Gibson Series 2

HomespunEffects said:
Yeah, i have a set of PG Blues. They are pretty authentic. Replaced the bridge with a Holy Diver. As stated above “weak, thin, screechy” but not “noisy” as they are improved.
Click to expand...
That’s a good pickup but it’s a specific thing not a generic paf replica. You would need to try it against an original to get what I mean.
 
Eagle said:
That’s a good pickup but it’s a specific thing not a generic paf replica. You would need to try it against an original to get what I mean.
Click to expand...
Well, the neck pickup is its own thing but by itself the bridge pickup is pretty much a ‘59 replica. I could be wrong about that but i think that’s how it goes.
 
i mean.. theres economics and then there's players.

far as i can tell, very few ever bridge that gap as players AND economic forces.

theres adequate resources for players, and i use them. once in a while i find a piece of expensive gear languishing and i get it for cheap- but its only by mistake things from that column of the register end up on my side. but i still dont make enough to buy them NEW.

all im saying is, gibson is kinda stating their position of being on one side rather than the other, and while i appreciate their output, im fine with a stainer over a stradivarius.
 
@Eagle would have more insight on this, but I'm sure all "PAFs" weren't/aren't created equal. They had to run the gamut from weak to hot. I've never gone too far down that rabbit hole though.
 
I’m kind of ambivalent about these. I’ll never buy them, but I don’t hate that other people will. And it makes perfect sense to me that Gibson is selling these.

Comments about them being weak, thin, screechy, and noisy leave me scratching my head a little… I don’t get that at all. I love PAFs
 
Phew, for a minute based on thread title and caption I was worried that Gibson was going to start producing off shore "Gibsons" a la the unsubstantiated rumors floating around a few weeks ago
 
FuzzyAce said:
@Eagle would have more insight on this, but I'm sure all "PAFs" weren't/aren't created equal. They had to run the gamut from weak to hot. I've never gone too far down that rabbit hole though.
Click to expand...

There's quite a lot of variety over the years but they become more consistent as they change to Pat number pickups. Pickups were just wound and placed in storage until they were needed so there's no such thing as neck or bridge pickups. It's absolute pot luck which pickups ended up in a guitar. Before the automatic shut off the winders had to turn then off manually so you would get variation there, magnet type could vary and because they charged magnets in big blocks the ones in the middle might get less charge than the ones on the outside.

There's no such thing as a specific paf spec out there and most winders (who know what they are talking about) try and recreate specific pafs they had which sounded great.
 
SillyOctpuss said:
There's quite a lot of variety over the years but they become more consistent as they change to Pat number pickups. Pickups were just wound and placed in storage until they were needed so there's no such thing as neck or bridge pickups. It's absolute pot luck which pickups ended up in a guitar. Before the automatic shut off the winders had to turn then off manually so you would get variation there, magnet type could vary and because they charged magnets in big blocks the ones in the middle might get less charge than the ones on the outside.

There's no such thing as a specific paf spec out there and most winders (who know what they are talking about) try and recreate specific pafs they had which sounded great.
Click to expand...
Yeah that makes sense.
 
Eagle said:
Ah you know it then.
Click to expand...

Yeah unfortunately I do. My friend is that guy who goes round junkshops, charity shops, car boot sales and buys the unflushables that no body else wants. If it's cheap and he hasn't bought a guitar already that day he's having it.

I don't get the thought process tbh. For the amount of cash he's spent on guitars he never sees, because they're in a pile of cheap cases in the spare room and garage he could have had a really nice guitar or two. I know which I'd rather have.
 
SillyOctpuss said:
Yeah unfortunately I do. My friend is that guy who goes round junkshops, charity shops, car boot sales and buys the unflushables that no body else wants. If it's cheap and he hasn't bought a guitar already that day he's having it.

I don't get the thought process tbh. For the amount of cash he's spent on guitars he never sees, because they're in a pile of cheap cases in the spare room and garage he could have had a really nice guitar or two. I know which I'd rather have.
Click to expand...
You should introduce him to Dave who started the Behringer thread.
 
SillyOctpuss said:
Yeah unfortunately I do. My friend is that guy who goes round junkshops, charity shops, car boot sales and buys the unflushables that no body else wants. If it's cheap and he hasn't bought a guitar already that day he's having it.

I don't get the thought process tbh. For the amount of cash he's spent on guitars he never sees, because they're in a pile of cheap cases in the spare room and garage he could have had a really nice guitar or two. I know which I'd rather have.
Click to expand...
Twin Peaks Mirror GIF by Twin Peaks on Showtime
 
Not totally sure why a $1k set of humbuckers grosses me out. PAFs are all I’ll use in my Gibson style stuff but they aren’t rocket science. There are plenty of great <$300 sets out there from builders who will sometimes even customize them to your preferences.
 
