# Gibson suing Dean Guitars



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 20, 2019)

Guess the petty video was serious. 

https://guitar.com/news/industry-ne...H4kS35itpr2qBgfoRfR6pJwuL0x2j9aUE7_cHO0liWjpk


----------



## diagrammatiks (Jun 20, 2019)

Starting with some low hanging fruit. They already got the boutiques the last time around.


----------



## gunshow86de (Jun 20, 2019)

Why now? Dean has been making those models for 40+ years. 

Sidenote: Why is this guy doing Gibson's on camera PR? Beyond un-charismatic, he comes off as thoroughly unlikable. 
https://www.reddit.com/r/guitars/comments/c1p9kc/gibsons_play_authentic_video_they_pulled_off_of/


----------



## GunpointMetal (Jun 20, 2019)

Throw the whole company away. They've been making over priced trash for close to 20 years now, and now they're just being assholes. Fuck 'em, hope it goes down and all their employees can find better jobs.


----------



## Randy (Jun 20, 2019)

If Gibson puts Dean out of business, who's going to be the one to profit off their posthumous signature guitar?


----------



## ImNotAhab (Jun 20, 2019)

gunshow86de said:


> Sidenote: Why is this guy doing Gibson's on camera PR? Beyond un-charismatic, he comes off as thoroughly unlikable.
> https://www.reddit.com/r/guitars/comments/c1p9kc/gibsons_play_authentic_video_they_pulled_off_of/



Agreed, he looks like the kind of guy who moved on to Hot Sauce enema's because Monster Energy Drink was not having an effect anymore.

Also, I wonder who they will bring to court next? ESP? Gretsch? KLM Airlines over that Flying V airplane? Seems like a really big set back in their PR campaign.


----------



## spudmunkey (Jun 20, 2019)

Randy said:


> If Gibson puts Dean out of business, who's going to be the one to profit off their posthumous signature guitar?



I could see them doing something shitty like demanding either all profits from those models, or a transfer of the actual trademarks/design patents.


----------



## Mathemagician (Jun 20, 2019)

There’s a quote by Vanderbilt where he basically insults his competition by saying he’s not going to try to litigate them out of competition he’ll just beat them in the market.

Most major companies do not operate that way. It is often far less expensive and brand damage is temporary to box out any competition using the law.

I’m all for IP protection as I’ve posted before, but Gibson has been trying to “prove” they invented/own single-cut guitars forever and a day. I believe they tried suing PRS and that flopped because of course it did.

I’m betting this is the V and explorer style shapes?

Gibson’s whole goal is “they would buy our mediocre instruments if others didn’t offer a better product at a better price point with better specs and features”.


----------



## BlackMastodon (Jun 20, 2019)

The V body shape I can kinda see, since the Dean one is a liiiiiittle bit less meaty and the crotch part of the V is closer to the neck. But for the headstock shape Gibson can fuck right off. It's a 3x3 non-pointy headstock with a small notch at the top, it's not even close.

When I read that article I was disappointed to read that Gibson recovered from their financial troubles. We can let legacies die sometimes, guys, please don't buy 3 overpriced Les Pauls as soon as you turn 50.


----------



## Cheap (Jun 20, 2019)

Dean seems like a weird place to start. I know they're a fairly big company, but to me it seems like they're taking on a little guy they think they can shake down easier rather than a brand that's blatantly been improving on their concepts and stealing their customer base for years. 

I don't think I've ever met anyone who's gone for a Dean instead of a Gibson if that's what they're shopping for. Either they want a Dean outright or they're into the idea of the 'full fat' Gibson. 

This is way too much too soon from them. Kind of confirms that nothing has really changed and they're as slimy as ever


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 20, 2019)

Mathemagician said:


> I’m betting this is the V and explorer style shapes?
> 
> Gibson’s whole goal is “they would buy our mediocre instruments if others didn’t offer a better product at a better price point with better specs and features”.



The V, Explorer/Z, the Gibson headstock, SG, and ES shape.

The V and Explorer I can MAYBE see going somewhere. Not the others, though.

Plus Gibson seems to be claiming that Dean is counterfeiting their guitars.



> The details of the filing are equally interesting. Rather than only accusing Armadillo of infringing trademarks, the filing accuses it of Trademark Counterfeiting – in effect accusing Armadillo of trying to deceive or mislead the public into thinking that the guitars made by Dean and Luna are in fact Gibsons, or have some connection to Gibson.



I'm no legal expert, but I think they'd need some absolutely airtight evidence to prove that.

EDIT: Actually since the Z and V shape have been around for so damn long, does that effect Dean's outlook in any way? I would think since Gibson took so long, they'd be at some kind of disadvantage. Like I said, though, no legal expert.


----------



## Mathemagician (Jun 20, 2019)

It’s so they have negotiating room. They think they can use it as leverage to “drop” the charge in the hopes that other ones stick. The problem is like you said, ain’t nobody ever said Deans are Gibson’s.


----------



## MAJ Meadows SF (Jun 20, 2019)

My question is WHY now? Hmm...


----------



## lewis (Jun 20, 2019)

company making shit guitars in suing other company who is making their own shit guitars shocker?

Can understand Gibson in that case.
"we thought we were shit first - then you started being shit too - we want to sue you - we are THE shittest around here"


----------



## JD27 (Jun 20, 2019)

If anything is damaging their “iconic legacy” it’s got nothing to do with Dean using 3x3 headstock and a V shaped body.


----------



## MASS DEFECT (Jun 20, 2019)

Will Wylde Audio get a pass?


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 20, 2019)

I'm actually curious to see if Gibson even thinks they have a case, or they're just doing this as a bully tactic. Probably was meant to go along with that shitty video.


----------



## spudmunkey (Jun 20, 2019)

i think the headstock issue is moot, because they aren't similar enough. The "V" shape, though..does Gibson have different protections in place for it's design than Fender does? Or does Fender just not go after Strat clones (yet)?


----------



## DeathbyDesign (Jun 20, 2019)

This move reeks of desperation to keep their name out there and think they are staying relevant. I wonder if it will go the same way as the PRS lawsuit.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 20, 2019)

spudmunkey said:


> Or does Fender just not go after Strat clones (yet)?



IIRC Fender never trademarked their very early shapes (Strat, Tele, Pbass, Jazz bass), and I don't recall what exactly happened. Either they tried to trademark or sue someone about 10 years ago and lost. So those 4 shapes are now pretty much generic shapes.


----------



## protest (Jun 20, 2019)

The headstocks aren't even close, and I have a feeling they're setting themselves up for failure by going the counterfeit route. I imagine the guitars and logos would have to be damn near identical.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 20, 2019)

protest said:


> The headstocks aren't even close, and I have a feeling they're setting themselves up for failure by going the counterfeit route. I imagine the guitars and logos would have to be damn near identical.



I'm actually curious to see what happens IF this backfires, and how other companies would react.


----------



## tedtan (Jun 20, 2019)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> EDIT: Actually since the Z and V shape have been around for so damn long, does that effect Dean's outlook in any way? I would think since Gibson took so long, they'd be at some kind of disadvantage. Like I said, though, no legal expert.



This is the crux of the issue here. If Gibson wanted to defend their IP, they should have gone after Dean 40 years ago. At this point, there is probably no case since Gibson hasn't done anything to protect their IP from Dean going back to around 1977.

I think it's just an attempt to bully Dean into agreeing to stop using those shapes in an out of court settlement. Not that I care about Dean, but I sincerely hope that approach does not work.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 20, 2019)

tedtan said:


> This is the crux of the issue here. If Gibson wanted to defend their IP, they should have gone after Dean 40 years ago. At this point, there is probably no case since Gibson hasn't done anything to protect their IP from Dean going back to around 1977.
> 
> I think it's just an attempt to bully Dean into agreeing to stop using those shapes in an out of court settlement. Not that I care about Dean, but I sincerely hope that approach does not work.



I'm hoping Dean has the money to call their bluff. This really seems like a bullying tactic.


----------



## BenjaminW (Jun 20, 2019)

MASS DEFECT said:


> Will Wylde Audio get a pass?


Let’s hope they do because it’s one less company that gets screwed by Gibson.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 20, 2019)

All this hate against “mediocre” Gibson guitars lol. Ahhhh... Your misery makes me happy.


----------



## arasys (Jun 20, 2019)

imagine the reaction if they sued ESP and somehow won


----------



## spudmunkey (Jun 20, 2019)

*Pfsh* They are going after Dean? Why don't they go after Epiphone. Total copies. They even sometimes say "les Paul" on them!!!


----------



## JD27 (Jun 20, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


> All this hate against “mediocre” Gibson guitars lol. Ahhhh... Your misery makes me happy.



I don’t think most are going to dispute that you can’t find a good one. It’s more, “How many do you have to go through to find a good one.” I guess even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while, haha. Out of the 9 or 10 I’ve gone through from 2007 and up, at least half had some issues. The nicest surprisingly was a 2016 SG with P90s. If anything they were consistently inconsistent.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 20, 2019)

http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/de...-lawsuit-we-will-vigorously-defend-ourselves/



> Earlier today, *Armadillo* released the following statement: "We believe that *Gibson*'s claims are baseless and will vigorously defend ourselves.
> 
> "As the proud owner of some of the most famous brands in the music industry, we respect and value the intellectual property rights of others. But we also recognize that some things are just too commonplace and basic for one company to claim as its property.
> 
> "*Dean Guitars* has been continuously offering the V and Z-shaped guitars at issue in the lawsuit since at least 1976 — for over the past forty years. And *Dean Guitars* is not alone; other guitar companies have for decades used the commonplace guitar shapes that *Gibson* now tries to claim exclusive rights to."


----------



## CapinCripes (Jun 20, 2019)

Wait are they trying to have v's and explorers ruled as generic shapes, because if they wanted a case against dean it should have happened 40 years ago. Bold move cotton. I guarantee the first words out of dean's lawyers mouths would be that since gibson did not defend their trademark on the shapes for the last 40 years, especially considering the fact there was no way they wern't aware of a little company called dean over the past 19 years and IIRC you can't selectively choose to defend your IP if you are aware and you wish to keep it you must take action.


----------



## Dekay82 (Jun 20, 2019)

I've seen this happen everytime my mom dates a new guy. JC Curleigh is the cool new dude that wears a denim jacket, lets you sneak a beer and cigarette, then after a few months of being comfortable, is kicking your ass out telling you to get a job. Fuck you, JC, you're not my real dad.


----------



## Nonapod (Jun 20, 2019)

I assume they don't care much about the any negative PR since people will by their way overpriced guitars simple because it's Gibson. But one wonders how much bad PR can drag a brand down on top of the various high prices and all the QC issues like Harley-Davidson during the AMF years.


----------



## MikeH (Jun 20, 2019)

I love my ‘92 LPC, but fuck everything in terms of business that Gibson has done since. I can only expect this is a ruse to get more 40 year old dads to be mad at millennials and “show them” by buying more Gibsons.


----------



## MASS DEFECT (Jun 20, 2019)

With news like this, you just want to give your money to the ones who do a better job, right? I own a nice Gibson SG, but Gibson just keeps ruining the brand image with stuff like these. 

I've been gassing for an LPC. Any other manufacturers do a great copy? I had an Edwards and it was great but I like those MOP block inlays.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 20, 2019)

MASS DEFECT said:


> With news like this, you just want to give your money to the ones who do a better job, right? I own a nice Gibson SG, but Gibson just keeps ruining the brand image with stuff like these.
> 
> I've been gassing for an LPC. Any other manufacturers do a great copy? I had an Edwards and it was great but I like those MOP block inlays.



I mean if you can afford a Gibson, try a Navigator. Edwards is to the ESP Standard/E-II line as what Navigator is to the ESP Original/Custom line.


----------



## GRUNTKOR (Jun 20, 2019)

Fuck Gibson and especially fuck mark agnesi, he's a cunt


----------



## ElysianGuitars (Jun 20, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


> All this hate against “mediocre” Gibson guitars lol. Ahhhh... Your misery makes me happy.
> 
> View attachment 70350
> View attachment 70351
> View attachment 70352


No misery here, Gibson makes some terrible guitars, and I, as a luthier, make money off their short-comings, of which there are many. Glad you have instruments you like. I'd take a Collings over a Gibson any day.

That being said, this lawsuit seems like needless self sabotage on Gibson's end. They are not going to prevail here, in my opinion. MAYBE on the "hummingbird" trademark claim, but the rest? Nah.


----------



## ArtDecade (Jun 20, 2019)

MASS DEFECT said:


> I own a nice Gibson SG, but Gibson just keeps ruining the brand image with stuff like these.



I dunno about that. I don't think the average musician cares about the legal side of all this stuff. "I like Jimmy Page so I bought a Gibson." "I like Mustaine so I bought a Dean." "I like Hendrix so I bought a Fender." etc etc. People just buy what they dig a bunch of different reasons, but only gear nerds worry about this end of the pond. Gibson has been suing other companies for decades, but their QC is what really damages their image - not their legal attack dogs.


----------



## thedonal (Jun 20, 2019)

This seems like a daft move to me- I accept they want to protect their brand interests, but after the last 5 or 6 years of the Juskiewicz era in particular, I think they should be working on positive PR for the time being. They seem to have sorted out the range to a degree (not heard much ref the quality of the 2019 models yet) but moves like this won't win them any popularity points.


----------



## ElysianGuitars (Jun 20, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> I dunno about that. I don't think the average musician cares about the legal side of all this stuff. "I like Jimmy Page so I bought a Gibson." "I like Mustaine so I bought a Dean." "I like Hendrix so I bought a Fender." etc etc. People just buy what they dig a bunch of different reasons, but only gear nerds worry about this end of the pond. Gibson has been suing other companies for decades, but their QC is what really damages their image - not their legal attack dogs.


I think there is a pretty marked difference this time, as they just put out a VERY poorly received video saying they were going to do exactly this, and it seems a LOT of people saw it. Lots of their previous legal activity predated social media.


----------



## efiltsohg (Jun 20, 2019)

lemme just trademark the letter V


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 20, 2019)

Your honor, I represent Dean Guitars and I can confirm that we make no such thing as a "V" guitar; but rather it is a partial "A". I rest my case.

Case dismissed!


----------



## Vyn (Jun 20, 2019)

This is actually bullshit. Completely the wrong way to go about improving your brand's imagine for starters.

If anything I'm going to go out and buy a Dean in protest.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 20, 2019)

Vyn said:


> This is actually bullshit. Completely the wrong way to go about improving your brand's imagine for starters.
> 
> If anything I'm going to go out and buy a Dean in protest.



You actually made me wonder if this would help Dean any?

Like, I doubt protest sells would play a factor, but I wonder if people would think "Well shit, if Gibson wants to stop them, then they must be good!"


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 20, 2019)

Not a fan of Dean at all, but fuck Gibson. I will never buy or use one of their guitars.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 20, 2019)

By the way, lemme just point out these fucking goobers have made a shit ton of cash when Slash started using a fake Les Paul because they basically told him to go fuck himself when he asked for an endorsement around the time of recording AFD. Then they changed their tune circa UYI and have been milking his name since. In fact, he was pretty instrumental in their turn around financially after how dismally their brand ended up as a result of pancake bodies and other silliness. Same, though to a lesser extent (I assume) is true of Iommi.

So yeah, eat shit, Gibson.


----------



## Hollowway (Jun 20, 2019)

I was hoping someone started a thread on here about this. All I know is that if Apple couldn't win against Samsung, given the evidence of documents telling the samsung engineers to copy the apple stuff exactly, then there's no way this Dean lawsuit wins. Dean is not putting any "Gibson" labels on their guitars, so that part of the suit is dead. There's a fairly limited way to make a headstock, so that's going to be a tough sell. And, I wouldn't be surprised if Dean claims that the V and explorer shapes (and HS, too) are generic trademarks. This whole 40 years thing falls well under the doctrine of laches, which means they waited WAAAAAAAY too long. So they must be blustering to either, A) scare the smaller companies into not making LPs, etc., or B) Get Dean to settle and pay something.


----------



## Hollowway (Jun 20, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> By the way, lemme just point out these fucking goobers have made a shit ton of cash when Slash started using a fake Les Paul because they basically told him to go fuck himself when he asked for an endorsement around the time of recording AFD. Then they changed their tune circa UYI and have been milking his name since. In fact, he was pretty instrumental in their turn around financially after how dismally their brand ended up as a result of pancake bodies and other silliness. Same, though to a lesser extent (I assume) is true of Iommi.
> 
> So yeah, eat shit, Gibson.



Yeah, this is the really shitty thing. Gibson is not a, "Hey musician's, let us help you out, and then you'll be a great ambassador to us when you get big." They're more one to ride coattails AFTER someone makes it big. Personally, I don't have much sympathy for a company that literally doesn't support their companies.


----------



## Glades (Jun 20, 2019)

Gibson were dominant when there was only a handful of guitar companies making instruments. Back then, imports were awful and the only way to get a quality instrument was to get something made in the USA. Today in 2019, overseas manufacturing rules the instrument market in volume and quality. The only way I see for a company like Gibson to stay afloat is to make superior quality instruments, and have a positive reputation for being a high-quality instrument maker. I though that was the direction they were going when they hired this new CEO. But petty crap like this, in an age of social media, seems like PR suicide for Gibson. I know many players that were going to give them a chance because of this perceived new direction was going in. I just think Gibson likes being the villain. It's baffling.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Jun 21, 2019)

This is now my current favorite video:



And now I want that V more than ever.


----------



## Strobe (Jun 21, 2019)

I happen to really like Gibson guitars (I own 3 and the quality is great). I also happen to really dislike Dean guitars. Mostly their headstock shapes, many play well, just not into the looks and extreme string break angles. Maybe there is something to the V body, but barely, and the rest of it is weaker still. Dumb lawsuit. Strategically, this is less about Dean than it is discouraging other builders from starting similar shapes in my opinion.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 21, 2019)

ElysianGuitars said:


> Gibson makes some terrible guitars,



Who knew? They should probably fire their CEO.



ElysianGuitars said:


> and I, as a luthier, make money off their short-comings, of which there are many. Glad you have instruments you like.



Yeah. Its just me and my lawyer friends.



ElysianGuitars said:


> I'd take a Collings _along with_ a Gibson any day.



*Fixed.


----------



## Werecow (Jun 21, 2019)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> This is now my current favorite video:
> 
> 
> 
> And now I want that V more than ever.




I've now see two videos of that guy now and they both seriously creep me out. He has evil eyes and a weird douchy demeanor.


----------



## BlackSG91 (Jun 21, 2019)

I think a chain-reaction is developing here. Maybe Bigsby should consider a lawsuit after all these decades.








;>)/


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 21, 2019)




----------



## Fred the Shred (Jun 21, 2019)

Thing is that the holding company is exactly the same, so I think I was pretty naive in thinking the board would allow the CEO to implement a proper development strategy and follow through on that. As it is, though, we may have lost the resident board parrot, but we have the same barrier between direction and the company's target audience as before. Good publicity for Dean, I guess.


----------



## Kemper (Jun 21, 2019)

Poor JP, no more Majesty


----------



## lewis (Jun 21, 2019)

this is dumb because IF its entertained and somehow Gibson win, it sets an awful precedent in the sense of EVERYONE COPIES EVERYONE

you would get about 150 guitar companies then try and sue all the other guitar companies haha


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 21, 2019)

lewis said:


> this is dumb because IF its entertained and somehow Gibson win, it sets an awful precedent in the sense of EVERYONE COPIES EVERYONE
> 
> you would get about 150 guitar companies then try and sue all the other guitar companies haha


----------



## Werecow (Jun 21, 2019)




----------



## Werecow (Jun 21, 2019)

lewis said:


> this is dumb because IF its entertained and somehow Gibson win, it sets an awful precedent in the sense of EVERYONE COPIES EVERYONE
> 
> you would get about 150 guitar companies then try and sue all the other guitar companies haha



The only logical way to settle that would be a battle royal on a small uninhabited Japanese island.


----------



## lewis (Jun 21, 2019)

Werecow said:


> The only logical way to settle that would be a battle royal on a small uninhabited Japanese island.


so Hunger Games?

HAHAHAHA


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 21, 2019)

Werecow said:


> The only logical way to settle that would be a battle royal on a small uninhabited Japanese island.



I'm in...


----------



## LuciusBolt (Jun 21, 2019)

Mathemagician said:


> Gibson’s whole goal is “they would buy our mediocre instruments if others didn’t offer a better product at a better price point with better specs and features”.



This is exactly what I was thinking this morning when I heard the news as well  But I think the whole thing is completely ridiculous really.

Gibson in a nutshell I guess "No competition = gradual and steady further decline in quality" (if the quality is not already terrible enough)

Anyone see that parody video I had a good laugh from that 



In response to all memes this one is mine XD


----------



## Nlelith (Jun 21, 2019)

At this point, Dean court defense may consist entirely of community outrage reaction videos/memes.


----------



## ArtDecade (Jun 21, 2019)

ElysianGuitars said:


> I think there is a pretty marked difference this time, as they just put out a VERY poorly received video saying they were going to do exactly this, and it seems a LOT of people saw it. Lots of their previous legal activity predated social media.



The average musician isn't watching these videos or hanging out on websites like this. We are the exceptions to the rule. Someone that wants a Les Paul has a million reasons for wanting one and would doesn't bother rating Gibson's endless lawsuits as a factor. I play Gretsch guitars. I played them when they were family-owned and I still play them now that Fender owns them. If Fender starts suing everyone, I would still keep playing Gretsch guitars. If Gibson bought them, I would still keep playing Gretsch guitars.


----------



## BlackMastodon (Jun 21, 2019)

A conversation I have every few years with my brother, who doesn't play a whole lot of guitar for the past decade:
Him: "Man, did you see the new Gibson? I really want that SG in green!"
Me: "Why, you barely play anyway."
H: "Yeah, but this one tunes itself! So I'll actually wanna play instead of spending time tuning it every time I go to play."
M: "It's a hard tail, you can spend a few minutes tuning it before you start playing and save yourself a few grand without getting some stupid near-useless gimmick. I can show you a dozen better guitars in green that you would pay way less for."
H: "...Yeah but I just really want a Gibson!"

ArtDecade is right, the average person that dabbles in guitars will want a Gibson because it has name recognition and it's one of the old dogs, so they assume it means it will be a quality instrument. Even people that see the countless broken headstocks and quality issues on line probably won't care because they think that those are lemons and theirs won't be bad.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 21, 2019)

If Gibson somehow win this, they will be going after everyone with even a vaguely similar shape. Bet on that. I knew it was way too early last year when everyone was stroking Gibson off.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 21, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> If Gibson somehow win this, they will be going after everyone with even a vaguely similar shape. Bet on that. I knew it was way too early last year when everyone was stroking Gibson off.



Yup, why I'm also hoping Gibson loses this. Will set a shitty precedent.
At the same time, though, if they lose this... maybe a return of the old 4-knob ESP Eclipse and MX. Hmm...

EDIT: Regarding Gibson and the 4-knob ESP Eclipse; was that a lawsuit or just a cease & desist? I've heard mixed things.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 21, 2019)

The idea they can sue over how many controls a guitar has on a certain vaguely similar shape is absurd.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 21, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> The idea they can sue over how many controls a guitar has on a certain vaguely similar shape is absurd.


There was actually a bit more to it. The old Eclipse shape also had a narrower cutaway and looked more Paul-like.






VS the "new" shape






I'm not sure what happened. I've heard lawsuit, I heard C&D. Either way I agree it's bullshit though.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 21, 2019)

Nevermind that some of Gibson's designs, including the headstock, are not original at all.


----------



## lurgar (Jun 21, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Nevermind that some of Gibson's designs, including the headstock, are not original at all.



I would be willing to bet this is one of the first things brought up in defense for Dean if this makes it to a court. Show prior usage of the shapes Gibson is trying to claim IP over.

It will never make it to court because I can't even see an east Texas judge saying this case has the merits to go forward.


----------



## manu80 (Jun 21, 2019)

so basically every brand has a les paul or V like shape...
Hamer Vector ? Cort LP, Maybach, FGN....so they'll attack everyone ?
what a band of d...ks. Make better guitar , then you'll talk... Even the last epiphone V are better than Gibsons...


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 21, 2019)

I don't think so either, but it might.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 21, 2019)

manu80 said:


> so basically every brand has a les paul or V like shape...
> Hamer Vector ? Cort LP, Maybach, FGN....so they'll attack everyone ?
> what a band of d...ks. Make better guitar , then you'll talk... Even the last epiphone V are better than Gibsons...


