# Gibson fails again.



## yellowv (Jan 11, 2013)

Ok so not only did they make the new sig for one of the Five Finger Deathpunch guys. Not only did they put this ridiculous paintjob on it, but look at the selector switch. Instead of making an Explorer without a pickguard with a rear route for the switch. They thought it would be a good idea to use $2 worth of cheap underhood auto wire covering to cover the wires in an open route and what looks like a jack plate to mount the toggle switch. Most ghetto thing I have ever seen. For shame Gibson, for shame.


----------



## Watty (Jan 11, 2013)

Is one of the members in the army or something? IIRC, one of their videos is all about the battlefield and that looks like an insignia...weird fascination if the answer's no.

Back on topic....blegh. That does look abysmal.


----------



## sell2792 (Jan 11, 2013)

Ewww,


----------



## OrsusMetal (Jan 11, 2013)

sell2792 said:


> Ewww,



I said the exact same thing.


----------



## Valnob (Jan 11, 2013)

ugly as hell


----------



## The Grief Hole (Jan 11, 2013)

Me no like


----------



## s_k_mullins (Jan 11, 2013)

In all fairness, the guitar is based on an Explorer that Jason customized himself. He pulls the pickguards off and puts that hose shit in there on several of his Explorers. 
So yeah it's ugly as fuck, but it's what he likes. Not some random shit that Gibson dreamt up.


----------



## SpaceDock (Jan 11, 2013)

I remember him having some god awful seven string too, but I can't find the pic.

I will hate them for everything they are and it's more than enough.


----------



## tedtan (Jan 11, 2013)

That looks like the (upside down) rank insignia for a US Army Seargent First Class, but that shouldn't have the star in the middle. A Seargent Major would have the star, but also an extra curved stripe (you would be able to see this on the lower horn where the switch is located if it were present).

Enlisted Soldiers Descriptions on Symbols & Insignias of the United States Army


----------



## s_k_mullins (Jan 11, 2013)

SpaceDock said:


> I remember him having some god awful seven string too, but I can't find the pic.
> 
> I will hate them for everything they are and it's more than enough.



Yeah he had some hideous 7-string from Justin Sane or something like that.
Jason is a good guitarist, but has horrible taste. I love a Gibson Explorer, but he totally fucks them up. Lol


----------



## mr_rainmaker (Jan 11, 2013)

it looks like a P***S


not me,I didn`t say it but the chick behind me says it looks like a Pe***s


----------



## yellowv (Jan 11, 2013)

s_k_mullins said:


> In all fairness, the guitar is based on an Explorer that Jason customized himself. He pulls the pickguards off and puts that hose shit in there on several of his Explorers.
> So yeah it's ugly as fuck, but it's what he likes. Not some random shit that Gibson dreamt up.



This is Gibson. Probably the most fabled guitar company in existance. You would think they would have a standard to uphold. I bet PRS or EBMM or Suhr wouldn't put plastic wire loom on a guitar for anybody, more or less a guy from FFDP. Just a new low.


----------



## Nile (Jan 11, 2013)

Fuck no.


----------



## Valnob (Jan 11, 2013)

SpaceDock said:


> I remember him having some god awful seven string too, but I can't find the pic.
> 
> I will hate them for everything they are and it's more than enough.



This ?


----------



## tedtan (Jan 11, 2013)

^ WTF is that?


----------



## 3074326 (Jan 11, 2013)

yellowv said:


> This is Gibson. Probably the most fabled guitar company in existance. You would think they would have a standard to uphold. I bet PRS or EBMM or Suhr wouldn't put plastic wire loom on a guitar for anybody, more or less a guy from FFDP. Just a new low.



I find this hilarious. You're basically bashing a company for allowing a user to customize exactly what he wants. I respect that about companies. 

If I ever want to build a custom guitar, I'm going to build a custom guitar. I don't want someone to tell me what I can or can't have on my signature guitar. Makes absolutely no fucking sense to me.

I do find this ugly as hell, but I see no issue with Gibson here. I definitely don't share the dude's taste in guitars.


----------



## BIG ND SWEATY (Jan 11, 2013)

Valnob said:


> This ?



thats a 6


----------



## s_k_mullins (Jan 11, 2013)

yellowv said:


> This is Gibson. Probably the most fabled guitar company in existance. You would think they would have a standard to uphold. I bet PRS or EBMM or Suhr wouldn't put plastic wire loom on a guitar for anybody, more or less a guy from FFDP. Just a new low.



Oh I agree, it is really shitty looking. But it's what the artist wanted. 

But then again, this is the company that made the Dusk Tiger, the Reverse Flying V, the Holy Explorer, and this...


----------



## yellowv (Jan 11, 2013)

3074326 said:


> I find this hilarious. You're basically bashing a company for allowing a user to customize exactly what he wants. I respect that about companies.
> 
> If I ever want to build a custom guitar, I'm going to build a custom guitar. I don't want someone to tell me what I can or can't have on my signature guitar. Makes absolutely no fucking sense to me.
> 
> I do find this ugly as hell, but I see no issue with Gibson here. I definitely don't share the dude's taste in guitars.



I'm bashing Gibson for building a ridiculous guitar. I have no shame in that. Yeah it's the way the artist wanted it. If I was Gibson I would say fuck you were not putting that shit on a guitar. However if I was Gibson I wouldn't be giving Jason Hook a sig model anyhow.


----------



## yellowv (Jan 11, 2013)

Also, I agree that Gibson has made some of the most ridiculous creations on the face of the earth, but when you can buy part of the guitar down the electrical aisle at Autozone I think that crosses a line


----------



## jephjacques (Jan 11, 2013)

s_k_mullins said:


> Oh I agree, it is really shitty looking. But it's what the artist wanted.
> 
> But then again, this is the company that made the Dusk Tiger, the Reverse Flying V, the Holy Explorer, and this...



Don't forget the Firebird X, arguably the dumbest guitar in the history of the instrument!


----------



## s_k_mullins (Jan 11, 2013)

jephjacques said:


> Don't forget the Firebird X, arguably the dumbest guitar in the history of the instrument!



Oh shit, I'd forgotten that one! 

Thanks for reminding me


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Jan 11, 2013)

On a positive note, I just listened to these guys a bit the other day, and some of their stuff is really good


----------



## axxessdenied (Jan 11, 2013)

Why blame Gibson for that guys terrible taste in guitars? They just made it how he wanted it...


----------



## Electric Wizard (Jan 11, 2013)

At least they put it next to the Grace Potter V so that you can see something tasteful when you look away in disgust.


----------



## s_k_mullins (Jan 11, 2013)

yellowv said:


> but when you can buy part of the guitar down the electrical aisle at Autozone I think that crosses a line



Word!  They could have thrown some gaskets and o-rings on that fucker too.


----------



## yellowv (Jan 11, 2013)

I think they should have thrown a chrome Edelbrock air cleaner on it.


----------



## yellowv (Jan 11, 2013)

axxessdenied said:


> Why blame Gibson for that guys terrible taste in guitars? They just made it how he wanted it...



They didn't have to build it. They CHOSE to.


----------



## Don Vito (Jan 11, 2013)

yellowv said:


> They didn't have to build it. They CHOSE to.



come on dude...


----------



## themike (Jan 11, 2013)

axxessdenied said:


> Why blame Gibson for that guys terrible taste in guitars? They just made it how he wanted it...



Because at the end of the day they should be making guitars that will sell well no matter whose name is attached to it. I own 2 Mark Tremonti signature guitars not because Marks name on them, but because they are amazing instruments with features that I can't get on any other model while looking normal.

Imagine if the Sully Erna LP didn't have that paint job - I bet they would sell 10x more than they will with it. Why can't Sully have that paint job on his custom shop models?  

Thats why I think the AW-7 is doing so well too - its a guitar that had features that people wanted together on one model and doesn't have any guady identifying things like an inlay or paintjob.


----------



## Miek (Jan 11, 2013)

s_k_mullins said:


> Oh I agree, it is really shitty looking. But it's what the artist wanted.
> 
> But then again, this is the company that made the Dusk Tiger, the Reverse Flying V, the Holy Explorer, and this...



That guitar is fuckin' cool


----------



## Don Vito (Jan 12, 2013)

I like it too.


----------



## Michael T (Jan 12, 2013)

It just blows my mind this guy gets a sig guitar when Bjorn Gelotte or Jesper Stromblad never did and in my opinion they far exceed this guys chops.


----------



## infernalservice (Jan 12, 2013)

th3m1ke said:


> Imagine if the Sully Erna LP didn't have that paint job - I bet they would sell 10x more than they will with it. Why can't Sully have that paint job on his custom shop models?



When I saw that guitar, I thought it was 1996 again. People do realize tribal is an abomination, right?

Also I am glad you own tasteful tremonti's and not tribal ones on a semi-similar note.


----------



## redstone (Jan 12, 2013)

Moar eye-candies


----------



## Chuck (Jan 12, 2013)

lol that FFDP dude takes the only cool Gibson and fucks it up


----------



## themike (Jan 12, 2013)

infernalservice said:


> When I saw that guitar, I thought it was 1996 again. People do realize tribal is an abomination, right?
> 
> Also I am glad you own tasteful tremonti's and not tribal ones on a semi-similar note.



