More “Inspired by Gibson Custom Shop” Epiphones…

NCo

Boromedic said:

NCo said:

First generation Epiphone 1959 is now on sale for £699, and the come with the Gibson BB 2&3. Custom models are also on sale for £599.

They come with Epiphone Pro-Buckers don't they, not USA Burstbuckers?

Edit: the 1959 does indeed have Burstbuckers 

It's pretty much an identical guitar except for the headstock (extra tone), MOP inlays (more tone) and Custombuckers, for £500 more.

The first gen second hand prices haven't caught up but you can get them for £550 -£600 which is a no brainer for anyone considering.

strtdv

The maple veneer jars a bit. How much cost saving on a £1200 guitar is there really in switching from solid maple to veneer for a huge buyer like Gibson? £50?

Gerz6558

Offset said:

Trogly has just reviewed the new SG Custom.  A cool £1400.  He was underwhelmed by it, which is unusual for him as he's such a huge Gibson/Epiphone fanboi.  Some of the neck binding was reminiscent of the issues highlighted in the now closed 'Gibson Quality' thread.

He also mentioned the typical scratchy fretwork as well. Hasn't bothered me with my previous 500 quid Epiphones because you can quickly smooth them out with playing. However, it confirms what some of us suspected,  that you aren't getting a better quality product with these top tier offerings. Just more expensive pickups and a few other mainly cosmetic (minor) appointments.

As I've said before, these are probably for trogly wannabes on a lemonade budget. Feel like you're collecting Gibson custom shop models. Guitarists in bands will probably swerve these and go used Gibson. 

thermionic

I’m pretty certain the original 1959s were £749 on launch. As said above, they’re great guitars if you can find one used for around £500 or even £600. I think the new ones have a one piece neck though, compared to the 3-piece of the first gen.

SixStringSage

NCo said:

Boromedic said:

NCo said:

First generation Epiphone 1959 is now on sale for £699, and the come with the Gibson BB 2&3. Custom models are also on sale for £599.

They come with Epiphone Pro-Buckers don't they, not USA Burstbuckers?

Edit: the 1959 does indeed have Burstbuckers 

It's pretty much an identical guitar except for the headstock (extra tone), MOP inlays (more tone) and Custombuckers, for £500 more.

The first gen second hand prices haven't caught up but you can get them for £550 -£600 which is a no brainer for anyone considering.

If you’re keeping the CBs in there then that’s not a horrendous price increase considering those pickups cost close to £600 to purchase on their own. MOP is, I assume, more expensive than the usual material and these guitars have better electronics in them. So a £500 increase isn’t horrific, especially given the cost increases we’ve seen across the board the last couple of years.

NCo

SixStringSage said:

NCo said:

Boromedic said:

NCo said:

First generation Epiphone 1959 is now on sale for £699, and the come with the Gibson BB 2&3. Custom models are also on sale for £599.

They come with Epiphone Pro-Buckers don't they, not USA Burstbuckers?

Edit: the 1959 does indeed have Burstbuckers 

It's pretty much an identical guitar except for the headstock (extra tone), MOP inlays (more tone) and Custombuckers, for £500 more.

The first gen second hand prices haven't caught up but you can get them for £550 -£600 which is a no brainer for anyone considering.

If you’re keeping the CBs in there then that’s not a horrendous price increase considering those pickups cost close to £600 to purchase on their own. MOP is, I assume, more expensive than the usual material and these guitars have better electronics in them. So a £500 increase isn’t horrific, especially given the cost increases we’ve seen across the board the last couple of years.

Custombuckers are £432 for the gold set, cheaper for other colour options. BB2 & 3 will cost you £242 for the Nickel set.
That's a £190 difference - not £500, and the cost for Gibson is a lot lower.

Also, electronics seem identical.

timmypix

strtdv said:

The maple veneer jars a bit. How much cost saving on a £1200 guitar is there really in switching from solid maple to veneer for a huge buyer like Gibson? £50?

I think that depends on how many decent veneers you can get out of a solid cap. I suspect a good ten or so, at least? So if you've got a nice bit of wood, do you use it all on one guitar or split it across ten? That sounds pretty economical to me.

SixStringSage

NCo said:

SixStringSage said:

NCo said:

Boromedic said:

NCo said:

First generation Epiphone 1959 is now on sale for £699, and the come with the Gibson BB 2&3. Custom models are also on sale for £599.

They come with Epiphone Pro-Buckers don't they, not USA Burstbuckers?

Edit: the 1959 does indeed have Burstbuckers 

It's pretty much an identical guitar except for the headstock (extra tone), MOP inlays (more tone) and Custombuckers, for £500 more.

