# So...Why do People Hate on Gibson and Fender Again?



## Church2224 (Mar 23, 2013)

I went to my local Guitar Center today and played two Gibson Les Paul Traditionals and a Fender HSS American Deluxe strat. Honestly there was nothing wrong with any of them, they played great and no major finish issues to be seen. Fretwork was actually pretty good on all of them. They sounded pretty damn good too. My question is why do internet guitar forums give these guys so much shit, it seems to me that even though they are the largest companies out there, they still make good guitars.


----------



## Leuchty (Mar 23, 2013)

People just like to hate whatever is popular.


----------



## 7stringDemon (Mar 23, 2013)

Fender has nothing I want. Hate Vintage styled Tremolos too. 

As for Gibson, I like Explorers and a few Les Pauls. That's it. Fuck the ugly rest


----------



## jl-austin (Mar 23, 2013)

People gravitate toward what their hero's play, every thing else is junk!


----------



## oneblackened (Mar 23, 2013)

I'd like Fender more if they had guitars that weren't JUST vintage style strats (and yes, I know, 2 point trems... they're still vintage trems to me). 

Gibson, I used to love them. Then I realized that they were heavy, fairly fragile, and didn't have what I was looking for playability-wise. Plus, the president of Gibson isn't someone I would ever want to support.


----------



## Black Mamba (Mar 23, 2013)

People love to pick on the big boys.


----------



## Lrrrr (Mar 23, 2013)

LP's are heavy as all get out with really fat necks.
Single coil and short scale are fail. Always. Be a real man and pony up the dough for teh customz.

Fwiw I love the feel of a LP in the seated position, really comfortable. I loved my old strat for the clean/slightly overdriven tones I used jamming to blues and country. Both companies make some great guitars (and some not so great, just like any major manufacturer trying to expand their footprint). Each has its drawbacks just like any guitar.

I don't seem to notice the hate as much as you do, but I don't understand the kind of hate that you mention. I'd attribute it to stupid group think though.


----------



## Khoi (Mar 23, 2013)

not metal enough


----------



## parksed24 (Mar 23, 2013)

I played a Fender Select Tele' at House of Guitars a little while ago and I almost walked out with it. It was spectacular.

My best guess is they aren't exclusive enough of names to be cool? Everyone has a Gibson and a Fender.
Well, I don't. Yet.
As far as I'm concerned though, a good guitar is a good guitar. Getting hung up on a name is a good way to miss out on something great.


----------



## technomancer (Mar 23, 2013)

I've got two Gibsons and a Fender, no hate here


----------



## leechmasterargentina (Mar 23, 2013)

Well, what I don't like of Fenders and Gibsons is that they're still just the same as 50 years ago...Strats with useless tremolos, for example.

A while ago I made a thread about why I don't like them and I got bashed because they are good guitars and popular. I don't question the quality of their make, or a particular sound they might have, but popular doesn't mean the best.

My main reason not to like them is that 50 years ago those brands were the ones bringing the latest in electric guitar technology and design, and they've just kept in the past. I'm not saying strats and les pauls should dissapear, but Fender and Gibson could release more up to date models of those guitars; I'd like that.

I began playing the guitar first with a Squier Stratocaster and then bought a Fender Stratocaster. I used to like them and kind of worship them...but after I grabbed an Ibanez RG for the first time, I felt the latter were way more comfortable, better sounding and I could use the tremolo without detuning all strings.

I think it's just a reputation they've gained over the years, and most people think they are the best brands, but I think if everyone had the chance to try other brands as well as custom luthier guitars, they'd just forget them, or they would start asking for more up to date designs.

Again, they are fine and playable guitars; no doubt most designs are based on those, but my oppinion is that they've stuck in time and have nothing new to offer. But well, they sell, a lot...so I don't think they're willing to change as long as people buy them.


----------



## texshred777 (Mar 23, 2013)

No hate here. Had some of both, loved them all.

And FWIW, while I love a Floyd I don't find the trems on a strat useless.


----------



## Mprinsje (Mar 23, 2013)

No hate here, love me some tele's, jazzmasters and sg's.


----------



## JPMike (Mar 23, 2013)

technomancer said:


> I've got two Gibsons and a Fender, no hate here



haha, same here!!!


----------



## technomancer (Mar 23, 2013)

texshred777 said:


> And FWIW, while I love a Floyd I don't find the trems on a strat useless.



+1


----------



## Dayn (Mar 23, 2013)

Completely insufficient for every single one of my needs.

Then again, I don't 'hate' them. I wouldn't have put a deposit down on a Strat for my friend if I thought it was terrible...


----------



## jephjacques (Mar 23, 2013)

I hate Gibson's CEO with a passion because of his probably-corrupt business practices and his disgusting cozying-up to the Tea Party after the feds raided their factory.

But they still make some excellent guitars. I've got a LP and an SG and like them both a whole lot.

Fender doesn't make anything that I'm interested in buying, but they're perfectly fine for what they are. And at least they haven't messed with Jackson too much since the buyout.


----------



## Elijah (Mar 23, 2013)

Not pointy enough? Idk probably the same reason a lot of people around here unconditionally love Ibanez


----------



## Fantomas (Mar 23, 2013)

I honestly believe that Gibsons and Fenders are adequate guitars, but they haven't changed anything significant in their designs in 50 years. 

The constant reissuing annoys the hell out of me: why would I pay top dollar for a reissue of a ' 92 reissue of a ' 69 guitar? That '69 guitar being a semi plywood piece of crap which was produced on a budget to begin with (looking at Fender here). Having said that: Gibson seems to be trying to innovate with their floyds and autotuning and killswitched guitars,. 


Anyway, people can spend their money how they want but what gets me is that when I get my local music catalogue which has like 30 pages of guitars, 28 of those are for Fenders and Gibsons which are all exactly the same. Meanwhile they will list only the cheapest Jacksons, LTD, Ibanez, and whatever guitars on the remaining 2 or three pages


----------



## Thep (Mar 23, 2013)

I don't like Gibsons because:

1) Their quality, fit and finish are often times equivalent to a typical Korean import, thus overpriced
2) The shapes and weight are unergonomic. Also, I find tunomatics uncomfortable. 
3) The company partakes in many bad business practices and has too many gimmicks 
4) Vintage heritage and traditions carry over too many obsolete design details

However, they're are alot of great things about Gibson guitars. In general though, I don't like them and I don't see myself purchasing one. 


I like Fender though  ... but would still get a Tom Anderson or G&L


----------



## Jake (Mar 23, 2013)

I once played an American Strat that was probably one of the best 3 guitars I have ever laid my hands on


----------



## gunch (Mar 24, 2013)

I just love nice guitars man. It doesn't matter where it's made, what it's made out of or who it's made by as long as it's a good specimen.

( I remember Max saying something similar )


----------



## Dawn of the Shred (Mar 24, 2013)

Love my MIA Fender fat strat white/mint pickguard. It plays and sounds awesome its the only 6 i have.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 24, 2013)

No Fender hate from me. I adore their necks and love Teles. 

You'll get hate from them on this board because people think they're "dated," which I think is a lame excuse. The solidbody electric guitar design has been nearly the same for 60+ years.

As for Gibson, the stuff they've released in the passed decade is eh... The Dusk Tiger, the Firebird X, the Holy series... Nah. Their original designs (Les Paul, SG, Explorer, V, and ES-335) are still awesome, though.

One of my wants, though, is a Gibson. I want the shit out of a Les Paul Junior Special.


----------



## Hollowway (Mar 24, 2013)

I just don't like the style of them. And I'm not a fan of paying for the brand name of anything, so I end up steering clear of them. But I steer clear of Blackmachines for the same reason, so my dislike is an equal opportunity aloofness.


----------



## pathogenicmetal666 (Mar 24, 2013)

I think it's kinda sad that people think a guitar designed in the 50's and built to 50's specifications is the best thing money can buy. Gibson actually went backwards in design. For example in the 70's they put volutes and maple stripes in a lot of their necks to strengthen the headstock and prevent it from breaking, but then they went back to the original inferior design.

I do love the Stratocaster in terms of design though. I think it's one of the most practical and durable designs.



jl-austin said:


> People gravitate toward what their hero's play, every thing else is junk!



This is partly why people buy Fender and Gibson. They have the mojo.


----------



## M3CHK1LLA (Mar 24, 2013)

in the town i lived in there was only one music store...they carried gibson, fender, gretch etc. it was ran cranky old men. anytime i need to order a part, or talked about my jacksons, ibbys or esp's...all i heard was hate lol.

all the metal bands i loved played other brands...

not really a hater, i do own an epi goth v & a fender strat, but my other guitars are far superior in my eyes.


----------



## Azathoth43 (Mar 24, 2013)

oneblackened said:


> I'd like Fender more if they had guitars that weren't JUST vintage style strats (and yes, I know, 2 point trems... they're still vintage trems to me).



You mean kinda like a Jackson or Charvel or maybe some crazy EVH type guitar?


----------



## ihunda (Mar 24, 2013)

Never had a fender, that's funny but each time I wanted a strat or tele, ESP and GL were here to scratch my itch 

I've had my share of Gibson Les Pauls, really loved them, but couldn't fully bond with them next to a Carvin, Navigator, Tokai Japan... They felt overpriced so I sold them all eventually.

I just own a studio worn brown now in the Gibson family => Great price, very cheap used, historic LP tone right there, not afraid to mod the f**k out of it, so Gibson, I am very thankful for the studio line.


----------



## SkullCrusher (Mar 24, 2013)

Gibson's quality is frightful.

Had two both returned due to neck problem


----------



## MetalKennedy (Mar 24, 2013)

Personally i like gibson, nice full tone and good playability, but fender on the other hand i dislike with a passion, with 1,500 at any other guitar company either gets you a custom (carvin), or at least a very very smooth neckthru guitar, but at fender it gets you a bolt on guitar with the thickest neck joint known to guitar kind, a shitty trem that doesnt hold tune and single coil pickups  ive tried and tested many diffrent kinds of fenders and notcied almost no diffrence between their productions line guitars (mid level mexi made) and their standard handmade line. Waste of money if you ask me


----------



## Estilo (Mar 24, 2013)

Church2224 said:


> two Gibson Les Paul Traditionals and a Fender HSS American Deluxe strat... no major finish issues to be seen. Fretwork was actually pretty good on all of them. They sounded pretty damn good too.



Your do realise the prices they're charging for the models you mentioned? For that "no major issues", "pretty good" and "pretty damn good" just don't cut it for me. I'd rather get something cheaper and mod it to my liking or go custom which, depending on where you are, can be much cheaper anyway.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 24, 2013)

oneblackened said:


> I'd like Fender more if they had guitars that weren't JUST vintage style strats (and yes, I know, 2 point trems... they're still vintage trems to me)


----------



## maliciousteve (Mar 24, 2013)

I don't like Gibsons because the quality can be very hit or miss, mostly miss. Every Gibson I've played that has been released in the last 10 years has had questionable build quality, mostly it's terrible fretwork. So for Gibson to keep raising prices to what they are now I find disgusting.

Fender on the other hand, I've only played one bad Stratocaster (that I can remember). Other than that I've really liked or loved what I've played (especially the JR Tele and EJ Strat)


----------



## JP Universe (Mar 24, 2013)

I like the vintage trem on my EJ strat more than anything I own  no problems here.......


----------



## elq (Mar 24, 2013)

For the $4k this costs - 





I'd much rather buy this for a bit more







And rather than spending $1400 for 






I'd much rather spend a bit more (well, less as it was used) for







This alone is good enough for me to, not quite hate, but certainly have zero interest in the big two manufactures


----------



## Bennykins (Mar 24, 2013)

When my sister used to work at a shop that stocked a lot of Gibson guitars, I would go in there and play this Howard Roberts Fusion III they had in stock. Man I loved that thing, probably my favourite guitar ever. Here's hoping I can score one in the future.


----------



## hutchman (Mar 24, 2013)

I love Fender.....


----------



## Choop (Mar 24, 2013)

I love Fender guitars tbh, at least strats and teles. The designs are very solid and practical, and offer a good platform for customization. They also feel really good to me, both the bodies and neck profiles too. Actually I'm in the process of acquiring another USA strat haha. I've been having them off and on for a good while and I think I'm really going to stick with at least one this time for sure. Gibsons are also great, good solid guitars (usually). 

I dunno. Most people probably don't like 'em because they're the kind of brands that the layman considers the best and above the rest lol, so maybe they feel like they need to represent other guitar possibilities. And they are really basic usually, and vintage designs, but that's kind of what I like about them. There's a kind of beauty in a Fender strat that no custom uber luthier's wacky super strat design can supersede. 

IMO of course.


----------



## Zado (Mar 24, 2013)

Church2224 said:


> I went to my local Guitar Center today and played two Gibson Les Paul Traditionals and a Fender HSS American Deluxe strat. Honestly there was nothing wrong with any of them, they played great and no major finish issues to be seen. Fretwork was actually pretty good on all of them. They sounded pretty damn good too. My question is why do internet guitar forums give these guys so much shit, it seems to me that even though they are the largest companies out there, they still make good guitars.


Nothing against fender..If I needed a strat I wouldn't probably get a fender,but that's me,they are fine instruments.

About gibson..well I've seen too many lemons for the price they have.Some standard sounded dead as soapbar,and some frets didn't sound at all.A friend of mine plays a bonamassa signature and you can clearly tell where the joint between fretboard and neck is because there's a step between the twther friends played custom models at shops and noticed crooked inlays,finish issues on the back,sometimes not great binding and the fretwork was at best decent.Now,a gibson custom costs 2500+&#8364; here,seriously too much for an instrument with flaws you can't find even in korean or chinese guitars.


----------



## sojourner (Mar 24, 2013)

leechmasterargentina said:


> Strats with useless tremolos, for example.





texshred777 said:


> And FWIW, while I love a Floyd I don't find the trems on a strat useless.



 

that's all.


----------



## danresn (Mar 24, 2013)

My favourite brands are Jackson and Fender. Why, partly the radius, I started playing on strats so that's what I like. Secondly there is something in the tone of those guitars that I just love, Jazzmasters, Teles and Strats *always* inspire me to play. G&L probably make a better guitar for the price, but in Australia you don't see many of those so I've always just stuck to what I had access to.

Gibsons on the other hand feel good, but in Australia they are the same price as a custom instrument. I just don't believe you get enough of an instrument to justify the price, that being said as soon as I'm not a student I will procure at least one Gibson Les Paul Junior. Those things are sexy.


----------



## jephjacques (Mar 24, 2013)

G&L really are better than Fender in every way. I've got a G&L P/J bass and it is wonderful. Basically I feel like Fender and Gibson are both good templates for other, smaller builders to expand off of. If you want a Les Paul style guitar there are literally hundreds of alternatives, many of which will be much better quality if not full custom.

Someday I'm gonna get a Tom Anderson 7-string with the cosmetics of a Jimi Hendrix strat and it will ownnnnnn


----------



## Nonservium (Mar 24, 2013)

I got my RGD2120z about a month after my close friend got his Les Paul studio. We paid roughly the same price when it was all said and done. We both feel like I got twice the guitar he did and still feel the same way now well over a year or two later. His Les Paul just feels and plays like shit compared to the RGD. On the LP we've had to have work done on the nut, the bridge posts, the stock tuners are absolute shit and already need replaced and the finish looks absolutely horrid. The only plus either of us can give it is the pickups and the beefy tone. It doesn't stay in tune for shit and just overall seems like overpriced junk. 

Out of all the people we know that have LP's made in the last 10 years no one is really happy with them and based on my experiences with his, I just generally feel like Gibson is living off the name alone and not giving too much of a fuck about what they spit out of the factory.

All that being said, the guy that got me into guitar (a friend of the family) has an old LP from the 70's and it's absolutely amazing. I love that fucking guitar. I've been trying to talk him into willing it to me since his son passed on years ago (this may seem shitty to some of you but this guy might as well be my uncle, I consider him family).

I feel like the Gibson of old and the modern Gibson are two different companies.

I've never looked down on Fender. I spent 15 years chasing down my Strat Plus Deluxe and now that I have it I absolutely love it. I'd still love to get my hands on a Tele Plus from the same era. The new American made models I play in the stores still feel and play good to me and I don't feel like I'd be taking it up the fartbox buying one if I wanted one. I can't say the same for Gibson.


----------



## Captain Butterscotch (Mar 24, 2013)

Yo dawg, I heard you want a reissue of the '93 reissue of the '80 reissue of the '62 reissue, so we made a '13 reissue and are charging $6,000 for it. It even comes with terrible fretwork, cracks in the neck heel, and 2" action.

Sincerely,
Gibson Guitar Corporation

I have nothing against Fender. I love their instruments!


----------



## Andromalia (Mar 24, 2013)

People don't really hate Gibson & Fenders. Wannabe elite metal misicians on a few forums do. These two companies still probably sell more guitars than *all* the other builders combined.

I guess some rant on them because, owning somethign else, they want: 
-to appear like they made an educated choice.
-to give value to theur guitars
-Self justify the price they paid for another brand.

Fender and Gibson don't offer all specs, but the specs they offer are good and convenient for an awful lot of people. The Gibson and Fender artist roster isn't exactly small fry, either.



> we know that have LP's made in the last 10 years no one is really happy with them


I'm extremely happy with my LP studio 60s goldtop reissue.

The reason the strat and LP are still there pretty much unmodified after 50 years is just that they were good designs to start with. It's a guitar, not a cello, you have a limited leeway in spec variation for it to still be a guitar.
I own a Gibson, two Fenders, ESPs, a custom pointy, two ibbies, and I like all of them. 

The honest truth is, we could probably do with two solidbodies and be done with it, one with single coils and one with humbuckers. All the rest is nitpicking and self justification for GAS.


----------



## vinniemallet (Mar 24, 2013)

No hate, I honestly would like to have a nice Stratocaster when I grow up and become more rich haha but now I have to focus getting metal br00tal axe's  About Gibson they're not really my scene


----------



## oneblackened (Mar 24, 2013)

Azathoth43 said:


> You mean kinda like a Jackson or Charvel or maybe some crazy EVH type guitar?



Well, yeah! 

Nah, but updating the heels a bit in particular would be nice.


----------



## MicrobeSS (Mar 24, 2013)

My main issue with Gibson is the 24.75 scale. I own a fender and love, the trem however I don't care for.


----------



## Basti (Mar 24, 2013)

They've had their time. Gibson has much better propensity towards heavier styles but Fenders haven't been pushed much farther than in the days of Iron Maiden. Both kinds of guitar are still widely used in mainstream acts (although PRS seems to be taking those over as well), i.e. when the music doesn't require anything ground-breaking or new from a guitar then you're likely to see a Fender or Gibson somewhere behind the spotlight. 
We're so familiar with their look and sound that they just seem to provide very little potential for improvement or change.


----------



## technomancer (Mar 24, 2013)

Probably the best points I've seen in this thread 

That said despite owning two Gibsons and a Fender I am completely with you on this. The pricing for Gibson's higher end stuff is nuts, and I got both of mine on smoking closeout deals and neither is one of the massively overpriced historics. 



elq said:


> For the $4k this costs -
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Demiurge (Mar 24, 2013)

M3CHK1LLA said:


> in the town i lived in there was only one music store...they carried gibson, fender, gretch etc. it was ran cranky old men. anytime i need to order a part, or talked about my jacksons, ibbys or esp's...all i heard was hate lol.



And this kind of thing happens a lot (especially on-line) and then some sort of haters' quid pro quo develops: "if you hate my X in favor of your Y, then I hate your Y just as much!".

Then, of course, is the argument that these companies are stuck in the past while the Ibanez, ESP, and thinline-superstrat-builder-du-jour are somehow working exclusively on the bleeding edge. Please. Because some of the models have a double-locking trem that (a) only about 10% of the playing populace uses enough to justify having and (b) is based on technology that ain't no spring chicken either?


----------



## cwhitey2 (Mar 24, 2013)

Imo you are just buying a name anymore...the new Gibsons dont have the 'mojo' the old ones have.

The only fender I would buy is a tele.....the rest are mehhh to me and offer 0 features that I want.


----------



## troyguitar (Mar 24, 2013)

Vintage trems work fine for Blackmore, Malmsteen, Uli Roth, Jeff Beck, etc. - Why are they useless again?


----------



## wrongnote85 (Mar 24, 2013)

what i don't get is the whammy bar hate on a strat. ritchie blackmore shook the hell out of those things all the time and never had any problems.


----------



## Govan Emmanuel (Mar 24, 2013)

elq said:


> For the $4k this costs -
> 
> And rather than spending $1400 for
> 
> ...



isn't that a Suhr Classic strat? 

as far as i know, that Fender american standard strat is cost around $950 - $1100 (new), and that Suhr classic strat is cost above $2500

I may be wrong, but i've never seen a Suhr Classic go below $1800 used 

that being said i'd rather buy a Suhr Classic than the hi-end/custom shop Fenders lol


----------



## BucketheadRules (Mar 24, 2013)

I love Fenders, and if you hate Fenders you're weird and I don't want you to talk to me.

I love Gibson guitars, but I hate that their headstocks are badly designed to the point where they're just too fragile, and that Gibson probably know about that but have done fuck-all about it for 60 years - says a lot to me about them as a company, none of it good. And the quality control leaves a lot to be desired... the actual instruments are often very nice (my Flying V is still my favourite guitar I've ever played) and they have some drool-worthy models on their website. You just have to find a good one.


----------



## elq (Mar 24, 2013)

Govan Emmanuel said:


> isn't that a Suhr Classic strat?
> 
> as far as i know, that Fender american standard strat is cost around $950 - $1100 (new), and that Suhr classic strat is cost above $2500
> 
> ...



It a Suhr pro C1. Snagged it for $1300 on eBay (yes, a fantastic deal ). The fender is a deluxe strat, which is closer in spec to the Suhr than an am std.


----------



## timbucktu123 (Mar 24, 2013)

No hate here 

I have a les paul surpreme in trans black on the way and im planning on buying a black beauty(the new light weight version) soon and both the matt heafy epiphones 

I love fenders too. I had an american special strat which i loved but i sold in order to afford my caparison angelus. I also still own a classic vibe tele which is a fantastic guitar for the money.

The reason gibson hasn't changed anything is because when they did their supporters back lashed at them and their sales dropped so they changed it back.


----------



## muffinbutton (Mar 24, 2013)

I love my fender acoustics.


----------



## satchmo72 (Mar 24, 2013)

I buy what works for me, I have tried to branch out and own a start or PRS but for me Ibanez is it. Not that Fenders and Gibsons are bad guitars, they just dont work for my playing style and tone choices.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 24, 2013)

Andromalia said:


> People don't really hate Gibson & Fenders. Wannabe elite metal misicians on a few forums do. These two companies still probably sell more guitars than *all* the other builders combined.
> 
> I guess some rant on them because, owning somethign else, they want:
> -to appear like they made an educated choice.
> ...



A comment so nice, it needed to be posted twice.


----------



## Estilo (Mar 24, 2013)

Andromalia said:


> People don't really hate Gibson & Fenders. Wannabe elite metal misicians on a few forums do. These two companies still probably sell more guitars than *all* the other builders combined.
> 
> I guess some rant on them because, owning somethign else, they want:
> -to appear like they made an educated choice.
> ...



