# Mysterious Gibson 2016 7 string



## Musiscience (Dec 1, 2015)

So, I dont know if this has been posted yet, but I just seen this image on Instagram:







Seems like a 7 string american made SG? RD?


----------



## CaptainD00M (Dec 1, 2015)

Ugh trying so hard not to get any hopes up.


----------



## cardinal (Dec 1, 2015)

looking forward to it! They've used that crown inlay an LPs in the past, too. So who knows what it could be. Almost looks like a Gothic guitar with no binding and a black nut and hardware.


----------



## setsuna7 (Dec 1, 2015)

Could be a new MKH sig.


----------



## Mesa Rookie (Dec 1, 2015)

Gibson.com: Les Paul Classic 7 String


----------



## celticelk (Dec 1, 2015)

Mesa Rookie said:


> Gibson.com: Les Paul Classic 7 String



Look at the headstock in the picture above vs. the one you linked. They're different guitars.


----------



## jwade (Dec 1, 2015)

The logical choice is an SG. I can't see an RD being chosen for a 7 as it's not one of their more popular/favorite shapes. I briefly thought it might be a doublecut LP jr, but that doesn't make much sense either. 

I assume it's either an SG, or a new LP7 at a lower price point with stripped-down aesthetics.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 1, 2015)

Given the crown inlays, I'm guessing it's going to be a metalized SG Standard 7?


----------



## eaeolian (Dec 1, 2015)

jwade said:


> I assume it's either an SG, or a new LP7 at a lower price point with stripped-down aesthetics.



I'm betting this is the winner right here - something on the lines of a Studio.

Then again, you usually see that headstock look on an SG, so...


----------



## Musiscience (Dec 1, 2015)

Mesa Rookie said:


> Gibson.com: Les Paul Classic 7 String



It's not the same guitar. Look at the headstock logo. They usually use this logo for SGs and rarely on LPs. I have never seen it on a classic at least.



HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Given the crown inlays, I'm guessing it's going to be a metalized SG Standard 7?



Considering their new High Performance specs that would be plausible. Maybe a High Performance 7 string SG?


----------



## eaeolian (Dec 1, 2015)

Nah, it's definitely not the LP Classic 7 (though those are actually rather good guitars, much to the surprise of many of us.)


----------



## TankJon666 (Dec 2, 2015)

Please let this be a 7 string RD in Silverburst!

That said, a 7 string SG would be equally as ball tingling.

Edit: Why am I even excited? I don't play 7's anymore!


----------



## GenghisCoyne (Dec 2, 2015)

carvin is way better at this


----------



## RUSH_Of_Excitement (Dec 2, 2015)

Musiscience said:


> It's not the same guitar. Look at the headstock logo. They usually use this logo for SGs and rarely on LPs. I have never seen it on a classic at least.
> 
> 
> 
> Considering their new High Performance specs that would be plausible. Maybe a High Performance 7 string SG?



Idk about it being part of the high performance line. Despite that picture being really low quality, I don't think it has the titanium, zero fret nut which all of the HP guitars have. I could be totally wrong of course lol


----------



## jephjacques (Dec 2, 2015)

I don't even want to think about the neck-dive a 7-string SG would have. At least the RD would have enough body mass to slightly offset that.


----------



## eaeolian (Dec 2, 2015)

jephjacques said:


> I don't even want to think about the neck-dive a 7-string SG would have. At least the RD would have enough body mass to slightly offset that.



Yeah, I was discussing that last night. Plus, if it has a *real* SG neck (and not the baseball bat they put on stuff like the SGJR), well, it really doesn't need anymore tension, now, does it?


----------



## ellengtrgrl (Dec 2, 2015)

Ya know, I like Gibsons (most of my guitars from the early 80s until 1999 were Gibbys, and I have a Gibson J-15 acoustic, and a Gibson Les Paul Special at the present time), and a new 7-string Gibson would be cool, but I have a feeling that it will once again be a letdown for me, when it comes to Gibson 7-strings. Why? Because the chances are that like other 7-string Gibson (and Epiphone) offerings, it will once again, have their standard 24.75" scale length, which I find to be too short for decent performance in drop tunings.  Please Gibson, make it at least a 25.5" scale length.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 2, 2015)

If Gibson wanted to take the risk and appeal to "our" demographic, they should go all-out and make it a 27-28'' scale.

I mean, they showed they aren't afraid to do it.


















That would be a sight to see/hear, though...

Rich djent kids rocking 7-string baritone SGs, Les Pauls, and RDs, tuned to drop G or F# with perfect intonation.


----------



## asher (Dec 2, 2015)




----------



## jwade (Dec 2, 2015)

ellengtrgrl said:


> the chances are that like other 7-string Gibson (and Epiphone) offering, it will once again, have their standard 24.75" scale length, which I find to be too short for decent performance in drop tunings.  Please Gibson, make it at least a 25.5" scale length.



This garbage, again? The incredibly minute difference in tension from 24.75 to 25.5 DOES NOT AFFECT THE GUITAR BEING ABLE TO HANDLE LOW TUNINGS!

It amazes me at how absurdly ill-informed some of you people are, and how often you simply parrot the same BS over and over. If someone posts about a guitar with a scale length you don't prefer (or stupidly believe to be inadequate for a specific tuning), just don't comment. It's that easy.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 2, 2015)

I didn't realize baritone guitars could be so offensive to some people. 

Also, that's your opinion, but I got much better results using a 25.5'' guitar with 56's tuned to B, vs a 24.75'' one with 59's.  I prefer using lighter gauge strings vs higher gauge strings.


----------



## CaptainD00M (Dec 2, 2015)

jwade said:


> . If someone posts about a guitar with a scale length you don't prefer (or stupidly believe to be inadequate for a specific tuning), just don't comment. It's that easy.



Dude if we followed your advice then this forum would have about HALF the traffic it does now. This forum is practically founded on subjective opinions, which probably contain SOMEkind of negative comparison.


----------



## JD27 (Dec 2, 2015)

It won't be a RD, but that would be awesome. I'd be forced to buy it just because I love RDs so much. But a 7 string SG is definitely cool and with that logo, it's really the only thing that makes sense.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 2, 2015)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> I didn't realize baritone guitars could be so offensive to some people.
> 
> Also, that's your opinion, but I got much better results using a 25.5'' guitar with 56's tuned to B, vs a 24.75'' one with 59's.  I prefer using lighter gauge strings vs higher gauge strings.