Yeah, I couldn't handle that! haha 

A lot of people dont realize it but the tribal Tremonti was a limited run. The production ones came in normal production colors.


----------



## axxessdenied (Jan 12, 2013)

th3m1ke said:


> Because at the end of the day they should be making guitars that will sell well no matter whose name is attached to it. I own 2 Mark Tremonti signature guitars not because Marks name on them, but because they are amazing instruments with features that I can't get on any other model while looking normal.
> 
> Imagine if the Sully Erna LP didn't have that paint job - I bet they would sell 10x more than they will with it. Why can't Sully have that paint job on his custom shop models?
> 
> Thats why I think the AW-7 is doing so well too - its a guitar that had features that people wanted together on one model and doesn't have any guady identifying things like an inlay or paintjob.



That's why Custom Shops exist 

It's not like Gibson doesn't have another bazillion different other guitars to choose from. I don't agree with your sentiment. It's not like gibson isn't selling guitars. I'm sure they can afford to churn out some sig models even if they don't sell well just for the PR. If you want something specific. Get a CS guitar.


----------



## jephjacques (Jan 12, 2013)

Michael T said:


> It just blows my mind this guy gets a sig guitar when Bjorn Gelotte or Jesper Stromblad never did and in my opinion they far exceed this guys chops.



Gibson also makes a Chad Kroeger signature Les Paul.


----------



## axxessdenied (Jan 12, 2013)

jephjacques said:


> Gibson also makes a Chad Kroeger signature Les Paul.



Yeah... why would Gibson give such an unsuccessful musician a Signature guitar... oh wait... that's right... dude is more successful than this whole forum put together


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Jan 12, 2013)

I do think that guitar is hideous, but I actually think it's pretty cool that Gibson is willing to reproduce a personal modification like that in the guy's signature model. They aren't exactly the first to do so, either.







That's the Navigator (by ESP) Ken Yokoyama siggie, with an MSRP of nearly $6k, and friggin' _tape_ covering the selector switch.

It isn't a Gibson, though, nor is it a siggie for one of SSO's punching bags, so I haven't seen anyone bring it up until now.


----------



## ZeroS1gnol (Jan 12, 2013)

I think liking 5FDP shows poor taste, so Gibson's marketing model is pretty solid, with them offering an ugly guitar to 5FDP fans.


----------



## Mprinsje (Jan 12, 2013)

s_k_mullins said:


> Oh I agree, it is really shitty looking. But it's what the artist wanted.
> 
> But then again, this is the company that made the Dusk Tiger, the Reverse Flying V, the Holy Explorer, and this...



To be honest, i really like that!


----------



## Rojne (Jan 12, 2013)

Well, the good thing about that model is.. that we don't have to buy it!


----------



## Andromalia (Jan 12, 2013)

redstone said:


> Moar eye-candies


They seriously think about selling that many ? 

On the other hand I don't really care if they issue crap, as long as they issue good stuff along with it. But apparently an explorer without a pickguard AND without any other mod is too much to ask for. The one they did recently had a floyd.


----------



## Zado (Jan 12, 2013)

It's not ugly,just particular!!!

















KILL IT WITH FIRE!


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jan 12, 2013)

Scumbag Henry J:

Could release a classy signature like the Lzzy hale





or Bill Kellhier customs





But releases this shitty model instead.


----------



## goldsteinat0r (Jan 12, 2013)

Don't worry, you can can still get a les paul (in like 10,000 trim levels), SG, Flying V or explorer (with a pickguard), if you want a completely kickass metal guitar.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jan 12, 2013)

I don't mind Explorers without pickguards (The ESP EX, EXP, MX and Gibson and Epiphone 1984 Explorers come to mind), but for fuck's sake, cover up the damn cavity and get rid of the graphic.


----------



## celticelk (Jan 12, 2013)

yellowv said:


> They didn't have to build it. They CHOSE to.



This. I contacted Daemoness about a custom build with an oak top, and Dylan said that he wouldn't make a guitar that looked "like furniture" because he didn't want to "dilute the brand." Now, I think that's ridiculous - Shad Peters agreed to take on this build, and the curly white oak top that he's created is stunning and would never in a million years be mistaken for a bookcase - but at the end of the day, what people see is the name on the headstock, and luthiers who want to stay in business are careful about the public image associated with that name. I don't think Gibson can be careless in that respect just because of their history and the fact that they still sell a gazillion Les Pauls every year.


----------



## ILuvPillows (Jan 12, 2013)

As much as I don't like the guitar, I really don't think Gibson needs advice from people on forums on how to create successful models. Will this guitar sell? I dont know...I won't buy it, but other people might. Do people on the Gibson sig list _deserve_ their signature guitars? Well now you're just speaking like a fucking retard.

^ Gibson is already a household name, releasing new models that people don't like won't spoil that image for most people. They've already made their legacy and in doing so are now the faceless company. They will make things that provide something to the company (either financially or PR based), smaller guitar builders work in a completely different field.


----------



## ThatCanadianGuy (Jan 12, 2013)

Most people with the money to purchase a guitar like this, are quite likely to just find someone to build something similar without the gaudy electrical tape work on the front, but that's just what I think, do whatever the frig you wanna do.


----------



## MassNecrophagia (Jan 12, 2013)

At the end of the day, someone will pay money for one. I, on the other hand, wouldn't piss on it if it were on fire.


----------



## technomancer (Jan 12, 2013)

ZOMG HOW HORRIFIC they build a signature guitar exactly how that artist wanted it 

Also it doesn't look like this is a sig guitar (or if it is it's not out yet) so how cares what he wanted on his custom


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jan 12, 2013)

Its his sig guitar. It's going to retail for around $1499.

EDIT: Whoopsie me... $1899. 

http://www.zzounds.com/item--GIBDSJH


----------



## Discoqueen (Jan 12, 2013)

tedtan said:


> That looks like the (upside down) rank insignia for a US Army Seargent First Class, but that shouldn't have the star in the middle. A Seargent Major would have the star, but also an extra curved stripe (you would be able to see this on the lower horn where the switch is located if it were present).
> 
> Enlisted Soldiers Descriptions on Symbols & Insignias of the United States Army



Yeah... I think it's more skate boarder influence then anything actually military. Sure they borrowed the sgt. stripes but they kinda just tried to make it look cool with one of them sk8 board stars.


----------



## engage757 (Jan 12, 2013)

That is disgusting, but as my Daddy used to say, "There's an ass for every seat".


----------



## engage757 (Jan 12, 2013)

ILuvPillows said:


> As much as I don't like the guitar, I really don't think Gibson needs advice from people on forums on how to create successful models. Will this guitar sell? I dont know...I won't buy it, but other people might. Do people on the Gibson sig list _deserve_ their signature guitars? Well now you're just speaking like a fucking retard.
> 
> ^ Gibson is already a household name, releasing new models that people don't like won't spoil that image for most people. They've already made their legacy and in doing so are now the faceless company. They will make things that provide something to the company (either financially or PR based), smaller guitar builders work in a completely different field.




Gibson simply DOESN'T CARE. If one sig model flops, it won't hurt them at all.


----------



## BillNephew (Jan 12, 2013)

They don't give a fuck.


----------



## User Name (Jan 12, 2013)

why bash gibson?? props to them man! i cant even imagine how much money they made off of this signature model. i think its smart for them even if it looks like a piece of shit. give the guy what he wants and make shitloads of money, i see no problem there man.


----------



## ILuvPillows (Jan 12, 2013)

engage757 said:


> Gibson simply DOESN'T CARE. If one sig model flops, it won't hurt them at all.



Either you quoted the wrong guy or are simply practicing the art of reiteration .


----------



## jrstinkfish (Jan 12, 2013)

I must be really out of it -- I have never heard a FFDP song, yet I see their last album went gold.


----------



## engage757 (Jan 12, 2013)

ILuvPillows said:


> Either you quoted the wrong guy or are simply practicing the art of reiteration .




I'm not talking about image. THeir image is set, like you said. I am talking about financially, it wouldn't hurt them if they don't sell one of those.


----------



## Loomer (Jan 12, 2013)

Watty said:


> Is one of the members in the army or something? IIRC, one of their videos is all about the battlefield and that looks like an insignia...weird fascination if the answer's no.
> 
> Back on topic....blegh. That does look abysmal.



From what I understand none of them have ever seen actual combat service. They DO however see many, many sweet paychecks from USO shows, and enjoy "patriots" buying their albums without questions simply because they support the troops. 

Zoltan isn't even American. 

Also, yes. That guitar looks like ass.


----------



## Loomer (Jan 12, 2013)

th3m1ke said:


> Imagine if the Sully Erna LP didn't have that paint job - I bet they would sell 10x more than they will with it. Why can't Sully have that paint job on his custom shop models?



Sully Erna can't just settle for that design on his CS guitars because Sully Erna is an idiot. 

Granted, his fans are mouthbreathers, rednecks and worse as well, so they will probably think it's cool. 

That said, if it didn't have the graphic I would really dig it. I might even buy it, despite the fact that Sully Erna is, as stated in another thread, a repugnant neanderthal homophobe with whom I want nothing to do. The fact that his band blows is almost an afterthought here.