I can see them imposing measures to make sure their Epiphone guitars stop getting comparable or favorable reviews compared to Gibson.


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Jun 21, 2019)

This could be the old whatever its called when they litigate enough to bleed enough funds out of the defendant as an end in an of itself. Like, let's blow $500K -$1M or whatever on this legal boondoggle. It might get dismissed, but who's next on the forced lawyer bill?


----------



## narad (Jun 21, 2019)

lewis said:


> so Hunger Games?
> 
> HAHAHAHA



#triggered


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 21, 2019)

There are talks about suing over "silhouettes" (meaning if I look at the general shape of it -- think Warmoth -- and it might confuse someone, then it's against the law), which would be a horrible idea to judge in favor of the plaintiff (Gibson in this case).


----------



## thrashinbatman (Jun 21, 2019)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Yup, why I'm also hoping Gibson loses this. Will set a shitty precedent.
> At the same time, though, if they lose this... maybe a return of the old 4-knob ESP Eclipse and MX. Hmm...
> 
> EDIT: Regarding Gibson and the 4-knob ESP Eclipse; was that a lawsuit or just a cease & desist? I've heard mixed things.



I'd love to see a scenario where the Explorer is ruled a generic shape and ESP brings back the MX. It's 100% a pipe dream but I can have some fun, right?



Spaced Out Ace said:


> There are talks about suing over "silhouettes" (meaning if I look at the general shape of it -- think Warmoth -- and it might confuse someone, then it's against the law), which would be a horrible idea to judge in favor of the plaintiff (Gibson in this case).



This would be pretty devastating to most guitar brands. By that standard almost any LP or Explorer style guitar would be infringement (I think the King V and ESP's V-II are different enough to make it out unscathed). I'm sure Gibson would LOVE that, but it is indeed a terrible idea.


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Jun 21, 2019)

Also, I guess if it goes to true litigation, they will have to actually technically define what IS a Flying V, SG, Exploreretc. Like exact dimensions and all that...I don't know, this was probably already mentioned in another post but just thinking. If this goes beyond "headstock" then there's going to be a lot of CNC programs slightly re-tuned...maybe. I don't know.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 21, 2019)

thrashinbatman said:


> This would be pretty devastating to most guitar brands. By that standard almost any LP or Explorer style guitar would be infringement (I think the King V and ESP's V-II are different enough to make it out unscathed). I'm sure Gibson would LOVE that, but it is indeed a terrible idea.


This is what Agnesi stated in their video; anything of a similar shape is an infringement. Anything. These people are absurd and insane.



By the way, someone tell Agnesi that his comments regarding taping over a headstock and wanting to work with film companies is not good. It looks like a vague, passive-aggressive threat, and not only that, if they think that film companies are going to pay them to advertise their brand, they are high. Brands pay FILM COMPANIES to advertise their crap, not the other way around. Knob ends.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 21, 2019)

The906 said:


> Also, I guess if it goes to true litigation, they will have to actually technically define what IS a Flying V, SG, Exploreretc. Like exact dimensions and all that...I don't know, this was probably already mentioned in another post but just thinking. If this goes beyond "headstock" then there's going to be a lot of CNC programs slightly re-tuned...maybe. I don't know.


There has been some talk about "silhouettes," which if the people who are talking about this are discussing Gibson's true angle, then anything with the "silhouette" of an LP (Agile, ESP/LTD, Edwards, et al) are ALL subject to this if Gibson manages to set precedent with Dean. 

ie, Ibanez RG, ESP M/MH/H, and anything remotely strat shaped (regardless of it not having the same contours and dimensions) would also be an issue as well.


----------



## ArtDecade (Jun 21, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Nevermind that some of Gibson's designs, including the headstock, are not original at all.



It is not about getting there first, but getting there biggest. Walt Disney ripped off the entire public domain, made a fortune doing so, and used that vast wealth the direct copyright law in his favor. Gibson wasn't first, but they have the money and lawyers to litigate smaller companies into the ground. If they find the right judge, they will damage the entire industry.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 21, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> It is not about getting there first, but getting there biggest. Walt Disney ripped off the entire public domain, made a fortune doing so, and used that vast wealth the direct copyright law in his favor. Gibson wasn't first, but they have the money and lawyers to litigate smaller companies into the ground. If they find the right judge, they will damage the entire industry.


Let's not get started on Disney, shall we? Those creepy pedophile loving weirdos need to fuck off already.

As for Gibson, they will either get tossed aside like Fender did, or they will fuck the entire industry up just because they make substandard firewood guitars.


----------



## Mathemagician (Jun 21, 2019)

As a reminder, Gibson worked with the makers of the original run of guitar hero guitars to look like Gibson guitars. 

Then tried to claim patents on “digital guitar-like controllers of any kind” and tried suing for damages from the company.

It was activision mind you, who could afford attorneys. They didn’t sue until activision decided to stop licensing the Gibson name and went a different direction.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 21, 2019)

Mathemagician said:


> As a reminder, Gibson worked with the makers of the original run of guitar hero guitars to look like Gibson guitars.
> 
> Then tried to claim patents on “digital guitar-like controllers of any kind” and tried suing for damages from the company.
> 
> It was activision mind you, who could afford attorneys. They didn’t sue until activision decided to stop licensing the Gibson name and went a different direction.


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 21, 2019)

Werent Les Pauls designed in such a way to resemble acoustic guitars that existed before them? Someone should sue Gibson if thats the case


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Jun 21, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> Werent Les Pauls designed in such a way to resemble acoustic guitars that existed before them? Someone should sue Gibson if thats the case



Surely someone here knows some necromancers so we can properly litigate this.


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 21, 2019)

The906 said:


> Surely someone here knows some necromancers so we can properly litigate this.


Yeah I don't know if any of those companies would still be around lol


----------



## feraledge (Jun 21, 2019)

All I know is this: for making me fell at all defensive of Dean... fuck you Gibson.

If Dean is getting sued, it should be over this:


----------



## Mathemagician (Jun 21, 2019)

I always felt that shape with the 6 online headstock would be a very pleasant guitar. 

That fucking fork headstock is ugly on everything. Everything.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 21, 2019)




----------



## AltecGreen (Jun 21, 2019)

MASS DEFECT said:


> With news like this, you just want to give your money to the ones who do a better job, right? I own a nice Gibson SG, but Gibson just keeps ruining the brand image with stuff like these.
> 
> I've been gassing for an LPC. Any other manufacturers do a great copy? I had an Edwards and it was great but I like those MOP block inlays.




Crews Maniac Sound. In particular, the Crews KTR guitars which are a collaboration between Crew, Key Music Japan (a big store in Japan), and K+T pickups. The guy behind K+T pickups made the legendary Dry Z pickups from the 70's/80's Those go for quite a bit of money now.

https://www.musicland.co.jp/fs/musiclandkey/c/eg-crews-ktr


----------



## CapinCripes (Jun 22, 2019)

Clinging to intellectual property that was innovative a full 60 years ago and suing everyone who does it better because you cant make a product of high enough quality to compete or at a non ludicrous price is the business equivalent of peaking in high school and getting mad when nobody wants to hear about how you were varsity several decades ago. Its cringy and serves only to annoy people and make them like you less. and doesn't change that you peaked decades ago.

Realtalk Gibson, im not asking you to make 9 string multiscale headless explorers or something, you would do better if you fixed your shit and listened within reason to what people want from you and stop the whining that when people who do just that that they do better than you at your own game.


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 22, 2019)

CapinCripes said:


> Clinging to intellectual property that was innovative a full 60 years ago and suing everyone who does it better because you cant make a product of high enough quality to compete or at a non ludicrous price is the business equivalent of peaking in high school and getting mad when nobody wants to hear about how you were varsity several decades ago. Its cringy and serves only to annoy people and make them like you less. and doesn't change that you peaked decades ago.
> 
> Realtalk Gibson, im not asking you to make 9 string multiscale headless explorers or something, you would do better if you fixed your shit and listened within reason to what people want from you and stop the whining that when people who do just that that they do better than you at your own game.


But what do people want? Who are these people? Do they want buckeye burl tops? Everyone and their mother jumped on that train. Gibson doesn't want to do that. Do they want sculpted neck heels? They've done that with the new Modern series. Do people want ebony fretboards? The brand new Modern series has that covered. Do they want just regular ole classic LP's without the stupid robot tuners and brass nut and stupid serial numbers? They've done that already this year.

Are you speaking from the perspective of a metal fan? Still thats a small niche. I dont know if they are listening to the metal community, but they certainly dont need to cater to the metal community in order to thrive.


----------



## CapinCripes (Jun 22, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> But what do people want? Who are these people? Do they want buckeye burl tops? Everyone and their mother jumped on that train. Gibson doesn't want to do that. Do they want sculpted neck heels? They've done that with the new Modern series. Do people want ebony fretboards? The brand new Modern series has that covered. Do they want just regular ole classic LP's without the stupid robot tuners and brass nut and stupid serial numbers? They've done that already this year.
> 
> Are you speaking from the perspective of a metal fan? Still thats a small niche. I dont know if they are listening to the metal community, but they certainly dont need to cater to the metal community in order to thrive.


they don't have to stop making the classics,but a little market research wouldn't kill them. what is it that these "copies" that sell better do that you dont? The god of capitalism is money that's all that matters. People seem to like the evertune eclipses esp put out. why not do a limited run and see how it does? maybe I don't know a les paul studio evertune. its not hard to see what is trending and just because you put out a product targeted at one market doesn't mean you abandon all the others. 

They can't afford innovation right now, thats not what im asking for. they need to get their quality up to snuf so that the grandpa guitars guys will come back and they need follow trends in limited runs to gain back market share in new areas and regain capital. Once your reputation for quality starts becoming watertight and your market-share reaches a more respectable amount thats when you take risks.

They need a bulletproof PR team a bullet proof QC team and a decent market research team and a willingness to try things that customers have been asking for elsewhere that may not be in their wheelhouse. I do not envy them but this is horrible PR plain and simple when they least need it.


----------



## BlackSG91 (Jun 22, 2019)

There's always ways of getting around Gibson.







;>)/


----------



## BlackMastodon (Jun 22, 2019)

Gibson took bigger risks than any other guitar company when they released the reverse V and reverse explorer. No one in their right fucking mind would see those designs and say "yes, make those, and market those, people will buy them."


----------



## BlackMastodon (Jun 22, 2019)

BlackSG91 said:


> There's always ways of getting around Gibson.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think that headstock is actually smaller than the Dean razerback headstock.


----------



## BlackSG91 (Jun 22, 2019)

BlackMastodon said:


> I think that headstock is actually smaller than the Dean razerback headstock.



I think you have a point...or two.







;>)/


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 22, 2019)




----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 22, 2019)

CapinCripes said:


> Clinging to intellectual property that was innovative a full 60 years ago and suing everyone who does it better because you cant make a product of high enough quality to compete or at a non ludicrous price is the business equivalent of peaking in high school and getting mad when nobody wants to hear about how you were varsity several decades ago. Its cringy and serves only to annoy people and make them like you less. and doesn't change that you peaked decades ago.
> 
> Realtalk Gibson, im not asking you to make 9 string multiscale headless explorers or something, you would do better if you fixed your shit and listened within reason to what people want from you and stop the whining that when people who do just that that they do better than you at your own game.



Gibson peaked when there was not much competition. I'm curious if they would be much at all if there was as much strong competition now back then. No one has asked Gibson to make multiscale 10 string extended scale length gui-basses. But apparently, Gibson thinks they should do something different, rather than address the fact that their quality has sunk further. 

Funny thing, though. Their quality has been pretty eh for quite awhile. They apparently, during the reunion tour for KISS, made Ace a signature model in an electric blue color. They were supposed to make something like 300 of these, yet tossed a number of them due to fucking up the guitars, and apparently a large number of them (doesn't take much when the build number is less than 300 after tossing out fuck ups) came with the wrong Dimarzio pickups in them. It seems that Dimarzio "couldn't supply Gibson with enough Super Distortions" so supposedly the blame for this was passed off on Dimarzio, rather than waiting to release the guitars with the proper pickups. That is an issue, and when that issue is allowed to continue affecting your brand's quality, don't be too surprised if people go, "Hmmm, this sleek looking ESP/Jackson/etc. single cut style guitar looks much more inline with my tastes."

I know it is hard to fathom for the Gibson circle jerk community, but it seems that some would rather get a great guitar for their money that is inspiring to them rather than the guitar version of Nike: substandard brand name with piss poor QC. 



MetalHex said:


> But what do people want? Who are these people? Do they want buckeye burl tops? Everyone and their mother jumped on that train. Gibson doesn't want to do that. Do they want sculpted neck heels? They've done that with the new Modern series. Do people want ebony fretboards? The brand new Modern series has that covered. Do they want just regular ole classic LP's without the stupid robot tuners and brass nut and stupid serial numbers? They've done that already this year.
> 
> Are you speaking from the perspective of a metal fan? Still thats a small niche. I dont know if they are listening to the metal community, but they certainly dont need to cater to the metal community in order to thrive.



Apparently the boomers aren't going to keep these guys ruling the roost for eternity. It's weird, but apparently people die, even entire generations. So maybe, just maybe, they should make LP types that appeal to younger demographics at a price point people give a shit about. I mean people will spend quite a bit for a great instrument, such as tracking down an Edwards LP style guitar in a specific color. This is not just metal fans, by the way. Here's an idea: Let's suppose that the same boring goldtops, cherry sunbursts, and black beauties are not the problem. Then why are people instead going for single cuts from other brands? Buying vintage Grecos, Aria Pro IIs, etc.? Maybe because you can get more for your cash... what a novel idea!


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 22, 2019)

BlackSG91 said:


> I think you have a point...or two.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ahh, innovations... like angled headstocks. Thanks, Gibson.

#PlayAuthentic


----------



## CapinCripes (Jun 22, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> vintage Grecos, Aria Pro IIs, etc.? Maybe because you can get more for your cash... what a novel idea!


Also becuase they are damn good guitars. Ive come close to buying a couple Aria PE-R80's with kahlers to get my single cut fix out of the way and always regret not doing it. never once have I felt the same regret for not snagging a les paul custom that was priced way too low for its condition. And its not just price I trust a 36 year old matsumoku factory guitar to be more well crafted than a new guitar made in nashville. That's embarrassing Gibson.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 22, 2019)

CapinCripes said:


> Also becuase they are damn good guitars. Ive come close to buying a couple Aria PE-R80's with kahlers to get my single cut fix out of the way and always regret not doing it. never once have I felt the same regret for not snagging a les paul custom that was priced way too low for its condition. And its not just price I trust a 36 year old matsumoku factory guitar to be more well crafted than a new guitar made in nashville. That's embarrassing Gibson.


I feel ya there. I'd rather own an 80s Kramer or any ESP over a Gibson. Hell, possibly even an Ibanez Destroyer or Rocket Roll if I got to play them first.


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 22, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Gibson peaked when there was not much competition. I'm curious if they would be much at all if there was as much strong competition now back then. No one has asked Gibson to make multiscale 10 string extended scale length gui-basses. But apparently, Gibson thinks they should do something different, rather than address the fact that their quality has sunk further.
> 
> Funny thing, though. Their quality has been pretty eh for quite awhile. They apparently, during the reunion tour for KISS, made Ace a signature model in an electric blue color. They were supposed to make something like 300 of these, yet tossed a number of them due to fucking up the guitars, and apparently a large number of them (doesn't take much when the build number is less than 300 after tossing out fuck ups) came with the wrong Dimarzio pickups in them. It seems that Dimarzio "couldn't supply Gibson with enough Super Distortions" so supposedly the blame for this was passed off on Dimarzio, rather than waiting to release the guitars with the proper pickups. That is an issue, and when that issue is allowed to continue affecting your brand's quality, don't be too surprised if people go, "Hmmm, this sleek looking ESP/Jackson/etc. single cut style guitar looks much more inline with my tastes."
> 
> ...


I just dont see anyone knocking Gibson off of the hill even after the blues dads die off.

Classic rock starting with the Beatles, Hendrix, Zeppelin, that music will never die. No matter how technologically advanced the future generations become, no matter how many gizmos and contraptions and computers they invent to come up with new music, people are always going to look to where it all started from. Theyre always going to look back at what came before them. And they will want to know who it was and what they were using when they originally wrote the memorable song structures and melodies that will be rehashed over and over ad nauseam into the future. And then they will come full circle to "damn, I want a real Gibson Les Paul or a real Fender Strat!

Whos going to take the crown? I certainly dont see Ibanez or Jackson or ESP taking the crown. Just about any music genre can be satisfied by a LP or a strat. An RG cant cover nearly the same ground as a Strat Or LP. I mean It "can", but c'mon, it really can't. Sure Ibanez has other models, but none are as versatile imo. Also I wouldnt say I would settle for any guitar without playing it.

Its also the great players who made those guitars famous. One could argue that Tosin Abasi is 10 times more technically proficient than David Gilmour, but I doubt Tosin's main Abasi brand guitar is going to sell for $4 million 40 years from now.

And not for nothing but I've never seen a Greco, or Edwards or any of those brands at a show before, so I dont know who or even if these people are going for those brands other than some niche folk on the internet or in Japan. (Just saying)


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 22, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> I just dont see anyone knocking Gibson off of the hill even after the blues dads die off.


Oh, really? Because it's happening. Hence, you know... why they filed for bankruptcy, went into restructuring, are desperately trying to grab any pennies they can from other builders by bullying them, and are harassing their dealers. When the boomers die off, Gibson will probably end up getting bought by a company with half a brain that won't insult potential customers, bully other brands, and even make weird overtures about suing film companies.

As the kids say, weird flex but okay, Agnesi. So much for "brand experience," eh? 



MetalHex said:


> Classic rock starting with the Beatles, Hendrix, Zeppelin, that music will never die. No matter how technologically advanced the future generations become, no matter how many gizmos and contraptions and computers they invent to come up with new music, people are always going to look to where it all started from. Theyre always going to look back at what came before them. And they will want to know who it was and what they were using when they originally wrote the memorable song structures and melodies that will be rehashed over and over ad nauseam into the future. And then they will come full circle to "damn, I want a real Gibson Les Paul or a real Fender Strat!
> 
> Whos going to take the crown? I certainly dont see Ibanez or Jackson or ESP taking the crown. Just about any music genre can be satisfied by a LP or a strat. An RG cant cover nearly the same ground as a Strat Or LP. I mean It "can", but c'mon, it really can't. Sure Ibanez has other models, but none are as versatile imo. Also I wouldnt say I would settle for any guitar without playing it.


God, I love how you've suspiciously left PRS outta this meandering diatribe of Gibson fellaciating. Reminds me of Shawn Michaels mocking the mark by miming a blowjob and pointing at the guy. Anyways, classic rock -- in case you've been encased in carbonite with Han Solo -- is dead. It has been turned into a disgusting, very un-rock n roll cash grab for corporate wankers. Kids cannot afford to go to that shit (you know, who went to rock and roll shows when rock was actually relevant) and the only people who can, are dads who drag their kids (sometimes unwillingly) and is why it is referred to as "dad rock." That music will die; and in fact, as I said, it is dead. Deal with it.



MetalHex said:


> Its also the great players who made those guitars famous. One could argue that Tosin Abasi is 10 times more technically proficient than David Gilmour, but I doubt Tosin's main Abasi brand guitar is going to sell for $4 million 40 years from now.
> 
> And not for nothing but I've never seen a Greco, or Edwards or any of those brands at a show before, so I dont know who or even if these people are going for those brands other than some niche folk on the internet or in Japan. (Just saying)


Sorry, I think Tosin is decent, but who gives a shit about Tosin? Gibson doesn't have him as an endorsee last time I checked, nor do they have David Gilmour for that matter. What are you even babbling on about here? Anything?

How about we talk the Derrig built Slash LP clone being a huge reason why Gibson became relevant again in the 90s after he was told by Gibson to basically go kick rocks? Then AFD becomes a hit and all of a sudden Gibson wants to endorse him. And they've had no problem using that counterfeit to produce extremely overpriced reproductions of the thing to fill their pocket books. But yes, lets go ramble on (you like to bring up Led Zep, so I hope you'll enjoy this reference) about Gilmour and Abasi.

Maybe, just maybe, these people are keeping their prized possessions at home. Weird idea, I know, but perhaps they don't want to get it stolen from some knob end after playing a gig that paid them $150 for the entire band. You do realize that some people have vintage guitars, pedals and amps they keep at home while using more easily obtainable and affordable gear live, right?


----------



## BlackSG91 (Jun 22, 2019)

And Gibson is so noble enough to even protect the heritage of Jimi...God bless their corporate hearts.







;>)/


----------



## nikt (Jun 22, 2019)




----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 22, 2019)

I always have to remind myself of what this site is... much like Twitter... it’s a very small segment of people with a loud bark, convincing themselves that their opinions are that of the majority.

This is AC/DC, close to 40 years after the song was written... (notice the crowd size at 2:20-2:40)



My favorite trope on here is that Gibson’s biggest problem is that they keep making the same boring models. Fact - The biggest complaint against Gibson until the ‘70s was that they wouldn’t make those same old ‘58-60 burst LPs with HB. They kept making new stuff people didn’t want.

Do they have QC issues? Yup. Are they getting better? Yup. Was HJ garbage as a CEO? Yup. Is this new lawsuit crap BS? Yup. But it doesn’t make their guitars “mediocre”.

And this idea that some 40 year old with a career that can afford to go out and buy a Gibson For $4k so he can poorly play Sweet Child of Mine makes him a “Dad Rocker” and somehow less of a person than any of you? Well... it just makes you another internet arsehole.

[listening to After the Burial as I type this lol]


----------



## Shadow Explorer (Jun 22, 2019)

Man you know what, as much as I like their guitars, this was a shitty move.
Especially on stuff they don't even own to begin with.

http://www.owappleton.com/index.htm...ULUwYRnU5mhl2HEJ5oe0WFa9pFsjnh0Z4iwPl9eLh7rRo

The open book headstock was used all around Europe on lutes and guitars even before Orville was born.

There are many examples, here's some:









What they want to do, is to stop others from doing exactly what they did in the 50s.
Take some old designs and try to improve them.

They only part Gibson designed on the LP was the bridge and later the pups.
All the rest is a mashup of features that previously existed, it should be public domain from the very beginning.

The V and explorer is entirely theirs, but they didn't do much when they should, it's 40 years too late. I can understand that move to some extent, this is where they really made something visually different.

In 2019, we are talking about stuff made during the 50s, it's kind of sad if you think about it...


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 22, 2019)

Shadow Explorer said:


> Man you know what, as much as I like their guitars, this was a shitty move.
> Especially on stuff they don't even own to begin with.
> 
> http://www.owappleton.com/index.htm...ULUwYRnU5mhl2HEJ5oe0WFa9pFsjnh0Z4iwPl9eLh7rRo
> ...



Gibson is the hot girl that smokes... I _want_ to like you but damn.


----------



## Spinedriver (Jun 22, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> God, I love how you've suspiciously left PRS outta this meandering diatribe of Gibson fellaciating. Reminds me of Shawn Michaels mocking the mark by miming a blowjob and pointing at the guy. Anyways, classic rock -- in case you've been encased in carbonite with Han Solo -- is dead. It has been turned into a disgusting, very un-rock n roll cash grab for corporate wankers. Kids cannot afford to go to that shit (you know, who went to rock and roll shows when rock was actually relevant) and the only people who can, are dads who drag their kids (sometimes unwillingly) and is why it is referred to as "dad rock." That music will die; and in fact, as I said, it is dead. Deal with it.



Gotta completely disagree with you on this one. Perhaps in larger cities, the 'old stuff' may not be popular but in more rural areas (like where I live) people don't listen to anything BUT. No matter where you go around here, stores, work, people's car radios, etc.. 75% of what you're going to hear can be called "classic rock". In my town, over the last I don't know how many years, there hasn't been a single 'big name' music act come to town that wasn't at least 30-40 years old. We don't get Meshuggah, Gojira, Devin Townsend, etc... We get artists/bands that peaked in the 70's or 80's because that's what the yokels want.

I agree that there are a lot of guitar makers that sell stuff better & cheaper but it really is the 'Nike of the music world' and it's literally the name that's going to keep them in business. I know quite a number of musicians that would love nothing more than to be able to afford a $4-$5K Gibson. It's more or less just a status symbol at this point. Just like owning a Lamborghini or a $300 pair of Air Jordans or a $50K Rolex watch. 