There's a lot more at play than scale length. The difference in 24.75 and 25.5 really is negligable. I owned the mkh SIG, and with stock strings it felt and sounded fine tuned down to A.

There's certainly nothing wrong with preferring different scales, but dude was right. People over-emphasize how useful an inch or less in scale length is. Especially between 24.75 and 25.5.


----------



## ellengtrgrl (Dec 2, 2015)

jwade said:


> This garbage, again? The incredibly minute difference in tension from 24.75 to 25.5 DOES NOT AFFECT THE GUITAR BEING ABLE TO HANDLE LOW TUNINGS!
> 
> It amazes me at how absurdly ill-informed some of you people are, and how often you simply parrot the same BS over and over. If someone posts about a guitar with a scale length you don't prefer (or stupidly believe to be inadequate for a specific tuning), just don't comment. It's that easy.



OK. Point well taken about not commenting about a guitar if you don't like it. I stand corrected.

As for the parroting part - no I was not. It's from my own personal experience. It's more of a playing feel thing with me, since getting the relatively taut feel/string tension I like out of a 24.75" scale length, means using a mucho mondo large string for the 7-th string when doing Drop-A tuning - larger than I like to use.


----------



## BucketheadRules (Dec 2, 2015)

I think a 7-string RD would be super badass actually. Much better idea than an SG, and I think it'd sell reasonably well.

A 7-string Firebird isn't the worst idea, come to think of it... as long as they come up with a stronger headstock design that still looks cool.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 2, 2015)

RD's are a cool shape indeed, but I think it'd be a bit stupid to make an _extended _range guitar when the range it already has is pretty much unreachable. The cutaway on those things is ridiculous. I just wish they'd make a decent god damned explorer with seven strings and passive pups. Somebody really needs to make one at a decent price so I can buy the damn thing.


----------



## Musiscience (Dec 2, 2015)

RUSH_Of_Excitement said:


> Idk about it being part of the high performance line. Despite that picture being really low quality, I don't think it has the titanium, zero fret nut which all of the HP guitars have. I could be totally wrong of course lol



You're totally right actually, I never noticed it did not have the titanium zero fret nut.


----------



## Slunk Dragon (Dec 2, 2015)

Just the fact that Gibson would produce a 7-string ANYTHING that isn't an Explorer, at this stage, is a shocker to me.

Curious to see what they roll out.


----------



## GuitarFactoryDylan (Dec 2, 2015)

I don't feel like Gibson are ever going to come out with something 7-string that would really be any better than all the amazing stuff that's already out there. I've just totally fallen out of love with the company like a lot of people have, I've only got a sentimental-value 74' Flying V left from them now.


----------



## Asphyxia (Dec 2, 2015)

I heard Brendon Small was working with Gibson for a signature 7 string.
Highly unlikely that this is it.
As I'm assuming it was going to be an explorer.
I post this in hopes that someone from Gibson reads this and makes a seven string explorer again, with or without Brendon.
Preferably with him.


----------



## jwade (Dec 2, 2015)

Yeah they built him a 7 string Thunderhorse. So nice:










I'd really love a 7 string version of Bill Kelliher's Golden Axe Explorer, but that'll never happen.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 2, 2015)

Slunk Dragon said:


> Just the fact that Gibson would produce a 7-string ANYTHING that isn't an Explorer, at this stage, is a shocker to me.
> 
> Curious to see what they roll out.



They released a 7-string Les Paul last year.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 2, 2015)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> If Gibson wanted to take the risk and appeal to "our" demographic, they should go all-out and make it a 27-28'' scale.
> 
> I mean, they showed they aren't afraid to do it.




How dare you forget the best one!








Or the more expensive version, but I could only afford the Studio, so I like to pretend the other one doesn't exist.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 2, 2015)

The Buckethead Les Pauls are pretty much white whales these days. 

...

...

_Ba dum tiss?_


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 2, 2015)

That was bad and you should feel bad.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 2, 2015)

Already ahead of you.


----------



## cardinal (Dec 2, 2015)

All I know is my 24.75" scale LP7 is an absolute beast of a metal machine. Looking forward to what this guitar will be.


----------



## Edika (Dec 3, 2015)

jwade said:


> Yeah they built him a 7 string Thunderhorse. So nice:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Is this Explorer a one off custom or are they planning a limited production model?


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 3, 2015)

The picture's pretty old (2012, I think?), so I doubt it'll happen. The Slow Falcon V ended up getting a release, though. 

Only way I can see it happening is if the final season of Dethklok ends up happening and a lot of 7-string is featured on it.


----------



## Edika (Dec 3, 2015)

That's a shame as this looks really awesome. One more reason to demand a final Dethklok season!


----------



## technomancer (Dec 3, 2015)

cardinal said:


> All I know is my 24.75" scale LP7 is an absolute beast of a metal machine. Looking forward to what this guitar will be.



Yeah I still regret not grabbing one of the Classics when MF was blowing them out... debated too long and when I went back to buy one they were gone.


----------



## GuitarBizarre (Dec 3, 2015)

jwade said:


> This garbage, again? The incredibly minute difference in tension from 24.75 to 25.5 DOES NOT AFFECT THE GUITAR BEING ABLE TO HANDLE LOW TUNINGS!
> 
> It amazes me at how absurdly ill-informed some of you people are, and how often you simply parrot the same BS over and over. If someone posts about a guitar with a scale length you don't prefer (or stupidly believe to be inadequate for a specific tuning), just don't comment. It's that easy.



Owner of 24.75", 25.5" and 27 27/32" scale 6 string guitars reporting in - The scale length makes a huge difference. The only person being an asshole here is you, with your semi-allcaps ranting.


----------



## canuck brian (Dec 3, 2015)

So I might be WAY off here - those tuners look like more modern black Grover locking tuners rather the ones they normally use. Doesn't Gibson normally use the "classier" Kluson or chrome hardware on their "nice" looking stuff?

I'd lean more towards a solid color (black i'm guessing) SG or Les Paul without a lot of trimmings.

(Carcass had no problems recording awesome music tuned to B using Les Pauls - scale length is subjective until you start screwing up intonation, then its measurable. )


----------



## JD27 (Dec 3, 2015)

canuck brian said:


> So I might be WAY off here - those tuners look like more modern black Grover locking tuners rather the ones they normally use. Doesn't Gibson normally use the "classier" Kluson or chrome hardware on their "nice" looking stuff?