I guess some really gave made educated choices realising that $4k for a LP with hit or miss quality makes shit sense. Now while a Gibby LP is no Epi LP, there are lots more things I would rather spend my $4k on. 

Few would argue the strat and the LP are FANTASTIC designs. All the hate is towards FMIC and TGGC and largely due to their sky high yet unjustified pricing. 

I don't hate FMIC that much though. I LOVE teles, the absolute best guitar neck I have every played was a Tele neck. I have even made a tribute thread to the Avril Lavigne Squier Tele here. 




Andromalia said:


> The honest truth is, we could probably do with two solidbodies and be done with it, one with single coils and one with humbuckers. All the rest is nitpicking and self justification for GAS.



I can't agree with this too. I think the minimum is 4. A 7, and 8, a 6 tuned to C#/ drop B and a 6 tuned to standard E/ drop D . And one of them has to be semi-hollow, one has to have a maple fretboard, one of the sixes has to have a floating bridge and the other 22 frets .


----------



## Andromalia (Mar 24, 2013)

Estilo said:


> I guess some really gave made educated choices realising that $4k for a LP with hit or miss quality makes shit sense. Now while a Gibby LP is no Epi LP, there are lots more things I would rather spend my $4k on.



Well, that's why shops are for, honestly. You are _not _required to buy blind on a website. Yeah, it can be more expensive than ordering on internet. I'll be shopping for an explorer next week and I'll go to shops to make sure I get a good one. (which is likely a bad idea, as knowing me I'll come home with something else and still want an explorer...)

Also, note that if I had to keep one guitar only I'd keep the LP: as much as I love my custom it's one of the less versatile guitars I own. I love having it in an arsenal, but by itself it's not sufficient for all my needs.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 24, 2013)

Estilo said:


> I guess some really gave made educated choices realising that $4k for a LP with hit or miss quality makes shit sense. Now while a Gibby LP is no Epi LP, there are lots more things I would rather spend my $4k on.
> 
> Few would argue the strat and the LP are FANTASTIC designs. All the hate is towards FMIC and TGGC and largely due to their sky high yet unjustified pricing.



Outside of certain CS and Reissue stuff, both Gibson and Fender pricing is amazingly fair. 

You can grab an honest to goodness, USA made, fully spec'd SG for $600 shipped. Gibson SGJ (Chocolate) | Sweetwater.com

Even Les Pauls aren't that expensive. Gibson Les Paul LPJ (Rubbed Goldtop dark back Satin) | Sweetwater.com

If you're referring to pricing in your part of the world, you can't really blame Gibson or Fender, they're not the ones applying tons of retail markup or asking for taxation on import.


----------



## will_shred (Mar 24, 2013)

> I hate Gibson's CEO with a passion because of his probably-corrupt business practices and his disgusting cozying-up to the Tea Party after the feds raided their factory.
> 
> But they still make some excellent guitars. I've got a LP and an SG and like them both a whole lot.
> 
> Fender doesn't make anything that I'm interested in buying, but they're perfectly fine for what they are. And at least they haven't messed with Jackson too much since the buyout.




that sums up my feels for both companies exactly

I have a _serious_ weakness for Les Paul's despite their flaws (I.E. relatively fragile necks). I'll probably end up getting one sooner or later


----------



## Stuck_in_a_dream (Mar 24, 2013)

Well, as many have said before me, in a word they are "dynasaurs", and they ought to be allowed to go extinct or EVOLVE into more robust species. 

Gibson, extremely expensive compared to what's available now on the market. I'd take an ESP EC, or a Carvin CS any day over a Gibson LP even if I have to pay more for the non Gibson LP. LP clones are much more diverse, with a multitude of pickup/finish/scale length/bridge...etc. options. As for Fender, there is not a single feature in their Strats or Teles that has not been surpassed by other brands, none!

For me buying a Fender or a Gibson is a waste of $$$, sorry.


----------



## Tom 1.0 (Mar 24, 2013)

Stuck_in_a_dream said:


> Well, as many have said before me, in a word they are "*dynasaurs*", and they ought to be allowed to go extinct or EVOLVE into more robust species.


----------



## mcrdsd911 (Mar 24, 2013)

No issues with gibson or fender guitars. Great guitars for some people, but their are guitars that play better for me. I dont care who plays them lol that doesn't push my decisions.


----------



## Jzbass25 (Mar 24, 2013)

I haven't been impressed by many Gibsons or Fenders, I don't really hate either but I don't see myself buying a Gibson probably ever unless it is some sweet ES model. I have a soft spot for strats being a big SRV fan but I prefer G&L and Suhr over Fender.


----------



## arasys (Mar 24, 2013)

I think the main reason is, these two brands achieved such a huge brand awareness that people see them as "the guitars brands", and feel somewhat cheated when a cheaper guitar from a different brand turns out better than their gibsons or fenders.

In addition I believe these brands are somewhat known with being slow in terms of giving what people are asking from them for some time, especially in terms of customization etc. 
And you know.. today people are even trying to customize their shoes. So not getting identical to what they have in mind can be another reason.


Let me give you an example: if Gibson comes up with a decent black explorer with emgs + fixed bridge without a pickguard, a lot of people wouldn't think twice before buying one.

Why ? 1st Gibson is associated with higher average quality ( in the past years, some people really hated the quality of their gibsons, but again there will always be rotten ones in an apple basket )

2nd the imaginary model I am talking about actually has a lot of demand but gibson either ignored the demand or came up with something little bit different from people have been asking for ( Gibson traditional explorer) . Yet on the other hand; some people dont hesitate to pay 6k for the same guitar from ESP custom shop. 

Brands have their own characters, Gibson and Fender are somewhat known with traditional approach, and they can set the prices somewhat above the average while trusting their brand image.


Guitars are just like people, theyre all different, even some of the same model guitars may sound different. And people are looking for "the guitar" especially while spending $2000+. 

I bought an ESP Alexi on sale for $1200, when I brought it home I felt cheated because it "fit me better" than my Jackson RR1 (which I paid $2000 in 2008) and I must say that ESP is slightly better in terms of craftsmanship..But that doesn't change the fact that Jackson is the first heavy metal guitar brand and equals "OMGSOKOOL!" for their target segment.

At the end, tastes are subjective, there will always be major or small details that will turn gold into turd. But this shouldn't stop the companies from trying for better guitar quality and market research.


----------



## pawel (Mar 24, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Outside of certain CS and Reissue stuff, both Gibson and Fender pricing is amazingly fair.



This. You can pick up a new USA Standard Strat for less than a MIJ Prestige or an ESP Standard Series and they are very solid instruments (I've owned all three). Even the Mexican models offer pretty solid quality at the price point. Gibson currently offers some of the cheapest USA-made guitars on the market, if not the cheapest. I really don't get the complaints about prices. 



Stuck_in_a_dream said:


> Well, as many have said before me, in a word they are "dynasaurs", and they ought to be allowed to go extinct or EVOLVE into more robust species.



Well, that's the funny thing - Gibson tried to innovate (Robot, Min-ETune etc.) but their customers just want them to make more Les Pauls (and SGs, ES 335s, Explorers), so they do just that. And you really can't blame them for not producing the ultimate Les Paul for entry-level prices - they must give people some incentive to buy the big dollar models. If they sort out their QC and get their CEO to keep his thoughts to himself, I don't see how they do all that much wrong (other than the design of the Firebird X). Hell, they even introduced some moderately successful new designs (Midtown/Midtown Custom).


----------



## ZEBOV (Mar 24, 2013)

Gibson doesn't have anything that would suit my needs except for maybe a baritone guitar, but I sure wouldn't want that to be a Les Paul. I don't mind Fender at all though. I'm not a huge fan of the look of any Fender, but I'll someday own a Fender bass because of their wide range of tones.


----------



## Capelo (Mar 24, 2013)

No hate here either. I like both brands although I currently don't own a guitar from either company. In my case, I simply find other designs more comfortable/suitable to what I play, especially EBMM Axis. Thanks Eddie!!


----------



## Andromalia (Mar 24, 2013)

> Well, that's the funny thing - Gibson tried to innovate (Robot, Min-ETune etc.) but their customers just want them to make more Les Pauls



Not necessarily, but innovation for the sake of change isn't very appealing if it doesn't bring something to the table. Ok, a guitar that can tune itself, woot, how have I managed for all those years ?
See the almost overwhelming positive response to the evertune bridge, which brings a solution to an existing problem.

At some point, an instrument specs become more or less fixed and it stops evolving. You don't hear violin players complaining the violin didn't evolve since 1750. The most important area of research today imho is about alternatives to wood, not the technical specs of the instrument itself, except maybe that Line 6 modeling thingy (don't remember the guitar line name) which in the end could make the pickups irrelevant.


----------



## TemjinStrife (Mar 24, 2013)

I don't hate them, but the value for money proposition is screwed.

When I decided I wanted a Strat, I played almost two dozen Fenders, ranging from Squiers to American Standards, and while there were gems in there (and almost every one was a solid guitar), none of them felt as nice or sounded as good as a used G&L Legacy Tribute that I ended up snagging for $300.

Similarly, there are great LP-ish options for much less than a good LP Standard will cost you.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 24, 2013)

Andromalia said:


> Not necessarily, but innovation for the sake of change isn't very appealing if it doesn't bring something to the table.



Look up the Digital Les Paul and Dusk Tiger models. The work made in mating hexaphonic/MIDI pickups with traditional magnetic pickups makes the last 20 years of Roland's stuff look like child's play. 

Remember the Smartwood series? Gibson using tons of lesser known, non-endangered species to make guitars out of. Great stuff.


----------



## Don Vito (Mar 24, 2013)

Basti said:


> They've had their time. Gibson has much better propensity towards heavier styles but Fenders haven't been pushed much farther than in the days of Iron Maiden. Both kinds of guitar are still widely used in mainstream acts (although PRS seems to be taking those over as well),* i.e. when the music doesn't require anything ground-breaking or new from a guitar then you're likely to see a Fender or Gibson somewhere behind the spotlight.*
> We're so familiar with their look and sound that they just seem to provide very little potential for improvement or change.








Now on tour with Katy Perry.


----------



## Veritech Zero (Mar 24, 2013)

I wouldn't say I hate them either, but the last time Fender made anything that remotely interested me was their HM strats from the late 80s early 90s.

And the last time Gibson made anything I wanted was... wait, have they ever made a long scale explorer or V?


----------



## pushpull7 (Mar 24, 2013)

When I see many gibson prices, I'm pretty blown away by how much they want. I don't know where people get all this money but it hasn't scared away business so more power to 'em I say. 

I can't afford that shit. I barely have a house.


----------



## Matt_D_ (Mar 24, 2013)

gibson has a reputation for substandard QA and high prices. note the use of the word "reputation". whether its true or not is up for debate (one im staying away from since i havent played a lot of them). they also seem to make very odd corporate level decisions (firebird X anyone?) at least they're not shy of tinkering with technology (the new mini robot tuner setup looks interesting). 

fender, I wasnt aware anyone hated fender? aside from strats being a tad, well, boring. the 2012 onwards american standard teles have been pretty stellar, nitro necks and brass saddles FTW.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 24, 2013)

chrisharbin said:


> When I see many gibson prices, I'm pretty blown away by how much they want. I don't know where people get all this money but it hasn't scared away business so more power to 'em I say.
> 
> I can't afford that shit. I barely have a house.



Have you checked the new LPJ and SGJ series?

People, Gibson DOES sell sub-$1000 guitars.


----------



## pushpull7 (Mar 24, 2013)

But come on, I can go open up the SW or MF catalog right now and the vast majority are 2000+


----------



## purpledc (Mar 24, 2013)

I think for the most part these comanies have their shit together. Im not sure how old you are but this most certainly hasnt and still isnt ALWAYS the case. I think the biggest issues I take with these companies is I find them to be unbelievably overpriced. And to me they dont offer anything special. And when the companies do actually try stepping out of their norm its usually in the totally wrong direction. I dont need robot guitars that tune themselves. But I would like solid woods, glossy finishes and decent build quality. 

As a past employee of Sam Ash (or as I like to say slam ass) and guitar center (I simply refer to that as the 4th circle of hell) I can say with certainty that I saw more quality control issues with gibson guitars than any other brand when talking about supposed quality instruments. The worst of all they sold was of course the house brands like carlo robelli. But when unboxing guitars in the warehouse we had more gibsons than anything else going out for warranty or to our in house luthier for setups. Fender wasnt so bad right out of the gate but they didnt fair well on the wall. Oddly enough you rarely had an issue with an ibanez or ESP product. 

These days I can usually find that legit fender and gibson labeled instruments to be pretty decent instruments. But there was only one gibson or fender that wowed me enough to actually buy it and even that instrument had to be replaced under warranty and the replacement was quickly sold. Sad really as it was a beautiful LP. 

I think for the most part its simply us older gents who have a beef with these companies as we just couldnt deal with the constand flux in quality and inconsistencies. But there are also those that rip on these two brands simply because they are repeating what others have said simply to give the impression that they have an opinion and are educated and even more so will also defend a company blindly simply because they like them. I think if people have a legitimate gripe then its all good. Voice it and move on. Its the people that hold a grudge and are the always the first to join on the slam Gibson or fender bandwagon that bother me. As it tends to dilute their credibility and simply seems they have an axe to grind. I dont want to get into every story I have about these companies as I have a lot of them. But if you could only walk a mile in my shoes and seen some of the things Ive seen you may not be so quick to question at least some of the bitching that is done on the behalf of fender and gibson.


----------



## Dan_Vacant (Mar 24, 2013)

Because misha/tosin/kerry king/deathcorepeople/ don't use them.


----------



## 3074326 (Mar 24, 2013)

leechmasterargentina said:


> My main reason not to like them is that 50 years ago those brands were the ones bringing the latest in electric guitar technology and design, and they've just kept in the past. I'm not saying strats and les pauls should dissapear, but Fender and Gibson could release more up to date models of those guitars; I'd like that.



These two companies make the same stuff on purpose. They sell lots of guitars to older players and people with other Gibsons/Fenders. When they make changes, their biggest consumers bitch about it. I had a guy a couple days ago actually get mad that we have a Studio with a Floyd. He walked out. 

They're doing what they know they can do well. Gibson puts modern stuff on some of their guitars though. The Robots, which are stupid as hell but it's modern, the wiring inside a Standard is definitely not a historical way of doing things. 

Same with Fender, minus the robot stuff and computer-like wiring in Standards. But they've made modern takes on vintage guitars - look at the Deluxe Strats. They're hitting the boutique guys with the Select Series. Nobody bitches about Suhr, but that's exactly what Fender is going for with their Selects. 

Gibson also owns Steinberger. Fender owns Jackson. They're keeping their name synonymous with what it always has been. They have other brands for the other stuff.

But, people hate them because they played one bad one and assume they're all bad. Or they read about it from some 14 year old LTD fan on the internet who says his F-100 kills every Les Paul he's every played.



purpledc said:


> As a past employee of Sam Ash (or as I like to say slam ass) and guitar center (I simply refer to that as the 4th circle of hell) I can say with certainty that I saw more quality control issues with gibson guitars than any other brand when talking about supposed quality instruments. The worst of all they sold was of course the house brands like carlo robelli. But when unboxing guitars in the warehouse we had more gibsons than anything else going out for warranty or to our in house luthier for setups. Fender wasnt so bad right out of the gate but they didnt fair well on the wall. Oddly enough you rarely had an issue with an ibanez or ESP product.



I work for Sam Ash, and this is not the case at all at my store. I've been there for three years and the amount of Gibsons I've seen issues with can be counted on one hand. I send an Ibanez back two or three times a month. The frets stick out on Ibanez more than any other brand I've seen. LTDs are very solid. Fenders have more issues than Gibson, but still less than most other brands. Gibson has the highest quality control I've seen.. I've worked at two Gibson dealers. I've said it before and I'll say it again - unless Gibson is just sending all their good guitars to the stores I work/have worked at, I find the quality control comments very odd.

EDIT: This coming from someone who owns three Ibanez guitars with another coming this week.. I do own a Gibson, but I'm by no means a homer. I'm just a guy who is very impressed by the hundreds and hundreds of guitars I've seen from them. They build good stuff. If it's worth the price or not is another debate entirely. Most common issue I've seen is regarding the finish. I've seen a couple with finish bubbles around the tuners on the headstock.


----------



## purpledc (Mar 24, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Have you checked the new LPJ and SGJ series?
> 
> People, Gibson DOES sell sub-$1000 guitars.




They do but they still dont seem like a bargain. At least not compared to other companies who offer so much more for the same price. I dont think I should have to pay and extra $500 to have a gloss finish.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 24, 2013)

chrisharbin said:


> But come on, I can go open up the SW or MF catalog right now and the vast majority are 2000+




Even then, they have over 100 sub-$2000 guitars.


----------



## drgamble (Mar 24, 2013)

All of my guitars have different purposes and uses. I have a $700 Gibson Les Paul Special that absolutely rocks for certain things. I have a $500 Japanese Strat with an Invader in the bridge that slays for other things, especially the single coils for some lead stuff, a '90's Ibanez S540LTD, and a Ibanez RG7321 with a d-sonic/liquifire set and both play really well and are useful to me. I love all of my guitars and use them for different things. I don't have any of the high end Gibsons or Fenders, but the ones I do have are solid and a joy to play. I don't hate on them. With guitars, you just have to play them and see if they do something for you that no other guitar does. That's how I buy guitars anyway. I don't get to attached to any one brand, I buy instruments that inspire me to play and I love my LP and my Strat as much as I love my Ibby's. They all strike me in a different way and have a purpose. I guess that's the utilitarian in me.


----------



## Rap Hat (Mar 24, 2013)

I've never really been a fan of Fenders, the look and feel don't jive with me and if I really need a strat-style tone I'll just grab my Variax .

I do like a good Gibson - Have a fun '67 ES330, played a Les Paul single and doublecut in my old band, had a cool ash-bodied Paul a bunch of years ago too. But after working in a store and seeing the quality decline, I soured a bit on the brand. It went beyond the fragility of the headstocks; there was a near-guarantee that each shipment would have one or two with glaring issues (fretwork, finishing, warping, etc.), sometimes more. It was never one specific model either - one day it'd be a special, the next a Custom. The CS Gibsons always seemed good, but I never really messed with them (and I'd hope they wouldn't ship out bad ones to stores...). 
That definitely shattered my notion that US-made guitars were always perfect and the pinnacle of guitars. Once I started to branch out further I realized country of origin could only be used as the broadest of guidelines.

It's been a while since I was involved on that side of things, and recently I checked out a few Gibsons at the local GC. They all seemed just fine, and the Studio I tried reminded me so much of my old Studio I had to fight not to buy it for the $300 off they were asking. I'd like to believe it's a sign they got their QC under control, but I'm sure there are tons of other people like me who saw firsthand the issues years ago and are still basing their opinion on that.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Mar 24, 2013)

purpledc said:


> They do but they still dont seem like a bargain. At least not compared to other companies who offer so much more for the same price. _* I dont think I should have to pay and extra $500 to have a gloss finish.*_



You don't. You pay the extra money to pay the salary of someone who lives in the US, not China or Korea. Knowing that and that those new entry-level Gibsons are actually about the same damned price as most nice Korean guitars these days, there really isn't much room for complaint.


----------



## broj15 (Mar 24, 2013)

The hate for Gibson and fender seen around here is just like the love for bkp's and black machines: teenagers on the internet suffering from herd mentality.


----------



## Blasphemer (Mar 24, 2013)

I actually quite like Gibsons. One of my dream guitars is a LP Custom, actually. That or an SG-Z. GOD Those were awesome


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 24, 2013)

broj15 said:


> The hate for Gibson and fender seen around here is just like the love for bkp's and black machines: teenagers on the internet suffering from herd mentality.



Also, this. 

Pretty much why the internet hates EMGs, thinks Schecters have necks bigger than telephone poles, considers Ibanez the guitar master race, says ToM's and Floyd Roses are bridges designed in part by Satan, and thinks Basswood is worse than cardboard. At least on this forum.


----------



## pushpull7 (Mar 25, 2013)

I dunno guys, I was just making a point. 

I'm 48. I get way more goo-goo eyed over a caparison or a mayones or a raptor or something like that than a gibson or a fender. There are exceptions of course. But I look at THIS and go WOW!






Or, I really like Ibanez RG's. 

It's just who I am. It's my taste, it's not hate. I just don't see anything about a fender custom shop that hits the mark for me. They're nice, the cost a lot  But it's not the drool factor the above pic gives. 

I don't djent, I can barely play, but I love guitars. Not hatin' on them at all!


----------



## Estilo (Mar 25, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Outside of certain CS and Reissue stuff, both Gibson and Fender pricing is amazingly fair.
> 
> You can grab an honest to goodness, USA made, fully spec'd SG for $600 shipped. Gibson SGJ (Chocolate) | Sweetwater.com
> 
> ...



That is one sweet looking SG. Yeah I remember having seen Gibson products at much lower prices than is typical Gibson but it must have slipped my mind when making that post. The LP Studio 50's/ 60's Tributes come to mind. If they keep up with this then I can foresee a much higher probability of me owning a Gibson product. 

To clarify, my point in my previous post was to point out that it's not so much about hate towards Fenders and Gibsons, but more of getting value for what we pay for than the 6 letters on the headstock. Andromalia's post was rather derogatory towards everyone who stays away from Fenders and Gibsons, I took a defensive stance for myself and like-minded people. It's charging $4k for a LP that I can't even be sure will play perfectly or $3k for a CS Strat with a badly filed nut and misaligned bridge that I have a problem with. And who decides on the pricing schemes? The corporations themselves. So you can't really blame me for having a slight semblance of hate for them. But it's not irrational hate, if they start releasing products that I feel are worth what they're charging, I'd jump on the bandwagon. 

A US made SG with (largely) standard SG specs at USD600, I'm all for it ! 

And regarding pricing at different parts of the world, while the makers aren't to blame for it, you can still compare prices relative to other makes and models. Eg if a store charges 200% markup on a Gibson LP, they would likely do the same with Fenders, Ibanezes, ESP's Jacksons, Schecters, you-name-its. Hence even though I'm not seeing US prices at my stores I can still make judgments based on relative prices.


----------



## Matt_D_ (Mar 25, 2013)

no matter how many pointy (black?) guitars with ridiculous numbers of strings, pickup output resistance, exotic woods or frets i own, my telecaster(s) will always have a special place in my heart. 

one day ill get my hand on a PRS CE24 too, and maybe a 90's lp. and one of those 2727z's, or a RGA420z, and a jazzmaster, and a regius, and a 335 and.. oh fuck it. can we just agree that guitars are just awesome?


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Mar 25, 2013)

Estilo said:


> And regarding pricing at different parts of the world, while the makers aren't to blame for it, you can still compare prices relative to other makes and models. Eg if a store charges 200% markup on a Gibson LP, they would likely do the same with Fenders, Ibanezes, ESP's Jacksons, Schecters, you-name-its. Hence even though I'm not seeing US prices at my stores I can still make judgments based on relative prices.



Nope, at least not here in Korea. Here, the markup depends on how popular the brand is. Since even here Gibson and Fender are the big names that the "serious" musicians go after, the markup on them is, quite annoyingly, usually higher than the markup on other brands imported into the country. That means we've got the increase in price resulting from import taxes, _and_ random increases in price depending on what the seller thinks people are willing to pay.