50% of owning a Gibson is for the playing of it, the other half is showing other people that you own one (or more). Scrape the name off the headstock and then see how much interest they have in it.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 22, 2019)

Spinedriver said:


> Gotta completely disagree with you on this one. Perhaps in larger cities, the 'old stuff' may not be popular but in more rural areas (like where I live) people don't listen to anything BUT. No matter where you go around here, stores, work, people's car radios, etc.. 75% of what you're going to hear can be called "classic rock". In my town, over the last I don't know how many years, there hasn't been a single 'big name' music act come to town that wasn't at least 30-40 years old. We don't get Meshuggah, Gojira, Devin Townsend, etc... We get artists/bands that peaked in the 70's or 80's because that's what the yokels want.
> 
> I agree that there are a lot of guitar makers that sell stuff better & cheaper but it really is the 'Nike of the music world' and it's literally the name that's going to keep them in business. I know quite a number of musicians that would love nothing more than to be able to afford a $4-$5K Gibson. It's more or less just a status symbol at this point. Just like owning a Lamborghini or a $300 pair of Air Jordans or a $50K Rolex watch.
> 
> 50% of owning a Gibson is for the playing of it, the other half is showing other people that you own one (or more). Scrape the name off the headstock and then see how much interest they have in it.



Titally agree with the fact that classic rock is still popular. SSO starting to make "flyover states" comments regarding music lol. 

But saying 50% of owning a gibsom is to say you own one is just pure supposition. I hated Gibson until I tried one. My ESP singlecut is a carbon copy and has much better QC as a MIK than some of my Gibsons. But that said, the tone from my Gibsons far supersedes that of my copies. Tone is subjective so YMMV.


----------



## Crundles (Jun 22, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


> Titally agree with the fact that classic rock is still popular. SSO starting to make "flyover states" comments regarding music lol.
> 
> But saying 50% of owning a gibsom is to say you own one is just pure supposition. I hated Gibson until I tried one. My ESP singlecut is a carbon copy and has much better QC as a MIK than some of my Gibsons. But that said, the tone from my Gibsons far supersedes that of my copies. Tone is subjective so YMMV.



Man, you're weirldy defensive of what has to be the most boring "Big Guitar" brand out there. Gibson is a pretty big company, it doesn't really need white knights on a sevenstring forum.

The main demographic of Gibson are undisputably dadrockers, there has not been a change of direction for Gibson because just swapping the CEO doesn't actually change much within a corporation except give them a blank page with the majority public in case they've already decided to make some changes, and all in all I'm starting to feel weird reading your posts in this thread, especially the "oooh your misery makes me happy" opener on page 2.

Will Gibson retain its brand recognition based on past accomplishments? Do they occasionally make good guitars even now? Of course, but ... who cares?

Also this lawsuit the big dumb huh


----------



## A-Branger (Jun 22, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> The average musician isn't watching these videos or hanging out on websites like this. We are the exceptions to the rule. Someone that wants a Les Paul has a million reasons for wanting one and would doesn't bother rating Gibson's endless lawsuits as a factor. I play Gretsch guitars. I played them when they were family-owned and I still play them now that Fender owns them. If Fender starts suing everyone, I would still keep playing Gretsch guitars. If Gibson bought them, I would still keep playing Gretsch guitars.



^ yuuuuup. People buy Gibsons and would still do because of the name. Its a "Gibson", its what they heroes played, its what they grew up watching, its what society thinks when you tell them "guitar". If you grab a random person on the street who has no idea about music, and you ask them to draw a guitar, they would either do a LP or a strat (or at least would try).

And thats whats pissing me off about the whole situation. Imagine Fender would do the same, to sue every brand who does a "strat"... they would kill like 30% of the guitar market, and like 80% of the bass market too..... There are soooooooooooo many "Strats/Teles/Jazz/Ps" out there that its ridiculous, some with a flavour, some an exact copy, yet people still buys Fenders.

couple of NAMMS ago I was there, catchup with an old friend and his amtes that happen to be at the show, they are more inot the music production/mixing side of things. All of them started talking about a specific Strat Fender thing.... I was there like "dudde?... Shur is like right fucking there!!!!, fucking look at it!....." nope, it was all Fender what they GASing for.

MY old friend and guitar player I grewup with. This is a guy playing Steve Vai stuff since he was 17.... he eventually end up getting a custom Fender (as hes a lefty) with the traditional tri-color booring burst... and I was there like why?, I get it Fender, but not even a flame top?

People wont care about Gibson coppies, people would buy their holly grail.... People would buy an eclipse as "oh a cheap LP I can afford", but in their minds they will eventually get that Gibson



Spaced Out Ace said:


> By the way, someone tell Agnesi that his comments regarding taping over a headstock and wanting to work with film companies is not good. It looks like a vague, passive-aggressive threat, and not only that, if they think that film companies are going to pay them to advertise their brand, they are high. Brands pay FILM COMPANIES to advertise their crap, not the other way around. Knob ends.



that was the more retarded thing about the whole video. I guess they dont want the free advertisement... Like you said, brands pay movies to have their products features, thats how movie budgets are made, and yes, covering the brand name/logo it is enough. Reason why you always see a mac laptop with a sticker on it.... Movies are NOT gonna pay them or "work with them", they would drop the guitar and grab another. Funny thing is that everyone knows what an LP is and how it looks, so yeah, they are right to say "covering the logo isnt enough" as true, people knows its a Gibson.... but at the same time, PEOPLE KNOWS ITS A GIBSON!!!..... its fucking FREEEEEEEEE advertisement... FFS



MetalHex said:


> But what do people want? Who are these people? Do they want buckeye burl tops? Everyone and their mother jumped on that train. Gibson doesn't want to do that. Do they want sculpted neck heels? They've done that with the new Modern series. Do people want ebony fretboards? The brand new Modern series has that covered. Do they want just regular ole classic LP's without the stupid robot tuners and brass nut and stupid serial numbers? They've done that already this year.
> 
> Are you speaking from the perspective of a metal fan? Still thats a small niche. I dont know if they are listening to the metal community, but they certainly dont need to cater to the metal community in order to thrive.



and why not a buckeye top LP?... that would be fucking amazing. Just think about a buckeye top with a black limba body and flame maple neck or whatever neck really, black binding and hardware, that would be great.... but you cant do that on a Gibson.. you do on a PRS tho

honestly, what they did this year its a step on the direction they should have done aaaaaaaaaages ago. Keep a "traditional line" for those purist who still want a tobaco/cherry burst 50's thing... and have another for more "modern" stuff

See PRS, do the same thing... give people colors, options. HAve a line with floyd, have a line with beautiful tops, have one with darker themes, have a custom option, have one with black hardware.... there are sooooooo many options to release. I do wanted a LP guitar for sooo long, but I could never get with their color options. WHy the binding has to be "aged white" or creme... why you cant release a white binding guitar?... why every guitar nees to have the back and neck stained red??, why there cant be a natural one?... ect ect

they dont need to "innovate" or create stuff from 0 again... just need to expand their pallette and play with the stablished platform while keeping a traditional line


look the fucking V and explorers..... I love a V or an explorer.... but looks at the options, either fucking black or fucking aged yellow Korina(white limba)... and thats fucking it... and they wonder why people buy other brands Vs and Explorers


----------



## Spinedriver (Jun 22, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


> Titally agree with the fact that classic rock is still popular. SSO starting to make "flyover states" comments regarding music lol.
> 
> But saying 50% of owning a gibson is to say you own one is just pure supposition. I hated Gibson until I tried one. My ESP singlecut is a carbon copy and has much better QC as a MIK than some of my Gibsons. But that said, the tone from my Gibsons far supersedes that of my copies. Tone is subjective so YMMV.



I agree with you that experienced guitarists can appreciate a good LP or SG from a bad one. I was meaning more about the people that are more or less just 'casual players' and say that they can't wait to get one. Give them a real one, scrape off the logo, tell them it's a copy & see if they still want it. There's a 50/50 chance they'd say that they want a 'real' one regardless of how it plays or sounds. The reason being is that because if you ask anyone on the street to name a guitar company, pretty much everyone has heard of Fender or Gibson. I think for the most part, people (in general) see Gibson as the 'expensive brand', so if they have people over & show them the "Gibson" on the guitar stand, they'll get the impression that they _must_ be a good player if they spent that much money on a guitar.


----------



## Demiurge (Jun 22, 2019)

It would be interesting if all of the judgment over "paying way too much for a guitar because your favorite player plays it" or "coasting on name recognition" was attempted anywhere else other than threads criticizing Gibson.


----------



## ElysianGuitars (Jun 22, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


> Who knew? They should probably fire their CEO.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You want to bark at the moon against reality, be my guest. Gibson isn't in danger of going under for no reason.


----------



## ElysianGuitars (Jun 22, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> The average musician isn't watching these videos or hanging out on websites like this. We are the exceptions to the rule. Someone that wants a Les Paul has a million reasons for wanting one and would doesn't bother rating Gibson's endless lawsuits as a factor. I play Gretsch guitars. I played them when they were family-owned and I still play them now that Fender owns them. If Fender starts suing everyone, I would still keep playing Gretsch guitars. If Gibson bought them, I would still keep playing Gretsch guitars.



Websites like this pale in comparison to Facebook, and it's all over on there.


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 22, 2019)

Maybe "dad rockers" are the only ones that own or care about Gibsons is because they are the only ones that can afford them. If they bring their pricing down they would do so much better.

Did these lawsuits ever happen with cars with 4 wheels and side doors and tapered bodies because they all fucking have them. Lmao


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 22, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> What are you even babbling on about here? Anything?



Lmao I dont know why I even mentioned that

"Oh, really? Because it's happening. Hence, you know... why they filed for bankruptcy, went into restructuring, are desperately trying to grab any pennies they can from other builders by bullying them, and are harassing their dealers. When the boomers die off, Gibson will probably end up getting bought by a company with half a brain that won't insult potential customers, bully other brands, and even make weird overtures about suing film companies."

When I say the hill I mean the hill of legacy and relevance....not financially or sales wise


----------



## ArtDecade (Jun 22, 2019)

ElysianGuitars said:


> Websites like this pale in comparison to Facebook, and it's all over on there.



It's the same friggin' people, mate. Gearheads! The average guy doesnt care about Gibson and their lawsuits. As long as Angus plays an SG, that is what their fans are going to be clambering for. As long as Slash plays a LP, that is what their fans are going to be clambering for. No one gives a shit because it doesnt impact them. If Dean is gone tomorrow, the world keeps spinning and Gibson keeps selling guitars. If Dean survives, the world keeps spinning and kids will buy Mustaine axes. At the end of the day, who cares?

Gibson has the biggest piece at the playground and sometimes they swing it around. That's how it has always been.


----------



## Spinedriver (Jun 22, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> It's the same friggin' people, mate. Gearheads! The average guy doesnt care about Gibson and their lawsuits. As long as Angus plays an SG, that is what their fans are going to be clambering for. As long as Slash plays a LP, that is what their fans are going to be clambering for. No one gives a shit because it doesnt impact them. If Dean is gone tomorrow, the world keeps spinning and Gibson keeps selling guitars. If Dean survives, the world keeps spinning and kids will buy Mustaine axes. At the end of the day, who cares?
> 
> Gibson has the biggest piece at the playground and sometimes they swing it around. That's how it has always been.



That's kind of why it's kind of a head-scratcher. 

There's almost ZERO chances someone buying a guitar will mistake a Dean for a Gibson. Even more, it's not as if people are buying a Dean INSTEAD of a Gibson because they are so similar. So, if Gibson is so successful and popular, why bother with suing them unless they also intend on suing every other guitar company on the planet that makes LP/SG/EXP/V style guitars. 

For example, what about companies from China that sell "Chibson" guitars (ie: they look identical to Gibson guitars even down to the name on the headstock) ? These companies or the people that import them for re-sale, I can see Gibson wanting to take down because those guitars are specifically designed to look exactly like their products and some people _could_ conceivably be fooled into thinking it was a genuine Gibson guitar. There, they could totally make a case for 'losing money to patent/copyright infringement. The Dean lawsuit is nothing more than them just being dicks and looking for an easy payday with a frivolous lawsuit


----------



## TonyFlyingSquirrel (Jun 22, 2019)

Gibson is hoping that the cost of other smaller manufacturers defending themselves will take from their profit margin enough to make it no longer affordable to stay in production.

Make no mistake, this isn't about protecting the integrity of the brand. If that were the case, Gibson would have been forthright in putting things in motion 60 years ago to prevent other manufacturers from building from Gibson's inspiration. This is about eliminating market competition in order to make Gibson a more viable choice in the market place. Gibson's whole credo on this is that if you are not buying a Gibson, and are choosing another brand over them, then they consider that you are essentially stealing from them. 

This isn't much different that my former landlord raising the rent and later confessing that the sole reason he did so wasn't because of any upgrades to the property that warranted the recuperation of remodel costs. He did so (in his own words) so that the tenants couldn't save up money for a down payment of their own home which would "remove his revenue stream".


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 22, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> Maybe "dad rockers" are the only ones that own or care about Gibsons is because they are the only ones that can afford them. If they bring their pricing down they would do so much better.



Huh? Gibson pricing is right in line with their competitors. $1199-2799 for Les Pauls and $1199-2k for their SGs. That’s the same pricing as USA Fender and MIJ Ibanez, and less than PRS.



MetalHex said:


> Did these lawsuits ever happen with cars with 4 wheels and side doors and tapered bodies because they all fucking have them. Lmao



Almost. The original car monopoly sued Henry Ford to prevent him from making a car, because of patent protection, and it went all the way to the Supreme Court. 

https://www.autonews.com/article/20...ent-case-broke-selden-s-lock-on-auto-industry


----------



## jwade (Jun 22, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Anyways, classic rock -- in case you've been encased in carbonite with Han Solo -- is dead. It has been turned into a disgusting, very un-rock n roll cash grab for corporate wankers. Kids cannot afford to go to that shit (you know, who went to rock and roll shows when rock was actually relevant) and the only people who can, are dads who drag their kids (sometimes unwillingly) and is why it is referred to as "dad rock." That music will die; and in fact, as I said, it is dead. Deal with it



Ok, Gene. You are ridiculously out of touch with reality. It’s referred to as ‘classic’ rock because that’s what it is, it’s something that will never go away and never be thought of as a fad because it is a musical legacy. It will never lose popularity, it will never stop being ‘discovered’ by younger people, it will never stop inspiring musicians. Classic rock is basically our musical DNA, and that’s never going to change.


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 22, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


> Huh? Gibson pricing is right in line with their competitors. $1199-2799 for Les Pauls and $1199-2k for their SGs. That’s the same pricing as USA Fender and MIJ Ibanez, and less than PRS


You're right


----------



## jephjacques (Jun 22, 2019)

jwade said:


> Ok, Gene. You are ridiculously out of touch with reality. It’s referred to as ‘classic’ rock because that’s what it is, it’s something that will never go away and never be thought of as a fad because it is a musical legacy. It will never lose popularity, it will never stop being ‘discovered’ by younger people, it will never stop inspiring musicians. Classic rock is basically our musical DNA, and that’s never going to change.



lol nobody born this century gives a shit about classic rock my dude


----------



## Demiurge (Jun 22, 2019)

^Hey. Hey. HEY. Don't remind me that people born after 2000 are almost 20!. Good lord.


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Jun 22, 2019)

You guys need to take a slow ride, just take it easy.


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 22, 2019)

jephjacques said:


> lol nobody born this century gives a shit about classic rock my dude


Tell that to bands like Greta van Fleet and their fans.

Of course, as the white population decreases there will be less and less people who give a shit about classic rock in the future.


----------



## efiltsohg (Jun 22, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> I just dont see anyone knocking Gibson off of the hill even after the blues dads die off.



a downtuned Les Paul with PAFs is still the best guitar for stoner/doom metal and it's not even close


----------



## jephjacques (Jun 22, 2019)

Greta Van Fleet's biggest youtube video has 46 million views and is from 2 years ago. Lil Nas X's "Old Town Road" has 161 million views and is _a month old.
_
Back on topic: Gibson is run by assholes


----------



## TonyFlyingSquirrel (Jun 22, 2019)

Say what you will, but the Classic Rock radio programming is largely responsible for being a viable revenue stream for aging musicians. Quite important if you're at an age where touring relentlessly is no longer healthy, but you still want to make your primary income from music, even if it is from your past.


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 22, 2019)

jephjacques said:


> Greta Van Fleet's biggest youtube video has 46 million views and is from 2 years ago. Lil Nas X's "Old Town Road" has 161 million views and is _a month old.
> _
> Back on topic: Gibson is run by assholes


Cant argue with that. I mean I could but it would be semantical. Like how many of Lil Nas fans will actual purchase his albums or just watch him on youtube. How many will attend his shows or just watch it on youtube. People who want the full band experience will at least go see GVF in concert. But yeah sadly those fans are in the minority.


----------



## BenjaminW (Jun 22, 2019)

Demiurge said:


> ^Hey. Hey. HEY. Don't remind me that people born after 2000 are almost 20!. Good lord.


Oh fuck, I'm getting close to that magic number.


----------



## spudmunkey (Jun 22, 2019)

Tune in to a classic rock station. New stuff is added all the time, as more stuff gets older. I remember when _Appetite_ was new...I bought it when I was 7 with my 1st communion gift money. But it's been played on classic rock stations for years. As has Nirvana, Green Day, old Foo Fighters and RHCP, Metallica (and not just the oldest albums), etc.

It's like how a car from 1996 is now considered a "classic" to many, including legally so in some cases.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 22, 2019)

nikt said:


>




"Still has a hard time staying in tune."

#OrvilleInnovation #PlayAuthentic 



jwade said:


> Ok, Gene. You are ridiculously out of touch with reality. It’s referred to as ‘classic’ rock because that’s what it is, it’s something that will never go away and never be thought of as a fad because it is a musical legacy. It will never lose popularity, it will never stop being ‘discovered’ by younger people, it will never stop inspiring musicians. Classic rock is basically our musical DNA, and that’s never going to change.


Sure thing, Wade. That's why mostly boomers like it and the younger crowd (ie people under 30, whom were typically the target audience) increasingly refer to it as dad rock. But yeah, it'll never go away bro.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 22, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> Tell that to bands like Greta van Fleet and their fans.
> 
> Of course, as the white population decreases there will be less and less people who give a shit about classic rock in the future.


----------



## BIG ND SWEATY (Jun 22, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> Of course, as the white population decreases there will be less and less people who give a shit about classic rock in the future.


I don't think I've ever seen something so profoundly stupid as this said on here before and thats saying a lot considering your Sun Cult thread. I actually felt my brain cells committing suicide as I read that.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 22, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> Of course, as the white population decreases there will be less and less people who give a shit about classic rock in the future.





BIG ND SWEATY said:


> I don't think I've ever seen something so profoundly stupid as this said on here before and thats saying a lot considering your Sun Cult thread. I actually felt my brain cells committing suicide as I read that.


----------



## gunshow86de (Jun 22, 2019)

While I don't side politically with the people that are obsessed with this statistic, the birth rate for white people is below replacement levels worldwide. So he's technically correct.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 22, 2019)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/03/18/racist-terrorists-are-obsessed-with-demographics-lets-not-give-them-talking-points/?outputType=amp

Anyways.... back on track... Gibson SUCKS...


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 22, 2019)

BIG ND SWEATY said:


> I don't think I've ever seen something so profoundly stupid as this said on here before and thats saying a lot considering your Sun Cult thread. I actually felt my brain cells committing suicide as I read that.


Lmao. Are you that ignorant as to not be privy to either fact? Thats 0 for 2. 1 more and you strike out completely.


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 22, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


> https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/03/18/racist-terrorists-are-obsessed-with-demographics-lets-not-give-them-talking-points/?outputType=amp
> 
> Anyways.... back on track... Gibson SUCKS...


Lmao


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 22, 2019)

gunshow86de said:


> While I don't side politically with the people that are obsessed with this statistic, the birth rate for white people is below replacement levels worldwide. So he's technically correct.


I am absolutely correct. And mentioning it isnt obssessing it


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 22, 2019)

So uh

Has anyone with actual any legal expertise commented on this? Specifically with copyright, trademark/counterfeit legalese?


----------



## BIG ND SWEATY (Jun 22, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> Lmao. Are you that ignorant as to not be privy to either fact? Thats 0 for 2. 1 more and you strike out completely.


You struck out long, long ago champ. Better luck in the next life, who knows, maybe you'll come back as something less dense than a brick.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 22, 2019)

BIG ND SWEATY said:


> You struck out long, long ago champ. Better luck in the next life, who knows, maybe you'll come back as something less dense than a brick.


He was the one pushing that sun cult flat earth stuff?


----------



## narad (Jun 22, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> Lmao. Are you that ignorant as to not be privy to either fact? Thats 0 for 2. 1 more and you strike out completely.



With the white population on decline, how much longer will we even understand baseball metaphors?


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 22, 2019)

narad said:


> With the white population on decline, how much longer will we even understand baseball metaphors?





I think whites are 0-1 according to this graph


----------



## narad (Jun 22, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> View attachment 70432
> 
> I think whites are 0-1 according to this graph



This is a terrifying trend. What are we doing wrong? Could we maybe do more outreach to suburban white neighborhoods? Setup more youth leagues? Maybe some sort of baseball/classic-rock/How-I-met-your-mother crossover event?


----------



## BlackSG91 (Jun 22, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> Tell that to bands like Greta van Fleet and their fans.
> 
> Of course, *as the white population decreases there will be less and less people who give a shit about classic rock* in the future.








;>)/


----------



## diagrammatiks (Jun 22, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> Cant argue with that. I mean I could but it would be semantical. Like how many of Lil Nas fans will actual purchase his albums or just watch him on youtube. How many will attend his shows or just watch it on youtube. People who want the full band experience will at least go see GVF in concert. But yeah sadly those fans are in the minority.



Think album sales are worth more then over 150 million YouTube views?

Does anyone actually understand how the new media economy actually works. 

I mean I know you don’t.


----------



## A-Branger (Jun 22, 2019)

I know we all are metal heads in this forum and we cant understand why people buy an LP, and that we all associate an LP with "classic rock".... But honestly, ANY music that its not "metal" is either played with a Fender or a Gibson... period... from rock, funk, jazz, pop, country, cotry/poop/singersonwriter/anything.... you guys have no idea how big is the music market for those who dont play "metal" music, and for those people there are only two hollygrails in the guitar world Fender and Gibson




Spinedriver said:


> I agree with you that experienced guitarists can appreciate a good LP or SG from a bad one. I was meaning more about the people that are more or less just 'casual players' and say that they can't wait to get one. Give them a real one, scrape off the logo, tell them it's a copy & see if they still want it. There's a 50/50 chance they'd say that they want a 'real' one regardless of how it plays or sounds. The reason being is that because if you ask anyone on the street to name a guitar company, pretty much everyone has heard of Fender or Gibson. I think for the most part, people (in general) see Gibson as the 'expensive brand', so if they have people over & show them the "Gibson" on the guitar stand, they'll get the impression that they _must_ be a good player if they spent that much money on a guitar.



yuuuuup.... people love a brand name. I too was guilty of it, I do wanted my "Gibson" as my ultimate guitar, because I though it was indeed the ultimate guitar.... I played bass, but I always wanted to learn guitar and my first guitar I almost bought was a whateverbrand LP custom copy in white, and I still think about it today.... I always wanted one till the day I eventually got myself an Eclipse and realize the scale lenght/shape/traditional color put me fully off and never again..... Today I just want a Sully 71' Trella as my LP fix because its similar, but different enough to look cool and also fixes the LP problems like scale lenght

but yeah, people love to brag about brands, back in my country/city we had waves of brands loves, sudenly EVERYONE was using a specific brand of shirts... not just the style of it, but ONE specific brand, and you better get THE right brand... same with shoes, cars, guitars, ect ect..... speaking of guitars, fucking Marshall, its the same thing, people who arent gearheads would want their MArshall amp too... why?... because it says "Marshall"


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 22, 2019)

diagrammatiks said:


> Think album sales are worth more then over 150 million YouTube views?
> 
> Does anyone actually understand how the new media economy actually works.
> 
> I mean I know you don’t.


You mean new media economy, such as streams on Apple, Spotify, etc. where you get about a tenth of a cent per song? Last year, I saw multiple artists asked the same question, regarding how to support them, probably expecting the artist to say tickets, merch, or similar, but instead were told to buy physical (CDs, LPs)


----------



## diagrammatiks (Jun 22, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> You mean new media economy, such as streams on Apple, Spotify, etc. where you get about a tenth of a cent per song? Last year, I saw multiple artists asked the same question, regarding how to support them, probably expecting the artist to say tickets, merch, or similar, but instead were told to buy physical (CDs, LPs)



No. That’s still old. That’s paying you for your media. That’s the same thing as before pretending to be different. 

