Page 3 of 7

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 3:15 am
by sevenSHARPnine
I'm with Spunkz, I love the RD shape. I also love Nirvana, and Novoselic.

BUT. I agree with this for sure:
Andrew wrote:Just stop radically chambering their Studio Les Pauls and decrease the price by a couple hundred and they'll dominate - noone wants any of the other 'cost effective' guitars that they bring out, nor do they want to buy some marked up guitar with some players name on it.

People want a good instrument, why is this so difficult to deliver? My 07 MiM Fender strat is still kicking strong.

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 5:39 am
by fiddelerselbow
I'd play it.

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 6:48 am
by warwick.hoy
Meh,...Player Sig guitars in general are dumb.

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2011 12:33 am
by madmax1012
Gearmond wrote:


3. no one fucking cares about Nirvana's bassist.



it needed to be said.

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2011 12:43 am
by Hybrid
Who's Nirvana? :|

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2011 1:39 am
by Mudfuzz
Hybrid wrote:Who's Nirvana? :|

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3giUSjs1uOU[/youtube]

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2011 1:47 pm
by snipelfritz
When I saw of Montreal they closed with a cover of Smells Like Teen Spirit.

It was nuts, but so was that show in general. Costumes and confetti and small, gold speedos abounding.

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2011 4:10 pm
by bob the r0bot
I can't wait till, JM JM effect kicks in and I can get one for $300.

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 9:18 am
by estragon
Sand off the signature and that's a fine lookin' instrument. Sure beats the Firebird X.

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 1:19 pm
by htsamurai
Andrew wrote:Tbh, I don't see why they need to keep on bringing in random signature guitars...

Just stop radically chambering their Studio Les Pauls and decrease the price by a couple hundred and they'll dominate - noone wants any of the other 'cost effective' guitars that they bring out, nor do they want to buy some marked up guitar with some players name on it.

People want a good instrument, why is this so difficult to deliver? My 07 MiM Fender strat is still kicking strong.


WRONG
"radically chambering" the studios creates a new pricepoint for people who can't go above a certain price, they're great for an intermediate player who wants an above average guitar
they're significantly better built than anything else anyone is putting out for the same price, that includes fender
simply because your 07 mim is still going strong doesn't mean that it's build quality is up to par w/ anything gibson. I have a 60s no badge teisco, a straight up sears guitar. still. going. strong.
i don't see how thats relavent to any argument you're making
whether you like it or not, whether it sounds asshole-ish of me or not, it's a fact. your fender, and my fender and anyone else's fender isn't as well built as a even the lower end gibsons
a gibson isn't priced for the market that needs them to be cheaper, they're not for the teenager or college student on a budget
I'm saving up to buy an LP custom. saving up, ramen noodle diet and shit. cause it's worth it.
they're a higher grade instrument for people who can afford it
studio deluxes are some of the coolest things out for the money, 1.4k, coil taps, weight relief (not totes chamb'd), figured top
no one wants the other cost effective guitars they bring out? so false, so misinformed
I work at guitar center for god's sake, you know how many of the lower end gibsons I sell? know how often I get asked about the melody maker Vs?
they're still damn good instruments, the worn studios are some of the best value things out anywhere
the single hum melody makers are amazing
so on and so on.

simply because a lot of us (myself included) would rather an old school, straight up gibson RD or grabber or some shit
doesn't mean there isn't a market for these
let's be real, even in this economy, the average nirvana fan and fanboy from when they were around are now relatively up in age, making a decent living
thats the market for this shit, not us
whats street price? 1399? thats nothing for what it is and what it's gonna mean to a lot of people

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 1:26 pm
by htsamurai
fuckin hater ass ilf
lol
srs biz yall, up in this piece

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 1:34 pm
by Mudfuzz
maz91379 wrote:I think this is a good point to mention i wish my wine red weight relived studio had binding. It just doesn't feel like a real les paul : (.

http://www.stewmac.com/shop/Bindings,_t ... Guide.html

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 1:38 pm
by bob the r0bot
I still think these would have sold buckets if they had just left his name off and put in twin mudbuckers.

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 2:07 pm
by moose23
I really like this bass. Been playing with the idea of making an RD style body to put a Jazz neck and jazz pups on for a few years now. 1200 euro seems ok for it too, not that I can afford one. Maybe a second hand one in a years time though. :)

Re: I think Gibson needs to stop trying so hard

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 2:13 pm
by Mudfuzz
moose23 wrote:I really like this bass. Been playing with the idea of making an RD style body to put a Jazz neck and jazz pups on for a few years now. 1200 euro seems ok for it too, not that I can afford one. Maybe a second hand one in a years time though. :)

I'm actually surprised there/this isn't a epi version...