My intention is not to claim that Gibson's are rubbish. I'm a very happy user of a 91 les Paul std. WhatI tried to say is how big names sometimes use dodgy techniques to fool people.
The new bumblebess caps are NOT like the old ones but made to look like the old ones. Mind you, a brand new Fender Twin Reverb looks 100% like an old BF Twin Reverb but what you find inseide is not quite the same.
Unfortunitely this is the nature of big business, lets squeeze more money out of the customer but also lower the cost of whatever it is we produce.
Though remember Gibson may well have asked for a vintage spec (orange) cap and received an orange cap that is in the ballpark.
Though in saying that there is probably a huge stock of eith NOS caps or a mfgr who for an extra $0.05 per 100 could have made sure of the 'real thing' being used. After all how many caps a year whould they have to buy for their custom shop guitars (they charge enough).
In the world of electronics, look at the efforts marshall have had to go to to release their hand wired amps (and the associated cost), and they're still different (but apparently close)
Even building a fuzz box to vintage specs is almost impossible mfgrs change their transistor & diode specs without notice, and a special run for anything less than a couple of million componants isn't an option.
I jusy can't help wondering if the real production problems that Gibson are thought to have applies across their whole range as it was in the case of Gretch and Fender.
Unfortunitely it's a case of compromise :( but it dosn't excuse mistepresentation (for want of a better term).
Rob...