YouTube doesn’t work that way.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 22, 2019)

diagrammatiks said:


> No. That’s still old. That’s paying you for your media. That’s the same thing as before pretending to be different.
> 
> YouTube doesn’t work that way.


Yeah, based on what I found, you get about $0.0076 per ad on a video...

Assuming it doesn't get demonetized.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Jun 22, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Yeah, based on what I found, you get about $0.0076 per ad on a video...
> 
> Assuming it doesn't get demonetized.



It’s not quite that low. 

The music videos are a bit different since a lot of them are monetized through the vevo mega channel. You get a lot higher ad bid once you hit certain subscriber levels. 

Even if we use .007 the single video monetizes at around 1 million revenue. 

Of course it also acts as marketing for the channel and drives album sales and gets people in seats for the tours.


----------



## BlackSG91 (Jun 22, 2019)

As a proud owner of two black Gibson guitars I think JC and Mark Agnasty have quickly worn out their welcome in the guitar world judging from the replies on this thread. I think it's due time for new leadership at Gibson by the man himself.








;>)/


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 22, 2019)

diagrammatiks said:


> Think album sales are worth more then over 150 million YouTube views?
> 
> Does anyone actually understand how the new media economy actually works.
> 
> I mean I know you don’t.


Yes. Clicks.

Also you missed my point...unsurprisingly. Its easy for a 14 year old kid with a smart phone to click on video after video of Lil Nas, thus generating views and royalties; supporting them but, kinda unknowingly.

Not to be confused with going to shows and buying cd's/albums/merch.


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 23, 2019)

I'm not a Gibson guitar hater by any means. I love me a good Gibby. But dare I say that Gibson is the Sharon Osbourne of guitars?


----------



## Hollowway (Jun 23, 2019)

A-Branger said:


> I know we all are metal heads in this forum and we cant understand why people buy an LP, and that we all associate an LP with "classic rock".... But honestly, ANY music that its not "metal" is either played with a Fender or a Gibson... period... from rock, funk, jazz, pop, country, cotry/poop/singersonwriter/anything.... you guys have no idea how big is the music market for those who dont play "metal" music, and for those people there are only two hollygrails in the guitar world Fender and Gibson



Actually, that would be an interesting breakdown. I associate most non-classic rock with Fender or off-brand guitars. I'd be interested to see how many punk/ska/blues/jazz/pop/country/etc use the different brands of guitars. Someone do their thesis on this and get back to me!


----------



## BlackSG91 (Jun 23, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> Yes. Clicks.
> 
> Also you missed my point...unsurprisingly. Its easy for a 14 year old kid with a smart phone to click on video after video of Lil Nas, thus generating views and royalties; supporting them but, kinda unknowingly.
> 
> Not to be confused with going to shows and buying cd's/albums/merch.



Millennials have such easy access to music these days compared to when we had to trudge through six feet of snow just to get to the record store.


;>)/


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 23, 2019)

Hollowway said:


> Actually, that would be an interesting breakdown. I associate most non-classic rock with Fender or off-brand guitars. I'd be interested to see how many punk/ska/blues/jazz/pop/country/etc use the different brands of guitars. Someone do their thesis on this and get back to me!


Country-Djent with a FF 8 string headless!


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Jun 23, 2019)

I hope that somehow Dean ends up not only winning..but getting a HUGE settlement from Gibson and Gibson's plan totally backfires.

That being said..Dean > Gibson.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 23, 2019)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> That being said..Dean > Gibson.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 23, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> View attachment 70432
> 
> I think whites are 0-1 according to this graph








tl;dr Gibson's still don't stay in tune.


----------



## A-Branger (Jun 23, 2019)

Hollowway said:


> Actually, that would be an interesting breakdown. I associate most non-classic rock with Fender or off-brand guitars. I'd be interested to see how many punk/ska/blues/jazz/pop/country/etc use the different brands of guitars. Someone do their thesis on this and get back to me!


also rmember the hollowboddies Gibson does too.

But yeah on most styles I would say Fender is number one, but Gibson would be on second.... if we count electric guitars only and not acoustics and the like


----------



## dr_game0ver (Jun 23, 2019)

I love how we went from "Peoples at Gibson are stupid" to "racial profile on the major baseball north-American league" on just a handful of pages...


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 23, 2019)

dr_game0ver said:


> I love how we went from "Peoples at Gibson are stupid" to "racial profile on the major baseball north-American league" on just a handful of pages...



https://oracleofbacon.org/




Best answer I could find...


----------



## Spinedriver (Jun 23, 2019)

A-Branger said:


> but yeah, people love to brag about brands, back in my country/city we had waves of brands loves, sudenly EVERYONE was using a specific brand of shirts... not just the style of it, but ONE specific brand, and you better get THE right brand... same with shoes, cars, guitars, ect ect..... speaking of guitars, fucking Marshall, its the same thing, people who arent gearheads would want their MArshall amp too... why?... because it says "Marshall"



I've looked at Epiphones a few times because there's NO way in hell I'm spending the kind of cash they want for full on Gibson LPs but the last time I looked at one, the sales guy told me they aren't worth the price tag either. I eventually got a really sweet deal on a Fernandes Ravelle which I had been kinda wanting for quite some time but could never find one. It's kinda Les Paul-like but it has a kind of 'sharper' cutaway and 'flare' on the bottom.






I remember back in the day, getting a Marshall amp (regardless of what kind of guitar you had) meant that you were ready to hit the stage in a band. The 1st Marshall I ever bought was a Mosfet 100 because a) it was a solid state (I've never been a huge fan of tubes) and b) it was a Marshall for $300 !!! lol .. But yeah, Mesa hadn't invented the Rectifier yet and the only other 'big name' amps around these parts were either Peavey or Fender, so Marshall was pretty much the 'dream amp' for every person just starting out.


----------



## Andromalia (Jun 23, 2019)

I hope Gibson loses so I can buy an MX without having to go through stupid steps to do so.

BTW, I think a lot of you should rethink how they see "blues dads" or whatever. We're in 2019, I'm 46 and..... I got my first computer at 9, work in the gaming industry and am a metalhead. People my age and a bit older don't swoon over Jimmy Page's LP, we want Hanneman's soloist instead. Just saying.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 23, 2019)

Spinedriver said:


> I've looked at Epiphones a few times because there's NO way in hell I'm spending the kind of cash they want for full on Gibson LPs but the last time I looked at one, the sales guy told me they aren't worth the price tag either. I eventually got a really sweet deal on a Fernandes Ravelle which I had been kinda wanting for quite some time but could never find one. It's kinda Les Paul-like but it has a kind of 'sharper' cutaway and 'flare' on the bottom.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Fernandes did another shape that's more accurate to the Les Paul shape, and I really dig it. The Monterey.






I remember YEEEARS ago, around the time Type O debuted their I Don't Wanna Be Me music video. I saw Kenny Hickey use this exact guitar on the music video, but with the usual green tape/paint on the fretboard. Always wanted one ever since then.


----------



## Spinedriver (Jun 23, 2019)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Fernandes did another shape that's more accurate to the Les Paul shape, and I really dig it. The Monterey.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I completely forgot about the Monterey, nice catch..  I was never really a fan of those ones because the back end just seems a little too disproportionate for the front end. Probably 10-12 years ago I remember seeing the Ravelle on a website somewhere but the Deluxe versions were $1,200 or so which put it WAYYYY out of my budget. Then close to 4 years ago now, I saw the one I posted in the picture for sale on Reverb for about $400 or so CDN with a custom hsc included. Since it was close to Christmas, my wife gave me the 'go-ahead' to get it, so I did and it's probably the best deal I've ever gotten on a guitar.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Jun 23, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


>


 Truth is truth....and Roxxy Andrews sucks


----------



## narad (Jun 24, 2019)

Andromalia said:


> People my age and a bit older don't swoon over Jimmy Page's LP, we want Hanneman's soloist instead. Just saying.



Man, speak for yourself. I want both.


----------



## Flappydoodle (Jun 24, 2019)

Can't understand the Gibson hate really

I have two. They're great guitars. They sound really good

I don't know the legal basis for suing for infringement in 2019, but it's pretty clear that a lot of companies have been making guitars similar to the LP, SG, V etc for decades. Seems fair to me that they can argue it and the legal system can decide where the line is drawn.


----------



## p0ke (Jun 24, 2019)

A-Branger said:


> people who arent gearheads would want their MArshall amp too... why?... because it says "Marshall"



Yup. I used to want one (and had one for a few years) just because of the logo. Now they're selling bluetooth speakers and all kinds of shit using just the logo and general design. Sure, why not, it does look nice, but they've lost the actual players to all the other brands that sound better for half the price... And about Gibson? Same thing but without the extra stuff to profit from 

Suing Dean sounds super weird too - I could totally see them suing ESP for their Eclipse models for example, but Dean... I really don't get it.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 24, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> Can't understand the Gibson hate really
> 
> I have two. They're great guitars. They sound really good
> 
> I don't know the legal basis for suing for infringement in 2019, but it's pretty clear that a lot of companies have been making guitars similar to the LP, SG, V etc for decades. Seems fair to me that they can argue it and the legal system can decide where the line is drawn.



The Trogly video does a great job of explaining the legal basis for their lawsuits.



p0ke said:


> Yup. I used to want one (and had one for a few years) just because of the logo. Now they're selling bluetooth speakers and all kinds of shit using just the logo and general design. Sure, why not, it does look nice, but they've lost the actual players to all the other brands that sound better for half the price... And about Gibson? Same thing but without the extra stuff to profit from
> .



First Gibson... now Marshall.

Their flagship (4-channel) JVM410 is $2500 and the handwired 1959 "Dad Rock model" is $3200. What are these equivalent half-price amps?


----------



## p0ke (Jun 24, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


> Their flagship (4-channel) JVM410 is $2500 and the handwired 1959 "Dad Rock model" is $3200. What are these equivalent half-price amps?



Well, for me personally, when I had my Marshall half stack, it was about the same prize as the Peavey Valveking that I swapped it for later - which is a 100W tube head vs. the Marshall (MG something) being a solid state. Sure, Peavey makes more expensive amps too, but Marshall doesn't really have anything to compete in the lower price range of tube amps (or at least didn't at that time).

My point was to continue on what A-Branger said: there's more suitable alternatives for metal than Marshall amps these days, but if you don't know anything about amps it's really easy to assume that Marshall amps are the best because they're all you've seen (or all you remember). I definitely don't have anything against Marshall, but if I could go back to when I bought the MG half stack I would buy something different.


----------



## Mathemagician (Jun 24, 2019)

I 100% wanted a Marshall the first full 2 years of my playing. By the time I had money I wanted a 5150. But I wouldn’t have known that without being a gearhead/user of several forums. 

Several of my retired family members have all asked what I “Play” when they found out I played guitar. And immediately said “Yeah I bet you can’t wait to get a Gibson and Marshall though right?” In a Very genuine attempt to make conversation. 

They are in their late 50’s/early 60’s. It’s not whether they can afford it. It’s that they are the only legitimate brands to them. All their favorite players played the same 4 things. Gibson/Fender guitars and Marshall/Fender amps. 

How many expensive car brands can non car fans name? Ferrari/Lamborghini then what? Many can’t even name McLaren. 

Brand name matters to everyone who is not deep into the hobby. Watches? “Rolex” even if the style isn’t for everyone. (That said at least their QC doesn’t leave anything to be desired) 

Guitarwise: Want to impress a stranger? Buy any random cheap Gibson and leave it out on a stand. Bonus points for the above mentioned Marshall MG halfstack.


----------



## thrashinbatman (Jun 24, 2019)

Speaking of, I find it fascinating that an 800 reissue is $3,000(!) but yet you can find an OG 800 for half that used. I picked up a heavily modded 800 that to me is the holy-grail (it's a clone of Gary Holt's Marshall, and his Marshall tone is the GOAT for me) for $1,300. Why even bother with the reissue at that point?


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 24, 2019)

p0ke said:


> Well, for me personally, when I had my Marshall half stack, it was about the same prize as the Peavey Valveking that I swapped it for later - which is a 100W tube head vs. the Marshall (MG something) being a solid state. Sure, Peavey makes more expensive amps too, but Marshall doesn't really have anything to compete in the lower price range of tube amps (or at least didn't at that time).
> 
> My point was to continue on what A-Branger said: there's more suitable alternatives for metal than Marshall amps these days, but if you don't know anything about amps it's really easy to assume that Marshall amps are the best because they're all you've seen (or all you remember). I definitely don't have anything against Marshall, but if I could go back to when I bought the MG half stack I would buy something different.



Well, as most people know, I’m a Peavey guy. But I guess the key thing you said is:



p0ke said:


> there's more suitable alternatives for metal than Marshall amps these days



Absolutely. I wouldn't pay $3k for a Marshall for metal either, but most of the people buying a Marshall probably aren’t ... they’re prob more into rock or classic rock. 

It’s like asking why is someone buying a Fender Twin when they could have an MI Gamma for that price lol.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Jun 24, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


> Well, as most people know, I’m a Peavey guy. But I guess the key thing you said is:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



twist. the jvms aren't good for anything.


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 24, 2019)

Mathemagician said:


> I 100% wanted a Marshall the first full 2 years of my playing. By the time I had money I wanted a 5150. But I wouldn’t have known that without being a gearhead/user of several forums.



It depends on who you looked up to and how much you were aware of what gear they used. If you looked up Yngwie and RRhoads and read their interviews and watched their videos then yeah you would likely want Fender/Gibson/Marshall.

If you worshipped Dimebag then you might want Randall/Dean etc..

But yeah if you didnt play guitar at all then you would likely have heard of Fender/Gibson/Marshall more than anything else. I don't see any problem with that though.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 24, 2019)

diagrammatiks said:


> twist. the jvms aren't good for anything.



Hahaha not a fan? I thought the HJS sounded pretty good from the few minutes I got with it.


----------



## Bearitone (Jun 24, 2019)

Nonapod said:


> I assume they don't care much about the any negative PR since people will by their way overpriced guitars simple because it's Gibson. But one wonders how much bad PR can drag a brand down on top of the various high prices and all the QC issues like Harley-Davidson during the AMF years.



All the guys i know that want a les Paul are over 40, with money to blow, have no clue about the QC issues over the years, are unaware that there’s a new CEO, etc... they just think they’re pretty/classic/classy looking guitars that all their childhood hero guitarists played.

So yeah i think you are totally correct. I think there is always (until they die off) going to be a large Gibson audience to buy their guitars regardless of PR.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Jun 24, 2019)

the expensive Gibsons are pretty good. 

Just gonna throw that out there.


----------



## narad (Jun 24, 2019)

Bearitone said:


> All the guys i know that want a les Paul are over 40, with money to blow, have no clue about the QC issues over the years, are unaware that there’s a new CEO, etc... they just think they’re pretty/classic/classy looking guitars that all their childhood hero guitarists played.
> 
> So yeah i think you are totally correct. I think there is always (until they die off) going to be a large Gibson audience to buy their guitars regardless of PR.



And if someone wants a "SSO approved" Les Paul, for playing songs that were played with Les Pauls, what should they buy?


----------



## Bearitone (Jun 24, 2019)

narad said:


> And if someone wants a "SSO approved" Les Paul, for playing songs that were played with Les Pauls, what should they buy?



A Les Paul?...

I wasn’t saying anyone “shouldn’t” buy a Gibson. I was just agreeing that, despite bad PR from this lawsuit, they are still going to have a large customer base due to how many guitar legends from the 60s 70s 80s used their guitars.

Edit: if you are sincerely asking what guitars could be used in place of a Les Paul i would say literally any guitar with a 24.75” scale length and two PAFs.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 24, 2019)

Bearitone said:


> A Les Paul?...
> 
> I wasn’t saying anyone “shouldn’t” buy a Gibson. I was just agreeing that, despite bad PR from this lawsuit, they are still going to have a large customer base due to how many guitar legends from the 60s 70s 80s used their guitars.
> 
> Edit: if you are sincerely asking what guitars could be used in place of a Les Paul i would say literally any guitar with a 24.75” scale length and two PAFs.


Frankly, I prefer 25.5". Regardless of wood choices, the guitar is brighter.


----------



## cardinal (Jun 24, 2019)

The huge draw to me for Gibsons and Marshalls and the like: countless killer recordings were made with that stuff. So if I liked those records (that's an important "if"!!!) and I'm using the same gear: if I'm not digging the tone, chances are that I'm doing something wrong. So it more or less keeps me off the constant search for something new-and-improved.

But this applies well outside of vintage stuff like Gibson and Marshall. The Rectifier, the 5150, EMGs, etc. All of this stuff has proven itself for certain types of tones, so you know what you're getting and it was good enough for platinum records, it's going to be good enough for me.

For example, I love that boosted Marshal tone, and tons of guys have used simple Tube Screamers and SD-1s with Marshalls to make some killer tones. But I could not get it to work for 8-strings and was going bonkers trying to find a new amp I liked. And I was starting to consider having to try some pretty expensive and exotic modern amps.

But all I needed was just the right thing to boost the Marshalls with: for me, that turned out to be the Fortin 33 (which, as it turns out, isn't that far off from the TC Electronic unit that Scott Ian used to boost his Marshalls back in the SOD days to get some killer tones!). Ended up with just an old tried-and-true set up once again.


----------



## Bdtunn (Jun 24, 2019)

Wait wait wait do we all hate Marshall’s now? Man I can’t keep up haha


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 24, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Frankly, I prefer 25.5". Regardless of wood choices, the guitar is brighter.



Hagstrom Super Swede. 



Bdtunn said:


> Wait wait wait do we all hate Marshall’s now? Man I can’t keep up haha



You'd be surprised. I've seen metal dudes who claim Marshalls suck because they're blues rock amps and like... Never even heard a DSL, Valvestate, 2 channel JCM, Silver Jube, JVM, 6100, 2203KK, JCM900... the list goes on.


----------



## budda (Jun 24, 2019)

narad said:


> And if someone wants a "SSO approved" Les Paul, for playing songs that were played with Les Pauls, what should they buy?



An LP studio. Then *possibly* swap pickups.


----------



## CapinCripes (Jun 25, 2019)

Bdtunn said:


> Wait wait wait do we all hate Marshall’s now? Man I can’t keep up haha


don't you know that Marshall only made super leads and only make blues amps for blues bands like slayer, magadeth, death, children of bodom, hammerfall, and half of erik rutan's amp setup. God i hope i do not need to label my sarcasm on that one. No they dont make a 5150 or a dual rec type amp but to say they are crap for metal is laying it on a bit thick. Would I buy a marshall personally? probably not, guys like freidman and splawn make really nice refined close enough version that would take care of my british style amp craving without the hassle of having the entire state file a noise compalint against you and your 2203.


----------



## p0ke (Jun 25, 2019)

Bdtunn said:


> Wait wait wait do we all hate Marshall’s now? Man I can’t keep up haha



No, absolutely not  I was just saying that Marshall is sort of the Gibson-equivalent in amps, that everyone knows and think they want until they get deeper into gear hoarding. And yes many metal bands use Marshalls too, but they could achieve their sound with less extra gear or modifications using something different.


----------



## A-Branger (Jun 25, 2019)

Bearitone said:


> I wasn’t saying anyone “shouldn’t” buy a Gibson. I was just agreeing that, despite bad PR from this lawsuit, they are still going to have a large customer base due to how many guitar legends from the 60s 70s 80s used their guitars.



yup^ and that not only applies to "old" people. it also applies to the rest... except on the Metal genres

reason why I hate this PR "sue everyone!" stunt.... they dont need that. Fender doesnt do it (fair enough, their shapes are not trademarked) but still, with hundreds of other's coppies, they still sell guitars. Gibson is not gonna die because DEAN...fucking DEAN make a "singlecut" and V/Z guitars...... (plus bunch of other small builders we dont know that are getting sued too)

I mean:

Gibson










Dean








And thats not counting the bunch of different finishes Dean has


like suuuuure someone is gonna go "oh I better get this Dean instead of the LP I actually wanted".... or "oh God donno which V do I want, they both look soooooo similar, halp!"....... starting from the fact they actually found one in a store, Im yet to find one thats not the cheapest model.


----------



## MerlinTKD (Jun 25, 2019)

A-Branger said:


> yup^ and that not only applies to "old" people. it also applies to the rest... except on the Metal genres
> 
> reason why I hate this PR "sue everyone!" stunt.... they dont need that. Fender doesnt do it (fair enough, their shapes are not trademarked) but still, with hundreds of other's coppies, they still sell guitars. Gibson is not gonna die because DEAN...fucking DEAN make a "singlecut" and V/Z guitars...... (plus bunch of other small builders we dont know that are getting sued too)
> 
> ...



Hmm... those Dean shapes are a lot closer to the Gibson’s than I realized... but as you (and all the rest of us) said, given the Gibson price point, the only buyers who will be confused are the ones least likely to be able to afford a Gibson to begin with. 

Here’s hoping for a swift dismissal.


----------



## MerlinTKD (Jun 25, 2019)

(double post)


----------



## diagrammatiks (Jun 25, 2019)

I can't believe Dean actually sells any guitars with that headstock


----------



## Zanmato86 (Jun 25, 2019)

I know a lot of people just don't like the headstocks. But I have been playing a Dean V for about 10 years (Karl Sanders Nile Inspired me). Its a Korean made model with Emg 81/85. Its not suited for modern metal but its just perfect for Thrash. Excellent sound, plays itself and looks great on stage. Yeah its not the right look for a prog band but Dean cater to a particular customer that Gibson do not.


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Jun 25, 2019)

Shouldn't it be the sum of all parts kinda thing? Like, the V's body looks similar shapewise, but then it has that massive ugly headstock on it. Not a single person, gearhead or simpleton, would mistake that dean for a gibson. 

Honestly, I really like Dean's ex shape, but never bought one because the headstocks are so heinous. Would love one of the inline models, but they're all the kind of cheap that makes you wonder what's wrong with them. 

I grew out of wanting a Gibson years ago. I owned several ~$2k gibsons. Most notably, an LP traditional, explorer, and a V. They were fine enough guitars, but nothing special. They've all been sold, and I don't miss any of them beyond the LP because Of K-On... (which is why I jumped on a chibson I found. No regrets.)

I think it's silly to be the PR monster that Gibson thinks it needs to be. They'll never lose all their fans, but they are steadily losing the "on-the-fence" crowd. I hope their lawsuit fails, as I honestly feel there is no merit to it. Similar body shape or not, even the V is unmistakably dean unlike a lot of past lawsuit models.


----------



## ArtDecade (Jun 25, 2019)

Gibson has lawyers. Let them sort out the law. Most likely, there isn't a case here. Gibson has gone this route before and failed. At the end of the day, this is a business / legal matter. It doesn't impact musicians in any way so I can't be bothered to care how it works out.


----------



## A-Branger (Jun 25, 2019)

MerlinTKD said:


> those Dean shapes are a lot closer to the Gibson’s than I realized.



Body shapes are different. Something I give to Gibson being the ones who does the "LP" shape the best, and to ESP/LTD too (as basically is the same but the lower cut), every other brand Dean included either have a too narrow waist, or too big of a lower body circumference, propertions looks off.

Yesh it does have the 4 knobs, and toggle switch on the top, plus the TOM bridge... which I think might be the Gibson trademarks (3 together) but still Dean has an overall aesthetics that comes no-where near an LP, either modern/traditional/studio/custom/whatever



Zanmato86 said:


> but Dean cater to a particular customer that Gibson do not.





Señor Voorhees said:


> Shouldn't it be the sum of all parts kinda thing? Like, the V's body looks similar shapewise, but then it has that massive ugly headstock on it. Not a single person, gearhead or simpleton, would mistake that dean for a gibson.



yup and yup. The V might have the exact body shape, but with that headstock (and overall colors/finishes/looks/) its just a whole different guitar. You can almost use the GIbson V in any genre no issues, except Jazz or Gospel. But with that Dean, unless you are playing Metal, everyone is gonna look at you like WTF?

again Gibson only has a black and a aged yellow "natural" V... maybe white or red.... Dean got an arrange of colors and finishes... Two whole different beast

both have masively different customers/target market... I dont see the point of the sue. Specially with how hard its to find a Dean at a store compared to the 23964949873234 stores that carry 50% Fenders 45% Gibsons and 5% every other brand


----------



## LeviathanKiller (Jun 25, 2019)

A-Branger said:


> yup^ and that not only applies to "old" people. it also applies to the rest... except on the Metal genres
> 
> reason why I hate this PR "sue everyone!" stunt.... they dont need that. Fender doesnt do it (fair enough, their shapes are not trademarked) but still, with hundreds of other's coppies, they still sell guitars. Gibson is not gonna die because DEAN...fucking DEAN make a "singlecut" and V/Z guitars...... (plus bunch of other small builders we dont know that are getting sued too)
> 
> ...