----------



## engage757 (Jan 12, 2013)

Loomer said:


> Sully Erna can't just settle for that design on his CS guitars because Sully Erna is an idiot.
> 
> Granted, his fans are mouthbreathers, rednecks and worse as well, so they will probably think it's cool.
> 
> That said, if it didn't have the graphic I would really dig it. I might even buy it, despite the fact that Sully Erna is, as stated in another thread, a repugnant neanderthal homophobe with whom I want nothing to do. The fact that his band blows is almost an afterthought here.




Not to get too off-topic, but Godsmack's first record kicked ass.


----------



## Loomer (Jan 12, 2013)

engage757 said:


> Not to get too off-topic, but Godsmack's first record kicked ass.



So did Burzum's. I still don't approve of the person behind it's views though. 

But still, wasn't that like.. 13 years ago? I was honestly surprised Godsmack still existed.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jan 12, 2013)

engage757 said:


> Not to get too off-topic, but Godsmack's first record kicked ass.



While getting more off topic, I liked their first 2 albums, but everything else blew, with The Oracle being the worst.


----------



## redstone (Jan 12, 2013)

They probably just have a hard time finding some famous modern metal guitarists to endorse their outdated designs and concepts.


----------



## Don Vito (Jan 12, 2013)

I wonder what Varg's signature guitar would look like.

Bear skin top with broken glass inlays? Or maybe built from the wood of Christ' cross(a Gibson original).


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jan 12, 2013)

redstone said:


> They probably just have a hard time finding some famous modern metal guitarists to endorse their outdated designs and concepts.



Given the fact that almost all guitars have been using the same designs and concepts for the past 60 years... 

And there's reason why they don't go out the box...

Have you seen the Firebird X?


----------



## redstone (Jan 12, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Given the fact that almost all guitars have been using the same designs and concepts for the past 60 years...



That's precisely their problem. Old brands need to innovate more than every others to catch _our_ attention. Plus with the recent internet rise, you can expect a brutal evolution of beginners demand. Not today but .. it's coming. Guitar noobs will soon ask you _"why not buying a true fanned pendulum 7str instead of some clones from epiphone ?"_ and .. yeah, soon.


----------



## budda (Jan 12, 2013)

Hate to break it to you guys, but the population of this forum is not the majority of purchasers of guitars.

Especially new ones.

So a guy got a signature you don't like. I passed some guy driving a 2012 BMW yesterday, I'm over it


----------



## Dawn of the Shred (Jan 12, 2013)

I love gibson and epiphones but come on man. They could do so much better then this. Just makes me sad.


----------



## Miek (Jan 12, 2013)

Loomer said:


> From what I understand none of them have ever seen actual combat service. They DO however see many, many sweet paychecks from USO shows, and enjoy "patriots" buying their albums without questions simply because they support the troops.
> 
> Zoltan isn't even American.
> 
> Also, yes. That guitar looks like ass.



AMURKA


----------



## Don Vito (Jan 12, 2013)

budda said:


> Hate to break it to you guys, but the population of this forum is not the majority of purchasers of guitars.


No way. That can't be true.


----------



## iron blast (Jan 12, 2013)

I would say that this is true to an extent but most guitarist do like alot of similar things. Its safe to say if a large majority here dislike something that a good amount of guitarist in general will be on the same page IMHO.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jan 12, 2013)

iron blast said:


> Its safe to say if a large majority here dislike something that a good amount of guitarist in general will be on the same page IMHO.



One exception:


----------



## technomancer (Jan 12, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Its his sig guitar. It's going to retail for around $1499.
> 
> EDIT: Whoopsie me... $1899.
> 
> Gibson Jason Hook M-4 Sherman Explorer Electric Guitar at zZounds



Cool, on a quick google I missed it.

That said, still, who cares. It's a sig guitar for a guitarist for a band with 3 gold albums  Not my cup of tea, but neither is a lot of stuff guys on here go nuts over


----------



## themike (Jan 12, 2013)

technomancer said:


> Not my cup of tea



TEA SUCKS BRO


----------



## Seanthesheep (Jan 12, 2013)

...... k cool...........



now how about that matt heafy sig?


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jan 12, 2013)

Seanthesheep said:


> now how about that matt heafy sig?



This.
I want a 7-string Les Paul Custom.


----------



## budda (Jan 12, 2013)

iron blast said:


> I would say that this is true to an extent but most guitarist do like alot of similar things. Its safe to say if a large majority here dislike something that a good amount of guitarist in general will be on the same page IMHO.



Im calling shenanigans over les paul owners alone


----------



## technomancer (Jan 12, 2013)

th3m1ke said:


> TEA SUCKS BRO



Indeed it's all about the coffee 



ok enough OT


----------



## engage757 (Jan 12, 2013)

budda said:


> Hate to break it to you guys, but the population of this forum is not the majority of purchasers of guitars.
> 
> Especially new ones.
> 
> So a guy got a signature you don't like. I passed some guy driving a 2012 BMW yesterday, I'm over it



Hey, I have a BMW!


----------



## Danukenator (Jan 12, 2013)

It's not pretty but I think people are overstating how bad it is. The graphic actually doesn't look to bad, it's the tubing that makes it a little tacky.


----------



## sniperfreak223 (Jan 12, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> One exception:



Still don't get all the TOM hate?


----------



## Galeus708 (Jan 13, 2013)

sniperfreak223 said:


> Still don't get all the TOM hate?



I can't speak for anyone else on the forum, especially due to being very new here, but for me, the fact that you can't adjust the action on each string individually annoys me.

Other than that, they're fine, though I prefer a Fender flat mount, or the PRS tremolo.


----------



## redstone (Jan 13, 2013)

Fixed 


Babicz Full Contact Hardware Tune-O-Matic Installation - YouTube


----------



## budda (Jan 13, 2013)

Galeus708 said:


> I can't speak for anyone else on the forum, especially due to being very new here, but for me, the fact that you can't adjust the action on each string individually annoys me.
> 
> Other than that, they're fine, though I prefer a Fender flat mount, or the PRS tremolo.



I've never had a guitar where I need to adjust the action on an individual string


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jan 13, 2013)

Galeus708 said:


> I can't speak for anyone else on the forum, especially due to being very new here, but for me, the fact that you can't adjust the action on each string individually annoys me.



You're thinking of Gibson's wraparound bridges, like on the Les Paul Jr and Melody Makers.

I honestly don't know why some people here hate the TOMs. They just do.


----------



## 777timesgod (Jan 13, 2013)

Ma they are just Jerry and they hate Tom. Couldn't resist...


----------



## skeels (Jan 13, 2013)

They could have at least put some speed holes in it.


----------



## Galeus708 (Jan 14, 2013)

skeels said:


> They could have at least put some speed holes in it.



Like this one?


----------



## Joshua (Jan 14, 2013)

Galeus708 said:


> Like this one?


Looks like they ripped the back off of a chair and slapped some strings on it


----------



## Pikka Bird (Jan 14, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> You're thinking of Gibson's wraparound bridges, like on the Les Paul Jr and Melody Makers.



Are you sure you're not confusing action with intonation?

No matter what, I still love TOMs... The feel, the look, et cetera.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jan 14, 2013)

Pikka Bird said:


> Are you sure you're not confusing action with intonation?
> 
> No matter what, I still love TOMs... The feel, the look, et cetera.



Apparently so.


----------



## Eric Christian (Jan 14, 2013)

Interesting how Gibson will make a semi-trailer full of those abortions but they close the Custom Shop to people like me who simply want a blacked out Les Paul Baritone...


----------



## that short guy (Jan 14, 2013)

Watty said:


> Is one of the members in the army or something? IIRC, one of their videos is all about the battlefield and that looks like an insignia...weird fascination if the answer's no.
> 
> Back on topic....blegh. That does look abysmal.


 
If someone already answered this you'll have to forgive me I didn't have time to read the entire thing, But to the best of my knowledge none of them were ever in the army, they just did a tour for deployed soldier awhile back... the footage you're talking about was for the Bad Company music video. 

That and they've always been a "support the troops" band. Nice guys actually.


----------



## hairychris (Jan 14, 2013)

It could be worse, it could be the ZV...






Or the reverse V....






Or the 3rd trimester abortion...


----------



## Galeus708 (Jan 14, 2013)

hairychris said:


>



Y'know, I take back what I said in the other Gibson thread. I want Gibson to leave the Explorer alone.


----------



## Dooky (Jan 14, 2013)

Kinda surprised at the amount of hate this guitar is getting, it's not exactly my cup of tea either, but I dont think it looks _that_ bad.

I am a little confused as to why Gibson haven't produced an explorer that looks like the ESP explorers that Hetfield used to play. i.e: plain black, no pickguard, ebony fretboard, dot. I'd love to own one like this!


----------



## Galeus708 (Jan 14, 2013)

^Well, there was the 1984 explorer, which is what Hetfield used before he moved to ESP, which was plain white with EMGs. No ebony board, though. They did reissue it a few years back, but, of course, Gibson being Gibson, they didn't keep it in production very long. They did also release an Epiphone version, which I think you can still get a hold of if you look around.