Typically they do, but the newer models are starting to come with Grover locking tuners. My RD Artist had them stock. The new 2016 Les Paul Standard models have them stock. I wish they would always come stock, locking tuners are usually the first thing I add to a guitar if they aren't already there.


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 3, 2015)

jwade said:


> This garbage, again? The incredibly minute difference in tension from 24.75 to 25.5 DOES NOT AFFECT THE GUITAR BEING ABLE TO HANDLE LOW TUNINGS!



I do play in B on one of my Gibsons, but this is definitely not for everyone, especially if you're a strong picker and/or don't like thick strings. I do feel a distinct difference between my Gibsons and the reste of my guitars in this regard. Is it unplayable ? No. Is it unplayable by some people ? Yes. It doesn't matter if Soandso can play in drop A on a gibson, the important matter is if *you* can when you buy one. I'm fine with a 58-60 for B but I'm not comfortable playing drop A with this.


----------



## JD27 (Dec 3, 2015)

I've got my Silverburst RD in Drop A with a 12,16,22,38,52,68 set, works just fine for me. I guess it's more on the individual playing the guitar though.


----------



## jwade (Dec 3, 2015)

GuitarBizarre said:


> Owner of 24.75", 25.5" and 27 27/32" scale 6 string guitars reporting in - The scale length makes a huge difference. The only person being an asshole here is you, with your semi-allcaps ranting.



Aren't you a classy one. Don't roll in calling names, lest ye cast yourself in a very unflattering light. No-one called anyone an asshole until you showed up. Good job. Not sure how you equate one sentence with 'ranting', but perhaps you need a lot more or a lot less caffeine this morning. 

Also, a whole 3 guitars, cool. I can post a lot more guitars with a lot wider range of scale lengths but won't, as that means literally nothing. The issue consistently brought up by Gibson detractors is that the .75" difference between the Gibson scale length and the Fender scale is somehow magical in its ability to suddenly make a guitar perform better in a low tuning. It doesn't, and there's no need to trot out other info randomly.


----------



## GuitarBizarre (Dec 3, 2015)

jwade said:


> Aren't you a classy one. Don't roll in calling names, lest ye cast yourself in a very unflattering light. No-one called anyone an asshole until you showed up. Good job. Not sure how you equate one sentence with 'ranting', but perhaps you need a lot more or a lot less caffeine this morning.
> 
> Also, a whole 3 guitars, cool. I can post a lot more guitars with a lot wider range of scale lengths but won't, as that means literally nothing. The issue consistently brought up by Gibson detractors is that the .75" difference between the Gibson scale length and the Fender scale is somehow magical in its ability to suddenly make a guitar perform better in a low tuning. It doesn't, and there's no need to trot out other info randomly.



Please, by all means, continue being a dick. 

You asserting something isn't true, doesn't make it so. The fact is the difference is easily discernible and you banging on about your beliefs doesn't change that.


----------



## eaeolian (Dec 3, 2015)

technomancer said:


> Yeah I still regret not grabbing one of the Classics when MF was blowing them out... debated too long and when I went back to buy one they were gone.



Dave's been playing his pretty much exclusively in Division over his KXKs. That's not something I thought I'd be typing.


----------



## BuckarooBanzai (Dec 3, 2015)

GuitarBizarre said:


> Please, by all means, continue being a dick.
> 
> You asserting something isn't true, doesn't make it so. The fact is the difference is easily discernible and you banging on about your beliefs doesn't change that.



The facts of the matter are these:

-.75" in scale length does not substantially affect whether or not a guitar is able to intonate correctly at lower tunings.
-.75" in scale length affects string tension and, therefore, gauge. This is usually in one-step increments (eg between 9-42 and 10-46). These factors determine feel and playability.
-Given the above two premises the conclusion is that 25.5" scale guitars will use lighter-gauge strings than 24.75" scale guitars if the same tension is desired. Lighter gauge strings prototypically have less bassy tonality, a characteristic which is often desirable for low tunings. The extent to which this is noticeable under heavy distortion and processing, however, is debatable. Anecdotal evidence suggests that 24.75" scale guitars are perfectly serviceable at least down to Drop B. I therefore claim that you are wrong and I (and the other gentleman) am right.

I don't see how you can be upset at somebody for "being a dick" and not substantiating their arguments then go do the same thing yourself. Try again, buddy 

**EDIT: Dude was also talking about the guitar being able to handle low tunings. You are barking about the "difference being discernable." Two wholly different concepts there, chief.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Dec 3, 2015)

I've heard of folks tuning Gibsons as low as A even.


----------



## technomancer (Dec 3, 2015)

Ok seriously folks enough butthurt over scale length or I'm going to start giving people time off.



eaeolian said:


> Dave's been playing his pretty much exclusively in Division over his KXKs. That's not something I thought I'd be typing.



That is not what I want to hear... I want to hear he's sick of it and is listing it for sale


----------



## TankJon666 (Dec 3, 2015)

Konfyouzd said:


> I've heard of folks tuning Gibsons as low as A even.



For my doom/stoner stuff I've got my SG tuned to drop G with 14-68. Tension is spot on and it's doom so intonation can suck it  It wasn't far off to be honest though.


----------



## jwade (Dec 3, 2015)

Assuming that they announce an SG seven string without active pickups, there's not much that will stop me from getting one. If they were to offer a couple of colours, I'll end up with two. Really excited for this, I've been dreaming about this for 20+ years now ever since I saw Steve again on the cover of a guitar magazine with a seven string, looked down at my red SG and thought 'I wish this had an extra string'


----------



## Konfyouzd (Dec 3, 2015)

TankJon666 said:


> For my doom/stoner stuff I've got my SG tuned to drop G with 14-68. Tension is spot on and it's doom so intonation can suck it  It wasn't far off to be honest though.



 Awesome


----------



## Pikka Bird (Dec 3, 2015)

RUSH_Of_Excitement said:


> Idk about it being part of the high performance line. Despite that picture being really low quality, I don't think it has the titanium, zero fret nut which all of the HP guitars have. I could be totally wrong of course lol



Having just glanced at their 2016 lineup on their website... don't they _all_ come in regular AND HP variants?