Is it just me, or are the Dean headstocks top edge, just inverses of the Gibson edges? Seriously, it looks like you could fit them together if you put them headstock-to-headstock.


----------



## tedtan (Jun 25, 2019)

ElysianGuitars said:


> You want to bark at the moon against reality, be my guest. Gibson isn't in danger of going under for no reason.



Gibson guitars is not in danger of going out of business. Their bankruptcy is due to Henry J buying Phillips electronics and other companies he did not know how to run in order to make Gibson a "lifestyle" brand. Gibson's guitar division has remained profitable all along and is a separate entity from bankruptcy court perspective.




Spaced Out Ace said:


> Their quality has been pretty eh for quite awhile.



True, but this is not as bad in reality as it is made out to be online. I've played many Gibsons over the past ~5 years and the biggest issue I've noticed has been minor finish flaws followed by improperly crowned frets above the 14th fret. Granted, neither should happen on guitar at Gibson's price points, but 1) they are not huge issues, and 2) I can find similar flaws on most of their competitors' guitars at the same price points.




Hollowway said:


> Actually, that would be an interesting breakdown. I associate most non-classic rock with Fender or off-brand guitars. I'd be interested to see how many punk/ska/blues/jazz/pop/country/etc use the different brands of guitars. Someone do their thesis on this and get back to me!



I certainly don't have a well researched thesis style paper at hand, but I have seen plenty of players in those styles playing Gibsons:

punk: often Les Paul Jr.s, sometime Les Pauls;
blues: Les Paul, SG, V (see Albert King), ES335, Various Gibson acoustic models;
jazz: TONS of Gibson hollow body and semi-hollow body models;
pop: Lots of Gibson acoustic models, Les Paul, ES335;
country: Les Pauls and various hollow body models, along with tons of Gibson acoustic model;
singer-songwriter: one of the most common models is the Gibson J45 acoustic.


----------



## tedtan (Jun 25, 2019)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> So uh
> 
> Has anyone with actual any legal expertise commented on this? Specifically with copyright, trademark/counterfeit legalese?



I am not an attorney, but I do deal with IP laws in my day job, so I will provide a very high level overview of the subject. Anyone actually practicing IP law can fill in the details.

First up, copyright. Copyright exists to protect written works (books, songs, movie scripts, software code, etc.) from being exploited for profit by people other than the rights holder. This right is granted at the time the work is created, but it still needs to be registered before a court will hear a case (at least in the US, other countries will differ a bit here). Since guitars are not written works, Gibson cannot file for copyright infringement, so we can forget about copyrights.

Next up, patents. Patents exist to protect certain mechanical devices, processes, designs, man made chemicals, etc. from being used for profit by anyone other than the rights holder *during the term of the patent*. A utility patent is good for 20 years and a design patent is good for 15 years. Had Gibson filed for a design patent on any of their guitars within the past 15 years, they may have a legitimate shot at winning this case. The problem here is that the designs in question are pushing 70 years old, so they should not be illegible for a design patent at this point. That would have been possible decades ago, but even then, the patent(s) would have expired by now. So we can forget about patents here, too.

That leaves us with trademarks. First, let's get the purpose of a trademark out of the way: *trademarks exist to protect consumers from accidentally buying fake/counterfeit goods*. They do not exist to protect the manufacturer; they exist to protect the consumer. Second, trademark law is a "use it or lose it" situation; if a manufacturer fails to protect their trademarks, they lose the right to those marks.

What does that mean in this case? it means that Gibson would have to 1) prove that a consumer would accidentally buy a Dean thinking that it was actually a Gibson, after 2) Gibson having protected it's trademarks over the past ~70 years.

Obviously Gibson has not protected its trademarks over that time period, and no one would mistake a Dean for a Gibson, so I don't think this lawsuit has legs to stand on.

What Gibson does have, though, is money, and they are using it to attempt to bully Dean (and others indirectly, plus possibly more suits to come) into altering their models enough that they look even less like a Gibson in the hope that this will drive more sales Gibson's way. If Dean has enough cash on hand for a suit, Gibson will fail, but if Dean id cash poor, they may agree to go along with Gibson's demands in order to stay in business.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 25, 2019)

tedtan said:


> True, but this is not as bad in reality as it is made out to be online. I've played many Gibsons over the past ~5 years and the biggest issue I've noticed has been minor finish flaws followed by improperly crowned frets above the 14th fret. Granted, neither should happen on guitar at Gibson's price points, but 1) they are not huge issues, and 2) I can find similar flaws on most of their competitors' guitars at the same price points.


For the price Gibson charges, those are huge issues. I expect a near flawless to play instrument at those price points.


----------



## manu80 (Jun 25, 2019)

I'll get this brazila V instead of the Gibson'V anytime. And that will be very soon.
The V headstick do'est bother me on ther V, as it Echoes the body shape. on the other, like the Z, it makes tick a bit. On the Cadi it's fine. Got used to it...


----------



## spudmunkey (Jun 25, 2019)

tedtan said:


> That leaves us with trademarks.[...] Second, trademark law is a "use it or lose it" situation; if a manufacturer fails to protect their trademarks, they lose the right to those marks.



This is an interesting one. I came up with a name for a company that I'd like to use on any guitars I'd ever build (note: I haven't even built one guitar body, so...yeah...). However, if I were to try to trademark it, I'd lose the trademark after a very short amount of time, unless I can show that I've made a bonafide effort to use it.

This is also why Kiesel will always have, IMO anyway, at least one model that's still Carvin branded (currently, it's the JB200C Jason Becker "bluey" model)...otherwise if they no longer used it, after a couple of years, my understanding is that someone else could come along and (legally) make Carvin-branded Guitars.


----------



## Andromalia (Jun 25, 2019)

A-Branger said:


> Dean



I'd take the Dean over the Gibson: Gibson fucked up their pickguard for this year's model. And, I already have a limited 2016 V which has a proper look. And the Dean headstock looks fine on a V.


----------



## Obsidian Soul (Jun 25, 2019)

According to Mark Agnesi,any company that does a singlecut,flying V,explorer,or any other shape they produce is a counterfeit Gibson,which is what I have a problem with.

If they were attacking the Chibsons,I would understand,but I think Dean and Gibson have different target demographics among other things(for the sake of brevity).


----------



## Andromalia (Jun 25, 2019)

AFAIK a "counterfeit Gibson" needs to have a Gibson logo somewhere. I have the feeling Mr Agnesi did a very bad career choice and is going to get sacrificed for the blunder of the company. Maybe he can still get back to Norman's.



> If Dean has enough cash on hand for a suit, Gibson will fail, but if Dean id cash poor, they may agree to go along with Gibson's demands in order to stay in business.



Can you educate us non US guys about this ? Can't Gibson be sentenced to paying the fees ? In France the party that loses pays the fees in addition to fines and damages.


----------



## spudmunkey (Jun 25, 2019)

So...and maybe I'm missing a piece of the puzzle...but why wouldn't they just go after companies, and that's it? Why did they make a video announcing it? I'll admit that I haven't sought out the video, but have only seen reactions to it.


----------



## Bdtunn (Jun 25, 2019)

My feeling is Gibson is going after the “smaller” of the larger brands out there as basically a test. If they win then I can see them going after the esp/schecter group and beyond. I mean the schecter “LP” head stock fits in the Gibson headstock.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 25, 2019)

Bdtunn said:


> My feeling is Gibson is going after the “smaller” of the larger brands out there as basically a test. If they win then I can see them going after the esp/schecter group and beyond.


Exactly my problem. "Not stiffing the boutique" market my ass. They want to bully everyone and Dean is just the first target. Whomever gave them this idea was not thinking.


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Jun 25, 2019)

I used to hate that schecter headstock, but now I love it. I will never be able to look at it and not giggle inside again.


----------



## prlgmnr (Jun 26, 2019)

Bdtunn said:


> My feeling is Gibson is going after the “smaller” of the larger brands out there as basically a test. If they win then I can see them going after the esp/schecter group and beyond. I mean the schecter “LP” head stock fits in the Gibson headstock.
> 
> View attachment 70537


Saucy.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 26, 2019)




----------



## manu80 (Jun 26, 2019)

Never thought about the schecter headstock !!! Smart !!!!!


----------



## Exchanger (Jun 26, 2019)

Some water for the irony mill :


----------



## Kreprn (Jun 26, 2019)

Kinda like a backlash on dean. Just as they’re suing this real small luthier who makes washburn dimebag, if not copies, then at least heavily inspired guitars. Now here comes big guitar boogieman gibson to spook dean with their foolery.
Just baffling how agressive the guitar industry is. As if brands were making the legal matters way more important than what the customers and supporters think of the company. Just cant see how all things like this could actually end up profiting the company.


----------



## Mathemagician (Jun 26, 2019)

The idea is very simple. Guitars are effectively commodities. They can in be differentiated on shape, color, and “specs”. 

But anyone can make almost anything using the same woods, metals, pickups. 

So what larger firms in any industry do once they reach maximum normal growth is clamp down on viable “alternatives” because anything one doesn’t make is a threat. 

Gibson has no new markets to uncover everyone knows what it is and whether they want one or not. 

The guys buying $2.5-4.5k Gibson’s often just buy one. Maybe more but it’s slower going. 

The $400-1500 has much more volume if lower margins. 

So since there is way more variety at that level and more options they can clamp down on options and therefore pick up more marketshare by force. 

I can guarantee you they did the market research to decide this was the most profitable route. This isn’t on a whim. 

Doing small “runs” with outsourced manufacturing is viable for small shops with minimal overhead. 

It’s not something a firm as big as Gibson seems to be interested in or even possibly could do if they wanted to. 

The current model of annual updates and making stores hold 40% or more of their product maximizes their numbers. 

Meanwhile tons of millennials and gen Z purchasers are following the Kiesel, Legator, Ormsby, et al on social media and buying online or buying direct. 

If the young shredder guys aren’t playing Gibson then they aren’t jnfront of new people. 

Solution? Sue everyone out of business. 

That said, the courts are going to decide the validity of their case. But people can decide what to do with their own money. 

And man black beauty LP’s look cool. Wish I liked how they feel to play - just not for me unfortunately


----------



## GunpointMetal (Jun 26, 2019)

If that can't figure out a way to compete in the lower-dollar market, they gotta be dumb. The reason people buy Deans/ESPs/Schecters in those body styles is because they offer a wider range of options (hardware, finishes, pickups, modern neck shapes) for a lower price with equal or better quality. If Schecter can produce a single-cut with name-brand pickups, a quilted finish, etc for $700 and it plays better than a comparable $3000 LP that's not Schecter's fault. A $3000 production guitar, no matter where its made, should be for all intents and purposes, flawless and play like a dream out of the box. From what I've tried and seen in the last 15 years or so, the probability of grabbing an off-the-shelf Gibson that plays awesome and has not finish/fit issues is about as likely as grabbing an Epiphone for $500 that plays awesome. So about 1 out of 3. For that price, it should 3 out of 3, all day every day. Gibson is a lifestyle brand for boomers and I honestly wouldn't feel even a little bad if it died with that generation.


----------



## tedtan (Jun 26, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> For the price Gibson charges, those are huge issues. I expect a near flawless to play instrument at those price points.



Depends on which price point, as Gibson has models ranging from $600 up to over $20,000.

In the $600-900 price range, I've never seen a guitar without issues. This is where the Les Paul Studio Faded, etc. are priced.

The USA SGs, Les Paul Classics, etc. would fall in the $900-1,500 range, and I'd expect a bit more at this level, though not perfection.

It looks like the new Les Paul Standard will probably fall into $2,000 street price range, and we should expect a solid, though still not perfect, guitar at that price point (Ibanez Prestige, ESP E-II, Keisel, etc. are not perfect, either).

Where they really need to up their game is with the custom shop instruments (Les Paul Customs, Reissues, artist models, etc.), because at $4,000 and up, Gibson is competing with Yaron, Bartlett, Collings, Anderson, Suhr, etc. all of whom will bring the quality.




Obsidian Soul said:


> According to Mark Agnesi,any company that does a singlecut,flying V,explorer,or any other shape they produce is a counterfeit Gibson,which is what I have a problem with.



I interpreted that as his intent, as well, and that will not work out for Gibson IMO.




spudmunkey said:


> if I were to try to trademark it, I'd lose the trademark after a very short amount of time, unless I can show that I've made a bonafide effort to use it.



Yeah, in order to qualify for a trademark, you have to be either 1) actively using it in commerce, or 2) begin using the mark in commerce within 6 months of registering it.


----------



## tedtan (Jun 26, 2019)

Andromalia said:


> Can you educate us non US guys about this ? Can't Gibson be sentenced to paying the fees ? In France the party that loses pays the fees in addition to fines and damages.



In the US, if a case goes to trial (or, generally, arbitration), then the winning party will almost always be awarded it's legal fees in addition to any damages awarded, as in the EU. The issue is that most court cases (it is estimated to be around 95%) are settled between the parties before actually going to trial. This is usually a good thing as it greatly reduces legal costs, but it opens the door for the party with more cash on hand to use the legal system as a weapon against the smaller party by dragging the proceedings out and "litigating the little guy out of business". This won't be an issue if both parties are acting in good faith, but a belligerent bully like a Donald Trump (or Gibson) can abuse the system for their own benefit.


----------



## stinkoman (Jun 26, 2019)

So this might be interesting to some. It is Gibson related, but not guitar related, so skip if you want. But Gibsons legal mess is beyond guitars and are after Mandolin makers as well and it's probably going to be a lot more nuts. 

Assuming most here won't know anything about mandolins, Gibson without question invented the what is called F5 style mandolin. EVERYONE makes this body style. Some only make this style and built a career around it. 

So not only do all makers build this body shape , most based their whole building careers on making copies off Gibsons golden years on what is called "Loyd loar specs".He was the guy from Gibson who created the shape. Builders would 
Meticulously take apart Lloyd loar made instruments , replicating all his measurements, dimensions, specs, making as close to identical copies for their own instruments to sell. Not all but definitely I would say most use the same headstock that was designed by Gibson. They also almost all use the same flower pot and fern inlay, bell truss rod cover and using the same logo font.

So imagine Fender, Ibanez, Esp ect only made les Paul's. And all of them are using the same font as Gibson, same diamond logo on the headstock, but only the name is different all trying to make the best 59 les Paul copy as possible and that is roughly what the mandolin community is facing.


----------



## Aso (Jun 26, 2019)

And they now have a page to rat out companies for counterfeits.
https://www.gibson.com/Support/Report-Counterfeits


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 26, 2019)

Just reported them for producing and suing over shit that they were not the first to use. Idiots. This will not last long.


----------



## narad (Jun 26, 2019)

Man, there were times I'd never consider buying a Gibson because of QC. Then there were other times they put together something I really wanted spec-wise, and I just couldn't find a decent one (thunderhorse explorer). 

But yesterday I went to a shop with lots, tried a high-end Kurosawa modified true historic spec, and it was amazing. I own a bunch of boutique LPs in this price range and those are all also phenomenal guitars, but this one was so much more on point in terms of classic Gibson sound (and they all have LP shape, mahogany body, 2 PAF-style HBs, etc.). I dare say I'd have been happier just getting this guitar, as I'm usually playing classic rock stuff with them anyway. The new standards were totally solid too. 

I know it's fun to hate on Gibson and that then turn around and use that to justify some Napster-esque mentality that they shouldn't have any trademarks on anything they've ever done, but the stuff they've been putting out lately seems noticeably improved.


----------



## Leviathus (Jun 26, 2019)

narad said:


> the stuff they've been putting out lately seems noticeably improved.



You're not helping my GAS for the 60's standard!


----------



## Bdtunn (Jun 26, 2019)

Aso said:


> And they now have a page to rat out companies for counterfeits.
> https://www.gibson.com/Support/Report-Counterfeits



Hahah this isn’t going to go well.

Should post this on the form.
http://www.myrareguitars.com/gibson-creates-signature-jimi-hendrix-strat


----------



## diagrammatiks (Jun 26, 2019)

stinkoman said:


> So this might be interesting to some. It is Gibson related, but not guitar related, so skip if you want. But Gibsons legal mess is beyond guitars and are after Mandolin makers as well and it's probably going to be a lot more nuts.
> 
> Assuming most here won't know anything about mandolins, Gibson without question invented the what is called F5 style mandolin. EVERYONE makes this body style. Some only make this style and built a career around it.
> 
> ...



This doesn’t really make that much of difference. If they haven’t enforced the copyright in 40 years or never patented the shape they have no claim to it anymore. 

The most they could hope for is to bleed their competitors dry with legal fees. 



narad said:


> Man, there were times I'd never consider buying a Gibson because of QC. Then there were other times they put together something I really wanted spec-wise, and I just couldn't find a decent one (thunderhorse explorer).
> 
> But yesterday I went to a shop with lots, tried a high-end Kurosawa modified true historic spec, and it was amazing. I own a bunch of boutique LPs in this price range and those are all also phenomenal guitars, but this one was so much more on point in terms of classic Gibson sound (and they all have LP shape, mahogany body, 2 PAF-style HBs, etc.). I dare say I'd have been happier just getting this guitar, as I'm usually playing classic rock stuff with them anyway. The new standards were totally solid too.
> 
> I know it's fun to hate on Gibson and that then turn around and use that to justify some Napster-esque mentality that they shouldn't have any trademarks on anything they've ever done, but the stuff they've been putting out lately seems noticeably improved.



Like I said before I think the expensive stuff has always been good. 

My r8 was light years better then my dc pro. All the es-lps I played were amazing. My old 336 is still one of my favorite hollowbodies. If I preferred the Gibson neck and scale I’d have that instead of my prs.


----------



## coupe89 (Jun 26, 2019)

Aso said:


> And they now have a page to rat out companies for counterfeits.
> https://www.gibson.com/Support/Report-Counterfeits


That has been on there for years I think it started with all the chibson from Aliexpress.


----------



## Werecow (Jun 27, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Just reported them for producing and suing over shit that they were not the first to use. Idiots. This will not last long.
> View attachment 70557



I just reported Gibson for stealing that O.W. Appleton guitar design


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 27, 2019)

I think what people are forgetting is that the "Les Paul" is a signature model itself, technically/by definition. So not only are they ripping off (what people have come to know as) a body style, but an actual signature model guitar.

Gibson did invent the SG model first if I'm not mistaken....that would be like Fender inventing the telecaster first, then coming out with the stratocaster (with its double cutaway), but instead of calling it the stratocaster, they called it the Leo model. All the companies that came after and copied that guitar, wouldn't be just copying a stratocaster, they would be copying a Leo signature model.

Maybe a silly hypothetical, maybe not, but I think the actual signature name on the model has more to do with it than people are considering.


----------



## narad (Jun 27, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> I think what people are forgetting is that the "Les Paul" is a signature model itself, technically/by definition. So not only are they ripping off (what people have come to know as) a body style, but an actual signature model guitar.
> 
> Gibson did invent the SG model first if I'm not mistaken....that would be like Fender inventing the telecaster first, then coming out with the stratocaster (with its double cutaway), but instead of calling it the stratocaster, they called it the Leo model. All the companies that came after and copied that guitar, wouldn't be just copying a stratocaster, they would be copying a Leo signature model.
> 
> Maybe a silly hypothetical, maybe not, but I think the actual signature name on the model has more to do with it than people are considering.



I disagree. A huge amount of the guitar buying public doesn't even understand it as a signature guitar. No one's listening to Les's music or buying it because they saw him playing it and aspired to be him. It's so past being a signature guitar, that you can have a Slash signature Les Paul. Doesn't that illustrate how little the sig matters?


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Jun 27, 2019)

narad said:


> It's so past being a signature guitar, that you can have a Slash signature Les Paul. Doesn't that illustrate how little the sig matters?



At this point, barely anyone outside jazz will remember Les Paul the musician. If anything Slash is guy everyone associates the Les Paul to since he brought Gibson back into the spotlight in a world of Superstrats and Floyd Roses with a monster hard rock album.

All even juicier that Slash used a counterfeit for Appetite. Also that album was mostly written by Izzy Stradlin and Traci Gunns, but I digress.

EDIT: Hell, at this point in time, Slash is considered Dad Rock for young players.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 27, 2019)

Counterfeit. Not replica. Counterfeit. That is the hilarious irony in all of this. Iommi's SG Sig is based on his counterfeits as well. Gibson needs to get their ass handed to them in court.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 27, 2019)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> All even juicier that Slash used a replica for Appetite. Also that album was mostly written by Izzy Stradlin and Traci Gunns, but I digress.


No no. Don't digress. Prove your claim. Sure Izzy likely wrote a lot, but you kinda need to prove that Traci wrote anything on the album, and considering its credited to a vague band songwriting credit, that might be a bit hard to prove that the album was "mostly" written by Traci.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Jun 27, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> No no. Don't digress. Prove your claim. Sure Izzy likely wrote a lot, but you kinda need to prove that Traci wrote anything on the album, and considering its credited to a vague band songwriting credit, that might be a bit hard to prove that the album was "mostly" written by Traci.



Alright.

Gunns involvement was largely considered urban legend, fair enough. I threw his name there just for the sake of that. But I stand by Izzy writing the lion's share of Appetite. Slash came in late and even admitted in his book that he wrote only a handful of bits like small parts of Welcome To The Jungle and the Sweet Child riff everyonr knows.

Still my point stands on Izzy.

Slash did write a lot of Use Your Illusion 1-2 and that's all that needs to be said about those.


----------



## Andromalia (Jun 27, 2019)

> I can guarantee you they did the market research to decide this was the most profitable route. This isn’t on a whim.



It wouldn't be the first time a major company fucked up their PR.



> At this point, barely anyone outside jazz will remember Les Paul the musician.


TBH if I had to give awards I'd put the light on his studio and recording works. Guy *just* invented multitrack recording, which is waaaaaay more important than designing a guitar, even a very successful one.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Jun 27, 2019)

Andromalia said:


> TBH if I had to give awards I'd put the light on his studio and recording works. Guy *just* invented multitrack recording, which is waaaaaay more important than designing a guitar, even a very successful one.



 Without putting down his contribution to guitar, Les Paul was a sonic innovator long before everyone else. He was doing overdubs live long before the thought of loop pedals were invented.


----------



## Adieu (Jun 27, 2019)

Can somebody recommend some notable


Obsidian Soul said:


> According to Mark Agnesi,any company that does a singlecut,flying V,explorer,or any other shape they produce is a counterfeit Gibson,which is what I have a problem with.
> 
> If they were attacking the Chibsons,I would understand,but I think Dean and Gibson have different target demographics among other things(for the sake of brevity).



Buuuuut.... between this first-comer Appleton guy and the waaaay-too-huge-to-miss/ignore Fender Broadcaster/Telecaster, surely they're under zero illusion whatsoever about being the originators of the singlecut solidbody design philosophy?????


----------



## efiltsohg (Jun 27, 2019)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> At this point, barely anyone outside jazz will remember Les Paul the musician. If anything Slash is guy everyone associates the Les Paul to since he brought Gibson back into the spotlight in a world of Superstrats and Floyd Roses with a monster hard rock album.
> 
> All even juicier that Slash used a counterfeit for Appetite. Also that album was mostly written by Izzy Stradlin and Traci Gunns, but I digress.
> 
> EDIT: Hell, at this point in time, Slash is considered Dad Rock for young players.



GnR was already considered dad rock 20+ years ago


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 27, 2019)

narad said:


> I disagree. A huge amount of the guitar buying public doesn't even understand it as a signature guitar. No one's listening to Les's music or buying it because they saw him playing it and aspired to be him. It's so past being a signature guitar, that you can have a Slash signature Les Paul. Doesn't that illustrate how little the sig matters?


That's besides the point though, its still his sig guitar regardless if people know who he was or not. How many people walk into guitar not knowing who John Petrucci is and walk out with a JP? I'm sure quite a bit, and that's not even on the same level of popularity as far as model/brand. How about a Holcomb SE?


----------



## diagrammatiks (Jun 27, 2019)

It's not really a sig guitar. He didn't even want it. The guitar he wanted was much much much more metal.