EDIT: Thinking about it, I don't think the '84 originally came with EMGs, but the reissue definitely did.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jan 15, 2013)

The Epi youre talking about ie still around, I think. The Epiphone Explorer EX or the Epiphone 1984 Explorerm


----------



## Xaios (Jan 15, 2013)

hairychris said:


> Or the 3rd trimester abortion...



I would never spend money on a Gibson personally, but after seeing this unholy abomination unto the Lord, it's hard not to admire the sheer audacity and brazenness of their don't-give-a-fuckitude.


----------



## MythicSquirrel (Jan 15, 2013)

hairychris said:


>



A store around here used to have one of these, they must've sold it 
Swear it was the most awkward and heavy guitar I've ever played, no idea why anyone would spend money on it unless it was a wall decoration.


----------



## Blackbog3 (Jan 15, 2013)

kennedyblake said:


> Bear skin top with broken glass inlays? Or maybe built from the wood of Christ' cross(a Gibson original).


I know you're joking, but I would purchase that.



_Posted from Sevenstring.org App for Android_


----------



## redstone (Jan 15, 2013)

Soon


----------



## Don Vito (Jan 15, 2013)

redstone said:


> Soon


check that fret ax-cess

NAMM's over, Gibson won.


----------



## redstone (Jan 15, 2013)

And the workmanship is out of this world.


----------



## Andromalia (Jan 16, 2013)

redstone said:


> Soon


Add some holes to that and you have a winner.


----------



## Forrest_H (Jan 16, 2013)

Yuck


----------



## r3tr0sp3ct1v3 (Jan 16, 2013)

I rarely use memes, but this calls for one.


----------



## Slunk Dragon (Jan 17, 2013)

So is this our new "Ugliest Guitars" thread? This is quickly becoming an entertaining contender. I'm rolling right now xD



On topic, that sig is absolutely weird; does this mean we could see Gibson partnering with JEGS soon? *banned*


----------



## Slunk Dragon (Jan 17, 2013)

Slunk Dragon said:


> So is this our new "Ugliest Guitars" thread? This is quickly becoming an entertaining contender. I'm rolling right now xD
> 
> 
> 
> On topic, that sig is absolutely weird; does this mean we could see Gibson partnering with JEGS soon? *banned*





redstone said:


> Soon



I feel like I could stand atop Mount Olympus with that guitar and sever heads.


----------



## ridner (Jan 17, 2013)




----------



## cronux (Jan 17, 2013)

yellowv said:


> ...*new sig for one of the Five Finger Deathpunch guys....*



that band still exists?


----------



## GatherTheArsenal (Jan 24, 2013)

Aesthetically speaking i've never been a fan of Explorers myself, it seems like there's too much wood and too little wood in the wrong places. That being said, the dude has his sig model and Gibson was nice enough to make him one. Kudos to him in my opinion. Some food for thought - if i ever got a sig model i guarantee half of you guys on here would loathe me for my taste and hate it for it's design. 

Because i might ask for shit like, oh i dunno...

... airbrushing Ryu, Ken, or Akuma shooting a blue, orange, or red Hadouken on a glossy blood-red/dark purple finished super strat body with the tail-end of the hadouken ending at a reverse headstock, 27" inch scale 7, red or pink LED fret markers, and a big, fuck-off kanji character right behind the bridge...

orrr

... an aqua-green matte finish on a flying V body, baritone 6, B.C. Rich style headstock with a picture of my pug by the bridge pickup cleverly positioned so it looks like his paw is actually strumming the strings...

i would love either of those... just saying.. 

the point is - while this might be a double or even quadruple face-palm for most ppl, it's my sig. Who the fuck cares if no one else likes it lol??


----------



## Hemi-Powered Drone (Jan 24, 2013)

Valnob said:


> This ?



I know this isn't the subject of the thread, but this guitar continues to perplex me. It looks like they got a child to draw a Parker Fly. It looks like the intention may have been to include a seventh high string a la a five string banjo (something I myself have contemplated to give extra high range on a longer scale), explaining the neck pickup, but changed their mind midway through and used a six string bridge. It raises so many questions.

As for being on topic, the guitar isn't that bad. Sure, it's not my cup of tea, but it's not like it's some horrid abomination like, well, that thing I quoted.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jan 24, 2013)

Xaios said:


> it's hard not to admire the sheer audacity and brazenness of their don't-give-a-fuckitude.



I don't think folks really grasp how much "don't-give-a-fuck" Gibson has, and I mean that in the best way ever.


----------



## skeels (Jan 24, 2013)

hairychris said:


>


 
The headstock reminds me of those mountain climbers who don't quite make it, or the arctic explorers who need to be rescued after being stuck in their tents and have lost all their fingers to frostbite. 

Sorry if that's anybody here....


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jan 24, 2013)

Gibson just made up for the 5 Finger Death Punch atrocity.


----------



## Hemi-Powered Drone (Jan 25, 2013)

Now isn't that a sexy little thang.


----------



## 1968 Charger B5 (Jan 25, 2013)

Agreed. Bashing a company for allowing him to cutomize EXACTLY what he wanted is lame.
I agree I do not like it, but I respect others opinions. Not a gibson fan myself, and_ I _do not like it. Nonetheless...


----------



## TIBrent (Jan 25, 2013)

hacky bands = hacky signature guitars.
-Brent


----------



## misingonestring (Jan 25, 2013)

1968 Charger B5 said:


> Bashing a company for allowing him to cutomize EXACTLY what he wanted is lame.



You're forgetting that this is sevenstring.org

Every guitar has to be made to OUR specifications, not the artist.


----------



## TIBrent (Jan 25, 2013)

Making a guitar exactly like you want (as a one off) is one thing, but then marketing that guitar to the masses (us), is another, you need to be intelligent about what you are asking for in your build, otherwise it tanks, company is bummed, the general public is bummed.
-Brent


----------



## edsped (Jan 25, 2013)

Valnob said:


> This ?


Please someone explain what the fuck this is.


----------



## K3V1N SHR3DZ (Jan 25, 2013)

GatherTheArsenal said:


> ... airbrushing Ryu, Ken, or Akuma shooting a blue, orange, or red Hadouken on a glossy blood-red/dark purple finished super strat body with the tail-end of the hadouken ending at a reverse headstock, 27" inch scale 7, red or pink LED fret markers, and a big, fuck-off kanji character right behind the bridge...


----------



## Jormal1ty (Jan 25, 2013)

Thats so cool


----------



## Goldentokin (Jan 25, 2013)

you're a wizard Harry!! a guitar wizard!


----------



## JoshuaVonFlash (Oct 26, 2013)

s_k_mullins said:


> Oh I agree, it is really shitty looking. But it's what the artist wanted.
> 
> But then again, this is the company that made the Dusk Tiger, the Reverse Flying V, the Holy Explorer, and this...


The pun in Holy Explorer is SO funny that I had to comment and necro bump this thread


----------



## redstone (Oct 27, 2013)

edsped said:


> Please someone explain what the .... this is.



More room for bends, quite clever actually


----------



## OmegaSlayer (Oct 27, 2013)

Hmm...
HMM...
I'm really really biased against Gibson and Fender.
I've nothing against the guitars they make...more or less, but I don't like how they rely on their glorious past.
For decades they have been absolute ZERO about innovation, and I don't find it neither appealing nor good towards musicians.
And when they try to innovate...*facepalms*
Sorry for being harsh/rude...but that's what I think, my opinion.
The musicians' skills move and they stay idle, I know it's a distinct decision/way to lead the brand, but I can't back it up, sorry.
Mind you, if I would have tons of money I would surely buy a Tele a Strato and a Les, because they ARE indeed good guitars for what they're supposed to be, but that's all.


----------



## MoshJosh (Oct 27, 2013)

It's one thing to build a guitar to someone's specs and another to make the ugly thing a signature production model.

I love explorers but this isn't my cup of tea


----------



## Danukenator (Oct 27, 2013)

OmegaSlayer said:


> Hmm...
> HMM...
> I'm really really biased against Gibson and Fender.
> I've nothing against the guitars they make...more or less, but I don't like how they rely on their glorious past.
> ...



You clearly are biased...because you're simply wrong.

People love to hang onto this "Fender/Gibson never innovate etc." Ignoring that they are simply following the general demands of their customers, Gibson especially has innovated. The Firebird X, Dusk Tiger and the Robot guitars are all sporting some pretty amazing hardware. Not saying they designed it all from the ground up but even using hardware like that is miles beyond what most companies are doing. 

What is innovation as far as companies go? Ibanez's core line up is basically the same as it's been for a while. Sure, they added the 8 strings but why does that count but Gibson's electronic work not?


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Oct 27, 2013)

Danukenator said:


> What is innovation as far as companies go? Ibanez's core line up is basically the same as it's been for a while. Sure, they added the 8 strings but why does that count but Gibson's electronic work not?



THANK YOU. Gibson and Fender have been using the same shapes since the 50's/60's, with some new shapes here and there. Ibanez has been using the same shapes since the late 80's, with some new shapes here and there. Same for Jackson and several other companies.