----------



## JD27 (Dec 3, 2015)

Pikka Bird said:


> Having just glanced at their 2016 lineup on their website... don't they _all_ come in regular AND HP variants?



All of the standard run models have the HP option, but there is also limited runs they do every year. There are already 4 of those released for 2016. For some reason the limited runs can kind of fly under the radar unless you look out for them. 

Les Paul Junior Single Coil Limited


----------



## Hollowway (Dec 3, 2015)

I'm not a huge fan of Gibson style guitars anyway, but I'm among those who would like a longer scale length for adding a low B. But, wouldn't it be cool if Gibson went the other direction, and added a high G. That would be totally cool, and work right in with the scale length. (And be one of the first to the added high string, instead of one of the last to the added low string.) 

(Oh, and don't blow a vessel, jwade - I love all scale lengths equally.)


----------



## MattThePenguin (Dec 4, 2015)

I remember freaking out and looking up 7 string explorers. 7 strings make the body look way more appealing to me because of how thick the neck is. A 7 string RD would be nasty, but an SG.... nah


----------



## Kashmir (Dec 4, 2015)

JD27 said:


> All of the standard run models have the HP option, but there is also limited runs they do every year. There are already 4 of those released for 2016. For some reason the limited runs can kind of fly under the radar unless you look out for them.
> 
> Les Paul Junior Single Coil Limited



Oh no, you should not have shared that link! I've got major GAS for a 2016 SG Supreme now, there goes my holiday budget...


----------



## Riffer (Dec 4, 2015)

Zakk Wylde tuned his Les pauls crazy low on early BLS stuff and it sounded badass. As long as you compensate string gauge and get it set up properly you can tune to whatever you want on a shorter scale guitar. It's all about how compensate for the different scale/strings/tuning. There's a balance that must be played.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 4, 2015)

Riffer said:


> As long as you compensate string gauge



That's one of my main gripes with using short-scale guitars at lower tunings. You compensate by using thicker gauge strings, which I don't like doing. 

I'll see a lot of old-school death metal dudes and stoner/doom guys say "Oh, Les Paul scale is fine!", but a lot of the times they don't go for the borderline thin sound I like to go for.  I like to use longer-scaled guitars so I can use thinner strings at lower tunings, to get a brighter, less woofy sound. 

Like, seriously, I get a lot of you can deal with it. A lot of guys dig that thicker sound you get when you use heavy gauge strings. I don't. I like to go for more light or medium-gauges. You (not you Riffer) don't have to call people who prefer the sound of baritone scales "ill-informed" or "parroting the same bull...." when a lot of us HAVE tried to use 24.75'' scales in B or less and didn't get the results WE like.


----------



## technomancer (Dec 4, 2015)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> That's one of my main gripes with using short-scale guitars at lower tunings. You compensate by using thicker gauge strings, which I don't like doing.
> 
> I'll see a lot of old-school death metal dudes and stoner/doom guys say "Oh, Les Paul scale is fine!", but a lot of the times they don't go for the borderline thin sound I like to go for.  I like to use longer-scaled guitars so I can use thinner strings at lower tunings, to get a brighter, less woofy sound.
> 
> Like, seriously, I get a lot of you can deal with it. A lot of guys dig that thicker sound you get when you use heavy gauge strings. I don't. I like to go for more light or medium-gauges. You (not you Riffer) don't have to call people who prefer the sound of baritone scales "ill-informed" or "parroting the same bull...." when a lot of us HAVE tried to use 24.75'' scales in B or less and didn't get the results WE like.



Admit it, you just have pvssy hands and can't handle the thick strings 

This one time I chose to just ridicule you instead of banning you


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 4, 2015)

technomancer said:


> Admit it, you just have pvssy hands and can't handle the thick strings



If it makes jwade happy, then sure, lets go with that.


----------



## aneurysm (Dec 4, 2015)

jwade said:


> Yeah they built him a 7 string Thunderhorse. So nice:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



OMG, this would be absolutely perfect, look at those Block Inlays and Binding.


----------



## ZeroS1gnol (Dec 4, 2015)

Ha, this scale length discussion...*grabs popcorn*

But honestly, it does make a difference, but I get the arguments coming from it. It's so subjective ofcourse, but sometimes on the forum I see people recommending a .70 for a low A on a 26.5 scale. I laugh hard at that sort of preposterous nonsense, but that's just my opinion.


----------



## jephjacques (Dec 4, 2015)

I want a 7-string Les Paul Junior with a single P-90 so I can do death metal Green Day covers


----------



## asher (Dec 4, 2015)

jephjacques said:


> I want a 7-string Les Paul Junior with a single P-90 so I can do death metal Green Day covers



Green Day I might be able to listen to!


----------



## aneurysm (Dec 4, 2015)

jephjacques said:


> I want a 7-string Les Paul Junior with a single P-90 so I can do death metal Green Day covers



I want a Gibson Dethklok Thunderhorse Explorer 7 String


----------



## Konfyouzd (Dec 4, 2015)

Hollowway said:


> I'm not a huge fan of Gibson style guitars anyway, but I'm among those who would like a longer scale length for adding a low B. But, wouldn't it be cool if Gibson went the other direction, and added a high G. That would be totally cool, and work right in with the scale length. (And be one of the first to the added high string, instead of one of the last to the added low string.)
> 
> (Oh, and don't blow a vessel, jwade - I love all scale lengths equally.)



Oh I like that... 

I've never experimented with high strings and that could actually be fun to try.


----------



## jwade (Dec 4, 2015)

I really enjoy having my 24.75" 7 tuned up to D-G, and often various open D tunings. Particularly fun for playing slide.


----------



## Spicypickles (Dec 4, 2015)

Yea, im just holding out for the fanned fret SG/Explorer/V hybrid with a flat exotic wood top and a hipshot.


----------



## asher (Dec 4, 2015)

Spicypickles said:


> Yea, im just holding out for the fanned fret SG/Explorer/V hybrid with a flat exotic wood top and a hipshot.



I'm just holding out for a pony.

And the new Tool album.


----------



## celticelk (Dec 4, 2015)

Me, I'm holding out for a hero. And a 7-string Corvus.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 4, 2015)

Nah, we need an 8-string 36.7'' version of the canceled Hendrix sig model. 






But seriously, do you know how awesome an ERG Gibson Victory would be?


