ilovefuzz.com

Theyre always releasing total eyescarring shit then once a quarter they put out something everyone wants at an affordable price. Then they stop making them immediately. Im starting to think gibson r&d is all on acid and every once in a while shareholders make them release something profitable to justify their usual garbage. This months candidate:



Yeah. They reissued the fucking awesome sideways term. Im not even being sarcastic here, that trem is gorgeous. Oh also looks like a real 60s spec sg in a heritage cherry that is actually faithful to the original HC for $1600. But its limited to a couple hundred and will probably be sold out right before i get the money for one. Just like the fucking tweedy. Goddamnit.

Oh also they brought back the firebird model that everyone wants with the maestro that everyone wants. Only in a color that noone fucking wants. Also its $6600. I think theyre calling this the "You can get an original for less" series.

Scrolled down
Saw second picture
Laughed

Is this surprising or even noteworthy at this point?

AxAxSxS wrote:Is this surprising or even noteworthy at this point?

At this point its like they do it just to torture me.

THEBEERHAMMER wrote:Oh also they brought back the firebird model that everyone wants with the maestro that everyone wants. Only in a color that noone fucking wants. Also its $6600. I think theyre calling this the "You can get an original for less" series.

but I want the awesome one.
not that one
the

awesome one

Theyll probably release it next year with robot tuners and an emg for $40,000


EDIT:also why the FUCK do they persist on putting tone knobs on single pickup guitars? Looks so whack.

THEBEERHAMMER wrote:Theyll probably release it next year with robot tuners and an emg for $40,000

THEBEERHAMMER wrote:EDIT:also why the FUCK do they persist on putting tone knobs on single pickup guitars? Looks so whack.

they think it will make up for no neck pickup

THEBEERHAMMER wrote:

This with a Fender'ish maple board with a white truss rod cover, white binding and black dots would be my jaaaaaaaaaaaaaam. Or hell, for that money, gimme f'n GOLD DOTS.

WHYYYY GIBSON WHYYYYY

Heritage Cherry is basic as fuck.

Have you ever tried using one of those sideways trems? They're really crappy

if it were up to me, guitar time would have stopped in 1962.

Officer Bukowski wrote:Have you ever tried using one of those sideways trems? They're really crappy

They reengineered it apparently. I dont actually care about using it as a trem i just like that its about a pound of metal for the tailpiece which makes it sound bomb as fuck.

Mudfuzz wrote:

THEBEERHAMMER wrote:Oh also they brought back the firebird model that everyone wants with the maestro that everyone wants. Only in a color that noone fucking wants. Also its $6600. I think theyre calling this the "You can get an original for less" series.

but I want the awesome one.
not that one
the

awesome one

This picture comparison shows something rather profound: Ignoring all that Gibson has done in the past and its impact on guitar history, imagine they were a fresh company on the scene and released the kind of guitars they're releasing now to the market, would they become the billion dollar business they are today? I probably raised that question poorly, and I'm sure everyone has asked it already, but it proves that people pay for a name rather than a product. When a company, if its history is removed, fails miserably on multiple occasions, folks will not buy their products. In business they say that if you haven't gone bankrupt at least once then you're not doing it right, so I understand that the most entrepreneurial business men and women out there fuck up, and have the capitol to get back on their feet. But Gibson became what they are today partly because they squashed the competition early in the game and partly because they squashed the competition early in the game by creating some of the greatest instruments on the planet, and made them accessible to the world. That does not excuse inconsistency with original designs, raising prices to ridiculous levels and not matching that with solid quality control, and releasing poor, relatively forgettable advancements in guitar technology. I see Gibson the way I see Marshall. If someone came along and released the Marshall MG or the Valvestate, would it have sold tens of thousands of units? I personally doubt it. Blackstar earned their stripes as a new company and fought their way to the top with solid products and are not an exception to the rule.