----------



## OmegaSlayer (Oct 27, 2013)

Danukenator said:


> You clearly are biased...because you're simply wrong.
> 
> People love to hang onto this "Fender/Gibson never innovate etc." Ignoring that they are simply following the general demands of their customers, Gibson especially has innovated. The Firebird X, Dusk Tiger and the Robot guitars are all sporting some pretty amazing hardware. Not saying they designed it all from the ground up but even using hardware like that is miles beyond what most companies are doing.
> 
> What is innovation as far as companies go? Ibanez's core line up is basically the same as it's been for a while. Sure, they added the 8 strings but why does that count but Gibson's electronic work not?



First of all, I know they're following the demands of their customers.

Neck shapes, joints solutions, bridges solutions, 30 frets, 7-8 strings, bridge pick-up simulations, sustain pickups...there's so much to innovate.


----------



## nikolix (Oct 27, 2013)

Can some tell me...are they doing this on purpuse in Gibson?
I used to love them as a kid but now i feel that they are guitars from a different era.


----------



## chandler1389 (Oct 27, 2013)

fair enough Gibson given this bloke what he wanted on his own personal guitar, but pushing this to public is just stupid, and a waste of wood.


----------



## Bevo (Oct 27, 2013)

If you look at the numbers of guitars sold you will no doubt find the biggest sellers are the traditional shapes, bread and butter or the ones that keep the companies going.

I bet the customs are such a small percent of overall sales that they probably lose money on them. If you design your own custom there is no commitment from the manufacture other than to supply. If an artist does a guitar it's a gamble and some are serious winners like JP6-7 or loosers that were posted previously.

Another part is trying to innovate or find a win with something new, you have to throw something out there to see if it stick. Companies that don't do that will never be leaders but will have refined guitars and stable customers.

If you look at business this is pretty much how everything works.


----------



## chandler1389 (Oct 27, 2013)

yes you should throw out ideas sometimes and see if it sticks, but Gibson seem to be throwing out consistent sh.t over the years.


----------



## Jakke (Oct 27, 2013)

joshuavsoapkid said:


> The pun in Holy Explorer is SO funny that I had to comment and necro bump this thread



It was an actual guitar:
Gibson.com: Holy Explorer


----------



## SquirtleSquad (Oct 27, 2013)

edsped said:


> Please someone explain what the .... this is.



Well. As you can see, it's a six string with a EMG-707TW and EMG-81TW with a "VL" neck.

The VL neck is designed so when you bend strings on the upper registry, they don't collide with other strings, allowing for unique ways of developing certain licks. Apparently it can do some pretty gnarly things. Looks weird, but I'd love to try one.


----------



## JoshuaVonFlash (Oct 27, 2013)

Jakke said:


> It was an actual guitar:
> Gibson.com: Holy Explorer


Yeah, I know that's why the pun is so funny it's a Holy guitar.


----------



## Danukenator (Oct 27, 2013)

OmegaSlayer said:


> Neck shapes, joints solutions, bridges solutions, 30 frets, 7-8 strings, bridge pick-up simulations, sustain pickups...there's so much to innovate.



With the exception of the 8 strings ad the 30 frets, pretty much all of that can be applied to Gibson. Hell, Gibson releases stuff like the M-III (original) and no one wanted it. They also released a line of shredder guitars in the 80's (name is escaping me) and offer Floyd's and cutaways on the Axcess. 

Gibson also has implemented richlite, which is a badass material and just re-released the M-III. I'm not saying they're the Steinberger when it comes to innovation but they certainly aren't stagnating.


----------



## aneurysm (Oct 27, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Scumbag Henry J:
> 
> Could release a classy signature like the Lzzy hale
> 
> ...



POST of the Year ! I have the Bill Kelliher nad with the Lzzy Hale it would be perfect !


----------



## patata (Oct 27, 2013)

I think I saw that guy on this show where they pimp the shit out of bikes and hot rods on History channel.

He had a badass bike though.


----------



## purpledc (Oct 27, 2013)

I think the issue with gibson is that they have completely let go of their own personal standards. Many of us guitar guys who have been in the game for way too long remember as early as the late 90's when gibson countless times said they would not do certain things because they learned from their mistakes and they wanted to have the gibson name stand for something. Something with integrity rooted in tradition. When I worked for Sam Ash I talked with many gibson reps that said they in the past took too many risks making guitars that were surely just never meant to happen. They felt it diluted the brand and made a mockery of what they were trying to accomplish. 

Fast forward to now and it seems they have completely abandoned these philosophies. Its as if they are taking the Anthony Bourdain approach of trying anything once. Sometimes even when a complete failure hits they revamp it slightly hoping for lighting to strike twice. Sure certain past gibson failures like the explorer and flying V and in some respects even the Les Paul were ahead of their time later becoming some of the most iconic and instantly recognizable instruments the world has ever known. 

But this does not mean every gibson failure will turn to gold. And it seems these days they are just firing shots in every single possible direction hoping to hit something. To me it shows that they dont know who they are and what they want to be. When a company like gibson loses its way and starts pumping out these totally odd ball guitars that have 90% of the people seeing it scratching their heads it does not make me feel confident in the brand. IMHO gibson has turned itself into a punchline. 

I would like gibson to return to its roots. Focus on making the traditional gibson shapes and do absolute bad ass versions of them. Wow us with quality. Show us that you want to build the highest quality guitars money can buy. Innovation is nothing if it is just different for the sake of being different. Who gives a shit about reinventing the wheel if the new one doesnt even roll? 20 years ago it seems PRS gave gibson a swift hard kick to the balls and took over as supreme leader in big name guitar brands. I dont think gibson every recovered and never will. Not unless they do what PRS is doing. Which is to stop focusing on making stupid gadgets and just make good guitars. There is an honesty in that. There is respect in that. Innovating is great. But only if there is actually something to be gained. Things like the Jason Hook explorer is just another example of gibson doing anything they can do to whore out their name. Is it what Jason Hook wanted? Yes. Does that mean they should have let it happen? Hell no. If he wants to hack up his guitars and "customize" them by all means be an idiot with your own toys. But when it comes to actually mass producing something for the general public companies who have an invested interest in their own well being need to know when to tell and artist no.

Just because you can play a guitar doesnt mean you know how to design one. Just as a guy who can drive a car probably cant build one. Its a simple matter of knowing your damn place in the world. Think about it, how many past signature guitars from the inflated egos and eccentric minds of top narcissistic players EVER turned out to be a good idea? I cant think of one signature guitar that was a runaway success that was completely designed by the artist. In fact most signatures that are designed completely by the artist fail miserably. I just hope Gibson wakes up one day before they go out of business wasting money on horrible ideas. Its bad enough that seemingly anyone can get a signature instrument these days but its something else entirely to let ridiculous ideas become a reality on a production instrument. Bottom line, somewhere somehow companies stopped drawing a line in the sand. And now we are all suffering, lol.


----------



## chandler1389 (Oct 27, 2013)

cough:les paul:cough


----------



## Bevo (Oct 27, 2013)

chandler1389 said:


> yes you should throw out ideas sometimes and see if it sticks, but Gibson seem to be throwing out consistent sh.t over the years.



One question to see if what they do is justified....

Is Gibson profitable?


----------



## chandler1389 (Oct 27, 2013)

more than likely yes, but if your company has been going for one hundred an eleven years you would hope to be seeing some profit.

that still doesn't justify the reverse v's and the robot guitars, which was a half baked concept that wasn't needed, and definitely wasn't made to the best of their abilities.

I am actually quite surprised that PRS hasn't completely put them out of buiseness by now.


----------



## purpledc (Oct 27, 2013)

chandler1389 said:


> cough:les paul:cough




What about it? Even the les paul they have got wrong many times over. They still make SOME of them to high standards but many of them are well, not so great lets say.




Bevo said:


> One question to see if what they do is justified....
> 
> Is Gibson profitable?




Of course they are profitable. I would argue too much profit. Its really the only way they could be able to pull the shit they have been pulling. They are kinda the chevy of the guitar world. They build a mediocre product and sell it based on heritage and a name and people identify with it as a household name and they play up the made in USA thing. Dont get me wrong, I like a good USA made guitar as much as the next guy. But Im not going to pay a premium just so I can say its usa made. If a factory in japan or korea or even indonesia is building better guitars at better prices (which they do) then thats where my money is going to go. Im not going to take a lesser instrument and pay more for it just because it was made in the states. The real sad thing is that for me by the time you climb the gibson line up to a point where I think the guitar is worthy you could have a better custom made for yourself. The craziest thing is that as critical of gibson as I am I still want a genuine les paul even though I know I could have a better replica made for me by another luthier. That is how engrained in our guitar playing DNA gibson is.


----------



## RevelGTR (Oct 27, 2013)

OmegaSlayer said:


> First of all, I know they're following the demands of their customers.
> 
> Neck shapes, joints solutions, bridges solutions, 30 frets, 7-8 strings, bridge pick-up simulations, sustain pickups...there's so much to innovate.


 Gibson has several great neck shapes, and both 7 and 8 strings are relatively limited markets. The 30 frets and bridge pickup simulations need no explanation lol. A Les Paul is still a great instrument. Not only that, but it doesn't look or sound out of place in modern music.
To they guy above, a PRS isn't a substitute for a Les Paul any more then a Les Paul is a substitute for any of the various PRS's.
I find the "Gibson sucks, they don't make any fanned fret headless 8 strings!" argument to be absolutely hilarious.