----------



## jwade (Dec 4, 2015)

^just think what could be done with that bevel.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 4, 2015)

jwade said:


> ^just think what could be done with that bevel.



I can see a young Jeff Kiesel looking through an old late '80s Gibson catalog; laying his eyes on the Victory's bevel, pointing at it, and exclaiming with glee, "*I WANNA DO THAT!!!*".


----------



## AngstRiddenDreams (Dec 4, 2015)

That victory is sweet


----------



## asher (Dec 4, 2015)

celticelk said:


> 7-string Corvus



YES.


----------



## themightyjaymoe (Dec 4, 2015)

My guitar teacher has a red victory. It is actually a super sick guitar. I really wish gibson would bring that one back. Even if it was a limited run I still think it'd be cool.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 4, 2015)

themightyjaymoe said:


> My guitar teacher has a red victory. It is actually a super sick guitar. I really wish gibson would bring that one back. Even if it was a limited run I still think it's be cool.



I agree.  They'll bring back the ugly-as-.... looking M-III (both a Gibson AND Epiphone version). But the Victory? NOPE.


----------



## Dabo Fett (Dec 7, 2015)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> But seriously, do you know how awesome an ERG Gibson Victory would be?



ive wanted one of these for the longest time, ive even gone to electrical guitar company and got a quote for a 7 string, aluminum neck version but the funds just werent there at the time


----------



## Spicypickles (Dec 8, 2015)

Mystery Solved?


SG Dark 7


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 8, 2015)

aneurysm said:


> I want a Gibson Dethklok Thunderhorse Explorer 7 String



The same, but free. Cause we won't have it anyway so we can dream bigger. 



> Mystery Solved?


Holy s.... there's a white one. Pretty expensive for a SG though.


----------



## celticelk (Dec 8, 2015)

Spicypickles said:


> Mystery Solved?
> 
> 
> SG Dark 7



Huh. I'd hit that.


----------



## Spicypickles (Dec 8, 2015)

I wouldn't, at that price.


----------



## Edika (Dec 8, 2015)

I think this is the third SG I've seen that I actually liked. Looking at the price though I'd rather go with the Explorer Blackout, if I could spare the money.


----------



## Captain Butterscotch (Dec 8, 2015)

Like, have you guys, like, seen the scale length? Uuuuugh, I'm so upset. #scalelengthmatters /s


Looks really tasty though.


----------



## cardinal (Dec 8, 2015)

Pretty cool! I doubt I'll get one, but great to see Gibson continuing to make 7-strings and staying away from the EMG routes now.


----------



## jwade (Dec 8, 2015)

Well that price sucks hard for us up here. Wish the dollar was doing better, buying multiple might be priced out of my budget. Damn. 

Not a fan of the VII inlay, but otherwise, they're badass looking.


----------



## JD27 (Dec 8, 2015)

Those are pretty awesome, I don't know if the price is as awesome. That and I just don't play 7's enough to justify that cost.


----------



## aneurysm (Dec 8, 2015)

Too expensive, butt ugly, basically it´s the same boring look they did on their Baritone SG


----------



## olejason (Dec 8, 2015)

A "richlite" fretboard on a $2500 guitar? No thanks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richlite


----------



## jwade (Dec 8, 2015)

It would be cool to snag one of each and swap the hardware. That would probably look much better/classier.


----------



## Veritech Zero (Dec 8, 2015)

Hm... TOM bridge, 12" radius, 24 3/4" scale... It's someone's dream guitar, just not mine. For me the reason to buy a Gibson is how they sound. You can get better looking, better playing, better quality instruments for much cheaper elsewhere, but nothing else can give you the same tone. And something tells me this particular 7 string wont sound like your typical SG... I could be wrong as I haven't played one yet, but I'd be shocked if it did. So if you aren't getting that Gibson sound, what are you getting?


----------



## Spicypickles (Dec 8, 2015)

I dunno, it's hitting all the typical gibby specs, it most likely wont sound much different than any other SG, just tuned lower on one string.


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 8, 2015)

Spicypickles said:


> I dunno, it's hitting all the typical gibby specs, it most likely wont sound much different than any other SG, just tuned lower on one string.




Disagree, they won't have Gibson pickups and we all know wood doesn't matter so they can't sound like SGs.

#crosspostingisevil #anyonetakingthistothefirstdegreeisan...


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 8, 2015)

And the richlite hate begins.  I don't mind it. It looks and feels like ebony.


----------



## Spicypickles (Dec 8, 2015)

After scrolling down I realized that, "Damn, if anyone ever needed an example of information overload, check these specs out." They even list the glue they used in construction :lol


----------



## aneurysm (Dec 8, 2015)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> And the richlite hate begins.  I don't mind it. It looks and feels like ebony.



And does it sound like Ebony ? I don´t care if it looks or feels like Ebony, but i can´t imagine it´s Tone like Ebony ?


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 8, 2015)

The only thing that is disappointing there is that for this price I'd expect somethign else than a painted logo you find on the studios...
Ok, the other only thing is drilling the horn for a decent pôsition for the strap. I don't really see the point in NOT doing that from the start.


----------



## aneurysm (Dec 8, 2015)

I think the whole Guitar is a Dissapointment. Like i said, it´s basically this only with a shorter Scale, different PU´s and 7 String !


----------



## olejason (Dec 8, 2015)

It isn't that I hate richlite but if I'm paying a few grand for a guitar I don't want a fretboard made out of shredded paper and glue.


----------



## JD27 (Dec 8, 2015)

Andromalia said:


> Ok, the other only thing is drilling the horn for a decent pôsition for the strap. I don't really see the point in NOT doing that from the start.



Boom! That just happened!  I noticed it the other day when I was looking at the Andertons 2016 SG Standard Demos. The HP model has a fast access heel and they did it on those, so when I saw the 7 has the same heel, I figured that would be the same.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 8, 2015)

olejason said:


> It isn't that I hate richlite but if I'm paying a few grand for a guitar I don't want a fretboard made out of shredded paper and glue.



Have you ever played one? I was the same way as you until I actually tried a Rich lite fret boarded guitar and it was as good as ebony IMO


----------



## JD27 (Dec 8, 2015)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Have you ever played one? I was the same way as you until I actually tried a Rich lite fret boarded guitar and it was as good as ebony IMO



Yeah I had that White Baritone SG and I thought it was fine.