Luckily (and as a direct result), I can find affordable Korean copies of both brands quite easily.


----------



## DH31701 (Mar 25, 2013)

I like most Fender models, pickups are replaceable so that's not an issue for me
only reason I didn't buy one is because there's only 22 frets(some even have only 21)
otherwise I really like the neck of most Fenders

But I hated the way they make Jackson nowadays, sloppy fretwork, super thick finishes, and same thin necks on all the models where usually every model has it's own neck shape in the Pre-Fender days


----------



## Loomer (Mar 25, 2013)

My main gripe with Gibson these days is their CEO and his behaviour in terms of press relations and his political affiliation. Given my own political views, I cannot buy a factory-new Gibson in good conscience, since their CEO, and thus by extension the Tea Party represents everything I consider to be indefensible, amoral, regressive and ignorant. I simply cannot bring myself to endorse that sort of thing, since I believe they will be the ruin of us all (including themselves) if they become more powerful. 

But then again the whole "Their QC these days is kinda hit-and-miss" argument is just as valid. I can't remember the last time I've been genuinely impressed with a factory-new Gibson. Personally I'd rather seek out one of the old japanese "Lawsuit clones" like Greco, Tokai and Hondo II. That said, one of my favourite guitars ever is a '97 SG-I.

Fender on the other hand is a-okay in my book. Though I find their whole Custom Shop thing of selling pre-reliced guitars for top dollar a little silly, they are still a solid company.


----------



## pawel (Mar 25, 2013)

Andromalia said:


> Not necessarily, but innovation for the sake of change isn't very appealing if it doesn't bring something to the table. Ok, a guitar that can tune itself, woot, how have I managed for all those years ?
> See the almost overwhelming positive response to the evertune bridge, which brings a solution to an existing problem.



Well, a traditional-looking guitar where you can change tunings on the fly without modelling is not that silly of an idea to me - not something I'd need, but I don't see it as a gimmick for gimmick's sake. 

Point taken that innovation has to be meaningful, but trying and failing is very much a part of it, so at the very least I would give Gibson the credit for that. Besides, we will all have different conception of what is innovative - SS.org may be about new materials, designs, and ERG solutions, while there are other parts of the guitar playing community still complaining about the fact that no company fully embraced the various polyphonic synth possibilities etc.


----------



## epsylon (Mar 25, 2013)

broj15 said:


> The hate for Gibson and fender seen around here is just like the love for bkp's and black machines: teenagers on the internet suffering from herd mentality.



The same argument goes both way :
The *love* for Gibson and fender seen around here is just like the love for bkp's and black machines: teenagers on the internet suffering from herd mentality.

Both Fender and Gibson have spent millions of dollars advertising their classic guitar designs. Their customers are very conservative precisely because they have managed to make everyone think that their designs are the best (using the good old "appeal to tradition" marketing technique).
It's a fallacy to say that Gibson and Fender don't innovate because their customers don't want them to : they have worked relentlessly for decades to ensure that.

I was reading an article the other day speaking about how the De Beers company (the cartel controlling most of the diamond market worldwide) managed to greatly increase the demand for engagement rings (notably in the US). Through clever and relentless advertising, they managed to convince every American women that the man must pays two months worth of salary for a diamond if he proposes. All this for a virtually worthless piece of carbon.
The market for electric guitars is "natural" (because regardless of whether they were advertised, electric guitars would still be sold to people who want to play music with them), so it's even easier for a marketer to sell guitars. You just have to be one of the first big players and have clever advertising (and that includes having "star" performers use with your products).
Note that I haven't said anything about the intrinsic quality of Fender's or Gibson's (and I certainly don't hate them).

People hate proportionnally more on Fender or Gibson because they are big and ubiquitous (and they are big and ubiquitous because they've been here from the beginning and worked hard towards remaining big and ubiquitous). There are also ESP and Ibanez haters, who gives a shit ?


----------



## pawel (Mar 25, 2013)

epsylon said:


> Both Fender and Gibson have spent millions of dollars advertising their classic guitar designs. Their customers are very conservative precisely because they have managed to make everyone think that their designs are the best (using the good old "appeal to tradition" marketing technique).
> 
> It's a fallacy to say that Gibson and Fender don't innovate because their customers don't want them to : they have worked relentlessly for decades to ensure that.



That's true to a degree - a huge chunk of Fender and Gibson's sales comes from the appeal to tradition which their advertising definitely contributes to, but they don't fully drive their market. In the 1960s Gibson decided that the singlecut LP design is dated and ditched in favour of what is now the SG. Around that time the first generation of rock electric guitar heroes (or maybe second after Hank Marvin and co.) started playing Les Pauls and the Les Paul came back. I can imagine that a similar re-focus on the Les Paul came around when Slash hit the scene in the late 1980s. Also, both Gibson and Fender made pointy superstrats in the 80s to respond to the market demand and even now Gibson is still trying to do something other than sell R9s. 

Maybe it's a bit of a romantic vision, but IMO there is something more to the enduring popularity of the Tele, Strat, and Les Paul designs besides advertising and wanting to be like Eric/Jimi/Jimmy/Jeff/Stevie/Slash. Advertising in the 1960s and 1970s was not what it is now and, even with more and more solidbody electrics hitting the market, these were the designs that had the staying power. Maybe it's because they were some of the first, but I think Fender and Gibson did get something right back then.


----------



## canuck brian (Mar 25, 2013)

I love strats. I've never had a chance to fully do one up the way I want, but i've got one in pieces at my place now that i'm slowly modifying. I'm not sure of the most current models, but for the longest time, I thought the made in Mexico ones played better than their American standard models. With a change in pickups, i figured they'd slay them.

Gibson....I don't even know where to start with this company. I've peeled two black Les Paul's down to their bare wood and found 3 piece bodies when they're supposed to be two. When a particular break gets the moniker "the Gibson break", it might be time to revisit how you scarf joint your necks. A friend of mine works in a pretty large store with well over a hundred Gibsons - we've laughed about how atrocious the quality control is in recent years - easily pointing out brutal finish, bad masking, terrible fretwork, numerous deep scratches in a lot of fretboards.... I'll snap pics of the shitty mask job on a $4000 Les Paul custom. It really sucks because the Explorer i bought brand new in 1996 was pretty badassed and basically flawless. Put a Gibson beside a PRS in the same price point and it's night and day.

Gibson also has the dubious honor of releasing the biggest heap of crap I've seen in the BFG Les Paul. I can't even think of a single thing on that guitar that I could remotely describe as quality. Everything about it was sub par and was basically sold based on the name on the headstock.


----------



## purpledc (Mar 25, 2013)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> You don't. You pay the extra money to pay the salary of someone who lives in the US, not China or Korea. Knowing that and that those new entry-level Gibsons are actually about the same damned price as most nice Korean guitars these days, there really isn't much room for complaint.




Well to each their own. But there are quite a few companies who can offer more than what gibson offers at a price point that is more competitive. Canadians are paid similar wages as USA employees and the la si do company who produces seagull and godin do a great job at keeping prices down and quality up. And they do things really old fashioned over there. IMHO gibson asks premium prices based on the legacy of their name. 

Id also take one of those nicer korean guitars over an entry level gibson. IMHO quality fit and finish, materials and components trumps Country of manufacture any day. Ten or 20 years ago I wouldnt have said this. But as the quality gap between the USA and overseas production closes more and more every year USA production means less and less. I understand pride. But it can also be a bad thing if you rely solely on it.


----------



## purpledc (Mar 25, 2013)

3074326 said:


> These two companies make the same stuff on purpose. They sell lots of guitars to older players and people with other Gibsons/Fenders. When they make changes, their biggest consumers bitch about it. I had a guy a couple days ago actually get mad that we have a Studio with a Floyd. He walked out.
> 
> They're doing what they know they can do well. Gibson puts modern stuff on some of their guitars though. The Robots, which are stupid as hell but it's modern, the wiring inside a Standard is definitely not a historical way of doing things.
> 
> ...




You have to remember that I worked for these companies between the years of 1998 to 2003 or 2004. So we are looking at a decade of evolution between then and now. I all ready stated that LATELY gibsons have stabilized with their quality control but that it hasnt always been that way. And it would seem a few people like me hold a grudge and others simply repeat what they hear. I have no doubt though about the current ibanez guitars. I dont remember picking an indo ibby up at a GC in the last few years that was even playable much less in tune. I guess every company has its ups and downs.


----------



## satchisgod (Mar 25, 2013)

CYBERSYN said:


> People just like to hate whatever is popular.


 
This is so true. I was one of those people...pure ignorant. I grew up learning the guitar to metal etc so it could only be Jackson, ESP, Ibanez and other "progressive" companies like that. Thin necks all the way, when in truth, the wide thin necks like on Ibanez don't suit my hands at all.

Recently bought a Les Paul Traditional and it's astonishing. The LP is the biggest guitar in rock for a reason. They are the best sounding, bar none. I've never experience tone like it and I have played a lot of guitars that would be a lot more expensive, some of which I own.


----------



## hairychris (Mar 25, 2013)

My most recent guitar purchase was a vintage spec FSR MIM Telecaster and it's awesome; factoring in the price-point of well under GBP400 I don't have a bad thing to say. A guy I know who owns a similar MIM does not want to A/B it against his vintage '68 in case it kicks the '68's arse. Some of the old Squire stuff was foul, but I'm glad that I scratched my Tele-itch with a MIM. Would I go MIA? Not really worth it from where I'm standing.

Gibson... erm. Firstly I haven't found their Epiphone range consistent in the slightest, and certainly in the UK you need to spend a chunk of cash for the real deal. However I have played some LPs that were stunning - the one that sticks in my mind is a Standard, one of the most resonant guitars that I've ever tried. I don't get on with the carved top/TOM combo of the LP so have never seriously been in the market for one.

I don't particularly hate on either, but as it is right now I'd trust a product less if it came from Gibson then from Fender.

EDIT: I used to hate PRS guitars when I was younger until I got a good deal on a Cu22. Immediate convert at that point. I suppose that until you try it you only have the image to go on.


----------



## Mr Richard (Mar 25, 2013)

Personally I find they are two of the best examples of "paying for a brand name" in the guitar market. Personally I find just the same old same old boring models for $3000+ year after year.

They seem way to attached to their "vintage" image and I'm just not a "vintage" kinda guy. I've owned a MIM Strat and a Gibson Firebird V and enjoyed both. Hell, aside from the mini buckers and neck dive the Firebird was one of my fav guitars I've owned. That being said my main beef with Gibson and Fender is what you get for the money.

All you really need to do is look at PRS guitars. Many of those guitars are $3000+ but you have some of the coolest finishs AND you get quailty along with it.

For me though, it boils down the paying for a brand name and getting the saem old same old. Not saying you don't get quality, but I can get quality anywhere for that price.


----------



## Overtone (Mar 25, 2013)

What's interesting about the branding concept of continuing a tradition ends up skewing the reference point for what is vintage, modern, etc.. The first Jem came out in the late 80's. When you think about it, it is 80s as fuck! But it still looks like a "modern" guitar to me and many people because of the Fender/Gibson reference point.


----------



## Choop (Mar 25, 2013)

Meh, you can easily get a used american standard strat for under $1k, IMO they are a fantastic bargain. There is definitely a point of diminishing returns with any product line really as far as price/performance.


----------



## pushpull7 (Mar 25, 2013)

Now you guys have got me wanting a Les Paul, thanks sevenstring!


----------



## Steinmetzify (Mar 25, 2013)

Best thing about both brands to me is resale value. Fenders and Gibsons are money in the bank, and higher end examples are investments, as far as it goes. 

FWIW, I rarely sell guitars...so I went the custom route. I had a luthier friend build me a LP with my specs/finish, because Gibson wouldn't do so. I A/Bed my custom with a LPC and it killed it, and the same for the LP Classic Custom I had. 

Cheaper Fenders are great modding platforms....I recently picked up a MIM strat, which I'm outfitting with a Hipshot bridge and BKP Painkiller. Should rock for what it is.

I wouldn't buy either brand hoping for a be-all/end-all guitar though...


----------



## RagtimeDandy (Mar 25, 2013)

Gibsons sound good to me but I find them unplayable half the time. Also the fretboards tend to be pretty shitty in my experience. I also find them profoundly uncomfortable to play overall. So good sound...which is half the battle, but I need to be able to play the damn instrument too.

Fender is just too old school for me. Awesome for blues and clean tones are amazing, but I've never picked up a Fender and wanted to buy it.

Also to play devil's advocate, the only Ibanez I've ever loved is my own JS1200 and even that has a weak sound to me. I find the craftsmanship of the regular models to be a total shitheap. Gibson and Fender atleast are consistent and you know what to expect. With Ibanez its monetary Russian Roulette. 

I'm a PRS guy. The best guitar I've ever played is my Custom 24. I've never had a guitar bond like that. Every time I pick it up I either write some riffs or just don't want to put it down. I've never experienced that with any of the other mentioned brands. In fact I really couldn't write music till I got my CU24

Id say it'd unsurprisingly personal preference. 


_Posted from Sevenstring.org App for Android_


----------



## broj15 (Mar 25, 2013)

epsylon said:


> The same argument goes both way :
> The *love* for Gibson and fender seen around here is just like the love for bkp's and black machines: teenagers on the internet suffering from herd mentality.
> 
> Both Fender and Gibson have spent millions of dollars advertising their classic guitar designs. Their customers are very conservative precisely because they have managed to make everyone think that their designs are the best (using the good old "appeal to tradition" marketing technique).
> ...



Hmmmm, an interesting point. But explain something to me: How exactly can people that love Fender and Gibson have a herd mentality when you just said yourself that people hate proportionally *more* on those two companies? Last time I checked if you weren't in the majority then the only other place you could be is in the minority and a herd/ hive mind mentality is something usually only present in the majority group. 

I also don't think you can call it herd mentality when someone is inclined to purchase what has been a time tested industry standard for the last 30-40 years. That's the same reason you see people rave about the 5150/6505. They don't say it's a good amp because everyone else says the same thing. They say it's a good amp because it really is the best tool for the job. Sometimes a strat, tele, les paul, sg etc. is just the best tool for the job. Bkp's on the other hand are a different story. In that situation someone with a minuscule amount of fame decided that bkp's were superior and the the next thing you know every fanboy was riding the dick train to bkp land, just because it's what some "famous" musician said on the internet. That, my friend, is a real herd mentality.


----------



## Basti (Mar 25, 2013)

shall we just say it's because of opinions and bandwagons? 

It's because of opinions. And bandwagons.


----------



## craigny (Mar 25, 2013)

I think the cheaper Fenders have gotten ALOT better and Gibson is finally getting around to making some decent affordable guitars....that's how I believe a fair amount of the "hate" has dissipated for them.


----------



## Unknown Doodl3.2 (Mar 25, 2013)

leechmasterargentina said:


> Well, what I don't like of Fenders and Gibsons is that they're still just the same as 50 years ago...Strats with useless tremolos, for example.
> 
> A while ago I made a thread about why I don't like them and I got bashed because they are good guitars and popular. I don't question the quality of their make, or a particular sound they might have, but popular doesn't mean the best.
> 
> ...



As much as I want to side with your point it just seems to me that you're asking fish to fly and birds to swim.



purpledc said:


> Canadians are paid similar wages as USA employees and the la si do company who produces seagull and godin do a great job at keeping prices down and quality up. And they do things really old fashioned over there. IMHO gibson asks premium prices based on the legacy of their name.



I've sold all these brands for years now and while la si do make really good stuff (especially for the price), comparing them to some of the stuff gibson and fender release is pure apples and oranges. Not even in the same league. 

I agree with those who spoke of herd mentality. Ibanez, with a few exceptions, hasn't done an RG worth buying since 2001 and no one's ever convinced me they SOUND good stock (keep in mind I own 2), Dean is firing on all cylinders trying to break the world record for the amount of lemons released, and Jackson's QC is all over the place (which is unfortunate since they've been releasing some interesting models lately, mirror that thought for Ibz).

Schecter seem to be one of the only "big" guitar brands lately coming out with stuff that actually feels like you're getting your money's worth. They have interesting models, different options for different players (most models available lefty as well, woot), signature models that are worth the extras, and something that resembles customer service in contrast to the aforementioned brands. PRS's quality is without question but it's sort of expected given how much they charge for their guitars (not saying it's not worth it of course).

In terms of quality or bang for your buck, I can understand those who feel Gibson and Fender can be falling behind especially compared to some of the options we have now like Shur, Vigier, Tom Anderson etcetc... all these brands that sell a product in a similar price range and are way more consistent in quality. 

So why do people still buy LPs and Strats? Because nothing else feels or sounds like em. It's not about better or worse


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Mar 25, 2013)

purpledc said:


> Well to each their own. But there are quite a few companies who can offer more than what gibson offers at a price point that is more competitive. Canadians are paid similar wages as USA employees and the la si do company who produces seagull and godin do a great job at keeping prices down and quality up. And they do things really old fashioned over there. IMHO gibson asks premium prices based on the legacy of their name.



Well yeah, of course they'll try to capitalize on their name. They're a business, after all, and if people are willing to pay a little extra for something that says "Gibson" on the headstock, they'd be fools not to take advantage of that (to a point). Looking at the prices of the Godins on the market right now, they're actually right there alongside most of the Gibson USA line, ranging from $500 to $2k depending on specs. 

As I understand it Godin does have better QC, but (and I almost hate to sound like I'm making excuses for them) Gibson is a _much_ larger company. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume they pump out _way_ more guitars every year than Godin does. You could say that if their QC can't keep up with their production then perhaps they should scale back their production a bit, but from the business side of things their production needs to keep up with demand. QC issues or no, the demand still seems to be there.



purpledc said:


> Id also take one of those nicer korean guitars over an entry level gibson. IMHO quality fit and finish, materials and components trumps Country of manufacture any day. Ten or 20 years ago I wouldnt have said this. But as the quality gap between the USA and overseas production closes more and more every year USA production means less and less. I understand pride. But it can also be a bad thing if you rely solely on it.



For what it's worth, so would I, in most cases. It still comes back to the wages the workers are paid. If it takes more time and effort to make a higher quality guitar, then you're going to have to pay someone more to put in that extra time and effort. Guess which worker you're going to be able to get more time out of for an $800 guitar: an American or a Korean? I've been living in Korea for almost 14 months now, and I assure you, living is cheaper here.

All that means when I'm looking to be frugal and have a certain type of guitar in mind, I'll go for the import. I've bought three guitars since coming here, one an MiA (a Gibson, in fact), one MiK (strat clone), and one MiChina (Epi LP), in descending order of price, each to fill a specific need and on a specific budget. If I had more money to fuck around with, though, then you bet your ass I'd pay extra money for the MiA, even if it _is_ just for the name on the headstock . I'm fine admitting that. I want dat mojo .


----------



## Dooky (Mar 25, 2013)

I own a Gibson Les Paul Custom, so no hate from me. 
But I have noticed Gibson & Fender do tend to get quite a bit of hate from time to time.
All the higher end Gibsons & Fenders I've played have always been really great guitars - so it surprises me when I read or hear people say that they have played some absolute dud Gibson Customs or Fender Deluxes. Perhaps I'm just lucky... or can't tell that I'm playing a piece of shit


----------



## Danukenator (Mar 25, 2013)

The traditional strat is one of my all time favorite body shapes. I really want to get one that has all the tweaks I want to make one day. I'd buy a Fender 7 string the second it's out...don't laugh, a man can dream dammit!


----------



## InfinityCollision (Mar 25, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


>



What the hell is that thing at the end of the neck? 



Andromalia said:


> It's a guitar, not a cello, you have a limited leeway in spec variation for it to still be a guitar.



You've got that backwards 



pawel said:


> Well, a traditional-looking guitar where you can change tunings on the fly without modelling is not that silly of an idea to me - not something I'd need, but I don't see it as a gimmick for gimmick's sake.
> 
> Point taken that innovation has to be meaningful, but trying and failing is very much a part of it, so at the very least I would give Gibson the credit for that. Besides, we will all have different conception of what is innovative - SS.org may be about new materials, designs, and ERG solutions, while there are other parts of the guitar playing community still complaining about the fact that no company fully embraced the various polyphonic synth possibilities etc.



Don't get me started  Innovation continues, albeit slowly, and mostly on the manufacturer's terms... I tried to get Moog to build me an ERG with their electronics system and they fed me a bullshit excuse for why it was, and I quote, "not possible". I'll figure out how to do it myself, but that takes time. Good thing the only part their patent covers is the system that allows them to have each pickup also operate as a driver, as I don't care about that.

Never really found a Gibson I liked but I've gotten along well with a few Fenders. Nearly picked up that Forshage 7-string strat that was on Ebay a while back, kind of wish I had.


----------



## knifefightintheor (Mar 26, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Have you checked the new LPJ and SGJ series?
> 
> People, Gibson DOES sell sub-$1000 guitars.



Not to mention the extreme playability and quality many of the comparable Epi's offer for the same price.

IMO strats and Lps definitely have proven extremely versatile - it's just that Fender and Gibson stayed true to their designs and specs while other companies took inspiration and went with it. Now we have our RGs, Dinkys, soloists, eclipses, vipers, kellys, king v's.. You name it.

Fender and Gibson make great guitars. If they aren't metal enough for you, oh well - no reason to "hate" on a specific brand.

Hell, I remember reading specifically about the Jim Root series of guitars and how they aren't "real" Tele's and Strat's, yet the same people will bitch and complain that there is no evolution or innovation on the Fender side of things

I'd hate to see the reaction if Ibanez was to suddenly start rounding off the bodies of RGs or Jackson renamed the soloist series the "Showmaster reissue"


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 26, 2013)

knifefightintheor said:


> Hell, I remember reading specifically about the Jim Root series of guitars and how they aren't "real" Tele's and Strat's, yet the same people will bitch and complain that there is no evolution or innovation on the Fender side of things



THAT annoys the hell out of me.


----------



## J7string (Mar 26, 2013)

It's not that Fender and Gibson are dated. It's not that Fender and Gibson hold to the vintage market to preserve iconic tones that are still used and loved today. It is however and issue that they really make a poor attempt to appeal to the newer markets. Gibson makes some attempt with new guitars that remind me of a Line 6 guitar... we'll see where that goes.

To me, Gibson's golden age was the time of Ted Mcarty. The original body shapes, and appeal to the growing rock/heavy metal market that wanted a guitar with a little more balls and could look the part. The Flying V the Explorer... awesome guitars at the time. Heating epoxy in large drums with heating coils and using fish glue for frets... Just an awesome iconic age and wonderful time for Gibson. 

I feel now they aren't what they used to be. The human element got to the business, and I feel the guitars suffered. They still spit out some good models, but fit and finish isn't always spot on. Their headstocks... Need I say more? Gibson needs a savior, a reincarnation of Ted Mcarty. Until that happens... I'll pass.

As for Fender, they'll always just be a vintage guitar maker to me. They've made no attempt to appeal to a changing market. It worked for them, and it works for people who buy them, but it doesn't work for me. I'm just not interested in Fender.


----------



## AfterTheBurial8 (Mar 26, 2013)

I have played around 30 different LP's and numerous SG's and just never felt comfortable playing them. However I played an Explorer for the first time a couple of weeks back and it was one of the most comfortable things I've ever played!


