based some odd brand loyalty, not because they are really good instruments and give them the sound that they want  

Teacherphil

https://photos.app.goo.gl/V2XAQP1cNShFmLuM2
2014 SG Standard. 2016 Firebird. 2017 Tribute T Gold top. All great playing guitars. I've read loads of people on t'interweb trying to claim the new ones are rubbish. IMHO they're talking bollocks. Personally I think its the competition trying to smear Gibson by spreading online rumours.

Nerine

I think "Gibsons quality control" is a bit of a Red Herring personally. 

bingefeller

I just bought a 2018 Les Paul Standard and it is flawless and I am very fussy with my guitars and how they are fitted and finished.  

jeztone2

I’ve had 6 Gibson’s over the years. QC can be hit and miss. But my 2017 LP Classic is beautifully put together. I think they’ve improved a bit recently. The 2013 LP Trad Pro II I owned was not so nice. My brothers 2001 Les Paul Standard has an off centred machine-head. But otherwise was a nice guitar. My 2003 Classic did have a neck that liked to move though. 

Id try some. Internet forums are no substitute for your own eyes. But I actually think they’ve gotten better recently.

crunchman

p90fool said:

proggy said:

I've never owned a Gibson, I can't recall ever playing one to be honest, but if they or so hit and miss on build quality why are they so sought after and expensive?

They're not, it's just their attention to tiny cosmetic details got a bit left behind when the likes of PRS came along to up the ante and everyone else started spraying their computer-built guitars with a flawless sheet of glass-like plastic. 

Add about a million internet know-it-alls to the equation and all of a sudden they're rubbish guitars at outrageous prices, even though half the world's favourite records are made using them.  

The truth is that Gibson have been making a tiny number of dodgy guitars and a huge number of fantastic guitars with occasional finish imperfections for well over a century, and your perception of whether that matters will largely depend on whether you're a musician or a collector. 

It's not just cosmetic issues.  I had an ES339 that one of the pickups started to intermittently cut out after I'd had it a few months.  It turned out that the wires to the volume pot had just been wrapped around the tag and not soldered.  That one also had some cosmetic issues, but I'm not so fussed about cosmetic issues.

I've had slight issues with a couple of others as well - and I've only owned 5 of them.

4 of the 5 I've owned were 2000 to 2010, so I don't know what the latest guitars are like, but the reputation for dodgy QC was well deserved at one point as far as I can see.  Someone mentioned above (or in the Gibson CEO thread) that once you get that reputation it is very hard to shake off.  From what other people have said, the QC on the recent ones seems to be a lot better.

What I would say, is that all the issues I've had have been solvable issues on otherwise good guitars.

thegummy

For those who think Gibson's quality is hot or miss, is there a guitar around the £1400 mark that gives the Les Paul sound but has more consistent quality?

I can't find any PRS in that price range with the same scale length. The Yamaha Revstar seems to have the closest specs I can find on paper (scale length, materials etc.) but not sure if it sounds like a LP.

Or is Gibson the only way to go for LP sound?

I'm assuming even the highest end Epiphone isn't going to be as good as a Gibson even if they're hit and miss?

Jez6345789

thegummy said:

For those who think Gibson's quality is hot or miss, is there a guitar around the £1400 mark that gives the Les Paul sound but has more consistent quality?

I can't find any PRS in that price range with the same scale length. The Yamaha Revstar seems to have the closest specs I can find on paper (scale length, materials etc.) but not sure if it sounds like a LP.

Or is Gibson the only way to go for LP sound?

I'm assuming even the highest end Epiphone isn't going to be as good as a Gibson even if they're hit and miss?

You could look at the modern Tokai higher end ones seem pretty nice I did a COD blindfold at my local shop and the higher price felt nice great fit finish and tone. I am interested or have been in Maybach but not played any. There are nice alternatives if you search at that price point.

guitars4you

thegummy said:

For those who think Gibson's quality is hot or miss, is there a guitar around the £1400 mark that gives the Les Paul sound but has more consistent quality?

I can't find any PRS in that price range with the same scale length. The Yamaha Revstar seems to have the closest specs I can find on paper (scale length, materials etc.) but not sure if it sounds like a LP.

Or is Gibson the only way to go for LP sound?

I'm assuming even the highest end Epiphone isn't going to be as good as a Gibson even if they're hit and miss?

easy answer is probably no with regard to getting a Gibson tone out of  guitar that is not a Gibson

However - 2 Gibson Guitars from different periods will sound similar but not the same and the same can be said for different Gibson Guitars with different price cards - There is an overall generic LP tonal character but variations within this - As such many LP inspired guitars are similar or close, but often the variation is similar to that of 2 different Gibson Guitars

As for a PRS around the £1400 price point - try a used SC245 - LP scale length as well and worth a try 

dindude

Having owned various Gibson's from around 2010 to present (though nothing exotic), I'd say there was a definite step up in quality around 2015. I've never found one that was completely flaw free, but it doesn't bother me if the fundamentals are there. I'd sooner have a few cosmetic flaws and an inspiring guitar than a flaw-free bland same-factory-different-logo thingy. Nothing quite feels or sounds like a Gibson, and nothing smells like one either!

As a footnote, my problem with Gibson's goes a bit deeper, the flaws are in the designs, all of them are an ergonomic mess (LP too small, weighty, crap for sitting down / SG neck heavy, neck sticks out too far / 335 too big / 339 too small / Flying V, Explorer, Firebird, ergonomic masterpieces they are not!). Then there's the headstock weak point, the unstable tuning. yes yes, I know this didn't bother half of all the guitar greats, and I do work around it, but it does limit my enjoyment of them.

ICBM

thegummy said:

For those who think Gibson's quality is hot or miss, is there a guitar around the £1400 mark that gives the Les Paul sound but has more consistent quality?

To be honest, for that price you should have your pick of Les Paul Traditionals. Getting a good one shouldn't be too difficult, they're among the more consistent models in my experience.