So these 2015 Gibsons with that logo....

GuitarMonkey

The 12th fret inlays of the 2014 models were worse

ICBM

GuitarMonkey said:

The 12th fret inlays of the 2014 models were worse

Oddly enough this "feature" had completely passed me by until you mentioned it, but now I've seen it you're right. Not as easy to fix as the 2015 headstock either.

Moe_Zambeek

It's amazing how cheap and tacky the 120th inlay is. What were they thinking?

I guess the 2015 changes indicate they don't really think things through...

martinw

They're hideous. I wouldn't buy one, especially as there are always loads of alternatives.

Come on, we all care what our guitars look like. Even those putting tape over logos are making an aesthetic choice and a statement.

hobbio

The shaky logo is just for this year, or that's what I thought anyway.

I don't understand why loads of people have a problem with the tuners either.

ThePrettyDamned

It would be a terrible dilemma if someone tried one, and it was magically good - one of those astounding guitars that's just better than any other...

... But the headstock was putting you off. Not saying that's wrong or anything, but it would be a tough choice.

ICBM

It shouldn't cost more than about £50 to have a luthier refinish the front of the head and add the proper decal, which is easily obtainable on Ebay. The hologram thing looks like it should be fairly easy to remove as well.

I don't do finish work, but I can recommend someone who does. However I am available for machinehead replacement, nut replacement, removing mini-switches and adding missing pots, active circuit removal and proper fitting of pickguards. Just saying .

TheOtherDennis

For me, all this proves is just how divisive Gibson has become as a brand lately. They're now even causing rows amongst their supporters!!

I've never felt that strongly either way about them (except for a natural ES335), and the new logo doesn't wind me up in any way either, but these recent changes really seem to have boiled the piss of more people than virtually anything they've done in years.

It seems odd to me that a company with such an iconic history would behave like that towards their customer base.

hobbio

Isn't the hologram a security thing, and wouldn't removing it make the guitar look dodgy?

Genuine question.

ThePrettyDamned

hobbio;525572" said:

Isn't the hologram a security thing, and wouldn't removing it make the guitar look dodgy?



Genuine question.

Doesn't matter if you don't want to sell it.

Which if it's a great guitar, you won't.

crunchman

I've said this in other threads before, but the more I see of the different models I think  it's deliberate in an attempt to sell more Custom Shop guitars.

Fundamentally the design and construction of a Custom Shop guitar is similar to a normal factory ones.  There may be a few tweaks and refinements but their profit margin on a Custom shop guitar is going to be a lot higher on a Custom Shop guitar than on a normal factory one.  If there is no decent spec conventional Les Paul from the factory then the people who want that will buy a Custom Shop model, and Gibson will probably make $500 more per instrument in profit.

Bogwhoppit

ThePrettyDamned said:

It would be a terrible dilemma if someone tried one, and it was magically good - one of those astounding guitars that's just better than any other...

... But the headstock was putting you off. Not saying that's wrong or anything, but it would be a tough choice.

57Deluxe

rlw said:

 
It's like when Porsche went water cooled for the 996 - it's change, it's progress,

...yeah = that looked silly too!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/61/Cars_movie's_car.jpg/1024px-Cars_movie's_car.jpg

XWulfhere

Look at what 993s are going for compared to the newer 996

I used to have a 928 S2!

RaymondLin

crunchman said:

I've said this in other threads before, but the more I see of the different models I think  it's deliberate in an attempt to sell more Custom Shop guitars.

Fundamentally the design and construction of a Custom Shop guitar is similar to a normal factory ones.  There may be a few tweaks and refinements but their profit margin on a Custom shop guitar is going to be a lot higher on a Custom Shop guitar than on a normal factory one.  If there is no decent spec conventional Les Paul from the factory then the people who want that will buy a Custom Shop model, and Gibson will probably make $500 more per instrument in profit.

Well, a normal Standard now is like £2500 ? With some USA model (Premium Quilt) is listed at £3200 at GuitarGuitar !!!

Andertons has the 2015 R8 with nice tops, as opposed to plain for £3300.

I know which one I'd get.  I mean if you are thinking of modding a £2500 standard, by the time you finished, you might as well get an R8.

 

Or you can get a Custom Shop Class 5 for £2,800-3,000 in a few places still.

sunshinewelly

I played a couple of the 2015 les pauls at guitarguitar on hagley road yesterday and i enjoyed the new necks. felt similar to the PRS neck i had on my singlecut trem.

jeztone2

I just wouldn't buy a Gibson again unless it was used. Henry Jusckievicz is a nasty idiot who thinks he's Steve Jobs running Apple. Robot tuners? I'll stick to my Dentist guitars thankyou.

Bogwhoppit

jeztone2 said:

 Henry Jusckievicz is a nasty idiot

Weird hair style as well...

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14045539

p90fool

We Gibson owners, if we're totally honest with ourselves have always been happy to spend a few extra hundred quid for a logo, so you'd think marketing rule number one would be; Don't @#*% with the logo!

rlw

Wulfhere said:

Look at what 993s are going for compared to the newer 996

I used to have a 928 S2!

And would you want to drive a 993 every day - no.
And my 996GT3 sold for rather more than I paid too.............

The world is full of luddites.