----------



## chandler1389 (Oct 27, 2013)

well that was more on the point of one person designing a guitar.

also I see no use at all for 30 frets, or eight strings, and yes my views on Gibson may be harsh but that just the experiences ive had with them.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Oct 27, 2013)

OmegaSlayer said:


> Neck shapes, joints solutions, bridges solutions, 30 frets, 7-8 strings, bridge pick-up simulations, sustain pickups...there's so much to innovate.



Gibson has done more to innovate in the last decade than most guitar companies have done in the last three. 

Does all of it stick? Nope, but at least they tried. 

Adding range isn't innovation. If that was the case the cheap, Chinese "Galveston" instruments you saw on eBay in the early 00's with 15 strings would be the most "innovative" company ever. 

Innovation is solving a problem that isn't there. I'd say the Digital LP, Dusk Tiger, X-Series, Robot Series, etc. certainly fit that outline. Same with a lot of what Rick Toone and Ned Steinberger have done. Do necks need to be square? Nope, but it DOES work. Do guitars need to be headless to balance right and weigh less? Nope, but it's a good idea.


----------



## purpledc (Oct 27, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Gibson has done more to innovate in the last decade than most guitar companies have done in the last three.
> 
> Does all of it stick? Nope, but at least they tried.
> 
> ...




Actually innovation is defined as doing something in a new way. To change an item that is established. Arguably the galveston instruments are innovative if they are the first of their kind albeit not popular or worth a shit. Unfortunately nothing about innovation needs to be an improvement. So any change can be viewed as innovative. I do wish innovation was rooted in improvement. Otherwise what is its value? What is the significance? Not only doing something in a new way, but to have it be a valid improvement. To me plek is innovative. But I dont think its innovative that gibson started to do it. They merely adopted the technology as others have. Gibson seems to want to change things for the novelty of change. A lot of their newer stuff is very gadget oriented. And gadgets have never been about longevity. I personally would rather gibson just make decent instruments. Because even if you can call what they have been doing recently innovative I think there are plenty of other less flattering descriptive words that certainly apply as well.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Oct 27, 2013)

purpledc said:


> Actually innovation is defined as doing something in a new way. To change an item that is established. Arguably the galveston instruments are innovative if they are the first of their kind albeit not popular or worth a shit. Unfortunately nothing about innovation needs to be an improvement. So any change can be viewed as innovative. I do wish innovation was rooted in improvement. Otherwise what is its value? What is the significance? Not only doing something in a new way, but to have it be a valid improvement. To me plek is innovative. But I dont think its innovative that gibson started to do it. They merely adopted the technology as others have. Gibson seems to want to change things for the novelty of change. A lot of their newer stuff is very gadget oriented. And gadgets have never been about longevity. I personally would rather gibson just make decent instruments. Because even if you can call what they have been doing recently innovative I think there are plenty of other less flattering descriptive words that certainly apply as well.



Well, I guess I'll have to admit to using the word "innovative" improperly, along with the majority of folks in this thread. 

What I meant to convey is that Gibson isn't just putting out the same exact thing every year like many are saying, they are putting out different things all the time, only they might not be as well received by the guitar playing community, or even just this particular community (they still sell darn good usually). 

Yes, they have a series of established models that they keep production on, all companies do, but they don't just do that. 

Just because you don't see a need for a lot of what they've put out in the "different" category, doesn't mean it's without value. Many of their concepts are great on paper, but we all know it's not all about that. 

As for the last part of your comment, you must be out of the loop as for the last few years Gibson has been putting out cheaper, better made, and better equipped guitars. The new T and J series are a great example.


----------



## mitchybang (Oct 29, 2013)

FAIL


----------



## Bevo (Oct 29, 2013)

I almost bought the LBJ, but found my Classic.

Nothing wrong with the cheaper Gibsons!


----------



## Dan_Vacant (Oct 29, 2013)

hairychris said:


>


it would be cool to re-position the strap pins and swap out the nut and have a explorer for the lefties with knobs on the oppisite side(hendrix it)


----------



## purpledc (Oct 29, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Well, I guess I'll have to admit to using the word "innovative" improperly, along with the majority of folks in this thread.
> 
> What I meant to convey is that Gibson isn't just putting out the same exact thing every year like many are saying, they are putting out different things all the time, only they might not be as well received by the guitar playing community, or even just this particular community (they still sell darn good usually).
> 
> ...




Actually I have seen many of these new gibsons in the flesh. I am not very impressed by them. Like I said, I have to give them credit for continuing to build in the USA but I have not played a gibson under $2500 street that I would purchase. But that is just me. I know many who are happy with their guitars. To me I think you can get a lot more guitar for your money.


----------



## OmegaSlayer (Oct 30, 2013)

Danukenator said:


> With the exception of the 8 strings ad the 30 frets, pretty much all of that can be applied to Gibson. Hell, Gibson releases stuff like the M-III (original) and no one wanted it. They also released a line of shredder guitars in the 80's (name is escaping me) and offer Floyd's and cutaways on the Axcess.
> 
> Gibson also has implemented richlite, which is a badass material and just re-released the M-III. I'm not saying they're the Steinberger when it comes to innovation but they certainly aren't stagnating.



Seems like you address innovation only on body shapes


----------



## redstone (Oct 30, 2013)

Yeah, did you see their new double-planetary 16:1 vertical tuners that lock the string and the key via a (great looking) push-pull knob ?

Just kidding, Gibson is too busy making new switches.


----------



## Andromalia (Oct 30, 2013)

purpledc said:


> Actually I have seen many of these new gibsons in the flesh. I am not very impressed by them. Like I said, I have to give them credit for continuing to build in the USA but I have not played a gibson under $2500 street that I would purchase. But that is just me. I know many who are happy with their guitars. To me I think you can get a lot more guitar for your money.


That's probably true for the expensive models, but, seriouslyn my studio 50es reissue I paud 700 new is a very solid guitar for the price bracket, and my Bill Kelliher sig is an excellent guitar period. (I also own a custom Amfisound, ESPs, Fenders, have owned a half dozen Prestige Ibbies these last years, etc, I think the comparison is fair)
I don't think I'd actually purchase a high end Gibson new (ie, Les Paul standard and up) because tue used market is so much more practical, but with their limited editions they actually make me want to buy them, so long as they're not monstrosities like the ZW moderne.


----------



## RevelGTR (Oct 30, 2013)

purpledc said:


> Actually I have seen many of these new gibsons in the flesh. I am not very impressed by them. Like I said, I have to give them credit for continuing to build in the USA but I have not played a gibson under $2500 street that I would purchase. But that is just me. I know many who are happy with their guitars. To me I think you can get a lot more guitar for your money.


 There's quite a quality jump between something like an LPJ and a Traditional. An LPJ is a good guitar for the money, but quality wise I would put either of my Traditionals on par with EBMM and those. It seems like lots of folks are determined to hate Gibson.


----------



## Metal-Box (Oct 30, 2013)

Gibson sure has an interesting (to say the least) list of endorsees.


----------



## purpledc (Oct 31, 2013)

WSchaferJR said:


> There's quite a quality jump between something like an LPJ and a Traditional. An LPJ is a good guitar for the money, but quality wise I would put either of my Traditionals on par with EBMM and those. It seems like lots of folks are determined to hate Gibson.




Actually I dont hate gibson. I even stated that I still want a les paul. I had one that I loved and regret selling it every single day. It was a Custom shop standard made exclusively for Sam Ash in 2000. It had a faded cherry sunburst finish, and creme/black zebra pickups and an insanely nice flametop. Im not determined to hate anything. I will give credit where I think it is due and I will speak up when I dont think it is due just the same. I am not a hater of anything really. 

But what I also am not is a "fanboy". If I think a company is doing something wrong, or if I buy a product with flaws I am not the type of person who is going to lie about it, cover it up or try and protect the reputation of a company. To me that is irresponsible behavior and doesnt do anyone any good including the company. I think negative feedback is just as productive as positive feedback as it helps a company know where they need to improve. I dont hate any company. But I wont blindly defend any company either. I call things like I see them whether that projects someone in a good light or not is of no concern as long as my comments are honest.


----------



## shawnperolis (Oct 31, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Adding range isn't innovation. If that was the case the cheap, Chinese "Galveston" instruments you saw on eBay in the early 00's with 15 strings would be the most "innovative" company ever.



Pics of 15 string Chinese guitars pls?


----------



## narad (Oct 31, 2013)

hairychris said:


> Or the reverse V....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I love that Gibson's approach to turning out more guitar shapes is identical to the one racing game designers use to turn out more race tracks. Yes, you've run these shapes a thousand times, but have you tried them... in REVERSE!? 

Next thing you know, alternate tunings downloadable content for robot guitar. Exclusive airbrush paint job for pre-ordering. Gibson Reverse V Player's Manual: "Learn all the best sitting positions! Reverse W preview!"


----------



## redstone (Oct 31, 2013)

narad said:


> Gibson Reverse V Player's Manual: "Learn all the best sitting positions! Reverse W preview!"



rofl'd


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Oct 31, 2013)

purpledc said:


> But what I also am not is a "fanboy". If I think a company is doing something wrong, or if I buy a product with flaws I am not the type of person who is going to lie about it, cover it up or try and protect the reputation of a company. To me that is irresponsible behavior and doesnt do anyone any good including the company. I think negative feedback is just as productive as positive feedback as it helps a company know where they need to improve. I dont hate any company. But I wont blindly defend any company either. I call things like I see them whether that projects someone in a good light or not is of no concern as long as my comments are honest.