The first gen second hand prices haven't caught up but you can get them for £550 -£600 which is a no brainer for anyone considering.

If you’re keeping the CBs in there then that’s not a horrendous price increase considering those pickups cost close to £600 to purchase on their own. MOP is, I assume, more expensive than the usual material and these guitars have better electronics in them. So a £500 increase isn’t horrific, especially given the cost increases we’ve seen across the board the last couple of years.

Custombuckers are £432 for the gold set, cheaper for other colour options. BB2 & 3 will cost you £242 for the Nickel set.
That's a £190 difference - not £500, and the cost for Gibson is a lot lower.

Also, electronics seem identical.

Fair enough that the higher price is retail and they're available cheaper, but they're north of £500 here https://www.gak.co.uk/en/gibson-custombucker-matched-set-double-black-true-historic-nickel-/963753

As I've said earlier in this thread, I think the guitars are too expensive and the retail price for CBs too expensive also. But £500 extra for a guitar when factoring it all in isn't as horrific as it may seem. What I was trying to say earlier was if you're buying the more expensive guitar and keeping it stock, it's not awful. If you're buying the £1200 guitar with plans to buy new pickups and other upgrades, it's particularly unappealing.

NCo

SixStringSage said:

NCo said:

SixStringSage said:

NCo said:

Boromedic said:

NCo said:

First generation Epiphone 1959 is now on sale for £699, and the come with the Gibson BB 2&3. Custom models are also on sale for £599.

They come with Epiphone Pro-Buckers don't they, not USA Burstbuckers?

Edit: the 1959 does indeed have Burstbuckers 

It's pretty much an identical guitar except for the headstock (extra tone), MOP inlays (more tone) and Custombuckers, for £500 more.

The first gen second hand prices haven't caught up but you can get them for £550 -£600 which is a no brainer for anyone considering.

If you’re keeping the CBs in there then that’s not a horrendous price increase considering those pickups cost close to £600 to purchase on their own. MOP is, I assume, more expensive than the usual material and these guitars have better electronics in them. So a £500 increase isn’t horrific, especially given the cost increases we’ve seen across the board the last couple of years.

Custombuckers are £432 for the gold set, cheaper for other colour options. BB2 & 3 will cost you £242 for the Nickel set.
That's a £190 difference - not £500, and the cost for Gibson is a lot lower.

Also, electronics seem identical.

Fair enough that the higher price is retail and they're available cheaper, but they're north of £500 here https://www.gak.co.uk/en/gibson-custombucker-matched-set-double-black-true-historic-nickel-/963753

As I've said earlier in this thread, I think the guitars are too expensive and the retail price for CBs too expensive also. But £500 extra for a guitar when factoring it all in isn't as horrific as it may seem. What I was trying to say earlier was if you're buying the more expensive guitar and keeping it stock, it's not awful. If you're buying the £1200 guitar with plans to buy new pickups and other upgrades, it's particularly unappealing.

You've found an example higher priced set, even though I provided a Thomann link that shows them in stock for £432. Thomann also have the Nickel set at £425 here, and they are a massive retailer.

Not sure what you're arguing to be honest. The CBs are not north of £500 unless you choose to overpay, and the difference between the CBs and the BB absolutely doesn't justify the price hike.

elstoof

skippy76 said:

Hi all, be interested to know what people think the issue is with laurel boards? Quality, tone, colour etc?

I’m a carpenter by trade and massive self confessed fretboard material snob, I’m lucky to have a few guitars with old and new Brazilian RW boards.

I played a couple at the GG and picked up one of the new DG Epi’s, nice guitar and the board looks and feels great on it. 

All that said I’m not a big fan of Pau Ferro boards, mostly because of the colour of I’m being honest.

(Murphy lab 64 335 in the pic with the DG)

https://i.imgur.com/t3lI7yy.jpeg

Mostly the fact it wasn’t used 70 years ago, as far as I can tell. The darker laurel boards I’ve seen have been great, better than the pale rosewood you sometimes see. I’ve got a nice laurel board on a Squier that darkened beautifully with some stain. Pau Ferro is a lovely looking wood in wide boards but I don’t think using it on fretboards plays to its strengths, the streaks are too wavy and high contrast for narrow pieces imo

Musicman20

Offset said:

Trogly has just reviewed the new SG Custom.  A cool £1400.  He was underwhelmed by it, which is unusual for him as he's such a huge Gibson/Epiphone fanboi.  Some of the neck binding was reminiscent of the issues highlighted in the now closed 'Gibson Quality' thread.