----------



## tedtan (Jun 27, 2019)

^ True.

Gibson had developed the Les Paul model before Les was involved. Les was just a popular artist at the time, so Gibson paid him $1 per guitar sold to use his name on it. When Gibson moved to the SG in '61, Les hated the guitar and ended the endorsement deal.


----------



## ArtDecade (Jun 27, 2019)

tedtan said:


> ^ True.
> 
> Gibson had developed the Les Paul model before Les was involved. Les was just a popular artist at the time, so Gibson paid him $1 per guitar sold to use his name on it. When Gibson moved to the SG in '61, Les hated the guitar and ended the endorsement deal.



Kinda sorta. Les approached them as early as the 1940s to design a solid-body electric, but Gibson hemmed and hawed a bit because they weren't ready to take the plunge into that market. Eventually, Ted McCarty and crew designed a solid body electric and they approached Les Paul to endorse it. I am sure he had some input, but he certainly was not the head guy on the design team by any stretch of the imagination. That said, Les built his original "Log" guitar back in the 1930s so he was a certainly an innovator, both in instrument design and recording practices.


----------



## tedtan (Jun 27, 2019)

Yeah, Les had built prior electric guitars, but according to Ted McCarty, Les's only contribution to the Les Paul design was to suggest the wrap around tail piece instead of the the TOM with trapeze tailpiece they were using when they showed him the guitar.



> *VG: There’s been some controversy about how much input Les Paul actually had with the design of that guitar.*
> 
> TM: He never saw it before I took it down there. He never had anything to do with it, but we had a regular trapeze tailpiece on it, like we used on our other guitars, and he said, “I’ve got an idea for what I think is a better tailpiece.” It had a bar on it, which the strings wrapped around. I told him we’d try it, and if it worked we’d use it.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 27, 2019)

Not typically a fan of SSS, but still a great parody.


----------



## Ataraxia2320 (Jun 27, 2019)

MetalHex said:


> I think what people are forgetting is that the "Les Paul" is a signature model itself, technically/by definition. So not only are they ripping off (what people have come to know as) a body style, but an actual signature model guitar.
> 
> Gibson did invent the SG model first if I'm not mistaken....that would be like Fender inventing the telecaster first, then coming out with the stratocaster (with its double cutaway), but instead of calling it the stratocaster, they called it the Leo model. All the companies that came after and copied that guitar, wouldn't be just copying a stratocaster, they would be copying a Leo signature model.
> 
> Maybe a silly hypothetical, maybe not, but I think the actual signature name on the model has more to do with it than people are considering.



Fun fact, the original name for the SG was the Les Paul. 

When SG's came out they slapped the LP name on it and discontinued the actual les paul shape for a few years IIRC.


----------



## Leviathus (Jun 27, 2019)

Ahh the classic "is the Les Paul a signature model?" debate...


----------



## nikt (Jun 28, 2019)

Just wonder who will be next target after Dean. Will Gibson play this game on few fronts or just picked one company to "scare" the others (like they care lol )?

At least Dean made some changes to the designs like headstocks or proportions.
How about Hamer?


----------



## manu80 (Jun 28, 2019)

hamer, vintage, maybach, tokai, fgn, burny etc etc...they 'll have a lot of brand to take care of
Even small one , like Heritage, Eastman etc....what will happen against a US Mammoth ?
Even Ibanez with the ARZ series could be bothered.... just wondering where will they stop the "likeness problem".
Gotta get a Maybach while I can now !!!!


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Jun 28, 2019)

https://guitar.com/news/gibson-loses-flying-v-trademark-case-in-eu-court/


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Jun 28, 2019)

What happens if they do sue dean and suffer the same fate? Will they still move on to someone else? Can the courts tell them to just fucking stop if they keep opening the same failing lawsuits?


----------



## Bdtunn (Jun 28, 2019)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> https://guitar.com/news/gibson-loses-flying-v-trademark-case-in-eu-court/



Good! I hope this may curb them to just stop.


----------



## spudmunkey (Jun 28, 2019)

Bdtunn said:


> Good! I hope this may curb them to just stop.



Not likely. Samsung and Apple have been going after each other for years, even sometimes getting opposing verdicts in US and EU.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 28, 2019)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> https://guitar.com/news/gibson-loses-flying-v-trademark-case-in-eu-court/



Welp, prepare for a flood of flying V clones in Europe. 

I'm ready. 

But yeah, I MIGHT be wrong, but the EU seems more consumer friendly than the US courts, so I'm not surprised with this outcome.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Jun 28, 2019)

Señor Voorhees said:


> What happens if they do sue dean and suffer the same fate? Will they still move on to someone else? Can the courts tell them to just fucking stop if they keep opening the same failing lawsuits?



The theory I've heard is they're banking on this case to succeed and let precedent take care of the rest. They're taking it to East Texas where they're famously favorable towards plaintiffs in cases like this, and they're requesting a jury trial. Said jury, of course, likely to be comprised of average citizens who may look at a Dean V and a Gibson V and say "Yup! Looks the same to me!"


----------



## ArtDecade (Jun 28, 2019)

Science_Penguin said:


> Said jury, of course, likely to be comprised of average citizens who may look at a Dean V and a Gibson V and say "Yup! Looks the same to me!"



But that is kinda the point. If the average person thinks that some guitar looks like a Gibson, that's the issue. Specialists are always going to know. That is why they are specialists.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 28, 2019)

But doesn't that instead bolster the idea that Gibson shapes are now generic?


----------



## ArtDecade (Jun 28, 2019)

Honestly, I don't know. Let's say you show a non-musician a Les Paul (or a V or whatever) and explain that the designs are 60 years old. Then, you show the same person a Dean made in the 90s. It might look _exactly_ the same to Joe Blow. That is what they are banking on... Gibson is hoping that a grand jury of non-musicians will feel much differently than a room full of guitar players and award them something/anything that they can work through the courts to damage other companies. Texas might actually be daft enough to go along with the argument.


----------



## tedtan (Jun 28, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> But that is kinda the point. If the average person thinks that some guitar looks like a Gibson, that's the issue. Specialists are always going to know. That is why they are specialists.



Keeping in mind that trademark law exists to protect consumers (those buying the product), I would say that this should interpreted as whether or not a typical person in the market for a V/Les Paul/SG/Explorer would mistake the Dean version for the Gibson offering. And at that point, I think the buyer (as opposed to an average person off the street) is close enough to the specialist that there should be no mistaking the two. This is a niche market, after all.


----------



## Obsidian Soul (Jun 28, 2019)

tedtan said:


> Keeping in mind that trademark law exists to protect consumers (those buying the product), I would say that this should interpreted as whether or not a typical person in the market for a V/Les Paul/SG/Explorer would mistake the Dean version for the Gibson offering. And at that point, I think the buyer (as opposed to an average person off the street) is close enough to the specialist that there should be no mistaking the two. This is a niche market, after all.


Will the jury be guitarists or have some sort of knowledge about guitars?


----------



## ArtDecade (Jun 28, 2019)

tedtan said:


> Keeping in mind that trademark law exists to protect consumers (those buying the product), I would say that this should interpreted as whether or not a typical person in the market for a V/Les Paul/SG/Explorer would mistake the Dean version for the Gibson offering. And at that point, I think the buyer (as opposed to an average person off the street) is close enough to the specialist that there should be no mistaking the two. This is a niche market, after all.



I'm with you. I think Gibson is going to try to frame in this way that doesn't just entail the consumer, but how the brand is recognized in film and everywhere else (at least according to their bizarre YouTube vid from last week). They want a grand jury because they are easier to sway than a room full of lawyers and musicians. That all said, I think what Gibson really wants is to screw over these companies in the meantime via settlements and what-have-you rather than actually taking this to a jury. Gibson has the money to really put Dean over a log.


----------



## Obsidian Soul (Jun 28, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> I'm with you. I think Gibson is going to try to frame in this way that doesn't just entail the consumer, but how the brand is recognized in film and everywhere else (at least according to their bizarre YouTube vid from last week). They want a grand jury because they are easier to sway than a room full of lawyers and musicians. That all said, I think what Gibson really wants is to screw over these companies in the meantime via settlements and what-have-you rather than actually taking this to a jury. Gibson has the money to really put Dean over a log.


I think Gibson wants to recoup money this way rather than put in the legwork to actually make their guitars and public perception attractive and affordable.


----------



## ArtDecade (Jun 28, 2019)

Obsidian Soul said:


> I think Gibson wants to recoup money this way rather than put in the legwork to actually make their guitars and public perception attractive and affordable.



Can't argue with that!


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jun 28, 2019)

Obsidian Soul said:


> I think Gibson wants to recoup money this way rather than put in the legwork to actually make their guitars and public perception attractive and affordable.


And they were doing well, too. Now they just rather say fuck it, let's pump out shit like WWE, and remove all competitors. Unfortunately for them, their guitars (body styles, headstocks, etc.) are generic.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Jun 28, 2019)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> https://guitar.com/news/gibson-loses-flying-v-trademark-case-in-eu-court/


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 28, 2019)

For those of you unsure about the origins of the LP and SG, and Les Paul's involvement. 

(Also great answer to the "they should make different models and colors" opinion that always seems to come up.)


----------



## drmosh (Jun 28, 2019)

spudmunkey said:


> Not likely. Samsung and Apple have been going after each other for years, even sometimes getting opposing verdicts in US and EU.



didn't they just settle?


----------



## spudmunkey (Jun 29, 2019)

drmosh said:


> didn't they just settle?



Maybe, but was it for all 50+ lawsuits all around the globe, or just certain ones, just in the US? I honestly dont know.


----------



## Hollowway (Jun 29, 2019)

Obsidian Soul said:


> Will the jury be guitarists or have some sort of knowledge about guitars?


I imagine it would be like any other court, where both sides attempt to educate the jury. Honestly, I’m as much for protecting IP as anyone, but if people think there is enough difference in outward appearance to tell a Samsung galaxy from an iPhone, then I would think the headstocks on these guitars would immediately tip them off. Or, they’ll go the route that says that you can’t trademark a generic and common shape. Which is what they did with the V.


----------



## Andromalia (Jun 29, 2019)

The one thing EU legislators don't like is US companies arguing silly stuff as if the legislators were morons. These last few days, a gamer company exec tried to pull one of those in a filmed meeting with UK MPs or officials of some kind and it's going to backfire pretty heavily on them. The "it's not loot boxes, it's surprise mechanisms" had the present people raise an eybrow in "wtf, 'Murica much ?" mode.

I mean, "country X has a different reading of its own law than we do, so they're wrong" isn't the way this is going to work. XD


----------



## Obsidian Soul (Jun 29, 2019)

Andromalia said:


> The one thing EU legislators don't like is US companies arguing silly stuff as if the legislators were morons. These last few days, a gamer company exec tried to pull one of those in a filmed meeting with UK MPs or officials of some kind and it's going to backfire pretty heavily on them. The "it's not loot boxes, it's surprise mechanisms" had the present people raise an eybrow in "wtf, 'Murica much ?" mode.
> 
> I mean, "country X has a different reading of its own law than we do, so they're wrong" isn't the way this is going to work. XD


EA,another company that would rather force the customers to deal with their shitty business practices instead of "getting good."


----------



## USMarine75 (Jun 29, 2019)




----------



## Adieu (Jun 29, 2019)

Hollowway said:


> I imagine it would be like any other court, where both sides attempt to educate the jury. Honestly, I’m as much for protecting IP as anyone, but if people think there is enough difference in outward appearance to tell a Samsung galaxy from an iPhone, then I would think the headstocks on these guitars would immediately tip them off. Or, they’ll go the route that says that you can’t trademark a generic and common shape. Which is what they did with the V.



If they're smart, they'll argue "you COULD have PATENTED the ERGONOMICS innovation behind the V shape --- about 60 years ago --- but that would have expired by now, and you guys DIDN'T anyway.... at this point, this would be like Ford trying to demand other companies cease making pickup trucks in 2019"


----------



## drmosh (Jun 29, 2019)

Adieu said:


> If they're smart, they'll argue "you COULD have PATENTED the ERGONOMICS innovation behind the V shape --- about 60 years ago --- but that would have expired by now, and you guys DIDN'T anyway.... at this point, this would be like Ford trying to demand other companies cease making pickup trucks in 2019"



doesnt really work that way. patents are for technical innovation and generally last 20 years


----------



## Adieu (Jun 30, 2019)

drmosh said:


> doesnt really work that way. patents are for technical innovation and generally last 20 years



Yeah that's exactly why an ergonomics innovation from like 60 years ago is by default in the public domain


----------



## Andromalia (Jun 30, 2019)

First time ever I see a V guitar labeled as "ergonomic". You can play it sitting when you got the gist of it, but still.


----------



## Adieu (Jun 30, 2019)

Andromalia said:


> First time ever I see a V guitar labeled as "ergonomic". You can play it sitting when you got the gist of it, but still.



If you're sitting on a stool or something and stick the lower horn between your legs, wasn't it MORE natural for classical posture vs. regular guitar shapes?

Haven't held a V in a while, but modded and flipped a few Gibson ones several years back... and that's how I remembered em... I think???

Or is that just Jackson/Charvel Rhoads shapes if you point em up and forward?


----------



## MetalHex (Jun 30, 2019)

So now EU guitar companies can start making V copies? Why couldnt they before?


----------



## Andromalia (Jun 30, 2019)

They just didn't want to, Framus has a V model for exemple.


----------



## Bdtunn (Jun 30, 2019)

Adieu said:


> If you're sitting on a stool or something and stick the lower horn between your legs, wasn't it MORE natural for classical posture vs. regular guitar shapes?
> 
> Haven't held a V in a while, but modded and flipped a few Gibson ones several years back... and that's how I remembered em... I think???
> 
> Or is that just Jackson/Charvel Rhoads shapes if you point em up and forward?




I own nothing but v’s at this “point”. I’ve always played in a classical position and in my opinion v’s take the cake for that style of playing. Currently I have two custom shop gibso......sorry dean v’s (I get them confused all the time, if only I could read and if the headstocks were different.....) but my RR is the clear winner for comfort


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Jun 30, 2019)

Adieu said:


> If you're sitting on a stool or something and stick the lower horn between your legs, wasn't it MORE natural for classical posture vs. regular guitar shapes?
> 
> Haven't held a V in a while, but modded and flipped a few Gibson ones several years back... and that's how I remembered em... I think???
> 
> Or is that just Jackson/Charvel Rhoads shapes if you point em up and forward?




Yup, V's play really well in classical position. Other guitars that lend themselves well to it are the Warlock, and Dean ML, and pretty much any "star" shaped guitar. V's are some of my favorite shapes for that very reason.


----------



## MrWulf (Jun 30, 2019)

I mean who plays V in the modern position? Honestly, modern position is a scam given how the classical position are generally better at posture, relaxation and ease of access.


----------



## Adieu (Jun 30, 2019)

Yup yup

That's what explorers are for


----------



## Bdtunn (Jul 2, 2019)

https://guitar.com/news/gibson-breaks-silence-on-lawsuits/


----------



## Demiurge (Jul 2, 2019)

^I'm guessing that "collaboration" = licensing fees and that Dean wasn't playing ball.


----------



## brector (Jul 2, 2019)

Still playing the "it was the previous executive team, not us" card


----------



## cwhitey2 (Jul 2, 2019)

Demiurge said:


> ^I'm guessing that "collaboration" = licensing fees and that Dean wasn't playing ball.


That is exactly how I read it.


----------



## LeviathanKiller (Jul 2, 2019)

Who would've guessed Gibson was in need of "clear lessons to be learned around tone".


----------



## Flappydoodle (Jul 2, 2019)

God, seeing EVERY SINGLE YouTuber pushing videos on this is so annoying


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Jul 2, 2019)

"It was the previous guy" says the guy who allowed a threatening poorly received video peddling similar ideals to be made.

You can't say it was the last guy when you yourself threaten everyone just a week ago.


----------



## lewis (Jul 2, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> God, seeing EVERY SINGLE YouTuber pushing videos on this is so annoying


Its why I like Ola. He never gets involved with politics. He was asked about this in an FAQ and it was literally just dismissed pretty quickly - and he moved onto the next question

Best way to be. Seeing every other youtuber go big on this is just boring as balls at this point


----------



## Andromalia (Jul 2, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> God, seeing EVERY SINGLE YouTuber pushing videos on this is so annoying


Youtube is more or less turning into the gutter press nowadays. Now they're putting titles on the thumbnails with completely-not-clickbaity-sentences such as "THE SAD TRUTH ABOUT...", "WHAT COMPANY X HIDES FROM YOU", "EXCLUSIVE INFO YOU WON'T SEE ANYWHERE ELSE" and such stupidities. And there aren't even boobs on the second page.


----------



## spudmunkey (Jul 2, 2019)

Andromalia said:


> Youtube is more or less turning into the gutter press nowadays. Now they're putting titles on the thumbnails with completely-not-clickbaity-sentences such as "THE SAD TRUTH ABOUT...", "WHAT COMPANY X HIDES FROM YOU", "EXCLUSIVE INFO YOU WON'T SEE ANYWHERE ELSE" and such stupidities. And there aren't even boobs on the second page.



"The thing everybody is missing...", and then proceeds to talk about something that's mentioned in everything but the most surface-level coverage.


----------



## r33per (Jul 3, 2019)

spudmunkey said:


> "The thing everybody is missing...", and then proceeds to talk about something that's mentioned in everything but the most surface-level coverage.


The thing everyone is missing is that the question "But Is It Authentic?" is going to take over from "But Does It Djent?"


----------



## ArtDecade (Jul 3, 2019)

r33per said:


> The thing everyone is missing is that the question "But Is It Authentic?" is going to take over from "But Does It Djent?"



Nothing should djent.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 3, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> God, seeing EVERY SINGLE YouTuber pushing videos on this is so annoying



Influencer culture found it's way into the guitar community and it fucking blows. Had to unfollow some youtubers because they were getting their head up their own ass about it.


----------



## spudmunkey (Jul 3, 2019)

I assume you mean "unfollow"?


----------



## Ataraxia2320 (Jul 3, 2019)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Influencer culture found it's way into the guitar community and it fucking blows. Had to unfollow some youtubers because they were getting their head up their own ass about it.



Most guitar youtubers have turned into infomercials for the products they are pushing.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 3, 2019)

Ataraxia2320 said:


> Most guitar youtubers have turned into infomercials for the products they are pushing.



I'd settle for a review of a pedal or guitar that actually lists cons for once. Not just a demo of it with the company's propaganda being regurgitated. "Amp like tones" and "touch sensitive" is every dirt pedal ever now.


----------



## Vyn (Jul 3, 2019)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Influencer culture found it's way into the guitar community and it fucking blows. Had to unfollow some youtubers because they were getting their head up their own ass about it.



This is why the only Guitar-related channel I follow now is @Ola Englund.


----------



## couverdure (Jul 4, 2019)

Something something ERNIE BALL MUSIC MAN GUITARS ARE THE BEST GUITARS EVER AND I BET YOU CAN'T AFFORD ONE

The way they send their guitars for YouTube guitarists to show them off for free really bugs me, but at least the testimonies from non-sponsored players are mostly very positive, unlike some certain popular guitar brand that's also made in the USA.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 4, 2019)

couverdure said:


> Something something ERNIE BALL MUSIC MAN GUITARS ARE THE BEST GUITARS EVER AND I BET YOU CAN'T AFFORD ONE.



I'm kind out of the loop but i feel like i know who this is.  



Vyn said:


> This is why the only Guitar-related channel I follow now is @Ola Englund.



There's actually some other great YTs out there. Plague Scythe Studio, Rabea, ArnoldPlaysGuitar... Some guys that either are fucking amazing players, give great information/unbiased reviews, or don't have egos the size of their studio racks they barely even know how to use.


----------



## couverdure (Jul 4, 2019)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> I'm kind out of the loop but i feel like i know who this is.


There's some popular names who have done it such as Jared Dines, Stevie T, Music is Win, but Fluff is the worst offender since he actually got a few custom guitars and showed them off every other week. He also came up with the new Mammoth Slinky set, so there's actually something going behind the scenes between Ernie Ball and him.


----------



## alekosh (Jul 4, 2019)

Every youtuber is like news channels. We are clever in identifying motives behind videos or a quick research does the trick. Knowing that is easy to follow and avoid misinformation. Critical judgement is pretty useful in everything in life as it gives you a reasonable perspective. No need to bash them as at least they put in a lot of effort and hard work. I hugely follow Ola and Rabea because i trust their judgement and they clearly state affiliations. I watch others when i have time


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Jul 4, 2019)

My favorite music YouTube channel is SMG. Constantly bags on how bad drum samples are, then can't pick them out in half of the critique my mix entries. Bags on line 6 spider amps and talks up bias, then provides audio demos where the spider sounds okay and bias sounds like scratchy assholes. His "unbiased gear reviews" are laughably biased. I recall him giving legator a crazy good review, where arnoldplaysguitar seems more in line with the general consensus. (And not unfairly so.)

This is horrendously off topic, though. I do hate the flood of identical videos. 900 different people saying the same damn thing. I want to keep up to date with relevant information, but I don't need 10 different videos telling me the open book wasn't gibson, lp shape was done before, etc.


----------



## narad (Jul 4, 2019)

Vyn said:


> This is why the only Guitar-related channel I follow now is @Ola Englund.



Ola and That Pedal Show. Forget the rest.


----------



## beerandbeards (Jul 4, 2019)

r33per said:


> The thing everyone is missing is that the question "But Is It Authentic?" is going to take over from "But Does It Djent?"



But is it Authdjentic?


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 4, 2019)

couverdure said:


> There's some popular names who have done it such as Jared Dines, Stevie T, Music is Win, but Fluff is the worst offender since he actually got a few custom guitars and showed them off every other week. He also came up with the new Mammoth Slinky set, so there's actually something going behind the scenes between Ernie Ball and him.



Fluff was the one i was gonna say. I remember when he got salty as fuck when people were saying the Cutlass bass he got was just a more expensive P bass.


----------



## Exchanger (Jul 4, 2019)

narad said:


> Ola and That Pedal Show. Forget the rest.



No love for Samurai Guitarist ?


----------



## Andromalia (Jul 4, 2019)

couverdure said:


> He also came up with the new Mammoth Slinky set, so there's actually something going behind the scenes between Ernie Ball and him.


Well apparently he managed to get into tjheir heads that the 24p of the "not even Slinky" set was an abomination, which is, honestly, a win for everybody. He's also right that premade string sets are often weird, especially for lower tunings, as if the people picked gauges at random. I'll try a set because the gauges he picked actually make sense. Sure, they won't work for everyone but it can't be worse than 7 string sets with a 52.


----------



## narad (Jul 4, 2019)

Exchanger said:


> No love for Samurai Guitarist ?



Good but unnecessary. 

I mean I just watch this stuff purely for information content. Ola knows just about all there is about metal tone. TPS guys know / explore all there is about other tones. The fact that they're all hilarious is just a bonus -- I'd watch Ola's channel even if it was just Ben Stein reading a transcript of everything Ola would say, just because I still learn so much from the content.


----------



## Vyn (Jul 4, 2019)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> I'm kind out of the loop but i feel like i know who this is.
> 
> 
> 
> There's actually some other great YTs out there. Plague Scythe Studio, Rabea, ArnoldPlaysGuitar... Some guys that either are fucking amazing players, give great information/unbiased reviews, or don't have egos the size of their studio racks they barely even know how to use.



I find Plague to be a little grating at times. He does go FULL in depth though so if you want every nitty gritty EQ curve it's there. Haven't watched much Rabea. Arnold just bangs on about fretwork like it's the most important thing on the planet and that several people died because a manufacturer didn't PERFECTLY dress the frets (seriously, if you can afford $$$$$ for a custom just take it to a guitar tech ffs).


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 4, 2019)

narad said:


> Ola and That Pedal Show. Forget the rest.



TPS Mick and Dan are great. And they are super obvious when they don't like something. There was one where they looked at eachother, muttered "huh", and then switched pedals lol. Plus it's great because they actually A/B similar pedals instead of just one-off post-production music videos. They show you can have humility, be fun, not be negative, but still be informative.

The rest...

I also really like the Captain and Danish Pete from Andertons (not Chappers). The Captain is usually very straight forward when it comes to what gear he is hawking in the store, and I like that they regularly demo cheaper stuff and show how something like an Epi can be as good (or even better) than a Gibson. Chappers always has shred tone and 3NPS nonsense no matter what he is demoing. Know your audience and gear, mate. Rabea>Chappie.

