Murphy Labs finish defects

Nick13

HandwrittenHero said:

I don’t think the stock level was necessarily a clue. They announced them a year before so that’s time to build ready for launch and obviously you’d want to have plenty to sell when hype is strongest.

Maybe not and maybe they downed tools to a degree on some of the other lines but having recently bought a Cs Gibson, the buying process was pretty odd as no retailer could actually tell you when things were due but they had more Murphy guitars than they knew what to do with and could easily provide timescales on what of those was arriving when etc

skunkwerx

When I bought my American Professional 1 tele from PMT last year, it came off the back of the truck, into the store, opened and handed to me, still freezing cold it was. 

I bought it, took it home, reopened it straight away. No issue. 

Sure its poly, and maybe things move a little.. but nothing cracked and nothing fell off either. 

5 fucking hours?
Do Gibson not realise how many hands and climates the guitar will move through from the states to an overseas or even stateside dealer?

Certainly wont get 5 hours to acclimatise anywhere along its journey or when it reaches most stores. Time is money dont they know. 

If Gibsons blaming the end user for not letting it settle then thats bull. The damage could have been done when it came off the ship or truck into the warehouse. 

designerseye88

Completely corporate guff from Gibson. Classic case of pass liability onto the dealer or customer. Just shows more than ever why we should support independent builders IMO. 

I’d be curious to see what people like Kim at Historic Makeovers say about this in terms of where the issue lies. I bet if the same issue happened with one of his finishes he would sort it out. Why can’t Gibson just own it, apologise, say they’ll do better and I think most would sympathise that when you’re trying something new sometimes things take a bit of tweaking to get right. 

Ossyrocks

No affiliation. I haven’t even watched it yet, but I intend to.

Joe B on the Murphy Lab guitars. I doubt they put a dud in his hands though.

https://youtu.be/JT33rB1NJiU

Philly_Q

Ossyrocks said:

No affiliation. I haven’t even watched it yet, but I intend to.

Joe B on the Murphy Lab guitars. I doubt they put a dud in his hands though.

https://youtu.be/JT33rB1NJiU

He's enthusiastic, but not too OTT.  And quite self-effacing.
Going back to the earlier comment about breaking and repairing the headstocks, he actually does suggest putting a heel crack in the SGs!

mbe

Gibson think they are too big to say sorry 

ICBM

mbe said:

Gibson think they are too big to say sorry 

Given how this sort of thing doesn't seem to even slightly reduce the demand for their overpriced pseudo-vintage this-year's model "most accurate ever" nonsense, are you surprised?

guitars4you

ICBM said:

mbe said:

Gibson think they are too big to say sorry 

Given how this sort of thing doesn't seem to even slightly reduce the demand for their overpriced pseudo-vintage this-year's model "most accurate ever" nonsense, are you surprised?

There has always been part of me that thinks that Gibson somehow insult its customers with this 'buy this years most accurate best ever yet model' - It is a bit of a kick in the teeth to those who spent hard dosh buying what was 12 months ago a  'this years most accurate best ever yet model' but is now a reject/failing in its historic accuracy - Who knows, next years effort might even be better yet

mbe

For all we know Gibson might have carried on making Les Paul's after they were discontinued in the 60s and stockpiled them in a secret warehouse to bring to market in the 21st century. Authentic NOS messed with to make them look 'nearly' accurate in varying degrees.

TINMAN82

guitars4you said:

ICBM said:

mbe said:

Gibson think they are too big to say sorry 

Given how this sort of thing doesn't seem to even slightly reduce the demand for their overpriced pseudo-vintage this-year's model "most accurate ever" nonsense, are you surprised?

There has always been part of me that thinks that Gibson somehow insult its customers with this 'buy this years most accurate best ever yet model' - It is a bit of a kick in the teeth to those who spent hard dosh buying what was 12 months ago a  'this years most accurate best ever yet model' but is now a reject/failing in its historic accuracy - Who knows, next years effort might even be better yet

My own impression is that’s not really a thing…mabye amongst non-player collectors but I don’t know any of those. 

When you’ve got a good Les Paul or SG you know it, whether it be a 1992, a 2013 or a 2021. I’ve literally never heard of anyone trading a great guitar in for one with more authentic plastic in the pickguard.