£1400 and it looks cheap with decent pickups. Rubbish QC. 

There is just nothing about these guitars that makes me want to buy them.

OilCityPickups

skippy76 said:

Hi all, be interested to know what people think the issue is with laurel boards? Quality, tone, colour etc?

I’m a carpenter by trade and massive self confessed fretboard material snob, I’m lucky to have a few guitars with old and new Brazilian RW boards.

I played a couple at the GG and picked up one of the new DG Epi’s, nice guitar and the board looks and feels great on it. 

All that said I’m not a big fan of Pau Ferro boards, mostly because of the colour of I’m being honest.

(Murphy lab 64 335 in the pic with the DG)

https://i.imgur.com/t3lI7yy.jpeg

Delighted to have Indian Laurel on my Gretsch ... equally delighted to have Purpleheart on both my Ibanez and  Jackson guitars. Firstly no difference in tone whatsoever ... but big difference in forests being saved ... a bit of oiling/darkening of the board and jobs a good-un. 
The fretboard is just there to be a smooth, hard wearing surface to fit the frets into ... Leo fender proved you can do that perfectly well straight into a maple neck with no separate fingerboard at all. Not everybody likes a blonde fingerboard ... so Laurel is great. 
We need to think more about what is sustainable with guitar woods ... I have no problems with Richlite, baked maple or whatever - guitars are to be played.  

BigPaulie

chris78 said:

Daiganzen said:

if these has been £899 they would sell like no tomorrow

Nah.
If they were £899 there would be a long thread on here saying they should be £599

£599 for a Chinese Epiphone? 

Get a grip!

BigPaulie

SixStringSage said:

If a non-Epiphone brand released that guitar, would we balk at a £1200 price? Honestly, I'm not sure. Likewise if they released these for £899 but with generic Epiphone electronics and pickups, a buyer would easily overshoot the £1200 by upgrading them.

Fair point. If Eastman can sell the SB59 for £1700 why can't Epiphone sell these much better looking guitars for £1200?

FWIW I think they're both too expensive.

SixStringSage

NCo said:

SixStringSage said:

NCo said:

SixStringSage said:

NCo said:

Boromedic said:

NCo said:

First generation Epiphone 1959 is now on sale for £699, and the come with the Gibson BB 2&3. Custom models are also on sale for £599.

They come with Epiphone Pro-Buckers don't they, not USA Burstbuckers?

Edit: the 1959 does indeed have Burstbuckers 

It's pretty much an identical guitar except for the headstock (extra tone), MOP inlays (more tone) and Custombuckers, for £500 more.

The first gen second hand prices haven't caught up but you can get them for £550 -£600 which is a no brainer for anyone considering.

If you’re keeping the CBs in there then that’s not a horrendous price increase considering those pickups cost close to £600 to purchase on their own. MOP is, I assume, more expensive than the usual material and these guitars have better electronics in them. So a £500 increase isn’t horrific, especially given the cost increases we’ve seen across the board the last couple of years.

Custombuckers are £432 for the gold set, cheaper for other colour options. BB2 & 3 will cost you £242 for the Nickel set.
That's a £190 difference - not £500, and the cost for Gibson is a lot lower.

Also, electronics seem identical.

Fair enough that the higher price is retail and they're available cheaper, but they're north of £500 here https://www.gak.co.uk/en/gibson-custombucker-matched-set-double-black-true-historic-nickel-/963753

As I've said earlier in this thread, I think the guitars are too expensive and the retail price for CBs too expensive also. But £500 extra for a guitar when factoring it all in isn't as horrific as it may seem. What I was trying to say earlier was if you're buying the more expensive guitar and keeping it stock, it's not awful. If you're buying the £1200 guitar with plans to buy new pickups and other upgrades, it's particularly unappealing.

You've found an example higher priced set, even though I provided a Thomann link that shows them in stock for £432. Thomann also have the Nickel set at £425 here, and they are a massive retailer.

Not sure what you're arguing to be honest. The CBs are not north of £500 unless you choose to overpay, and the difference between the CBs and the BB absolutely doesn't justify the price hike.

I thought I was clear, to be honest. Many products can be found at cheaper prices but that doesn't mean the original price ceases to exist — you're saying CBs can be bought cheaper and I'm not saying you're wrong. You can go even further and say that these Epiphones will be available cheaper in the near future, or pickups can be purchased secondhand for even less.

