I dunno, I wish Gibson would quit innovating.
If they stuck to guitars like they made in the old days, they wouldn't be nearly as annoying a company as they are when they try to get clever. The "Robot"? Didn't think so.
but when they do that, people complain that they don't do anything new.
i think the robot, the digital guitar and the dark fire (despite it's silly name) are great innovations. they are in their infancy still, but i think these technologies will have a real impact on the future of our instrument.
if they'd been encased in the body of a Parker Fly, they'd be hailed as marvellous new inventions, but because they're in a Les Paul many people seem to view them almost as blasphemous!
i agree that gibson's corporate structure, it's quality control and it's custom shop pricing are all distasteful. but the same can be said about many companies; PRS may have better QC, but their limited editions are even more obscene than Gibson's. £30,000 for a guitar that Paul himself looked in on while it was built? with Mammoth ivory inlays! the next thing'll be an all brazillian rosewood mccarty, with inlays made from Ted McCarty's own shinbones!
yes, gibson make some things at massively inflated prices for collectors, but like any company they are taking advantage of a market to make money. if no one bought them, they wouldn't make them. they have also, in recent years, started making more affordable guitars like the faded series, which several forumites own and love. they are not the evil empire some people make them out to be.