----------



## the.godfather (Mar 26, 2013)

Absolutely no hate from me. If 'vintage' is what they do and it's worked for 50, 60+ years, then why change it? 

If it isn't a Blackmachine or a Daemoness with BKP's, all of a sudden nothing else will suffice! Ridiculous.


----------



## mcd (Mar 26, 2013)

Im a huge tele and SG fan, I think to each their own. I'm more of a fender guy, more nostalgia than anything else.


----------



## Djdnxgdj3983jrjd8udb3bcns (Mar 26, 2013)

To me it seems to be down to a mix of things.

I think it's fair to say that whilst these brands get some hate on some forums, such as this on occasion and other more metal oriented ones, but if you go on to some of the forums aimed at LP/Tele/Strat owners etc you'll see that there is often hate for anything non-USA. 

The love/hate of certain brands is the product of the environment imho. Metal players represent a majority on this forum, and so brands such as ESP, Ibanez etc. are going to have a large following. 

Whilst I have not played many Gibsons, I would also argue the apparently numerous horror stories about QC are probably exaggerated slightly as the customer is likely to be angry after spending a hefty sum of cash on a lemon. Moreover, they seem frequent, but to me that is probably due to the fact that the number of Gibson sales is so high that there will be more problems as a matter of proportionality.

The reasons the guitars have stayed very similar for 50+ years are:
-People still buy them at whatever price they go up at
-People with that amount of disposable income are likely to be older, and thus more into blues, classic rock etc.


----------



## MF_Kitten (Mar 26, 2013)

I have played sweet fenders and gibsons, but generally they aren't that special. They are the baseline of guitars though, the industry standard "reference" guitars, and they are two opposing flavours of guitar.

What i dislike about them is the whole staying-in-the-past thing. They haven't done much innovative for a long time, and since they became the standard names, they haven't really had any other designs or ideas on the market aside from the odd toe in the water. Gibson has been known for periods of horrible quality control, and the vintage design means even the structural problems that make them prone to breaking, most notably the headstock snapping off, remains.

They also both take a lot of money for them, without that really translating into substantially better quality.


----------



## J7string (Mar 26, 2013)

You know what... I change my response. If vintage/the old classic spins on the electric guitar is what's working for both Gibson and Fender, then they shouldn't really change anything.

It's like any other art form. The traditional and contemporary vibes get people by and they are appreciated just the same as something new and modern, if not more by people who seek these things out, or just like to remember.

I still have some personal feelings on how the thing are run on a corporate level, but both companies will always be iconic and legendary.


----------



## knifefightintheor (Mar 26, 2013)

Unknown Doodl3.2 said:


> Schecter seem to be one of the only "big" guitar brands lately coming out with stuff that actually feels like you're getting your money's worth



Gaudy inlays and pounds of abalone?


----------



## knifefightintheor (Mar 26, 2013)

MF_Kitten said:


> I have played sweet fenders and gibsons, but generally they aren't that special. They are the baseline of guitars though, the industry standard "reference" guitars, and they are two opposing flavours of guitar.
> 
> What i dislike about them is the whole staying-in-the-past thing.



Once again.. When they try to innovate, people bitch. Fender and Gibson have a huge following, and it would be stupid to risk losing hundreds of thousands of customers who are "tried and true" believers as opposed to taking a shot in the dark and failing miserably.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 26, 2013)

knifefightintheor said:


> Gaudy inlays and pounds of abalone?








Say what now?

I'll say it before, and I'll say it again; The Hellraiser line ISN'T the only line of guitars Schecter has.


----------



## knifefightintheor (Mar 26, 2013)

Oh I know. I'm just saying at the same time, Schecter is no more "innovative" then any other company.

It also isn't just the hellraiser line that falls guilty to this


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 26, 2013)

I think the point he was trying to make is that Schecter actually listens to their customers and releases what they want. 

People complained about them releasing too many metal guitars; they released some vintage-style guitars. (see: Retro and Custom series)
People complained about them having too many EMG-equipped guitars; they released passive-equipped guitars (see: Banshee and SLS Passive)
People complained about them having thick necks; they release a new series with thinner necks. (See: SLS series)
People complained about their inlays; they re-release the series with classier inlays (See: SLS series again)
People complained about their short-scale 8-strings; they release longer-scaled 8 strings (See: SLS 8, Hellraiser 8-FR, and Omen Active 8)
People wanted an old, discontinued model back; they bring it back (See: the 006 and 007)

Yet people still wanna bitch about them. 

Okay, enough Schecter whiteknighting, back to Gibson/Fender whiteknighting.


----------



## pawel (Mar 26, 2013)

J7string said:


> They've made no attempt to appeal to a changing market



I would say they did (from 1992):


----------



## WiseSplinter (Mar 26, 2013)

^holy shit, those are pretty cool. I have NEVER seen any of them.
Fender with HSH and a floyd?! Excuse me while i crawl out from under this rock...


----------



## Overtone (Mar 26, 2013)

Even though I have 2 strats that I love, here are the things I don't like about

Fender
too small of a radius
too small frets (I am not an extra jumbo guy but these are still tiny)
some of the necks are not straight enough
purely a playing style thing but I feel like legato doesn't come out as evenly (this one could be BS)

as I understand it some of today's offerings have a bigger radius and frets so maybe they are changing to the times after all

Gibson
i don't like tune-o-matic
i've played too many LPs with ridiculously chewed up frets in no time


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 26, 2013)

Anyone who says that Gibson and/or Fender hasn't "innovated" in years is either willfully ignorant or living under a rock. 

In the last ten years Gibson has:
-Introduced the Digital Les Paul, a model which integrates MIDI function, digital output, and magnetic pickups far beyond a simple Ghost/Shadow install. 
-Used uncommon, yet great sounding and sustainable woods via the Smartwood series. 
-Introduced the Firebird X, while maligned for being "pointless" and "ugly" it does the represent the first high-end approach to built in amp modeling in a guitar.
-Gibson's work with Ned Steinberger is of note, granted not much was accomplished, but they've still backed some interesting ideas such as the scalable-baritone.
-The use of composite materials such as Richlite.
-The Dusk Tiger, a guitar that can be setup with pre-programmed EQ for each pickup and setting, years before the EBMM "Gamechanger". 

In the last ten years Fender has:
-Incorporated things like compound radius fretboards on Strats in an attempt to "modernize".
-The use of LSR hardware such as specialized roller nuts, tuners, and bridges.
-Using electronics such as S1 switching, Greasebucket, and No-Load pots. Who else loads stock guitars with that? 
-Working with Roland to have integrated MIDI systems in guitars. Something that wasn't even done fully in the 80's outside of some unique, and usually homebrewed, examples. 
-Being one of the first major companies to work with and help develop Lace's unique Sensor line of pickups. 

That's all the tip of the iceberg by the way, especially Fender considering how they own Jackson/Charvel. 

Just because a Les Paul looks like a Les Paul and a Strat looks like a Strat, doesn't mean changes haven't been made.


----------



## timbucktu123 (Mar 26, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Anyone who says that Gibson and/or Fender hasn't "innovated" in years is either willfully ignorant or living under a rock.
> 
> In the last ten years Gibson has:
> -Introduced the Digital Les Paul, a model which integrates MIDI function, digital output, and magnetic pickups far beyond a simple Ghost/Shadow install.
> ...


thank you so much for this post someone actually understands


----------



## baptizedinblood (Mar 26, 2013)

I love the shit out of my SG Standard, it's a reliable 'work-horse' guitar that hasn't let me down yet. My Fender Strat is great too, whoever says the trems are useless hasn't played a properly setup strat. 

A majority of players don't hate on Gibson and Fender...gotta remember that we're on a niche internet forum in which favored/hated custom luthiers change like the weather, and if it doesn't have BKPs then it suxorz. They are famous respected brands because they have been putting out reliable instruments for many years. You're bound to find some lemons because of the amount of guitars being put out. If you buy one with imperfections, return it.


----------



## RagtimeDandy (Mar 26, 2013)

timbucktu123 said:


> thank you so much for this post someone actually understands



More than anything I think the issue is that Gibson and Fender haven't changed their model shapes much. SS.org wants:







Gibson makes:





I personally find the Gibson look boring as hell, but sometimes I'll dig it. More than anything I love the Mayones Regius look or the PRS Custom 22/24. Theyre double cutaway, but nothing ridiculous or pointy. Also not fat like a Fender


----------



## brandons122 (Mar 26, 2013)

Just a remind that Fender owns Jackson, so it really wouldn't make sense for them to expand into the market that appeals to the majority of ss.org because they already have an established presence.

I also think that people don't really see how small companies like schecter and ESP are in comparison to what this forum doesn' like. When in fact although Fender and Gibson don't have a great reputation here, outside this forum and other small metal forums they are highly praised. Like a lot of people have said "to each his own."


----------



## Quitty (Mar 26, 2013)

Hate, being what it is, requires that Gibson and Fender do something actively offensive.
It's not about whether or not we have use for them, but whether or not they annoy us on ideological grounds. Or am i getting this wrong?

Anyway, the only problem with Gibson and Fender is the terribly, criminally poor value for money. 
We're used to paying for brand names, but both these companies have failed to justify their branding for the past two decades at least. IMO.


----------



## Otaru (Mar 26, 2013)

CYBERSYN said:


> People just like to hate whatever is popular.



This. My Gibson LP Standard is one of the best guitars I've ever owned. Miss that thing.


----------



## Overtone (Mar 26, 2013)

I think there is one really good counterargument to the bang for your buck comments. MIM Strat/Tele. Yes, upgrades are necessary, but it is a really solid instrument... quality finish and woods, good assembly. For Ibanez in that price range the workmanship is usually shoddy, the finishes unimpressive, and the guitar shows wear and tear very fast. Meanwhile the pups and hardware are still junk.

Get a used MIM strat and upgrade the parts as you can is always my advice to people on a budget of a few hundred. How can that be "criminally poor value for money".


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Mar 26, 2013)

Overtone said:


> I think there is one really good counterargument to the bang for your buck comments. MIM Strat/Tele. Yes, upgrades are necessary, but it is a really solid instrument... quality finish and woods, good assembly. For Ibanez in that price range the workmanship is usually shoddy, the finishes unimpressive, and the guitar shows wear and tear very fast. Meanwhile the pups and hardware are still junk.
> 
> Get a used MIM strat and upgrade the parts as you can is always my advice to people on a budget of a few hundred. How can that be "criminally poor value for money".



Not to mention the MIA Standard Series. You can get an American Standard Strat or Tele _brand new_ for what, $1k? $1.1k? And with those, you _don't_ have to replace anything. The stock pickups are awesome (Fender knows their way around a single coil), the hardware is solid, and the craftsmanship is great. All that, and it's still cheaper than pretty much any MIJ Ibby or ESP of similar quality, unless you go used.



Seriously fellas, I know I'm pretty much a fanboy, but I'm just not seeing where all the complaints about pricing are coming from.


----------



## Matt_D_ (Mar 26, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Anyone who says that Gibson and/or Fender hasn't "innovated" in years is either willfully ignorant or living under a rock.



im not sure how anyone can accuse gibson in particular of not trying to innovate, sure not all their products worked well (original robot tuners? lol wtf?), but you're unlikely to get everything right first time. (the new mini robot system looks really decent!)

gibson have to walk a fine line though, pushing their products forward but not alienating their main purchaser base. (i just wanna sound like slash man, or the infamous blooz lawyers)

fender have to walk that same line, but they've been continually bringing out new series of models (see the pawn shop, and modern player lines) that stray away from the "classic" lines. hell my tele has a tone knob that when wound all the way out actually decouples the potentiometer from the circuit for straight through output, thats pretty cool. 

also, gibson offer lp studios in swirl finishes. i really want one.


----------



## Matt_D_ (Mar 26, 2013)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Seriously fellas, I know I'm pretty much a fanboy, but I'm just not seeing where all the complaints about pricing are coming from.



living in australia, an american std tele was 2.4k AUD until recently. i bought mine in the fire sale as allens music died, and paid 1.2k AUD (almost us price!). considering I paid more for my schecter C7 custom, and the tele is twice the guitar that the C7 is.. its very good value for money.

not so much at 2.4k tho 

speaking of prices, gibson's out here are super expensive, a lp studio will be 1.7k AUD, and a proper lp will set you back well over 3k AUD. as much as I'd love an lp, i'd rather just order a j custom or prestige ibz for well under that from japan (we love you ishibashi!)


----------



## thatguy87 (Mar 26, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


>




It's so... run of the mill. there is absolutely nothing special about the above guitar. BUT that's my opinion. I won't ever sell my Candy apple red MIM strat my Dad bought me when I was 16, but tbh, the neck shape is not my taste.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Mar 26, 2013)

Matt_D_ said:


> living in australia, an american std tele was 2.4k AUD until recently. i bought mine in the fire sale as allens music died, and paid 1.2k AUD (almost us price!). considering I paid more for my schecter C7 custom, and the tele is twice the guitar that the C7 is.. its very good value for money.
> 
> not so much at 2.4k tho
> 
> speaking of prices, gibson's out here are super expensive, a lp studio will be 1.7k AUD, and a proper lp will set you back well over 3k AUD. as much as I'd love an lp, i'd rather just order a j custom or prestige ibz for well under that from japan (we love you ishibashi!)



Believe me, I feel your pain. MIA guitars are stupid expensive here in Korea, too, unless you do some serious bargain hunting. I was pretty well shocked when I came across a Buckethead LP Studio for around $1200. You bet your ass I bought it . Usually though, $1200 is what I'd have to pay for the barebones 50s and 60s Studio Tribute LPs, and standard Studios are up around the same price as they same to be in the land down under.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 26, 2013)

thatguy87 said:


> It's so... run of the mill. there is absolutely nothing special about the above guitar.



It's $500, what more do you want?


----------



## pushpull7 (Mar 26, 2013)

I actually looked up LP's today just because I was bored. Most of them were very expensive, but the local shops didn't have any more affordable models. About 2k is where they start locally.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Mar 26, 2013)

chrisharbin said:


> I actually looked up LP's today just because I was bored. Most of them were very expensive, but the local shops didn't have any more affordable models. About 2k is where they start locally.



How hard did you look?

Gibson Solid Body Electric Guitars | Musician&#39;s Friend

There seems to be plenty of inexpensive ones to me. Perhaps not in stock at your local shops, but that's a strike against your local shops, not against Gibson.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 27, 2013)

thatguy87 said:


> nothing special about the above guitar.



I would think that fact it's MIA, and actually surprisingly good sounding, even in a Metal context, for $500 would be something special. The two I played were actually pretty well built too, with two-piece bodies. 

Well built for a $500 guitar mind you, but that's what it costs. On par with Schecters, LTDs, and Ibanez guitars in the same range, in some ways better depending on the model and what you plan on doing with it.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 27, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> I would think that fact it's MIA, and actually surprisingly good sounding, even in a Metal context, for $500 would be something special.


----------



## pushpull7 (Mar 27, 2013)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> How hard did you look?
> 
> Gibson Solid Body Electric Guitars | Musician's Friend
> 
> There seems to be plenty of inexpensive ones to me. Perhaps not in stock at your local shops, but that's a strike against your local shops, not against Gibson.



I wanted to see it locally. I don't understand what I said wrong?


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 27, 2013)

chrisharbin said:


> I wanted to see it locally. I don't understand what I said wrong?



I guess when you said you "looked up" folks just thought you meant you just searched on the internet. 

I got what you meant though, for what it's worth. 

Though, I don't see how that really pertains to this thread.


----------



## pushpull7 (Mar 27, 2013)

Because we were talking about why people hate on gibson/fender when in fact someone mentioned price. Price is ultimately why there is a perceived hate so it's on topic.

Anyhow, I don't hate on gibson or fender, so over and out!


----------



## RagtimeDandy (Mar 27, 2013)

As far as the price points go, it really depends on the guitar. I own a Gibson LP Studio, and the playability and quality is the same as any PRS SE I've tried. I've also bought an Ibanez RGA8 for about the same price and returned it because the frets were protruding out and was just a shoddy build. Ultimately you get what you pay for. I've never played a $2500+ Gibson, but I'm sure they beat the shit out of my $500 2008 Studio. I feel like many people judge the brand exclusively on their lower end models (lets face it, anyone on this forum with $3000 to blow is going for a custom shop, a super high end Ibanez or Jackson, or something less "mainstream", and arguably more carefully constructed).


----------



## sear (Mar 27, 2013)

Fenders are cool, but don't really do it for me. Not a fan of their neck profiles and I don't play too much clean. Nice to have around, but I don't really go crazy for them. If I wanted a Strat-style guitar I would pick any infinite number of other options over Fender. G&L, for one, do the whole Fender thing way better than Fender has in decades.

Gibson... while I admit they do make some awesome-sounding and well-built guitars sometimes, I have played way too many Gibsons with obvious problems. Bad fretwork, check. Fucked up neck angle, check. Stupid-high action out of the factory, check. Badly cut nut slots that cause strings to keep popping out, check. The hilarious thing is that if you check the factory tag (usually removed by the store) they often are fully aware of these defects and mark the guitars as "fail" in those categories, yet they still go out to shops. Uh? Okay.

If you can find a Gibson that really is perfect, then it'll probably be a dream to play (though personally I can't stand Les Pauls, they're just heavy and uncomfortable). My brother got himself a Flying V Faded and it's a great instrument for the money, huge tone and well built. But personally I think other brands have FAR better QC and finish/build quality for the money, and unless you just have to have a Gibson, you're better off going elsewhere.



MaxOfMetal said:


> Outside of certain CS and Reissue stuff, both Gibson and Fender pricing is amazingly fair.
> 
> You can grab an honest to goodness, USA made, fully spec'd SG for $600 shipped. Gibson SGJ (Chocolate) | Sweetwater.com
> 
> Even Les Pauls aren't that expensive. Gibson Les Paul LPJ (Rubbed Goldtop dark back Satin) | Sweetwater.com


I dunno about that. Those models just came out recently and feature absolute basics in terms of finish options, and probably inferior build quality/QC compared to more expensive Gibsons. "American made" is not code for "awesome." You can get Korean guitars with finishes and build quality better than most $1500 Gibsons for $700 these days. That sounds like "overpriced" to me.


----------



## goldsteinat0r (Mar 27, 2013)

Everything is preference. I love my strat mainly because I've had it for so long. If I'm honest it plays like crap but it sounds great and feels like an old friend, even if it has a rusted bridge, high-ish action, and needs a fret job like yesterday. 

My les pauls, to me, deliver that fat, warm, punchy, woody, saturated deliciousness (THATS WHAT SHE SAID) that I have not heard from any other type of guitar no matter what the setup. Just what I prefer. Obviously most of us on here don't and thats great. I mean thats why there are like a bajillion guitars out there.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 27, 2013)

sear said:


> I dunno about that. Those models just came out recently and feature absolute basics in terms of finish options, and probably inferior build quality/QC compared to more expensive Gibsons. "American made" is not code for "awesome." You can get Korean guitars with finishes and build quality better than most $1500 Gibsons for $700 these days. That sounds like "overpriced" to me.



I'm not guessing here. My local GC has about half dozen of each of the new J series models and they're actually all solid instruments. Nothing amazing, but surely equal to anything else on the market from a build perspective, in the same price range of course. 

Most of them even have two piece, center joined bodies. 

Gibson is offering the LPJ and SGJ in four different finishes each, and all available left handed. How is that bad? We're lucky these days if Ibanez or Schecter give us two finish options.  

Most of the cheaper ($500 to $900) Gibson stuff I've played, as in actually put my hands on, has been incredibly solid. Much better that Faded series that originally gave lower end Gibsons a pretty bad reputation some years ago. 

Of course MIA doesn't instantly equal a certain level of quality, but it doesn't instantly mean overpriced either.


----------



## RagtimeDandy (Mar 27, 2013)

Another thing I noticed too is that my enjoyment of Fender and Gibson wasn't until more recently (and by enjoyment, I mean I picked them up and was actually surprised at how much I didn't hate them anymore). When I was younger I got an Epiphone LP Classic, quilt top yellow, so I could look like Billie Joe in Green Day. Still have the guitar actually, I swapped out the PUPs with my PRS HFS/Bass combo and it sounds monstrous. Then I got into shreddy stuff like Satch, and I thought anything Les Paul related sucked and Ibanez was the greatest band ever. Then I got into Mastodon (many years later) and I started playing my Epiphone again and dug it, even ended up buying the aforementioned Gibson Studio LP. Then I started hating Ibanez again  
Then I got into BTBAM and other stuff like that and got my Custom 24, and thought that was the greatest thing ever (still do  ). Then I got into 7 strings and got my Agile Septor and thought "Why get anything other than a 7 string?!"

Fastforward roughly a year to now, where I've been recording and writing almost nonstop, and I've come to realize that every single one of those instruments is fantastic, regardless of brand. They each suit a specific purpose. My Les Pauls make awesome rhythm guitars and have great lead tones, any good Fender I've ever tried had clean tones that stand above the crowd, Ibanez are very playable and versatile, but tend to sound weak so they work best as shred/lead guitars (shocking, I know). Again I'm a PRS fanboy so I find PRS to just be the best all around guitar.

From what I can tell, anyone vehemently hating on a specific brand is either a younger person going through the same thing I did (brand/band bias), got too many lemon guitars (my experience with Ibanez in general), or just found their favorite brand and thinks everything else sucks. I think once people get into recording and tone chasing, they realize each individual guitar and each brand specializes in a certain sound, and you can stretch that sound quite a bit, but ultimately there is a core sound that these brands have. Fender are the best blues and clean tone guitars, but you can get a Gibson LP to sound great for those as well, but the distinction comes in the players tonal preference. Some people are just more opinionated in regards to their opinions. Hell, I was pretty opinionated on the matter up until recently. I used to actively HATE (understatement) on Fender, but I've come to realize they have a specific tonal focus, and that generally isn't what I'm going for, hence why I used to think they're useless. I'd love to have a Tele for clean tones in recordings, but I'm pretty content with what my PRS can dish out. 

I guess my point, in summary, is that people need to be more open minded towards specific brands, and they need to realize that each brand has a target tone, demographic, image, etc. If the brand doesn't fall into their category, that doesn't mean it sucks, that just means it's not for you and you should look for the one that DOES fit your tastes. But don't hesitate the reinvestigate the brands you've shirked, you may be surprised to find they've grown on you.


----------



## engage757 (Mar 27, 2013)

Don't even get me started Kevin...


----------



## Estilo (Mar 27, 2013)

I'm tempted to create a similar follow-up thread titled "So.. Why do people hate om EMG's again?" since most people who hate them probably have 3 or 4 of their 5 favourite albums recorded entirely with them . 

But nope I'm not intoxicated nor that keen on starting a flame war. Will hold back for now.


----------



## xHavokUndeadx (Mar 27, 2013)

All i have to say is, real musicians and men play PRS. Fenders and gibsons are great in there own right, but in all honesty you really can play anything with a prs, and they pretty much makes a guitar for just about anything. I had a se 24 toreo custom and it was honestly the nicest guitar ive ever played and it was only 1200.


----------



## themike (Mar 27, 2013)

xHavokUndeadx said:


> All i have to say is, real musicians and men play PRS. Fenders and gibsons are great in there own right, but in all honesty you really can play anything with a prs, and they pretty much makes a guitar for just about anything. I had a se 24 toreo custom and it was honestly the nicest guitar ive ever played and it was only 1200.


