ilovefuzz.com

Well... Gibson did it again... unfortunately...

http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Electri ... ird-X.aspx

Say what you will about the robot tuners, they do what they do well enough, but what bothers me is that all of the other features have been seen in other, better, more attractive guitars...

Now Gibson has kinda... lost it more than usual... what do you guys think?

I took one look and I can already feel my lunch coming back up.

seriously, this is the first guitar that i legitimately think is ugly.

yo that sucks real bad. at least my gibson sounds good.

Nychthemeron wrote:I took one look and I can already feel my lunch coming back up.

At least you would have had something to throw up. I just dry heaved.

thats the.....wow, gibson, really?
I love the firebird vii.........well I used to before I saw this bullshit guitar

it doesn't even look like a firebird to begin with

Mudfuzz wrote:

no assistance needed. it already sounds like crap

That paint and that neck

Gibson really hasn't put much of anything out in the last few years that has interested me at all. Everything's all roboty and super-expensive. If they'd put out a P90 goldtop at a good price, maybe then I'd be interested (and yes I know about that 50's tribute studio version, but why make it limited?)

colin wrote:Gibson really hasn't put much of anything out in the last few years that has interested me at all. Everything's all roboty and super-expensive. If they'd put out a P90 goldtop at a good price, maybe then I'd be interested (and yes I know about that 50's tribute studio version, but why make it limited?)

maybe they're so paranoid about what they do, that they just sorta test the waters and see what works.


of course if that were true, the robot guitar wouldn't be a standard model...

colin wrote:Gibson really hasn't put much of anything out in the last few years that has interested me at all. Everything's all roboty and super-expensive. If they'd put out a P90 goldtop at a good price, maybe then I'd be interested (and yes I know about that 50's tribute studio version, but why make it limited?)

There's also the epiphone one...

But seriously, this is a hideous guitar. First, it looks like they made the prototype out of butter, which then melted slightly before they got it delivered to the factory. And what's with all the random knobs and switch color jacks? Couldn't they find a slightly more subtle way of getting rid of their leftover parts? I also like how they think a professional guitarist would use this. Can you imagine a session player walking into a studio and telling the producer "Oh, no need for compression or reverb, I already have those in my guitar." I try not to be too harsh on Gibson's designs or "innovations" because its cool to see a major company attempt something different, but this is full of

hclapp219 wrote:But seriously, this is a hideous guitar. First, it looks like they made the prototype out of butter, which then melted slightly before they got it delivered to the factory. And what's with all the random knobs and switch color jacks? Couldn't they find a slightly more subtle way of getting rid of their leftover parts? I also like how they think a professional guitarist would use this. Can you imagine a session player walking into a studio and telling the producer "Oh, no need for compression or reverb, I already have those in my guitar." I try not to be too harsh on Gibson's designs or "innovations" because its cool to see a major company attempt something different, but this is full of

This about sums it up.

its one thing if its like the Mason guitar where you have a legit effect built in, like a Zvex in their Matt Bellamy signature, but if its like... just some random-ass effect they made, it doesn't work.

they always tout these as "for the studio musician" but aside from versatile pickup arrangements, i hardly see a practical need for onboard effects.