NGTD - Where's all the supposed Gibson quality control issues I been hearing about?

[SillyOctpuss]

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.

 

[spawnofthesith]

Congrats looks excellent!!

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

 

[HotRats]

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.

 

[Aelred]

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.

 

[Eagle]

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,

who wouldn’t have one ?

 

[TSJMajesty]

who wouldn’t have one ?

Me. If I was just starting out today. Too many other better choices.

That PRS Singlecut I got to use for a month back in the early 2000's was so much better than any LP I'd ever played.

 

[HotRats]

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.

 

[HomespunEffects]

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.

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.

 

[SillyOctpuss]

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.

 

[Eagle]

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.

 

[Eagle]

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.

You are right, they have done this several times and had to reverse because of their customer reaction.

 

[HotRats]

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.

Don't know, I'm among those who bought more than one custom shop les pauls because they are somehow made the old way :)

 

[likitlikeyoulikeit]

I love how people are still arguing and ruining this man's new guitar day post......what a joy kill.

Sorry @maguchi I love your guitar, and your jazz, no matter how you do what you do.....you do you...maybe change the title, it may help.

Maybe this needs to be changed to a, "hi, I have many opinions on Gibsons manufacturing methods ands quality control". Thread.

Not trying to be a dick. Well...not anymore than anyone else.

Cheers

 

[HotRats]

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.

that's fair, sloppiness can't be justified with legacy and I don't think that Gibson does that, at least not explicitly.

on the other hand, their inability to have a bulletproof QC is kind of a "suck it up" message sent to the customer.

 

[Los-D]

You are right, they have done this several times and had to reverse because of their customer reaction.

I always thought the “Modern” line would be just that: design and manufacturing improvements to make it compete with something like a PRS, where the “Traditional” would be 50s/60s specs and process. But maybe the ROI isn’t there to have separate processes, or lack of vision (or simply hubris/ego kicks in), etc…

@maguchi, that is one beautiful gold top. P90s FTW. Enjoy it!!!

 

[HomespunEffects]

I love how people are still arguing and ruining this man's new guitar day post......what a joy kill.

Sorry @maguchi I love your guitar, and your jazz, no matter how you do what you do.....you do you...maybe change the title, it may help.

Maybe this needs to be changed to a, "hi, I have many opinions on Gibsons manufacturing methods ands quality control". Thread.

Not trying to be a dick. Well...not anymore than anyone else.

Cheers

He asked about QC issues in the title though. You can’t discount others’ experiences like that and expect no push-back.

 

[Eagle]

that's fair, sloppiness can't be justified with legacy and I don't think that Gibson does that, at least not explicitly.

on the other hand, their inability to have a bulletproof QC is kind of a "suck it up" message sent to the customer.

PRS ,Suhr and others raised the bar but Gibson ignored them. In fairness to Gibson the Murphy Lab guitars are the best they have ever produced. These double down vintage replicas are better than most originals and are extremely faithful to the small details. Credit where it is due.

 

[HomespunEffects]

You are right, they have done this several times and had to reverse because of their customer reaction.

They changed the headstock on a Les Paul or SG?

 

[Eagle]

They changed the headstock on a Les Paul or SG?

Yes they reduced the angle to14degrees and added a volute. Some models switched to a three piece maple neck.

 

[FuzzyAce]

If anyone's interested I started a thread for qc related issues. A catch-all for this kind of stuff? @Eagle , I'm counting on you!
https://thegearforum.com/threads/quality-control-design-improvements-cost.6638/