----------



## sezna (Dec 8, 2015)

Has anyone played the old gibby 7's? How was the feel? Shreddy or jazz guitarist who wants more low range? Just curious about the metal potential.


----------



## Scordare (Dec 8, 2015)

These are very cool! 24 fret and no soapbars. 

Limited run of 300 each. ..Kinda funny the white one is called "Angel of Death (Metal)" 

This is my first time hearing of Richlite, but I have one of the Washburn WM7s with a Phenolic fretboard and it is very nice to play on.


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 8, 2015)

JD27 said:


> Boom! That just happened!  I noticed it the other day when I was looking at the Andertons 2016 SG Standard Demos. The HP model has a fast access heel and they did it on those, so when I saw the 7 has the same heel, I figured that would be the same.


It's better, but I like it most on the horn tip. I modded my ESP viper that way and it's the right place for my position, at least.


----------



## cardinal (Dec 8, 2015)

sezna said:


> Has anyone played the old gibby 7's? How was the feel? Shreddy or jazz guitarist who wants more low range? Just curious about the metal potential.



I have one of the LP7s. It's a great Les Paul, just with an extra string. I assume this SG7 will be nice too.


----------



## JD27 (Dec 8, 2015)

Andromalia said:


> It's better, but I like it most on the horn tip. I modded my ESP viper that way and it's the right place for my position, at least.



The correct modification of your Viper would be sending it to me!  I can't even find one.


----------



## celticelk (Dec 8, 2015)

JD27 said:


> The correct modification of your Viper would be sending it to me!  I can't even find one.



7 string viper in Electric Guitar | eBay


----------



## Demiurge (Dec 8, 2015)

Damn, so it wasn't a 7-string Firebird X?! Why do bad things happen to good people?


----------



## stretcher7 (Dec 9, 2015)

I guar-un-tee it'll be super neck heavy, Pftt I'll pass.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 9, 2015)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Have you ever played one? I was the same way as you until I actually tried a Rich lite fret boarded guitar and it was as good as ebony IMO



That's not exactly the point. It's not so much the quality, but the outlandish price. Cheaper, easy to work with materials should yield a cheaper price, not an inflated price. 

That said, I'd love a white one. If only I had fistfuls of cash. :c


----------



## pedalcollector371 (Dec 9, 2015)

So someone may have said this already (i just read the first and last page lol), but won't the "standard" Gibson scale length (24.75) kinda make it pointless for a 7? I can barely put a 52 in drop C on my LP without having a ....ton of intonation issues lol


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 9, 2015)

pedalcollector371 said:


> So someone may have said this already (i just read the first and last page lol), but won't the "standard" Gibson scale length (24.75) kinda make it pointless for a 7?


----------



## ovlott (Dec 9, 2015)

For some reason I feel these would look a bit better with the hardware colours swapped... Black on the White and Chrome on the Black.


----------



## dr_game0ver (Dec 9, 2015)

24 frets on a 24.75" scale? No thx.


----------



## cardinal (Dec 9, 2015)

dr_game0ver said:


> 24 frets on a 24.75" scale? No thx.



The SG neck traditionally had room for 24 frets; for some reason the neck is positioned so that the 22nd fret is pretty far away from the neck pickup. Originally, they just put a plastic pickguard-type thing in that space. Now on some modern SGs, they just add the 23-24th frets.

And BC Rich guitars always had 24 frets with the shorter scale. And we've kinda gone 'round and 'round on this scale length thing already.


----------



## eaeolian (Dec 9, 2015)

Veritech Zero said:


> Hm... TOM bridge, 12" radius, 24 3/4" scale... It's someone's dream guitar, just not mine. For me the reason to buy a Gibson is how they sound. You can get better looking, better playing, better quality instruments for much cheaper elsewhere, but nothing else can give you the same tone. And something tells me this particular 7 string wont sound like your typical SG... I could be wrong as I haven't played one yet, but I'd be shocked if it did. So if you aren't getting that Gibson sound, what are you getting?



The LP Classic 7 sounds like an LP, so why wouldn't it?


----------



## Devyn Eclipse Nav (Dec 9, 2015)

I'd play it 

Yeah, the 24.75" isn't ideal, but I've got an Explorer tuned down to A with a 66 that sounds and feels pretty damn good.


----------



## BrailleDecibel (Dec 9, 2015)

ovlott said:


> For some reason I feel these would look a bit better with the hardware colours swapped... Black on the White and Chrome on the Black.



I know what you mean there! I do like the black hardware on the black one, but I think the white one would look a bit cooler with some black hardware to contrast all that white in the finish/knobs/pickups.


----------



## jwade (Dec 9, 2015)

ovlott said:


> For some reason I feel these would look a bit better with the hardware colours swapped... Black on the White and Chrome on the Black.



That was a great idea when I said it yesterday on the previous page. Beat you to it, sucka! 

But seriously, the more I see these, the more I feel like they really missed the chance to do something so much better. Even the LP7 had better aesthetics. The price is pretty bad, and they're just too plain. Waited 20 years, got monochrome bs  God damn.


----------



## technomancer (Dec 9, 2015)

Gibson and Dream Theater: no matter what they do, everyone will bitch about it


----------



## BucketheadRules (Dec 9, 2015)

Not fussed about the 7s in the slightest but this, hello:


----------



## Black Mamba (Dec 9, 2015)

I dig both of them. Hopefully, they get blown out at $1599 like the LP7.


----------



## BucketheadRules (Dec 9, 2015)

I also don't get the Richlite hate, I think it's totally fine and I'd happily have a guitar with it.

I've also found this, which I quite like but wtf is that thing around the Floyd?






Here's a close-up.


----------



## Musiscience (Dec 9, 2015)

BucketheadRules said:


> I also don't get the Richlite hate, I think it's totally fine and I'd happily have a guitar with it.
> 
> I've also found this, which I quite like but wtf is that thing around the Floyd?
> 
> ...



https://www.floydrose.com/catalog/tremolos/6:frx-series


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 9, 2015)

BucketheadRules said:


> I also don't get the Richlite hate, I think it's totally fine and I'd happily have a guitar with it.
> 
> I've also found this, which I quite like but wtf is that thing around the Floyd?
> ]



It's a non-routed Floyd Rose. It's a drop-in replacement for Tune O Matic bridges, and vice-versa.