The marketing guff is aimed at new buyers or those who’d be looking to expand their collection either way, IMO.

Alex2678

guitars4you said:

ICBM said:

mbe said:

Gibson think they are too big to say sorry 

Given how this sort of thing doesn't seem to even slightly reduce the demand for their overpriced pseudo-vintage this-year's model "most accurate ever" nonsense, are you surprised?

There has always been part of me that thinks that Gibson somehow insult its customers with this 'buy this years most accurate best ever yet model' - It is a bit of a kick in the teeth to those who spent hard dosh buying what was 12 months ago a  'this years most accurate best ever yet model' but is now a reject/failing in its historic accuracy - Who knows, next years effort might even be better yet

100% agree

Also feel like the marketing guff for the custom shop does the same for the standards - makes it seem like you don’t have a proper Les Paul, even though you paid Gibson 2k for it. 

Fender CS offers things that the production models don’t, and offer the ‘one man paying attention to detail’ thing, and I’m sure fender would say they’re better, but the regular USA strats aren’t constructed differently a la Gibsons tenons and neck angles and, until recently, the chambering, all while the same company advertises that the ‘real’ guitars in the custom shop get those things ‘right’

guitars4you

TINMAN82 said:

guitars4you said:

ICBM said:

mbe said:

Gibson think they are too big to say sorry 

Given how this sort of thing doesn't seem to even slightly reduce the demand for their overpriced pseudo-vintage this-year's model "most accurate ever" nonsense, are you surprised?

There has always been part of me that thinks that Gibson somehow insult its customers with this 'buy this years most accurate best ever yet model' - It is a bit of a kick in the teeth to those who spent hard dosh buying what was 12 months ago a  'this years most accurate best ever yet model' but is now a reject/failing in its historic accuracy - Who knows, next years effort might even be better yet

My own impression is that’s not really a thing…mabye amongst non-player collectors but I don’t know any of those. 

When you’ve got a good Les Paul or SG you know it, whether it be a 1992, a 2013 or a 2021. I’ve literally never heard of anyone trading a great guitar in for one with more authentic plastic in the pickguard.

The marketing guff is aimed at new buyers or those who’d be looking to expand their collection either way, IMO.

Agree that a good R9 is a good R9 regardless of year - My comment was about what maybe Gibson's 'hidden' marketing thinking/believe and not mine - Hope that makes sense - Agree that a change to the inlay of pick guard doesn't make it feel, play, sound better - But I have known customers trade a R9 for a later 'more accurate' R9 for precisely that reason - So it does happen - But equally I've known many more buy a R9, of any age, for the fact that it is a good example - So both sides exist

Yet equally it is always accepted by certain 'purist' that if the guys who make 'fake' R9 replicas can make a more accurate replica then why can't Gibson

Musicman20

JBo sticking his oar in again. Snooze

wraub

More than ever I'm happy when I went looking for a singlecut I found an inexpensive import that scratches all of my LP itches except for the logo on the peghead. Is it a Gibson? No, but it's close enough for me and my money.

Were I to win lottery money tomorrow the only Gibson guitars I'd look for are used ones.

Boromedic

Yet I'm more than happy with my 2 Gibsons, strange that. I had a Tokai and it was a nice guitar, but it was heavy and didn't feel as tactile as my Les Pauls, on my knee it wasn't as comfy to play. In fact I would go as far as to say it wasn't as high quality tbh. Both of the Gibsons played and sounded better too, even before I had my standard fettled by Feline after 20 years of use. For me, I'd also rather the headstock had the big G on there.

Is this Murphy Lab thing terrible (which as far as I'm aware only affecting a range of the dark cherry backed guitars), and being dealt with badly, absolutely. Doesn't mean all Gibsons are bad though.

The takeovers mean they are a corporate business, not only that but a US one, they will always double down and avoid admitting fault in such a massively litigious society. Plenty of buyers on the Les Paul forums have managed to get some resolution (good and bad) from Gibson. I'd be unhappy after shelling out 5 figures in some cases. It's one of them things though isn't it, doesn't mean it has to be a pile on however. 

