Gibson....the good, the bad and the ugly

vic · 2009-08-06T15:13:49+00:00

Hi Guys....thought I should start a thread on Gibson guitars. I discovered that many on this forum just love them while others simply love to hate 'em (especially the Les Paul lines) And one finds this on a worldwide scale. I simply love Gibson guitars and especially Les Pauls. Why?.....Tone, action and playability. Some USA players refer to all these as the "Les Paul Mojo". Any downsides ?...perhaps the weight and price ? Value for money?...yes perhaps, if one considers re-sale value after say 5 years or so. Just my few cents... And how about SG's and ES175's and 335's....??

vic

Rocker Gramps wrote Alan

This is general knowledge, among Gibson aficionado's?

And I mean no harm in any of my posts, if it seem so, I apologise.

To spare some people further disgruntlement, I will now leave

this thread still wondering about some answers.

If it has anything to do with Gibson guitars I will gladly try and give you some answers.....so shoot ?

guidothepimmp

as iconic as Gibson is and as famous as the les paul is, it has never done anything for me.

Nice to look at but that is where it ends for (my opinion of course)

SG however has always been one of my favourites, even today... then I played one and my world imploded. Still a looker though... :-[

Now, to say "ibanez" as if it is some sort of of down grade and cannot be mentioned in the same thread is obtuse to say the least.

Ibanez AR3000, AR5000, AR300, AR500 etc etc are ALL arguably as good as any Gibson out there. As are the Yamaha SG2000s. Not as famous? sure! Inferior? nope

IMHO of course ?

Reinhard

guidothepimmp wrote as iconic as Gibson is and as famous as the les paul is, it has never done anything for me.

Nice to look at but that is where it ends for (my opinion of course)

SG however has always been one of my favourites, even today... then I played one and my world imploded. Still a looker though... :-[

Now, to say "ibanez" as if it is some sort of of down grade and cannot be mentioned in the same thread is obtuse to say the least.

Ibanez AR3000, AR5000, AR300, AR500 etc etc are ALL arguably as good as any Gibson out there. As are the Yamaha SG2000s. Not as famous? sure! Inferior? nope

IMHO of course ?

I don't have anything against Ibanez guitars and I apologise if my thread came across like that. I played a SG2000 which was a really well made guitar.
Unlike the poster, I don't go into Ibanez threads shooting down the brand, proclaiming mine is far superior, because I played some "insert name here" which pissed all over two other guitars. Blanket statements are awesome if you want to stir shit though.

Rocker-Gramps

Vic

The Les Paul history, that Alan noted above, do you also have it exactly as he has?
Be interesting to know. Thanks

vic

guidothepimmp wrote as iconic as Gibson is and as famous as the les paul is, it has never done anything for me.

Nice to look at but that is where it ends for (my opinion of course)SG however has always been one of my favourites, even today... then I played one and my world imploded. Still a looker though... :-[

Now, to say "ibanez" as if it is some sort of of down grade and cannot be mentioned in the same thread is obtuse to say the least.

Ibanez AR3000, AR5000, AR300, AR500 etc etc are ALL arguably as good as any Gibson out there. As are the Yamaha SG2000s. Not as famous? sure! Inferior? nope

IMHO of course ?

......that's because we all have diverse tastes in music and in our instruments we prefer.....AND Ibanez is indeed a respected brand (IMHO ? )

ezietsman

alan is correct about the les paul story. wikipedia will also tell you the same as well as a host of other sources. les paul had as much to do with 'the les paul guitar' as any other signature artist. ted was the man.

vic

Rocker Gramps wrote Vic

The Les Paul history, that Alan noted above, do you also have it exactly as he has?
Be interesting to know. Thanks

Yes it's more or less like that Gramps. I also know from the literature that Les Paul had a lot to do with the choice of the finish of those early LP's (goldtop and black custom models) Gibson used him as a consultant so to speak and legend has it that he did not approve of the design of the bridge of the'52 and early '53 LP's.....this was later proved to be a less than intelligent design. Literature also has it that he suggested the maple and mahogany combination for the LP Standard and the all mahogany body of the Custom.....
Les Paul definately did not approve of the SG and as Alan says, did ask (soon after it's production started) that his name be removed from the headstock.

Rocker-Gramps

Interesting, thanks!

« Previous Page