----------



## eaeolian (Dec 9, 2015)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> It's a non-routed Floyd Rose. It's a drop-in replacement for Tune O Matic bridges, and vice-versa.





https://www.floydrose.com/catalog/tremolos/6:frx-series


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 9, 2015)

Gibson uses richlite on an expensive guitar and everyone brings out the pitchforks, but people can't line up fast enough to get on Aristides' dick these days.

People are confusing.


----------



## technomancer (Dec 9, 2015)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Gibson uses richlite on an expensive guitar and everyone brings out the pitchforks, but people can't line up fast enough to get on Aristides' dick these days.
> 
> People are confusing.



Aristides sent free guitars to the right people


----------



## jwade (Dec 9, 2015)

Hasn't Taylor been using richlite for a fairly long while? People should have gotten used to it by now. It seemed just fine on the baritone SG.

As for the LP7 blowout price, that would be so much better. It'd be cool if the exchange rate got a bit better so it wouldn't as much of a hit to snag these things from Gibson!


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 9, 2015)

You're thinking of Martin. Taylor owns their own ebony mill.


----------



## jwade (Dec 9, 2015)

Even better example then, I knew it was one of the really 'big' acoustic guys.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 9, 2015)

Gibson's been using it for a looong time, too. It's been on LP Customs for ages, unless you shell out top-dollar for a Custom Historic model.


----------



## technomancer (Dec 9, 2015)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Gibson's been using it for a looong time, too. It's been on LP Customs for ages, unless you shell out top-dollar for a Custom Historic model.



3 or 4 years IIRC so not THAT long


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 10, 2015)

technomancer said:


> 3 or 4 years IIRC so not THAT long



I'm about to start my fifth year here in Korea and they were using it before I moved here.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 10, 2015)

The point remains that if a material is cheap and easy to work with, why charge a premium price for it? It's no different than a normal SG outside of the extra string and pickups, so why the huge price difference?

They'll sell though, which is probably the only reason for the price difference. Still, I think it's a bit asinine to use less labor intensive materials, regardless of how great they are, and charge more for it.

Edit:I'm also not against these guitars or their fretboards. I'd love to play and own one. I just think the pricing is weird, albeit not that weird considering Gibson is a company, and companies like to make money. They'll sell some at full price, then blow them out and sell the rest, making a hefty profit.


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 10, 2015)

technomancer said:


> 3 or 4 years IIRC so not THAT long



Of course it is, some people label 2000's guitars as _vintage _already.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 10, 2015)

Chokey Chicken said:


> The point remains that if a material is cheap and easy to work with, why charge a premium price for it? It's no different than a normal SG outside of the extra string and pickups, so why the huge price difference?
> 
> They'll sell though, which is probably the only reason for the price difference. Still, I think it's a bit asinine to use less labor intensive materials, regardless of how great they are, and charge more for it.
> 
> Edit:I'm also not against these guitars or their fretboards. I'd love to play and own one. I just think the pricing is weird, albeit not that weird considering Gibson is a company, and companies like to make money. They'll sell some at full price, then blow them out and sell the rest, making a hefty profit.



There are only 300 of these being made in each color. I'd wager they're going to make a few more SG Standards than that. The more you make of something, the less you can charge for it, and vice versa. Frankly, it's more surprising that they're able to sell the Standards for $1200 now than it is that they're selling a limited run MIA seven string for $2500. 

On that note, what company is selling MIA sevens for less than that?


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 10, 2015)

Not sure the "only 300" has anything to do with the price, Gibson release a lot of such "limited" releases, meaning they don't really have value since... they're doing it all the time.
I mean, just look at the price and features of the Kelliher explorer I bought and this. That's a SG studio, technically. It's twice as expensive as the 7 string flying V, accounting for inflation.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 10, 2015)

Yeah, the M4-Sherman comes to mind, which zZounds still has new ones available. Something like 400 made, two years later are still in stock, and they're $1400. I remember getting sweetwater and Musician's Friend catalogs recently that were trying to get rid of them. 

They just want to make a bunch of money off of the handful of folks who REALLY want them, and then will drop the price once they stop selling and they'll make plenty of profit.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 10, 2015)

And for the second part of my post?

What's the grounds for comparison here? What other companies are selling MIA seven strings for less than that that makes people so shocked that Gibson is selling theirs for that much?


----------



## jwade (Dec 10, 2015)

Maybe the sorta-Star Wars vibe will help these move quickly and give them motivation to do a somewhat more 'normal' SG seven, something like the cherry red with black pickguard and ditch the VII inlay, put that out and have it be $1500 and it'd sell like crazy.


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 11, 2015)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> And for the second part of my post?
> 
> What's the grounds for comparison here? What other companies are selling MIA seven strings for less than that that makes people so shocked that Gibson is selling theirs for that much?



Wrong comparison point imho. the good question would be "what companies sell their 7 strings 2 1/2 times the price of the 6 strings version", SG studios being around 800 I believe.

The 6 string with the pretty woods can justify that price, the 7 not so much.


----------



## cardinal (Dec 11, 2015)

Gibson guitars just aren't about being a bargain or bang-for-your-buck. They say "Gibson" on their trademark headstock and have their iconic shape. If you want those things, you just have to pay what they want.

Otherwise, there is the ESP/LTD Viper and the DeArmond S67.

It stinks. It'd be nice if they made stuff cheaper, but Gibson at times has no real competition (no one else can use that headstock or the Gibson logo or probably that exact SG shape), so they can price it however they want. 

And, they've found themselves in a terrible spot where folks now except a price blowout in the fall. So they probably price high now, expecting that they'll sell most of them for several hundred dollars less next fall.


----------



## canuck brian (Dec 11, 2015)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Gibson uses richlite on an expensive guitar and everyone brings out the pitchforks, but people can't line up fast enough to get on Aristides' dick these days.
> 
> People are confusing.



Richlite wasn't developed by physics engineers and 10 years of research to produce the best material for injection molding instruments and can reproduce the same guitar over and over again down to a difference of a few ounces. I dont' remember Gibson using carbon fiber skeletons inside their guitars either. They're also incredible people (Pascal and Erik are awesome), interact with their customers and run a company that people actually like being at....so the total opposite of Gibson. Aristides doesn't suck. Big difference.  

Richlite is a great material for fretboards. I think it's just going to be purists being all pissy about it.