Brett Kingman is great IMO too because he usually lets the gear speak for itself. I wish he would be more negative when necessary, but I feel like I get the best in-the-room feel for gear with him.

Pete Thorn is the master of demoing _and_ teaching you how to actually use the gear properly. Why is he the only one to figure out that you can just use a looper to record a sample and then be hands-free to demo the pedal controls and tones??? (Or have a second person there) I hate the let me play and turn knobs at same time BS lol.

I still like Mike Hermans, but his videos are all the same and feature verbatim the company's propaganda. You have to forward to the end to see the pedal without a ton of post processing.

Troglys is painful because dude just can't play, but he's so knowledgable.

Ola is great if you want to see how someone can show you how to adjust every piece of gear to sound like him.

Fluff I don't mind. I guess I'm out of the loop as to the hate? Please elaborate!

Stevie T... just no. Every time he talks or makes a stupid face I want to punch a kitten. He's everything that sucks about his generation and I wish he would figure out whatever dosage of Adderall he needs and then eat the whole bottle.

Darrel Braun... yeah.


----------



## MetalHex (Jul 4, 2019)

I can only stomach listening to a british accent for so long. Thats why I dont watch to many Andertons/Chappers videos. But Rabaea is an amazing player so I make exceptions for him.

I dont care for Fluff because I dont like the tones he gets.

Ola ftw because he doesnt BS around with clean tones for half the video he gets right into the meat and potatoes.


----------



## Mathemagician (Jul 4, 2019)

Andromalia said:


> Well apparently he managed to get into tjheir heads that the 24p of the "not even Slinky" set was an abomination, which is, honestly, a win for everybody. He's also right that premade string sets are often weird, especially for lower tunings, as if the people picked gauges at random. I'll try a set because the gauges he picked actually make sense. Sure, they won't work for everyone but it can't be worse than 7 string sets with a 52.



Every since I was a young wannabe shredder I have wanted a 10-48 set for E standard tuning. But they only had a fucking 11-48. What the shit tuning is that even for?

And FINALLY this year they put out a ..... 10.5-48 set. 

So. Fucking. Close. 

I still have to use 10-52 because i’m Not away of an EB or D’ad set of 10-48 or maybe 10-50.


----------



## Bdtunn (Jul 4, 2019)

Mathemagician said:


> Every since I was a young wannabe shredder I have wanted a 10-48 set for E standard tuning. But they only had a fucking 11-48. What the shit tuning is that even for?
> 
> And FINALLY this year they put out a ..... 10.5-48 set.
> 
> ...



Go to string joy and make your own set, they are fantastic strings!


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 4, 2019)

Mathemagician said:


> Every since I was a young wannabe shredder I have wanted a 10-48 set for E standard tuning. But they only had a fucking 11-48. What the shit tuning is that even for?
> 
> And FINALLY this year they put out a ..... 10.5-48 set.
> 
> ...



I gotchu fam


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 4, 2019)

You can order NYXL single strings to configure custom sets. I had to do this with my "baritone" 25.5" Tremonti because I wasnt digging the 14-68 (iirc) stock string set lol..


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Jul 4, 2019)

#Au djentique.



USMarine75 said:


> You can order NYXL single strings to configure custom sets. I had to do this with my "baritone" 25.5" Tremonti because I wasnt digging the 14-68 (iirc) stock string set lol..



That is thiccccc


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 4, 2019)

The906 said:


> #Au djentique.
> 
> 
> 
> That is thiccccc



I think Tremonti and Paul Reed Smith were just trolling us buyers.


----------



## couverdure (Jul 4, 2019)

Mathemagician said:


> Every since I was a young wannabe shredder I have wanted a 10-48 set for E standard tuning. But they only had a fucking 11-48. What the shit tuning is that even for?
> 
> And FINALLY this year they put out a ..... 10.5-48 set.
> 
> ...


EB does have a new 10-48 set that came out months ago.





Also Dunlop has their Heavy Core 10-48 set (plus a 60 for the 7-string one) with the same gauges for a long time now.

I was kinda confused when you said there's a 10.5-48 set until I found out they also just released this one along with the Mammoth Slinky and the Primo Slinky sets.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jul 5, 2019)

I have to buy three sets of Elixirs for two guitars because I use 9-46 and 10-49. E and Eb respectively on 25.5" scale length guitars. 9-42 is too light and rubbery; 10-52 is too taut and bulky. 10-46 is alright, but using 9-46 in E has a certain feel that's closer in Eb with 10-49 rather than 10-46. I also like to bump up the 3rd string a gauge. 18 instead of 17, and so on. 

Something like these, if memory serves:
9-11-17-26-36-46
10-13-18-28-38-49

Would prefer a 12 gauge B string for the 9 set, but not worth it. Close enough for rock n roll.


----------



## Lukhas (Jul 5, 2019)

Mathemagician said:


> Every since I was a young wannabe shredder I have wanted a 10-48 set for E standard tuning. But they only had a fucking 11-48. What the shit tuning is that even for?
> 
> And FINALLY this year they put out a ..... 10.5-48 set.
> 
> ...


As mentioned by others, Ernie just made one and Dunlop also does, the Heavy Core "Heavy" set which I'm using.





La Bella also makes sets of 10-48; apparently I've tried it since Thomann tells me I've bought one, but I don't even remember actually playing that.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Jul 5, 2019)

narad said:


> Ola and That Pedal Show. Forget the rest.



I'm a big fan of Arnold too but he does sound a little same-y from time to time.



USMarine75 said:


> I think Tremonti and Paul Reed Smith were just trolling us buyers.



You _think_? That they were trolling with the 25.5" 'baritone'? 
It's a cool guitar but man, it's funny how they handled it. Didn't know they shipped with exxtra thiccboi strings too.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 5, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> You _think_? That they were trolling with the 25.5" 'baritone'?
> It's a cool guitar but man, it's funny how they handled it. Didn't know they shipped with exxtra thiccboi strings too.



But in the end it crushes so I cant complain. More so with those ridiculous 14s, but Ive never heard another guitar with that much punch. I just still cant bring myself to call it a baritone lol.


----------



## Exchanger (Jul 10, 2019)

So the EU ruled the design wasn't counterfeit, but what about the name ?
In which case, new lawsuit pending 

https://www.tudelft.nl/en/ae/flying-v/

(can't find the quote again but the name is actually inspired by the guitar)


----------



## cwhitey2 (Jul 10, 2019)

Go Dean!

https://guitar.com/news/dean-seeks-...du6o7n7BjBvqxoAZU03mbMSdrVFwt1fngzHALOH8UTWOg


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 10, 2019)

“To suggest that famous musicians like Michael Schenker, Eric Peterson, Christian Martucci, and John Connolly have openly promoted, played, and endorsed spurious, ‘counterfeit’ products on stages across the world is absurd.”

^ the rock n roll hall of fame right there lol

/lawsuit


----------



## cwhitey2 (Jul 10, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


> “To suggest that famous musicians like Michael Schenker, Eric Peterson, Christian Martucci, and John Connolly have openly promoted, played, and endorsed spurious, ‘counterfeit’ products on stages across the world is absurd.”
> 
> ^ the rock n roll hall of fame right there lol
> 
> /lawsuit


I hope the counter suit against Gibson for threatening retailers gets them in trouble.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 10, 2019)

cwhitey2 said:


> I hope the counter suit against Gibson for threatening retailers gets them in trouble.



Oh definitely! I actually feel like there is some merit to their case based on stuff like the troglys video... but that stuff is egregious. 

I was just laughing that they invoked those holy names lol. I mean Schenker is a rock god and I'm a huge Testament fan... and of course Whitey Bulger's ex-FBI guy was known to wail on the 6-string back in the day... but I think they could have omitted that part of their legal argument.


----------



## prlgmnr (Jul 10, 2019)

Now Gibson will sue them for copying their idea of suing other guitar manufacturers.


----------



## possumkiller (Jul 10, 2019)

To be completely honest, fuck Gibson.


----------



## ixlramp (Jul 10, 2019)

Yes, cancelling those trademarks is the right thing to do, and Gibson should support this after not defending them for so long.
If true, threatening innocent dealerships is disgusting behaviour.

I dislike Gibson even more than Fender, partly for buying Steinberger and reducing them to a single-design travel guitar company.
If Gibson had actually created good new designs in the last 40 years they wouldn't have to be so protective of their old designs. They're thrashing about as they die.

That Dean V has different V angles, wing thickness and headstock.
Besides, trademarking such a characterless geometric shape is rather silly, like trademarking the circle.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 10, 2019)

And here I was just starting to like Gibson again after trying some of their 2019 guitars and being blown away. I played an all mahogany SG for $999 that almost went home with me it was so good. Dammit, why do you have to be so difficult to love, Gibson?


----------



## possumkiller (Jul 10, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


> And here I was just starting to like Gibson again after trying some of their 2019 guitars and being blown away. I played an all mahogany SG for $999 that almost went home with me it was so good. Dammit, why do you have to be so difficult to love, Gibson?


The problem isn't the guitars themselves. The problem is the already wealthy but still greedy as fuck money grabbing genuine pieces of shit that always wind up running things.


----------



## ArtDecade (Jul 10, 2019)

I can't believe people are defending Dean... their QC is just as shit as Gibson. Neither one of them can make a V worth playing.


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Jul 10, 2019)

I don't so much support Dean as much as I'm against Gibson trying to throw their dick around. Dean is incredibly "meh," but Gibson is expensive pretentious "meh."


----------



## BlackMastodon (Jul 10, 2019)

I don't think I'll ever buy a Dean guitar, always thought the Razerbacks played as bad as they look, but I'll root for them when Gibson tries to be the big dick in town and screw them over based on complete bullshit.


----------



## Mathemagician (Jul 10, 2019)

I just like that dean offers a scalloped fret Flying V so I want them to keep being dean.


----------



## Bdtunn (Jul 10, 2019)

I’ll defend dean USA built guitars 
But imports is a different story....


----------



## possumkiller (Jul 16, 2019)

Someone really needs to start a boutique shop building nothing but Gibson clones and call the brand Authentic. Use the same Gibson fonts on the headstock and everything.


----------



## Ataraxia2320 (Jul 16, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> The problem isn't the guitars themselves. The problem is the already wealthy but still greedy as fuck money grabbing genuine pieces of shit that always wind up running things.



The problem has been the guitars themselves though. Gibson got their bad rep through bad designs (Handstock design needs a string butler to hold tuning properly, break angle is so extreme that people say it's not a true Gibson until the neck breaks and is repaired) along with horrible QC.


----------



## crossthestyx (Jul 16, 2019)

Gibson's are the cheapest made guitars and yet the most expensive. They've been living off their name for far too long, with ZERO innovation and shitty business planning. It's probably cheaper to sue at this point then to admit they've been swirling the toilet bowl for years because of terrible company management. When the Chinese can build your guitar for $250 bucks (Chibsons), and you're still pawning of your "Standard" dinosaurs to the general public for $2500 bucks, and referring to it as a "piece of furniture", you're not a guitarists guitar making company in my opinion. And that's why companies like Dean, ESP, and Schecter have taken over the market. A guitar's play ability is far more important than prestigious-ness that collects dust in the corner to impress your drunk date to a real guitar player.


----------



## spudmunkey (Jul 16, 2019)

crossthestyx said:


> Gibson's are the cheapest made guitars and yet the most expensive.



They are carved-top, set-neck guitars, mostly made from mahogany. How is that cheaper than an alder/maple bolt-on with pickguard-mounted electronics?



crossthestyx said:


> When the Chinese can build your guitar for $250 bucks (Chibsons), and you're still pawning of your "Standard" dinosaurs to the general public for $2500 bucks



Have...have you actually seen a "Chibson"?

Gibson guitars don't get the same freedom of questionably-sourced woods from all over the world as those "Chibsons". Which are often veneer tops instead of solid caps. But more than anything, it's the labor. And not just the per-hour cost of it in other countries (which is vastly different), and not just the additional costs that the US companies have to bear (like health insurance, etc), but also just the amount of time they spend on their guitars. Watch any "____ looks at a fake gibson" video on youtube, and they will all point out rushed fretwork, mis-aligned top bookmatch seams, glue squeeze out that wasn't taken care of, poorly-taped-off finish lines, poor-quality soldering, etc...and all of that doesn't even take into account cheap/garbage hardware. Wobbly tuners, pitting finishes, tarnishing frets, messily-routed fretboards will fill packed arund the inlays, etc.

I'm not saying Gibson are flawless, but, c'mon...Any good "chibson" took a lot of work to get to that point. Work that wasn't done in the factory.

I'm also not saying they are excellent value. But they aren't the "rip off" you claim...until you get to the ones that are meant as luxury items.



crossthestyx said:


> And that's why companies like Dean[...]have taken over the market.



You know what, I apologize. I took it to assume that you were from planet earth, but clearly you're existing outside of my light cone.

ESPs and Schecters from their US or Japan-made lines are still super rare here. Nobody's taking over anything. There are tons of LTDs and WMI Schecters out there, but that's nothing ANY US company can do up against, price-wise.


----------



## possumkiller (Jul 17, 2019)

spudmunkey said:


> rushed fretwork, mis-aligned top bookmatch seams, glue squeeze out that wasn't taken care of, poorly-taped-off finish lines, poor-quality soldering, etc...and all of that doesn't even take into account cheap/garbage hardware. Wobbly tuners, pitting finishes, tarnishing frets, messily-routed fretboards will fill packed arund the inlays, etc.


I've had the same on real Gibsons. I bought a 3 pickup faded flying v and when it arrived only the middle pickup worked. I've played a 1700$ flying v brand new off the rack that played the note of the 8th fret when you hit the 7th fret on the low e. My friend's lp standard will not stay in tune throughout a song. I've played a 2500$ lp with painted over glue squeezed out of the neck joint. My faded v had rough belt sander marks all around the neck joint that were painted over.

Gibson is capable of making great guitars because I've played a few. And most Gibsons can be made into amazing guitars if you are willing to spend a little time and money fixing it up. But so can an eipiphone or a chibson...


----------



## manu80 (Jul 17, 2019)

you guys are bit hard on Dean. The ones i had were pretty good, , Got a cadillac and a Trans amber mustaine, (namm one), finish is really good, no problem in any way ....
and yeah the USA models kick ass also.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 18, 2019)

crossthestyx said:


> Gibson's are the cheapest made guitars and yet the most expensive. They've been living off their name for far too long, with ZERO innovation and shitty business planning. It's probably cheaper to sue at this point then to admit they've been swirling the toilet bowl for years because of terrible company management. When the Chinese can build your guitar for $250 bucks (Chibsons), and you're still pawning of your "Standard" dinosaurs to the general public for $2500 bucks, and referring to it as a "piece of furniture", you're not a guitarists guitar making company in my opinion. And that's why companies like Dean, ESP, and Schecter have taken over the market. A guitar's play ability is far more important than prestigious-ness that collects dust in the corner to impress your drunk date to a real guitar player.



So much BS to unpack here...

The Gibson price range is 999-2500 for SG and 999-3k for LP. Which is either the same or lower than their comps. Especially when you consider $1500 is for a MIA Gibson vs a MII Ibanez. A direct comp is the innovative ESP Viper, at $1800 for MIJ E2 and $3500 for MIA version. The "Gibsons are the most expensive BS" is factually far from true.

Zero innovation? Am I missing all of the patents on Ibanez and LTD as of late?

So fuck Gibson with their zero innovation, but Dean and LTD and Schecter are leading the way? With their copies of other designs? Mmkay. Literally all of those companies got their start by NOT innovating. and lead the way in NOT innovating to this day.

"Gibsons are the cheapest made guitars". Too dumb for me to comment on. Moving on.

I remember when MIK guitars were garbage. They were starter guitars with bad fretwork, dead wood, and god awful locally machined parts. They didnt intonate and just sounded like shit. Now MIK guitars are generally pretty great.

I just bought an MII G&L that kicks ass for $400. So fuck Suhr and Anderson then for their $3k garbage right? What innovation has Suhr done? They literally make ripoff Fender clones and they dont play or sound any better than a $1900 Fender American Elite.

Oh well come at me bro. Your tired tropes are tired. I'll be the one playing dad rock on my Gibsons before court later today... or maybe some John Mayer, since he is the greatest guitarist alive and smokes Jason Richardson...


----------



## possumkiller (Jul 18, 2019)

Idk man all of this douchebaggery from Gibson makes me want to put the Greco truss rod cover back on my flying v and put the Gibson one in the trash.


----------



## JD27 (Jul 18, 2019)

couverdure said:


> EB does have a new 10-48 set that came out months ago.



Picked up the new 10-48s a few months ago for my Charvels. They are perfect for 1/2 step down and D standard. I prefer them over the Dunlop strings. Still use the 10-52s for Drop C though.


Back on topic though, that counter suit from Dean is awesome!


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 18, 2019)

Saying something is better than Dunlop's guitar strings is an extremely low bar.


----------



## John (Jul 18, 2019)

Hey everybody, Mark Agnesi here for Gibson guitars
Today I want to take a few minutes to talk to you about originality; what it means to "Play Authentic"
you know, for 125 years now, Gibson has been shaping sound across generations, genres of music and genders, all the way back to the turn of the turn of the century with Orville Gibson's innovations in mandolin building through the 1920s with Lloyd Loar's perfection of archtop instruments, to our fabulous flat top instruments of the 30s, 40s, 50s and 60s, which helped shape sound across all genres, to our semi-hollowbody and solid body instruments of the late 1950s and early 1960s which helped define the sound of rock n roll. Gibson's been innovating the ️whole️ time.
and we want to talk to you today about some of those innovations. First, the one I got in my hands, the big daddy of them all, the ‍‍Les‍‍ Paul. This single cutaway, carved maple top design originally came out in 1952 and is as iconic to rock n roll as the name it bearson the headstock. In 1960 the introduction of the Gibson SG, with its double-horned body. It's never been out of the production. The only Gibsonsolid body guitar to be in production since it's creation in 1960. We have the mouse-eared, F-holed, semi-hollow body design with the ES-335, 345 and 355 that graced so many albums of the 50s and 60s. All the way to Ted McCarty's most iconic designs in the futuristic series, like the Flying V and Explorers, some of the most copied and imitated guitars of all time.
And not just our body shape, but things like the shape of the headstock, that open book design or mustache kinda design. The split diamond inlay you'd find on the ‍‍Les‍‍ Paul Custom or ES-355, or that crown, or some people call it "pineapple" inlay that you'd find on the 335 or the Gibson SG. All of those innovations and design elements are trademarks of Gibson.
Why does this matter? Well for a few reasons. People ask us a lot about forgeries and counterfeit guitars. you know, often of lower craftsmanship, coming in from overseas, but there's some common misconceptions about what a forgery is and what trademark infringement is.
Any ️copy️ of anyone of those designs that we've named is in fact by definition a counterfeit Gibson guitar. What that means for a ‍‍couple‍‍ different ‍‍people‍‍, to the manufacturers out there, we want you to know that you've been warned. We're looking out and we're here to protect our iconic legacy and the️ designs️ that we've ️created️ over generations
To all the people in the ️film️ and television and commercial industry. Reach out to us. We want to work with you. stop taping over the logos on the headstocks. By the way, that's not enough to get out of a trademark infringement anyway. Contact us. We want to work with you. We want to be partners with you. We want to help bring authenticity to your projects.
And this isn't about us trying to be bullies or trying to stifle the boutique marketplace. This is about protecting our legacy. 125 years of ️innovation and relevance in music. It's worth protecting, and it's our job and we will continue to fight to protect our intellectual property.
And to all the players out there what does this mean? Well it goes back to what we started talking about. being original and playing authentic. Gibson's been investing money in our factories in our team of people working in the content we're creating to make theGibsonexperience the best and make the best guitars we've made in 125 years.
And it's our goal for the next 125 years that we will be the most relevant, the most loved and the most played guitar brand in the world.
be original. Play Authentic and remember only aGibsonis good enough.


----------



## Kaura (Jul 18, 2019)

Now those are some spicy memes.


----------



## John (Jul 18, 2019)

Kaura said:


> Now those are some spicy memes.



It wouldn't let me add all of the emojis I actually had for fully poking fun at the deleted Agnesi video, but this will suffice I suppose.


----------



## Mathemagician (Jul 18, 2019)

I mean even in the script they stop describing innovations as of the ‘60’s. Did no one at Play Authentic^TM proofread that? 

Very roundabout way of saying “We’ve been around 125 years but stopped innovating 55 years ago”.


----------



## John (Jul 18, 2019)

Mathemagician said:


> I mean even in the script they stop describing innovations as of the ‘60’s. Did no one at Play Authentic^TM proofread that?
> 
> Very roundabout way of saying “We’ve been around 125 years but stopped innovating 55 years ago”.



Yeah, it looks like it wasn't very well thought out from start to finish. From riding on the coattails of past achievements and stagnation, to Mark's passive aggressive tone (he sounded like he was about to cry in a couple instances), all the way to their subsequent actions. I don't see any reason why I should actually support this sinking ship of sorts.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jul 18, 2019)




----------



## Mathemagician (Jul 18, 2019)

Also who is this young Marcus Agnesius? I feel like I’ve seen him before.


----------



## John (Jul 18, 2019)

Mathemagician said:


> Also who is this young Marcus Agnesius? I feel like I’ve seen him before.



He used to work over at Norm's Rare Guitars and has some stuff on YouTube for them. He was hired by Gibson a few months ago, so this legacy talk that he's spewing out as if he's part of it doesn't really check out.

For all this lawsuit crap, here's an old clip of him with an Ibanez Rocket Roll lawsuit V. Funny how he's not pissing and moaning about it at the time he wasn't on Gibson's payroll as their corporate toolbag puppet.


----------



## GRUNTKOR (Jul 18, 2019)

Mathemagician said:


> Also who is this young Marcus Agnesius? I feel like I’ve seen him before.


Some douchebag who used to work at Norm's Rare Guitars in Tarzana. He appeared in YouTube videos for them and came across as a prick even then


----------



## spudmunkey (Jul 18, 2019)

How has nobody brought up the Gibson Authorized Partnership Program? (AKA Fine Brother React World, and Nintendo Creators Program...)

https://www.guitarworld.com/news/su...ounces-the-new-authorized-partnership-program

Gibson: "You're using our designs. We're going to sue you."
Rest of the world: "Yes we are, but no you can't."
Gibson: "Cmon, guys...no fair...ok, how about...you can still use our designs, buuuuut....you agree to pay us anyway."
Rest of the world: "...."
Gibson: "But only a couple of you. Everyone else, we'll sue."
Rest of the world:


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jul 18, 2019)

johnucol said:


> He used to work over at Norm's Rare Guitars and has some stuff on YouTube for them. He was hired by Gibson a few months ago, so this legacy talk that he's spewing out as if he's part of it doesn't really check out.
> 
> For all this lawsuit crap, here's an old clip of him with an Ibanez Rocket Roll lawsuit V. Funny how he's not pissing and moaning about it at the time he wasn't on Gibson's payroll as their corporate toolbag puppet.



I love how he calls it the "lawsuit copy" and then in another video specifies that the only thing that Gibson could really enforce anything on is the headstock and that people misuse the "lawsuit" term. What a dolt.


----------



## MFB (Jul 18, 2019)

I think that "post" gave me cancer


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 18, 2019)

Gibson: PLAY AUTHENTIC!!!!
Also Gibson: Check out these Strat clones from our sub-brand at Winter NAMM


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jul 18, 2019)

Real great fucking banana headstock on that purple Kramer, Gibson.

Watch these goofy ass clowns go after ESP, when they are producing guitars in the same factories as ESP's sub-brand does, when ESP used to produce the fucking guitars of their sub-brand. What a fucking joke that'll turn out to be.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 18, 2019)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Gibson: PLAY AUTHENTIC!!!!
> Also Gibson: Check out these Strat clones from our sub-brand at Winter NAMM



Jeez, now Gibson is ripping off EVH???!!!


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jul 18, 2019)

When did they start doing Kramer HSS strats? Lol


----------



## Mathemagician (Jul 18, 2019)

The ugly Kramer body looks better with a pickgaurd at least from that angle.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jul 18, 2019)

Mathemagician said:


> The ugly Kramer body looks better with a pickgaurd at least from that angle.


I disagree.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 18, 2019)

Mathemagician said:


> The ugly Kramer body looks better with a pickgaurd at least from that angle.