 
Even with my stance on PRS as a company I wouldnt go THAT far in saying that they are the only professional choice for musical instruments  

I would however say that I would choose a majority of 2013 PRS guitars over 2013 Gibson and Fenders - but thats simply personal preference and not a written law of gear.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 27, 2013)

The Toreros are only like... $1000. I think you were slightly ripped off.


----------



## Basti (Mar 27, 2013)

Any thread entitled "Why do people hate..." is bound to be a real cracker


----------



## elq (Mar 27, 2013)

By far the most "hate" I've seen for Gibson guitars comes from the hardcore Fender fans (and a few PRS folks) on TGP. By far most of the "hate" I've seen for Fender guitars comes from the hardcore Gibson fans (but oddly no PRS folks) on TGP.

And don't even get started on hate for modern "metal" guitars, it's something the old fogy Gibson and Fender haters agree on.


Which guitar is better comes down to taste as all tastes can be had in a wide range of price points and quality. Arguing about taste is either masterbation or the output of non-science academia.


----------



## All_¥our_Bass (Mar 27, 2013)

I'm fine with most Fender stuff, I just want 24 frets, humbuckers, and more strings.
But from a feel and tone, perspective Fender gels with me quite well.

Not so hot on Gibson: shorter scales, TOM bridges, but I don't "hate" them, just not my thing.
Gibsons (usually) tend to have tone that's a bit on the warmer side than fender cause of the shorter scale length.
There's nothing wrong with it, but it isn't my thing.


----------



## flint757 (Mar 27, 2013)

Why do people hate TOM bridges so much? 

I personally love them. I'm the minority here, but I also prefer a non-locking trem as well.


----------



## Church2224 (Mar 27, 2013)

elq said:


> Which guitar is better comes down to taste as all tastes can be had in a wide range of price points and quality. Arguing about taste is either masterbation or the output of non-science academia.


----------



## knifefightintheor (Mar 27, 2013)

xHavokUndeadx said:


> All i have to say is, real musicians and men play PRS. Fenders and gibsons are great in there own right, but in all honesty you really can play anything with a prs, and they pretty much makes a guitar for just about anything. I had a se 24 toreo custom and it was honestly the nicest guitar ive ever played and it was only 1200.



You can really play anything with a Les Paul and a Strat too. Look at their nostalgia over the years.

I enjoy PRS and love my SC245, but to say that it's the only guitar real musicians should play is wrong. Not to be a dick, but there are guitars that are far better than your Torero. There are guitars far better than my SC245, and my Ibanez' and my Les Pauls. 

A real musician or "man" plays whatever guitar feels good to him and gets the results desired, without giving a shit what other people have to say about it.


----------



## InfinityCollision (Mar 27, 2013)

Estilo said:


> I'm tempted to create a similar follow-up thread titled "So.. Why do people hate om EMG's again?" since most people who hate them probably have 3 or 4 of their 5 favourite albums recorded entirely with them .
> 
> But nope I'm not intoxicated nor that keen on starting a flame war. Will hold back for now.



People prefer certain pieces of gear/certain tones over gear/tones used by a subset of the musicians they listen to? Preposterous!


----------



## SpaseMoonkey (Mar 27, 2013)

knifefightintheor said:


> A real musician or "man" plays whatever guitar feels good to him and gets the results desired, without giving a shit what other people have to say about it.



+1 

I've owned a butt load of guitar brands, not even the cheapies. I feel each company has their +/- . 

Gibson pisses me off due to both of the ones I owned the g-string never once stayed in tune after a bend. But I loved the tone it had, so rich and full compared to any other guitar I have owned.

Fender I've never played one, which they no longer make the one I do want to try.

PRS have to add this because I hear tons of people raving about them in here. I had a Custom 24, needless to say I don't have it anymore. It played everything beautifully and could cover any tone I would need. But the volume knob on mine would slowly lower on its own. Which I just took it off and didn't worry about it. But needless to say I don't have it anymore it just doesn't feel like "me".

Had a EBMM JPX-6 for a few months, another great tone guitar. Everyone of my friends that came over always grabbed it to jam but I never really used it. Not sure why, just never gave me that want to play feeling.

I have come to like Ibanez due to the necks. It doesn't even have to be a high end Jem, it can be the cheap S420, it just feels nice to me. The weight and neck are amazing in my hands. But the pickups have to go.

I try to respect all brands personally. They might not meet my needs or feel like an extension of myself, but without them we may never have had the greats before us who paved the path of music because of them.


----------



## flexkill (Mar 27, 2013)

No hate here. A Les Paul and strat should be a mainstay in any guitar players arsenal IMHO.


----------



## Eric Christian (Mar 27, 2013)

Andromalia said:


> People don't really hate Gibson & Fenders. Wannabe elite metal misicians on a few forums do. These two companies still probably sell more guitars than *all* the other builders combined.
> 
> I guess some rant on them because, owning somethign else, they want:
> -to appear like they made an educated choice.
> ...



This is probably one of the most intelligent and insightful comments I've ever seen on sevenstring. American made Gibson and Fender guitars personify rock n' roll. Its all about nostalgia. Pretty much every classic rock song you can think of was composed with one. On the other hand, when you're having a house built who cares what brand or hammer the carpenters are using?

I think it really boils down to the personal relationship you have with the guitar whether its an old Matao strat or brand new VOS Les Paul. Watching videos of Jimi Hendrix wailing away on his Strat and tuning it while simultaneously smoking a cigarette and singing is simply amazing. Or watching Eddie Van Halen play his homebuilt Charvel. Right now there is some kid playing the crap out of his/her cheap Dean strat someday he/she is going to be the next superstar.


----------



## Rap Hat (Mar 27, 2013)

This got me thinking about the ERG hate from the old Gibson and Fender fogeys. It always gave me a chuckle, we could be having a good conversation about vintage Gibson hollowbodies and I'd bring up my main guitar is an 8 string, all of a sudden I'm a dumb youngster who needs to learn how to play the guitar. It's not something you can really take personally - like a lot of things, nostalgia and longing for youth tends to come with age. These guys are distrustful of change in the guitar world, and are more than content to let you know.

Funny thing though... They'd always be up to talk about the old Danelectro 30" scale baritones (tuned E1 like an 8 string). Those are okay because they're vintage!


----------



## All_¥our_Bass (Mar 27, 2013)

flint757 said:


> Why do people hate TOM bridges so much?


Personally, my muting technique is terrible with them.
Seriously, hand me an axe with a TOM bridge and it's almost painful how bad I sound. Anything strat-derived and it's gravy.

Also, you can't adjust them for intonation as much as a bridge with individual saddles.


----------



## flint757 (Mar 27, 2013)

Yeah, they aren't very adjustable, but once you get it set it is solid. I think they make some low profile versions as well though. My muting technique is atrocious on pretty much anything else.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 28, 2013)

flint757 said:


> Why do people hate TOM bridges so much?


I don't hate them. But I think that's because I've been playing one for over half of my time as a guitar player.


----------



## Given To Fly (Mar 28, 2013)

When it comes to Gibson and Fender, I usually feel you can get something else thats better for the same price. They make good guitars (Squire has stepped up their game recently too!) but the way they do business and market their products doesn't impress me very much. Everything from the proliferation of "Relic" Strats to Gibson's ridiculous signature model list almost feels like they really aren't trying very hard.

Having said that, for some reason I love Fender Telecasters. I think it might be because they are the complete opposite of what I normally play.


----------



## knifefightintheor (Mar 28, 2013)

Given To Fly said:


> When it comes to Gibson and Fender, I usually feel you can get something else thats better for the same price.



*cough* Gibson J series. Jackson X Series. Fender American Special series.

Once again, these guitars serve their purpose well. Better for other genres at the same price? Sure, but the quality in even the lower end Fender MIM series of guitars can be astonishing at times. I've played a lot of MIM that can definitely hold their own against their MIA counterparts.

Look at the Epiphone guitars too - I've never been short of impressed at how well they match up to their Gibson big brothers.

I like that out of the box I can get some amazing sounds from most Fender, Squier, Gibson and Epiphone guitars. If price is an issue, consider that there are Ibanez guitars bearing the Prestige name that almost warrant an immediate pickup swap, which in my opinion is unacceptable for a $1000+ guitar.

There is a lot of bias in this thread and I get that - but it has to be understood somewhere along the line that Fender and Gibson guitars are fantastic for what they're geared towards - Blues, Rock, Country and so forth, the same way other manufacturers such as Ibanez and ESP are geared towards speed and heavier music.

Not to mention, Fender owns Jackson as someone previously said - So it wouldn't be in their best interest to expand their market to reach metal players when they already have a pretty big stake on that side of things. One of the BEST values for the money right now in my opinion is the Jackson X Series, so the value is definitely there, then you have Charvels Desolation series, so it's safe to say that Fender/Jackson/Charvel have all grounds covered at any price point.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 28, 2013)

The thing I see is that people ONLY think Gibson only makes $2000+ guitars. As I've said before, they have over 100 sub-$2000 models.


----------



## knifefightintheor (Mar 28, 2013)

You and I definitely see eye to eye.

When I was young I started on a strat, then saved up and bought an Epi LP Custom for $750 or whatever they usually run for, while a buddy of mine eventually shelled out for the MIA LP Custom. Aside from a couple very minor details, I was still proud of MY guitar, and from there I never had a bias towards country of origin, place of manufacture, etc. 

It's not that they don't have affordable instruments, it's just that they employ different marketing strategies - and like you said, there are heaps and heaps of affordable Gibsons! Hell, look at Melody Makers! You can get a base model Gibson, made in America for what, $500? Or get a fully decked out Epi for under $1000!


----------



## geoffshreds (Mar 28, 2013)

If Gibson made their flying v alot stabbier i would get one... always wanted an explorer. Havent really ever been a fan of Fender body styles or their sound, but now that Fender owns Jackson i guess most of my guitars are fenders? lol


----------



## ASoC (Mar 28, 2013)

I feel like Gibson is very gimmicky and they use their name as a justification to jack up prices. I'm sorry, but a Les Paul custom is just not worth $4000 to me. They just aren't designed well IMO

"Ok, lets make a guitar. Lets give it an uncomfortable bridge with little room for adjustment. Whoops, that requires a neck angle... ok we can do that. Lets angle back the headstock too to keep the strings in the nut, but don't bother with any reinforcement. Ok, now lets make it really heavy for the toanz! Cool! Now if it falls, the headstock is coming right off"

And as others have said, Gibson addressed the headstock thing in the past, but now refuse to do so.

I just feel like there are many things that are designed better for less money. (Fenders for example) I actually love stratocasters and teles


----------



## Hyacinth (Mar 28, 2013)

Fender and Gibson are great brands, don't get me wrong, but 85% of the people on this forum play metal. On top of that, they play 7 or 8 string metal, and Gibson and Fender don't make 7s or 8s, so people are naturally going to hate on them because they're missing one or two strings.

Nowadays its seems like if you're going to be a metal guitarist, you need at least a 7 string guitar, and a lot of people don't give a shit about the oldest and most trusted brands like Gibson and Fender. 

In the end, there's nothing wrong with ANY guitar as long as you as a player can get along with it and it's comfortable/plays nicely. Brand shouldn't matter in the least so long as you're happy with your guitar and it does what you need it to do.


----------



## Hyacinth (Mar 28, 2013)

ASoC said:


> I feel like Gibson is very gimmicky and they use their name as a justification to jack up prices. I'm sorry, but a Les Paul custom is just not worth $4000 to me. They just aren't designed well IMO
> 
> "Ok, lets make a guitar. Lets give it an uncomfortable bridge with little room for adjustment. Whoops, that requires a neck angle... ok we can do that. Lets angle back the headstock too to keep the strings in the nut, but don't bother with any reinforcement. Ok, now lets make it really heavy for the toanz! Cool! Now if it falls, the headstock is coming right off"
> 
> ...



I'm with you on Gibsons being overpriced, and Fender for that matter, too. Maybe that's the reason people give them so much shit. They make a good guitar, but charge twice the price of other guitars made just as well because they have a big name.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 28, 2013)

MatthewLeisher said:


> Nowadays its seems like if you're going to be a metal guitarist, you need at least a 7 string guitar, and a lot of people don't give a shit about the oldest and most trusted brands like Gibson and Fender.



On this forum, maybe, but there's still a LOT of 6-string metal bands.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Mar 28, 2013)

MatthewLeisher said:


> I'm with you on Gibsons being overpriced, and Fender for that matter, too. Maybe that's the reason people give them so much shit. They make a good guitar, but charge twice the price of other guitars made just as well because they have a big name.


 
Someone. Please. PLEASE.

_PLEASE_ point out another company that makes guitars _in America_ and sells them for half of what Gibson and Fender charge for their MiA offerings. Hell, I'll do you one better and ask to point out another company that makes MiA guitars and charges _the same_ prices as Gibson and Fender. Keep in mind there are a fair number of guitars from both companies that are less than $1500, with some Gibsons going as low as $5-600 _brand new. _Go ahead. I'll wait.









Back? Did you find any? 




It's dumb that I have to point this out again, but do people really think American Fenders and Gibsons cost more than Schecters, Ibby Premiums or LTDs because of what they say on the headstock?


Can you get a Schecter for $1k that's nicer than a Gibson you'd get for the same price? Sure (if you like Schecters, that is ), but guess which worker draws a higher salary: The American who made the Gibson, or the Korean who made the Schecter? Guess which factory costs more to run: The Gibson factory in Memphis, or the factory in Korea that makes Schecters (and LTDs, Deans, and several Korean brands, all in the same factory)?

Quality aside, guitars cost less to make in countries where the cost of living is lower, and those savings are passed on to Western consumers. It has very little to do with Gibson and Fender being more famous and charging out the ass just because they can.


Now, are the ultra high-end Gibsons and Fenders worth what they charge for them? That's another story entirely . I don't see myself ever paying $4k+ for a guitar no matter _what_ name is on the headstock.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 28, 2013)

Also, speaking of a brand "using their name" to jack up the prices...

Ibanez charging nearly $1000 for an Indonesian guitar. I'm not trying to bash Indonesian guitars, but why is it bad for Fender and Gibson to overcharge for their guitars, but not Ibanez?


----------



## joebalaguer (Mar 28, 2013)

I think some of the hate comes from the build quality inconsistency over the years. I have played quite a few les pauls that did not warrant the price tag, but my 1973 Gibson ES150D is the best guitar I own and have ever played. The new LPJ is a great guitar, especially for the money. I definitely think their QC has tightened up over the past 5 years. Just my


----------



## rythmic_pulses (Mar 28, 2013)

I love Gibson and Fender just as much as the other, when I started playing guitar, I wanted a Fender real bad, and now I've been playing the guitar for almost 9 years now, I'm starting to get that Fender urge again, I'd want a Jim Root Tele personally, maybe even a Jazzmaster, Jaguar or even an H-H Strat, the sky is the limit as far as my Fender craving goes.

There is this in my local guitar store and I feel it would be my main workhorse for almost anything I'd want to do:

Apart from the most overused pup combo (JB & Jazz) it's £750, looks awesome and plays like a dream too, Tele elitists won't agree though 
With it having the "wrong" tailpiece, humbuckers & a set neck.

I do have a 7 string (Schecter) and a Fernandes Revolver Pro as my main workhorses at the moment, but none have the same "I'll last you a lifetime" feel of a Fender, because Fender's are rugged as all hell most of the time, you can treat them like dirt but they'll still love you in the end, that's why I want a Fender, cause I'd use for as long as I live.


----------



## DarkWolfXV (Mar 28, 2013)

No hate from me, well mostly, i like LPs and Explorers, rest Gibson shapes aint pointy enough or good looking enough to me. Fenders look nice, Jon Levasseur uses a modded strat, so thats a plus. I probably wouldn't buy a LP or Explorer, rather a LP or Explorer shaped guitar, because most of time they have better specs. I would probably buy a strat and mod the fuck out of it, but i dont have money


----------



## DjentDjentlalala (Mar 28, 2013)

I dont like both,aside from some jazzmasters,teles,and double cut gibbies.


----------



## knifefightintheor (Mar 28, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Also, speaking of a brand "using their name" to jack up the prices...
> 
> Ibanez charging nearly $1000 for an Indonesian guitar. I'm not trying to bash Indonesian guitars, but why is it bad for Fender and Gibson to overcharge for their guitars, but not Ibanez?



Lets also consider the Kerry King Wartribe 6 and 7.. Which are crafted in China.

BC Rich Kerry King Wartribe 6 String Warlock Electric Guitar


----------



## Eric Christian (Mar 28, 2013)

MatthewLeisher said:


> Fender and Gibson are great brands, don't get me wrong, but 85% of the people on this forum play metal. On top of that, they play 7 or 8 string metal, and Gibson and Fender don't make 7s or 8s, so people are naturally going to hate on them because they're missing one or two strings.



Actually, both Gibson and Fender have previously made 7 string guitars.


----------



## technomancer (Mar 28, 2013)

Eric Christian said:


> Actually, both Gibson and Fender have previously made 7 string guitars.



Unfortunately they were both mediocre imports  (I've owned and played both at one time)

I would LOVE a Gibson Traditional LP 7 and a Fender American Deluxe Strat 7


----------



## CrazyDean (Mar 28, 2013)

I have a Gibson and a Fender. Granted they both are from the 80s and both have Kahler trems.

- Very few models offered from either with good trems.
- I don't like set necks.
- I don't care for single-coil pups.
- Gibson necks are too fat.
- Very few 7s offered.

All in all, they both make some great guitars, but they just don't offer what I like.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Mar 28, 2013)

technomancer said:


> Unfortunately they were both mediocre imports



The Gibson V 7 wasn't MiA? 

I'm only partly being sarcastic, because stranger things have happened, I suppose.

Wasn't there also a Gibson EX-7 briefly? I'd have thought it was MiA, too.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 29, 2013)

You're right. 












The guy from Nickelback used this one. They looked awesome, but (I know Max and some other people are going to get at me about this) I don't like 7-strings that are below 25.5''. I don't think it feels and sounds right.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 29, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> The guy from Nickelback used this one. They looked awesome, but (I know Max and some other people are going to get at me about this) I don't like 7-strings that are below 25.5''. I don't think it feels and sounds right.



I'm not going to get at you at all. I fully respect that you haven't liked any of those <25.5" scale 7-strings you've owned.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 29, 2013)

But I do own a 24.75'' 6 string that doesn't like lower tunings.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 29, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> But I do own a 24.75'' 6 string that doesn't like lower tunings.



Which would be? Through what amp? What aren't you digging? 

Totally not trying to pick on you man, just laying it out there. Just trying to help you find some awesome tones for the guitar you already own. 


I LOVE my Les Pauls in A#, B, and C# through my Flexi, and I can totally respect how someone playing through their gig rig might not like certain things. My A# LP is more for the Doom though, but the B LP has been digging Amon Amarth tracks lately.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 29, 2013)

LTD Eclipse, EMG 85, TBX150H w/ an OD pedal. Just didn't sound right, a bit too loose and not enough attack. Sounded fine in higher tunings like DE standard to drop C. . My RG7321 sounded better, even with the stock pickups.

EDIT: Also, i was using those Dunlop Heavy Core strings. .12 - .54 or something like that.


----------



## tommychains (Mar 29, 2013)

I'll just put my 2 cents in here.

My beef with gibson is that they are REALLY far behind in "innovation". Their prices are through the dam roof, and I've played their real expensive ones. I played a $4000 Gibson Custom Shop Les Paul (mouthful) and I really wasn't blown away by it. Just felt like a regular Les Paul with fancy bells and whistles.

As much as I like fender (wouldn't have 2/3 of my collection if it wasn't for the strat), they really need to step up their product lines. Nothing really amazing, but nice. Like Gibson, nostalgia only gets you so far. Let's all remember Kramer almost put Gibson into bankruptcy in the 80's because they offered everything but the kitchen sink. Gibson didn't, and the only reason they're still around is their aquisition of kramer. Their buisiness practices are real scummy, ask anyone on the receiving end of their lawyer army.

To sum it up for both gibson and fender, try some new things. For fender, some new models and some gear for the heavier musicians. Not neccessarilly 7 strings, but some floyds and active pickups standard would sure get people interested.

For gibson, new models and something to bring a new generation of players into the gibson grips. A seven string les paul would basically blow imitators out of the water. Another idea is to STOP CHARGING AN ARM AND A LEG FOR EVERYTHING YOU SELL. Not every person who wants a Gibson can afford $2000.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 29, 2013)

Okay, as said before.

GIBSON MAKES CHEAPER MODELS. Seriously, it's like everyone here thinks Gibson Custom Shop is the ONLY Gibson brand. Go to Musiciansfriend.com and see how many sub-$2000 guitars Gibson sells.

And for not being innovative:



MaxOfMetal said:


> Anyone who says that Gibson and/or Fender hasn't "innovated" in years is either willfully ignorant or living under a rock.
> 
> In the last ten years Gibson has:
> -Introduced the Digital Les Paul, a model which integrates MIDI function, digital output, and magnetic pickups far beyond a simple Ghost/Shadow install.
> ...



Also, Fender doesn't need to release metal-oriented guitars when they own both Jackson and Charvel.


----------



## Don Vito (Mar 29, 2013)

HEY GUYS CAN I GET A GIBSON FOR UNDER $7000

PLEASE HELP



HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> GIBSON MAKES CHEAPER MODELS.


I DONT BELIEVE YOU


----------



## tommychains (Mar 29, 2013)

I know fender owns jackson and charvel, but I myself sometime miss that duck tone of a strat. So combine the two maybe? Idk; maybe I'm just speaking for myself here.

In regards to the smartwood guitars, the reason they did that was because they were caught illegally using and storing endangered woods. They had EPA come down on them HARD and they made a distraction for the public, which was the smartwood guitars.

I think gibson's just one of those love it or hate it kind of brands. I've used a number of their cheaper guitars, so I know you don't NEED $2000 for a gibson. All I'm saying is the cheaper guitars they're selling are just that; cheap. I had to fix a buddy's SG right out of the box. The wiring was bad, frets were still sharp at the ends, and the nut had to be fixed as well. I may have just worked on a rare exception, but it's not the first time I've heard horror stories. When's the last time you heard of a completely jacked up Dean?


----------



## flexkill (Mar 29, 2013)

tommychains said:


> When's the last time you heard of a completely jacked up Dean?


----------



## nothingleft09 (Mar 29, 2013)

I own a US Explorer standard in black and I love the thing. Changed the pups, put some ZW strings on it and it sits comfortably in drop B flat.  

My problem with Gibsons innovations are this... Only a few of those innovations make any difference to musicians. Most of those "innovations" are gimmicks in my book. I love the smart wood ideas though. As the other threads posted on woods point out we cut down trees for everything. They don't grow back fast. So having sustainable wood choices is a great thing. But seriously, the auto tune thing... Are you really so lazy you have to spend a shit load of money on a guitar that tunes itself? The Baritone Explorer is the shit though and I would love to have one and would love to see Gibson come out with a baritone in more of their models and actually keep them in production. 24.75 scale is great for Standard tuning but there are other tunings and styles of music to consider from a product standpoint. On the fender side of things it is true there is no need for them to really do anything other than traditional guitars when they have Jackson/Charvel in their pocket.


