Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum
Forum Ringside => Guitars, Amps and Effects => Topic started by: Jonny on November 20, 2009, 08:01:34 PM
-
Check it out:
http://www.gibson.com/en-us/Lifestyle/Features/gibson-dusk-tiger/
My first response was: "Eh?"
I liked the top finish, then I hated the back, then I thought what is that GODLY hideous scratchplate type thing at the bottom photo. Then I looked back at the top at the pickup surrounds and the switch plate.
UGH!
Also "and all at a more affordable price" will be fun to find out what it is.
"You have a rare wealth of creative potential lurking deep within, but until now no guitar has had the power to fully tap into it. Enter the Dusk Tiger..."
Oh come on..
Here's a full picture on GAK:
http://www.guitarampkeyboard.com/en/84790
-
the pickguard is hideous, without that i quite like it
-
"You have a rare wealth of creative potential lurking deep within, but until now no guitar has had the power to fully tap into it. Enter the Dusk Tiger..."
Ah, that's why I've been so utterly shite for 30 years. Quick, where can I buy one?
Nah, seems like yet another monstrously misguided Gibson gimmick to me. The "teeth" inlays and mismatched knobs made me laugh out loud, bless 'em. :lol:
-
Not my cup of tea.
-
its a sort of reinterpretation of the LP recording I guess..
-
Gibsons head office must be too close to the jack daniels distilery.
-
Why can't they just stick to what they do well??????
-
Why can't they just stick to what they do well??????
Agile, tokai, edwards and more do it better?
-
Good point, though I still lust after a black LP custom.
-
looks a bit weird... :lol:
-
Absof*ckinglutely hideous. Signs of desperation at Gibson? Or do they have loads of money to burn on ridiculous stuff.
-
Got you all talking though haven't they.
It's ugly, but then so am I and I'm shagging an ex-playboy bunny so there!
-
Why can't they just stick to what they do well??????
Agile, tokai, edwards and more do it better?
I've yet to play a Les Paul from any maker than feel better to me than my 2. Yes I've played quite a few... tons infact of Gibson which were at best ok, but then again I've played loads of other makers LP's that were meh too.
-
Why can't they just stick to what they do well??????
Agile, tokai, edwards and more do it better?
I've yet to play a Les Paul from any maker than feel better to me than my 2. Yes I've played quite a few... tons infact of Gibson which were at best ok, but then again I've played loads of other makers LP's that were meh too.
Playability is a matter of opinion. Its my observation that all the above have more consistent (and on average higher) quality control standards.
I've never played your guitars, so I cant make an assesment based on them ;)
-
It's ugly, but then so am I and I'm shagging an ex-playboy bunny so there!
When did she hang up her ears and tail? 1972? :P
-
It's ugly, but then so am I and I'm shagging an ex-playboy bunny so there!
When did she hang up her ears and tail? 1972? :P
I dunno, I make shite up and I have Tourette's.
-
Why can't they just stick to what they do well??????
Agile, tokai, edwards and more do it better?
I've yet to play a Les Paul from any maker than feel better to me than my 2. Yes I've played quite a few... tons infact of Gibson which were at best ok, but then again I've played loads of other makers LP's that were meh too.
Playability is a matter of opinion. Its my observation that all the above have more consistent (and on average higher) quality control standards.
I've never played your guitars, so I cant make an assesment based on them ;)
Fair point, I will admit whilst I love mine and wouldn't sell them... are they worth 2 x, 3 x or more the cost of the likes of Tokai or Edwards etc? No is my simple answer! :wink:
-
Why can't they just stick to what they do well??????
Agile, tokai, edwards and more do it better?
I've yet to play a Les Paul from any maker than feel better to me than my 2. Yes I've played quite a few... tons infact of Gibson which were at best ok, but then again I've played loads of other makers LP's that were meh too.
Playability is a matter of opinion. Its my observation that all the above have more consistent (and on average higher) quality control standards.
I've never played your guitars, so I cant make an assesment based on them ;)
Fair point, I will admit whilst I love mine and wouldn't sell them... are they worth 2 x, 3 x or more the cost of the likes of Tokai or Edwards etc? No is my simple answer! :wink:
That said (to my previous) THE best les paul I've ever played was a gibson. A friend of mine hunted for one for years; hes a very bright chap and not the sort to let himself be fooled into thinking the guitars automatically good by a name, only enchanted (knowingly) by its image and rock heritage, and went hunting for the best LP he could find. 5 years into the hunt he found a few on the same day that were candidates and called me out for a second opinion. Out of those there we chose the same one (he just said "what do you think of these?" and sat there impassively so both our decisions were only influenced by the guitars). It was a kickass guitar, still stands out in my memory as one of the best guitars I've played.
But its the exception to prove the rule, in my experience.
So, yes, I believe completely that you *can* have a couple of kickass gibsons: I've seen it with my own ears. Even to the point where, for that little extra mojo that makes all the difference, one can spend far more on them.
I just think you have a better chance at getting a better guitar, in terms of objective quality measures, with several non-gibsons.
-
is this more innovative than their Little Wing guitar series?
-
Isn't that fancy wood from Madagascar?
Well it looks shitee to me.. :?