I hope that isn't an indictment of the people on SSO who come to Gibson's defense. I know that at least in my case, I don't do it because I'm blinded by fanboyism, but rather because it annoys me that Gibson is one of SSO's favorite whipping posts, and I suspect alot of the whipping is done from the back of a bandwagon. I'm not incapable of finding fault in Gibsons (I bought my beloved Tele because the SG I had gone to the store to try was such a QC turd that I'd have been a fool to buy it), but I think the nature of the gear and music this forum leans toward, combined with that dark stretch of abysmal QC Gibson had in the 90s/early 00s, causes people to just throw out "LOL Gibson" any time the company comes up.


----------



## MikeDojcsak (Oct 31, 2013)

Valnob said:


> This ?



What in ....?


----------



## clubshred (Nov 1, 2013)

Valnob said:


> This ?



Jesus H. Tapdancing Christ.... what the hell am I looking at here?


----------



## Hyacinth (Nov 1, 2013)

NO ONE should make guitars for these guys. I just checked out a few of their songs, unfortunately. It sounds like something an angry high schooler would write after his parents grounded him from his dirt bike for the weekend. Pure faggotry through music.


----------



## Danukenator (Nov 1, 2013)

"Pure faggotry through music." Wow, get bent man. Come up with a less bigoted way to express an opinion.


----------



## Hyacinth (Nov 1, 2013)

Danukenator said:


> "Pure faggotry through music." Wow, get bent man. Come up with a less bigoted way to express an opinion.



I'd like to clarify. By "faggotry" I'm not referring to gay people or calling the music gay in any way. I've never thought of or used the word "fag" to mean gay people. Maybe I should have said "pure dipshittery" instead, because that's what I meant by it.


----------



## pushpull7 (Nov 1, 2013)

I know it's en vogue for people on this forum (considering the smilies) to use gay slurs as "it ain't no thang" but I want to go on record saying it offends me.

I'm not a dick who neg reps, but I couldn't let that one go. Usually I do, couldn't this time.


----------



## purpledc (Nov 2, 2013)

MatthewLeisher said:


> NO ONE should make guitars for these guys. I just checked out a few of their songs, unfortunately. It sounds like something an angry high schooler would write after his parents grounded him from his dirt bike for the weekend. Pure faggotry through music.




I have to admit while I dont agree with your choice of words, but I do agree with not caring for FFDP. Some of it could be viewed as jealousy. And in a way I am. Music IMHO for the most part (at least popular) music is stagnating as of late. To me it would seem popular music lacks any depth, character and/or creativity. No risks are being taken. No new ground be broken. Nothing comes on the radio in any great frequency that moves me like music did in years past. It seems music is now a reflection of a bland, self absorbed, social media dependent lives so many people live today. 

Even with lyrics of many bands have been dumbed down so much that they really sound like Dr. Seuss. Simple rhymes and very simple themes seem to run rampant in popular music. The sadest part is that this music being popular is a reflection of how the majority of people intake such arts. Its sad really that that is how "deep" the majority of people are. Maybe I'm reading into it too much. Some would argue "Man its just fun heavy music calm down". 

The jealousy comes into play because I know that there are so many bands that make superior music in every respect that will NEVER get the same recognition, exposure and subsequent success as a band like FFDP and yeah, when I hear that singer struggling to keep pitch I do get jealous that he is where he is at and I am where I am. But I dont get mad at him. It simply makes me lose a little bit more faith in the people that put him there. Sure, its just my opinion and opinions can vary greatly. But I dont think its an opinion that FFPD is simple music written in a simple way for simple minded people. I dont mind straight forward lyrics but I cant stand when it is so simple that it sounds like the singer is reading a childrens book. I also can stand when the words are poorly chosen to where it seems they are trying to cram too many words into a given bar of music because it simply doesnt fit. Both of these things seem to be very apparent in their music. Rant off.


----------



## celticelk (Nov 2, 2013)

^^^ Let's assume that I wrote a comprehensive reply about the (sometimes arrogant) elitism of outsider cultures and the futility of trying to assert objective standards in evaluating art and just move on, 'kay?


----------



## Hyacinth (Nov 4, 2013)

chrisharbin said:


> I know it's en vogue for people on this forum (considering the smilies) to use gay slurs as "it ain't no thang" but I want to go on record saying it offends me.
> 
> I'm not a dick who neg reps, but I couldn't let that one go. Usually I do, couldn't this time.



I'm sorry I offended you. I supposed it's just a habit that carried over from real life, because in my group of friends we say it without a second thought because we all know that we're not talking about actual gay people. This is going to sound like an excuse, but I have friends and even family members that are gay, and I have no problem with homosexuality. From now on, I'll refrain from using such language in a public forum. It just occurred to me that I actually don't say it in public because it might offend people  For some reason I didn't think about that when I posted the original comment. Anyway, sorry bro, won't happen again!


----------



## Andromalia (Nov 4, 2013)

celticelk said:


> ^^^ Let's assume that I wrote a comprehensive reply about the (sometimes arrogant) elitism of outsider cultures and the futility of trying to assert objective standards in evaluating art and just move on, 'kay?


Nope, I'm out of interesting reads, get to work now.


----------



## Dopey Trout (Nov 4, 2013)

celticelk said:


> ^^^ Let's assume that I wrote a comprehensive reply about the (sometimes arrogant) elitism of outsider cultures and the futility of trying to assert objective standards in evaluating art and just move on, 'kay?



Exactly what I would've written, but I probably would've used more swears, being Scottish and all


----------



## pushpull7 (Nov 5, 2013)

MatthewLeisher said:


> I'm sorry I offended you. I supposed it's just a habit that carried over from real life, because in my group of friends we say it without a second thought because we all know that we're not talking about actual gay people. This is going to sound like an excuse, but I have friends and even family members that are gay, and I have no problem with homosexuality. From now on, I'll refrain from using such language in a public forum. It just occurred to me that I actually don't say it in public because it might offend people  For some reason I didn't think about that when I posted the original comment. Anyway, sorry bro, won't happen again!




It's all good. I just get a bit miffed at how people use that word and think it's no big. I prolly shouldn't have said anything.


----------



## Hyacinth (Nov 10, 2013)

chrisharbin said:


> It's all good. I just get a bit miffed at how people use that word and think it's no big. I prolly shouldn't have said anything.



No way man, I'm glad you said something. It reminded me of the weight that word carries. I should probably cut it out of my vocabulary.


----------



## Valnob (Nov 11, 2013)

here's another one (for zakk wylde)


----------



## purpledc (Nov 11, 2013)

celticelk said:


> ^^^ Let's assume that I wrote a comprehensive reply about the (sometimes arrogant) elitism of outsider cultures and the futility of trying to assert objective standards in evaluating art and just move on, 'kay?




Sorry if I offended you. But with all due respect, human beings have been creating standards and evaluating the validity and merit of art since it was art. Our whole society is achievement based and those achievements are graded and classified. Whether it be your grades on a school essay, an athletes placement in the Olympics or yes, even the grading and rating of art in movies, books and music. Every single one of those grades and classifications are given to them by someone with an opinion of their performance. Some are more qualified than others to give their opinion. So I ask what is more futile, expressing your opinion for the sake of discussion even if it isn't a positive opinion? Or trying to tell somoene that expressing their opinion is futile because they dont share it?


----------



## InAbsentia_ (Nov 11, 2013)

purpledc said:


> I have to admit while I dont agree with your choice of words, but I do agree with not caring for FFDP. Some of it could be viewed as jealousy. And in a way I am. Music IMHO for the most part (at least popular) music is stagnating as of late. To me it would seem popular music lacks any depth, character and/or creativity. No risks are being taken. No new ground be broken. Nothing comes on the radio in any great frequency that moves me like music did in years past. It seems music is now a reflection of a bland, self absorbed, social media dependent lives so many people live today.
> 
> Even with lyrics of many bands have been dumbed down so much that they really sound like Dr. Seuss. Simple rhymes and very simple themes seem to run rampant in popular music. The sadest part is that this music being popular is a reflection of how the majority of people intake such arts. Its sad really that that is how "deep" the majority of people are. Maybe I'm reading into it too much. Some would argue "Man its just fun heavy music calm down".
> 
> The jealousy comes into play because I know that there are so many bands that make superior music in every respect that will NEVER get the same recognition, exposure and subsequent success as a band like FFDP and yeah, when I hear that singer struggling to keep pitch I do get jealous that he is where he is at and I am where I am. But I dont get mad at him. It simply makes me lose a little bit more faith in the people that put him there. Sure, its just my opinion and opinions can vary greatly. But I dont think its an opinion that FFPD is simple music written in a simple way for simple minded people. I dont mind straight forward lyrics but I cant stand when it is so simple that it sounds like the singer is reading a childrens book. I also can stand when the words are poorly chosen to where it seems they are trying to cram too many words into a given bar of music because it simply doesnt fit. Both of these things seem to be very apparent in their music. Rant off.