----------



## Crabface (Mar 29, 2013)

tommychains said:


> I know fender owns jackson and charvel, but I myself sometime miss that duck tone of a strat. So combine the two maybe? Idk; maybe I'm just speaking for myself here.
> 
> In regards to the smartwood guitars, the reason they did that was because they were caught illegally using and storing endangered woods. They had EPA come down on them HARD and they made a distraction for the public, which was the smartwood guitars.
> 
> I think gibson's just one of those love it or hate it kind of brands. I've used a number of their cheaper guitars, so I know you don't NEED $2000 for a gibson. All I'm saying is the cheaper guitars they're selling are just that; cheap. I had to fix a buddy's SG right out of the box. The wiring was bad, frets were still sharp at the ends, and the nut had to be fixed as well. I may have just worked on a rare exception, but it's not the first time I've heard horror stories. When's the last time you heard of a completely jacked up Dean?



Lol 
I disagree with most of what you said here and that last sentence does it for me. Dean?! Seriously? Gibson are miles ahead of dean on every aspect. Also, cheap Gibsons hardly feel cheap. They are generally very sturdy and well built and the fret work isn't bad at all most of the time. My Les Paul Studio is still one of the best guitars I've played.
Also, their cheaper guitars usually comes down to cosmetics at the end of the day. The just cut down on the gloss, binding and pretty woods... But at the same time half the the people on the forum are getting natural satin finished guitars - just like on Gibsons.

The first thing I thing if when I hear "cheap guitars" is crap feel. It just feels wrong... Like a toy of sorts. That is the last thing you can associate with Gibson in my experience.

That said... Gibson really need to add some 7 strings and baritones to their Tribute or Studio series. I'd jump on that in an instant, but otherwise Gibson doesn't have much more to offer me. I'd love to see them with swamp ash bodies too.


----------



## josefh (Mar 29, 2013)

Nice quality on the new Gibbos by far just upload a review/test of a classic custom 2012 and it played nice


----------



## Demiurge (Mar 29, 2013)

tommychains said:


> My beef with gibson is that they are REALLY far behind in "innovation".



Really, aside from guitars with advanced onboard electronics in Variax, Moog, Peavy Autotune guitars, and the Firebird X (ah! Gibson!) I'm really itching to know what other companies are doing that are out-innovating these old geezers.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 29, 2013)

I'm going to go on a whim and say that people are accusing them of not being "innovative" is because they don't make many 7 strings and have no 8 string models at all.


----------



## knifefightintheor (Mar 29, 2013)

tommychains said:


> I know fender owns jackson and charvel, but I myself sometime miss that duck tone of a strat. So combine the two maybe? Idk; maybe I'm just speaking for myself



Adrian Smoth SDX? HSS Dinky? HSS Soloist? So Cal with coil taps?

The two have been combined. I didn't quote the rest of your post because it was full of myths that have already been dispelled in this thread.


----------



## Andromalia (Mar 29, 2013)

For te record, I tried an Adrian Smith Smith SDX, being a Sith fanboi, and it was, well, bland. Nothing too exciting about it, not specially good for its price.


----------



## knifefightintheor (Mar 29, 2013)

Well you are definitely in the minority there. I've yet to play one but they receive a lot of praise for being a lot of guitar in a very small price tag.


----------



## Murmel (Mar 29, 2013)

tommychains said:


> I know fender owns jackson and charvel, but I myself sometime miss that duck tone of a strat. So combine the two maybe? Idk; maybe I'm just speaking for myself here.



You do realize that A LOT of strats come with a HSH or swimpool route and can easily mount a pair of EMG's if you'd want it to?
Few guitars are as easily modified as the Stratocaster.

Edit: There are also Fender strats with Floyd's, most stores just don't stock them, but look it up online and you'll find many.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Mar 29, 2013)

There have been strats with Floyds for over a decade now.

EDIT: At least.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 29, 2013)

They did a Blacktop MiM with a Floyd Rose, but it was discontinued.

EDIT: Scratch that, MiM Strats with a FR are still around.

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/guit...-w-floyd-rose-electric-guitar/h76507000006001


----------



## WaffleTheEpic (Mar 29, 2013)

Murmel said:


> You do realize that A LOT of strats come with a HSH or swimpool route and can easily mount a pair of EMG's if you'd want it to?
> Few guitars are as easily modified as the Stratocaster.
> 
> Edit: There are also Fender strats with Floyd's, most stores just don't stock them, but look it up online and you'll find many.



Even then, there are SSS format EMGs that sort of keep the Strat tone with the EMG edge. And they sound spectacular, a lot better than I assumed they would.

Personally, I don't HATE Gibson or Fender, they're great companies, I just think there's better guitar companies out there. My bud owns a Gibson Les Paul Studio with an ebony fretboard and a somewhat thinner neck profile and I love that guitar to death. Plays like BUTTA. But on the other end of the spectrum, I have played some shitty high end and medium end Gibbs and Fenders. *shrug* But it's like that with every company, right?

Except... you know, DeVries and Roter. *shudder*


----------



## Konfyouzd (Mar 29, 2013)

I don't really like to hate on them, they're just not my preferred axes... 

What I do hate on, is all the kids that think they have to play a Les Paul cuz they like Led Zeppelin or something similar. Playing a guitar because you think it'll make you sound like some dude you look up to is stupid. But even then, play what you like...


----------



## technomancer (Mar 29, 2013)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> The Gibson V 7 wasn't MiA?
> 
> I'm only partly being sarcastic, because stranger things have happened, I suppose.
> 
> Wasn't there also a Gibson EX-7 briefly? I'd have thought it was MiA, too.



Was referring to the Les Pauls, which were both Epiphones


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Mar 29, 2013)

technomancer said:


> Was referring to the Les Pauls, which were both Epiphones


 
Ah. Yeah, that is unfortunate. A legit LP Standard 7 would be...

...sexually attractive.


----------



## WaffleTheEpic (Mar 29, 2013)

Konfyouzd said:


> I don't really like to hate on them, they're just not my preferred axes...
> 
> What I do hate on, is all the kids that think they have to play a Les Paul cuz they like Led Zeppelin or something similar. Playing a guitar because you think it'll make you sound like some dude you look up to is stupid. But even then, play what you like...



Well, new players do tend to latch onto their favorite guitarists and therefore buy a guitar that they think can easily emulate the tone that they like. Therefore Slash fans usually buy Les Pauls, Jimi Hendrix fans usually buy Strats... etc.

Edit: post #700! lulz


----------



## Konfyouzd (Mar 29, 2013)

Oh yea I know... I had a buddy who wanted to learn guitar. And I only have 13 of them in my basement... And he would always make stupid excuses about why he couldn't learn on mine. If you don't know anything about guitar how does he know so much about what he can and can't learn on? And how does he know the difference between a strat and a super strat beyond looks on day one? 

"Extra frets? Humbuckers?" *brain shuts down*

None of which are important when I'm tryina show your simple ass how to play a major scale...


----------



## satchmo72 (Mar 29, 2013)

RagtimeDandy said:


> More than anything I think the issue is that Gibson and Fender haven't changed their model shapes much. SS.org wants:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Andromalia (Mar 29, 2013)

Fact: some of my colleagues play rocksmith and are learning guitar with that game. When we started discussing guitars, none of them had any clue a guitar could have more than 6 strings and different scales and pickups. To them, a guitar is a guitar, as a violin is a violin. they don't know how to assess a guitar quality, they buy on looks primarily.


----------



## RagtimeDandy (Mar 29, 2013)

satchmo72 said:


> RagtimeDandy said:
> 
> 
> > More than anything I think the issue is that Gibson and Fender haven't changed their model shapes much. SS.org wants:
> ...


----------



## flint757 (Mar 29, 2013)

The soloist shape is just as over done, but that does look sexy.


----------



## Demiurge (Mar 29, 2013)

Andromalia said:


> When we started discussing guitars, none of them had any clue a guitar could have more than 6 strings and different scales and pickups. To them, a guitar is a guitar, as a violin is a violin.



They'll learn... musicians can't leave well-enough alone.


----------



## Andromalia (Mar 29, 2013)

That's a viola. /nitpick.


----------



## All_¥our_Bass (Mar 29, 2013)

Eric Christian said:


> Actually, both Gibson and Fender have previously made 7 string guitars.


But 7s are not a staple in either company and I think the fender one is discontinued.


----------



## knifefightintheor (Mar 29, 2013)

Seven strings aren't necessarily what I'd call a "staple" in any company. More prominent, yes but not really a majority in any case.


----------



## All_¥our_Bass (Mar 29, 2013)

Well neither company(gibson/fender) continues to make them.

Ibanez makes and sells many more 6s than 7 and 8s, but they have more than one model of seven and eight string guitars that they continue to make, not just putting one model out and 'killing' it a few years later.


----------



## fr4nci2c0 (Mar 30, 2013)

$0.02 time. It really all depends on what sound your going for. Today I was at GC and as far as high gain goodness goes I found the sweetest with an EBMM reflex through a 6505+ and for imaculate cleans my fave was a fender tele thinline trough a fender twin reverb. ill say it again it is all about what sound your going for. to the ppl that hate why do you expect extreme metal sounds when plugging in a fender or gibson? thats not ther intention duh!


----------



## TylerP1212 (Mar 30, 2013)

I'm sure I'm not saying anything that hasn't been said already, but I think there are pros/cons to every type of guitar, be it ERG or a classic 6 string. I side with the minority of members here that prefer vintage/classic-modled gear and guitars, as in my honest opinion, for the price of most of the gear you can find if you do a little digging on your own you can get a wider variety of tones out of the guitars themselves, leading to being less dependent on stomp boxes and multi-effect units to color your sound, in my experience. Its a lot more of an organic approach.

Is it a pain in the ass to lug around all that gear and to actually work with the guitar in question to get the tones you want? To you, maybe. To some its worth the pay off of phenomenal tone.

While some may prefer to stick with their Ibanez RG and Axe FX, others may get a kick out of lugging around a Leslie speaker, full rig, 4-5 different guitars, etc. I love using different guitars for different applications...going from tele, to strat, to les paul, to es-335, for a diff song each is a beautiful thing...so many tones.

I can say as a person who used to work at a store (as if that carries merit lmao) and playing over 50+ different Gibsons and Fenders of varying years/makes, my tl;dr opinion is...

Gibson: Anything they're cranking out now-a-days that's below a "Standard" model, isn't worth the money. So If you're not dropping $2k on an LP or $1500 on an SG, it honestly just doesn't feel/sound the same. NOTHING feels or sounds the same as a real Les Paul. Any Gibson worth getting is going to play phenomenally, and sound like pure bliss. Full,middy goodness. Quit being a pussy about the weight issue, you sound like my sister.

none of this applies to Epiphone though, which I like as a company. Most of the things they put out over $500/600 are manageable, and a simple pickup swap makes them alright guitars. I dig their semihollows.

Fender: I'm more biased towards Fender as I bond a little with a 25.5 scale, but I think it goes without saying that Fender is a way better bang for your buck. A $600 MIM Strat usually out-performs an epiphone in its price range, and w/o a doubt any of the awful, awful "gibsons" under $1200. Strats are practically the most versatile guitars ever. I have a hard time imagining what is wilder than an ash body tele w/a rosewood fingerboard and a p90/bucker setup. The options are great. In my (very personal) opinion, I believe people that grub about Fenders and fender styled guitars not sounding good is because they're simply bad guitarists, who CAN'T GET good tone out of one. You have to work for it with Fender.

...yep, there's my opinion hahaha


----------



## flint757 (Mar 30, 2013)

Single coil pickups are definitely a lot more honest when it comes to technique.


----------



## flexkill (Mar 30, 2013)

flint757 said:


> Single coil pickups are definitely a lot more honest when it comes to technique.



You might think i'm joking...but I am dead serious. I am thinking of putting P90's in every guitar I own....they are the BEST pickup option. I have tried just about everything out there and the P90's are simply the best.


----------



## flint757 (Mar 30, 2013)

I've never played one to have any assumptions one way or the other and they don't come stock on many guitars.


----------



## knifefightintheor (Mar 30, 2013)

All_¥our_Bass;3486155 said:


> Well neither company(gibson/fender) continues to make them.
> 
> Ibanez makes and sells many more 6s than 7 and 8s, but they have more than one model of seven and eight string guitars that they continue to make, not just putting one model out and 'killing' it a few years later.



I see what you're sayin man. More companies are far more prominent in their ERG's, even though still not a staple.

It all comes back to what each company does best


----------



## josefh (Mar 30, 2013)

To many Ibanez elitist all arround..

Differents guitars, differents tones.. just enjoy.. there´s no ''unique'' guitar, every guitar have pros & cons ..


----------



## Jinogalpa (Mar 30, 2013)

most of Gibson's are too heavy for my likes, i don't buy guitars that weights more than 3,8 kilograms. 
also they look like grandpa's guitar to me.

But i do love Fenders especially the custom shop strats, they are often sorted for lightweight, have nice relic finishes  and with Fender's handwound pickups they are really tone machines


----------



## Murmel (Mar 30, 2013)

flint757 said:


> Single coil pickups are definitely a lot more honest when it comes to technique.



Totally. When I first got my strat I had only been playing high-output humbuckers.

Holy shit did I sound bad


----------



## TylerP1212 (Mar 30, 2013)

flexkill said:


> You might think i'm joking...but I am dead serious. I am thinking of putting P90's in every guitar I own....they are the BEST pickup option. I have tried just about everything out there and the P90's are simply the best.



I love P90s, my favorites as well for a jack-of-all-trades pickup


----------



## Daf57 (Mar 30, 2013)

Not much for Gibsons but do love the strats. I have several that I really enjoy playing - plus I like the fact that they come in colors.   Lately tho nothing beats the Ibanez 7 strings. I've acquired 3 already this year!


----------



## xHavokUndeadx (Mar 30, 2013)

I payed 1200 after taxes and eveything, and i bought it the first year it came out so yeah, 1200 is what i payed. Sadly though, some faggot stole it from me after not even having it a year.


----------



## xHavokUndeadx (Mar 30, 2013)

Also, no hate on either gibson or fender cause ive owned a strat and an sg and though they were great, but i fucking love prs. I will retract my last statement that only pros and resl musicians use them. For fuck sakes you can use what ever you want, but i will always take a prs over a gibby or fender anyday.


----------



## Pandemican (Mar 30, 2013)

xHavokUndeadx said:


> I payed 1200 after taxes and eveything, and i bought it the first year it came out so yeah, 1200 is what i payed. Sadly though, some faggot stole it from me after not even having it a year.


wut


----------



## knifefightintheor (Mar 30, 2013)

xHavokUndeadx said:


> I payed 1200 after taxes and eveything, and i bought it the first year it came out so yeah, 1200 is what i payed. Sadly though, some faggot stole it from me after not even having it a year.



Please prove your maturity by not using that word.



xHavokUndeadx said:


> Also, no hate on either gibson or fender cause ive owned a strat and an sg and though they were great, but i fucking love prs. I will retract my last statement that only pros and resl musicians use them. For fuck sakes you can use what ever you want, but i will always take a prs over a gibby or fender anyday.



Calm down Tex, no need to get butthurt.


----------



## flexkill (Mar 30, 2013)

xHavokUndeadx said:


> I payed 1200 after taxes and eveything, and i bought it the first year it came out so yeah, 1200 is what i payed. Sadly though, some faggot stole it from me after not even having it a year.


Ahhhh yes, those pesky "faggots" and their guitar thieving ways....


----------



## xxx128 (Mar 31, 2013)

I kind of like gibsons, they look decent, they play decent, they sound AWESOME. If you are lucky...

Based on the fenders i played i have to say i hate them. They sound wrong, feel wrong, look wrong. after playing a fender strat for more than two minutes i feel intensely disgusted.


----------



## Murmel (Mar 31, 2013)

^
I'm a big advocate of 'to each his own', but I can't in my life imagine how you can't manage to get a strat to sound amazing


----------



## Rap Hat (Mar 31, 2013)

flexkill said:


> You might think i'm joking...but I am dead serious. I am thinking of putting P90's in every guitar I own....they are the BEST pickup option. I have tried just about everything out there and the P90's are simply the best.



I'm right there with you! There's something so fantastic about the P90 bite, especially in a high gain situation. I'm so thankful for Lace and their XBar - it sounds like a supercharged P90 but totally noiseless. Gives my 8 a hell of a tone.


----------



## pathogenicmetal666 (Apr 2, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Anyone who says that Gibson and/or Fender hasn't "innovated" in years is either willfully ignorant or living under a rock.
> 
> In the last ten years Gibson has:
> -Introduced the Digital Les Paul, a model which integrates MIDI function, digital output, and magnetic pickups far beyond a simple Ghost/Shadow install.
> ...



Those features don't sound like the things most players want. Those models are also on the fringe of their line-up, not their bread and butter models. They won't change those models because they have to satisfy the purists who will rage and say "it's not like a real LP!" when anything is changed. A lot of people just want a nice guitar and don't care if it has a volute or not, if it's painted with poly or nitro, etc., as long as it's a quality instrument that works. Those people may be losing out a little bit IMO. They won't even move the strap buttons on the SG so the guitar doesn't neck dive? Vintage style gear is fine, personal preferences are made to be different, but is it the best for everyone? I don't think so, and a company as large as Gibson could offer up some alternatives instead of just 50's, 60's, 70's tributes and re-issues.


----------



## knifefightintheor (Apr 2, 2013)

pathogenicmetal666 said:


> I don't think so, and a company as large as Gibson could offer up some alternatives instead of just 50's, 60's, 70's tributes and re-issues.



And Ibanez could install some useable pickups.. Properly route guitars for passive 8 string pickups... Jackson could step into the vintage world and Carvin could make it a little easier to swap out pickups in their guitars.

No, these aren't desirable traits, but what I'm saying is that companies are different for a reason. It's what makes people prefer one or the other. There are lots of "coulds" that could happen but each company has its icon, so why screw with a proven product?


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 2, 2013)

pathogenicmetal666 said:


> Those features don't sound like the things most players want.


 
Isn't that the key to innovation? Introducing features that are new, not readily available, or plain old different in hopes that they will catch on and/or cause players to look at them differently. 



> Those models are also on the fringe of their line-up, not their bread and butter models.


 
Three of the things listed above were on the Les Paul model. It doesn't get any more "bread and butter" for Gibson than the LP. The Richlite is what's on the LPC, one of Gibson's most iconic models. 



> They won't change those models because they have to satisfy the purists who will rage and say "it's not like a real LP!" when anything is changed.


 
See above. Not to mention they have made changes, and some pretty significant ones. Look at the Axxcess LPs and the cheaper Shredder Models, The "Blood Moon" (worse name ever) series, and the new LPC Lite. There are also the affordable 24-fret SGJ models out. 



> I don't think so, and a company as large as Gibson could offer up some alternatives instead of just 50's, 60's, 70's tributes and re-issues.


 
Look up the M3 Series and a lot of the other stuff Gibson was doing in the late 80's and early 90's. Gibson has certainly tried to make very non-Gibson guitars, it's just folks don't look to Gibson for that. 

Also, consider that Gibson owns Kramer, Valley Arts, and Steinberger. Why compete with yourself? It's the same reason that FMIC doesn't release certain products under the Fender banner.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Apr 2, 2013)

Speaking of Valley Arts, are they even still in business? I see them on the Gibson website, but I haven't seen one for sell in years.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 2, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Speaking of Valley Arts, are they even still in business? I see them on the Gibson website, but I haven't seen one for sell in years.


 
They're still around, the output is just very small, they only make less than half a dozen different modes including basses. They're available to any Gibson dealer to order. 

The original two owners of Valley Arts nearly destroyed the brand before Gibson got a hold of it, so by the time Gibson marketed them around 1998, they had nearly zero endorsers or fans, hence why they're still super small. 

As for the current guitars, they're all made in the Gibson Custom Shop (even though the prices imply a cheaper build) and until last year thier production was overseen by one of the original Valley Arts owners.


----------



## guitareben (Apr 2, 2013)

The price of Gibsons


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Apr 2, 2013)

Sigh.


----------



## Jakke (Apr 2, 2013)

guitareben said:


> The price of Gibsons



Are we really doing this again?


----------



## baptizedinblood (Apr 2, 2013)

guitareben said:


> The price of Gibsons



Gibson SG Standard Electric Guitar | Musician&#39;s Friend


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Apr 2, 2013)

baptizedinblood said:


> Gibson SG Junior 60&#39;s Electric Guitar | Musician&#39;s Friend


----------



## knifefightintheor (Apr 2, 2013)

guitareben said:


> The price of Gibsons



You haven't read any of the points basically proven this argument wrong, have you?



HeHasTheJazzHands said:


>



+1 as well!

Right now with L&M's "Gibson Month" on the go, I managed to grab myself a 2013 LP Traditional for $1799

I'm starting to wonder if people just look at the MSRP's on Gibsons website and think those are the actual prices?


----------



## bulletproof_funk (Apr 3, 2013)

I wouldn't say I hate or dislike Fender, but I feel inundated with their retro offerings that don't suit my tastes when I walk into a number of shops. Granted they are a business and are no doubt targeting the demographics with the most disposable cash and willingness to part with it so I'm not surprised it's Strats and Teles galore in many shops, but they also have the Jackson/Charvel brand which I'm not seeing much of in my area yet (just lower end stuff), certainly nowhere as much as their traditional offerings. I almost feel FMIC is hedging their bets or are waiting to ramp up the 80s shredders if they somehow pick up popularity again. Not to say Fender hasn't tried new things recently like on the EVH line or the Machete amp that sadly no one ever talks about even though it's a pretty kick-ass amp when I tried it last summer, they are a victim of their own success in a way (again many, many Strats, Teles, Blues Jr., etc. on the store floors).

Winter NAMM 2013 showed promise with the Jackson Pro series and the return of the Charvel San Dimas Pro Mods (albeit w/ recessed FR). I'm not sure what sort of timeframe we'll be seeing them here in Canada in quantity, but when I had 5153 GAS last summer and it took them over 9 months to restock us Canucks, well let's say I was very disappointed at how long they turned things around, so I don't have high hopes with the new stuff showing up anytime soon. That, and it feels like us Canadians get nothing but Strats and Teles, and I'll continue believing it until I see otherwise.

Ok, so if that wasn't hate or dislike, I guess it's irritation and annoyance?


----------



## StevenC (Apr 3, 2013)

I absolutely love and want almost every Gibson. Except for the ES-335, I just don't see the point of that thing.


----------



## ArtDecade (Apr 3, 2013)

I love Telecasters. If given the option, I would sell all my other guitars and replace them with nothing but Telecasters... in fact, I might just do that this summer!


----------



## magarishun (Apr 3, 2013)

StevenC said:


> I absolutely love and want almost every Gibson. Except for the ES-335, I just don't see the point of that thing.



I love all of them, ESPECIALLY the 335. 

A vintage cherry 355 and a Black beauty LP (without the middle pickup) are basically my two dream guitars, sadly my student budged got me only up to the 339 (figured it's the best compromise between the two)

Gibsons just have a certain aura to them that no other guitars have. The Headstock shape is IMO the prettiest and classiest out there period, even more so when combined with the custom binding and diamond inlay. They also have quite a unique feel with the neck binding done after the fretting.

Are they ergonomic and modern? Hell no, but they have character. Somehow everything just feels how it's supposed to. They are like those old muscle cars that despite all of their faults and shortcomings still fascinate people.

