Yeah, I hear what you’re saying.
www.sweetwater.com
Well that’s hot as hell.Yeah, I hear what you’re saying.
And they do make them without floyds. I’ve been eyeing this forever, but ended up finding and buying my Blue Widow, so that stole the funds away…
Gibson Custom Les Paul Axcess Custom Figured Top - Bengal Burst
Solidbody Electric Guitar with Mahogany Body, Figured Maple Top, Mahogany Neck, Ebony Fingerboard, and 2 Humbucking Pickups - Bengal Burst
For the reasons stated. The Gibson suffers from design flaws. It’s heavy, its recessed headstock makes it overly prone to breaking, the upper access sucks and lord knows they haven’t learned to get a finish right in 70 years.That analogy doesn't fit. If my Les Paul was giving me half as much trouble as your hypothetical 57 Bel Air it would be gone in a second and something else would take it's place.
But it doesn't give me any problems at all.
In all 192 shows I played with it last year I never once had a situation where something about it was bothering me or not working the way I wanted it to. I never once had any frustration with it, and never once thought I wish I had something else. It just worked.
I don't find myself feeling a need for anything on it to be changed, or fixed, or updated, or improved. If I did, I would get rid of it and get something that worked better for me.
It has nothing to do with it being cool, or vintage, or traditional. It has nothing to do with fearing change, it has nothing to do with what any other guitarist besides me has ever used. It's a tool I have, and it works.
So why should I give up a tool that does everything I need just because it happens to be traditional and there are other modern alternatives available?
I can think of a huge list of reasons to trade a 57 Bel Air for a 2023 Hyundai, because there are a ton of practical considerations there. But I can't think of a single reason to trade my Gibson for anything else.
It's actually impressive how they managed to make something different/modern without addressing any of their design flaws.
I haven't had any more tuning trouble with Gibson style guitars vs. Fender-style. The only difference is that the tuning stability problems on G-style will almost always be the G-string, where on other guitars...it's whatever string the nut slot isn't quite perfect on.
Of all the friends I've got that've had snapped headstocks, it was nothing to do with "being careful", it was an accident, a drunk oaf, etc. So yeah, a volute (as appears on the one Axxess model) is a better design.
I mean if you want a guitar with a scarf joint, volute, or other design choice to make it more resilient to drunken oafs, there are plenty of options available and one should choose one of those options rather than not choosing one and then bitching about the poor design they chose to buy
That’s hilarious. Buy a completely different guitar, because of one design issue that’s easily fixed (and they have, on one model).I mean if you want a guitar with a scarf joint, volute, or other design choice to make it more resilient to drunken oafs, there are plenty of options available and one should choose one of those options rather than not choosing one and then bitching about the poor design they chose to buy
We will go bike analogy. And instead of comparing a '70s era banana seat to a modern carbon fiber bike, we'll talk about two high performance machines:
Nah, let’s go car analogy. “This Model T is bumpy as all hell. Let’s give it shocks and struts”.
Dude, now you're just talking nonsense. Volutes are bumpy as hell.
None of the mentioned problems are a problem……until they’re a problem.
Not sure how often you bring your guitars out or the environments you may play in, but being careful is the least of it.
I get that. But saying that any guitar that isn't designed to stand up to precarious gigging situations has a "design flaw", given how few guitars are actually used in those kinds of situations, is kind of pretending that all cars should be designed to be 3-row seaters with loads of storage space and 4-wheel drive, even if you're a widowed empty-nester living in the suburban south.
Okay guy.
I’ve told you more than once, you shouldn’t. If you like the sound and feel of your Gibson, keep playing it. I hope you circle the world 10 times on the biggest stages with it. It still doesn’t negate the inherent problems with Gibsons. That’s what we are talking about. If those shortcomings suit you and are worth it you you for feel and tone supposed gains, then keep playing a Les Paul.You're skipping around the question I'm asking with analogies that don't fit.
I've played tons and tons of modern guitars and I like the feel and sound of my Gibson better.
So... why should I use a guitar that doesn't sound or feel as good to me just because the one I like best happens to be a traditional design?
That makes no sense to me. It's going modern for the sake of going modern. Which to me is every bit as ridiculous as going traditional for the sake of going traditional.
I don't care if it's modern or vintage or traditional, I only care if it sounds and feels the way I want it to.
We can go back to cars. If one car was built without crumple zones and most people dropped dead in accidents in that car, the answer isn’t stop having accidents. Gibsons are known for the delicate headstock for a reason.