The reason you feel this way is because you seem to believe that talent and/or skill should define how popular you are. The centuries have taught us this is very often not the case. It's mainly how you market yourself. If you write songs in your bedroom and distribute your CD on a street corner it doesn't matter if you're Beethoven reincarnated, you will not be known and you will not sell.


----------



## Electric Wizard (Nov 11, 2013)

purpledc said:


> Some are more qualified than others to give their opinion.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Nov 11, 2013)

purpledc said:


> Whether it be your grades on a school essay, an athletes placement in the Olympics or yes, even the grading and rating of art in movies, books and music. Every single one of those grades and classifications are given to them by someone with an opinion of their performance.



Erm... No. 

Generally, an athlete's placement in the Olympics is based on his performance of a specific task, and that performance is judged on actual measurable physical outcomes (time, distance, speed, accuracy), unless you only meant the artistic events like figure skating or the floor routine, but the results of those tend to be hotly debated and some even think they shouldn't be in the Olympics at all. 

With essays, it depends entirely on the sort of essay being written. There will obviously be some bias from the teacher, but there will still be set guidelines the essay is supposed to adhere to (and those guidelines will change from essay to essay), and its grade is often based on a rubric provided to the students before writing it. 

Music is more similar to essays in that regard, in that one can only really "judge" it either wholly subjectively, or partially subjectively according to an arbitrary rubric provided by the judge(es). What qualifies as a great Crossover Hardcore album isn't going to be considered a great New Age Ambient record. If you're choosing to judge ALL music based on whatever standard (technicality, here on SSO; record sales, on the pop charts), that's imposing objective standards where they need not always be, particularly when considering a medium as subjective as music.



purpledc said:


> Some are more qualified than others to give their opinion.



Some are certainly more qualified to give their opinions on certain aspects of music, or a certain subset or genre, sure. But when it gets into the realm of one person feeling more qualified to judge ALL music according to the narrow quality rubric he applies to music _he_ likes, that's when the whole thing goes off the rails, and you get, as Celticelk put it, the "(sometimes arrogant) elitism of outsider cultures and the futility of trying to assert objective standards in evaluating art."

That was kinda rambly, but it made sense in my head .


----------



## Kaappari (Nov 11, 2013)

Valnob said:


> here's another one (for zakk wylde)



I like it and I'm ashamed


----------



## Don Vito (Nov 11, 2013)

It's a Little Debbie zebracake.


----------



## dedsouth333 (Nov 11, 2013)

It certainly fixes the whole "I can't play a V sitting down" problem


----------



## purpledc (Nov 12, 2013)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Erm... No.
> 
> Generally, an athlete's placement in the Olympics is based on his performance of a specific task, and that performance is judged on actual measurable physical outcomes (time, distance, speed, accuracy), unless you only meant the artistic events like figure skating or the floor routine, but the results of those tend to be hotly debated and some even think they shouldn't be in the Olympics at all.
> 
> ...




Im sorry but I think your splitting hairs. My only failure I feel is I spoke in what appears to be absolution. Poor choice in rushed words. I should have stated that in each of those categories lies the potential for opinion to effect the outcome and subsequent grading and/or ranking of someones performance. Your ability to name figure skating and teacher influences, while not being every example of situations that would support my position it certainly shows that you knew what i was getting at and I fear your using a technicality of my poor wording to lend superiority to your own opinion. 

And again in the subject of essays and music I wasnt trying to speak in absolution that all grades and awarded achievements will be opinion based but rather point out that there are many instances where it can be true and it is. I do think its worth mentioning though that I have never asserted my qualifications or lack thereof to judge music. Im not saying I am qualified nor unqualified. I was never debating this. I was simply stating that I have the right to VOICE that opinion regardless of those qualifications or lack thereof. 

There seems to be many who would like to shush any person who expresses a negative opinion no matter how politely they attempt to express it. I however dont think conversations should only consist of nothing but pillow fluffing and reach a rounds. If somone doesnt like something they should be able to state it and why as long as a certain tact and respect are utilized when doing so. Of course there is the saying that if you dont have anything nice to say then say nothing at all, I dont think that saying was coined with its application to a "discussion" forum in mind. And I simply find it amazing how quick people are to come to the defense of a band or single person when a negative opinions is expressed. Especially when the band or person being discussed is well known for their penchant for expressing their own negative views and opinions. Seems rather biased.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Nov 12, 2013)

yellowv said:


> Ok so not only did they make the new sig for one of the Five Finger Deathpunch guys. Not only did they put this ridiculous paintjob on it, but look at the selector switch. Instead of making an Explorer without a pickguard with a rear route for the switch. They thought it would be a good idea to use $2 worth of cheap underhood auto wire covering to cover the wires in an open route and what looks like a jack plate to mount the toggle switch. Most ghetto thing I have ever seen. For shame Gibson, for shame.



Yeah, too bad this schmuck probably wanted it to look like that. oke:


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Nov 12, 2013)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Yeah, too bad this schmuck probably wanted it to look like that. oke:



Pretty much. He's been using a custom Explorer exactly like his sig for years now.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Nov 12, 2013)

purpledc said:


> Im sorry but I think your splitting hairs. My only failure I feel is I spoke in what appears to be absolution. Poor choice in rushed words. I should have stated that in each of those categories lies the potential for opinion to effect the outcome and subsequent grading and/or ranking of someones performance. Your ability to name figure skating and teacher influences, while not being every example of situations that would support my position it certainly shows that you knew what i was getting at and I fear your using a technicality of my poor wording to lend superiority to your own opinion.



If splitting hairs is pointing out how your argument was flawed, then sure, that's exactly what I was doing. Yes, you _should have_ said those things, but you _didn't_. Don't pretend that I'm just using your words against you and it's all some forced false "misunderstanding" on my part, when at least two other people on this page found fault in what you've been saying and how you've said it.



purpledc said:


> And again in the subject of essays and music I wasnt trying to speak in absolution that all grades and awarded achievements will be opinion based but rather point out that there are many instances where it can be true and it is. I do think its worth mentioning though that I have never asserted my qualifications or lack thereof to judge music. Im not saying I am qualified nor unqualified. I was never debating this. I was simply stating that I have the right to VOICE that opinion regardless of those qualifications or lack thereof.



Nobody here is trying to stop anyone from voicing their opinions, we're bothered at the insinuation that some people's opinions are somehow better than others. 

We're bothered at people LITERALLY saying something that clearly is an opinion, isn't: 



purpledc said:


> But I dont think its an opinion that FFPD is simple music written in a simple way for simple minded people.



We're bothered at the outsider elitism some people show when expressing their opinions:



purpledc said:


> The sadest part is that this music being popular is a reflection of how the majority of people intake such arts. Its sad really that that is how "deep" the majority of people are.



Do you see how that's different from just expressing a negative opinion of a band? Do you see how you come off when you say things like that? 



purpledc said:


> There seems to be many who would like to shush any person who expresses a negative opinion no matter how politely they attempt to express it. I however dont think conversations should only consist of nothing but pillow fluffing and reach a rounds. If somone doesnt like something they should be able to state it and why as long as a certain tact and respect are utilized when doing so. Of course there is the saying that if you dont have anything nice to say then say nothing at all, I dont think that saying was coined with its application to a "discussion" forum in mind. And I simply find it amazing how quick people are to come to the defense of a band or single person when a negative opinions is expressed. Especially when the band or person being discussed is well known for their penchant for expressing their own negative views and opinions. Seems rather biased.



Nobody is "shushing" anybody. You weren't just giving a negative opinion of a band, you were slagging an entire demographic for liking something you don't like. I think FFDP is overrated and terrible too, but I'm not going to come in here and smirk down at the ignorant masses from atop my high horse about it. Just as you're free to say whatever you want in here, we're free to hop on and call a spade a spade, man.


----------



## Leuka (Nov 13, 2013)

Valnob said:


> here's another one (for zakk wylde)


----------



## purpledc (Nov 13, 2013)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> If splitting hairs is pointing out how your argument was flawed, then sure, that's exactly what I was doing. Yes, you _should have_ said those things, but you _didn't_. Don't pretend that I'm just using your words against you and it's all some forced false "misunderstanding" on my part, when at least two other people on this page found fault in what you've been saying and how you've said it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




All right, we both said our piece and its probably best for both of us if we dont have another page dedicated to why neither one of us will change each others mind. We could go on for days. Agreeing to disagree is probably the best option at this point. Though I have to laugh at your blunt use of the word "terrible" to describe FFDP. That is rather harsh for someone advocating for a more polite way of expressing a dislike for their music. Regardless, good day to you and see you on the forum.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Nov 13, 2013)

purpledc said:


> All right, we both said our piece and its probably best for both of us if we dont have another page dedicated to why neither one of us will change each others mind. We could go on for days. Agreeing to disagree is probably the best option at this point. Though I have to laugh at your blunt use of the word "terrible" to describe FFDP. That is rather harsh for someone advocating for a more polite way of expressing a dislike for their music. Regardless, good day to you and see you on the forum.



Not once here have I been advocating expressing dislike for aband more politely, but the fact that you THINK that's the point I've been arguing is indeed a good sign that this is going nowhere, and we should leave this thread to the people who just want to talk about how fugly the guitar is .


----------