My point is pretty simple: £1200 is a sharp-intake-of-breath price for an Epiphone, but if purchased and kept as stock then the increase over the £900 1959 model isn't too bad considering increased cost of goods and the more expensive pickups. Even using your calculations of a £190 difference between CB and BB, that's still making up the vast majority of the price difference between guitar. But if someone buys the £1200 guitar to remove the pickups and make upgrades, it becomes even more expensive and not worth it.

NCo

SixStringSage said:

I thought I was clear, to be honest. Many products can be found at cheaper prices but that doesn't mean the original price ceases to exist — you're saying CBs can be bought cheaper and I'm not saying you're wrong. You can go even further and say that these Epiphones will be available cheaper in the near future, or pickups can be purchased secondhand for even less.

My point is pretty simple: £1200 is a sharp-intake-of-breath price for an Epiphone, but if purchased and kept as stock then the increase over the £900 1959 model isn't too bad considering increased cost of goods and the more expensive pickups. Even using your calculations of a £190 difference between CB and BB, that's still making up the vast majority of the price difference between guitar. But if someone buys the £1200 guitar to remove the pickups and make upgrades, it becomes even more expensive and not worth it.

The numbers you use to make your points are incorrect:

• The Gen 1 model was launched at £749 and it's currently priced  £699, not £900.
• For the end consumer, the difference in pickup cost between the models is about £200. For Gibson, the cost difference would be significantly less.

Given these numbers, it appears to me that the bulk of the price increase can be attributed more to marketing and re-branding efforts rather than the cost of components or inflation.

Bennyboy-UK

Henrytwang said:

Wish they’d make a good SG Junior.

I wish they would as well - its probably my single favourite guitar EVER.

I don't understand why they can't or won't get them right like - whether its the wrong headstock shape (even custom shop reissue ), wrong neck joint, wrong stratchplate shape - they are always just a bit wrong  

SixStringSage

NCo said:

SixStringSage said:

I thought I was clear, to be honest. Many products can be found at cheaper prices but that doesn't mean the original price ceases to exist — you're saying CBs can be bought cheaper and I'm not saying you're wrong. You can go even further and say that these Epiphones will be available cheaper in the near future, or pickups can be purchased secondhand for even less.

My point is pretty simple: £1200 is a sharp-intake-of-breath price for an Epiphone, but if purchased and kept as stock then the increase over the £900 1959 model isn't too bad considering increased cost of goods and the more expensive pickups. Even using your calculations of a £190 difference between CB and BB, that's still making up the vast majority of the price difference between guitar. But if someone buys the £1200 guitar to remove the pickups and make upgrades, it becomes even more expensive and not worth it.

The numbers you use to make your points are incorrect:

• The Gen 1 model was launched at £749 and it's currently priced  £699, not £900.
• For the end consumer, the difference in pickup cost between the models is about £200. For Gibson, the cost difference would be significantly less.

Given these numbers, it appears to me that the bulk of the price increase can be attributed more to marketing and re-branding efforts rather than the cost of components or inflation.

here's Anderton's article from 2020 - selling at £749 also, but down from £899. GuitarGuitar has it for £699 now but shows a previous price of £849. There's a reasonable chance the same will happen with the new ones, it's still a pre-order guitar. You can't just keep finding the cheapest prices an item is available for and then use that for all cost bases, especially when comparing to a guitar that isn't yet on the market. Otherwise the implication is that the previous model went on sale at a lower price but the new one won't, which is a big leap.

I have already said the pickup price to Gibson is obviously lower than to the consumer but we're talking about what the consumer would pay if they themselves were to replace the pickups. 

And yes of course, marketing and re-branding are in effect here. Gibson is clearly working to reposition Epiphone as a mid-tier brand, which necessitates a shift in perception and pricing. Personally I also suspect the price is also reflecting the use of the Gibson headstock shape.

To clarify my stance on this, because I think it's starting to get muddied: I think these guitars are too expensive. But I think taking into account the difference in pickups and the inflationary environment, the increase isn't as bad as it first seems. 

Bigsby

SixStringSage said:

NCo said:

SixStringSage said:

I thought I was clear, to be honest. Many products can be found at cheaper prices but that doesn't mean the original price ceases to exist — you're saying CBs can be bought cheaper and I'm not saying you're wrong. You can go even further and say that these Epiphones will be available cheaper in the near future, or pickups can be purchased secondhand for even less.

My point is pretty simple: £1200 is a sharp-intake-of-breath price for an Epiphone, but if purchased and kept as stock then the increase over the £900 1959 model isn't too bad considering increased cost of goods and the more expensive pickups. Even using your calculations of a £190 difference between CB and BB, that's still making up the vast majority of the price difference between guitar. But if someone buys the £1200 guitar to remove the pickups and make upgrades, it becomes even more expensive and not worth it.

