Ironstine wrote:
What this thread is REALLY about is the definition of counterfeit vs. copy.
There we agree. Case closed.
Gibsons are as much copies of the original 1950s guitars as Tokai, Heritage, et. al. The company has changed hands a few times (CMI, ECL, Norlin, Henry) since the originals and the design and construction has changed repeatedly over the years. Production was even stopped for a few years. Tooling and dies were lost and destroyed over the years and they had to deconstruct the originals as much as anyone else to try and copy them accurately - whether they are 100% successful in this is also debatable.
Players are to blame for any unoriginality. Makers who stray too far from the classic designs always struggle to sell them, regardless of how much better they are. Even the most successful modern brands and models have their feet firmly planted in the classics. What do you own and play? That's right - something basically designed 60 years ago. If originality was such a priority for you, you'd be playing a Steinberger, or a Parker, or a Klein, or a Forshage, or a Talbo.
For me the simple facts are:
- Gibson originally created these guitars
- Everyone who makes them (including Gibson) either copies the original models or has their own take with variations on the theme (or both).
- The "copies" are not illegal (regardless of Gibson's current or past efforts). They are not even immoral. They simply keep the makers on their toes and provide the end users with choice - as any good competition between brands does.
- Gibson's Standard models have quality control issues (IINM, didn't you have issues with your LP?). Other manufacturer's in the same or lower price ranges have no such issues.
- Gibson's custom shop models are overpriced. If someone else can make it to the same or better quality standard for half the price and still be building them nearly 40 years later, that tells you something.