As to the point of the 335: It just has it's unique character and is pretty versatile, being capable of everything from jazz to classic metal tones and excelling in jazz, blues and rock'n'roll.

PS: I love the fact that they generally don't put tremolos onto their guitars. fuck tremolos


----------



## Beowulf Von Thrashmeister (Apr 3, 2013)

I love my two Gibsons (67` re-issue Flying V in Vintage White, and a 76` re-issue Explorer in Cherry), they are such iconic and brilliant instruments, which this ball crushingly heavy sound right out of the box !!!. 

Just think of all the classic rock and metal albums and all the famous guitarists that play them !!!. 

I`m hoping to save up for a Les Paul Standard next year !!!.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 3, 2013)

I think the 339/336 is what the 335 should have been from the start. Or the 390. If you want a smaller jazz guitar, why would you keep it so wide? And I'm all for wide and deep jazz boxes, but not thin and wide. And even then, some of their wide and thin guitars are alright, because they're hollow, but it's not even hollow! Furthermore, what's with those new cheaper single pickup 335s? If you've got a jazz guitar shouldn't the single pickup go in the neck position? And why is the Epiphone version called the "Dot"? What was wrong with ES-335? And then when people refer to there Epi 335s as Dots instead of 335s...

In closing, I think the reason people hate Gibson is because they created the ES-335.
/rant

Maybe people hate Fender because the invented Dean's tactic of the signature for a dead guitarist. I don't have anything against them, but I'd like a recreation of Steve Howe's Relayer Tele. Not an aged one that costs 15k, but a reasonable one. Hell, make it MIM if you have to, all the MIM Teles I've experienced play better than the MIA versions.


----------



## ghost_of_karelia (Apr 3, 2013)

I love Gibson Explorers. Love them. Adore them. Want to marry them. Want to sleep with-- wait, what?

Nobutsrsly. If I actually owned one (as in, owned, not borrowed off someone *sigh*) I wouldn't honestly ever *need* another guitar (though I'd probably invest in an LP custom, Flying V and SG because I love those too, but they still don't compare to the Explorer).

Other guitars look great and, christ, they especially *sound* great. But there's just something about Gibsons that I can't describe. I'll always love them.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 3, 2013)

StevenC said:


> If you want a smaller jazz guitar, why would you keep it so wide?



Keep in mind, the guitars the ES335 was running against were as big as 19" wide. The ES335 was smaller for it's time. 



> And I'm all for wide and deep jazz boxes, but not thin and wide.



The ES335 is by no means a "Jazz Box", and it was only marketed as such early on in it's life span. 



> And even then, some of there wide and thin guitars are alright, because they're hollow, but it's not even hollow!



No, it's _semi_-hallow, which was the point of the ES335. 




> Furthermore, what's with those new cheaper single pickup 335s?



They're trying to cop the stripped down, rock and roll thing. Think the short lived, but awesome ES333. 



> If you've got a jazz guitar shouldn't the single pickup go in the neck position?



Not full solid. =/= "Jazz Guitar" 



> And why is the Epiphone version called the "Dot"? What was wrong with ES-335? And then when people refer to there Epi 335s as Dots instead of 335s...





The "Dot" was the nickname given to the cheaper ES335s that were released with dot inlays, opposed to trapezoids, blocks, or small blocks like the upper end models. 

To this day Gibson makes a "Dot" and Epiphone has a few "non-Dot" ES335s that are called just that, ES335s. 

Please tell me that was all satire.


----------



## InfinityCollision (Apr 3, 2013)

StevenC said:


> I think the reason people hate Gibson is because they created the ES-335.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 3, 2013)

@MaxOfMetal
Some was satire, some was because because that guitar makes no sense to me, and my experience with people who want to talk about Epi Dots have never been great.

I'll admit that those are all very valid points and answers to my questions. I was thinking all of that as I was typing, but I really don't understand or like that guitar. Give me a 175 or 295 any day, or a chambered LP.

Apologies for the rant, I needed to get that 335 hate of my chest. Almost certainly irrational hate, and it's great that no one's forcing me to buy one.


----------



## magarishun (Apr 3, 2013)

StevenC said:


> @MaxOfMetal
> Some was satire, some was because because that guitar makes no sense to me, and my experience with people who want to talk about Epi Dots have never been great.
> 
> I'll admit that those are all very valid points and answers to my questions. I was thinking all of that as I was typing, but I really don't understand or like that guitar. Give me a 175 or 295 any day, or a chambered LP.
> ...


you should listen to some chuck berry, BB king or cream 335 clapton stuff

that should get the GAS going


----------



## Rap Hat (Apr 4, 2013)

Hell, get a 330 if you want a true hollowbody! 

I'm majorly gassing for a 335 though. I love my 330 don't get me wrong, but every time I look at Gibsons I think how cool it would be to use one for metal and not have to worry about insane feedback.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Apr 5, 2013)

I've got a Hamer 335 clone back in the States that I absolutely love, and it was my guitar of choice in the last black metal band I played guitar in. I'd love to have a legit 335, but Gibsons tend towards the "...as a motherfucker" side of expensive here in Korea. The shop where I bought my Epi LPC had a satin black 335, and they were asking what came out to damned near three grand for it. Nope.


----------



## Murmel (Apr 5, 2013)

StevenC said:


> I think the 339/336 is what the 335 should have been from the start. Or the 390. If you want a smaller jazz guitar, why would you keep it so wide?


I actually really like that they kept it wide. It looks good (I think the smaller Gibson semi-hollows look pretty weird), and my arm feels perfect resting on the bigger body. More perfect than on any other guitar.

I'm still to get an ES335 though


----------



## flexkill (Apr 5, 2013)

I will never forget the first time I played a 335 many years ago when I was a kid. I was all "fuck this grandpa guitar shit" Then I plugged it in an.....WOW! I had no idea...and now I do.

Thing sounded killer and what really surprised me was how rock n roll it was with gain. Killer killer guitars.


----------



## Limpbizkitfan (May 18, 2013)

Gibson and fender are good but not that good if ur a metal guy


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (May 18, 2013)

Limpbizkitfan said:


> Gibson and fender are good but not that good if ur a metal guy



No.


----------



## Don Vito (May 18, 2013)

ooh, ohh

I wanna play.

















Matt looks like he just got back form Nam'


----------



## technomancer (May 18, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> No.



That one is a Jaydee not a Gibson  (not that I have anything against Gibsons, I own two currently including an SG)


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (May 18, 2013)

technomancer said:


> That one is a Jaydee not a Gibson  (not that I have anything against Gibsons, I own two currently)



Well if you wanna be picky like that...


----------



## technomancer (May 18, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Well if you wanna be picky like that...


----------



## Skyblue (May 18, 2013)

we can play this game all day long.


----------



## Nicki (May 18, 2013)

For me, the reason why I hate Fender and Gibson guitars so much is due to several reason. The first being they both have fat necks with a clear coat on them. It just doesn't feel natural and since my hands get sweaty, my left hand either sticks or slips around too much on them. The second being is because I find that Fender and Gibson are one trick ponies. They've had the same sound since the dawn of time and they just don't give me the flexibility or versatility of a brand like Ibanez. It's just to me, all Fenders sound the same and all Gibsons sound the same, whereas the different models of Ibanez guitars all have different characteristics.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (May 18, 2013)

Nicki said:


> The first being they both have fat necks



That's simply not true. A Fender Modern C/D and a Gibson 60's are very close in dimensions to many Ibanez and Jackson guitars. I'm sitting here with my UV7 and Les Paul Traditional, and the necks, while certainly different, are both very playable. Now, my old Broadcaster reissue had a GIANT neck.  



> with a clear coat on them.



Just like every Ibanez (well, minus those with neck backs which are finished to the body color) that leaves the factory. Two of my three LPs have satin finished necks. Fender does do satin finishes on the necks as well. Not ever model, but a lot of them. 



> The second being is because I find that Fender and Gibson are one trick ponies.



Both of these guitars are stock:





These are another pair:







> They've had the same sound since the dawn of time and they just don't give me the flexibility or versatility of a brand like Ibanez.



See above. I love Ibanez too, but that's because 95% of my RGs have sounded exactly the same.  



> It's just to me, all Fenders sound the same and all Gibsons sound the same, whereas the different models of Ibanez guitars all have different characteristics.



You can't say that a Telecaster and a Jazzmaster sound at all the same, or a Les Paul Deluxe and an SG Custom. The only thing those guitars share, for the most part, is the name on the headstock.


----------



## Basti (May 19, 2013)

Because you look at all the customs, sevens and ERG guitar porn on here and you're just like...I WANT MORE.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (May 19, 2013)

steve_k said:


> Gibson is too busy supporting Guitar Center and Musicians Friend with lower grade guitars for the masses that they have diluted the company to a point where they are turning out shit.



Boy, Gibson just can't win there, can they? Either all their stuff is overpriced, or their affordable guitars are diluting the company.



steve_k said:


> Anything worth a damn from Gibson will come from the Custom Shop by a master luthier, but it is all show.



I love my Buckethead LP Studio 



steve_k said:


> And, they are too busy suing luthiers like Gil Yaron, Ken McKay and others for reproducing period correct replicas. Instead of suing, they should license these guys.



Nothing wrong with protecting a company's interests. I honestly don't know if Gibson licenses out their ideas or not, though. Have those guys tried to obtain the right to build reproductions legally, or did they just build unlicensed reproductions and then get a letter from mean ol' Gibson?


----------



## MaxOfMetal (May 19, 2013)

steve_k said:


> I can't speak for Fender, but Gibson is too busy supporting Guitar Center and Musicians Friend with lower grade guitars for the masses that they have diluted the company to a point where they are turning out shit. Anything worth a damn from Gibson will come from the Custom Shop by a master luthier, but it is all show. And, they are too busy suing luthiers like Gil Yaron, Ken McKay and others for reproducing period correct replicas. Instead of suing, they should license these guys.



Have you played any of the 2013 stuff? I used to shit all over the Special and Faded models, because they really were pretty mediocre, but it seems that Gibson has REALLY upped their game in the $800 to $1500 bracket. The bodies are no longer 3+ pieces, the fretboards are wonderfully put together, the fretwork is on par with their $2500 range, the hardware is solid, and the finish and dress options are very abundant. 

I know GC and SA stock tons of them (last GC I went to have roughly a dozen or so T, J, and Tribute models. It's like night and day. 

As for Gibson licensing, or in this case the refusal of, that's Gibson's right. It's not their fault that some builders rather profiteer of them than innovate on their own. If this was a small builder suing the big guy, would you really have the same issue?


----------



## Don Vito (May 19, 2013)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Boy, Gibson just can't win there, can they? Either all their stuff is overpriced, or their affordable guitars are diluting the company.


This

Their cheap stuff isn't even that bad. My step dad's 09 Satin LP Studio is one of the best under 1k guitars I've ever played.

Compared to other guitars around that price, the craftsmanship is similar(not gonna lie), but the Gibsons have a warmer and more distinguishable tone IMO.


----------



## Curt (May 19, 2013)

Basti said:


> Because you look at all the customs, sevens and ERG guitar porn on here and you're just like...I WANT MORE.


 If Gibson would just do some maple fretboard, solid color, baritone Explorers... I wouldn't be looking into customs.


----------



## s_k_mullins (May 19, 2013)

So let's review some of the obviously well-thought-out and impartial reasons given for why Gibson and Fender suck...

1. They can't do metal.
2. Their reasonably priced guitars are poorly built.
3. Their well built guitars are too expensive.
4. Their necks are too fat. 
5. They are one trick ponies. 
6. They all sound the same. 
7. They're old and outdated. 
8. The ES-335 sucks. 
9. They sue people who copy their designs. 

Man, you guys give such good arguments. I have to thank some the well-educated users here for setting me straight. I can't believe I was such a fan of Gibson and Fender all these years and never realized they _actually _ were horrible.

/sarcasm


----------



## xxx128 (May 19, 2013)

I don"t get it. Guitars are a personal affair. And everyone has different tastes and needs.
If i would get a fender for free it would be on ebay in 5 minutes and i am passionate about guitars as most of us are here. At the end of the day one man's trash is another man's treasure. Enjoy the variety that's out there.

/thread


----------



## CloudsofGrass (May 19, 2013)

s_k_mullins said:


> So let's review some of the obviously well-thought-out and impartial reasons given for why Gibson and Fender suck...
> 
> 1. They can't do metal.
> 2. Their reasonably priced guitars are poorly built.
> ...


1. I have a totally stock AS Strat that gives me better solo tones for recording any genre than any other guitar I own. Granted, the neck isn't quite as comfortable; but if I am of the firm opinion that if you can't play it on a Strat or LP then you just haven't practiced enough or just don't rock hard enough.  The newer American Deluxe Strats are getting with the times, they have compound radius fretboards and scalloped neck heels.
2. What constitutes "reasonable priced"? The $500 MIM Standards are great playing and sounding guitars. I think $1000 for an American Standard is peanuts. If you played cello you'd be looking at like $700+ for a cheap student model, and strings are like $50 EACH. Even a $5k les paul is incredibly cheap compared to classical instruments.
3. See "2."
4. This is a matter of opinion. 
5. How so?? 
6. Not true at all.
7. They're "tried and true" 
8. You got me there
9. Wouldn't anyone? What if you were a guy that made couches or something, and you found a guy a few states away was ripping off your designs and selling cheap knockoffs, undercutting your prices, and tarnishing your good name? I'd sue that guy soooooo hard.

Different strokes to move the world, etc, etc.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (May 19, 2013)

Dude, he was being sarcastic. He even said it at the end of the post.


----------



## CloudsofGrass (May 19, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Dude, he was being sarcastic. He even said it at the end of the post.


My bad. Good trolling though, got my blood boiling


----------



## FILTHnFEAR (May 19, 2013)

I don't care for either of them mainly becuase they don't have features that I want in my guitars. And I do think they are very overpriced in alot of cases but not all.

Now what does get on my nerves that isn't the companies fault is walking into a store with 150 Fender and Gibsons on the wall with a multitude of higher end models and then going to the opposite wall with everything else containing 50 or so Ibbys, LTD's, Schecter, Jacksons etc., most of which are low end models I want nothing to do with and only a very few mid-ranged or high end instruments to check out. Annoying, but thats just because the average person going in to buy a guitar is going straight for what their classic rock guitar hero played. And thats totally cool.


----------



## s_k_mullins (May 21, 2013)

CloudsofGrass said:


> 1. I have a totally stock AS Strat that gives me better solo tones for recording any genre than any other guitar I own. Granted, the neck isn't quite as comfortable; but if I am of the firm opinion that if you can't play it on a Strat or LP then you just haven't practiced enough or just don't rock hard enough.  The newer American Deluxe Strats are getting with the times, they have compound radius fretboards and scalloped neck heels.
> 2. What constitutes "reasonable priced"? The $500 MIM Standards are great playing and sounding guitars. I think $1000 for an American Standard is peanuts. If you played cello you'd be looking at like $700+ for a cheap student model, and strings are like $50 EACH. Even a $5k les paul is incredibly cheap compared to classical instruments.
> 3. See "2."
> 4. This is a matter of opinion.
> ...



   Successful trolling. 

Read the whole post, guys.


----------



## Luafcm (May 21, 2013)

It's cool to hate them. Once everyone follows suit and hates them too... it's time to run out and buy one. LOL

They are fine, and metal enough (just not for me, haha)


----------



## Andromalia (May 21, 2013)

Jannick duckface. Now I'll have seen anything.


----------



## GuitaristOfHell (May 21, 2013)

The Les Paul and Explorer are by far my favorites. I like a heavy guitar. Soild, clear tone, not to mention massive. I'll just leave this here.


----------



## Blackheim (May 22, 2013)

The only issue I have with both companies is that I can find what they offer and better in some cases for a much lower price. I mean, I'd love to have a Black LP with Gold hardware and a Flat Head Tele and Strat, and don't even start with Fender basses (they are awesome), BUT, every LP, Tele, Strat, whatever I tried don't have that "mojo" some claim they have. I'll tried other guitars (Thorn, PRS, Washburn) that have similar characteristics and other times better than previously stated guitars with a lower price.


----------



## Nicki (May 25, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> That's simply not true. A Fender Modern C/D and a Gibson 60's are very close in dimensions to many Ibanez and Jackson guitars. I'm sitting here with my UV7 and Les Paul Traditional, and the necks, while certainly different, are both very playable. Now, my old Broadcaster reissue had a GIANT neck.



I find thin necks more playable to my style than the traditional C shape of a Gibson.



MaxOfMetal said:


> Just like every Ibanez (well, minus those with neck backs which are finished to the body color) that leaves the factory. Two of my three LPs have satin finished necks. Fender does do satin finishes on the necks as well. Not ever model, but a lot of them.



None of my RGs have a clear coat on them from the factory. The only one of my Ibbys that have a clear coat is my SZR720. I know Fender does a satin finish, but I've only ever found 1 Strat that I've liked (50th anniversary model) and it was MIM. 



MaxOfMetal said:


> Both of these guitars are stock:
> 
> See above. I love Ibanez too, but that's because 95% of my RGs have sounded exactly the same.



I'm not saying that Gibsons and Fenders can't be used to play any style, because quite honestly any guitar can be used for any style. I just find that Gibson and Fender don't fit as well into a style that they weren't necessarily made for.

As far as RGs sounding the same, can't say I feel you on that one. I have an RG320FM that just has that right balance in resonance between the neck and body which makes it sound ....ing godly. I have an RG320EX that gives a more full and rich tone. My RGR121DX sounds thin as piss, and my RGD2127Z sounds so thick that it's almost guaranteed to make your dick hard.



MaxOfMetal said:


> You can't say that a Telecaster and a Jazzmaster sound at all the same, or a Les Paul Deluxe and an SG Custom. The only thing those guitars share, for the most part, is the name on the headstock.



As far as Fender goes, yes I can because in all Fender models there's a certain twang to them that you hear no matter which you're using. Even in Jim Root's tele and JM I can hear the slight twang. Not bashing it. That's what makes a Fender a Fender. But if I want twang, I'll twang the string myself, don't need the guitar to do it for me.

Where Gibson is concerned, an LP and SG model sound extremely close to each other and the only thing that seperates them, aside from body shape, is the wood density in the models. You can shape a guitar any way you'd like, but similarly dense woods will produce similar resonance and tone. I realize that the SG has less wood volume than a Les Paul, but less volume can be counteracted by a higher density. Couple that with just about the same necks and you're more or less producing the same guitar. 

To each his own. I don't bash anyone that plays a Fender or Gibson, these are just my observations on why I don't like them.

I'm extremely picky when it comes to guitars. I know in less than 10 seconds of playing a guitar whether or not it's worthy of consideration or if it's utter failage. And I've played RGs that cost more than I can afford which sound thinner than piss and put them back on the wall. All in all, I've never found two RGs to sound the same. Even when I was going through that hell with the guitar shop chipping the paint on my previous RGD, I could hear the difference between the previous RGD and the one I got in exchange. The new one sounded a little darker than the one before it.

With all the Fenders and Gibsons I've played, I've only heard one tone from them and they all sound the same to me. Now, consistency can be a good thing, but for me, I actually appreciate Ibanez's inconsistency because it means if I need a new guitar for a different task, I can find one that will suit that task to my preference. Consistency is great, but variety is the spice of life.


----------



## L1ght (May 25, 2013)

Max, don't Ibanez necks come finished with a satin poly finish?


----------



## Nicki (May 25, 2013)

Hrm,

I'm thinking there may be some confusion over what "clear coat" means...


----------



## sawtoothscream (May 25, 2013)

I like fender. Sound great for clean stuff 

Gibson meh. Played the les paul a few times and never liked. Heavy hate the neck and don't like the sound. Just a guitar I don't work well with.


----------



## flint757 (May 25, 2013)

Nicki said:


> As far as Fender goes, yes I can because in all Fender models there's a certain twang to them that you hear no matter which you're using.



Twang is not a fender thing, it is a single coil thing. It just so happens that the majority of their guitars have single coils.  Unless you are coil splitting or turning the treble on your amp way up I don't see how you could pull off the 'twang' without single coils.


----------



## JP7 (May 25, 2013)

I love me a good gibson lol! It's what got me into not only shredding but also was my introduction to true GAS and when I get any guitar I judge it by that guitar my playing has been built around it! Sad to see so much hate but if you search and find yourself a good one just get it. It will be your "instrument"


----------



## Eclipse (May 25, 2013)

Not enough dje... I won't go there.


----------



## yingmin (May 25, 2013)

tristanroyster said:


> Not enough dje... I won't go there.


----------



## Nicki (May 25, 2013)

flint757 said:


> Twang is not a fender thing, it is a single coil thing. It just so happens that the majority of their guitars have single coils.  Unless you are coil splitting or turning the treble on your amp way up I don't see how you could pull off the 'twang' without single coils.



Chicken Pickin is one way. You'll still get a twang even if you got buckers. Even an aggressive up-pick will give off a little twang. 

Single coils help to accentuate a twang, they don't cause them. And twang is certainly not exclusive to Fender, it's just a sound that Fender is quite known for.


----------



## pushpull7 (May 25, 2013)

I dunno, but I'm gassing over this right now.

American Deluxe Strat® HSS | Electric Guitars | Fender Guitars

Seems pretty high quality to me. Not sure about the compound radius neck though.


----------



## s_k_mullins (May 26, 2013)

chrisharbin said:


> I dunno, but I'm gassing over this right now.
> 
> American Deluxe Strat® HSS | Electric Guitars | Fender Guitars
> 
> Seems pretty high quality to me. Not sure about the compound radius neck though.



The American Deluxe models are definitely high quality, great guitars!

And the compound radius is pretty cool. I had it on my Charvel San Dimas and I really dug it.


----------



## pushpull7 (May 26, 2013)

I had a pro mod and it was cool. What I'm worried about is when I need work done on it. I'm guessing someone would have to know what they are doing if it ever needed let's say a fret level.


----------



## Danukenator (May 26, 2013)

As a Fender fan, I left my local shop disappointed this week. A gold finished Jazzmaster that just had lame quality control. Same for the Cobain tribute/sig. Both had sloppy binding and a terrible set up. The Gold one had a few routing errors near the neck pocket as well. 

I'll try some newer Gibsons tomorrow but I'm a little bummed with Fender's high end stuff. Their "middle" class range was dominating the more expensive stuff.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (May 26, 2013)

Nicki said:


> I find thin necks more playable to my style than the traditional C shape of a Gibson.



Not all Gibson necks are fat Cs though, they have plenty of thin, D shaped necks. Try out some SGs with the 60's profile, it's a bit thinner than the LP version and a really beauty to play, and that's coming from a HUGE Ibby fan/player. 



> None of my RGs have a clear coat on them from the factory. The only one of my Ibbys that have a clear coat is my SZR720. I know Fender does a satin finish, but I've only ever found 1 Strat that I've liked (50th anniversary model) and it was MIM.



Ibanez does not ship guitars with "unfinished" necks. They all have a poly based clear coat applies. All of them. That's a fact. 

Usually it's satin/matte finished, but not always. 

Gibson, while usually gloss, have been releasing tons of satin finished LPs and SGs as of late. 




> I'm not saying that Gibsons and Fenders can't be used to play any style, because quite honestly any guitar can be used for any style. I just find that Gibson and Fender don't fit as well into a style that they weren't necessarily made for.