-
they could have done something really cool with this:
(http://www.guitarphotographer.com/gibson%20les%20paul/1973-Gibson-Les-Paul-Recording-Natural-Big.jpg)
too bad they made such a mistake with the styling, though somehow if i would see a Dusk Tiger in a shop I would give it a go
-
I'm totally with the above from gwEm. The Recording was not pretty, but so funky.
-
gwem speaks the truth - thats what they should have done instead of the 52 tribute which lp would have hated
-
Make the recording normal sized (looks a bit big to me), Keep the weight in check, and make it rear route, and I think they would stand a chance of making more money than with the Tiger.
For an extra bonus, maybe a flame maple veneer for the bling bunch
-
I Kinda Like it.
It's a bit like an ugly bird with a nice pair, you still want to take her home but perhaps not parade her in public too much :?
-
I Kinda Like it.
It's a bit like an ugly bird with a nice pair, you still want to take her home but perhaps not parade her in public too much :?
That's actually quite a good analogy.
-
I Kinda Like it.
It's a bit like an ugly bird with a nice pair, you still want to take her home but perhaps not parade her in public too much :?
That's actually quite a good analogy.
In a Nuts/Zoo kind of way, eh lads? :wink:
-
I voted "Dislike", but I'm prepared to believe that could change if I saw one in the flesh... (prepared to believe, that is, not actually believing it at the moment! :lol:)
-
Got you all talking though haven't they.
It's ugly, but then so am I and I'm shagging an ex-playboy bunny so there!
depends on if it's a recent one.. or one fro the 50's
about the guitar.. i like the top. i really do.. ditch the 5th fret inlay and the pickup surrounds/scratchplate/selector surround and it would be a pretty.. even if a bit unorthodox LP.. now it's just freakin HIDEOUS
-
It'll probably be LP Traditional money or even more, and it doesn't even have a top.
-
"Simply the most astounding innovation in the history of the guitar ..."
... says the most gushing press release in the history of marketing.
-
The slightly similar looking "Luna Sol" guitar that's in the sidebar on the GAK page linked there: I do believe, Gibson, that's probably what you may have been aiming for. How come the £350 guitar can nail the aesthetics so well, and the Big Boys can miss so utterly?
-
i keep seeing the term 'exotic hardwood' associated with this guitar... but what the hell is it!!! i think i have a few ideas and am not really interested but it seems odd that they are not stating wood type clearly - this being the company that started giving us fancy wood names with the rather nice smartwood series now resort to a generic and meaningless tag.
maybe they imported it illegally and dont want to say the name out loud ;)
-
Goncalo Alves maybe?
-
Goncalo Alves maybe?
It looks close to that, doesn't look exactly like it though, GA looks too smooth.
Someone needs to ring GAK and ask.
-
thats a distinct possibility. its also a bit like pale moon ebony but you know damn well gibson would use a name like that in the marketing... and it would cost a lot - possibly even more than a fancy maple top
thats whats confusing me - why not say what they are using???
-
thats a distinct possibility. its also a bit like pale moon ebony but you know damn well gibson would use a name like that in the marketing... and it would cost a lot - possibly even more than a fancy maple top
thats whats confusing me - why not say what they are using???
maybe its thin layers of exotic hardwood, loving glued together at 90 degrees to each other for strength and tone ;)
-
I think its ahead of its time, we should wait 'til next week to judge it
-
Spot of necromancy due to the clone thread. Now that a bit of time has passed and there's more pictures available, what do people think? I think now that there's some real photos and video footage available the plate looks nowhere near as bad, and actually is growing on me.
As someone suggested this is really more the guitar Les Paul wanted than a '58 standard, technology has reached a point where Hi-Fi guitar output is a practical reality.
On the detail front, apparently the top is "marblewood" from Surinam, and it'll be cheaper than an LP custom or Axcess, so really not stupidly expensive.
I think people are being a bit harsh here, this is not the holy V, and they're genuinely trying to do something innovative, which i think they should be applauded for. Guitarists are a notoriously old fashioned bunch, so for a company like Gibson, launching guitars with tons of new technology on board is a bit of a bold move. Most of the "regular" LP buyers wouldn't want the tech anyway, so they can be more experimental with the aesthetics (although everyone slagged off the Darkfire, which was fairly staid, and I thought looked quite good, so they can't win).
-
i still stand by my previous statement .. ditch 5th fret inlay and all that chrome on the body and it'd be cool
-
I saw one in real life last night and it looked horrendous!
-
i still stand by my previous statement .. ditch 5th fret inlay and all that chrome on the body and it'd be cool
+1.
the dark fire was really cool. they could have done the tiger with a more traditionally shaped, angled chrome pickguard and even chrome rectangular pickup rings and it would have been cool.
-
Over 100 reader's comments on Gibson's website and pretty much all slagging it.
My girlfriend said wait until Billy Gibbons buys one; everyone will think it's cool then
-
My girlfriend said wait until Billy Gibbons buys one; everyone will think it's cool then
:lol:
These wives and girlfriends can be annoyingly perceptive sometimes!
-
My girlfriend said wait until Billy Gibbons buys one; everyone will think it's cool then
What a VERY wise girlfriend you've got there...If I were you I'd be getting worried that every time you argue she "just might" have a point. :? :lol:
-
It's not just the DUsk Tiger. I was in a music shop yesterday and the whole Gibson range just looked ... wrong. I don't know what their designers are thinking lately, they're churning out £2000 guitars that look like kiddy toys.