The numbers you use to make your points are incorrect:

• The Gen 1 model was launched at £749 and it's currently priced  £699, not £900.
• For the end consumer, the difference in pickup cost between the models is about £200. For Gibson, the cost difference would be significantly less.

Given these numbers, it appears to me that the bulk of the price increase can be attributed more to marketing and re-branding efforts rather than the cost of components or inflation.

here's Anderton's article from 2020 - selling at £749 also, but down from £899. GuitarGuitar has it for £699 now but shows a previous price of £849. There's a reasonable chance the same will happen with the new ones, it's still a pre-order guitar. You can't just keep finding the cheapest prices an item is available for and then use that for all cost bases, especially when comparing to a guitar that isn't yet on the market. Otherwise the implication is that the previous model went on sale at a lower price but the new one won't, which is a big leap.

I have already said the pickup price to Gibson is obviously lower than to the consumer but we're talking about what the consumer would pay if they themselves were to replace the pickups. 

And yes of course, marketing and re-branding are in effect here. Gibson is clearly working to reposition Epiphone as a mid-tier brand, which necessitates a shift in perception and pricing. Personally I also suspect the price is also reflecting the use of the Gibson headstock shape.

To clarify my stance on this, because I think it's starting to get muddied: I think these guitars are too expensive. But I think taking into account the difference in pickups and the inflationary environment, the increase isn't as bad as it first seems. 

That's one perspective; the one the consumer has whilst trying to justify paying the RRP on a new guitar. It's a completely different perspective to the consumer who is trying to understand why a guitar has a higher RRP, where the difference in manufacturing costs is the relevant factor. Neither is right or wrong, they're just different perspectives and may be causing some crossed wires here. 

SixStringSage

Bigsby said:

SixStringSage said:

NCo said:

SixStringSage said:

I thought I was clear, to be honest. Many products can be found at cheaper prices but that doesn't mean the original price ceases to exist — you're saying CBs can be bought cheaper and I'm not saying you're wrong. You can go even further and say that these Epiphones will be available cheaper in the near future, or pickups can be purchased secondhand for even less.

My point is pretty simple: £1200 is a sharp-intake-of-breath price for an Epiphone, but if purchased and kept as stock then the increase over the £900 1959 model isn't too bad considering increased cost of goods and the more expensive pickups. Even using your calculations of a £190 difference between CB and BB, that's still making up the vast majority of the price difference between guitar. But if someone buys the £1200 guitar to remove the pickups and make upgrades, it becomes even more expensive and not worth it.

The numbers you use to make your points are incorrect:

• The Gen 1 model was launched at £749 and it's currently priced  £699, not £900.
• For the end consumer, the difference in pickup cost between the models is about £200. For Gibson, the cost difference would be significantly less.

Given these numbers, it appears to me that the bulk of the price increase can be attributed more to marketing and re-branding efforts rather than the cost of components or inflation.

here's Anderton's article from 2020 - selling at £749 also, but down from £899. GuitarGuitar has it for £699 now but shows a previous price of £849. There's a reasonable chance the same will happen with the new ones, it's still a pre-order guitar. You can't just keep finding the cheapest prices an item is available for and then use that for all cost bases, especially when comparing to a guitar that isn't yet on the market. Otherwise the implication is that the previous model went on sale at a lower price but the new one won't, which is a big leap.

I have already said the pickup price to Gibson is obviously lower than to the consumer but we're talking about what the consumer would pay if they themselves were to replace the pickups. 

And yes of course, marketing and re-branding are in effect here. Gibson is clearly working to reposition Epiphone as a mid-tier brand, which necessitates a shift in perception and pricing. Personally I also suspect the price is also reflecting the use of the Gibson headstock shape.

To clarify my stance on this, because I think it's starting to get muddied: I think these guitars are too expensive. But I think taking into account the difference in pickups and the inflationary environment, the increase isn't as bad as it first seems. 

That's one perspective; the one the consumer has whilst trying to justify paying the RRP on a new guitar. It's a completely different perspective to the consumer who is trying to understand why a guitar has a higher RRP, where the difference in manufacturing costs is the relevant factor. Neither is right or wrong, they're just different perspectives and may be causing some crossed wires here. 

100% agree. I re-stated this because it was the basis for my original comment about this guitar, that it's too expensive but if someone wanted to buy a cheaper model but put those same pickups in, they'd be paying consumer prices and very quickly close the price gap.

This is partly why I'm on the fence and find myself saying that it's both too expensive, but somehow defending the price.