What are they "made for" though? Look at all the artists who use Les Pauls in heavier context and make them sound absolutely amazing. 

Can you really throw on an In Flames, Amon Amarth, or Mastodon album and say that Gibsons are only built for blues rock? Or play a Yngwie Malmsteen or Slipknot record and say the same for Strats? 



> As far as RGs sounding the same, can't say I feel you on that one. I have an RG320FM that just has that right balance in resonance between the neck and body which makes it sound ....ing godly. I have an RG320EX that gives a more full and rich tone. My RGR121DX sounds thin as piss, and my RGD2127Z sounds so thick that it's almost guaranteed to make your dick hard.



Well, I wouldn't exactly call the low end Ibanez stuff consistent in any stretch of the imagination.  

Just about all my 90's MIJ RGs, whether a 550, 560, 750, 770, etc., sounded identical. They had great consistency back then. I've probably owned well over 100 at this point. 

Same goes for my UV7s, they've all sounded essentially the same, minus two that really stood out. 



> As far as Fender goes, yes I can because in all Fender models there's a certain twang to them that you hear no matter which you're using. Even in Jim Root's tele and JM I can hear the slight twang. Not bashing it. That's what makes a Fender a Fender. But if I want twang, I'll twang the string myself, don't need the guitar to do it for me.



Sorry, I'm going to have to call BS on this. I've played the JM and it sounds far closer to a couple ESP M-II models I've owned than any of my Fender or G&L Strats. 

The mahogany body and EMGs don't know that it says "Fender" on the headstock. 

Can you point out the twang here:


Or here:




> Where Gibson is concerned, an LP and SG model sound extremely close to each other and the only thing that seperates them, aside from body shape, is the wood density in the models.



They can sound similar, but it really depends on the exact models we're talking about. A Les Paul Custom 3P is going to sound significantly different than an SG Special P90. 



> You can shape a guitar any way you'd like, but similarly dense woods will produce similar resonance and tone. I realize that the SG has less wood volume than a Les Paul, but less volume can be counteracted by a higher density. Couple that with just about the same necks and you're more or less producing the same guitar.



Similar, not the same. Just like an Alder/Maple/Rosewood Strat (even with buckers) can sound quite different than an Alder/Maple/Rosewood JEM. 

A guitar is the sum of everything that goes into it.


----------



## Curt (May 26, 2013)

I am just going to throw out there that I love strats, and REALLY wish Fender would make some normal SSS 7 string strats. When recording, I reach to my strat almost exclusively for clean tone duty.
Also, I make a little extra money doing setups for people in my area, and love when people bring in Fenders. Easiest and quickest setups to do are on a vintage trem strat.


----------



## yingmin (May 26, 2013)

Curt said:


> I am just going to throw out there that I love strats, and REALLY wish Fender would make some normal SSS 7 string strats.



They probably don't perceive much of a market for them, and honestly, I can't blame them.


----------



## Curt (May 26, 2013)

yingmin said:


> They probably don't perceive much of a market for them, and honestly, I can't blame them.


Oh, I am aware of the niche market within a still somewhat niche market. either way, I do plan to have one built at some point.


----------



## Nicki (May 26, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Not all Gibson necks are fat Cs though, they have plenty of thin, D shaped necks. Try out some SGs with the 60's profile, it's a bit thinner than the LP version and a really beauty to play, and that's coming from a HUGE Ibby fan/player.



I hate to say that I have tried all sorts of SG models and have just found none with a neck profile thin enough to be comfortable for me to play on.



MaxOfMetal said:


> Ibanez does not ship guitars with "unfinished" necks. They all have a poly based clear coat applies. All of them. That's a fact.
> 
> Usually it's satin/matte finished, but not always.
> 
> Gibson, while usually gloss, have been releasing tons of satin finished LPs and SGs as of late.



I think this is where we seem to getting confused on what the difference between a "clear coat" and "finish" is, possibly differing in opinion. 

I don't argue that Ibby necks come with a poly based _finish_. 

My distinction between a finish and clear coat is that a finish will still allow you to feel the texture of the wood on the back of the neck. The clear coat I'm talking about is what you see on most LP necks. It gives one uniform feeling throughout and can be glossy. I also feel a thin layer of this clear coat on Fenders as well which is enough to turn me off to it. The clear coat causes my fret hand to really drag along the neck where the finish that comes on most Ibanez guitars doesn't cause that.

I apologize if there was confusion regarding this.






MaxOfMetal said:


> What are they "made for" though? Look at all the artists who use Les Pauls in heavier context and make them sound absolutely amazing.



I find Gibson to be good for Rock, Blues, SOME country, more or less the roots of music played on instruments. Fender - Jazz, Classic Rock, Country, Bluegrass... As far as translating into metal or more aggressive styles, I just don't happen to like the way that they sound in those genres. Even Matt Heafy's LP sound on the Trivium records I can't say I'm huge on. 



MaxOfMetal said:


> Can you really throw on an In Flames, Amon Amarth, or Mastodon album and say that Gibsons are only built for blues rock? Or play a Yngwie Malmsteen or Slipknot record and say the same for Strats?



Again, referring to above, I personally don't like the way those brands and models translate into aggressive styles.



MaxOfMetal said:


> Well, I wouldn't exactly call the low end Ibanez stuff consistent in any stretch of the imagination.
> 
> Just about all my 90's MIJ RGs, whether a 550, 560, 750, 770, etc., sounded identical. They had great consistency back then. I've probably owned well over 100 at this point.
> 
> Same goes for my UV7s, they've all sounded essentially the same, minus two that really stood out.



1. I don't consider my RG320FM to be a low end Ibanez by any stretch considering its $600 CAD price tag when it was new. I'd say it's more mid ranged, though it honestly plays better than my prestige Ibby. Quite frankly my RG320FM puts a lot of RGs from 2007 onward to shame. My RGR121DX... yeah. No argument about low end. I bought it as a beater.

2. Don't take this as an insult as it's not meant to be. If you can't hear a difference in the guitars you're playing, you're listening only to the notes you play, not the guitar itself. Listen more closely and try to distinguish the different frequencies your guitars resonate through. You'll hear a difference in characteristics then.



MaxOfMetal said:


> Sorry, I'm going to have to call BS on this. I've played the JM and it sounds far closer to a couple ESP M-II models I've owned than any of my Fender or G&L Strats.



G&L's I find have completely different tonal charactistics than those of their predecessors in Fender. Aside from some playability issues, G&L's are solid guitars. You might find that strange considering they were made by Leo Fender, but I find G&L strats don't have that twang that Fender guitars do. Just what my ears hear...



MaxOfMetal said:


> The mahogany body and EMGs don't know that it says "Fender" on the headstock.



Doesn't this only further my saying that the twang doesn't come from the single coils?




MaxOfMetal said:


> Can you point out the twang here:



0:57 - 1:09 right stereo track.




MaxOfMetal said:


> Or here:



Right in the beginning dude. Opening riff.




MaxOfMetal said:


> They can sound similar, but it really depends on the exact models we're talking about. A Les Paul Custom 3P is going to sound significantly different than an SG Special P90.



No argument here.



MaxOfMetal said:


> Similar, not the same. Just like an Alder/Maple/Rosewood Strat (even with buckers) can sound quite different than an Alder/Maple/Rosewood JEM.
> 
> A guitar is the sum of everything that goes into it.



Also keeping in mind that wood density can vary depending on which part of the world the wood comes from. However, factor in the neck shape/thickness + headstock shape and amount of wood use, and you'll have different resonant frequencies. So quite possibly Fender found some magic formula for creating combinations of wood + hardware that give off that twang, but I just haven't heard one Fender guitar that doesn't have it. Again, it's just what my ears tell me.


----------



## donray1527 (May 26, 2013)

Gibson and Fender are great guitar manufactures and I will always vouch for them. I just bought my first gibby yesterday actually but have always enjoyed playing them. For me, the price tag isn't justified in the Lp standards and I think the should be 1800 or 2000 dollars at he most, but the customs and studio models are right on par with their price. The customs are super high end double bound pieces of art, while the lower end studios and whatnot are great work horses with similar qualities of their big brothers. 
To me, I think you pay for three things aside from being USA made and the Gibson name when you buy one. You pay for sustain for DAYS, tuning stability, and reliability


----------



## InfinityCollision (May 26, 2013)

yingmin said:


> They probably don't perceive much of a market for them, and honestly, I can't blame them.



The 7-string Sentinels that Rondo's been putting out lately have sold pretty well. Nothing by Fender's standards obviously, but Rondo's also a hell of a lot smaller. There's also a certain fandom around here regarding the Squier 7s. I can't speak to whether it's enough to warrant Fender making a 7-strat, but I really do believe there's a market for _someone_ to offer them. Mind you I'm a bit biased...


----------



## technomancer (May 26, 2013)

Nicki said:


> I think this is where we seem to getting confused on what the difference between a "clear coat" and "finish" is, possibly differing in opinion.
> 
> I don't argue that Ibby necks come with a poly based _finish_.
> 
> ...



That's not a differing opinion, you're using the term incorrectly. All of the necks you mention have a clear coat on them, Ibanez just uses a thin satin clear on their necks.


----------



## Dooky (May 26, 2013)

s_k_mullins said:


> So let's review some of the obviously well-thought-out and impartial reasons given for why Gibson and Fender suck...
> 
> 
> 4. Their necks are too fat.
> ...



Haha, yeah, "their necks are too fat" always gives me the lulz
Back in the day, when I was all about the widdly-widdly and wang bar, I thought thin necks were the make of a great guitar. While I do still like some thin necks, I quickly learnt that a hell of a lot of tone comes from the neck and that a slightly fatter neck can add heaps too the overall tone of the guitar. Hence why I now have a Ibanez ARZ800 and Gibson Les Paul Custom in my collection and they are two of the best sounding guitars I own. As long as the neck profile is good, fatter necks can be quite comfy too.


----------



## yingmin (May 26, 2013)

InfinityCollision said:


> The 7-string Sentinels that Rondo's been putting out lately have sold pretty well. Nothing by Fender's standards obviously, but Rondo's also a hell of a lot smaller. There's also a certain fandom around here regarding the Squier 7s. I can't speak to whether it's enough to warrant Fender making a 7-strat, but I really do believe there's a market for _someone_ to offer them. Mind you I'm a bit biased...



Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there isn't a market for them. I think it would absolutely be worth their whole to do, say, a run of maybe a couple hundred 7-string Strats, sell them at or not too far above US Std prices and see how it goes. However, I'm not an executive at Fender. I can certainly understand some trepidation on their part. Hell, this is a website literally dedicated to 7-string guitars, and what I perceive to be a pretty significant majority of members complain pretty regularly about Fender, and are far more interested in guitars that are as unlike standard Strats as possible while still being effectively the same shape.


----------



## flint757 (May 26, 2013)

Nicki said:


> I find Gibson to be good for Rock, Blues, SOME country, more or less the roots of music played on instruments. Fender - Jazz, Classic Rock, Country, Bluegrass... As far as translating into metal or more aggressive styles, I just don't happen to like the way that they sound in those genres. Even Matt Heafy's LP sound on the Trivium records I can't say I'm huge on.
> 
> Again, referring to above, I personally don't like the way those brands and models translate into aggressive styles.



Here's the thing though they CAN do aggressive tones, you just don't like it. I hate most Ibanez guitars I've played and EMG/active pickups, that doesn't equal bad for metal though.



Nicki said:


> Doesn't this only further my saying that the twang doesn't come from the single coils?



 No it doesn't.



Nicki said:


> Also keeping in mind that wood density can vary depending on which part of the world the wood comes from. However, factor in the neck shape/thickness + headstock shape and amount of wood use, and you'll have different resonant frequencies. So quite possibly Fender found some magic formula for creating combinations of wood + hardware that give off that twang, but I just haven't heard one Fender guitar that doesn't have it. Again, it's just what my ears tell me.



 I don't know where to begin. First of all if you are correct on your notion that all the pieces make up the 'twang' (maybe your definition of twang is just off ) then each variation of wood type/hardware would create or not create the twang sound. Same with the routing as well (swimming pool, direct mount, SSS route, tremolo, non-tremolo, etc.). I mean the fender shapes are used by countless companies and builders too and they don't all have the 'twang' sound obviously. There are 2 conclusions we can draw from this: either Fender does make guitars that don't have the 'twang' sound given the sheer variety that is achievable OR the twang does NOT come from the guitar, but the pickups . 

I built a Warmoth 'Strat' out of Black Korina, Goncalo Alves, Pau Ferro, Wilkinson bridge, and Planet Wave tuners. None of that comes on ANY fender as far as I'm aware. First round I put a humbucker in and there was no 'twang' whatsoever to be found. Second go around I went the SSS route and voila twang galore. The 'twang' comes from the pickups and is only emphasized further by brighter guitars.

There are ways to emulate the sound I'm sure, but the original 'twang' sound came from guitars using single coil pup's.


----------



## McBonez (May 26, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> No.









Omgz EMG's and drop A# on a 24.75 scale! Impossible!


----------



## Jakke (May 28, 2013)

Quote from a guy from Gibson Sweden on the Gibson acoustics:
"Weeell, they basically smell like a combination of wood shop class and a polish whore-house"

What's not to like?


----------



## Forkface (May 28, 2013)

I generally dislike Gibson guitars because I've never felt that they're worth their pricetags.
Every time I try one I go "well, this is pretty nice, sounds good too, but 2k? nahh" I feel like you pay a lot of money just because it says "Gibson" on the headstock. 

I have no beef with Fender


----------



## Jakke (May 28, 2013)

Forkface said:


> I generally dislike Gibson guitars because I've never felt that they're worth their pricetags.
> Every time I try one I go "well, this is pretty nice, sounds good too, but 2k? nahh" I feel like you pay a lot of money just because it says "Gibson" on the headstock.
> 
> I have no beef with Fender



Gibson Studios, some of the best bang for the buck there is


----------



## Curt (May 28, 2013)

I agree, I have owned 2 gibby LP Studio's that played nearly every bit as good as the $3800 LPC that I had. (in my Travis Stever fanboy days. )


----------



## McBonez (May 28, 2013)

Forkface said:


> I generally dislike Gibson guitars because I've never felt that they're worth their pricetags.
> Every time I try one I go "well, this is pretty nice, sounds good too, but 2k? nahh" I feel like you pay a lot of money just because it says "Gibson" on the headstock.
> 
> I have no beef with Fender



I can tell you this - If my Eclipse was USA made and not Japanese made, I certainly wouldn't feel it was worth it's price, either.


----------



## AngstRiddenDreams (May 28, 2013)

Guys, how could you have forgotten? It doesn't matter what wood or pickups Fender or Gibson's use. Each guitar has twang and baldness inducing blues wankery pixy dust rubbed into it before it leaves the factory!


----------



## flint757 (May 28, 2013)

AngstRiddenDreams said:


> Guys, how could you have forgotten? It doesn't matter what wood or pickups Fender or Gibson's use. Each guitar has twang and baldness inducing blues wankery pixy dust rubbed into it before it leaves the factory!





They have a bottle of Leo Fender and Les Paul's jizz stored away just for this process (warning kids that's not pixie dust ).


----------



## Curt (May 28, 2013)

McBonez said:


> I can tell you this - If my Eclipse was USA made and not Japanese made, I certainly wouldn't feel it was worth it's price, either.


 Explain this to me, please. If your roughly $1500-$2000 ESP was made in the USA, it would suddenly not be worth what you paid? 



AngstRiddenDreams said:


> Guys, how could you have forgotten? It doesn't matter what wood or pickups Fender or Gibson's use. Each guitar has twang and baldness inducing blues wankery pixy dust rubbed into it before it leaves the factory!


 Baldness, and blues wankery be damned... I love my fender.


----------



## AngstRiddenDreams (May 28, 2013)

flint757 said:


> They have a bottle of Leo Fender and Les Paul's jizz stored away just for this process (warning kids that's not pixie dust ).


They use extra for the Olympic White color.


----------



## CTID (May 28, 2013)

Curt said:


> Explain this to me, please. If your roughly $1500-$2000 ESP was made in the USA, it would suddenly not be worth what you paid?



My _guess_ is that he's probably saying that if it was made in the USA to the same quality it was made in Japan, it'd probably cost significantly more.

But that's just a stab in the dark, I really have no idea.


----------



## flint757 (May 28, 2013)

That's what I was thinking.


----------



## RevelGTR (May 28, 2013)

I was/am a huge Ibanez fan boy for several years. I picked up an LP traditional gold top a couple months ago, and to my ear and hand it sounds and feels so much better then my Ibanez guitars that I was shocked. I've since bought one of the custom shop satin ES-335s and have a firebird on the way. Gibson stuff sounds, looks, and feels great and is just plain cool. I also love Fender as well, and my AV52 Tele-Esquire conversion is an awesome guitar as well. Different strokes for different folks as they say, but a big fan of both here.


----------



## pushpull7 (May 29, 2013)

AngstRiddenDreams said:


> They use extra for the Olympic White color.



haha, I just bought an Olympic White HSS


----------



## baptizedinblood (May 29, 2013)

steve_k said:


> I can't speak for Fender, but Gibson is too busy supporting Guitar Center and Musicians Friend with lower grade guitars for the masses that they have diluted the company to a point where they are turning out shit.* Anything worth a damn from Gibson will come from the Custom Shop by a master luthier, but it is all show.* And, they are too busy suing luthiers like Gil Yaron, Ken McKay and others for reproducing period correct replicas. Instead of suing, they should license these guys.



My 1300$ SG Standard would like to have a word with you. 




People dislike Fenders and Gibsons because they aren't ERG superstrat/RG shaped customs 69" Scale 8 string guitars preloaded with BKPs.

Too many opinions formed on firsthand experiences with Squiers and Epiphones.


----------



## Curt (May 29, 2013)

CTID said:


> My _guess_ is that he's probably saying that if it was made in the USA to the same quality it was made in Japan, it'd probably cost significantly more.
> 
> But that's just a stab in the dark, I really have no idea.


 I didn't think about it that way.
Though, I dont see a problem with Gibson pricing. But, that is just my opinion.


----------



## yingmin (May 29, 2013)

Curt said:


> I didn't think about it that way.


I don't really see any other way to interpret his statement but that he thinks Japanese labor is intrinsically better and/or more valuable than American labor.


----------



## Jakke (May 29, 2013)

Other killer Gibson for a shamelessly low price, which I'm also probably picking up one of this year, is the SGJ and the LPJ. 

These are great guitars, and most of the reviewing sector seems to be raving about these currently as well.


Oh yes... Come to Jakke..


----------



## yellow (May 29, 2013)

Hey Church  For the same reason people here hate EMG's: no reason at all....well that and trashing other people's opinions to feel better about their own AKA frontrunning

I used to own a Gibson SG Standard when I was a new player, and now I know why after years I prefer Ibanez and ESP, I still think the SG is a helluva guitar


----------



## McBonez (May 29, 2013)

Curt said:


> Explain this to me, please. If your roughly $1500-$2000 ESP was made in the USA, it would suddenly not be worth what you paid?



No. I'm saying that if it was made in the USA, the price would be far higher than it is for the same product, and there's no arguing that.


----------



## fortisursus (May 29, 2013)

My friend's American Strat Standard is one hell of a resonant piece of wood. Nice guitar. People like to hate what is different to their personal taste. Then over time figure out there is nothing inherently wrong with the ladder. I think you can get some sweet tones from Fenders and Gibsons, but maybe they aren't detuned uber metalz. 

Haters gonna hate. Nothing more than that.


----------



## Addison90 (Jun 1, 2013)

I've met people who bash fender and gibson because they can't play the blues, and underestimate pentatonic scale..


----------



## Captain Shoggoth (Jun 1, 2013)

Gibsons are like the most metal thing there is (well, LPs and Explorers anyway)-massive slab of mahogany, thick-ass mahogany neck and hot passive pickups. Hell yeah.

If you think the neck is too big to shred then man the .... up and shred anyway


----------



## pushpull7 (Jun 1, 2013)

Well, I original chimed into this thread to mention it's rough to see many Gibson and Fender prices. I stand by that, but I picked up this Fender HSS American strat and though it's not ghastly, but it's the most expensive guitar than I've had*. The quality is pretty f'ing amazing though. Better than the EC I had years and years ago. The frets are REALLY well done, the trem now is a pop-in and I can move that arm where I'd like, stays in tune great, sounds terrific with the stock pups. 

*I'm auditioning a MM SM but I'm pretty sure I won't keep it, but yeah the combined price would rival a custom shop or higher priced LP


----------



## Whitestrat (Jun 2, 2013)

I have a strat. It's nice. The vintage pickups weren't what I needed so I replaced them. Thanks to Paul Gilbert and his injectors, and some dimarzio area 67s, I now have a guitar that can so almost anything from vintage to all out modern rock. Oddly my mesa throttle pedal sounds best with the strat! And for those who say fender didnt update their designs, please have a look at the fender American deluxe strat. That S1 switch coupled with the modernish neck profile and the reduced heel is a great take on a classic guitar. I believe there's even a HSS version?


----------



## pushpull7 (Jun 3, 2013)

Whitestrat said:


> I have a strat. It's nice. The vintage pickups weren't what I needed so I replaced them. Thanks to Paul Gilbert and his injectors, and some dimarzio area 67s, I now have a guitar that can so almost anything from vintage to all out modern rock. Oddly my mesa throttle pedal sounds best with the strat! And for those who say fender didnt update their designs, please have a look at the fender American deluxe strat. That S1 switch coupled with the modernish neck profile and the reduced heel is a great take on a classic guitar. I believe there's even a HSS version?



You mean like this one: 

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/standard-guitars/238808-ngd-fender-american-content.html



It seems really well made.


----------



## Herrick (Jun 4, 2013)

If Fender made a reasonably-priced 7-string Strat (Mexican or USA-made) I'd Buy *That* For A Dollar!


----------



## sonicwarrior (Jun 6, 2013)

3074326 said:


> Gibson also owns Steinberger.



Unfortunately. Look what they have done to that name. The Synapse series had/has [not sure if it's discontinued] more quality control problems than Gibson and there is no advertising (that I know of). 
Ever tried to get replacement parts for a Transtrem 3? Good luck on that.



broj15 said:


> a herd/ hive mind mentality is something usually only present in the majority group.



Ehm, no. You can break up almost every group in smaller groups and that drasticallly changes the mainstream way of thinking.
Like we here as a group of guitarists are thinking subtle differences in pickups are a big deal whereas the majority of all human beings couldn't care less. Then there are smaller groups inside the guitar player group like people who would never use an active pickup and those who prefer them.



flexkill said:


> No hate here. A Les Paul and strat should be a mainstay in any guitar players arsenal IMHO.



I don't hate Fender and Gibson only a little for the Steinberger incident and some other things but statements like these? Argh. 
Their PR staff will like the statement of course. Did you get paid for that? 

The only headstock from Fender that I like is the Telecaster one and Gibson doesn't make a single headstock I like. Apart from that the Gibson scale is too short for me and I don't like the angled neck. 
Both don't offer the pure flat radius that I like, their neck joints usually suck and most of the finishes are boring or worse (goldtops, sunbursts with all this yellow/brown/reddish stuff).

So there is barely any Gibson/Fender which appears sexy enough for me and for those that are other brands are offering more appealing stuff.


----------

