Author Topic: Gibson's new bumblebees aren't quite what they're meant to b (Read 11531 times)

5F6-A · « **Reply #15 on:** December 18, 2005, 05:07:58 PM »

Quote from: Ratrod

I'm sure someone makes a resistance cap that's better than the bumblebee.

Thay are too scared...too many false "new and improved" campaings have made some companies to go safe; an safe in guitar business is spelt V-I-N-T-A-G-E

tewboss · « **Reply #16 on:** December 18, 2005, 05:31:43 PM »

The problem with the bumblebee's is that they are an old design, and more reliable capacitors exist now that don't "leak".

Isn't £900 rather expensive for a Les Paul Studio? I thought they were only around the £700 mark.

jt · « **Reply #17 on:** December 18, 2005, 05:31:52 PM »

:D Have to say i`m with Ratty on this one. Guitar makers shoud stop trying to reproduce the past & should start trying to make the future !

The only guitar maker on the market for along while doing this was PRS they took the good things from the past & added modern attitudes to it & modern techniques & have revolutionised the entire industry. They`ve done it so well that Gibson recentley had `em in court trying desperatly to get them "Handicapped" by the legal system.

If you want a good quality LP shaped guitar the buy a Tokai Love Rock, PRS single cut or get a Custom build.

:D 8)

bucketshred · « **Reply #18 on:** December 18, 2005, 06:42:31 PM »

What about Line 6 and Ibanez?

The amazing Phil · « **Reply #19 on:** December 18, 2005, 11:15:52 PM »

They're new though, as opposed to an older "more respected" company keeping up with the times and new ideas etc. It's one thing for a young company to innovate, but the older ones are afraid incase they harm their golden legacy, a legacy that was brought about under previous ownership (in most cases) anyhow...

5F6-A · « **Reply #20 on:** February 18, 2007, 09:14:17 PM »

a pic of an original cap and the reissue

they look fairly similar but hey! through the unbiased eyes of the x-rays the original is full

and the reisue is "empty". Iti's not paper-in-oil at all but a modern plastic cap dressed up as the real thing

incredible

aisuru · « **Reply #21 on:** February 19, 2007, 06:43:22 PM »

every so often Gibson is bought over by a new consortium, who vow to improve the quality up to a standard befitting the heritage and reputation of Gibson. at first, the quality does improve, but pretty soon they just go back to the same ways and start selling the decidedly average guitars at the high prices, cutting costs to maximise profit.

the quality control is patchy, even on Custom Shop models sometimes, but sometimes you find a belter. you just need to try a lot of them.

but their main problem is the board think they can sell more guitars by making niche market models, like the 'GT', 'Menace', 'New Century', 'Vixen', 'Goddess' lines... when they'd be far better to produce a traditional range of well put together guitars. putting a plastic air intake and racing stripes on an SG doesn't make it a better guitar, but Gibson executives don't seem to realise that.

indysmith · « **Reply #22 on:** February 19, 2007, 06:56:59 PM »

eurgh i hate that SG GT thing. appauling.

I don't understand why anyone in their right mind would shell out for a modern gibson. My £200 MIJ Greco Mint Collection EG-600 Les Paul custom easily owns every modern Gibson LP I've ever played.
There is something about vintage guitars though. I can't resist the vibe of an old guitar, honestly used and aged. Vintage guitars should be vintage, not modern reincarnations... although i do find myself seduced daily by a certain 1960's reissue relic'd stratocaster in daphne blue...

Philly Q · « **Reply #23 on:** February 19, 2007, 07:09:39 PM »

Quote from: aisuru

but their main problem is the board think they can sell more guitars by making niche market models, like the 'GT', 'Menace', 'New Century', 'Vixen', 'Goddess' lines... when they'd be far better to produce a traditional range of well put together guitars. putting a plastic air intake and racing stripes on an SG doesn't make it a better guitar, but Gibson executives don't seem to realise that.

I agree Gibson have a strange approach to re-vamping their product line. Rather than coming up with new designs which stay in the line - or simply fine-tuning traditional models, as Fender do - they change the cosmetics and a few features of existing models - then discontinue them after a year.

They do get it right occasionally though - the Firebird Studio is as cool as can be (no doubt I'll look on their site in a minute and see it's been discontinued... :roll: ).

And the Vixen would be a cracking little stripped-down rock guitar if they'd offer it with a '59 neck and standard-width nut. I'd buy one in a second.

indysmith · « **Reply #24 on:** February 19, 2007, 07:56:05 PM »

i'm pretty impressed with the look of those explorer pro's - great alternative to a run-of-the-mill LP without being too extreme. the 90% body size and maple top make it far more interesting to me than your usual explorer anyways.

Antag · « **Reply #25 on:** February 19, 2007, 08:45:04 PM »

Well, as an owner of 3 Les Pauls & 2 Flying Vs (& one time owner of an SG & Explorer) I have to admit that I've been drawn in by Gibson guitars. I play one of my Les Pauls & can imagine that I'm playing an instrument like some of my heroes played (even though it probably bears little resemblence to what they had).

However, I totally agree that Gibson's quality control is atrocious. You often hear it said that Gibsons "need a bit of work" as if it's the most normal thing in the world. For example my Goldtop is indeed a nice guitar after Feline refretted it & fitted BKPs to it.

But should a guitar costing >£1200 require ANY work doing to it? Would we tolerate this from a maker that didn't have Gibson's heritage & history (i.e. pulling power)?

This isn't to say that all Gibsons are bad. Some are fantastic instruments. But you have to shop around, look VERY hard & not get carried away by the rack of shiny goodies in the shop.

Pay particular attention to the fretwork (smoothness of the fretboard, seating of the frets, whether they've been evenly filed all the way up the neck, the fret ends) - this IMO is their real weakness. Crackly pots, sticky tuning machines, flaky/corroded hardware can easily be replaced, as can stupidly small strap buttons (IMO anyone in their right mind fits straplocks anyway). Even poorly cut nut slots can be relatively cheaply fixed. But a refret is a major job (& major expense) that very few of us can do ourselves.