The Gibson-era Kramer Focuses use standard Strat bodies. They haven't made Baretta focuses since the '80s


----------



## Kaura (Jul 19, 2019)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Gibson: PLAY AUTHENTIC!!!!
> Also Gibson: Check out these Strat clones from our sub-brand at Winter NAMM



Shiiet, a matching headstock and HSS config. I think they might have something here.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 20, 2019)

Btw for those that think you cant patent headstock designs:

https://patents.justia.com/inventor/edward-van-halen

[388117 is for the headstock, the others are for the D-tuna.]

And for those that think you can't patent guitar shapes, bodies, etc:

https://patents.justia.com/patent/D242648








https://patentcut.com/D496390

Personally, I'm kind of interested in a guitar with a cell phone slot, or perhaps a chicken tender shaped one...


----------



## BlackMastodon (Jul 20, 2019)

Bank of America has patents on guitar bodies? Also the chicken tender is shaped like a guitar, not the guitar shaped like a chicken tender. That would just be asinine.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 20, 2019)

BlackMastodon said:


> Also the chicken tender is shaped like a guitar, not the guitar shaped like a chicken tender. That would just be asinine.



Haha well now we're talking!


----------



## possumkiller (Jul 20, 2019)

Don't patents expire? Isn't that how everyone on planet Earth makes Gibson humbucker pickups? I know it's the reason Smith & Wesson aren't the only company that produces revolvers with completely bored through cylinder chambers. Gibson should start suing all the big pickup makers for making counterfeit PAFs.


----------



## MYGFH (Jul 20, 2019)

At summer NAMM this week Gibson announced this "partnership" program for indy luthiers where they offer "protection" from lawsuits. Sounds like a mob shakedown. If I were a small luthier approached by Gibson wanting money, I'd go to the FBI.


----------



## Hollowway (Jul 20, 2019)

MYGFH said:


> At summer NAMM this week Gibson announced this "partnership" program for indy luthiers where they offer "protection" from lawsuits. Sounds like a mob shakedown. If I were a small luthier approached by Gibson wanting money, I'd go to the FBI.



In a normal time, this would sound logical. "Hey, you're a respected luthier. Want to license our designs?" But given the recent actions of Gibson, it sure does look like a gang/mob thing. 
It's like a security company going to businesses and offering their security services, vs a gang offering "protection" for a fee.


----------



## Hollowway (Jul 20, 2019)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Gibson: PLAY AUTHENTIC!!!!
> Also Gibson: Check out these Strat clones from our sub-brand at Winter NAMM



As most know, I am perhaps THE most vitriolic about guitar companies stealing other guitar companies' IP. I'm frothing at the mouth whenever someone posts a Grote strandberg rip-off NGD. But, Gibson is just too two-faced about this for me to feel like they have any integrity. And, as pointed out, the guy that is the face of this used to praise copies in his previous job. He looks like he'll say anything for a buck. The whole thing is just weird.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jul 20, 2019)

MYGFH said:


> At summer NAMM this week Gibson announced this "partnership" program for indy luthiers where they offer "protection" from lawsuits. Sounds like a mob shakedown. If I were a small luthier approached by Gibson wanting money, I'd go to the FBI.


Sounds like fucking Death Wish 3. Someone modify the scene where the old woman sticks up for herself with Gibson's logo over the creeps face.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jul 20, 2019)

Hollowway said:


> In a normal time, this would sound logical. "Hey, you're a respected luthier. Want to license our designs?" But given the recent actions of Gibson, it sure does look like a gang/mob thing.
> It's like a security company going to businesses and offering their security services, vs a gang offering "protection" for a fee.


I dunno, but it seems like it kinda verges a bit close to corporate blackmail/extortion. Could be wrong though and probably am.


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Jul 20, 2019)

Broke: Iconic
Woke: Ironic


----------



## efiltsohg (Jul 31, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> When did they start doing Kramer HSS strats? Lol



1983


----------



## Exchanger (Jul 31, 2019)

Ok that's just criminal now...


----------



## gunshow86de (Jul 31, 2019)

^
Came here to post that video. Destroyed hundreds of guitars instead of donating to music schools. Gibson PR just keeps getting worse.


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Jul 31, 2019)

Firebird x icide.


----------



## Metropolis (Jul 31, 2019)

Why they had to be destroyed, is it some kind of insurance thing? Something to do with selling policies? Was donating them even possible or legal? I don't even know what is going on


----------



## Demiurge (Jul 31, 2019)

^My guess is that they're flawed beyond what could be considered "B-stock": twisted necks, huge & unrepairable flaws, etc. Hell, I've seen hobby builders smashing shit that didn't meet their standards... and that's fine. Who would want a guitar out there with their name on (or associated) with it that didn't meet a certain standard? Obviously, Gibson gets shit for bad QC, but there's obviously a limit for any builder. Is there anyone who sees that who actually thinks that other companies don't dispose of their unsellable shit?


----------



## Metropolis (Jul 31, 2019)

That option was in my thougths afterwards, but that many... jeez. Being furious about it is ridiculous too.


----------



## aesthyrian (Jul 31, 2019)

If you watch the video, there was nothing wrong with the guitars at all. They were simply a very poorly researched & marketing attempt to sell some sort of modern Gibson with all sorts of extra unnecessary electronics. The vintage snobs that are probably the only people left with any interest in buying a Gibson, had no interest in this new, "modern" addition.

So, they sat in a warehouse until Gibson shut down that warehouse when new owners and investors became involved and they decided to scrap those guitars most likely as a tax write off.

Happens in most industries, but this is still complete garbage and a serious symptom of shitty capitalism, and shitty tax code. My opinions, of course.


----------



## ixlramp (Jul 31, 2019)

Heart breaking to see that, i don't doubt those were bad guitars in many ways, and possibly too much of a technological mess to donate to anyone, but at least remove the usable hardware.
But then, many other guitar compaines may do the same.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jul 31, 2019)

What a joke. Gibson will never get a dime of my money. I'd much rather play something Japanese or Mexican anyways (ESP, LTD, EVH, Fender, etc.)


----------



## ElysianGuitars (Jul 31, 2019)

Exchanger said:


> Ok that's just criminal now...



Pretty standard stuff for guitars that don't meet standards, even for b-stock. I know Collings has a policy where every guitar that doesn't meet standards is destroyed, one of my friends has one on his wall in a frame, cut up by bandsaw into several pieces. It's a cool art piece.


----------



## spudmunkey (Jul 31, 2019)

Carvin used to have a video on youtube where they put a green-flamed top CT6 through their bandsaw. They've since deleted it, but I still remember the #oddlysatisfying sense of just how smoothly their bandsaw cut through the finished guitar...like hot wire cutting through a block of foam. It also made me realize just how shitty and not-at-all-kept-up my own power tools were.


----------



## spudmunkey (Jul 31, 2019)

dblpst


----------



## Nlelith (Jul 31, 2019)

Couldn't they at least salvage hardware/pickups?  What a waste.


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Aug 1, 2019)

Maybe it was a morale thing too. The end of the Henry J era.


----------



## chipchappy (Aug 1, 2019)

Jesus christ, couldn't there be at least _a couple _salvageable guitars they could at least donate to a school or something? What a waste, regardless of business practices.


----------



## Hollowway (Aug 1, 2019)

Apparently no one at Gibson knows how to build goodwill with the target audience. They just keep digging themselves into a hole.


----------



## possumkiller (Aug 1, 2019)

Maybe it was some employees celebrating the end of Henry's reign of tyranny? Like the people pulling down statues of Stalin?

Also those are all Firebird X guitars. Idk if you kids remember but a few years back Henry was pretending to be Steve Jobs and making some big teasers and announcements for a "game changer" at NAMM. Then there was a big Apple style reveal of this turd. It's called a Firebird but not shaped like one. It's filled up with proprietary electronics with onboard effects and recording to an SD card and stupid shit like robo tuners. It won't make a sound unless plugged into the proprietary pedal floor unit sold separately of course.

They were supposed to be $3k USD hard currency and a total of five people bought one. They were laughed at for years. A guy claiming to be an employee said the thing didn't even function as it should but Henry forced them to release it as is.


----------



## iamaom (Aug 1, 2019)

I bet Norm's Rare guitars was behind this.


----------



## InHiding (Aug 1, 2019)

The guy being interviewed gives the impression that there were no actual faults in those guitars...


----------



## Exchanger (Aug 1, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> Maybe it was some employees celebrating the end of Henry's reign of tyranny? Like the people pulling down statues of Stalin?
> 
> Also those are all Firebird X guitars. Idk if you kids remember but a few years back Henry was pretending to be Steve Jobs and making some big teasers and announcements for a "game changer" at NAMM. Then there was a big Apple style reveal of this turd. It's called a Firebird but not shaped like one. It's filled up with proprietary electronics with onboard effects and recording to an SD card and stupid shit like robo tuners. It won't make a sound unless plugged into the proprietary pedal floor unit sold separately of course.
> 
> They were supposed to be $3k USD hard currency and a total of five people bought one. They were laughed at for years. A guy claiming to be an employee said the thing didn't even function as it should but Henry forced them to release it as is.



I get it, they were obviously unsellable, but surely they could have replaced the electronics or something or at least salvage something out of it, sell them at a very low prive for parts or donate it to music shcools.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Aug 1, 2019)

It’s a write off Gibson is better off taking that money and gifting 10 times as many 300 guitars to schools

Like good solid working Epiphones. 

Because hey schools and the less fortunate don’t want your garbage anymore then you do.


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Aug 1, 2019)

They'd be largely useless to schools. Honestly, the worst part about it is the wasted pickups, wasted wood, wasted paint, and wasted man hours. 

As I recall, that was a super shitty form of the robo tuners. Not quite nearly as intuitive as the things floating around now. Like they drew power from the battery via the strings or something stupid like that. They also needed a proprietary battery to function, only lasted a few hours.

I say good riddance. On the surface it looks slimy, but I think it's for the better. Mostly, anyway... salvage those pickups, dudes.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Aug 1, 2019)

Señor Voorhees said:


> They'd be largely useless to schools. Honestly, the worst part about it is the wasted pickups, wasted wood, wasted paint, and wasted man hours.
> 
> As I recall, that was a super shitty form of the robo tuners. Not quite nearly as intuitive as the things floating around now. Like they drew power from the battery via the strings or something stupid like that. They also needed a proprietary battery to function, only lasted a few hours.
> 
> I say good riddance. On the surface it looks slimy, but I think it's for the better. Mostly, anyway... salvage those pickups, dudes.



Those Gibson’s cost like less then 10 bucks to wind. They’d waste more money having some going in there and salvaging them.


----------



## USMarine75 (Aug 1, 2019)

And here I am enjoying my Gibsons...


----------



## Demiurge (Aug 1, 2019)

I'd like know more about all these schools with electric guitar-slinging music programs that these should have been donated to. I went to a pretty good school and they couldn't deign to tune the piano.


----------



## p0ke (Aug 1, 2019)

Demiurge said:


> I'd like know more about all these schools with electric guitar-slinging music programs that these should have been donated to. I went to a pretty good school and they couldn't deign to tune the piano.



The elementary school I went to had a couple of electric guitars and basses  And that wasn't a special school in any way...


----------



## brector (Aug 1, 2019)

Demiurge said:


> I'd like know more about all these schools with electric guitar-slinging music programs that these should have been donated to. I went to a pretty good school and they couldn't deign to tune the piano.


We have a local music school for kids that can't afford instruments or lessons: https://www.joyofmusicschool.org/


----------



## narad (Aug 1, 2019)

Donation is a terrible idea as guitars can have long lives. Sure, maybe even with some problems they could be useful as donations, but then eventually that program ends and the guitars change hands. if these guitars have serious and objective flaws, they go out into the world, strengthening the association of Gibson with flawed guitars. 

Their QC drops the ball on that enough as it is already -- can you imagine how bad the rejects are going to be?


----------



## Exchanger (Aug 1, 2019)

But then if they're so shite, who greenlighted the series production ? Such a waste of man hours and materials.


----------



## BlackMastodon (Aug 1, 2019)

I'm jumping on the waste-train, too, because I feel like at least one person that had a hand in the decision-making process could've come up with a better idea than a lame PR stunt. If not donations/salvage, then at least build them up into a big-ass statue of the previous CEO and bring it to the next Burning Man. Then have the Doof Warrior from Mad Max Fury Road drive through the desert and light the bastard on fire.

That would get me to go to Burning Man.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Aug 1, 2019)

Exchanger said:


> But then if they're so shite, who greenlighted the series production ? Such a waste of man hours and materials.



You’re going to lose your shit when you find out how many 5k and over prs shreds every year.


----------



## brector (Aug 1, 2019)

narad said:


> Donation is a terrible idea as guitars can have long lives. Sure, maybe even with some problems they could be useful as donations, but then eventually that program ends and the guitars change hands. if these guitars have serious and objective flaws, they go out into the world, strengthening the association of Gibson with flawed guitars.


See my link above


----------



## narad (Aug 1, 2019)

brector said:


> See my link above



Still seems like a relevant claim. If a product isn't up to your quality standards, having it out in the world with your name on it will lower your reputation. I guess there are reasonable compromises - like stamping something like "REJECT" in a way that would be difficult to repair or something.


----------



## Fred the Shred (Aug 1, 2019)

We can go on about the ethics (or lack thereof) pertaining the destruction of these instruments forever, to be fair - it's down to waste and how justifiable it can be regarded. In the case of the Failbird X, there's also the problem of the guitars not playing at all without their dedicated controllers, which are nowhere to be seen and were apparently plagued by a fair number of issues, in what is essentially a very, very dumb idea. So let's face it: no matter our views, either Gibson was keen on investing money refurbishing all there to be more conventional standalone affairs prior to donating them or someone would be getting a poisoned gift in the form of guitars that wouldn't play at all unless you were to invest time, money, or both, sorting the electronics side.

Giving these away would likely end up being a dreadful PR move, since people managed to hate these things to the point of them the culmination of the hatred and "yup, the definitely lost it" feeling coupled with the last administration, so add that to "horrible issues" and "incomplete product" and even refurbishing the things to pristine instrument standards would come across as "time to vacate some shelves in the warehouse" or "here's our shitty scraps" in the public eye - all in all, it's the last thing Gibson wants.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Aug 1, 2019)

There also the fact that at the end of the day these are 3k+ guitars. They are each 50 dollars worth of wood and metal.


----------



## TonyFlyingSquirrel (Aug 1, 2019)

There is a reason why companies like PRS & Warmoth will saw a piece in half if it is below their prescribed tolerances.
Having such a piece out in the market place contributes to market perception, and a distinction of a "B" product very easily gets lost by the presumed private seller likely by intention in order to fraudulently drive up the selling price for increased profit. All they buyer knows is that they bough a substandard instrument with a reputable name on the headstock.

Companies like Warmoth & PRS choose not to be included in that market misperception.


----------



## Demiurge (Aug 1, 2019)

I guess there could be poor optics in donating them: "Here, charity, take our unsellable boondoggle guitars that people don't want- you're welcome". I mean, if I were a kid getting a chance to start on a nicer guitar- I'd be thrilled...


----------



## narad (Aug 1, 2019)

Demiurge said:


> I guess there could be poor optics in donating them: "Here, charity, take our unsellable boondoggle guitars that people don't want- you're welcome". I mean, if I were a kid getting a chance to start on a nicer guitar- I'd be thrilled...


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Aug 1, 2019)

I think the real travesty here is someone believed in the firebird x enough where they had this many left over. I think the wasted materials and man hours sunk into this obviously bad idea is a shame. At least the variax guitars with magnetic pickups work as a normal guitar when the battery dies. 

I honestly hate stuff that requires proprietary junk that won't exist in five years. If a part fails, you're stuck paying a premium for a nicotine stained half failing used piece. 

The real issue is that they made so damn many, and they've already had an earful about how bad they are.


----------



## chipchappy (Aug 1, 2019)

narad said:


> Donation is a terrible idea as guitars can have long lives. Sure, maybe even with some problems they could be useful as donations, but then eventually that program ends and the guitars change hands. if these guitars have serious and objective flaws, they go out into the world, strengthening the association of Gibson with flawed guitars.
> 
> Their QC drops the ball on that enough as it is already -- can you imagine how bad the rejects are going to be?



That's fair, and I was unaware of @possumkiller 's info on them being pretty much useless... so that definitely changes things. I guess I just hate the idea of an at least playable (assuming the fret ends aren't sharp etc) guitar being destroyed when it could go to some person who wouldn't otherwise be able to access musical instruments. I'm sure it's much more complex than all that, just a bummer to see so many decimated at once I guess haha


----------



## Hollowway (Aug 1, 2019)

I think some of you are missing the point here. The criticism is not that Gibson doesn’t donate all of its QC rejects to poor people. The criticism is that a company with an ongoing PR issue chose to make a spectacle of destroying guitars that, as the video said, were not suffering from poor QC. It’s an embarrassing display of a complete lack of understanding, from a marketing perspective, of how people view the company. This is a company that has not been doing well financially, and is showcasing (to someone - employees or otherwise) that they A) made a huge mistake in terms of estimating who would buy this product, and B) spend more money than necessary just to destroy the products, and C) are proud of how they waste their money. I know other companies for this - there are probably a shit ton of destroyed iPhones. But this video is just obnoxious. Whatever they were trying to show - there are better ways to show it. And for god’s sake, why promote the mistakes your company made?


----------



## Hollowway (Aug 2, 2019)

Welp, I just read more about it, and Gibson is saying these guitars had hazardous complements, could not be donated, and were based on Windows 98 or something. Idk what the hell that means  but it sounds like there was no way around it. The company than said that they take 10-20 guitars a day and destroy them because there is some minor blemish, and they don’t want anything out there except perfect instruments. I can’t comment about the state of guitars in the video, but I’m calling complete BS on the last part. I don’t doubt that they destroy guitars that don’t meet QC, but I think it’s far more than “some minor blemish.” I’ve seen those in GC. I’m sure they’re better than the “fretless wonders” from long before, but that’s quite an exaggeration.


----------



## possumkiller (Aug 2, 2019)

Idk maybe they meant starting right now they are destroying guitars with blemishes and such. Definitely not in any past time that I can remember.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Aug 2, 2019)

They made a limited edition Ace Sig, of around 300 guitars I think, during the KISS reunion era and were both releasing guitars with the wrong DiMarzio pickups as well as destroying an unknown amount for whatever reason. It's suspected at least 30 were destroyed, just because.


----------



## thedonal (Aug 2, 2019)

Well the properly outdid Pete Townshend with that move...


----------



## ArtDecade (Aug 2, 2019)

*Internet:*
"GIBSON QC IS TERRIBLE! THEY SUCK! SO EXPENSIVE! SUCKY QC!"

*Gibson: *
"This stuff is too screwed up to do anything with with. Let's destroy these rejects."

*Also The Internet: *
"GIBSON WON'T GIVE AWAY GUITARS WITH BAD QC! THEY SUCK. WE WANT THE BAD GUITARS WITH TERRIBLE QC THAT GIBSON CAN'T SELL. FOR FREE!"


----------



## BlackMastodon (Aug 2, 2019)

Nobody said -WE- want them.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Aug 2, 2019)

Dunno if the video was shared here or not, but here is a snippet of the video where they are sawing through ES style guitars. @15:52



I hope they go out of business. Wasting wood like this, in such high numbers, really pisses me off.


----------



## possumkiller (Aug 2, 2019)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Dunno if the video was shared here or not, but here is a snippet of the video where they are sawing through ES style guitars. @15:52
> 
> 
> 
> I hope they go out of business. Wasting wood like this, in such high numbers, really pisses me off.



Yeah I guess we need the government to raid them again and rescue all the wood before it can be turned into Gibsons.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Aug 2, 2019)

Isn't that the same thing PRS and Carvin does to rejects? Like, down to the bandsaw and everything?


----------



## aesthyrian (Aug 2, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> *Internet:*
> "GIBSON QC IS TERRIBLE! THEY SUCK! SO EXPENSIVE! SUCKY QC!"
> 
> *Gibson: *
> ...



Fun narrative, but you probably are aware that those Firebird X's were completely fine and playable. They were just a shitty concept and didn't sell, but they were not "defective" in any other manner than the sales and general concept of a modern Gibson with tons of unnecessary electronics powered by a proprietary battery.

So Gibson QC probably does still suck, but this is about how shitty their R&D and marketing is, not the QC.


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Aug 2, 2019)

Yup, it's not exclusive to Gibson, though I'm not gonna lie, I've never seen hundreds of the things lined up and destroyed all at once by anyone. Usually it's like one or two... Sometimes the stores even dumpster them after smashing them at the guitar company's request.

This most recent video was equal parts soul crushing and cathartic. It's a shame to see so many potential wonderful instruments get just destroyed. At the same time, they were flawed un-salvageable junk that never should have been made in the first place. Hindsight and all that, but I"m bummed that there were this many "rejects." (I'm sure they were just fine. Nothing can be done at this point, but it's really sad to see all those materials and hardware go to waste like that.




aesthyrian said:


> Fun narrative, but you probably are aware that those Firebird X's were completely fine and playable. They were just a shitty concept and didn't sell, but they were not "defective" in any other manner than the sales and general concept of a modern Gibson with tons of unnecessary electronics powered by a proprietary battery.
> 
> So Gibson QC probably does still suck, but this is about how shitty their R&D and marketing is, not the QC.



Those are my thoughts exactly. I think the guitars were functional. It's just nobody wanted them and they still had hundreds even after all these years. Gotta deal with them somehow. What remains to be seen is if the required floor units were destroyed or even manufactured as well. Maybe the guitars WERE technically functional, but if they don't have the floor units, they are firewood.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Aug 2, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> Yeah I guess we need the government to raid them again and rescue all the wood before it can be turned into Gibsons.


I was against that at the time, but if I only knew how much of a shitshow Gibson was...


----------



## Hollowway (Aug 2, 2019)

Yeah, it’s one thing to have a video of you destroying a guitar that doesn’t meet QC. That’s a great marketing move - it shows commitment to quality. But, taking hundreds of them and destroying them makes people wonder how fucked the company is that they got THAT many guitars that didn’t meet QC. And then a video that shows them carefully lined up, and a tank driving over them makes you wonder what kind of a company can’t get their quality control correct, but has the time and bandwidth to line up their guitars, source a tank, and then drive over them. Then, go collect the remains, and properly dispose of them by (presumably) separating out whatever these toxic components were.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Aug 2, 2019)

Hollowway said:


> Yeah, it’s one thing to have a video of you destroying a guitar that doesn’t meet QC. That’s a great marketing move - it shows commitment to quality. But, taking hundreds of them and destroying them makes people wonder how fucked the company is that they got THAT many guitars that didn’t meet QC. And then a video that shows them carefully lined up, and a tank driving over them makes you wonder what kind of a company can’t get their quality control correct, but has the time and bandwidth to line up their guitars, source a tank, and then drive over them. Then, go collect the remains, and properly dispose of them by (presumably) separating out whatever these toxic components were.


Solder is likely the toxic component. It's spin and preying on the ignorance of the public.


----------



## possumkiller (Aug 3, 2019)

Was there a tank? Is there another video? The one I saw had an excavator.


----------



## Hollowway (Aug 3, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> Was there a tank? Is there another video? The one I saw had an excavator.


Sorry, my bad. I meant that thing.
And it’s interesting, because now it appears that there was nothing wrong with the guitars, they just never sold, but this company took the contents of the warehouse and destroyed them, and they do this with a lot of stuff. So it wasn’t Gibson. But, Gibson is not saying, “hey, that wasn’t us.” They’re saying that they WERE below QC, and that’s why they were destroyed. But no mention of the other company. I’m totally confused on what the actual facts are.


----------



## Werecow (Aug 3, 2019)

Hollowway said:


> Sorry, my bad. I meant that thing.
> And it’s interesting, because now it appears that there was nothing wrong with the guitars, they just never sold, but this company took the contents of the warehouse and destroyed them, and they do this with a lot of stuff. So it wasn’t Gibson. But, Gibson is not saying, “hey, that wasn’t us.” They’re saying that they WERE below QC, and that’s why they were destroyed. But no mention of the other company. I’m totally confused on what the actual facts are.



"Those guitars were totally below QC, especially after that company that we are in no way affiliated with invaded the warehouse with their specially designed guitar-smashing stealth tank. PS... Buy authentic" - Gibson yesterday.


----------



## possumkiller (Aug 3, 2019)

It would've been way more awesome if it was a Sherman tank with James Garner driving with his son and a 20 year old prostitute with him.


----------



## LeviathanKiller (Aug 3, 2019)

No guys, that's just how they distress them. That batch is gonna be the new 2020 distressed Firebird X line.


----------