Here is the other aspect of it that kills me. Gibson is a luxury brand by virtue of price and history only. They are the most notoriously lacking in QC of the major companies. They are notorious for buying other companies and killing them. They have nothing to do with musicians except the legacy of the brand. No one is as anti innovation. Even when they try to improve anything, you get robot tuners that break left and right.

If they were like Vigier, Anderson, Suhr, or some company that makes the guitar equivalent of a Ferrari, where you don't have look twice at anything to make sure it's made right, that's another story. I still think it's a murderous price worthy of ridicule, but coming from such a piece of shit company, it adds to the insult.

The fact that you can go to any number of other companies to buy a single cut guitar that is actually made well enough to justify the price every single time, the fact that with Gibson you can pay enormous sums and still be subject to the luck of the draw, is unbelievable. For anything that expensive, you should be guaranteed to have the best of the best without question every time.

Whatever money and time they invested in this peak blues lawyer bullshit should've been spent on QC and on repairing their reputation. I'd hire someone to travel the country to go from dealership to dealership to play new Gibsons on the shelf and see what they've done wrong, then fix them or make it right, and never let another lemon out of their factories again.

Clean up the name for a decade, then you can earn the right to charge whatever your greedy little heart desires, but until then, you're just cosplaying the quality that would justify that price. Reputation matters.
 
State of Epicicity said:
Here is the other aspect of it that kills me. Gibson is a luxury brand by virtue of price and history only. They are the most notoriously lacking in QC of the major companies. They are notorious for buying other companies and killing them. They have nothing to do with musicians except the legacy of the brand. No one is as anti innovation. Even when they try to improve anything, you get robot tuners that break left and right.

If they were like Vigier, Anderson, Suhr, or some company that makes the guitar equivalent of a Ferrari, where you don't have look twice at anything to make sure it's made right, that's another story. I still think it's a murderous price worthy of ridicule, but coming from such a piece of shit company, it adds to the insult.

The fact that you can go to any number of other companies to buy a single cut guitar that is actually made well enough to justify the price every single time, the fact that with Gibson you can pay enormous sums and still be subject to the luck of the draw, is unbelievable. For anything that expensive, you should be guaranteed to have the best of the best without question every time.

Whatever money and time they invested in this peak blues lawyer bullshit should've been spent on QC and on repairing their reputation. I'd hire someone to travel the country to go from dealership to dealership to play new Gibsons on the shelf and see what they've done wrong, then fix them or make it right, and never let another lemon out of their factories again.

Clean up the name for a decade, then you can earn the right to charge whatever your greedy little heart desires, but until then, you're just cosplaying the quality that would justify that price. Reputation matters.
Click to expand...
I get your point but it’s nothing to do with quality control. They produce the exact product that they want to produce. They have just not moved on with production methods and continue to build guitars largely with old school mentality even though they use Plek and cnc extensively. All the finishing and fret work is the same methodology as it was 50 years ago.
Other companies have embraced far tighter tolerance and are not saddled with the customer expectations of classic models. Gibson could easily produce a PRS to the same level but they have suffered severely economically whenever they change anything away from their current format.
So they pander to what they see as their market and it’s working better for them now than for many years.
 
Eagle said:
I get your point but it’s nothing to do with quality control. They produce the exact product that they want to produce. They have just not moved on with production methods and continue to build guitars largely with old school mentality even though they use Plek and cnc extensively. All the finishing and fret work is the same methodology as it was 50 years ago.
Other companies have embraced far tighter tolerance and are not saddled with the customer expectations of classic models. Gibson could easily produce a PRS to the same level but they have suffered severely economically whenever they change anything away from their current format.
So they pander to what they see as their market and it’s working better for them now than for many years.
Click to expand...

I respect your thoughts on all things guitar related, but Gibson does not have my respect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

metropolis_4
Gibson Mary Ford LP?
Replies
5
Views
366
EOengineer
E
State of Epicicity
Passive Mid Cut for SC Emulation on a HB
Replies
0
Views
40
State of Epicicity
State of Epicicity
CBHScott
New Gibson Falcon amps
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
6K
CBHScott
CBHScott
metropolis_4
NGD! This one is really special
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
norminal
norminal
B
NBD: Squier Bass VI in Antigua
Replies
9
Views
733
bikescene
B
Back
Top