Has anyone on here even bought one?

HandwrittenHero

Boromedic said:

Yet I'm more than happy with my 2 Gibsons, strange that. I had a Tokai and it was a nice guitar, but it was heavy and didn't feel as tactile as my Les Pauls, on my knee it wasn't as comfy to play. In fact I would go as far as to say it wasn't as high quality tbh. Both of the Gibsons played and sounded better too, even before I had my standard fettled by Feline after 20 years of use. For me, I'd also rather the headstock had the big G on there.

Is this Murphy Lab thing terrible (which as far as I'm aware only affecting a range of the dark cherry backed guitars), and being dealt with badly, absolutely. Doesn't mean all Gibsons are bad though.

The takeovers mean they are a corporate business, not only that but a US one, they will always double down and avoid admitting fault in such a massively litigious society. Plenty of buyers on the Les Paul forums have managed to get some resolution (good and bad) from Gibson. I'd be unhappy after shelling out 5 figures in some cases. It's one of them things though isn't it, doesn't mean it has to be a pile on however. 

Has anyone on here even bought one?

Bought a Murphy Lab, no. Bought CS Gibson yes, I've got an R9 and a CS SG. I love them both, SG had some issues (some screws missed under vibrola cover, got replacements sent, vibrola arm doesn't store perfectly south) Les Paul had no issues that I've spotted or care about. Both are guitars I intend to keep for a very long time.

I believe the issue has started to affect the lighter backs as well and I've seen elsewhere someone state they had seen a 335 with the issues as well. The darker finishes look to have reacted sooner. I've also seen suggestions that the issue may have been fixed going forward, but we have no date and with my driest tone of voice I can only suggest we take Gibson at their stated word to follow the 5 hour acclimation.

Gibson are capable of putting out some really wonderful instruments. I doubt anyone being serious is arguing all Gibson are bad so let's put that to bed. Now don't get me wrong either, I'm firmly into the easygoing category of fit and finish. I've yet to measure the degree a neck is set at, couldn't tell you at a glance if a logo is set exactly how it was in 1959 or if the binding is the correct thickness. I know some stuff from when I did my homework, but above all I go by how it sounds and feels and if it does what I want then it's good. But this isn't nit picking level, they're blatantly faulty. And to be blunt it's a finish problem when the actual selling point of the ML is the finish. I can't really get away from that being a massive cock up.

I get the PR side, which is why I understood the relative radio silence. Personally it didn't sit well since it hangs dealers out to dry but so be it. But then when you finally do put something on the record it's just to blow smoke up people's arses that's poor and they deserve brickbats. I'd love to bring a balanced argument, but the thing is they fucked up fairly plain and simple. To paraphrase, balance isn't bringing someone to tell you it's raining and someone to say it isn't when you can just look out the window. Also if you go through my post history you'll see plenty of track record of me being complimentary about not just the CS I own but other Gibson's I've played whether I've owned or not - I'd like to think I'm nothing if not fair (and probably if anything have a soft spot towards the bigger boys with the storied name)

Philly_Q

Boromedic said:

Has anyone on here even bought one?

Not that I'm aware.  Whether that's due to reservations about the finishing process - even before the problems emerged - or just the eye-watering prices, I don't know.

One thing I'd say about them, there's a particular dark cherry shade they're using now on Custom Shop guitars, especially SGs... I don't know if it's the problematic colour or not, but I just think it's too dark and really ugly.  Maybe they're using a darker grain filler as well.  But I much prefer the orangey faded colour that used to be more common.

Apologies to Peach for borrowing their picture:

Boromedic

That does look weird @Philly_Q !

HandwrittenHero

Believe the lacquer is different for the ML to the CS so wouldn’t be a problem colour there other than preference.

Think it’s just lighting as well, if you watch a video eg https://youtu.be/LW7r8CIhSEw some angles it catches it looking dark and others it’s spot on to my eyes

HandwrittenHero

PMT have also just put a Murphy lab video out as well. I could be jumping to an assumption, but I smell a soft relaunch judging off the few videos cropping up around the same time. Let’s hope regardless of what’s said in public that behind the scenes they’ve fixed the fault.