----------



## cardinal (Dec 11, 2015)

I mean I get that people have a scale length preference and that this guitar may have a shorter scale length than some folks like. I don't get why it raises such a fuss? Lots of folks (me included) like guitars with trems and I sure can't dive bomb on that SG, but no one's in here fussing about the lack of a Floyd Rose on the SG7? So maybe the SG7's not built to play much lower than B standard. It's not made to dive bomb or have single coils or any number of other things that other guitars are good at. 

It's just not the guitar for everyone. Just like every other guitar...


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 11, 2015)

Edit: I'm gonna go ahead and apologize. I forgot mods requested we stop bitching about scale lengths.


----------



## jwade (Dec 11, 2015)

I'm not going to bother addressing ElRays giant wall of tension calculator numbers, there are a substantial number of threads dedicated to that sort of thing, if you feel like continuing with that topic. 

They've requested that there be no more bitching about scale length, let's stick to just discussing the actual guitar here.


----------



## celticelk (Dec 11, 2015)

Hollowway said:


> Maybe this *initial foray into 7 strings on an SG* will generate a little movement there.



ESP, DeArmond, and Ibanez have all made SG-style 7-strings in the past - in the case of DeArmond and Ibanez, 15 years in the past. It's not been a popular idea, apparently, but it's hardly a new one.


----------



## jwade (Dec 11, 2015)

I don't know if it's just a trick of the angle of the shots, but it kind of looks like they've made the horns a bit more symmetrical than in the past. Most of the SGs I've had have the sliiiiightly longer upper horn.


----------



## monkeysuncle (Dec 11, 2015)

Pray to god this comes with the Min-E tune! How else will I know what to tune that other string to!?


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 11, 2015)

Andromalia said:


> Wrong comparison point imho. the good question would be "what companies sell their 7 strings 2 1/2 times the price of the 6 strings version", SG studios being around 800 I believe.
> 
> The 6 string with the pretty woods can justify that price, the 7 not so much.



You're jumping around there. Is the issue that the 7 isn't worth its price compared to the six, or just that it can't be justified period?

Also, why is it the wrong comparison? If you compare the prices involved here to other American-made guitars, the surprise isn't the high cost of the 7, it's the low cost of the six. You should ask "what companies sell their 7s for twice the price of their 6," but rather "what companies sell their 6s for half the price of their 7s?" 

The aberration here is the crazy low prices Gibson has on their sixes these days, not the "high" price of their sevens.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 11, 2015)

canuck brian said:


> Richlite wasn't developed by physics engineers and 10 years of research to produce the best material for injection molding instruments and can reproduce the same guitar over and over again down to a difference of a few ounces. I dont' remember Gibson using carbon fiber skeletons inside their guitars either. They're also incredible people (Pascal and Erik are awesome), interact with their customers and run a company that people actually like being at....so the total opposite of Gibson. Aristides doesn't suck. Big difference.
> 
> Richlite is a great material for fretboards. I think it's just going to be purists being all pissy about it.



I wasn't comparing richlite to the material Aristides uses for their bodies. I was comparing it to the material they've started using on some of their fretboards.



...which would be richlite.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 12, 2015)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> You're jumping around there. Is the issue that the 7 isn't worth its price compared to the six, or just that it can't be justified period?
> 
> Also, why is it the wrong comparison? If you compare the prices involved here to other American-made guitars, the surprise isn't the high cost of the 7, it's the low cost of the six. You should ask "what companies sell their 7s for twice the price of their 6," but rather "what companies sell their 6s for half the price of their 7s?"
> 
> The aberration here is the crazy low prices Gibson has on their sixes these days, not the "high" price of their sevens.




This is just semantics. The point remains, if they can make the sixes the price they are and maintain profit, why is the seven so much more. The general upcharge is like $50-$100 per added string. Gibson being the only one I can think of who's trying the "one extra string costs as much as a new guitar" approach.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 12, 2015)

Chokey Chicken said:


> This is just semantics. The point remains, if they can make the sixes the price they are and maintain profit, why is the seven so much more. The general upcharge is like $50-$100 per added string. Gibson being the only one I can think of who's trying the "one extra string costs as much as a new guitar" approach.




It's nuts how cheap Gibson sells their large production run sixers, so it doesn't surprise me at all that they don't try to sell the limited run stuff for similarly low prices. Of course, there's obviously a bit of the "let's see how much we can get away with charging people for this" involved, but I honestly cannot see why people are so surprised and outraged that an American-made seven string costs $2500. 

Seriously, apply this to any other product. 

Let's say it's standard in the sex toy industry for 8 inch dildos to cost $25, and 10 inch dildos to cost $30. If there's one company that sells their 10s for $30 but their 8s are only $15, what is the industry anomaly there? 

Would you complain about what they're charging for their limited edition 10 Inch Mighty Intruder because it's twice as much as their 8 Inch Fancy Finger, even if the Mighty Intruder was in the same price range as every other company's 10 inch toys? 

Shouldn't the complaint here be that all the other companies are overcharging for their 8 inch pleasure sticks, rather than that the one company has a larger gap between their two models?

I think I need a nap.


----------



## celticelk (Dec 12, 2015)

In terms of pricing on American-made 7s, the Oakland Axe Factory price list might be a useful comparison, and that tends to support the argument that Gibson's 6-strings are priced unusually low.


----------



## technomancer (Dec 12, 2015)

Apparently people thought I was kidding... especially the guys that need to bitch in EVERY THREAD about shorter scale guitars. You don't like it, the tension is lower, we get it.


----------



## bhakan (Dec 12, 2015)

I assume Gibson can charge such low prices for standard SG's because they're mass producing them in the same way they have for years. There's no R&D cost for a standard SG and they're probably churned out in some sort of assembly line type workflow. 7 strings are relatively new to Gibson so they have to recoup R&D costs, plus they're making a lot less of them and in basically all situations, the more of something you make the cheaper it is.


----------



## Slunk Dragon (Dec 12, 2015)

That SG 7 ain't bad, to me. The Roman numeral '7' on the 7th fret is a slightly odd touch, but the inlay itself is classy. And I hope at that price, it plays and sounds good!

Though as my personal gripe, I'm sick of seeing guitars in ALL BLACK.


----------



## jwade (Dec 12, 2015)

Little update for those of us in Canada, Long & McQuade has these in their system, and say it's $2,999.99. Not nearly as brutal of a price as anticipated.


----------

