.

I'm glad I don't have to see the broken headstocks and other faults, flaws and issues that guitar techs see due to the nature of their work.
Enjoy your guitar. I still love to play and try to see the good side in stuff because nothing is perfect . Most famous guitars that I have played are not good examples but the player made them iconic. I see quite a few because I authenticate stuff for auction.
IMG_3723.jpeg

Always a fun ticket.
 
Here is one I did.
View attachment 30223
And after ;
View attachment 30224
View attachment 30225
Fortunately/unfortunately it is a Murphy limited Joe Walsh so I could use the relic to my advantage.

My first repair was done in N Ireland by someone I'd never used before. The tech I always used retired and this other guy was recommended by a few people. He did a pretty poor job tbh.

After it broke the second time (from tension this time, it literally snapped off while I was playing it) I took it to feline and Jonathan did a really great job. It was barely visible and you certainly couldn't feel it.

I've not needed anything doing since we moved back to NI. Not sure who I'll use now.
 
I don't like Gibson, but it has more to do with the necks I've played feeling very uncomfortable in my hand. You seem to like them, so obviously that isn't an issue for you. Enjoy!
 
I've seen plenty of Gibson QC problems since I first became interested within the past twenty years, so I stopped even pulling them down to try at a certain point. Hopefully they're better these days, but I just can't get behind their pricing unless their production quality was commensurate with other brands at the same price level. I can't believe at their prices they mostly don't do stainless steel frets, and I can't believe they would buy a company like Steinberger then do almost nothing with it. Maybe I have too much animosity toward them, but there are plenty of other brands that don't bother me the way Gibson does.
 
Cool NGD! Gold top LP's with P90's are pretty sweet.

Both my newer LP's were pretty good in terms of QC and fit and finish but they were satin faded models so expected to be rough. Both had really good Plek'd fretwork and pretty decent nuts too.
 
Honestly it’s one of my most common structural repairs. I’ve done well over 100 and 99% where Gibson.
Out of curiosity, what are the most common issues you encounter on guitars, regardless of brand? What are the worst common issues (structural or otherwise expensive/hard to fix)?

I feel like a badly cut nut is the most common issue I've had to fix on my own guitars, but that's easy.
 
I broke a headstock on a les paul once. I had it repaired but the guy didn't do a particularly great job and it broke again in the same place about a year later. I had it repaired by Jonathan at Feline guitars in London the second time and he actually did a wonderful job but I was so annoyed with the guitar by this stage that I sold it at a massive loss.
I always go to Jon for any guitar work. He did the frets on my LP and it is the best damn guitar I've ever played.
 
I always go to Jon for any guitar work. He did the frets on my LP and it is the best damn guitar I've ever played.

My PRS is due for a refret and I'm probably going to end up shipping it over to them. I've not had many good experiences with repair people in N Ireland. I used Jon for everything when we lived in England.

Their fretwork is second to none.
 
Congrats looks excellent!! :love

I'm an avid Gibson fan, never had any issues with mine over the years. Never had any tuning stability issues either. In fact my LP surprises me with how stable it is all the time when I haven't picked it up in a couple months and its still perfectly in tune. I have several PRS too (in fact outnumber gibson 5 to 1 for me) and I don't think they're any better than the Gibsons I have/have had at all. Different. All excellent guitars :idk
 
I'm a Gibson "fanboy", I really am and I'm lucky because I don't care about some of the small cosmetic "issues" can be found on Gibson guitars and, honestly, some of those "issues" are not issues at all in my book, they are part of what Gibson is.

But I can't say Gibson QC is perfect because it's not. Sometimes they let out guitars with obvious problems like dead spots, faulty electronics, big scratches here and there. I've seen all.
 
Poor QC does not mean that every guitar has issues.

But with that reputation and the comments I have seen on Forums, I chose an ESP LTD EC-1000 Deluxe over a LP Studio at about the same price-point. Locking tuners and Fluence pikups were the main points, but I had Gibson QC issues in the back of my mind when making my choice.
 
Poor QC does not mean that every guitar has issues.

But with that reputation and the comments I have seen on Forums, I chose an ESP LTD EC-1000 Deluxe over a LP Studio at about the same price-point. Locking tuners and Fluence pikups were the main points, but I had Gibson QC issues in the back of my mind when making my choice.
It does on Gibson because there is whole process that are just missing from the production line . There is no method to ensure the binding is flush or the finish is flat when the main buffer won’t fit . They have no mechanism to prevent lacquer bleeding from dark to clear . I still like Gibson but this all comes with the territory. Or the fact that 99% of head breaks are on them because of poor design but they have an amazing sound and a huge heritage,
IMG_3057.jpeg

who wouldn’t have one ?
 
It does on Gibson because there is whole process that are just missing from the production line . There is no method to ensure the binding is flush or the finish is flat when the main buffer won’t fit . They have no mechanism to prevent lacquer bleeding from dark to clear . I still like Gibson but this all comes with the territory. Or the fact that 99% of head breaks are on them because of poor design but they have an amazing sound and a huge heritage,
View attachment 30480
who wouldn’t have one ?

I might be wrong or simply partial to Gibson but I do belive that the small innacurancies that come from the production process can't be called issues.

I say that because those imperfections are expected and not somenthing has slipped through the QC check. Things like bleeding, small imperfections on the finsh, small glue residues, the way the guitar stay (or doesn't stay in tune), the headstock construction, all this kind of thngs are part of what a Gibson guitar is and, I guess, want to be.

In other words for the most part Gibson sell guitars that are built like they are intended to be and only sometimes (too often if you ask me) they fuck up and send to stores guitars with real problems.

Most of the so calle issues look like that compared to other guitars made by other manifacturers, but that's not a real apple to apple comparison in my opinion.

It's a bit like trying to compare a gourmet and a traditional restaurant. They both can serve excellent food that is presented in a very different manner and with different goals.

All that said, I understand those who won't accept what Gibson has to offer.
 
Yeah, but Gibson is charging fancy restaurant pricing. All they have to do is make very small changes to their headstock design and I’ll be happy. Legacy isn’t enough.

Most gibson buyers don't want that though. As much as it sucks, If it's not late 50s spec for gibson it doesn't sell well.
 
I might be wrong or simply partial to Gibson but I do belive that the small innacurancies that come from the production process can't be called issues.

I say that because those imperfections are expected and not somenthing has slipped through the QC check. Things like bleeding, small imperfections on the finsh, small glue residues, the way the guitar stay (or doesn't stay in tune), the headstock construction, all this kind of thngs are part of what a Gibson guitar is and, I guess, want to be.

In other words for the most part Gibson sell guitars that are built like they are intended to be and only sometimes (too often if you ask me) they fuck up and send to stores guitars with real problems.

Most of the so calle issues look like that compared to other guitars made by other manifacturers, but that's not a real apple to apple comparison in my opinion.

It's a bit like trying to compare a gourmet and a traditional restaurant. They both can serve excellent food that is presented in a very different manner and with different goals.

All that said, I understand those who won't accept what Gibson has to offer.
Yes but it does make them look pretty bad compared with other brands. Literally no other brand says manufacturing slop is just something that you should suck up this price point.
 
Back
Top